# Spitfire Studio Strings or CSS? That is the question...



## SturtOfTheWeald (Jan 27, 2021)

Hello everyone!

For a bit of context, I'm a concert composer who is turning his hand at getting into library music in a fairly traditional orchestral style. To that end, I'm building up my sound samples, and I have my woodwinds, and I'm set on Infinite Brass, but I've yet to decide on a good string sample library.

I've previously used LASS2, and I've had nothing but trouble from it - the samples sound lovely, but almost insurmountable difficulties setting them up and having a lot of installation problems recently has rather killed my love for them in the present moment. Maybe I'll return to them in the future, but right now, I'm after a workhorse library that A) sounds good and B) can be used without much fiddling around (ie having all-in-one articulation patches like I have with Berlin Woodwinds)

I'm currently stuck between Spitfire Studio Strings and Cinematic Studio Strings. Both of them have all in one patches, and seem to be what I'm looking for. However, in the demos of SSS, I can't help but notice some intonation slips, so I'm a bit wary of it. On the other hand, CSS doesn't have as many articulations as SSS, and the sul tasto on the latter sounds gorgeous.

Can any of you help me in my decision?

Cheers!


----------



## JonS (Jan 27, 2021)

SturtOfTheWeald said:


> Hello everyone!
> 
> For a bit of context, I'm a concert composer who is turning his hand at getting into library music in a fairly traditional orchestral style. To that end, I'm building up my sound samples, and I have my woodwinds, and I'm set on Infinite Brass, but I've yet to decide on a good string sample library.
> 
> ...


Eventually get both and if you can get SCS Pro and SStS Pro too. I suggest start with SSS.


----------



## ridgero (Jan 27, 2021)

The community agrees that CSS is a no brainer for everyone.

I, as a noob, love CSS and would always prefer it over the Spitfire Studio Series. It has a damn good sound, is diverse, has a great consistency such as the rest of the series, uses the same keyswitches as the rest of the series. it makes it very easy to combine the whole series. Btw, CSS will get an update for Runs soon

The whole Cinematic Studio Series is a masterpiece with a lovely company behind it.


----------



## Kevinside (Jan 27, 2021)

I think, he means the Studio Stings with SSS and not the spitfire symphonic strings...
So @SturtOfTheWeald Spitfire Studio Strings is called SStS here...

I don´t understand your question, cause Spitfire Studio Strings and CSS are sounding totally different.
SStS are very dry and CSS has the room of the recording stage. 
SStS Pro has Divisi Sections and many more articulations, but CSS brings you a wonderful legato out of the box. You should listen to both and decide, which fits best to your projects...
So my advice watch the spotlight videos from Cory Pelizzari... and then think, whats best for you...

CSS


SStS


SStS Pro


----------



## Kevinside (Jan 27, 2021)

@ridgero

You can not compare CSS to SStS...

I have a lot of compositions, where i prefer SStS Pro or SCS Pro over CSS...cause especially the Studio Series give you a perfect definiton of the strings (and Divisi Secitons and con sords, trills up to 4th with violins and celli and more) , where CSS fails...

Its a question, what you want with your composition and which sound fits best...


----------



## SturtOfTheWeald (Jan 28, 2021)

@Kevinside Apologies for not using the right acronym - I did mean SStS (blame the sleep meds).

I do understand that they sound different in terms of timbre and wet/dryness. I think what it boils down to is versatility and inherent usability, which, so far, CSS appears to be winning at. 

I may well get SStS at a later date, but the intonation problems still stick out for me. Has this been much of a problem for users of the library?


----------



## Oakran (Feb 17, 2021)

You can't go wrong with CSS, it's a great sounding string library which covers a lot of ground.


----------



## thorwald (Feb 17, 2021)

To tell you the truth, I am really not impressed with the intonation of SSTS. The legato is by far not on the level of CSS.

I'd rather grab CSS and Sunset Strings (for textures), the two libraries are almost the same price as SSTS Pro currently.

Later on, if you'd like to go down the Spitfire rabbit hole, SCS, SSS and BBC are all great for various reasons.


----------



## N.Caffrey (Feb 17, 2021)

CSS


----------



## oboemaroni (Feb 18, 2021)

Something that's put me off buying CSS is that it apparently doesn't have legato on non vibrato samples, which seems a strange decision... Also the latency is a pain to deal with tho I hear a fix is being worked on.


----------



## scoringdreams (Feb 18, 2021)

oboemaroni said:


> Something that's put me off buying CSS is that it apparently doesn't have legato on non vibrato samples, which seems a strange decision... Also the latency is a pain to deal with tho I hear a fix is being worked on.


but there's that cc2 vibrato crossfade feature which sounds good enough for me

i agree, the latency is a pain. the spitfire performance legato patches are brilliant imo


----------



## Wedge (Feb 18, 2021)

CSS was my first string library. It sounds good, is simple and straight forward. The timing is solid. A lot of other libraries I've tried since have something like off timing on stacattos or a click on the first round robin, which is pretty annoying. I feel I may have been spoiled with CSS being my first. I highly recommend it. I haven't had too big a problem with latency and just drag the lines to line up as needed, been meaning to make a macro to speed the process up.


