# SHY DEER (Kirk Hunter Spotlight Strings)



## Hannes_F

The story why I wrote this is quite strange - it is an ongoing joke between Piet and me that whenever he finds something extra bad I try my hand on it to prove the opposite for a challenge.

This time it is the new Kirk Hunter Spotlight Strings. I found them to follow a quite ingenious concept: The strings themselves are recorded without vibrato which is then added within the Kontakt player. Do that for 18 individual voices ( 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 2) and you have a chamber orchestra . . . which then transforms into a full strings orchestra by a magic Ripieno button 

(Disclaimer: In the above calculation I counted Violins 2 seperately from Violins 1 because that is how I use them, however the KH Spotlight strings deliver only one Violins instrument and the rest is then up to your mixing.)

All Instruments fully loaded into Kontakt (full version) take approx. 2 GB of RAM and for that you can have as much solo, chair, small group and big section voices as you desire without extra RAM cost. Number one why I like them. (But the load on the CPU is not neglectable, I use a i7 for it).

Also, I found that these strings inspire me for writing. I don't know, sometimes it clicks and sometimes it does not. For me it does, I love the concept and what it does and it makes me write. Perhaps because it is far enough away from the uncanny valley. But I think it is more the fact that I can have control over things that are not possible with other libraries, and this helps me to make a musical statement. I actually found that I don't care too much whether samples sound 'real' as long as I can have bespoke expression, and that works with these strings.

The point is that one can regulate (and automate) everything independently, if one wishes: Attack, volume, vibrato depth and vibrato speed. For doing things quick and easy these are all tied together and steerable with velocity and modwheel, but I prefer to untie the parameters and automate each of them, which is possible. In a certain way the working with this library can be similar to the old Garritan Strad or the Garritan Goffriller. So I guess these are my go-to strings for writing now. Go figure.

I used the built-in reverb and did not have time yet to experiment with others. Also I used Virtual SoundStage and Proximity for pushing things back, and also EQ of course. Still, my mixes are on the bright side, it is a plague because my ears miss so much if I muffle it, sorry for that.

Unfortunately, after I had set up everything to my liking the actual composition time nearly ran out and I will not have more time for this and the next week, so here is a quick and dirty mixdown of a work in progress, to be continued. It just ends after the deer has once showed.

Thank you for listening.

EDIT
3rd Version with own reverb switched off
[mp3]http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/KH_Spotligh_Strings_Spaces.mp3[/mp3]
Direct link:
http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/KH_S ... Spaces.mp3

Second version:
[mp3]http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/KH_Spotlight_mixdown_02_20140127.mp3[/mp3]
Direct link:
http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/KH_S ... 140127.mp3

First version:
[mp3]http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/KH_Spotlight_mixdown_01_20140127.mp3[/mp3]

Direct link:
http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/KH_S ... 140127.mp3


----------



## ProtectedRights

Oh dear, at least this is not a commercial announcement. 

Are Spotfire Strings different from Spotlight Strings?

Hannes, to be honest, your piece did not manage to convince me of this product at all. I am kind of shy to express it in any more detail cause I don't know whether that is appreciated in this forum.


----------



## Hannes_F

Spotlight, not Spotfire.

Detailed critique is good, broad-sweeping critique not so much imo.


----------



## rayinstirling

Where can I listen with my iPad?


----------



## Hanu_H

Yeah this confirms everything I had in my mind. If a experienced composer and violinist like you can't make this library sound better than this, it's definitely not worth even downloading the demo. The cellos sound like a midi instrument, violins sound a bit better sometimes but they also have this weird phasing sound going on. There's no air in the samples and the sound is totally dead, it doesn't even sound sampled but more like a synth...

Your composition sounds nice but I really can't enjoy it with that library. Appreciate the time and effort you put in it, keep up the good work!

-Hannes


----------



## Hannes_F

@ Hanu_H 
Ah, experienced composer . . . not so much. Still searching the light.

@ Ray
I added a direct link, does that help?


----------



## ryans

Hi Hannes, I like the piece.

There are a couple frequencies bothering my ears, guessing around 120 - 160Hz and another one 330 - 400 (guessing) I some subractive EQ would greatly assist. I hear air there.. it's just hard to hear with all that low-mid activity going on.

The sustained notes in the cellos stood out to me as pretty flat and lifeless.. mostly due to a lack of natural dynamics.. 

Violins sound not bad, quite nice in a few places although the quick passages aren't very convincing.

Most of the short notes sound useable to me..

Ryan


----------



## KingIdiot

I'm sorry Hannes.

I really find this boxy and romplerish.

just a bit above GPO territory.

it may be inspiring to you as a writer, but as a listener it's distracting. This might be because I have critical ears, but it feels very mock. Like something you'd hear in the wing commander days, or space quest 12 (which in itself isn't a BAD thing, unless you're trying to compare in terms of what can be done with similar libraries and these low pricepoints, with regards to this crazy realism chase everyone is after)

it's awesome that it's inspiring to you and the way you write. That should be the selling point?


