# Legato Test with 4 major Strings libraries (audio)



## Cat (May 17, 2017)

This is from a music cue from a film I scored a little while ago. I only took the Strings section (Brass and Winds are gone) and redid it using four of the major Strings libraries at my studio and my friend's.

I used:
1. Spitfire Symphonic Strings (2 mics: Close and Tree),
2. EWQL Hollywood Strings Diamond (2 mics: Mid and Main),
3. Cinematic Studio Strings (1 mic: Mix),
4. OT Berlin Strings (2 mics: Close and Tree).
There are subtle interpretation differences between the four passes, slightly different energy flows, also dictated by the characteristics of each library. I spent roughly the same amount of time on each pass.

Which one you like the most?

Further improved Berlin Strings version (v3):


Revised CSS version (thank you, Rob Elliott, for the advice!):


1. Spitfire Symphonic Strings, 2. EW HW Strings, 3. Cinematic Studio Strings and 4. Berlin Strings(the last two in earlier version):


----------



## Jdiggity1 (May 17, 2017)

What? No poll??

Fine. I'll just say it. The 2nd one is my favourite. Though I do think that all the other options could be tweaked some more to improve the attacks and 'virtual space'.

Beautiful writing by the way!

EDIT: Just to make me look silly, OP has now included a poll.


----------



## Oliver (May 17, 2017)

ranking:
3
2
4
1


----------



## AdventureSounds (May 17, 2017)

Thanks for this, I wish there were more side by side comparisons of libraries.
Spitfire takes it for me, but it's hard to tell because of the slight differences as you mentioned.


----------



## Farkle (May 17, 2017)

I never thought I'd say this, but I prefer #1, followed closely by #2. The reason I say this, is, I've always found SF strings to be too wet and drenched in verb, but in this context, they have a lush, modern sound, and a lot of emotion.

I'm assuming that 1 is Symphonic Strings, and 2 is Hollywood Diamond.

Thank you for sharing, and to echo jdiggity... lovely writing!

Mike


----------



## Rodney Money (May 17, 2017)

For overall sound I liked Spitfire even though I would've liked to hear more silky smooth transitions in spots, and next Cinematic Strings which sounded more like a small group of close friends sharing warm and fond memories. Hollywood had a beautiful, soft, almost blurry, blended angelic choir timbre with less detailed bow on string sound. Although beautiful, sometimes the softs in Hollywood gave you the illusion of an unison woodwind blended in there, but where Hollywood really shined in this example was during the fuller forte swells showing its true beauty. I am almost happy for both my computer resources and wallet that I did not care for Berlin. I have heard examples for faster, more articulated passages though where Berlin excels. Great job, my friend!


----------



## Cat (May 17, 2017)

Thank you all for your input.
Just wanted to add that the main idea of this exercise was that I had limited time for each pass (library). Roughly 10-15 minutes including mixing. Most of the time was spent with the those damn accents and re-bows (I always struggle with these!) and drawing CC curves (each library reacts so differently). Now I listen back and I definitely find spots where I would change a dynamic here and there, etc. But when working with a self-imposed deadline, this is roughly what I could achieve.


----------



## MA-Simon (May 17, 2017)

I like this, because it shows, to me, that there are almost no legato bumps in CSS, so I might finally pick it up. Hollywood Strings does work well too.

Not going by sound, but by "fluidity", I would probably say:

3
2
4
1


----------



## JohnBMears (May 17, 2017)

Cat said:


> This is from a music cue from a film I scored a little while ago. I only took the Strings section (Brass and Winds are gone) and redid it using four of the major Strings libraries at my studio and my friend's.
> 
> I used:
> 1. Spitfire Symphonic Strings (2 mics: Close and Tree),
> ...




Could you share which mics of each library you used? HWS? Close and Mid? Tree?


----------



## Cat (May 17, 2017)

For achieving this kind of legato-flow, I find SSS to be the hardest to work with. There is a Violas transition that I simply could not make it sounds right and I gave up. However, I like the SSS sound very much for this particular kind of projects. For the movie I actually used Spitfire Mural with 3 mics (Added surround). 
CSS is a good balance between a good sound and easiness to work with.
HS is also good, too, but it absolutely needs EWQL Spaces reverb added (to my ears this is the only one suitable) but this makes my DAW a little unstable (ASIO spikes). 



Rodney Money said:


> For overall sound I liked Spitfire even though I would've liked to hear more silky smooth transitions in spots, and next Cinematic Strings which sounded more like a small group of close friends sharing warm and fond memories. Hollywood had a beautiful, soft, almost blurry, blended angelic choir timbre with less detailed bow on string sound. Although beautiful, sometimes the softs in Hollywood gave you the illusion of an unison woodwind blended in there, but where Hollywood really shined in this example was during the fuller forte swells showing its true beauty. I am almost happy for both my computer resources and wallet that I did not care for Berlin. I have heard examples for faster, more articulated passages though where Berlin excels. Great job, my friend!


----------



## WindcryMusic (May 17, 2017)

In the first 2/3rds of this cue (before the 8va split in the high strings) I think I liked CSS the most, followed by SSS and EW in a virtual tie. In the last section I liked SSS the most (it excelled when the arrangement filled out), followed by CSS and EW in a virtual tie. The constant (and a surprise to me) is that Berlin would be my last choice throughout ... but not by very much.

Mainly my thoughts after listening to this were 1) how fortunate we are to have such an array of powerful compositional tools to choose from, because any of these choices can do a beautiful job in its own way, and 2) it is a very nice cue.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 17, 2017)

Wow, this was long overdue; I can't even remember last time we did a comparison of legato amongst string libraries. I was just wondering the other day why this practically never comes up.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 17, 2017)

For fun, I did cast my vote for EW, however I have no experience (yet am dying to try) SSS.


----------



## sazema (May 17, 2017)

Difference in few grams... It's just about taste. All four examples sounds good.


----------



## Living Fossil (May 17, 2017)

To my ears, 1 is the clear "winner" by quite a big leap to 2 and 3. I'm surprised in a negative way about 4.
However, the mockup is beautifully crafted, compliments!


----------



## Oliver (May 17, 2017)

it's interesting how different our "tastes" are


----------



## thov72 (May 17, 2017)

sorry but it all sounded pretty synthy to me....but I´m having a bad day...it´s too hot here


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 17, 2017)

Living Fossil said:


> To my ears, 1 is the clear "winner" by quite a big leap to 2 and 3. I'm surprised in a negative way about 4.
> However, the mockup is beautifully crafted, compliments!



#4 _*is*_ surprising, isn't it? I would have guessed them over Cinematic, minimum.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 17, 2017)

thov72 said:


> sorry but it all sounded pretty synthy to me....but I´m having a bad day...it´s too hot here



88 in Northern New England.


----------



## sazema (May 17, 2017)

Parsifal666 said:


> #4 _*is*_ surprising, isn't it? I would have guessed them over Cinematic, minimum.



