# Pro/con comparison of orchestral string libraries



## Zhao Shen (Aug 6, 2014)

Hi guys,

It's another string library post, as if we needed more of those. But I was contemplating my choices in terms of getting a new string library and I decided to make a thread so that I could be able to get some opinions and hopefully help other people in the future make an informed decision... I've seen a lot of these types of threads, but more in the format "___ Strings vs ___ Strings."

So here's a list of the main string libraries afaik. I'm looking toward strings that encompass a full ensemble since they're the bread and butter of film scoring. I'm trying decide on which one to get, and the only real string library that I have is Cinematic Strings 2. It's very good, but with strings being super-important and all, I think I'd be better off after adding another string library to my palette.

Last update: 9/7/2014 (I'm American so M/D/Y)

Hollywood Strings
PROS: great sound, good variety of mic positions and articulations, often on sale
CONS: *very* intensive on RAM, long load speeds, many people dislike the PLAY engine (though it is improving)

Los Angeles Scoring Strings
PROS: realistic sound, ARC makes it very versatile, includes divisi sections, low RAM load, LASS Lite upgrade path
CONS: pretty expensive, no sales, out-of-the-box sound often needs tweaking

Berlin Strings
PROS: lovely sound, adaptive legato, 24x RR?!
CONS: can't change the sound very much, lack of divisi options, no customization of legato, high RAM usage (24xRR?!)
(NOTE: BST's smaller sections has at times been quoted as a plus to simulating divisi with their ensemble patches)

Spitfire Mural
PROS: great legato, very nice and detailed sound
CONS: no divisi, separated into multiple volumes (can be good or bad), Vol. 1 only shorts are spiccatos
(NOTE: Sable - see below - has often been stated as an alternative with small enough sections to write divisi)

Spitfire Sable
PROS: great legato, very nice and detailed sound
CONS: separated into multiple volumes (can be good or bad), full range is pretty expensive
(NOTE: Sable Ensembles includes all Sable instrument sections in one ensemble patch)

CineStrings
PROS: sounds good, nice legato, great mic options, hairpin creator
CONS: not as intricately detailed as other libraries

Cinematic Strings 2
PROS: great out-of-the-box sound, performs most lines very well
CONS: no divisi, lack of some pretty important articulations (con sordino, gliss/slur transitions, etc.), not very customizable

VSL strings
PROS: very dry and versatile, comprehensive list of articulations
CONS: no divisi, no 2nd violins, very pricey, need good reverb

8Dio Adagio strings
PROS: good sound, purchase segmentation is a plus, dynamic bowing, extensive articulations
CONS: fairly expensive to buy the full suite

8Dio Adagietto
PROS: simple, easy to use, lush sound
CONS: essentially just a simplified Adagio (uses Adagio ensemble patches)

---

Now to the info relating to me specifically.

I own CS2 and I'm looking for a library to help round out some of CS2's rougher edges as well as contribute with a good sound. At the moment I'm seeing a lot of potential in Mural, but if you guys have any advice I'd be open to opinions 

If I missed any important ensemble string libraries, be sure to leave a note! Since I'm less familiar with some of these libraries than I am with others (especially CineStrings, which never really held the attraction that the other libraries did for me), please feel free to correct me/add some more info that might be useful, and I'll do my best to update it.

NOTE: I posted this in the thread but decided it'd be clearer to have it here. The reason that libraries truer to the label "ensemble library" like Albion and Symphobia are being left out is because I'm looking for strings-only libraries. Using Albion as an example, though it has nice strings, they are ensemble-based to the point of not have separate instrumental sections. Also, libraries that focus on strings only tend to end up having better-sounding strings.


----------



## RiffWraith (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

Hi.

CineStrings
_CPU intensive_ - certainly not here
_weak performance at lower dynamics_ - disagree

Spitfire Mural
_no divisi_ - That's what Sable is for
_separated into multiple volumes _ - that's actually a good thing; you needn't spend money on stuff you don't need/want
_the [in]famous Spitfire sound - beautiful but unchangeable_ - "infamous" sound? That's saying that Spitfire's sound is world renowned as being bad.* Not only is that not true, it's just the opposite. At least, from what I know. And I am not sure what "unchangeable" is supposed to mean. You can change the sound and the tone of Mural - in fact, you can do that to the same extent as you can any other lib on the market.

**infamous *: having an extremely bad reputation

Cheers.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

Sorry about some of the poor wording, made a variety of edits that I hope clears up some of the confusion. I still stand by my comment about lack of divisi in Mural though. I really like the sound of the library and it's one of my top picks atm, but you should not be shoehorned into buying a completely new library just for divisi functionality.


----------



## The Darris (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

Firstly, when I read the word "ensemble" in terms of sampling, I think of it as a single instrument that contains all the sections mapped over the keyboard. From what you have posted, it seems that divisi is important. Firstly, LASS is the only library that does a true divisi style of sampling. Secondly, Spitfire's Sable comes probably close second in the ability to do a 'faked' divisi. This is done by use of the transpose trick. I believe one or more of the VSL libraries can do this trick and they did with their second violins (again, unsure of which library this happened in though). 

Now, there is the simplistic divisi which is the traditional sections recorded separately. All of the string libraries you post did this except that VSL library I can't remember and Cinematic Strings 2. CS2 transposed and remixed the 1st violins to create a second violins section. 

Now, the real test..for you.. is which one of these libraries has the sound you want? Since you are wanting to buy into a good string library, you DO need to be well informed but the library you choose should also be the one that sounds the best...TO YOU. The sound and character these libraries is subjective. Personally, I prefer Spitfire's approach to string sampling. I love the sound of Air and I find that it is a pro versus a con. Their mic options allow me to get a different sound if I want and other libraries are quite easy to mix into spitfire ones via the reverbs I use.

The next thing you need to consider is how much work you will need to put into mixing them. VSL and LASS are quite dry. Do you have good convolution and algorithmic reverbs? 

Next, you have to ask yourself, "What do I need?" Do they offer me (you) a wide range of articulations to cover most styles? Or do I need something that covers most bases? CS2, LASS, CineStrings, and Mural Vol 1 cover the bases of 'basic' tools needed for string writing. Sable Vol 1 - 4 however, covers so many different playing styles, especially legato, and they are still making more for it. 

So, I wrote a lot but you can see that my advice centers around your subjective opinions of what you are looking for. 

I will say that you left out the Adagio/Adagietto series by 8dio. It isn't a traditional library of articulations though it has some basic ones. Its design was to capture true dynamic phrasings and specialty legato types. 

As for me: I own CS2, Mural Vol 1, Sable 1 -4, and some other 'ensemble' based libraries like Orchestral Essentials and the Albion series. Sable is my workhorse string library because of what it offers....flexibility in articulations.

tl;dr: To each his/her own.

I hope that helps.

o-[][]-o 

Chris


----------



## The Darris (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

re; changing sound in Mural.

I did a quick video on YT to show how you could essentially take the big Mural sound and fake a string quartet with it using the Section Leader mics and some reverb. Sure, it needs some more fiddling (pun intended) but it just shows you right out of the box what you can do with the sound.

http://youtu.be/oiqedkMl16s


----------



## Zhao Shen (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*



The Darris @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> tl;dr: To each his/her own.



I suppose that really is the answer. I'm personally leaning toward Mural at the moment, so thanks for the video on solo imitation. The section leader patches are a big plus to the library.

Even so, I hope to get some sort of a comparison guide to string libraries formed by the end, even if it's just to give people an idea about the general strengths and weaknesses of each library. Thanks for the help!


----------



## Maestro77 (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

A few years ago I bought LASS. Since then I've picked up a few newer libs but always seem to go back to LASS. It just sounds incredible to my ears and is versatile enough to use in most every scenario.


----------



## JPQ (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

VSL cons are here: no divisi,and no own samples for 2nd violins. and full versions are super pricey. But i still like mostly for generic strings them and cinematic strings. i dont own cinematic strings anyway. one thing what i thinked but i maybe must remove it my list becouse VSL has some gaps which needs filled i mean some uses their brass dont work...


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*



The Darris @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> Now, the real test..for you.. is which one of these libraries has the sound you want? Since you are wanting to buy into a good string library, you DO need to be well informed but the library you choose should also be the one that sounds the best...TO YOU.
> 
> Chris



Yep.


----------



## Stephen Rees (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

If LASS is expensive then aren't VSL, Mural Volumes 1 and 2 combined, and Berlin Strings also expensive (by your measure of what 'expensive' is)?

Just saying  Seems a bit harsh on LASS to single it out for its price.


----------



## Vik (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*



Zhao Shen @ 6.8.2014 said:


> Hollywood Strings
> PROS: great sound, good variety of mic positions and articulations, often on sale
> CONS: *very* intensive on RAM


Some people will say that it relies on Play and not Kontakt is a big con.



> Los Angeles Scoring Strings
> PROS: realistic sound, color and engine functionalities make it very versatile, includes divisi sections, low RAM load
> CONS: pretty expensive


LASS seem to be very well scripted, but it's also the library that I have seen the most negative comments about in terms of sound (harshness etc), which some LASS users claim is difficult to deal with even after the implementation of the coloring functionality). 



> Berlin Strings
> PROS: lovely sound, 24x RR?!
> CONS: can't change the sound very much, lack of divisi options


The adaptive legato is at least as good, or even better (when it comes to playability) than the legatos of other ensembles, isn't it? Anyone? 



> Spitfire Mural
> PROS: great legato, very nice and detailed sound
> CONS: no divisi, separated into multiple volumes (can be good or bad)


Re. the separation into multiple volumes - one has IMO to see Vol 1 and Vol 2 as one product, because Mural 1 has good legato but no portamento. Portamento is essential for realistic mockups. 



> CineStrings
> PROS: sounds good, great mic options
> CONS: not as detailed as other libraries


It's actually quite detailed in some areas, the sul ponts and harmonics is AFAIK quite among the best out there.


----------



## StevenOBrien (Aug 6, 2014)

Hollywood Strings
PROS: Many different pricing levels.
CONS: The PLAY Engine it uses can be temperamental, and has many frequently reported stability/reliability issues. 

8Dio Adagio Strings
PROS: Beautiful, lush, classical sound. A huge variety of legato types, all with different built in dynamic arcs. Includes a huge variety of shorts, sustains, dynamic bowings, tempo-synced loures and FX. Includes in-depth divisi and solo patches for each section.

CONS: The built in arcs and endings in a lot of the legato sustains can be obstructive at times for some people. The unique recording setup used can sometimes cause subtle problems with the stereo imaging when the sections are panned. The baked in ambiance may not always be desirable. May not always be suitable for faster legato lines.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 6, 2014)

StevenOBrien @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> Hollywood Strings
> PROS: Many different pricing levels.
> CONS: The PLAY Engine it uses can be temperamental, and has many frequently reported stability/reliability issues.



I think those comments about Play's cons are no longer true for most users. Sure, HS is more demanding of resources and Play is just a player and not a full-featured sampler, but I use it daily and both Mac and PC and it has been quite a while since there have been any serious stability issues for me.


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 6, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> I think those comments about Play's cons are no longer true for most users. Sure, HS is more demanding of resources and Play is just a player and not a full-featured sampler, but I use it daily and both Mac and PC and it has been quite a while since there have been any serious stability issues for me.



Judging from past threads, I thought you never had serious problems with Play engine in the first place with your Macs and PCs for the years, but now you are putting it as "no longer"? :wink: 

Joke aside, Play engine still can throw some issues depending on your setup, but I think for the most cases it can be troubleshooted by disabling Overload Protection, adjusting buffer size (both up and down), notifying rendering mode from the DAW side, etc. After some tweaks it really gets better.

(I just hope we can get an optimization FAQ for Play, just like this: http://impactsoundworks.com/optimizing- ... ow-part-2/)


----------



## AC986 (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

If you want divisi you should look at Sable or LASS.


----------



## Carbs (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

Hmmm. For what you're going for I would probably choose LASS. I say this as an owner of all you listed, except for cinestrings and berlin strings. 

I'm very interested in berlin strings though, and those 24 round robins of the spic is one of the biggest reasons why.