----------



## rayinstirling

Thanks Hannes,
I managed to have a listen with the ear buds but perhaps I should wait until I'm back in my music room before deciding on comment if any. I actually didn't express an opinion on my own effort with the library but I think some folks actually liked it and bought it.
At the end of the day, it's our own money we spend and therefore our own responsibility when doing so.
Cheers
Ray


----------



## JE Martinsen

ryans @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> Hi Hannes, I like the piece.
> 
> The sustained notes in the cellos stood out to me as pretty flat and lifeless.. mostly due to a lack of natural dynamics..
> 
> Violins sound not bad, quite nice in a few places although the quick passages aren't very convincing.



I agree with Ryan here. I don't really know how a real string orchestra "is supposed to sound" to the tiniest detail, so I can just base my comment on what I hear and how I feel about that.. :mrgreen: 

I quite like the demo, Hannes! But this demo also shows the same thing I've heard in the other KH demos. It's this "boxy" sound, especially on the cellos IMHO. It sounds like the orchestra has been stacked together playing in a closet. This is perhaps just a preference thing, but I really miss some air and openness to the KH strings.

Thanks for your post and the demo, Hannes!


----------



## Hannes_F

@ryans
Thanks for the detailed response. When I go for the second part I will watch those boomy basses. As for the air - it might just be an overcompensation on my part because I know that my mixes tend to bright. I deactivated an EQ that sat on the sum and was probably responsible for killing the air for a second version.

@KingIdiot
Thanks for listening. It gets some creative juices flowing for me . . . perhaps, as I said, because it is wide enough away from the uncanny valley. Or my brain adds all that your ears are missing, who knows.

@JE Martinsen
Yes, the infamous boxy sound - quite an obstacle. Once it is in the recording then no filter can remove it any more, how true. However there are more libraries that suffer from this.


----------



## synergy543

Nice piece Hannes and I applaud your valiant effort. Interesting points about the controllability and being far enough away from the Uncanny Valley. From a compositional standpoint I can see the merit of having easy manipulation over the sound parameters. I have felt the same thing about NotePerformer (my preference) in Sibelius which is so convenient as it lets me just focus on the notes and eliminates loading times and complexity. I suppose for each of us we need to decide where the best cost/performance balance is (both in terms of money and time spent). Thanks for sharing.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Sounds OK but obviously does still need considerably more massaging.

BTW, here is my Ask Audio article on Spotlight Strings that was just posted.

http://www.askaudiomag.com/articles/review-kirk-hunter-studios-spotlight-strings (http://www.askaudiomag.com/articles/rev ... ht-strings)


----------



## ProtectedRights

Well I doubt that the boxy sound that many notice can be fixed by "massaging" or EQ. Phase cancellations can't be undone, and I suppose thats the origin of the boxiness. You can improve the sound a little through EQing, but not bring life fully back to it.


----------



## Ian Dorsch

This is a brave endeavor, Hannes! I like the writing very much. 

I agree that the sound of the library really leaves a lot to be desired, though. The timbre is mostly quite unpleasant to my ears, especially the sustains. I honestly do not think it is a stretch to say that one could get more sonically pleasing results with the old Roland orchestral samples and a decent reverb.

Very cool that you have found it inspiring, though. To echo KI's post above, maybe its value is more as a writing tool and less as a production tool?


----------



## JE Martinsen

Hannes_F @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> @JE Martinsen
> Yes, the infamous boxy sound - quite an obstacle. Once it is in the recording then no filter can remove it any more, how true.



Hehe! I don't know if that was ironically meant, but I suppose you COULD come a long way with some clever EQ'ing? But of course it would be preferable if the sound out of the box is such that it doesn't really require much EQ to get the tone you're after.


----------



## ProtectedRights

I corrected my post above where I was saying the opposite of what I was intending to say.


----------



## Hannes_F

@JE Martinsen
No, it was not ironically. The boxy sound usually is a more a time domain phenomenon, so EQ has a hard time to cure it. But of course it could be worth a try.
Also possible that it comes from the built-in reverb or the use of VSS but I did not have time to switch and test.
In any case the raw sound of the library needs to be pushed back by some means, it is very close.


----------



## jleckie

EastWest Lurker @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> Sounds OK but obviously does still need considerably more massaging.
> 
> BTW, here is my Ask Audio article on Spotlight Strings that was just posted.
> 
> http://www.askaudiomag.com/articles/review-kirk-hunter-studios-spotlight-strings (http://www.askaudiomag.com/articles/rev ... ht-strings)



The article says," After much testing, Jay Asher discovers it is even better than it sounds."

HOW exactly is a sample library 'better' than it sounds?


----------



## JE Martinsen

I can't help but wonder why it sounds the way it does, out of curiosity. Microphone placement issues? Choice of microphones? EQ'ing in post production? I mean, a violin or a cello doesn't sound like this if you were to stand in the same room as the player?

I would like to hear which other libraries you think suffers from this "boxy" sound, Hannes. It would be useful to hear as a comparison to the KH libraries. But I certainly understand if you don't want to share that here.


----------



## Hannes_F

JE Martinsen @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> I can't help but wonder why it sounds the way it does, out of curiosity. Microphone placement issues? Choice of microphones? EQ'ing in post production? I mean, a violin or a cello doesn't sound like this if you were to stand in the same room as the player?