Yes, but levels are not the same at all, and it's visible just by quick look at waveform. As original poster explained there is a slightly difference in interpretation.
It's not same to play some notes with Spitfire's and play same that notes with OT's. But, I guess, we all know that


----------



## coprhead6 (May 17, 2017)

As a professional orchestral string player, CSS legato really speaks to me. I feel like I'm listening to a real section shifting around their instruments and even using different fingerings. Not everyone would use the same fingering in a real orchestra and therefore there are different timbres mixing within the same section. At 1:44 I can hear some violists playing the B - E _sul C_, and some are changing strings. Also, it's the only library that really captures the growl of the open strings in the violins and violas. I'm just obsessed with those little details, haha. 

Hollywood sounds fantastic, but almost a bit too bright / brittle. The violins sound _sul ponticello_ :57-1:01. 

In terms of the tone, I thought SSS was a good middle ground between Hollywood and CSS.

The Berlin patch definitely needs some tweaking. It is a bit frenetic. There is a really nice cello portamento at 2:57 though!


----------



## muziksculp (May 17, 2017)

sazema said:


> Difference in few grams... It's just about taste. All four examples sounds good.



+1


----------



## erica-grace (May 17, 2017)

They all sound good, but my fav is SFA, and least is CSS.
However, no test is complete without CineStrings 
And I agree - very nice writing!


----------



## Kyle Preston (May 17, 2017)

We should do a blind test, remove our biases for specific VI libraries. Not sure I have enough string libraries to conduct a good (and fair) legato test though. O darn, guess I'll have to get more. The horror...


----------



## Vik (May 17, 2017)

I voted for CSS and HWS. When listening to them again now, I realise that the mixes are quite different (CSS seems to be louder and have more bass, for instance, BS has a V1 which sticks more out and a lower volume etc), so I'm not sure if this is a totally fair comparison. I'm used to both Berlin and CSS; and also have some Spitfire stuff, and don't feel that the differences between them are reflected in those four clips. But interesting to hear, nevertheless! 
BS sounds clearly weakest in this particular test, while it IMHO sounds really good in real life use - as good as in this demo actually (by adding a little close mic/concert master mic).


----------



## JC_ (May 17, 2017)

I find 2 and 3 to be the most pleasing to listen to. Is there something like Ozone on the master bus?


----------



## EuropaWill (May 17, 2017)

Thank you for posting this. For me the ranking is 2,1,3 and lastly 4. With 2&1 much better than 3 and 4. 2 & 1 are very close in their effectiveness to me, but 2 edges out 1 just slightly in that the interplay of the sections are more clear and more authentic sounding. 3 is quite heavy handed sounding with less dynamic range and less refinement, and 4 has an unemotional feel to it which is out of place when set to the lush writing and orchestration style of this idiom.


----------



## Rob Elliott (May 17, 2017)

It shows me why we all have SO MANY string libraries.  If you have LASS you might throw that in the foray.


----------



## Cat (May 17, 2017)

Interesting regarding the Berlin Strings rendition (no. 4). It is probably me who messed up....Perhaps I got a bit of a fatigue after doing the first 3 versions.
It is a smaller section so it was normal for it to sound a little more quiet (that's how the template was setup).
Will come back later today with a revised Berlin, it is definitely a fantastic library in the right hands. Will probably add LASS as well.

I would like to once again say that, with enough additional time spent with tweaking, all the libraries can sound better and that all the versions could be improved. No wonder that the professional libraries' demos (on the vendors' websites, etc) sound better as I suspect there was a LOT of work (and time) spent on them. The point here was to not spend more than 15 minutes with each library (the actual composing was done at a different time, though).


----------



## Vik (May 17, 2017)

Thanks, Cat! I also sometimes discover that libraries simply don't sound equally load at with equal (default) settings, and they they also react in different ways to automation + they may have different settings (Niente etc). And the mic positions also behave in different ways between libraries, even if they have the same names + some libraries has separated more expressive longs into separate presets, while others are expression and 'emotional' all the time. So with 15 minutes in each library only, there are bound to be differences!


----------



## Cat (May 17, 2017)

Vik said:


> Thanks, Cat! I also sometimes discover that libraries simply don't sound equally load at with equal (default) settings, and they they also react in different ways to automation + they may have different settings (Niente etc). And the mic positions also behave in different ways between libraries, even if they have the same names + some libraries has separated more expressive longs into separate presets, while others are expression and 'emotional' all the time. So with 15 minutes in each library only, there are bound to be differences!



Absolutely! But I built the templates at some other time (loaded the preferred mics, loaded most of the articulations, expression maps in Cubase, etc) and not within those 15 minutes per library. I had the music in my head and I tried to achieve that with each library. I tried different legato types, alternated with different articulations. This IS real world testing, when you have a limited time for it, and you need to achieve a cue that sounds great and convinces the Director that it is right for the film. Of course, it is also down to each one's skills and here it is my take 
I had initially done this with Mural and it was really hard. The updated Spitfire library made a lot of difference


----------



## Rodney Money (May 17, 2017)

I hope you don't mind, Cat, and if you do I will delete it from your thread, but I thought I would do a short demo of Cinesamples' offerings concerning legato:


----------



## Kyle Preston (May 17, 2017)

Rodney Money said:


> I hope you don't mind, Cat, and if you do I will delete it from your thread, but I thought I would do a short demo of Cinesamples' offerings concerning legato:




Ahh, a fellow Cinesamples appreciator. I do love the Tina Guo Cello. It's like a 'make it sound awesome' button. Also, beautiful piece man – gives me a _Band of Brothers_ vibe.


----------



## Rodney Money (May 17, 2017)

Kyle Preston said:


> Ahh, a fellow Cinesamples appreciator. I do love the Tina Guo Cello. It's like a 'make it sound awesome' button. Also, beautiful piece man – gives me a _Band of Brothers_ vibe.


Yes, Tina is my secret sauce, lol, I put that girl on everything! I am thinking about going back over this demo if I have time tommorow with a touch of Orchestral Tools new brass mute library. I was playing with some of the patches today and was quite impress how lively they sound. Alrighty, back to string talk!


----------



## Cat (May 17, 2017)

Okay, I have revised number 4 (Berlin Strings) and I also matched the volumes of the four segments. Please see the first post for the link. You may recast your votes if you wish. I allowed 2 votes per member (so you can choose 2 favourite if you think there is a tie).


----------



## byzantium (May 17, 2017)

Thanks Cat, I love these comparisons on the same piece of music, always very interesting. And of course so much depends on the type of piece, style, etc. For me here CSS is the winner. As you do say yourself, it (and do doubt all of them) can sound better - for example in the CSS case, the repeated note at 1:41 which currently doesn't sound very good at all and sounds really unrealistic, can sound great if you hold the sustain pedal over the transition, it should trigger a nice re-bow. And also the sound can be brightened up a smidgeon with EQ. I don't get the Spitfire thing at all, always sounds slightly artificial to me (would be interested to hear it with SCS though). But hey everyone is different!


----------



## Cat (May 17, 2017)

no problem, Rodney and great stuff!!
But this is a different kind of exercise (writing for a library versus having the music written and trying to achieve that EXACT score, note by note, with different libraries). But my thread is open to all the ideas so - welcome!