----------



## muk (Aug 6, 2014)

Don't forget Dimension Strings. It doesn't get any more divisi than that. 
As you already have Cinematic Strings 2, do you want something that sounds similar, or do you want something more contrasting? Do you want a lush sound, or more intimate? Mural has big section sizes and a 'symphonic' sound. If you want to broaden your palette towards more intimate strings other choices such as LASS, Sable, Dimension Strings may be better suited for that.


----------



## Casiquire (Aug 6, 2014)

I'm with muk, what's with everyone talking about VSL not having divisi?! Dimension Strings is like a reinvention of what divisi even means in sample libraries!

Anyway I agree LASS is fairly priced, especially considering how many ensembles you actually get. And their upgrade options are incredibly fair--start with Lite and First Chair, then upgrade to Full. As for LASS's sound, I've actually seen very few complaints about the sound since the Stage and Color options have been released, and anybody who's good with EQ or who has a good, warm reverb should have an easy time taming it. Also most of the people with complaints about the sound are misunderstanding the CC structure of LASS in the first place. Forte with that library is like CC60-70. So turn up the modwheel to 70 during a mezzo-forte and you get a very harsh sound. The library is very warm in the quieter dynamics. As for harshness, it's interesting VSL never gets a mention because Dimension Strings is much more harsh than LASS, I find myself toning it down to match LASS first and then applying EQ and reverb from there.

Just my two cents!


----------



## FriFlo (Aug 6, 2014)

The 24 RR to me just seems like something they tried on on spicc patch of the first violins but then abandoned, because it is overkill and doesn't make a big difference. 9RR is more than enough if you ask me. But Berlin Strings is great for the richness of other articulations you don't find in any other libraries (or in few I should say). That and it's good room sound and legato make it a good addition to a drier library like VSL.
In regards to the OP: If I only had CS2 (which I do not have), I would be looking for a dry library with a good collection of different arctics and something to cover different sizes of sections ... VSL DS all the way, if you ask me! Only con sordino is not covered by this, I am afraid, but there will be DS con Sord at some point I guess.
Covering more articulations than DS, but with less detail, SF sable would also be a good option: different size, good sound, mic options, etc
In the end, you will alway want ANOTHER string library ...


----------



## JPQ (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

I dont remmber Dimension Strings but i now remember them and i dislike their sound in their demos. Dimension Brass is opposite thing i like how they sound.


----------



## Karl Feuerstake (Aug 6, 2014)

*Re: Pro/con comparison of ensemble string libraries*

Hollywood Strings also doesn't include any 'effects' - just common articulations. No clusters, bends, risers, chops, glissandi staccato, etc... all important to someone like me. Don't get me wrong, I still love the sound of HS; I just wish there was more to it.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 6, 2014)

StatKsn @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Aug 06 said:
> 
> 
> > I think those comments about Play's cons are no longer true for most users. Sure, HS is more demanding of resources and Play is just a player and not a full-featured sampler, but I use it daily and both Mac and PC and it has been quite a while since there have been any serious stability issues for me.
> ...



I have at times, with a handful of releases, had some annoying but not serious problems with Play, but overall not, and not in quite some time.

I have at times, with a handful of releases, had some annoying but not serious problems with Kontakt as recently as a year ago, but overall not.

I have at times, with a handful of releases, had some annoying but not serious problems with Logic Pro as recently as a 1/2 year ago, but overall not.

I have at times, with a handful of releases, had some annoying but not serious problems with the Mac OS as recently as a a year ago, but overall not.


----------



## gsilbers (Aug 6, 2014)

for the libs i have my opinion is:

LASS - i dont like much the sound excpet for the spicc. 
but there is the sections (LASS lite) which the price is about right imo. doing the altiverb todd ao early reflection trick does actually work very good. still meh. 
LASS does have ensemble patches but its just adding all the combined presets. which you can do with any lib. so not sure why its being addresed here. 

Symphobia.- i like it a lot. sadly projectsam just fell asleep and never did a section library with the same sound. great for sfx, trailer and stronger music. 

albion - its very nice. its more lush sounding. shorts sometimes need some help. but good overall. 

hollywood strings. - my god does play suck. and a hard headed team still says it doesn't. but omg does it sound great. also, the 70% off sale all the time is a little bit sleazy imo, but the price is very competitive compared to other libs. 
also, this is not an enemble library so not sure why its being address.


----------



## Carbs (Aug 6, 2014)

FriFlo @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> The 24 RR to me just seems like something they tried on on spicc patch of the first violins but then abandoned, because it is overkill and doesn't make a big difference. 9RR is more than enough if you ask me...



Hi! 

Since you own Berlin Strings and have an issue with the 24 round robins, I'm curious why you prefer to have less? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but as someone who is very interested in this library, I'm just curious what the problems those 24 round robins create for you are.

The annoying thing I run into with some of my sample libraries is that the round robins create a sort of "pattern" in my string line that I do not want. Sometimes the round robins sound just bad, so while I may be starting with 8 or 9, I have to tweak them down to about half that and - then I run into the same problem I just described. That is of course better than "machine gunning," but I always figured if you have a whole bunch of RR's than you avoid that "pattern" problem. 

But if having that many creates other problems (aside from RAM usage) I'd love to know about it. It would probably also help the OP (and other prospective buyers) to have this info. Thanks!

o-[][]-o


----------



## Zhao Shen (Aug 6, 2014)

Thanks for all the info guys! Updated the title and some of the wording in the original post to help clear up any confusion. It's true that HWS and Sable aren't true ensemble string libraries, but what I'm looking for are strings to be able to cover the range of an ensemble. 

Also, the reason that libraries truer to the label "ensemble library" like Albion and Symphobia are being left out is because I'm looking for strings-only libraries. Using Albion as an example, though it has nice strings, they are ensemble-based to the point of not have separate instrumental sections. Also, libraries that focus on strings only tend to end up having better strings.

To anyone who is familiar with Sable, what is Sable Ensembles and why is it cheaper? The way I understand it it's essentially every section in the Sable collection but without the more advanced articulations.


----------



## Carbs (Aug 6, 2014)

Pauls walkthrough should tell you all you need on that one. 

http://www.spitfireaudio.com/bml-sable-ensembles


----------



## Zhao Shen (Aug 6, 2014)

I can't imagine how I missed that. Slap me or something, quickly.

A shame though... I suppose it's actually a high-quality product, but I really dislike it when a library combines all of its sections into one patch. Then again, I've used my fair share of CS2's Full Ensemble so maybe I'm just being hypocritical.


----------



## The Darris (Aug 6, 2014)

Carbs @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> FriFlo @ Wed Aug 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Since you own Berlin Strings and have an issue with the 24 round robins, I'm curious why you prefer to have less? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but as someone who is very interested in this library, I'm just curious what the problems those 24 round robins create for you are.



The main issue is that at a full 24 RR with all Microphone positions, you are sitting at a >0.75gb ram footprint with a voice count of up to 300 (more depending on how fast the passage is). You can see this in the video demo of the Berlin Strings Shorts. 

Now, I don't own the library but that to me is an issue especially since the library doesn't offer a mix microphone position to allow for a more resource friendly library. BUT, iirc, you can adjust the RR usage to limit the voice and ram usage but again, you will lack the diverse sound. 

My other issues with the whole 24RR problem is that because they did this, it made the price for the library significantly higher because of the cost to record that many more. 

Does it sound good though? Absolutely, I won't knock the product for that. It sounds amazing but as for the design of the overall product from a system usage/resources standpoint, that is what has held me back and what I feel is the main issue with the 24 RR concept. The fact also remains that this 24RR isn't consistent among the rest of the library or even the Berlin Series. (Just compare the sound of BWW to the strings). I like unity, especially when developers are doing a modular series with the section. Record them in the same manner and offer the same features. I know the focus is always on Violins and Celli for the 24RR but I want my entire orchestra to sound just as diverse. Go big or go home (but not really because I like Orchestral Tools :D ). I just didn't hop onto the Berlin Strings hype-train. For that very reason. Many disagree with me but again, to each his/her own.


----------



## Carbs (Aug 6, 2014)

The Darris @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> Carbs @ Wed Aug 06 said:
> 
> 
> > FriFlo @ Wed Aug 06 said:
> ...



I fully understand how that could be a problem for some people, which is why I asked an owner of the library if there were any issues aside from RAM troubles.


----------



## The Darris (Aug 6, 2014)

Carbs @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> The Darris @ Wed Aug 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Carbs @ Wed Aug 06 said:
> ...



Gotcha but Voice count is a completely different issue which was something I mentioned. :wink: 

Sorry I don't own the library in this case to answer your question.


----------



## Carbs (Aug 6, 2014)

@TheDarris

I have a habit of bouncing midi to audio if/when I need to, so that's not enough to put me off the library, but a valid concern none the less. Thanks!


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> I have at times, with a handful of releases, had some annoying but not serious problems with Play, but overall not, and not in quite some time.
> 
> I have at times, with a handful of releases, had some annoying but not serious problems with Kontakt as recently as a year ago, but overall not.
> 
> ...



Come on, I clearly wrote that my first sentence was just a lighthearted joke.

Also my reply was intended to be in support of Play, since I was able to fix issues I had for the most part. It probably is more constructive to talk about optimizations and workarounds than discuss or try to convince people that Play has problems/no problems which imho won't help anyone - we just want to solve issues when we have one. Even Kontakt can be problematic under certain circumstances and setups, but there almost always is a workaround.


----------



## FriFlo (Aug 7, 2014)

Carbs @ Wed Aug 06 said:


> The Darris @ Wed Aug 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Carbs @ Wed Aug 06 said:
> ...



No, there are no issues apart from ram footprint. I just don't find 24RR noticeably different from 9 - 12 RR. I just wanted to point out that 24 RR is very far down the list of the features that would make me recommend the library. It is the rare arctics of the library (e.g. Sfz trills, sfz terms, lots of short note alternatives, ...) combined with a wealth of legato options and (if you buy expansion a) different bowing techniques (sul pont, sul tasto, ...) that makes this library unique. Most versatile library in that respect IMO ...


----------



## Carbs (Aug 7, 2014)

FriFlo @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> No, there are no issues apart from ram footprint. I just don't find 24RR noticeably different from 9 - 12 RR. I just wanted to point out that 24 RR is very far down the list of the features that would make me recommend the library. It is the rare arctics of the library (e.g. Sfz trills, sfz terms, lots of short note alternatives, ...) combined with a wealth of legato options and (if you buy expansion a) different bowing techniques (sul pont, sul tasto, ...) that makes this library unique. Most versatile library in that respect IMO ...



Right on, FriFlo, thanks for the detailed opinion! I own several VSL string libraries, so a wealth of articulations doesn't tickle my ivories as much as the thought of all those round robins. :lol: I'm probably in the minority here, but when BST was first announced that was the one feature that really perked my ears up.


----------



## Daryl (Aug 7, 2014)

Berlin Strings was one of the worst purchases I ever made. If I wasn't a professional I would have returned it for a refund. Unfortunately that option doesn't apply to those of us who do it for a living.

Having said that, for me a String library rises or falls on its legato. if you don't use legato, you might find uses for it.

D


----------



## The Darris (Aug 7, 2014)

Daryl @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Berlin Strings was one of the worst purchases I ever made. If I wasn't a professional I would have returned it for a refund. Unfortunately that option doesn't apply to those of us who do it for a living.
> 
> Having said that, for me a String library rises or falls on its legato. if you don't use legato, you might find uses for it.
> 
> D



Please, can you be a little more constructive with your criticism? Obviously you don't like it which is ultimately a subjective thought but what is it about the legato that makes this library "fall?"

Also, I am pretty sure you don't have to be a professional to NOT get a refund. They specifically don't offer refunds on their products, nor does any other developer, afaik.


----------



## AC986 (Aug 7, 2014)

Daryl @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Berlin Strings was one of the worst purchases I ever made. If I wasn't a professional I would have returned it for a refund. Unfortunately that option doesn't apply to those of us who do it for a living.
> 
> 
> D



Crazy and utterly ridiculous situation. An utter nonsense and hardly endearing to future customers.


----------



## Carbs (Aug 7, 2014)

Daryl @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Berlin Strings was one of the worst purchases I ever made. If I wasn't a professional I would have returned it for a refund. Unfortunately that option doesn't apply to those of us who do it for a living.
> 
> Having said that, for me a String library rises or falls on its legato. if you don't use legato, you might find uses for it.
> 
> D



Hi, Daryl!