But stick a microphone in front of the player and in many cases it will sound pretty much like the raw recordings used in this library. Recording strings instruments is not easy, it is an artform. Oh yes . . .


----------



## EastWest Lurker

jleckie @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Mon Jan 27 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds OK but obviously does still need considerably more massaging.
> 
> BTW, here is my Ask Audio article on Spotlight Strings that was just posted.
> 
> http://www.askaudiomag.com/articles/review-kirk-hunter-studios-spotlight-strings (http://www.askaudiomag.com/articles/rev ... ht-strings)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The article says," After much testing, Jay Asher discovers it is even better than it sounds."
> 
> HOW exactly is a sample library 'better' than it sounds?
Click to expand...


I didn't write that, the editor did. I am guessing he means all the soli and ripeno options, but, yes, it does read a little oddly.


----------



## germancomponist

Hannes_F @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> But stick a microphone in front of the player and in many cases it will sound pretty much like the raw recordings used in this library. Recording strings instruments is not easy, it is an artform. Oh yes . . .



+1 

Exactly! 

And this is true not only for string instruments recordings!


----------



## Hannes_F

@ JE Martinsen
To the boxyness: It did not bother me particularly. Perhaps because I remember the times when we were rehearsing with string chamber orchestras in small rooms and I could not decide whether to fall in love with the cellist girl, the violinist girl or neither of them (don't say both). The sound in that situation is supposed to be raw and boxy.
Of course I can understand that most people want to have a LSO sound because that is the market - no question about that.


----------



## Ian Dorsch

Hannes_F @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> @ JE Martinsen
> To the boxyness: It did not bother me particularly. Perhaps because I remember the times when we were rehearsing with string chamber orchestras in small rooms and I could not decide whether to fall in love with the cellist girl, the violinist girl or neither of them (don't say both).



:lol:


----------



## ProtectedRights

Don't know if this is appropriate to judge micing technology, but this video is obviously recorded in a very very small room yet it sounds full, open and natural:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rrys0E5Yesk


----------



## Hannes_F

ProtectedRights @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> Don't know if this is appropriate to judge micing technology, but this video is obviously recorded in a very very small room yet it sounds full, open and natural:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rrys0E5Yesk



No, there is a small room signature in the sound that will not go away if you put that into a virtually bigger space. It is nice but it is what it is.


----------



## re-peat

There is a part of my brain that is actually capable of making me say positive, kind, good and helpful things ...
... but everytime I hear Kirk Hunter samples, it seems to switch itself off completely.

I admire your courage here, Hannes, but I fear that this time you went against an adversary of such uglyphiliac and antikalonite disposition that it will never surrender and assume the role of a good-sounding and useful stringslibrary.

_


----------



## JE Martinsen

Hannes_F @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> JE Martinsen @ Mon Jan 27 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can't help but wonder why it sounds the way it does, out of curiosity. Microphone placement issues? Choice of microphones? EQ'ing in post production? I mean, a violin or a cello doesn't sound like this if you were to stand in the same room as the player?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But stick a microphone in front of the player and in many cases it will sound pretty much like the raw recordings used in this library. Recording strings instruments is not easy, it is an artform. Oh yes . . .
Click to expand...


Hehe, I've figured that much out.. If recording a string sample library would be merely a cakewalk, based on a standard procedure every developer would prefer.. Well, then we wouldn't have all these wonderful (and perhaps not so wonderful) discussions.. :lol:

Perhaps KH is one of the few who are closest to the raw "boxy" sound one would hear in a real life environment standing next to the player? I'm not being sarcastic here, I'm serious. Maybe most of the string sample libraries I've heard have some added colour to them, not in the form of EQ'ing perhaps, but in the choice of microphones/placement, preamps and various recording techniques. Making them sound marvellously good, but not so realistic. I would definitely be willing to say these strings sound more realistic (and not "boxy" sounding) if that is the case. I just don't know, but I'm hoping to learn more about this.


----------



## KingIdiot

strings are difficult to get tonality right on. They are even more difficult ... it seems, to get sampled correctly. 

To be fair. I think the new offerings fall short as well. So yes I *AM* overly critical, but part of it comes form knowing that it can be done differently.

That said. I can totally see how it being far away form teh uncanny valley, especially if you work with live stuff all the time, can help you focus on composition and not wonder why something doesn't sound right.

As well, I know you, Hannes, are pretty averse to deep vibrato in sustain sections except for here and there, and I'm pretty sure these KH strings can do deeper vib, even if it's fake 

I don't think any of these things are useless. I do question some peoples ears sometimes, but then I have to remind myself that we all come at it form different vantage points and towards different ideals. It's a grand canyon of opportunity with all the stuff available. Buy any one of them, and try to focus on making music.


This realism stuff drives me nuts. I'd like to hear more pieces by everyone just having fun or exercising like this. It *really* reminds me of the old days. When it was all about inspiration, and not, shut up and take my money.


----------



## Hannes_F

@Piet
If nothing else I always learn a few new words from each of your posts.