----------



## Cat (May 17, 2017)

Thank you, byzantium, I went back and fixed those re-bowings using the Sutain Pedal. You are right, it sounds better 
(the link is in the "revised version").



byzantium said:


> Thanks Cat, I love these comparisons on the same piece of music, always very interesting. And of course so much depends on the type of piece, style, etc. For me here CSS is the winner. As you do say yourself, it (and do doubt all of them) can sound better - for example in the CSS case, the repeated note at 1:41 which currently doesn't sound very good at all and sounds really unrealistic, can sound great if you hold the sustain pedal over the transition, it should trigger a nice re-bow. And also the sound can be brightened up a smidgeon with EQ. I don't get the Spitfire thing at all, always sounds slightly artificial to me (would be interested to hear it with SCS though). But hey everyone is different!


----------



## Rodney Money (May 17, 2017)

Cat said:


> no problem, Rodney and great stuff!!
> But this is a different kind of exercise (writing for a library versus having the music written and trying to achieve that EXACT score, note by note, with different libraries). But my thread is open to all the ideas so - welcome!


Cool man, thanks for being open. I actually love threads like this as it helps me decide on my own personal needs. This short track was written to a score that I may or may not use as the opening to the finale of my trumpet concerto I've been working on.


----------



## Rodney Money (May 17, 2017)

Cat said:


> Thank you, byzantium, I went back and fixed those re-bowings using the Sutain Pedal. You are right, it sounds better
> (the link is in the "revised version").


Oh yes, I use that sustain pedal all the time with my CSS.


----------



## EuropaWill (May 17, 2017)

Rating the Revised, 2, 1, 3 and 4, which is the same order as as before, but this time 1 and 3 are almost tied when previously there was a big gap between 1 and 3. 4 is still a good ways behind. CSS gets most improved based on the levels this time.


----------



## coprhead6 (May 17, 2017)

Oh boy, the revised Berlin patch is tasty! Very three dimensional. Similar to SSS but there is more definition in the sound. Maybe there is more separation between the instruments? Still, there are some wonky legato transitions that I can forgive in a mix. 

All of these libraries sound amazing, damn :\
I think my list is 3, 1, 4/2


----------



## EuropaWill (May 17, 2017)

AdventureSounds said:


> Thanks for this, I wish there were more side by side comparisons of libraries.


----------



## ctsai89 (May 17, 2017)

MA-Simon said:


> I like this, because it shows, to me, that there are almost no legato bumps in CSS, so I might finally pick it up. Hollywood Strings does work well too.
> 
> Not going by sound, but by "fluidity", I would probably say:
> 
> ...



"fluidity" I agree. But it's just hard to judge when all of their programming is different.

Sound wise though, it's really hard to choose which one is the best tbh. They're all good in different ways. 

There are a lot of chords in different parts of this piece. Different chords sounds better on different libraries. On the one chord that sounds good on Spitfire does not sound good for hollywood, etc. I suppose the halls have for the instruments certain sweet spots in their ranges.


----------



## byzantium (May 17, 2017)

Thanks Cat. They sound a lot closer now to me. I found it interesting to compare just the right-hand 'abdomen' of each piece, which is quite legato-ish and full and probably even closer between the libs. Berlin is much improved indeed. Still think CSS is probably still my favourite and the most consistent and balanced and less jumpy sound-wise, but I guess that could just be the luck of the draw in terms of each piece having had a limited time in programming. Cheers.


----------



## JPQ (May 18, 2017)

I like them all i feel amost depends what composers wants tell with music. somehow last one is one what i like least. best is hard say maybe 1 depdends i say many things.
Ps. Makes me think CSS section sizes.


----------



## MA-Simon (May 18, 2017)

I did a rendition of the theme with SCS, Lass Lite, Soarings Strings & Cinesamples Solo Strings (Because why not).

Midi was tweaked quite a bit to fit with the different libraries.
Could probably still be improved, but here they are for anyone interested:


----------



## robgb (May 18, 2017)

CSS by far. Quite beautiful.


----------



## robgb (May 18, 2017)

MA-Simon said:


> I did a rendition of the theme with SCS, Lass Lite, Soarings Strings & Cinesamples Solo Strings (Because why not).
> 
> Midi was tweaked quite a bit to fit with the different libraries.
> Could probably still be improved, but here they are for anyone interested:



LASS lite for me.


----------



## robgb (May 18, 2017)

I would've preferred to see this as a blind test. I think we're sometimes swayed by brand names...


----------



## Vik (May 18, 2017)

Sure, and with even more similar mixes.


----------



## Karl Feuerstake (May 18, 2017)

Honestly, normally I'm a huge fan of Spitfire products, but the legato transitions, and some of the short notes just.. do NOT sound good to me. I'm kinda surprised to hear this was a Spitfire product.

The Cinematic Studio Strings sounded really good. Berlin was OK, and Hollywood Strings were surprisingly convincing.

The only product I own is Hollywood Strings Gold, and I rarely, if ever, use it - but this might make me take a 2nd look. I usually use Albion string sections for my stuff, and it works well, once in a while I layer it with MA1 (or on occasion, that ol' Hollywood Strings Gold.)


----------



## ctsai89 (May 18, 2017)

robgb said:


> LASS lite for me.



Ironically, me being someone who detest the sound of LASS first chair (yea I know it's because they are to be used for layering purposes) LASS lite is also the best sound out of these for me. 

oh and.... cinesamples solo strings.... nasal sound... :( sounds a lot like VSL's solo strings.


----------



## prodigalson (May 18, 2017)

Karl Feuerstake said:


> Honestly, normally I'm a huge fan of Spitfire products, but the legato transitions, and some of the short notes just.. do NOT sound good to me. I'm kinda surprised to hear this was a Spitfire product.
> 
> The Cinematic Studio Strings sounded really good. Berlin was OK, and Hollywood Strings were surprisingly convincing.
> 
> The only product I own is Hollywood Strings Gold, and I rarely, if ever, use it - but this might make me take a 2nd look. I usually use Albion string sections for my stuff, and it works well, once in a while I layer it with MA1 (or on occasion, that ol' Hollywood Strings Gold.)



SCS can sound FAR better than this example


----------



## Vin (May 19, 2017)

HS is my favorite here, followed closely by CSS - Alex Wallbank really did something special with this library. I still love and use CS2 as well.


----------



## Tatu (May 19, 2017)

I expected to answer SSS, but in this example HWS sounds best to my ears and BS sounds.. how to say.. awful.
I have to listen to this through better stuff later though.

1 - HWS - Great over all tone that supports the composition in question.
2/3 - SSS - A bit too muddy balance to my taste and lifeless compared to HWS.
2/3 - CSS - I was a bit "meh" about it, pretty much on par with SSS, but has nicer legatos.
4 - BS - Based on this, I would pay 100USD for this library.



Rodney Money said:


> I put that girl on everything!