I've read a couple older threads where you expressed the same sentiments - I assume it's safe to say that none of the updates have addressed your concerns? If you don't mind, what are your top three string libraries? (Not patronizing at all, I really truly value your opinion!).


----------



## re-peat (Aug 7, 2014)

adriancook @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> (...) Crazy and utterly ridiculous situation. An utter nonsense and hardly endearing to future customers.


The wise thing here, Adrian, if I'm allowed to say so, is to check out these things for yourself. Or at least seek out a second and even third opinion. Daryl's condemnation of the Berlin Strings, while _in abstracto_ entirely justified and possibly even correct (he certainly has my vote), is quite unforgiving, and considering the poor quality of most anything else that's available — ask me for a stringlibrary I'm entirely happy with, and I reply with complete silence —, somewhat unrealistically tilted towards the negative, it seems to me. After all, it's a sample library.
In simpler words: the Berlins are flawed, yes, but no more so than most anything else. 

Having said that: Berlin's ExpansionA has to be considered — bias-free — a remarkably useful addendum to any stringslibrary or virtual orchestral palette. I wouldn't mind being without the core BSS set, I'd be sorry to see the ExpA go though.

_


----------



## AC986 (Aug 7, 2014)

re-peat @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> adriancook @ Thu Aug 07 said:
> 
> 
> > (...) Crazy and utterly ridiculous situation. An utter nonsense and hardly endearing to future customers.
> ...



Not talking about the sound Piet. I agree, if you like the sound or any aspect of anything, then no problem with that. 
I'm talking about policy and if someone is obviously genuine, then the policy of not being able to, or rather, not being allowed to return these 'things' (_for that is what they are_) should be made crystal clear to potential buyers who are about to, (in this case), part with £800 approx with no come back on returns.
Also, I'm not sure or aware of purchasers being able to sell on these things in this case?


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 7, 2014)

Daryl (or adriancook),

Could you please tell us what do you think was so bad now about Berling Strings?

I wonder, I personally don't expect digital downloads to be returnable (unless the license is dongled and can be removed, which is not the case for Berlin Strings) and I won't say it is a very bad policy by not being returnable alone. But I expect a proper support and service if the software costs more than $100, and if the support is good, I can totally live with a non-refundable product. I am not sure what could be really wrong with BST here...


----------



## Daryl (Aug 7, 2014)

The Darris @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Please, can you be a little more constructive with your criticism? Obviously you don't like it which is ultimately a subjective thought but what is it about the legato that makes this library "fall?"


We've had this discussion before. Please do a search.



The Darris @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Also, I am pretty sure you don't have to be a professional to NOT get a refund. They specifically don't offer refunds on their products, nor does any other developer, afaik.


You obviously have different T & C than I do then.

D


----------



## Daryl (Aug 7, 2014)

Carbs @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Hi, Daryl!
> 
> I've read a couple older threads where you expressed the same sentiments - I assume it's safe to say that none of the updates have addressed your concerns? If you don't mind, what are your top three string libraries? (Not patronizing at all, I really truly value your opinion!).


As far as BS is concerned, I haven't checked the updates, as whilst they make have fixed the editing, tuning, ensemble horrors, there can be no fix when the concept is flawed, which in my opinion it is.

All String libraries have problems and issues. It all depends on where you choose to make the compromise and what your purpose in using them is.

D


----------



## Mystic (Aug 7, 2014)

I've not had any problems with stability in Play for the past 3 or so updates. Are there still issues to be kinked out? Sure. But I can think of issues to be kinked out in every plugin, as well. I tend to think it has a pretty large stigma against it by many users because of earlier releases being, well, terrible and the fact that so many people are so gun-ho about EW using Kontakt that they are not willing to give Play a chance.


----------



## OT_Tobias (Aug 7, 2014)

Hi folks.

I don't want to intrude in this topic, but I hope you can understand I want to defend OT a bit 

Our terms of sale are of course displayed before the payment - the return policy bt is even printed bold so it is clearly visible.

If anyone has any questions, PLEASE contact me. This is especially true for issues, alleged bugs, etc.... If I don't know of problems people are having, I can't try to fix them.

ok, now back to topic. I actually find this topic very interesting and I agree with the sentiment that each library has its own merits. It would be pretty boring otherwise 

best

Tobias
OT Support


----------



## dryano (Aug 7, 2014)

Daryl,

I checked your posting history a little bit and I found, that you also said many things against Berlin Woodwinds, without having bought it. To be honest it seems to me, you only bought BS - or pretend of having bought it - to drag it through the mire now. You not only did this here, but also at the VSL forum, when a discusstion about Berlin Strings was startet there and I don't want to know, where else...
To me your remarks are totally useless unless you provide examples and proven arguments. When I listen to the music, that was made with Berlin Strings, I can only say, that it is the most advanced and best sounding string library out there.

I also find it quite alarming, that such harsh and unfounded critics and attacks you and other people do and did against Orchestral Tools, East West or 8dio seem to be tolerated (this thread here is a laudable exception and for the record: for me its ok to tolerate harsh critics)... and at the same time users, who dare to criticise Spitfire Audio get threats of bans and shitstorms almost immediately. Something is terribly wrong with this forum and its community.


----------



## Daryl (Aug 7, 2014)

dryano, do you really think that I would pretend to buy a product, just to criticise it? :roll: 

D


----------



## AC986 (Aug 7, 2014)

dryano @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Daryl,
> 
> I checked your posting history a little bit and I found, that you also said many things against Berlin Woodwinds, without having bought it. To be honest it seems to me, you only bought BS - or pretend of having bought it - to drag it through the mire now.



Can I ask you how old you are? Because if you're older than 6 I would be really surprised.


----------



## Arbee (Aug 7, 2014)

dryano @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> ....I also find it quite alarming, that such harsh and unfounded critics and attacks you and other people do and did against Orchestral Tools, East West or 8dio seem to be tolerated (this thread here is a laudable exception and for the record: for me its ok to tolerate harsh critics)... and at the same time users, who dare to criticise Spitfire Audio get threats of bans and shitstorms almost immediately. Something is terribly wrong with this forum and its community.


I checked, this isn't a Commercial Announcements post, and as such political correctness is not necessary or even welcome IMHO. While brutal honesty on this forum may have robbed me of a few gems along the way, it has undoubtedly also saved me thousands in buyer's remorse and much frustration, for which I am eternally grateful. I'm not really aware of your comment about Spitfire either, I don't buy the whole Spitfire concept, but many do and love it - they're allowed to defend their taste just as others are allowed to criticise.

.


----------



## jamwerks (Aug 7, 2014)

Daryl @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> there can be no fix when the concept is flawed, which in my opinion it is.


Can you elaborate? That's a very severe judgement, which you have the right to make, but imo you should back up with details.


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 7, 2014)

Mystic @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> I've not had any problems with stability in Play for the past 3 or so updates. Are there still issues to be kinked out? Sure. But I can think of issues to be kinked out in every plugin, as well. I tend to think it has a pretty large stigma against it by many users because of earlier releases being, well, terrible and the fact that so many people are so gun-ho about EW using Kontakt that they are not willing to give Play a chance.


I too think that Play is not unstable or anything now (with a few tweaks when needed). But I suspect that the problem is coming from EW's support stance.

Kontakt, while I have been experiencing crashes and hangs with it, I never have much problem finding out workarounds and DIY fixes. NI at least lets users openly discuss (and rant!) about tech troubles, even in their own forums. When I looked into NI's support forum, there are so many tech support threads, so Kontakt is not flawless and it is actually problematic on many users. But often in the end, they can find out how to fix, or at least can get the problem recognized by the community.

What EW has been doing is the polar opposite: deleting/not approving tech support threads, chiming in to almost every Play related threads to just tell that "it is working w/ our PCs", or even "your PC is too weak to run it". Of course it won't help solve anyone's problem. Even the EW's support forum can't be seen without logging in, so you can't google it. Because there is no official knowledge base of Play (like NI's Kontakt tech forums), I often find out possible workarounds in a seemingly unrelated places such as Reaper forums, VSL forums etc. definitely frustrating to find :? 

Imho it is impossible to make anything that works flawlessly on anyone's PC (because the environment widely varies) especially when it is a complex, professional software. But how you deal with problems can dramatically change the situation, just like Kontakt. In that sense, I can understand why Play is still often recognized as an unreliable software.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 7, 2014)

One point and one point only: Hollywood Strings is not synonymous with Play and yet people speak about issues with Play as if they were .I rarely see complaints about Play's performance when using any of the libraries except the Hollywood Series , which ARE demanding of resources if you want to run more than a little and this is especially true of Hollywood Strings.


----------



## Jetzer (Aug 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ August 6th said:


> StevenOBrien @ Wed Aug 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollywood Strings
> ...



+1
Haven't read the whole thread, but this is also true for me.


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 7, 2014)

My practical opinion of strings, based on the libraries I own are.

Hollywood Strings
Pro: Good out the box sound, Bow change legato is nice

Cons: Even one patch can bring a session to a halt with clicks and pops, which requires some form of dedicated external sample machine...I have issues running even one patch with my 8 core 22 gig RAM MacPro. 

Slow load times. Requires the use of PLAY engine, which can be hit or miss for some people. 

LASS:

Pro: Really great aggressive spiccatos. Divisi is a nice touch. ART script can be useful.

Cons: Very dry out of the box sound which can take some time to get sounding the way you want. 

Cinematic Strings:

Pros: Amazing out of the box sound (very comparable to HollyWood Strings if you dont want to go the PLAY route) Really good sounding legato (its my goto melody line library). The full ensemble patch sounds great. 

Cons: Not particularly strong Stac or Spic articulations.

CineStrings:

Pros: Great sound and mic options. Good legato. Strong shorts and has some cool playability options with the articulations. Nice harmonics.

Cons: Honestly not much. This is probably my main lib. It lacks con sord and any dedicated 'ppp' libs but most do.

Symphobia:

Pros: Great sound, Useful for layering with other libraries to make a beffier sound. Great ensembles and standard effects patches. Still getting updates

Cons: No really decent legatos, shorts are a bit weak in places. Starting to be easy to spot.

Albion 1 2 and 3: 

Pros: Between all 3 Albions you cover alot of ground with great ensembles in Albion one. Good dedicated softer patches in 2 and good aggressive and large sounds in 3. Has good mic options. Great sound out of the box. 

Cons: Being set up as ensembles you dont have access to the individual sections. The shorts sound great but can be hit or mix timing wise, with some sounding really loose. Can't go as fff as some libraries without getting a little muddy.


Thats my views on the ones I own. And for the record I use them all in every project that has strings in it....except for Hollywood Strings, which just doesn't work for me.....regardless of how many times people from EW tell me its my fault it doesn't, when literally every other library I own does.

As others have said, alot of it comes down to the type of sound you want and the type of music you write.

-DJ


----------



## JohnG (Aug 7, 2014)

Daniel James @ 7th August 2014 said:


> Cons: Even one patch can bring a session to a halt with clicks and pops, which requires some form of dedicated external sample machine...I have issues running even one patch with my 8 core 22 gig RAM MacPro.



Then you are doing something weird.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 7, 2014)

Exactly, John.So just for grins, I just now loaded up from the Powerful System Folder 5 of the HS legato slur + portamento patches, which are probably the most demanding in the library. This is on a 2012 iMac 3.4 i7 with 32 GB, not the most beastly computer on the planet, but pretty darned good. HS is streaming form a WD Caviar Black 7200 HD, not an SSD which would improve voice count. 

Here it is in Logic Pro 10.0.7 running at a 256 buffer:


----------



## The Darris (Aug 7, 2014)

Daryl @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> The Darris @ Thu Aug 07 said:
> 
> 
> > Please, can you be a little more constructive with your criticism? Obviously you don't like it which is ultimately a subjective thought but what is it about the legato that makes this library "fall?"
> ...



Considering that this thread is current and to save other lurkers and members time. Do you think you could still elaborate on your opinions a little more? If you've already discussed this before and don't care to do it again then why even post a cryptic negative comment in the first place? Anyway, it would be courteous to the OP to offer your constructive feedback and opinions of the library for them to make their own judgement which is what they asked for in the first place, hence my comment.