----------



## ProtectedRights

Guys, get your dictionaries out


----------



## JE Martinsen

TBH, I'm very happy there ISN'T a standard string sample library sound that all others are judged by and compared to. I am very fond of my Adagietto strings, because they have a unique sound - which I like. But I'm also glad I have the "old" Peter Siedlazek COC for a very different, but to me warm and beautiful sound. It's good to have different sounding string libraries for different occasions. And after all it's just a matter of taste.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

JE Martinsen @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> TBH, I'm very happy there ISN'T a standard string sample library sound that all others are judged by and compared to. And after all it's just a matter of taste.



Yep.


----------



## germancomponist

JE Martinsen @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> TBH, I'm very happy there ISN'T a standard string sample library sound that all others are judged by and compared to. I am very fond of my Adagiettio strings, because they have a unique sound - which I like. But I'm also glad I have the "old" Peter Siedlazek COC for a very different, but to me warm and beautiful sound. It's good to have different sounding string libraries for different occasions. And after all it's just a matter of taste.



Yeah, and I sometimes use my old EMU samples because I love them... . The 6 french horn patch sounds also even awesome nowadays!


----------



## AC986

Hannes_F @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> @Piet
> If nothing else I always learn a few new words from each of your posts.



:lol: 

Nice music though Hannes.


----------



## re-peat

Hannes_F @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> @Piet
> If nothing else I always learn a few new words from each of your posts.


Well, I'm not going to make the same mistake again of using plain English to describe my sentiments on the subject, am I? So I had to think up a few new words to convey the unconveyable.

_Uglyphilia_ is self-explanatory I suppose. And if I remember the teachings of Mr. Van Puyenbroeck well, _kalon_ (or _kallos_) is the old Greek word of 'beauty' and 'inner beauty'. The 'call' in _calligraphy_ comes from there, for example. (Not the 'call' in _call-girl_ though.)

_


----------



## Jaap

The writing itself is lovely Hannes, no doubt about that 

The sound of the strings and the midi programming couldn't convince me to be honest, but we are spoiled nowadays with lushy and large sounding strings.
If you actually would record this with a live ensemble full of conservatory students in a bad concerthall, the actuall diference wouldn't be that big I think.
I actually remember this kind of soundings when students performed my pieces when I was a student myself haha.

Overall it sounded a bit like if it came directly out of Finale (though I am still stuck with my 2009 version so dunno if it still sounds the same, but can't imagine that part improved that much)
But again, lovely writing


----------



## rayinstirling

Hannes,

Just before I go do my real job I've had a listen and play with your piece in wavelab this morning.
My conclusion is, if you tidy it up a bit but play the solo part yourself it will work quite nicely.

Catch up later,
Ray


----------



## Simon Ravn

Sorry, but it just sounds plain horrible. Confirms everything I already knew and then added 50% horribleness to it. And no, Hannes, "other libraries" don't have this boxy sound problem. At least none of the big ones like East West, Spitfire, Berlin Strings, Cinestrings, Adagio etc.

There might be other not so well known, inexpensive, just as bad sounding libraries out there but I haven't heard of them. This is just sad and quite a mis-achievement.


----------



## Waywyn

I honestly can't help myself but as much as I like the writing, I hear that canny sound which sounds as if someone processed the sound with Altiverb on a send bus and forgot to turn the wet ratio all the way to 100%!


----------



## Ian Dorsch

Waywyn @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> I honestly can't help myself but as much as I like the writing, I hear that canny sound which sounds as if someone processed the sound with Altiverb on a send bus and forgot to turn the wet ratio all the way to 100%!



That's a great observation. That's very much what it sounds like.


----------



## KingIdiot

Waywyn @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> I honestly can't help myself but as much as I like the writing, I hear that canny sound which sounds as if someone processed the sound with Altiverb on a send bus and forgot to turn the wet ratio all the way to 100%!



pretty much what I've always heard in it. Very processed sounding.


----------



## Hannes_F

@ Alex and all
You beat me to something that I should have done long before. I have a sense that partly I was perhaps fighting with my effects against the internal effects in Kontakt.

I deactivated all the instrument-internal convolution reverbs, also deactivated VSS and all EQs . . . and ran the dry result through a single instance of QL Spaces, Northwest Hall.

http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/KH_S ... Spaces.mp3

I should have adjusted gains and stuff but for starters: The room certainly is widened up now - boxiness better now too?


----------



## ProtectedRights

I listened on my tablet, can't really tell much but I had the impression that the boxiness was indeed a little less, the general sound more natural.

However the whole thing still sounds very Midi-ish. The cello sustained notes just sound terrible, sorry. I guess it takes more programming to sound convincing. 

Will check tomorrow with better speakers. If you indeed managed to greatly reduce the boxiness, that would be a great achievment.


----------



## KingIdiot

it sounds like recordings of recordings being played and mic'd

that kind of speaker emulation sound. Almost like a boom box.


----------



## Ian Dorsch

I do think it is improved by turning off all that stuff.


----------



## Mike Greene

It sounds much more open now.


----------



## Hannes_F

ProtectedRights @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> However the whole thing still sounds very Midi-ish. The cello sustained notes just sound terrible, sorry. I guess it takes more programming to sound convincing.