Me too! To the point that I've started to get bored of my arrangements


----------



## ctsai89 (May 19, 2017)

Tatu said:


> I expected to answer SSS, but in this example HWS sounds best to my ears and BS sounds.. how to say.. awful.
> I have to listen to this through better stuff later though.
> 
> 1 - HWS - Great over all tone that supports the composition in question.
> ...



lol!!! harsh harsh. But I've heard really good demoes of BS. The vibrato sound in that small symphonic string ensemble is unbeatable.


----------



## Tatu (May 19, 2017)

ctsai89 said:


> lol!!! harsh harsh. But I've heard really good demoes of BS. The vibrato sound in that small symphonic string ensemble is unbeatable.


I shall revise any "false" statements I've made after listening this with better gear.

I've also heard a lot of good come out of BS, so I'd almost like to suspect, that OP has the least experience with it of the four.


----------



## Cat (May 19, 2017)

Thank you all for the comments.

It seems like the Berlin Strings version, although I personally like it a lot, received the least love here  It is true that I have almost no experience with it (I did that version in my friend's studio) but for the revised version I asked my friend (who is very experienced with it) to do the recording (programming) himself.

I agree that BS might sound much better on different demos (different music) found online. Question is - given this music piece, can it do better?

P.S. Tatu, I saw your comment above after I wrote this post


----------



## Vik (May 19, 2017)

I think BS can do better with this piece. Would be interesting to give it a try. 
Very often, when a piece is composed with a certain library, that library does gets in comparisons, because the whole process started with the composer knowing that these harmonies and melodies would match the qualities (tone, legato types, attackm, "mood" etc of that library.) could king from Mural, I was very disappointed at first with Berlin Strings. But even if it's not really difficult to use, it takes some to get used to, or at least I'd did for me. 

Another aspect of this is that sometimes, a weak or unfinished arrangement can sound better with cheesy/glossy string sounds than they would do with sounds that are more close to how strings actually sound in real life. So if a library is better at reavealing how a composition would sound with real strings better than others, that's not always a bad thing.... and I'm not saying that this is what's happening here! I just feel that it's both true that certain libraries are better for certain compositions and that I somehow still feel that BS could do this piece better.


----------



## Rob Elliott (May 19, 2017)

Cat - on the CSS one are you riding the vibrato CC - a LOT? I am not hearing that and I have found with CSS that is super important (but don't cut and paste that CC to each section - having unique curves to each section is highly recommended.) Admittedly CSS' vib control from 0%-100% is not super smooth, but with choral writing like this and each section having it's own vib curves (CC) - it gives that last bit of 'expression and emotion'.


----------



## Cat (May 19, 2017)

Feel free to give it a try, if you would like, in which case I will send you the midi. I personally fail to understand what exactly was wrong with this BS rendition (nor anybody in this thread did actually give any details). 

This example #4 was a little more of a gentle approach, not over the top; I imagine that whoever uses BS would _mostly_ use it in a more delicate context. Correct me if I am wrong. Unfortunately in my audio file it comes after 3 big-sounding libraries renditions. I wonder what it would have happened if I had reversed the order and placed the Berlin example at the very top, followed by the other three... 

What I think it is very important to remember here is that I never intended this to be the most comprehensive, detailed and rigorous comparison between libraries. Is there such thing?  I don't think it is possible. But yes, maybe I should have done it differently: do it as a blind test, provide separate files for each rendition, better match the mixes (I sort of did that in my revision, though), etc...I had fun taking a fragment from a cue, program it with different libraries as good as I was able to in only about 15 minutes for each lib and then I thought I would post it here. Also this test, like the title states, is only focusing on the legatos.



Vik said:


> I think BS can do better with this piece. Would be interesting to give it a try.
> Very often, when a piece is composed with a certain library, that library does gets in comparisons, because the whole process started with the composer knowing that these harmonies and melodies would match the qualities (tone, legato types, attackm, "mood" etc of that library.) could king from Mural, I was very disappointed at first with Berlin Strings. But even if it's not really difficult to use, it takes some to get used to, or at least I'd did for me.
> 
> Another aspect of this is that sometimes, a weak or unfinished arrangement can sound better with cheesy/glossy string sounds than they would do with sounds that are more close to how strings actually sound in real life. So if a library is better at reavealing how a composition would sound with real strings better than others, that's not always a bad thing.... and I'm not saying that this is what's happening here! I just feel that it's both true that certain libraries are better for certain compositions and that I somehow still feel that BS could do this piece better.


----------



## Cat (May 19, 2017)

Thanks, Rob and funny you should say that. The ability to control vibrato, along with having more dynamic layers is crucial for this kind of music, IMHO. Hollywood Strings excels here and I did a lot of vibrato control on that example.

On CSS I did a little as well, though, maybe I should try to do it even more; as far as I remember CSS only has Vib and non-Vib sustains that are crossfaded via CC. No Strong vibrato like the HS. Plus, as you said, the transition vib/non-vib is not that smooth so I was a little shy riding that CC2 

Mural used to have legato patches with CC control from non-vibr/vibrato/strong vibrato. Unfortunately the updated Symphonic Strings performance legato patches only crossfade between non-vib and vibrato. Correct me if I am wrong. It would have made a lot of difference if I could go Strong vibrato on a couple of moments (in example no.1).

Berlin has no way to crossfade the vibrato via CC. You need to decide whether it is non-vib, romantic or strong when you trigger each note.



Rob Elliott said:


> Cat - on the CSS one are you riding the vibrato CC - a LOT? I am not hearing that and I have found with CSS that is super important (but don't cut and paste that CC to each section - having unique curves to each section is highly recommended.) Admittedly CSS' vib control from 0%-100% is not super smooth, but with choral writing like this and each section having it's own vib curves (CC) - it gives that last bit of 'expression and emotion'.


----------



## Symfoniq (May 19, 2017)

Karl Feuerstake said:


> Honestly, normally I'm a huge fan of Spitfire products, but the legato transitions, and some of the short notes just.. do NOT sound good to me. I'm kinda surprised to hear this was a Spitfire product.



This might be an unpopular opinion, but...here goes: Spitfire has yet to release a product with fantastic legato, IMO, and I own most of their orchestral stuff. The legato in Spitfire Chamber Strings is better than Spitfire Symphonic Strings or the Albions, but still doesn't compare with CSS, CS2, or VSL. I love Spitfire longs with con sordino or flautando on top as much as anyone, but after all these libraries, I'm beginning to wonder if it's even possible to sample great legato in Air Studios. Perhaps the room is just too lively.


----------



## Vik (May 19, 2017)

Symfoniq said:


> This might be an unpopular opinion, but...here goes: Spitfire has yet to release a product with fantastic legato, IMO, and I own most of their orchestral stuff. The legato in Spitfire Chamber Strings is better than Spitfire Symphonic Strings or the Albions, but still doesn't compare with CSS, CS2, or VSL. I love Spitfire longs with con sordino or flautando on top as much as anyone, but after all these libraries, I'm beginning to wonder if it's even possible to sample great legato in Air Studios. Perhaps the room is just too lively.