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 7, 2014)

JohnG @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Daniel James @ 7th August 2014 said:
> 
> 
> > Cons: Even one patch can bring a session to a halt with clicks and pops, which requires some form of dedicated external sample machine...I have issues running even one patch with my 8 core 22 gig RAM MacPro.
> ...



Start Project. Load PLAY onto empty midi track. Load instrument. Play instrument.

Sure. I must be doing something weird.

-DJ


----------



## Daryl (Aug 7, 2014)

The Darris @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Daryl @ Thu Aug 07 said:
> 
> 
> > The Darris @ Thu Aug 07 said:
> ...


Sorry not to be able to take time to go into it all again, but you should find some info here:

http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37306

D


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 7, 2014)

Well, what I just wrote about Play/HS became true in this thread. Somebody reported that it is not working well with his PC, and the reply is "it's your fault, working here" without any suggestions of what to do. :roll:

Also, I guess most people that are using HS now have a PC well above the recommended spec (even I and EW Lurker agree that we can run Play/HS using 7200rpm HDDs) so something must be wrong.


----------



## The Darris (Aug 7, 2014)

Thanks Daryl. A lot of useful information relevant to this thread is in there. Much appreciated o-[][]-o .


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 7, 2014)

StatKsn @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Well, what I just wrote about Play/HS became true in this thread. Somebody reported that it is not working well with his PC, and the reply is "it's your fault, working here" without any suggestions of what to do. :roll:
> 
> Also, I guess most people that are using HS now have a PC well above the recommended spec (even I and EW Lurker agree that we can run Play/HS using 7200rpm HDDs) so something must be wrong.



Funny how it works flawlessly on the machine of an employee huh. But yeah I have seen many times on VI people say that HS isn't working for them only to be told they are wrong....often in quite a condescending manner too. I have just come to accept that type of behavior when it comes to HS by this point. It DOESN'T work on my machine and no matter how many times Jay tells me it works for him doesn't change shit for me. 

-DJ


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 7, 2014)

Honestly I think that if EW was not like that, people's perception of Play stability should be much much better (because of the reasons I wrote in previous post). Yes Play/HS is misunderstood, but they got what they asked for, to be brutal.


----------



## germancomponist (Aug 7, 2014)

Huh...


----------



## prodigalson (Aug 7, 2014)

> Exactly, John.So just for grins, I just now loaded up from the Powerful System Folder 5 of the HS legato slur + portamento patches, which are probably the most demanding in the library. This is on a 2012 iMac 3.4 i7 with 32 GB, not the most beastly computer on the planet, but pretty darned good. HS is streaming form a WD Caviar Black 7200 HD, not an SSD which would improve voice count.



Jay, you've loaded 5 powerful system slur + port patches and are streaming from a 7200rpm HD? 

...would you mind confirming how long it actually took you to load all 5 patches?

If I tried loading those patches on my iMac 2013 i7 from my USB 3.0 7200rpm HD I could take a shower, grab a beer, take a nap and still be waiting for all 5 patches to load. 

Any tips on how to speed up loading times for HS? (Other than buy an SSD)


----------



## Carbs (Aug 7, 2014)

Is there any legato going on in that 8 bars? Visually it just looks like some sustaining notes and some short notes. Thanks


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 7, 2014)

prodigalson @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> > Exactly, John.So just for grins, I just now loaded up from the Powerful System Folder 5 of the HS legato slur + portamento patches, which are probably the most demanding in the library. This is on a 2012 iMac 3.4 i7 with 32 GB, not the most beastly computer on the planet, but pretty darned good. HS is streaming form a WD Caviar Black 7200 HD, not an SSD which would improve voice count.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



App. 4:20. Now understand I run HS on a PC in VE Pro 5 from an SSD so I only load it at the beginning of my composing day, and you can be damned sure that if I ran it on my Mac it would not be directly loaded into Logic Pro but also in VE Pro so that I only had to load it once. And as far as I know the only way to make load times faster is an SSD.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 7, 2014)

Carbs @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Is there any legato going on in that 8 bars? Visually it just looks like some sustaining notes and some short notes. Thanks



Carbs, I just dragged in some Apple Loops and reassigned the software instruments to Play.

Is this more helpful?


----------



## JohnG (Aug 7, 2014)

Daniel James @ 7th August 2014 said:


> Funny how it works flawlessly on the machine of an employee huh. But yeah I have seen many times on VI people say that HS isn't working for them only to be told they are wrong....often in quite a condescending manner too. I have just come to accept that type of behavior when it comes to HS by this point. It DOESN'T work on my machine and no matter how many times Jay tells me it works for him doesn't change [email protected]#t for me.
> 
> -DJ



DJ, you produced a hasty, glib "review" of HS when it first came out and concluded that, since it was more demanding than another library, it was bad. Ever since, you have stuck to this line.

Your response, when challenged on your views, has always been (and here again) to attack the messenger. You imply that Jay is somehow corrupt or lying because he gets a modest stipend from them. Maybe there's another reason? Maybe he's more knowledgeable than you about it? Maybe that's why it works for him?

It feels as though you have stuck a flag in the ground and are defending it no matter what. Have you updated PLAY and the library? Have you taken the time to adjust buffer and other settings to the recommended ones? Are you loading the most monstrous patch instead of the ones your rig can handle? Have you used an SSD? 

HS is a big, demanding piece of software. It's not "load and play the max patches however you want." If that's your criticism, that seems pretty shallow to me.

And just in case I come in for the same treatment as Jay, I have received free products in the past from EW, but most of them have been paid for. I spent over $4k for EWQLSO when it first came out and have been an enthusiastic user ever since, along with products from many other great software providers.

Since then I've written music for dozens of trailers for major motion pictures, film scores, television, video games, animation, TV adverts -- lots of stuff on deadlines. And EW (including PLAY and HS) works fine for me.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Aug 7, 2014)

Daniel James @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> CineStrings:
> 
> Pros: Great sound and mic options. Good legato. Strong shorts and has some cool playability options with the articulations. Nice harmonics.
> 
> ...



Could you elaborate a little on this? I've considered CineStrings a few times, but it seems to me like it's the weakest of the CineSamples orchestral series, and some side-by-side comparisons to other libraries have made me a critic of the level of detail included in some of the patches. Not trying to put it down by any means (love CineSamples), but I'd be interested in being enlightened.


----------



## Carbs (Aug 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Carbs @ Thu Aug 07 said:
> 
> 
> > Is there any legato going on in that 8 bars? Visually it just looks like some sustaining notes and some short notes. Thanks
> ...



Yes! Thanks a lot for taking the time to do that, I appreciate it. o-[][]-o


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 7, 2014)

See there is one little problem for the Daniels here : I can PROVE what I write to anyone who lives in LA and cares to drive over here and several have. There is nothing special about my rig either but yeah, I know how to get the most out of it.


----------



## wanmingyan (Aug 7, 2014)

Let's keep this friendly discussion conflict-free shall we? :D - Settle our grievances elsewhere!


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 7, 2014)

wanmingyan @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Let's keep this friendly discussion conflict-free shall we? :D - Settle our grievances elsewhere!



I have no grievance with Daniel. I never saw the video he did on HS that John is mentioning because I was not interested. 

I do have issues with what he wrote because right here on my studio I can disprove it!

i am not btw saying that he may not have issues and that it is his fault if he does. What I AM saying is that at my place on both a moderately powered Mac and a moderately powered PC I can demonstrate that it does not HAVE to be that way. Why it is on his, I have no idea.


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 7, 2014)

JohnG @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Daniel James @ 7th August 2014 said:
> 
> 
> > Funny how it works flawlessly on the machine of an employee huh. But yeah I have seen many times on VI people say that HS isn't working for them only to be told they are wrong....often in quite a condescending manner too. I have just come to accept that type of behavior when it comes to HS by this point. It DOESN'T work on my machine and no matter how many times Jay tells me it works for him doesn't change [email protected]#t for me.
> ...



First up John, I called it how I saw it. I never asked for your approval on my 'hasty glib reviews' I am sorry it didnt align with how you felt but its exactly how I felt when using it.

Secondly I am not attacking the messenger. I stated my opinion, as is the kind of point of this thread and you snarkily responded with 'You must be doing something weird' as if I hadn't tried everything I could to make the $1000 sample library I bought actually work for me. So don't piss and moan when you don't like the way I word my reply.

I never said Jay was corrupt. I just said that its fitting that an employee of EW has a perfectly operating version of the software when we both know there have been numerous examples of people having nothing but problems with HS and PLAY running...its not just me. Yes I have updated PLAY. Yes I have tried to use it since my video. Yes I have played with the buffer. But no I havn't used an SSD nor have I built an external sample machine as the only library in my entire system that I have any issue with is HS and I am not about to change my setup for the sake of one library that doesnt work. My computer meets the recommended specs, so it should operate as advertised...which it doesn't.



> HS is a big, demanding piece of software. It's not "load and play the max patches however you want." If that's your criticism, that seems pretty shallow to me.



How is that a shallow criticism? when I can do literally that with every other string library I have. HS is doing nothing special when it comes to the sound you get from it, but it seems to needlessly run like shit for me and quite a few others I have seen post here before. Its almost like its needlessly being a big demanding piece of software when every other library out there can achieve similar/better results for much lower system use.



> And just in case I come in for the same treatment as Jay, I have received free products in the past from EW, but most of them have been paid for. I spent over $4k for EWQLSO when it first came out and have been an enthusiastic user ever since, along with products from many other great software providers.
> 
> Since then I've written music for dozens of trailers for major motion pictures, film scores, television, video games, animation, TV adverts -- lots of stuff on deadlines. And EW (including PLAY and HS) works fine for me.



Good for you John. I am glad its going great for you. That doesn't change the fact that It doesn't work for me. 



> I do have issues with what he wrote because right here on my studio I can disprove it! (Jay wrote this)



No Jay. You can prove that its working for you, and that is smashing. But it doesn't change that it runs like shit here. Does it run that smooth in a full project, while being run on the 7200rpm HD in the box with no VE Pro? I only ask because you mentioned in a later post that you actually run the library off a separate PC (not mac?) on SSD's. And like I said before, every other library I own runs great in huge projects in the box. I meet the system requirements to run the library, so I shouldnt be expected to spend another few grand just to make, what I can only assume is one poorly optimized library, run.



> i am not btw saying that he may not have issues and *that it is his fault if he does*.



Good ol fashioned EW support.


-DJ


----------



## RiffWraith (Aug 7, 2014)

I am not taking sides here, and I take no exception to what_ anyone _says about this, but I must admit... I did see this one coming:



Daniel James @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> > i am not btw saying that he may not have issues and *that it is his fault if he does*.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Jay will correct me if I am wrong, but it is pretty clear to me that he was saying that he was _not _saying ( :shock: ) that it is your fault (DJ) if you do. ie - Another way to read that line is:
_
i am not btw saying that he may not have issues, and i am not saying that it is his fault if he does._

And that is backed up by what came next.

Ok, carry on.


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 7, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> I am not taking sides here, and I take no exception to what_ anyone _says about this, but I must admit... I did see this one coming:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Good point, the wording of that might have thrown me off. I am reading it as him saying:

"I am not saying he doesn't have problems"

"But if he does its his own fault"

-DJ


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 7, 2014)

Zhao Shen @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> Daniel James @ Thu Aug 07 said:
> 
> 
> > CineStrings:
> ...



Cinestrings is a pretty good all rounder IMO. The sustains may feel a little harsh in places, but it can go big very easily. Typically when I am writing melodic lines I will put Cinematic Strings as the main upfront section as it has a great softer edged sustain, but then layer it with Cinestrings to put some of that Sony room sound into it (Or Albion if I am wanting some AIR Studios) The thing about Cinestrings that makes it beat out a few of the others for me is the shorts. They are really sharp and can get very rhythmic.

-DJ


----------



## JohnG (Aug 7, 2014)

DJ -- you are by turns aggressive and defensive. You gave a glib review of a complex product and have attacked everyone who disagrees with you.

You have insinuated over and over again that Jay is somehow not telling the truth or is merely piping propaganda. That is not fair, in my view. Moreover, you have not responded in any way regarding whether or not you followed the company's suggestions about settings or have ever updated the software.