@ProtectedRights
Maybe I don't understand what you mean - the solo cello coming in at 13 seconds (three times)? I automated four parameters by cc: volume, vibrato speed, vibrato depth and a EQ band (the latter is deactivated in the last version just to rule out any artefacts), plus some volume automation after bouncing the stem. Keyswitches are used, too. What else could I do?

[mp3]http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/KH_Spotlight_SoloVC.mp3[/mp3]
http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/KH_S ... SoloVC.mp3

OK, one thing comes to mind: I could switch the delivered script with SIPS with possibly a smoother result but I'm not going into this here.


----------



## re-peat

Still sounds pretty awful, Hannes, if you don't me saying. Removing VSS was a good idea — never using it is even a better one —, but even if you were to use a Bricasti, the most elaborate CC-automation and the finest set of mixing tools, there is simply no hope for these strings. None. Everytime that cello enters, we’re transported back to the paleolithicum of sampling, when the world was clueless and skill was not even a glint in the milkman's eye. These are the worst sampled strings in the history of sampled strings. They deserve a medal for that. 

I’m puzzled as to why you, of all people, with all your talent, taste and extensive hands-on strings-expertise, keep spending time on this and what it is you want to prove. These strings are beyond rescue.

Render this with any other library of the past 10 years and there's every chance you end up with a nice, enjoyable piece of music, rendered with the Spotlights however, this will always be a torturous ordeal to have to sit through.

_


----------



## rayinstirling

yes! adding to my last post where I said as much.
If using these samples at all they should not be in the spotlight but hidden in the background.


----------



## G.R. Baumann

On a funny note, perhaps it was just the cello? At the end of the 2.5 minutes video clip.

http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2012/10/video-just-in-composer-smashes-cello-in-concert-to-protest-orchestra-merger-plans.html


----------



## G.R. Baumann

mhhh....

http://www.amazon.com/Crescent-Beginner-Cello-Starter-Kit/dp/B00770MKOA/ref=sr_1_3?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1390984338&sr=1-3 :lol:


----------



## rayinstirling

Are you suggesting the cello had little value unlike these

http://www.thewho.net/whotabs/gear/guitar/smashed.html


----------



## Guy Rowland

Hannes_F @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> The story why I wrote this is quite strange - it is an ongoing joke between Piet and me that whenever he finds something extra bad I try my hand on it to prove the opposite for a challenge



Is it too early to call it? If it is in fact callable, then have to say that Piet wins. It would be lovely to hear this piece with pretty much any other contemporary sample library.


----------



## Gusfmm

re-peat @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> I’m puzzled as to why you, of all people, with all your talent, taste and extensive hands-on strings-expertise, keep spending time on this and what it is you want to prove. These strings are beyond rescue.



Yes, absolutely quite agree, not sure why you Hannes and Rob (on another thread) bother, really, having so many other better sounding libraries available in the market.


----------



## Rob

Gusfmm @ 29th January 2014 said:


> re-peat @ Wed Jan 29 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’m puzzled as to why you, of all people, with all your talent, taste and extensive hands-on strings-expertise, keep spending time on this and what it is you want to prove. These strings are beyond rescue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, absolutely quite agree, not sure why you Hannes and Rob (on another thread) bother, really, having so many other better sounding libraries available in the market.
Click to expand...


Maybe because we find something useful in these libraries? And speaking only for myself, I don't see the fun of massacring other people's work...


----------



## ProtectedRights

Rob @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> Gusfmm @ 29th January 2014 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> re-peat @ Wed Jan 29 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’m puzzled as to why you, of all people, with all your talent, taste and extensive hands-on strings-expertise, keep spending time on this and what it is you want to prove. These strings are beyond rescue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, absolutely quite agree, not sure why you Hannes and Rob (on another thread) bother, really, having so many other better sounding libraries available in the market.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe because we find something useful in these libraries? And speaking only for myself, I don't see the fun of massacring other people's work...
Click to expand...


I think I may speak for all critics here if I say it is NOT about massacring and even having fun with that.

I cannot really get what should be useful about the library. Hans already made a big effort with automation and still it sounds Midi-ish. And that is the question that also occurs to me: why not use another library that would sound awesome with much less effort in programming?


----------



## Gusfmm

Not "massacring" anybody's work Rob, this is not personal. My most kind respect for your (and Hannes in this case) work. This is not about that. This is about the sound of this library. Simply not attractive, at all.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

I am not posting this to win anybody over because I don't believe there are many open minds here, and of course Piet and the Pietsters will indeed probably massacre it, but here is something that I whipped up that I would happily send to a client for a scene and I am confident that the client would like it, because that is what happened with Kirk's older solo strings when I used them and I think these sound better.

BTW, it sounds better when i play the mp3 from my desktop in Quicktime than from Soundcloud. Soundcloud seems to make mp3s a little more nasal.

https://soundcloud.com/jay-asher/bach-chorale-with-s-s


----------



## Hannes_F

@Piet & Gusfmm
A perfectly valid question, and no offense taken.