I'm sure it's possible; the studio isn't the problem here. The legatos are often too loud and too long, and also sound less musical in my ears than the other libraries I like. SSS doesn't have legato volume and legato speed control, and in Mural these sliders basically doesn't work. Berlin, CSS, LASS, Hollywood Strings... there are actually many libraries out there which does this better. Maybe Spitfire simply isn't, as a company, so interested in the kind of portamento/legato we're talking about here?


----------



## MA-Simon (May 19, 2017)

prodigalson said:


> SCS can sound FAR better than this example


I agree! This is probably not the demo to end all demos, but just a test, for myself to see how a library handles stuff that is not written specifically with that library in mind on the go. Just to throw something at it and compare how different libraries handle that. Some are more succesfull then others. I still spend about 20-30min editing the midi/automation for each. Imho I know were I would use SCS above another library or the other way arround. Some libraries are faster to work with then others.


----------



## Cat (May 19, 2017)

Following Rob Elliott's advice, I redid the CSS version using more vibrato control:


----------



## Scamper (May 19, 2017)

Cat said:


> Unfortunately the updated Symphonic Strings performance legato patches only crossfade between non-vib and vibrato. Correct me if I am wrong.


Is that the case? 
That would be an upgrade, because the Spitfire Chamber Strings performance legato patches don't have a crossfade at all. It's just on or off.


----------



## Pianolando (May 19, 2017)

Very interesting test, thank you for taking the time!

I use Berlin Strings a lot (only one I own of these four) and love it, but it didn't shine in my ears in this test. Sure, it's a smaller sound, and maybe drier than the other three, so a little bit of reverb could help, but I was surprised it sounded so "harsh".

I expected that I would love SSS but actually the opposite was the case, didn't like the cellos at all. CSS was a bit to dark and muffled for my taste, imho HS beat the rest, sounded big, real and expensive!


----------



## Vik (May 19, 2017)

Scamper said:


> Is that the case?
> That would be an upgrade, because the Spitfire Chamber Strings performance legato patches don't have a crossfade at all. It's just on or off.



From the manual:
"4. EXPRESSIVE CONTROLLERS Dynamics - probably the most important controller you have. This crossfades between the different dynamic layers recorded. Vibrato - where appropriate this crossfades from no (or senza) to lots (molto) vibrato."


----------



## Cat (May 19, 2017)

Yep, the sustain patches have that but not the performance legatos, afaik...

[QUOTE= Vibrato - where appropriate this crossfades from no (or senza) to lots (molto) vibrato."[/QU


----------



## Cat (May 19, 2017)

Hmm, maybe too much Close Mics?



Pianolando said:


> Very interesting test, thank you for taking the time!
> 
> I use Berlin Strings a lot (only one I own of these four) and love it, but it didn't shine in my ears in this test. Sure, it's a smaller sound, and maybe drier than the other three, so a little bit of reverb could help, but I was surprised it sounded so "harsh".
> 
> I expected that I would love SSS but actually the opposite was the case, didn't like the cellos at all. CSS was a bit to dark and muffled for my taste, imho HS beat the rest, sounded big, real and expensive!


----------



## aelwyn (May 19, 2017)

Thanks, Cat, for this interesting comparison. Of these four libraries, I only have Berlin Strings, and while I'm quite happy with it, in this particular comparison, I liked CSS the best. But for me, they were all within a stone's throw of each other.

What really stood out to me, hair-splitting aside, is how good all of these libraries can sound. Taken by themselves, I think they all sound great.


----------



## The Darris (May 19, 2017)

I'm honestly surprised at how well CSS did in this poll considering it was the least dynamic of all of them. I felt Spitfire Symphonic Strings was more dynamic and balanced versus the rest. Berlin Strings just doesn't work well on this piece at all which was surprising since I hear so many great things about it. At least now, in this context, it's not as good as people claim. By the way, great writing @Cat !!


----------



## Scamper (May 19, 2017)

Vik said:


> From the manual:
> "4. EXPRESSIVE CONTROLLERS Dynamics - probably the most important controller you have. This crossfades between the different dynamic layers recorded. Vibrato - where appropriate this crossfades from no (or senza) to lots (molto) vibrato."


That describes the controls in general and is not referring to specific patches. Sure, there are patches with vibrato crossfade, but we were talking about the performance legato patches and those, certainly in SCS, have no crossfade at all. It's a switch at 50%.


----------



## Pianolando (May 19, 2017)

Cat said:


> Hmm, maybe too much Close Mics?



I thought about that as well.


----------



## Vik (May 19, 2017)

Cat said:


> I personally fail to understand what exactly was wrong with this BS rendition (nor anybody in this thread did actually give any details).


Hi Cat! I had a new listen now.
Among the things I notice are:
First bar: the C# in the bass has a low volume, resulting in the other instruments not sounding really together.
The notes under the melody-E in the same bar doesn't sound 'connected' to the lower pitched notes beneath it, so the dynamic 'smell' sounds like it is being played by players don't really listen to each other. In the CSS example, the level of the deeper G# in the same spot makes that section sound more together. 
The F# in bar 3 has a different attack than eg the HWS example, making it sound 'alone' right there.
At 2:47, the melody (G# F# B) isn't properly supported by the underlying notes - eg the bass sounds weak there))
There are also some timing differences, because these libs don't react the same way eg in terms of a how low velocity affects the attack/"fade-in" of a note - and so on. 
So - my comments isn't at all about you not doing a good job, it's just that I don't think the idea of having only 15 minutes with dealing with so many details/notes possibly can offer each of these libs any justice.


----------



## Vik (May 19, 2017)

Scamper said:


> That describes the controls in general and is not referring to specific patches. Sure, there are patches with vibrato crossfade, but we were talking about the performance legato patches and those, certainly in SCS, have no crossfade at all. It's a switch at 50%.


BS don't have vibrato crossfades anywhere, which is one of the arguments for me pro updating from Mural 1/2 to SSS, but now I vaguely remember that I've heard about what you just told me before.


----------



## Cat (May 19, 2017)

Very cool, thank you, Vik. Will look into this when I'll get to my friend's studio next time. I also received your PM and I will send you the MIDI file as per your request  I would love to hear your version, if you find the time to give it a shot.




Vik said:


> Hi Cat! I had a new listen now.
> Among the things I notice are:
> First bar: the C# in the bass has a low volume, resulting in the other instruments not sounding really together.
> The notes under the melody-E in the same bar doesn't sound 'connected' to the lower pitched notes beneath it, so the dynamic 'smell' sounds like it is being played by players don't really listen to each other. In the CSS example, the level of the deeper G# in the same spot makes that section sound more together.
> ...


----------



## markleake (May 19, 2017)

OK, deep breath.... with SSS, you get the following:

Performance Legato: 50% switch for NV / V (Malto); No legato speed, volume or portamento speed controls

Legato Performance Palette (legacy): 33% switch for NV / V (moderate) / V (Malto); Has legato speed, volume and speed controls (but as people have noticed, they don't necessary alter the sound much sometimes - personally for me I find that this is really the portamento control that doesn't change things much, the speed and volume legato controls do seem to work fine for me)

Sul G Legato: Always V; Has Legato speed control, but no legato volume (and portamento is N/A for this patch)

The longs allow for cross-fading between NV/V.