To quote you, "I call it as I see it." Your review and opinion are based on a hasty, careless look at a great product and continue to retail that original opinion by implying nasty things about the character and knowledge of anyone who disagrees with you.

I disagree with your statement that "HS is doing nothing special" or that "every other library out there can achieve similar / better results." I don't think so. Different, yes. Good, yes. Not the same. It baffles me that you could think any of these libraries sounds "the same" as the others.


[note: I have received free products from East West]


----------



## prodigalson (Aug 7, 2014)

> App. 4:20. Now understand I run HS on a PC in VE Pro 5 from an SSD so I only load it at the beginning of my composing day, and you can be damned sure that if I ran it on my Mac it would not be directly loaded into Logic Pro but also in VE Pro so that I only had to load it once. And as far as I know the only way to make load times faster is an SSD.



So to clarify, In your experiment where you loaded 5 powerful system slur + port patches were you streaming from a 7200 HD or an SSD? I think you originally said 7200rpm but this statement seems like the 4m 20 secs load time was via SSD...

The reason I ask is that I just tried to load ONE Powerful System slur + port patch in Logic 10 via a USB 3.0 7200rpm HD on my iMac 2014 i7 (buffer size was 256) and it took exactly *10 minutes and 33 secs. * ...for ONE patch. 

PLEASE know that I am not trying to fan any flames here, I have absolutely no dog in this race. I truly love the sound of HS and I would love to be able to use it more. It just seems like the specs of my experiment seemed to be identical to your 5 patch experiment so why then does it take me over 10 minutes to load ONE patch when it takes you a little over 4 minutes to load FIVE? 

Again, I am not arguing that what you are saying isn't true, I'm sure that if I drove to your house in LA I would be a believer but short of that I just don't understand it.


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 7, 2014)

Well, Daniel, your problem of pops and clicks sounds like a (lesser known) glitch that happens when either the host/plugin buffer size is doing something weird. It may get better if you adjust host/plugin buffer size a bit, both longer and shorter. It can actually happen with Kontakt under certain circumstances. But at least I can say that Play can handle HS without a slave (you'll need a SSD if you use full 4 mics) if properly setup, and having pops and clicks all over the place is definitely not normal.

Edit: When this happens, it is the internal convolution reverb that glitches out on my PC.
Edit2: To be more precise, this is not happening because the buffer size is too short. It is very hard to explain, but it seems it happens when either (1) DAW's delay compensation (which is often determined by VST effects you route) and host/plugin buffer size is conflicting (2) Plugin block size determined by the host is "improper" or not compatible with the VSTi in question.

I'm sorry for possibly derailing the thread to be yet another Play/HS tech thread, please move on.


----------



## The Darris (Aug 7, 2014)

prodigalson @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> The reason I ask is that I just tried to load ONE Powerful System slur + port patch in Logic 10 via a USB 3.0 7200rpm HD on my iMac 2014 i7 (buffer size was 256) and it took exactly *10 minutes and 33 secs. * ...for ONE patch. .



Do you have any anti-virus running? If so, restart your computer to purge the memory cache and turn off your antivirus. Once that is done, try to load that same patch and time it again. 

Loading high sample count libraries in Kontakt with certain antivirus software on will cause it to do a quick scan of every sample file which takes forever (my template would take 30 minutes to load). Once I tested without the AV on, it loaded in 2 minutes. I don't own any PLAY instruments but the concept might be the same here since you are loaded tons of samples and from the sound of it, HW strings has a lot of samples to it. Give that a shot and see if it helps.

Cheers,

Chris


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 7, 2014)

JohnG @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> DJ -- you are by turns aggressive and defensive. You gave a glib review of a complex product and have attacked everyone who disagrees with you.



I don't attack people who disagree with me. I stated my opinion originally, then you came in and said "You must be doing something weird" implying that I am making it up or doing it wrong. I might have got a bit defensive based off that snarky condescending response. If you don't like my opinion, fine. 



> You have insinuated over and over again that Jay is somehow not telling the truth or is merely piping propaganda. That is not fair, in my view. Moreover, you have not responded in any way regarding whether or not you followed the company's suggestions about settings or have ever updated the software.



Did you even read my previous post. The one where I explained how I updated the software and tried everything (bar spending a few extra thousand for slave machines) to get it working. Also I NEVER said Jay isn't telling the truth, you keep saying that for me for some reason. I said that the fact its working for Jay, doesnt mean it works for me. And to the other point...as an employee of EW he kinda does have to pipe the EW propaganda.....I can't say I ahve seen him say a negative word about it so far, have you?



> To quote you, "I call it as I see it." Your review and opinion are based on a hasty, careless look at a great product and continue to retail that original opinion by implying nasty things about the character and knowledge of anyone who disagrees with you.



I honestly don't know where you are getting this bullshit from. If someone disagrees with my opinion and I choose to defend it, doesn't mean I am attacking anyone. And lets not throw around accusations that I am digging at peoples character when your first response to me was that I must be doing it wrong and then in your second telling me how much more knowledgeable Jay is than me. 

I stand by my comparison video to this day because the software still pretty much works like it did back then. A big pile of shit. I notice you don't seem to take issue with any of the negative things I had to say about the other libraries, most of which are working great for me still.



> I disagree with your statement that "HS is doing nothing special" or that "every other library out there can achieve similar / better results." I don't think so. Different, yes. Good, yes. Not the same. It baffles me that you could think any of these libraries sounds "the same" as the others.



When I play a legato line with HS then play it back with say Cinematic Strings, the end result is very similar. What exactly are you hearing so magically different? When I play spiccatos with HS then play the same pattern with LASS the results are very comparable...again I am not sure why it baffles you I hear the end result as pretty similar. They both sound like great sounding string sections playing the parts I wrote...its just HS seems to need its own dedicated machine to achieve it. 

I honestly don't see WHY it needs to be so resource intensive. The end result still just sounds like a string section....the same as all the others, the only difference is preference of tone.

Again I am not attacking you or your character. I am responding to your posts with the same hostility you seem to be harboring against me. Perhaps calm it down a tad or just dig at me through PM. There is more than enough talk about the Cons of HS and PLAY if one uses the search function.

-DJ


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 7, 2014)

prodigalson @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> The reason I ask is that I just tried to load ONE Powerful System slur + port patch in Logic 10 via a USB 3.0 7200rpm HD on my iMac 2014 i7 (buffer size was 256) and it took exactly *10 minutes and 33 secs. * ...for ONE patch.



When I tested the loading time for 1st Violins Legato Slur + Port Powerful patch with 7200rpm HDD, SATA3 (main mic only/ Engine buffer 256/standalone), it was about 55sec. I am not running a realtime antivirus. USB3.0 may be a bottle neck here?


----------



## JohnG (Aug 7, 2014)

DJ, your desperate attempts to justify yourself look -- desperate.

If you can't hear the difference between HS and other libraries, that says a lot.


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 7, 2014)

For what it's worth, I think Cinematic Strings' character is similar (if not identical) to HS than any other libraries, and if HS was not working properly on my PC, I might have been replaced HS with it.

A quick comparision of legato violins:

http://www.mediafire.com/listen/rgajawwajm5y1zv/legato_comparision.mp3

I applied a bit of a multiband comp to Cinematic Strings. There is also Adagio Violins in this test, but you can tell that as it is extremely different from the other two.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 7, 2014)

prodigalson @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> > App. 4:20. Now understand I run HS on a PC in VE Pro 5 from an SSD so I only load it at the beginning of my composing day, and you can be damned sure that if I ran it on my Mac it would not be directly loaded into Logic Pro but also in VE Pro so that I only had to load it once. And as far as I know the only way to make load times faster is an SSD.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



i don't get it either. Sure the patches take a long time to load but not 10 minutes per patch. it didn't ever take that long here even on my my older computer before this one from a 7200 drive, so I am at a loss to explain that.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 7, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> I am not taking sides here, and I take no exception to what_ anyone _says about this, but I must admit... I did see this one coming:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes that is indeed what I meant.


----------



## FriFlo (Aug 8, 2014)

Daryl, may I ask you why you found BS to be so bad, obviously the legatos? I found the legatos really versatile and could apply them to almost any situation so far. The basic module offers different sustains and you can get very dramatic violin lines that no other library could offer so far. In EXPA and B there are some of the best soft, but still expressive (sul tasto) and hard to harsh (sul pont) options. I could go on ... 
Not that I don't find any whack spots! There are some tuning problems I noticed using the basses (didn't have the time to dive into what exactly was the problem). And there are still some scripting issues, like some som short notes react to mod wheel while others to velocity, which doesn't make sense. I am pretty confident though, OT will improve these, as they did already with other issues I reported. 
It is always a matter of taste, but I find it hard to say much bad thing about BS and I can compare to VSL, SF Sable / Mural and LASS.


----------



## OT_Tobias (Aug 8, 2014)

@FriFlo: You can switch all patches (except Legato) between modhweel and velocity by clicking on the big knob in the middle of the interface. No scripting error


----------



## Casiquire (Aug 8, 2014)

Let's not lose sight of the fact that in the blind tests on this very forum, people had a difficult time detecting whether the library they were listening to _was even a legato library in the first place_, let alone details of sound. This idea that Hollywood Strings has a better out-of-the-box sound, or Cinematic Strings has a less detailed sound, etc, has little practical merit considering someone with good mixing skills can make the decade-old sample library compete fiercely with the newest best-of-the-best. By that same token the best out-of-the-box library will sound like trash in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to mix. The sound of a library means nothing at all if it's a hindrance to your workflow, or if you worry that you will not be met with professional support for the product when things don't work out. Not naming any names, not fanning any flames.

(Hey that rhymed, I'm a poet and I didn't even realize!)


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 8, 2014)

EW Lurker, when I look at any other professional software tech support, nobody tries to prove that their software is working on their PC, let alone disprove. They just give a helping hand to solve the problem (Tobias's post in this thread is a very good example). Tech troubles you can fix, but you can't "disprove". It is impossible (since you are yet to see Daniel's PC), pointless and baffling.


----------



## feck (Aug 8, 2014)

JohnG @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> DJ, your desperate attempts to justify yourself look -- desperate.


Huh? I watched Daniel's video review of HS before buying it, and while he clearly seems to not dig the loading times of HS in comparison to the other libraries in that particular video (who does dig the loading times?), you said several things that frankly were pretty biased towards EW and disparaging towards him. I have owned HS for a year or so now, and while I won't rehash the conversations/posts I have had with Jay on this forum about the "dead" nature of HS as a living product, I can say that - of all of the libraries I own (and I own a LOT of them) HS is by far the most (unnecessarily) resource intensive and unintuitive of them ALL. This is point of contention for me and MANY other users. DJ pointed that out, and that's that. What I want to know is - why do some people try to argue against the plain truth that HS uses a less-streamlined-than-competitor-Kontakt engine which makes the product less usable to the majority of people than they would prefer, and that it has been publicly acknowledged by Jay as a product that won't receive any more development when there is SO much that could be done to improve it? I suppose EW is probably a big sponsor of this site, but seriously, the amount of unwarranted defense of it's obvious weak points just keeps baffling me. My experience with it can be summed up very easily - sounds damn good, plays and runs a whole lot less than damn good. EW doesn't care about streamlining it any further, nor does it care about the fact that these forums keep populating with posts like these which show how many purchasers want the product to become better than it currently is. Looks like EW is the Steinberg of the sampling world. Buy at your own risk. :mrgreen:


----------



## AC986 (Aug 8, 2014)

Casiquire @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> (Hey that rhymed, I'm a poet and I didn't even realize!)



It's..

I'm a poet and didn't know it.


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 8, 2014)

Casiquire @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> .



+1


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 8, 2014)

JohnG @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> DJ, your desperate attempts to justify yourself look -- desperate.
> 
> If you can't hear the difference between HS and other libraries, that says a lot.