After some soul-searching I found many reasons. Sorry for writing them down, however you asked:

1. My initial plan was and still is to write a number of music pieces that are rewarding for live players insofar as they are relatively easy to play (even by laymen orchestras or small ensembles) but sound good, are musically interesting and fun for players and the public and then will hopefully find their way into some concert plans.
2. The last significant musical output in that direction that I had was in my GPO times.
3. Afterwards I started a long and costly journey that lead towards better and more expensive libraries (I have lots of them) and even into the establishing of own recordings, studio acoustics, mixing knowledge etc.. However the more I cared about "realness" and "sound" the less significant I perceived my musical accomplishment to be.
4. My current plan now is to get going again musically, perhaps even better with a low-level library, and then record the music anyways live and then offer it (sheet music and a good audio demo) to players as I said.
5. After neither SISS, Siedlaczek, Appassionata nor LASS nor EW fully did it for me . . . which options do I have? If I for example want to change to the latest 8dio strings (Adagio and their newly announced expansion) that would cost me USD 3000 and then I would need also a new computer for more EUR 2-3000 . . . and that all for strings that will be replaced anyways? And all that considering that I will most certainly not earn much money if any at all with my compositions?
6. With that in mind it was a relatively nonhazardous try to test the KH strings which at the end (group buy refund included) will cost me about USD 150. 

Then: Initially I thought I could mix single stems of the KH strings into my recordings, but I abandoned that thought very early.
Then I thought that I could use them as a composition tool that can serve as a clay mould for own recordings insofar as they can do tension and relax and therefore provide a good playalong.
The third thought was then that if I post my results here then others that might be interested in the library might learn what is possible with it and what not.

I think that possibly of all the intentions only the last one was fully achieved, so it might have been of use after all. 

Did I answer the question?


----------



## germancomponist

Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> 5. After neither SISS, Siedlaczek, Appassionata nor LASS nor EW fully did it for me . .


I know only too well what you're writing here. It is very often very frustrating if the libraries can not play what you have composed in your head. It is like you have a musician booked and he is not able to play the notes right..... .

You are not alone with this problem, Hannes!


----------



## ProtectedRights

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> I don't believe there are many open minds here



I very much think so. To the contrary, I think YOU are one of the few biased, narrow-minded who won't discuss something with open result.


----------



## rayinstirling

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> I am not posting this to win anybody over because I don't believe there are many open minds here, and of course Piet and the Pietsters will indeed probably massacre it, but here is something that I whipped up that I would happily send to a client for a scene and I am confident that the client would like it, because that is what happened with Kirk's older solo strings when I used them and I think these sound better.
> 
> BTW, it sounds better when i play the mp3 from my desktop in Quicktime than from Soundcloud. Soundcloud seems to make mp3s a little more nasal.
> 
> https://soundcloud.com/jay-asher/bach-chorale-with-s-s



Mr. Asher,
There has been a lot said recently about folks hiding behind anonymity when making what is suggested as rude personal remarks about other members. Things they would not say face to face. Let me say in no uncertain terms. You would not call me a pietster to my face. You really are a piece of work.


----------



## Gusfmm

@Hannes- Thanks Hannes. To each it's own, and respect your reasons. I can see how cost was a major determination in your decision, but understand your rationale.


@Jay- I actually downloaded and tried the 4GB demo, had to hear it myself just to make sure it was my own assessment, no somebody else's comments, that drove my opinion. So as far as I'm concerned, my opinion is totally independent and quite simply coincident with Piet's. Regarding your piece, well, you know, what else needs to be said... but no need to re-peat (pun intended) myself.


----------



## Guy Rowland

Well, it's all very interesting. I'm sorta wondering if some folks - especially composers - are very highly tuned to the uncanny valley effect. For myself, it's very hard to imagine VSL, EW or LASS not sounding significantly better than KH (I've no experience of the other two you mentioned, Craig). Of the five, I only own LASS 2, and I'm as certain as I can be (given that everything is ultimately subjective) that it would sound better to me if re-rendered with a spot of care using that library.

When it comes to VIs, I don't really get the Uncanny Valley thing. I definitely get it with CGI human faces, so I understand the phenomenon (how a cartoon face might be perceived as more real than a photorealistic texture map). But I don't get it mimicing real instruments. It's a pretty linear equation to me - the more realistic it is, the better I like it. This itself is an age old debate of course - what sounds good vs what sounds real, but I've always taken the ultra-simplistic view that if a VI sounds real, it's better because - and this is the important bit - I think that's how the overwhelming majority of the public perceive it too. Few will wrestle with how precise that violin sounds if its a good VI, but it might well be desirable that they know its a violin and not a synth or a pipe organ. Throw a whole bunch of realistic sounding VIs together, and hey presto, Joe Public in seat H9 thinks he's listening to an orchestra. Of course, he doesn't question it, but if asked "is that music some synthesizers or an orchestra", I'd lay money that he'd pick the latter (if done well of course - and I've heard plenty that would qualify).

The current thread on Legato demos showed to me that all the libraries evaluated sound pretty damn respectable, while acknowledging that none had the effortlessness of the real thing. To me, that's fine, that's the tech gap and there it is, but I wonder if for some folks the subtler imperfections actually matter more than the big ones.