(V = Vibrato, NV = Non-Vibrato)

Someone correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## markleake (May 19, 2017)

markleake said:


> The longs allow for cross-fading between NV/V.


I mean, smoothly across all the vibratos, which I think there are 3 vibrato levels?


----------



## I like music (May 20, 2017)

@Cat - firstly, I love the music itself. Have listened to the line at least 20 times now.

I really liked CSS here (and HWS). My question is, does CSS have crossfades between different vibrato strengths? Or is it simply an on/off?

What are your opinions on the non-vib samples on CSS? Do they sound good? I've found HWS to have a really lush sound regardless, and wondered if the same could be said of CSS's non-vib samples.

Thanks!


----------



## Tatu (May 20, 2017)

I took a better listen and my original opinion stands. But! Berlin Strings does sound better than a 100USD library  HWS still sounds the best, but not because of the legatos, but how the samples behave when riding the wheel.

Usually when I find my self lost in mud with Mural (SSS), I end up transposing it up a third - fifth for more clarity.


----------



## Cat (May 20, 2017)

@I like music: Thank you and yes, CSS has crossfade control between non-vib and vibrato. So if you move the vibrato assigned CC to, say CC2=64, you will hear both vibrato and non-vibrato sustains. It's like some players play with Vib, some don't. It is cool because it gives you more control and expressiveness. Downside is that it makes the sound bigger (as if twice as many players were playing). Not really a concern with samples, it sounds okay.

@markleake: you are right, Spitfire (at least SSS) doesn't have vibrato crossfading but rather switching. For the SSS Performance patches there are only two settings: non-vib (CC= 0-64) or Molto-vibrato (strong vibrato) (CC=65-127). Too bad the intermediate vibrato is missing. All three settings are available in the Sustain patch though but in a nice fluid/legato line I can't use any Sustain patches with SSS because of their bad release behaviour.

In my opinion, Spitfire (SSS and possibly CSC which I don't have) would be improved enormously if they did three small changes:
1. Legato Volume control (the volume of the transition samples) and one that actually works.
2. Release volume control (volume of the Release Triggered or "RT" samples) -for all the performance patches and the sustain patches, including Blend CS which is gorgeously sounding.
3. Adding back the third vibrato setting (the middle vibrato) to the Performance patches. Having 3 vibrato settings is very important. Again, that is the case in the Mural and in the SSS legacy patches but these patches have too many issues...

@Tatu Hollywood Strings has 5 dynamic layers (the most of all the libraries), with 3 vibrato settings that crossfade from one to another (not just switch). It requires a powerful computer but the expressiveness is fantastic. It might sound too lush and too big for certain types of music but in this example it was okay.


----------



## Tatu (May 20, 2017)

Cat said:


> @Tatu Hollywood Strings has 5 dynamic layers (the most of all the libraries), with 3 vibrato settings that crossfade from one to another (not just switch). It requires a powerful computer but the expressiveness is fantastic. It might sound too lush and too big for certain types of music but in this example it was okay


After all these years I'm tempted to pick HWS.


----------



## Vik (May 20, 2017)

Cat said:


> In my opinion, Spitfire (SSS and possibly CSC which I don't have) would be improved enormously if they did three small changes:
> 1. Legato Volume control - one that actually works.
> 2. Release volume control (for all the performance patches and the sustain patches, including Blend CS which is gorgeously sounding).
> 3. Adding back the third vibrato setting to the performance patches, if possible. Having 3 vibrato settings is very important


Portamento speed control would be brilliant as well.


----------



## Cat (May 20, 2017)

Tatu said:


> After all these years I'm tempted to pick HWS.


Go for the Diamond if you can.


----------



## kavinsky (May 20, 2017)

This thread is great and really reflective of my own experience.

I'm not surprised by BS performance here at all, this thing just does not work for this kind of music that well and I've been saying it here for years, and was hated for it ha. But hype only lives up to a point the good shootout takes place.

Yet again, no surprise about HWS, this one just never fails simply because it was recorded so well, it just always sounds expensive no matter who uses it or how fiddly you go about it.
Actually I find the comments that suggest that you should fiddle with the lib for days to make it sound good completely irrelevant.

The success of CSS comes at no surprise too. I think it's that golden era sound of vibrato that really makes this product unique. We all subconsciously react to those Morricone vibratos, it's just something universally emotional imo. Masterfully scripted legatos only add to its greatness. It does sound dark but anybody with a basic mixing skills can fix it in a moments notice.

I own SSS aswell and I agree that legatos never been its' strongest side. Nothing to add here really, not the worst option and certainly not the best by s long shot.

Somebody posted soaring strings and I quite liked it on that part with 8va violins, nice vibs

I'll be back at the studio in a few weeks and could add a few more libs to the comparison.
Thanks for doing this one. I constantly shootout stuff for my own purposes and it's cool when somebody else does this, could save some time when you're trying to find a right sound for the cue.
Also, if the music was just slightly different, the results could be 100% reversed, for example Berlin really shines for spicc riffage.


----------



## Sebastianmu (May 20, 2017)

IMHO I think Berlin Strings example only sounds that bad because it's badly programmed* and has way too much of the close mics in the mix.

(* the midi cc stuff)


----------



## Cat (May 20, 2017)

Very good points, thank you.
CSS does sound darker (and warm?) and I personally love that! I would not consider brightening it too much (I did a bit of bump at 6-8 kHz though). If I need a brighter sound I would use HWS instead. Just my taste, of course ... 



kavinsky said:


> This thread is great and really reflective of my own experience.
> 
> I'm not surprised by BS performance here at all, this thing just does not work for this kind of music that well and I've been saying it here for years, and was hated for it ha. But hype only lives up to a point the good shootout takes place.
> 
> ...


----------



## Vik (May 20, 2017)

Cat said:


> I would not consider brightening it too much


Thanks for the MIDI file, Cat! I'd like to try to make a version with Berlin's Sul Tasto presets, but meanwhile - I removed (for now) some of your automation and changed some small stuff (and made the last note longer)... so in addition to only be half done with it, this lacks both dynamics and is probably much brighter than you want it to. I'm only posting it to show one of the many faces of Berlin Strings - even if its' unfinished and sounds a bit synthy at times. There's also a too abrupt attack in the bass (cello?) at some point; either my preset is somehow corrupted or some of the original BS presets have a sudden attack on low velocities and a sifter attack on harder velocities. Oh well. I'll probably remove this file after a couple of days anyway.

Your main theme was played by the viola - a favourite instrument of mine - but IMO, the BS violas don't sound so good in the register you used. So I added some violin there as well. And since BS clearly is a clearly smaller ensemble than all the others, I did some other small changes as well. I like this little composition!


----------



## midiman (May 20, 2017)

3 is the best by far in terms of fluidity and realism of legato. 2 is also very good.