I honestly don't get you by this point John. You are a moderator of this forum and should be setting a good example for the rest of us. The point of this thread was share opinions on string libraries, which I did, I offered my honest opinion on all the ones I own. I didn't ask nor need your approval of my opinion, or comments on my situation, yet the EW defensive flag came out in force yet again....and you have the audacity to say that restating my opinion is looking desperate, when I don't think a HS thread has gone past where you havn't personally jumped to the defense of EW, going along that same old "It works for me therefor you must be doing it wrong"

If I was the only one having issues John then sure, I would just let it go. But this constant 'it works for me so you must be doing it wrong' vibe that I keep getting from the EW defenders needs to be addressed at some point. I mean there are people in this very fucking thread sharing some of the same issues I have....yet we ignore those when they dont support your somewhat personal vendetta against my opinion on HS....I mean you never seem to take issue with my cons of any of the other libraries....nor anyone elses problems with HS.

And no I honestly don't hear anything particularly special from the sound of HS that would justify the extra amount of system resource it requires. 

I suggest if you have more personal disagreements with me and my opinion you goto PM. The HS/PLAY derailment (again) has already gone as far as it needs too.

-DJ


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 8, 2014)

I'm wondering - could some kind soul do a loading time comparison (possibly violin legato patches) between the string libraries covered in this thread? I wanted to do by myself, but I don't own Spitfire, BST etc.


----------



## tokatila (Aug 8, 2014)

Peace. While you were fighting futile battle I made 15 secs of mediocre music. 

I'm happy not to have golden ears, since I like the sound of all libraries mentioned in this thread (based on professional demos).

To me it's usability that comes first. I have CS2, Albions and Mural Vol.1 and they are easy enough to use for me. My problem is the lack of orchestration skills, not the quality of the libraries. 8)


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Aug 8, 2014)

Wow! This is a very aggressive thread!


Dyrano - I share similar sentiments about Berlin Strings to Daryl. 

Although, I have found use for it and even come out with some really great passages. But it is in my opinion a slightly poorly put together library. I too was astonished that they released it in the state that it was. 

I have downloaded the first update and a lot of bugs were not sorted out in that. However, the recent update may have fixed it. 

In its original state, the library was hard to use for most applications. For slow to medium legato speeds, its really great! But BS sounds thin in comparison to most other libraries. I do have to fatten it up with reverb/eq etc. 

I don't have much use for their tremolos, pizzicato and the shorts are not to my liking. Spitfire Albion II Pizz and tremolos are much, much better. I also have VSL which is fantastic and probably the most bug-free orchestral library on the planet. 

What Daryl says about samples is true. Some problems stem from the concept or the sampling method perhaps and there is little you can do do change that. 

I find the Albion II shorts very weird for example. They are very loose in the lower dynamics and only get tight in the upper range. Therefore, it is mostly useless to ride the dynamics and build a convincing fast shorts passage. Legato is bumpy as well but that can be manged with the speed controller to an extent. However, the sound is very good and I often find myself layering it with other samples. The con sordino stuff is beautiful. Perhaps their Mural is better as it is a more complete string library. 

But, guys don't fight with EW loading times. As Berlin Strings takes first position as the most demanding library. It is by far the heaviest on RAM and the slowest to load. 

It needs to be said that neither EW or Berlin Strings can be used on a 7200 RPM drive. You need an SSD and even then these libraries are quite slow. However, I have made peace with EW loading times. They are definitely longer than most libraries but every library has different things going on. 

I am not in love with EW strings but have found a lot of use for it. Play for the first time works perfectly on my windows system. It loads up lightning fast (Just the software itself) and I have had no crashes whatsoever. 

But then there are some bugs. For example, Cubase will stop updating the Export Down progress whenever EW is in use in the session. It will just sit at zero and stop only when its finished. Auto-Save also slows down a bit when you are using EW in a session in Cubase. 

There are also some tuning issues still in EW and a couple of bugs. But mostly, its all working well. 

Obviously you only need to hear TJ's demos to hear what this library can do. So its great!

Like most everyone else, I don't really like any string library the most. But over all, its really a great pleasure to work with VSL because it just works! 
 
Here are a couple of examples for those interested:

* Fate: Made using only Berlin Strings - https://soundcloud.com/tanujtiku/fate (BS does this sort of thing very well)

* Lost: Lots of EW Brass in here - https://soundcloud.com/tanujtiku/lost (Its a mix of EW, VSL, Sample modeling and some Spitfire) But all the top layers for the brass are EW except some french horn stuff like the trills. 



Tanuj.


----------



## OT_Tobias (Aug 8, 2014)

BST indeed runs best on an SSD, but we ran it from a slooooooow 5400 rpm drive at NAMM and I extensively tested with 7200rpm drives. It is not perfect, but works actually pretty well.

If BST (or any Kontakt library for that matter) loads slowly, do a batch resave. This should be done for any library anyway and will massively speed up loading times.

As for RAM use, that's of course subjective, but I find BST's memory usage quite ok. The only heavy patches are the legatos. The way I use them (tree mic enabled, First chair on, bow noises) each legato patch uses about 1 GB and loads in about 4 seconds (background loading takes longer, but the patch is usable after 4 secs). But with any Kontakt library total RAM use doesn't say anything, because most people run their instances fully purged. Even in the biggest of prchestrations you will maybe need 400MB of samples or so for the legato. Remember that the BST legato has 4 different sample sets loaded at the same time. It is essentially multiple patches in one.
Attached is a video of BST VL1 Legato from 1.6 loading with the factory settings. I would not call that excessive. Yes, it is running from an SSD, but that mainly influences background loading, not the actual loading of the patch. Actually this system is quite slow - it is my test system to test with Logic, etc... and not the system I use for composing. In case anyone cares: The SSD is connected to a relatively slow Marvell SATAIII port and is a pretty old Crucial M4.

EDIT: Doesn't let me attach it - "file too big". So here's a Dropbox link: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/104901/bst_leg.gif

As usual - any issues, PLEASE send me emails. I have NEVER heard about excessive BST loading times before. Quite the contrary.

*BUT:
As StatKsn rightly put it, there is no use in saying "it works on my system". Anyone of you who has issues I welcome you to contact me and will happily look at it on your own system. No "It works here". You can show me how it works for _you_. I am pretty sure we can find out what can be done. If not, if it is a bug, it will be dealt with. Pinky promise.*


----------



## Daryl (Aug 8, 2014)

FriFlo @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> Daryl, may I ask you why you found BS to be so bad, obviously the legatos?


Did you read the thread I linked to?

D


----------



## Valérie_D (Aug 8, 2014)

Any more comments on Mural and Sable? I was thinking about it for my first string Library.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 8, 2014)

This turned into a fun little thread, didn't it?

FWIW, I almost think that Jay and DJ are actually two sides of the same coin. I've never bought HS, mainly because all of my reading and talking to users has lead me to conclude that unless you have a separate rig with SSD, you're asking for trouble. You may get lucky on their reccommended specs, but imo that's not a wise description by EW, they should junk their minimum requirements and rename "reccommended" to "minimum". Like Daniel, I don't want to buy a whole rig to run one library that doesn't give me anything I can't get an equivalent elsewhere for a lot less hassle. But from the other side of the coin, if you love the sound and follow all the advice out there (PC slave, SSD, buffer tweaks), I've no doubt it'll be solid, reliable and sound terrific once you're set. My own current experience of Play generally is it is working fine in VE Pro and background loading really helps on a first boot of the template. I've given up using 4.1.7 in Cubase 7.5.2 as it has random CPU spiking even when idle, but this isn't consistent. Rather than spend weeks tracing it (and although its been reported to EW by others I don't think there's any movement on it) I just solely use it in VE Pro.

LASS - still love it. Not much left to say about its sound - if you don't like even with S&C etc then you don't like. I have no problem with it, and it's a dream to play. AA divisi legato still never bettered. FC integrates perfectly and works very well for solo strings.

CINESTRINGS - I like it very much. You MUST enable HQ under the hood though, it plays like a buggy monster otherwise. With that done (and I also expand the dynamics under the hood for a more realistic pp to ff), it seems really solid, legato plays very well. It's a bright tone and the legato patches need tail for sure, but sits very nicely for me.

SABLE vol1-4. Love the tone for a more intimate sound, just a dizzying amount of articulations. Fast legato / runs working really well. So as I have it right now, a terrific asset. That said, I'm still on 1.1 basic legato which I find the most uneven of all my libraries, since they still haven't released 1.2 for Stereo Mixes. Hence I'm a little frustrated with it - bought vol 1 18 months ago and I don't feel I've ever been able to make my peace with it yet . But that's how I view Spitfire - exceptional products in the end, and they can't be faulted for ongoing commitment or breadth of vision. The downside is that you might have to be patient while they release 218 other libraries til they get round to what you a specifically waiting for 

SPITFIRE SOLO STRINGS. This does need a bit of love, again I'm sure it will come. The tone is gorgeous, but it feels quite limited in where you can successfully use it. As it is, I typically reach for it if it is a particularly emotional part, and use LASS FC for everything else.

SYMPHOBIA. I know its technically out of the remit, but it's amazing how often I still reach of Symphobia strings first and last, especially for shorts. I disagree with DJ that they are too recognisable, that only applies to specific fx for me.

ORCHESTRAL TOOLS STRING RUNS. This is a product that has really improved over time. It still has the odd strange bump and glitch but very glad to have it for some extra glue or flourish.

Final thought - I maintain my heretical stance towards tone. Sure there are libraries whose tone I can't stand, but none of them are from the big hitters here. In my many orchestral recordings, I hear a huge variety in tone and space, and it never bothers me. I like 1997 Star Wars next to 2014 HTTYD2 and they couldn't be more different. The playing, orchestration and the composition are more important to me, and I think I plain like the variety in the tone. I feel the same way about sample libraries. I take exception to John G's comment "_If you can't hear the difference between HS and other libraries, that says a lot_". John's such a thoughtful smart poster, it doesn't seem worthy of him. Is the tone of HS better than Mural? No. It's a silly question, there is no definitive "better" . "It's A Fair Lass" still sounds superb to me now, as it did when I first heard it, and Colin says its got only very modest processing of LASS. I've heard amazing stuff done with Berlin and Mural, but have no working knowledge of either. Some of Andy B's stuff is simply jaw dropping.

So I'm wary in general of "pick the library that sounds best to you" philosophy, because there's so much more to consider, and some of us have a broader grazing area on tone, there might be half a dozen I'd be happy with - it's not the be all and end all to me (and I know Piet disagrees with me). But I'm EXTREMELY wary of the kind of comment that John made there, which suggests if you don't share his exact view of a particular library's sound there is something wrong with your ears.


----------



## jamwerks (Aug 8, 2014)

Surprised at some of what I'm reading. Yes HS is a bit resource intensive. Why all the whining about it? It's a very old library (7 years old?), with probably 7 year old scripting, etc.

All of the Hollywood stuff can be easily run on professional equipment. Most of the people who complain don't really have a professional setup. By that I mean PC's, loaded with ram & SSD's. And all that is dirt cheap these days by the way, so there are really no excuses. Maybe we should start a "Low end" forum here where all the hobbiest and wanna be's can moan and grown that HS won't run on their "Mac Plus's" :mrgreen: 

I would still honestly advise anyone serious about making music with samples, to buy the Hollywood stuff. It's now inexpensive, and it's value imo comes from the quality of the producers, and the musicality it brings "to the table".

SSD's will make loading 3 x faster, and enable you to work glich-free. FWIW I run full templates of HS, HB, & HOW, 14-16 arts per instrument, main & surrounds mic's open, and no problems (on W8 & W8.1)


----------



## jamwerks (Aug 8, 2014)

Valérie_D @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> Any more comments on Mural and Sable? I was thinking about it for my first string Library.


Other libraries have their strengths, but Mural-Sable is imo the best string option out there, but quite a long shot.


----------



## Daryl (Aug 8, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> I take exception to John G's comment "_If you can't hear the difference between HS and other libraries, that says a lot_". John's such a thoughtful smart poster, it doesn't seem worthy of him. Is the tone of HS better than Mural? No. It's a silly question, there is no definitive "better" . "It's A Fair Lass" still sounds superb to me now, as it did when I first heard it, and Colin says its got only very modest processing of LASS. I've heard amazing stuff done with Berlin and Mural, but have no working knowledge of either. Some of Andy B's stuff is simply jaw dropping.


Guy, my reading of John's comment is not that at all. To me all he is saying is that HS sounds different from other String libraries. Not that the sound is better. I'm sure he can deliver a slapping if I'm mis-reading him. :wink: 

D


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 8, 2014)

jamwerks @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> All of the Hollywood stuff can be easily run on professional equipment.