Which returns us to KH. I get your rationale Craig that they can be a great writing tool if its exclusively used for replacement by real players. I can see how you can perform and sculpt it to clearly show intent to players. But - for me anyway - that's pretty much where the usefulness ends.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

rayinstirling @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Jan 29 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not posting this to win anybody over because I don't believe there are many open minds here, and of course Piet and the Pietsters will indeed probably massacre it, but here is something that I whipped up that I would happily send to a client for a scene and I am confident that the client would like it, because that is what happened with Kirk's older solo strings when I used them and I think these sound better.
> 
> BTW, it sounds better when i play the mp3 from my desktop in Quicktime than from Soundcloud. Soundcloud seems to make mp3s a little more nasal.
> 
> https://soundcloud.com/jay-asher/bach-chorale-with-s-s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. Asher,
> There has been a lot said recently about folks hiding behind anonymity when making what is suggested as rude personal remarks about other members. Things they would not say face to face. Let me say in no uncertain terms. You would not call me a pietster to my face. You really are a piece of work.
Click to expand...


I did not mention you or anyone else specifically, did I? It is a case of "if the shoe fits, wear it."

And let me assure you, there is nothing I EVER write here that I would not say to someone's face, and what would ensue would ensue.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Gusfmm @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> @Hannes- Thanks Hannes. To each it's own, and respect your reasons. I can see how cost was a major determination in your decision, but understand your rationale.
> 
> 
> @Jay- I actually downloaded and tried the 4GB demo, had to hear it myself just to make sure it was my own assessment, no somebody else's comments, that drove my opinion. So as far as I'm concerned, my opinion is totally independent and quite simply coincident with Piet's. Regarding your piece, well, you know, what else needs to be said... but no need to re-peat (pun intended) myself.



I take you at your word for it and I have no problem with it. Hell, occasionally Piet and I even agree.


----------



## Gusfmm

Gusfmm @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> @Hannes- Thanks Hannes. To each it's own, and respect your reasons. I can see how cost, not quality, was a major determination in your decision, but understand your rationale.
> 
> 
> @Jay- I actually downloaded and tried the 4GB demo, had to hear it myself just to make sure it was my own assessment, no somebody else's comments, that drove my opinion. So as far as I'm concerned, my opinion is totally independent and quite simply coincident with Piet's. Regarding your piece, well, you know, what else needs to be said... but no need to re-peat (pun intended) myself.


----------



## re-peat

Just to be absolutely clear here: as Gusfmm and ProtectedRights already said, any negative comment or critique here is not about massacring or putting down anyone’s efforts with these strings, this is purely, strictly and to the exclusion of any other implication, about the abstract sound (both the bizarre timbre of the sampled instruments and the non-quality of the recording) of the library.

*Jay*, 
you’re in luck. I listen to your Chorale and my entire body goes into a painful spasm, making it impossible for me to type out what I normally, under less convulsive circumstances, would be inclined to write.


*Hannes,* 
well, if you put it like that (your third thought), then this whole thing has indeed served some purpose, I suppose (although I had hoped that that very purpose was already served some time ago, even before the abysmal thread of last week), but I still do not understand why you didn’t immediately dismiss these strings the moment you pressed your first key. And what I understand even less is how an owner of LASS and/or SISS could even have the faintest of interests in these strings. OK, LASS or SISS may not be entirely to your liking, fair enough, but even so: if you’re critical of those libraries, I _really_ can not understand your patience with these Spotlights. 
Honestly, I couldn’t — physically couldn’t — spend a single second with a library like this while needing to concentrate on making music. The two just don’t go together, I believe.
I mean there is disappointing, there is totally bad, there is completely horrible, and then there are the KH Spotlight Strings. All the way at the extreme end of utter, mind-boggling awfulness.

Seriously, render your piece of music with LASS and your deer will have a lot less reasons to be shy.

_


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Piet, when the spasms ease up, go for it. If you hate it, you hate it, we long ago established that we have largely very different taste.


----------



## AC986

Hannes why don't you, just for fun, do this piece of music on another library and let's hear what it sounds like in comparison. Say on VSL or Spitfire. The music is rather good and it would be of technical interest to everyone I'm sure to hear another library version.


----------



## cmillar

Perhaps KH is one of the few who are closest to the raw "boxy" sound one would hear in a real life environment standing next to the player? I'm not being sarcastic here said:


> I agree!
> 
> I've been using KH's Diamond library (Emerald/Ruby) for a few years, and every time I think of buying something 'better', I realize that what I already have is really fine, and in fact, even more versatile than many of the other libraries out there.
> 
> With the KH libraries, you can find your own reverbs you will require for any given project. You don't have to be stuck with an already 'burnt-in' reverb that's not quite right for a project.
> 
> And, bonus, you can save a ton of money by buying and getting to know the KH libraries!!!! Money to spend on other libraries and sounds you may really need.
> 
> Even the KH Brass can cover many styles of music.
> 
> Many people here are far too harsh in their criticism of KH products.
> 
> If you want to sound like everybody else, then go ahead and buy something that'll make you sound like everybody else.
> 
> The KH libraries aren't developed so you can play one note and have a 'movie trailer' sound that sounds like other libraries doing the same thing. But.... you can make them sound like that if you want to work at it a little, and then be happy knowing that you have a library that will also allow you to compose anything else that you might want.