----------



## markleake (May 20, 2017)

I've listened to these quite a few times now, on two different systems. Personally I think all 4 of the libraries sound good, and the legatos work fine. The legatos are a bit different between each, with CSS being the smoothest here, but really it is personal taste and what you are using the library for. While HWS does sound very good here, I think personally I still prefer SSS over all. HWS seems to come across as a little too thick and full, and I find SSS is more naturally expressive when writing with it vs. HWS. CSS can get a little samey over time, as the legatos are a bit emphasized, although your don't notice it here due to the shortness of the track. SSS strikes a good ballance for me personally.

What about Cinematic Strings 2 though? I still use that library a lot, and it has good legatos too. Is CS2 suddenly out of favour?


----------



## Tatu (May 21, 2017)

markleake said:


> What about Cinematic Strings 2 though? I still use that library a lot, and it has good legatos too. Is CS2 suddenly out of favour?


Well, Tom "Junkie XL" Holkenborg still - understandably - seems to prefer it, so I'd say don't worry.

I also think that legatos are OK on each of them and pay more attention to tone.


----------



## Erik (May 21, 2017)

Very interesting thread. Thank you CAT!

Here _my two cents_:

Cinematic Strings
VSL Dimension Strings, except for Violins 1: Auddict USO vl1.
VSL Dimension Strings exclusively


Of course CS does the job much better VSL DS in their than the chamber strings setting. I wasn't able to get real decent musical results with the VSL Orchestra Strings, maybe someone else?
Eagerly waiting for the release of the rest of the Auddict strings btw.

Anyway, I hope this was a useful contribution. Maybe I'll add a different SCS also.


----------



## Cat (May 21, 2017)

Thank you Erik and Vik for posting your versions. I liked the CS version (I suppose it is the original Cinematic Strings library) and also Vik's Berlin Strings is good but I thought I would give it another try myself as well. okay, now I am way outside the allowed 15 minutes for this version haha...

So here is another version of Berlin Strings - I reduced the Close mics volume, added EWQL Spaces reverb (ACME preset) and more Valhalla Room reverb, 670 compressor warmth and L2 limiter. I also redrew all the CCs and made some notes playing with "strong reverb" (CC3). I wish we had a progressive control of the vibrato (crossfade) but for now this will do. I agree with Vik, Berlin's violas don't sound quite fantastic in this register, normally I would have changed the arrangement to fix this; but in the realm of this test I am not allowed to  Also in the last part I would have normally gone one octave higher with Vln1/Vln2 8va but I did not change this either (my original film cue also had woodwinds and a bit of brass supporting the strings). So here it is:


----------



## passsacaglia (May 22, 2017)

Nice one Cat!
ps what notes did you use playing the low chords? 1 - 2 (5ths or 1-1 octave?) or 3 or more?

Always when I do stuff I think my sound is too heavy/bassy in the low chords supporting the melody.
Anyone else can also give their input on pref. chord combinations for different types of sound...or else I'll just make a thread 

or if some of you guys mind sharing the midi? Can't find it


----------



## passsacaglia (May 22, 2017)

passsacaglia said:


> Nice one Cat!
> ps what notes did you use playing the low chords? 1 - 2 (5ths or 1-1 octave?) or 3 or more?
> 
> Always when I do stuff I think my sound is too heavy/bassy in the low chords supporting the melody.
> ...


or if someone perhaps would like to share their project file (Logic Pro X).


----------



## Scamper (May 22, 2017)

Can I get a MIDI file? I'd like to make a version using Spitfire Chamber Strings.


----------



## I like music (May 22, 2017)

Would love to see a midi file for this if possible. Love the lines, and my transcription skills are basically minimal, so it'd be amazing to see what you've written, and how you've done it.


----------



## Erik (May 22, 2017)

Already finished for the moment: some versions with SCS.

Default: one section each voice
Doubled (-2 transp.)
Tripled (+2 transp.)
as 3 but some touch of verb added.


Of course interesting to hear more SCS contributions!


----------



## EuropaWill (May 22, 2017)

Here is my VSL Dimension Strings attempt... I learned a lot during this exercise so thank you to Cat for starting this thread! After much midi editing, I've come away with the realization Cat is a guru of strings rendering. That he was able to get those results in 15 minutes (especially Spitfire and HS) proves just that. I certainly struggled to get DS to sound lush and moving in a way that tried to emulate those examples, but I believe it falls short by a margin. I'm new to the process so i'm glad to share my version nonetheless.


----------



## Replicant (May 22, 2017)

To my ears, Hollywood Strings sounded the best with CSS tailgating it hard.


----------



## EuropaWill (May 23, 2017)

Erik said:


> Already finished for the moment: some versions with SCS.
> 
> Default: one section each voice
> Doubled (-2 transp.)
> ...



Erik, Can you explain technically how you doubled and tripled each section? Do you have to render the midi to audio first a few semi-tones down, then speed up the audio for playback so it hits the right pitch? Or do you transpose all the midi down 2 semitones and then midi pitchbend it up 2? I really wish I could figure out how to do it in realtime with midi pitchbend but I can't seem to figure it out.


----------



## Erik (May 23, 2017)

I retuned a second set of all patches in Kontakt . -2. Then transposed in Cubase +2. The third set reversed. So you'll have a sort of multiplied Chamber Ensemble. That's about it.


----------



## EuropaWill (May 23, 2017)

Erik said:


> I retuned a second set of all patches in Kontakt . -2. Then transposed in Cubase +2. The third set reversed. So you'll have a sort of multiplied Chamber Ensemble. That's about it.


Thank you! This will work for playback and I'll experiment with it. VSL DS is also quite chamber like and its violin section is not very lush sounding with only 8 players (and due to their performance). I wonder if there is a plugin that allows you to automatically pitchbend everything in realtime during the recording process but that doesn't result in stuck open notes, etc...


----------



## EuropaWill (May 26, 2017)

Cat, sorry for the minor detour in my last two posts...but getting back to the topic at hand: I'm curious out of the 4 libraries you originally posted examples of - which was easiest for you to achieve the results you achieved? I'm pretty sure Berlin wont be the answer since you had to go back to it multiple times. I'm most interested to hear about your workflow experience between Spitfire and Hollywood - which allowed you to work faster and more intuitively? Does either have certain pitfalls you must go out of your way to avoid? Which is your "goto" library for this kind of style?


----------



## Cat (May 27, 2017)

I would say that both HWS and CSS were pretty easy to work with. With HWS I have the most experience. I have to say that Berlin Strings was not bad at all, it was just that I initially messed up due to my lack of experience with it (I used too much close mics and I had a template issue related to triggering various type of legatos - fixed in the meanwhile).

Spitfire I have always found to be the hardest to work with, by far. I have a lot of experience with it (and with Mural, before, as well as with other BML collections) but it needs a lot of work. The legatos are simply not as smooth as they could be (see my previous post where I explained why and what it would need to improve, IMO) so I need to keep shaping those CCs until I can live with them. I love the sound though so in the end it is worth the extra effort.




EuropaWill said:


> Cat, sorry for the minor detour in my last two posts...but getting back to the topic at hand: I'm curious out of the 4 libraries you originally posted examples of - which was easiest for you to achieve the results you achieved? I'm pretty sure Berlin wont be the answer since you had to go back to it multiple times. I'm most interested to hear about your workflow experience between Spitfire and Hollywood - which allowed you to work faster and more intuitively? Does either have certain pitfalls you must go out of your way to avoid? Which is your "goto" library for this kind of style?