BTW I have a rig with an Intel SSD, i7 6 core 3930k, tons of RAM with minimum services running and used to have pops/clicks/note cutting in the middle with HS quite often, in both Play 3 and 4, even with lighter patches. After an extensive testing it turned out that it was buffer size conflicting/internal CPU meter spike (overload protection)/not notifying the render mode to VSTi that was causing the trouble on my end. Well, might be just me, but when I enable the overload protection, I can't play any powerful legato patch without notes cutting off (with all samples loaded to memory!) because of CPU meter spike while the real CPU meter is steadily under 10%. Sometimes it's not just spec, but your setup.


----------



## jamwerks (Aug 8, 2014)

StatKsn @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> Sometimes it's not just spec, but your setup.


Yes there are lots of variable to get right. I've gone to a buffer setting of "3" in VEP, which does induce some latency while recording, but not a problem for how I work.


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 8, 2014)

jamwerks @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> Surprised at some of what I'm reading. Yes HS is a bit resource intensive. Why all the whining about it? It's a very old library (7 years old?), with probably 7 year old scripting, etc.
> 
> All of the Hollywood stuff can be easily run on professional equipment. Most of the people who complain don't really have a professional setup. By that I mean PC's, loaded with ram & SSD's. And all that is dirt cheap these days by the way, so there are really no excuses. Maybe we should start a "Low end" forum here where all the hobbiest and wanna be's can moan and grown that HS won't run on their "Mac Plus's" :mrgreen:
> 
> ...



I think the issue isn't with the whole 'professional setup' part. I mean I work professionally and have zero issues with my setup at present (In the box MacPro 8 core 22gig RAM). The *only* thing that doesn't work with how I am set up right now is HS and like I have said before I don't hear it doing anything particularly outstanding over the competition to warrant upgrading to a 'professional setup'. 

-DJ


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 8, 2014)

StatKsn @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> EW Lurker, when I look at any other professional software tech support, nobody tries to prove that their software is working on their PC, let alone disprove. They just give a helping hand to solve the problem (Tobias's post in this thread is a very good example). Tech troubles you can fix, but you can't "disprove". It is impossible (since you are yet to see Daniel's PC), pointless and baffling.



When _anyone_ emails me an issue, I do PRECISELY that, try to . get them the help that they need, and a whole bunch of people here can vouch for that. 

That does not mean that I need to remain silent when people make sweeping negative statements based on their experience that I know not to be true for most users.

Think for a minute, people. Most people who bought HB and then HOW certainly already owned HS. If it had that many major problems as to be virtually unusable why would they do so?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 8, 2014)

prodigalson @ Thu Aug 07 said:


> The reason I ask is that I just tried to load ONE Powerful System slur + port patch in Logic 10 via a USB 3.0 7200rpm HD on my iMac 2014 i7 (buffer size was 256) and it took exactly *10 minutes and 33 secs. * ...for ONE patch.



Actually I made an error: I loaded the Vln 1 patch in Vln 2 as well soI was only loading 4 Powerful System folder patches,. I replaced it ,restarted the computer and loaded and the time is* 5:12* for the Logic Pro X project with 5 instances of Play from a 7200 HD with 4 legato + portamento patches and 1 legato slur, as the basses do not have portamento.


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> That does not mean that I need to remain silent when people make sweeping negative statements based on their experience that I know not to be true for most users.


Well, open discussion about problems is actually proven beneficial for many software (incl. Kontakt) because it lets people discover how to deal with it, and people can google and look for possible solutions. Actually, you said nothing wrong. However, I don't really want to put it this way, but you are trying to be right for the sake of being right, and you are not helping Daniel and many other customers (who are genuine customers supposedly having a problem with your product) even after a number of replies.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 8, 2014)

Daryl @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Fri Aug 08 said:
> 
> 
> > I take exception to John G's comment "_If you can't hear the difference between HS and other libraries, that says a lot_". John's such a thoughtful smart poster, it doesn't seem worthy of him. Is the tone of HS better than Mural? No. It's a silly question, there is no definitive "better" . "It's A Fair Lass" still sounds superb to me now, as it did when I first heard it, and Colin says its got only very modest processing of LASS. I've heard amazing stuff done with Berlin and Mural, but have no working knowledge of either. Some of Andy B's stuff is simply jaw dropping.
> ...



If so, fair enough - it wasn't how it read to me, I must admit. I don't think DJ has ever suggested that others sound identical, but many sound equally good in different ways (forgive paraphrasing).



EastWest Lurker @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> That does not mean that I need to remain silent when people make sweeping negative statements based on their experience that I know not to be true for most users.
> 
> Think for a minute, people. Most people who bought HB and then HOW certainly already owned HS. If it had that many major problems as to be virtually unusable why would they do so?



Jay, could you point to Daniel's "sweeping negative statements" that are not true for most users? I read about his own negative experience, and that this has been shared by others in a similar position. I'd sure be interested to know what percentage of mac users running HS multi-mic on a 7,200rpm drive without VE Pro are happy campers. That's the like-for-like here, and of course that group is a subset of all HS users, many of whom run more powerful / Play-friendly systems. Of course, you may respond that they SHOULD use VE Pro and buy cheap-as-chips SSDs etc, but it doesn't invalidate the argument that many in that position a) have issues and b) don't with other comparable libraries. I don't see it as a sweeping statement I guess, a more specific one.

I'm also interested to know what your advice to someone in Daniel's position is. Should they contact you directly to get to the bottom of their problems? Should they just buy VE Pro / SSDs / increase buffers? 

Likewise, I'm not too sure of the logic of the 2nd paragraph. I bought HB partly because I'd consistently read that it was less resource intensive than HS. I'm sure that others will have factored this feedback into their purchasing decisions, including HS owners.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 8, 2014)

StatKsn @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Fri Aug 08 said:
> 
> 
> > That does not mean that I need to remain silent when people make sweeping negative statements based on their experience that I know not to be true for most users.
> ...



I am not tech support, just a conduit to it. Had Daniel sent me his issues (maybe he did. I don't remember) I would have got those issues to the person that I best believed could help him They would have told him what hew could do, if anything, to improve his performance with HS. Because HS is admittedly uniquely demanding, they would have told him about how much of it he could expect to run on his rig and suggested that if he wanted to run more he would need more power.

That is part of my job. What is ALSO part of my job, however, is to correct statements about EW products that I _know_ to be not true for most users, not because I want to be right, but because when people consider buying them I don't want them put off by someone on a forum making a statement that I believe I can disprove left unchallenged. Fortunately, there are some others here who chime in and support what I say.

The only reason I keep stressing that it works fine on my rig is because there is nothing magical about my rig. By today's standards it is not even that powerful, but what I can run with it blows my mind. 

For those who decide not to buy it because it is:
1. Too resource intensive.
2. Doesn't sound o their ears appreciably better than others or they prefer the sound of another.
3. Don't like Play and/or prefer Kpntakt.
4. Don't like EW and/or don't like me.

Fine, that is all valid and I accept that. But I love the library's sound, as does John, as do many others, and as a user I was willing to spend the dough to have the rig I needed to run it (and now HB and HOW.)

What I _don't_ accept and will not is someone saying that it cannot be used without a rig ay least like mine because I KNOW that if I sold my PC, I still could. Not nearly as much of it , not nearly as pleasurably, but yes, I still could on my one iMac.


----------



## StatKsn (Aug 8, 2014)

EW Lurker,



> but because when people consider buying them I don't want them put off by someone on a forum making a statement that I believe I can *disprove* left unchallenged.



Honestly I am lost. To me, almost every your reply seems to be very off from what I tried to say, as to possible reasons why Play/HS is often cited as unstable (while it is stable enough for many users incl. me), but I don't know how can I communicate with you anymore (no insult intended). We are having an extremely unconstructive conservation.

Please accept my apology for bothering you.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 8, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> Daryl @ Fri Aug 08 said:
> 
> 
> > Guy Rowland @ Fri Aug 08 said:
> ...



Guy, you are correct in saying that single "mac users running HS multi-mic on a 7,200 rpm drive without VE Pro" are not going to be happy campers.They are only going to be able to run a minimal amount and have to bounce/freeze tracks. There is a reason I built a slave PC with an SSD for it and it is not because I just like to throw money at a problem.

There probably is no other library as resource demanding as HS, particularly Platinum. I have never argued that was not the case. For me and many who use it however, there simply is not another library that we feel is both as good sounding in the way we want sampled strings to sound and complete with articulations in itself. If others feel differently, well that is subjective and I have no dog in that hunt.

HB and HOW are considerably less demanding, but still among the more demanding libraries out there.

Surely I have posted this before but one more time. My recommendations are the following:

1. If they are having pops/clicks etc. and cannot figure out why, by all means they should email me with the specifics and see what our tech guys have to say.

2. HS or no HS, IMHO (not EW's ,Jay's) if you are running large orchestral templates, regardless of your DAW, you would be wise to be using VE Pro 5. On one machine. On two machines. On 20 machines.

3. Especially with HS SSDs make a big difference but if I won the lottery tomorrow all my HDs would go hasta la bye bye in favor of SSDs. Because while HS is the most demanding, more and I read people here writing that we are seeing libraries from competitors that are also pretty demanding.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 8, 2014)

StatKsn @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> EW Lurker,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am not responding specifically to you. I think you have been very reasonable. And you are not bothering me at all.

But I cannot diagnose everyone's issues on this forum because I am not tech support and not knowledgeable enough to do so. So all I can tell people is what works here and when they contact me, try to get them help.


----------



## AC986 (Aug 8, 2014)

Valérie_D @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> Any more comments on Mural and Sable? I was thinking about it for my first string Library.



I would start with Sable. It's quite small and detailed. It's probably a bit easier to use than Mural and has wider applications.
Remember, that with string libraries, once you buy big, you can't make it go small or smaller. Mural is quite big.

Whatever you get, because it's your first string library, it will be a bit of a learning curve and some patience is necessary.

The issues as you can see here on this thread is when people run out of patience with a purchase. You want to get the purchase right and and rule out and potential problems.

If not Sable, then I could easily recommend VSL in one of their smaller packages. The legato is still the best implementation out there, the sound is good, you need to add reverb and possibly placement and their backup is very good.


----------



## Stephen Rees (Aug 8, 2014)

We really need a 'Stubborn EastWest Complainents vs Stubborn EastWest Defenders' thread to keep this stuff out of regular threads that might actually be useful to some people.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> Guy, you are correct in saying that single "mac users running HS multi-mic on a 7,200 rpm drive without VE Pro" are not going to be happy campers.They are only going to be able to run a minimal amount and have to bounce/freeze tracks. There is a reason I built a slave PC with an SSD for it and it is not because I just like to throw money at a problem.
> 
> There probably is no other library as resource demanding as HS, particularly Platinum. I have never argued that was not the case. For me and many who use it however, there simply is not another library that we feel is both as good sounding in the way we want sampled strings to sound and complete with articulations in itself. If others feel differently, well that is subjective and I have no dog in that hunt.
> 
> ...



Cool - I think we're getting somewhere. IMO you've slightly over-reacted to Daniel's posts because - as I read them - his main beef is that he's using a recommended system yet it doesn't work well, and your suggestions mostly seem to be about moving towards an optimum system. Honestly I think the best thing at this point is to get those recommended system specs re-labelled on the website as minimum specs. Of course it's bolting horses and stable doors, but better late than never.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Aug 8, 2014)

Stephen Rees @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> We really need a 'Stubborn EastWest Complainents vs Stubborn EastWest Defenders' thread to keep this stuff out of regular threads that might actually be useful to some people.



OK, I will take that as undoubtedly the chief Stubborn EastWest Defender as a request for me to exit the thread and since I have made all the points I can make, bow out.


----------



## Daniel James (Aug 8, 2014)

> Guy, you are correct in saying that single "mac users running HS multi-mic on a 7,200 rpm drive without VE Pro" are not going to be happy campers.They are only going to be able to run a minimal amount and have to bounce/freeze tracks. There is a reason I built a slave PC with an SSD for it and it is not because I just like to throw money at a problem.