----------



## Jordan Gagne

re-peat @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> *Jay*,
> you’re in luck. I listen to your Chorale and my entire body goes into a painful spasm, making it impossible for me to type out what I normally, under less convulsive circumstances, would be inclined to write.



:D


----------



## dgburns

re-peat @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> There is a part of my brain that is actually capable of making me say positive, kind, good and helpful things ...
> ... but everytime I hear Kirk Hunter samples, it seems to switch itself off completely.
> 
> I admire your courage here, Hannes, but I fear that this time you went against an adversary of such uglyphiliac and antikalonite disposition that it will never surrender and assume the role of a good-sounding and useful stringslibrary.
> 
> _



my vote for post of the year. (yes i know it's early days and all)

your friendly neighbourhood pietster -

burnsey

edit-not taking any sides in the debate,good on Hannes for making the effort in all this.


----------



## Hannes_F

adriancook @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> Hannes why don't you, just for fun, do this piece of music on another library and let's hear what it sounds like in comparison. Say on VSL or Spitfire. The music is rather good and it would be of technical interest to everyone I'm sure to hear another library version.



Marker in mind is set.

@Piet
Because it inspired me to writing and I had fun. What else can I say?
Probably either I have tin ears or it is a sort of reverse psychology, but hey, if it works ...

For example: As a player I have spent decades on the topic of legato transitions. How they must prepared sonically, the hundreds of variations of them, etc.. For me, there is a world of legato transitions existing, and that world is almost as important as the notes themselves.

Therefore, any of the variations offered in sample libraries are painful for me after a while. I usually hold back on my opinion because I don't want to badmouth all the great efforts, on the contrary I want to courage them. However this problem often keeps me personally from writing my music, and therefore I perhaps am better off with something that is honestly mock. Maybe?


----------



## Guy Rowland

Hannes_F @ Thu Jan 30 said:


> As a player I have spent decades on the topic of legato transitions. How they must prepared sonically, the hundreds of variations of them, etc.. For me, there is a world of legato transitions existing, and that world is almost as important as the notes themselves.
> 
> Therefore, any of the variations offered in sample libraries are painful for me after a while. I usually hold back on my opinion because I don't want to badmouth all the great efforts, on the contrary I want to courage them. However this problem often keeps me personally from writing my music, and therefore I perhaps am better off with something that is honestly mock. Maybe?



Ah ha - this does give credence to what I was saying at the bottom of the previous page, I think you are suffering from Uncanny Valley Effect.

I remember the revelation for me that was first playing a true legato phrase, from VSL. The difference when playing connected notes was a simple real / not real for me. To play a line that requires a connected phrase, it stands to reason you need both the notes and the connnections. But of course you're right - there are dozens of variations and subtleties in a single legato transition. And then - just as important imo - is the quality of the joins (in general easier to fudge on ensembles than solos). If you know what you're listening for, that creates a problem as true legato is only ever going to be conjuring trick, a mechanical process of stitching together different fragments of audio in real time. And a trained ear will start picking up on all sorts of problems.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing and all that. I can totally understand why something that sounds less like its intention - say, a violin - can create fewer problems for someone of your skill and expertise. But I maintain that for the vast majority of an audience, the reverse will be true. Of course we're discussing more than legato transitions here - tone, vibrato etc - but the principle for me is a very simple one. Does it sound more or less like well recorded real strings? In the case of Spotlight, it seems many of us are saying the answer is no, despite all the problems of true legato in other libraries. The bigger picture trumps the subtle details.

But you're unarguably right in that if it inspires you and aids the composition process (and all the parts get replaced by real), there's simply no arguing with it. If Shy Deer gets recorded by great musicians, then one has to acknowledge that the piece might not even exist if the KH library wasn't around. If a "better" library drives you mad through its subtle imperfections then its a great shame... not least because I don't see what anyone can do or say to make the Uncanny Valley effect disappear. It's a curse!


----------



## re-peat

Hannes,

I think I have to go with Guy here: the big picture trumps the details. When I hear that cello enter in “Shy Deer”, or when I hear the first second of the first chord of Jay’s chorale, the shock is such that it doesn’t really matter to me anymore what sort of legato might be implemented and how well it works. The timbre and the sound — the first things that grab my ear — are, in my opinion, of such poor, poor quality that any other consideration with regard to the believability of the performance becomes instantly completely irrelevant to me. Even rather silly.

I can understand (up to a point anyway) that people discuss things like legato, vibrato, dynamic cross-fading, spatial characteristics, etc. in libraries from Spitfire, EastWest, Audiobrio, etc. … but not in these Spotlights.
That’s like discussing the lubing of the chain on a bicycle that has no wheels, it seems to me.

I do entirely agree with what you say about ‘the honesty of a flawed mock-up’ though. Not having to foolishly obsess over 'realism', which is largely unattainable anyway, and simply accepting the medium’s many imperfections for what they are, often brings about a much more relaxed state of mind with which it is much more pleasant and productive to create music. (This argument stops making much sense of course, the moment you are required to present your clients with good-sounding and somewhat believable strings.)

_


----------