----------



## Fry777 (Feb 18, 2021)

oboemaroni said:


> Something that's put me off buying CSS is that it apparently doesn't have legato on non vibrato samples, which seems a strange decision... Also the latency is a pain to deal with tho I hear a fix is being worked on.


That issue is basically people complaining about an added feature (3 legato speeds), and them also not wanting to use the alternative provided by the lib to solve this issue : the classic patches (or sticking to a fixed legato speed + a fixed delay)


----------



## Harry (Feb 18, 2021)

Oakran said:


> You can't go wrong with CSS, it's a great sounding string library which covers a lot of ground.


CSS does have the legato delay issue which make it very much less "playable" than Spitfire alternatives. For me this is the main reason I have invested more in Spitfire than in the CSS series. 

Like has been said you can't compare Spitfire Studio with CSS - its a symphonic library comparable with Spitfire Symphonic strings, which cost more.


----------



## from_theashes (Feb 18, 2021)

I really like the divisi-sound of SStS pro and how well that library takes reverb and layers with other libraries. Also the super-sul-tasto and flautando patches are just beautiful. And it’s flexibel... going from chamber-sized divisi to full symphonic size.
Never had any tuning issues so far.


----------



## chrisphan (Feb 18, 2021)

SturtOfTheWeald said:


> B) can be used without much fiddling around


I don't think CSS is the right choice then. For me personally, the legato delay is super fiddly.


----------



## oboemaroni (Feb 18, 2021)

Fry777 said:


> That issue is basically people complaining about an added feature (3 legato speeds), and them also not wanting to use the alternative provided by the lib to solve this issue : the classic patches (or sticking to a fixed legato speed + a fixed delay)


But unless I'm mistaken the classic patches aren't really a fix, as you can't just play in using those and then switch to the non-classic and get a usable result, as all the delay times are different depending on the transition used meaning you have to adjust all the timings.


----------



## oboemaroni (Feb 18, 2021)

scoringdreams said:


> but there's that cc2 vibrato crossfade feature which sounds good enough for me
> 
> i agree, the latency is a pain. the spitfire performance legato patches are brilliant imo


Not familiar with the cc2 vibrato crossfade feature, is that a workaround to get legato on the non-vibrato samples?


----------



## Getsumen (Feb 18, 2021)

oboemaroni said:


> But unless I'm mistaken the classic patches aren't really a fix, as you can't just play in using those and then switch to the non-classic and get a usable result, as all the delay times are different depending on the transition used meaning you have to adjust all the timings.


There are a couple third party kontakt scripts made to help compensate for legato delay I believe

(You just set the overall track delay to something large, and the script automatically does the offsets for you if I recall?)

Of course this doesn't really solve the playability issue, but it does mean you spend less time fiddling with delays.


----------



## scoringdreams (Feb 18, 2021)

oboemaroni said:


> Not familiar with the cc2 vibrato crossfade feature, is that a workaround to get legato on the non-vibrato samples?


not sure what it does technically, but to my ears, there is a slight modification to the sound where it sorts of emulates a non-vibrato version of the legato / longs, not perfect, but still better than nothing i guess


----------



## Fry777 (Feb 18, 2021)

oboemaroni said:


> But unless I'm mistaken the classic patches aren't really a fix, as you can't just play in using those and then switch to the non-classic and get a usable result, as all the delay times are different depending on the transition used meaning you have to adjust all the timings.


Why would you want to switch back to non-classic ? With other libs you don't/can't... And the classic legato is on par with a lot of competitor libs' legatos, including the most popular ones. I feel these patches get frowned upon just because they're admitedly not as detailed as the default ones, but if you compare them to other libs they really stand their ground

And even if you did change it, you then select all your legato notes and change the velocity to a fixed value (let's say medium legato speed), apply to all (ctrl+enter in Cubase) and put the corresponding delay on the track. It's a quick mod' really


----------



## Oakran (Feb 18, 2021)

Harry said:


> CSS does have the legato delay issue which make it very much less "playable" than Spitfire alternatives. For me this is the main reason I have invested more in Spitfire than in the CSS series.
> 
> Like has been said you can't compare Spitfire Studio with CSS - its a symphonic library comparable with Spitfire Symphonic strings, which cost more.


Well after some time composing with it you get used to it, it's no big deal really. I consider each new library like a new instrument, you have to learn how to use it and understand the limitations. To me it's one of the best sounding strings library and imho CSS sound and programming are superior to Spitfire Studio Strings. Come on these legatos transitions are so good !


----------



## mushanga (Feb 18, 2021)

thorwald said:


> To tell you the truth, I am really not impressed with the intonation of SSTS. The legato is by far not on the level of CSS.


Not sure if you are referring to particular instruments or patches, but if this example is anything to go by, SStS legato/intonation sounds extremely good to me..


----------



## thorwald (Feb 19, 2021)

mushanga said:


> Not sure if you are referring to particular instruments or patches, but if this example is anything to go by, SStS legato/intonation sounds extremely good to me..


If I had to rank patches, based on the linked video, the violins and viola are last, while the celli are first. This is a personal opinion, of course.

Having said that, Spitfire's legato is definitely among the best playable legatos.

The Cinematic Series sacrifices playability for a more realistic sound, which also means that the played-in notes need some aftercare. Soundwise though, I think CSS is the winner, no questions.


----------