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 27, 2017)

Cat said:


> Spitfire I have always found the hardest to work with, by far. I have a lot of experience with it (and with Mural, before, as well as with other BML collections) but still it needs a lot of work. The legatos are simply not as smooth as they could be (see my previous post where I explain why and what it would need to improve, IMO).



I'm not always happy with the Albion string legatos (I switch between the new and old libraries for that articulation, they both have their uses imo), however considering One is basically a sketchpad (and sometimes a nicely broadening source of layers) it never bothered me. 

Albion One (the more recent) does have some terrific woodwind legato imo, and I think that's one of the aspects of the library that could be used bald in a final mockup. Off topic but I thought it bore mentioning.


----------



## SillyMidOn (May 27, 2017)

Parsifal666 said:


> I'm not always happy with the Albion string legatos (I switch between the new and old libraries for that articulation, they both have their uses imo), however considering One is basically a sketchpad (and sometimes a nicely broadening source of layers) it never bothered me.
> 
> Albion One (the more recent) does have some terrific woodwind legato imo, and I think that's one of the aspects of the library that could be used bald in a final mockup. Off topic but I thought it bore mentioning.


Those woodwinds in Albion One are fantastic - they sit so well in a virtual instrument mix. I sometimes find myself scoring everything neatly for each instrument in the woodwind section using East West Hollywood Woodwinds, then when I'm done I simplify all the woodwinds down to a piano reduction, stick it into Albion High and Low woodwind patches, and boom, it sounds better than everything "correctly scored" in Hollywood Woodwinds.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 27, 2017)

SillyMidOn said:


> Those woodwinds in Albion One are fantastic - they sit so well in a virtual instrument mix. I sometimes find myself scoring everything neatly for each instrument in the woodwind section using East West Hollywood Woodwinds, then when I'm done I simplify all the woodwinds down to a piano reduction, stick it into Albion High and Low woodwind patches, and boom, it sounds better than everything "correctly scored" in Hollywood Woodwinds.



Great strategy, and how about the arranged WW patches? Makes things nice and easy, and they sound great as well imo.

I checked up, the only time I've used Albion One in a final mockdown (besides layering) was the abovementioned woodwind patches, and that to-die-for pair of spiccato and staccato/spiccato patches in the strings (ee-HAW love 'em!).


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 27, 2017)

You could try using the legato WWs for a sweeping melody, using the arranged WW shorts in a rhythmic pattern, alternating intricately with the spiccato strings. Then you have a bit of a tapestry. I've used this several times, and it's a very gratifying thing to do. If you keep the chords simple and few, it can draw you irresistibly in: MORE INSPIRATION!


----------



## SillyMidOn (May 28, 2017)

Parsifal666 said:


> Great strategy, and how about the arranged WW patches? Makes things nice and easy, and they sound great as well imo.



Apologies - what do you mean by the "arranged WW patches"?



Parsifal666 said:


> I checked up, the only time I've used Albion One in a final mockdown (besides layering) was the abovementioned woodwind patches, and that to-die-for pair of spiccato and staccato/spiccato patches in the strings (ee-HAW love 'em!).



Haha, yes, we are thinking along very similar lines here. I actually use those spiccato patches from a very early version of the original Albion, (v1 me thinks) - as there is a key-switch somewhere low down on the keyboard that you can hit to make them "tight"and not have that over the top loose feel. The one other thing I often use in a final mix is the Easter Island hits, with some fx on for low sub hits.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 28, 2017)

SillyMidOn said:


> Apologies - what do you mean by the "arranged WW patches"?
> 
> 
> 
> Haha, yes, we are thinking along very similar lines here. I actually use those spiccato patches from a very early version of the original Albion, (v1 me thinks) - as there is a key-switch somewhere low down on the keyboard that you can hit to make them "tight"and not have that over the top loose feel. The one other thing I often use in a final mix is the Easter Island hits, with some fx on for low sub hits.



Hmm, sounds like I'll have fun messing about with those Legacy KS later today 

When you open the Hi Woodwinds section of Albion One you have the short and long arranged patches along with the "regular". You might have already used them without thinking, because they fit in so well. For a far better explanation of how they work than I could do, simply make a sustained, single note midi entry using the long arranged patch, then render it and extract the midi from there. It's a very interesting and (particularly for sketches but far from just that) useful set of patches.


----------



## SillyMidOn (May 28, 2017)

Parsifal666 said:


> Hmm, sounds like I'll have fun messing about with those Legacy KS later today
> 
> When you open the Hi Woodwinds section of Albion One you have the short and long arranged patches along with the "regular". You might have already used them without thinking, because they fit in so well. For a far better explanation of how they work than I could do, simply make a sustained, single note midi entry using the long arranged patch, then render it and extract the midi from there. It's a very interesting and (particularly for sketches but far from just that) useful set of patches.


That keyswitch is at A#-1 on the v1v2 Ostinatum patch in Version 3 of Albion 1 (the old Albion 1). They got rid of it, afaik, in later versions.

Apologies, I'm still not quite sure which patches you are referring to - there are fx x 3, shorts, short alt, long, long alt, legato - I'm talking about the "old" Albion 1.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 28, 2017)

SillyMidOn said:


> Apologies, I'm still not quite sure which patches you are referring to - there are fx x 3, shorts, short alt, long, long alt, legato - I'm talking about the "old" Albion 1.



Blergh, sorry about that. 

I meant the more recent One.

Oh and how great is the ostinatum in both Legacy and One? HUGELY helpful...it can also help me when I get stuck in general.


----------



## SillyMidOn (May 29, 2017)

Parsifal666 said:


> Blergh, sorry about that.
> 
> I meant the more recent One.
> 
> Oh and how great is the ostinatum in both Legacy and One? HUGELY helpful...it can also help me when I get stuck in general.


My bad - should have mentioned I only have the "old" decrepit, moth-balled version of Albion


----------



## Cat (May 29, 2017)

Very cool, maybe we need to create a separate Albion thread? 



SillyMidOn said:


> My bad - should have mentioned I only have the "old" decrepit, moth-balled version of Albion


----------



## Ihnoc (Jul 5, 2017)

Thank you very much @Cat for opening my ears. All 4 of these are on my list as an upgrade to the VSL SE strings I've currently. I was quite surprised by CSS with its emotional tone, and HW with what feels like a cue that's already had a pass from an engineer.

To you and those who have used it, Orchestral Tools touts the legato scripting for BS and that is what was drawing me to it. In this context, accents, intonation wobbling and fast legato aren't so pertinent. However, do people find those automatic options for legato beneficial or realistic, in comparison to CSS? The poll would suggest not...


----------



## ctsai89 (Jul 5, 2017)

Erik said:


> Already finished for the moment: some versions with SCS.
> 
> Default: one section each voice
> Doubled (-2 transp.)
> ...




SCS just sounds like it has way too much volume bumps.. SSS doens't do that nearly as often.


----------