Which is a legitimate criticism or CON in terms of this original thread.....particularly when pretty much every other library in the running can run even the heaviest patches, in large projects, with multiple mics, on a single machine, with no SSD/Slave, without VEPro, without needing to bounce AND STILL get an amazing string sound. Like I keep saying I hear nothing special in HS with justifies the extra investment needed to use it, when the competition is every bit as capable.

Like Guy mentioned. When it comes to String libraries these days, the tone of the library is very much up to the individual, based on their own opinion. The amount of system resource use however is a technical issue which is not centered around opinion, and as I have said, I am not the only one who has had issues. I am not making false accusations or sweeping negative statements. I am only stating how it works for me.

-DJ

EDIT: Ok in the spirit of the thread I will stop talking about HS now. I think I have made myself clear too.


----------



## Stephen Rees (Aug 8, 2014)

Jay I don't want you to exit this thread. I enjoy your company


----------



## Vik (Aug 8, 2014)

> We really need a 'Stubborn EastWest Complainents vs Stubborn EastWest Defenders' thread to keep this stuff out of regular threads that might actually be useful to some people.




A question about HW Strings.... are there any good examples online somewhere demonstrating the sound/playability of the portamento samples for all the instrument groups - in solo?


----------



## bmiller360 (Aug 8, 2014)

I am confused as to what your mean by divisi? In my world, divisi is a part that is divided...eg: 2 parts in vlns 2, etc. Do you mean divisi to be a full ensemble, as opposed to individual sections (vlns 1, vlns 2, vlas, vc, bs)? Confusing use of the word relating to traditional writing...


----------



## FriFlo (Aug 8, 2014)

Daryl @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> FriFlo @ Fri Aug 08 said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl, may I ask you why you found BS to be so bad, obviously the legatos?
> ...


Yes, I Even remembered reading it! But. I must say I am pretty much in line with piet's post on that one, although I am not at all at other times.
I guess, I was just asking you, because I wanted to know, why you would want to declare BS to be shit!? I understand that every one is entitled to his opinion, but I can not get, why you would go that far.
At least I never did this. I really like the lack of yelling of OT in threads like these. Whenever I did ONE negative remark about any SF library, I got a response full of hatred by Christian followed by a shit storm of other people. Look how relaxed Tobias is handling that! 
By the way! Thanks for the remark with the short notes, Tobias! I was looking for a switch, but couldn't find one. Don't know how I missed that!


----------



## Daryl (Aug 8, 2014)

FriFlo @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> I guess, I was just asking you, because I wanted to know, why you would want to declare BS to be [email protected]#t!? I understand that every one is entitled to his opinion, but I can not get, why you would go that far.


At the time I wrote that, BS was pretty dreadful. Out of tune, sometimes 3 different pitches within a note, clunky bow changes during legato transitions, wrong release samples attached to notes, articulations that didn't work, and notes that actually had the wrong notes hanging over in the room reverb tail, just to mention a few faults. I guess I'm just used to products that have good QA, and this wasn't one of them. I'm sure that some of this has been sort of fixed, but if the guys can't hear the problems, how are they going to fix them?

D


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 8, 2014)

bmiller360 @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> I am confused as to what your mean by divisi? In my world, divisi is a part that is divided...eg: 2 parts in vlns 2, etc. Do you mean divisi to be a full ensemble, as opposed to individual sections (vlns 1, vlns 2, vlas, vc, bs)? Confusing use of the word relating to traditional writing...



I'm not sure whose use of the word you are referring to, but it's the same in the world of samples really. LASS has A, B and C section divisi of 4, 4 and 8 players for violins (as an example), making up 16 in unison. Dimension Strings is perhaps a little different (as I understand it - I don't own it) in that you can group the 8 players at will. There was reference here to using Sable as divisi for Mural, as the section sizes are much smaller but match tonally and spatially.


----------



## re-peat (Aug 8, 2014)

FriFlo @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> (...) although I am not at all at other times.


That mood of ineptness will pass, Fri. You have to give these things some time.

_


----------



## FriFlo (Aug 8, 2014)

re-peat @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> FriFlo @ Fri Aug 08 said:
> 
> 
> > (...) although I am not at all at other times.
> ...



o-[][]-o

Do you still find BWW completely useless?


----------



## Zhao Shen (Aug 8, 2014)

bmiller360 @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> I am confused as to what your mean by divisi? In my world, divisi is a part that is divided...eg: 2 parts in vlns 2, etc. Do you mean divisi to be a full ensemble, as opposed to individual sections (vlns 1, vlns 2, vlas, vc, bs)? Confusing use of the word relating to traditional writing...



I'm pretty sure you have it right, but just to clarify, divisi means division in the individual string parts, like dividing Violins I into two or three sections. Some libraries do have divisi capabilities, like LASS has Cellos A, B, and C as well as a unified cellos section patch.

I was wondering about CineStrings vs. LASS Lite, though. Any advice on that? It's a difficult choice for me because though I like CineStrings, I like the full version of LASS better, especially with the new Stage & Color feature. But I don't have the budget to get LASS Full right away, and LASS Lite demos and walkthroughs are virtually nonexistent, so it's hard to gauge its usefulness aside from as an upgrade path to LASS Full.


----------



## Grilled Cheese (Aug 8, 2014)

Daniel James @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> JohnG @ Thu Aug 07 said:
> 
> 
> > DJ, your desperate attempts to justify yourself look -- desperate.
> ...



I have to admit that I was surprised to see a moderator make such a statement too. Reading as an objective third party while enjoying my breakfast this fine morning, his comment, ironically, seemed desperate.

I can relate to much of what you're saying DJ. Hollywood Strings was almost impossible to run on my 2010 8 core Mac Pro 32gb. You've heard it all before but adding SSDs really was the only way to get half decent performance out of it. It made a world of difference and I have zero problems with PLAY. One wonders if the only real problem here at the end of the day is that EastWest's specified system requirements might have been a little bit lower than is realistic. 

Getting back to the bigger picture, I marvel at how unbelievably good string libraries are today, and how incredibly frustrating they all are too. Every one of them has a weak point that inevitably disrupts my creativity or wastes time. I think it's because they are so good that I feel the pain of their shortcomings so keenly. We're so close, yet so far from having the feel and sound of an orchestra at our fingertips.

For example, ten years ago, true legato was a pipe dream, so having it is sheer joy. But then I play some lines with 8Dio Adagio and the legato transitions are occasionally too "lumpy" or slow footed, and frustration sets in. 

I used 8Dio as an example, but I'm not singling them out. By and large I love their work (heck - sometimes a lumpy legato transition is just what the doctor ordered). I could easily cite pros and cons galore with every other company's libraries that I own. But on the whole, my appreciation for these libraries far outweighs my frustration for working with them, (or the eye strain I get from endlessly tweaking midi cc data). :wink:


----------



## germancomponist (Aug 8, 2014)

I was pretty sure that this thread would move to some action... . So I will post this picture again:


----------



## prodigalson (Aug 8, 2014)

> All of the Hollywood stuff can be easily run on professional equipment. Most of the people who complain don't really have a professional setup. By that I mean PC's, loaded with ram & SSD's. And all that is dirt cheap these days by the way, so there are really no excuses. Maybe we should start a "Low end" forum here where all the hobbiest and wanna be's can moan and grown that HS won't run on their "Mac Plus's" :mrgreen:



Wow, the arrogance and elitism in this thread is awe-inspiring. I am one of those people "moaning" about my experiences with Hollywood Strings but I assure you I am not a hobbyist or a "wannabe". I have a bachelor's degree in composition and I make 100% - ALL - of my income as a creative professional in the music industry. I haven't scored a major studio movie but my rig is a key part of my work life. I have invested heavily in my system, iMac 2013 i7, 24Gb RAM, pro monitoring, various outboard gear, several mics etc etc and a whole slew of "professional" VSTs including Komplete 9 Ultimate, virtually ALL of Spitfire's catalogue, Cinesamples, 8dio AND EW Complete Composer's Collection, IRCAM Flux, a ton of Waves plugins, QL Spaces etc etc Blah blah blah. 

Every cent I have invested in my setup I have earned making music on this same rig. That is the definition of a PROFESSIONAL Setup. 

However, I DO NOT have an SSD, VE Pro or a slave and that is not, in fact, because i can't afford it or (despite "their not being any excuses") because I don't want to invest in my system. It is because up until now I haven't needed it. I have been able to run everything I just listed perfectly well and you know what, >8o I STILL manage to make ALL of my income from making music. 

I got on the Hollywood Strings train because I thought it sounded fantastic (still do) and because my system met the RECOMMENDED specs. Not the the MINIMUM specs, the RECOMMENDED specs. If someone had said "you know what? you actually need to invest in an SSD, VE Pro and a slave machine to run this single piece of software even remotely comfortably" I would have said "Fair enough! My Mural/Sable/LASS projects are sounding pretty great too. I'll just stick with that for now". 

We'll obviously all have to agree to disagree about whether or not there is something so inherently mindblowing about HS over ANY of it's competitors that would warrant a complete overhaul of your systen but in the mean time let's all chill out with the "you can't hear the difference? there's something wrong with you" or "You can't run HS? You're a wannabe" bull$&it".

Let's keep this "FORUM" exactly what it should be, a place for everyone who cares about this kind of stuff to come together and air their opinions openly without being stigmatized or attacked.


----------



## Matt Hawken (Aug 9, 2014)

@Vik, under the 'Diamond Articulations/Legato' tab of the Hollywood Strings demo page on soundsonline.com you can hear a selection of the articulations played by each solo section.

I use Hollywood Strings all the time on a hobbyist type of set-up (iMac 2010, i5, 10GB RAM) and can usually get it to work comfortably off the 7200RPM hard drive, with some freezing of tracks etc. I would never attempt to stream 4 voices of legato off the HD but a full orchestra of non-leg patches works fine (for me).

However, and this is just my anecdotal evidence, I find its performance to be really unpredictable. Sometimes a legato/port patch will load right up in c. 1 minute, sometimes I need to go and put the kettle on and wait c.5-10 minutes. During playback, sometimes a line will refuse to stream off the disk at all, then just 30 seconds later it will work again.

I assumed this kind of performance was a symptom of my HD failing but after a trip to the shop, I know it's not. So I can only assume it's a cocktail of Logic 9, Play, HS, my machine that sometimes tastes fine and sometimes turns sour. 

My workarounds include bouncing/freezing tracks frequently, making sure tracks aren't record-enabled in Logic when playing back and using 'purge' regularly in the terminal. I wonder if this unpredictable nature is what causes some of these frustrating 'It works for me, why won't it work for you' threads?


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Aug 9, 2014)

Hello there, 

just battled through the whole thread...To some of the comments, I am not yet sure what to say. Guys, relax. We all want to make nice music and have fun doing our jobs, and not eating us up here. So..to the Thread creator: 

I am using as my main String Library Hollywood Strings and I am using them for around 1 1/2 years by now. In my opinion, regardless of any technical issues, you have to learn to know your library. In my case it took me a while to know..certain things... Especially with the Hollywood Strings, because they have a tons of Patches in each String Section. I am running no powerfull patches at all, because of my system Recources and mainly of my limited Ram of 16 GB, so I was doing an indepth research to find patches which can do not only "one" thing, or lets say "patches", which you can use for several situations musically. In the End I am very pleased with my Hollywood Strings, and luckily..don´t have major issues with the stability and performance so far. My System is by far no top notch exclusive new Rig: 

Intel Core 5 Quadcore 2,8 Ghz, 16 GB Ram, HS Strings running on a 7200 RPM USB 2 Harddrive..with Win 7 64 Bit, Cubase 6.5 64 Bit. No external Host used, or any VE Pro. I have all instances 12-13 Play Instances running in Cubase. 

You can find some Works on my Sc Page, if you are more interested in the Sound, for instance the "Deepwater Creatures" Track. 

So, in the end for me the Hollywood Strings is (just my personal opinion) the String Library I go with. Off course it is not all perfect around there. My choice in the end was the lush and creamy and out of the Box great sound (though I tweaked some eq here and there..) and also the price, which is half of the prize in comparrison to some of other Libraries mentioned in the Review. 

_Alex


----------



## Jason_D (Aug 9, 2014)

I think Richard Ames has a good explanation of why some people may have clicks and pops with the PLAY engine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtBxZaU ... m9A#t=2852


----------



## Synesthesia (Aug 9, 2014)

FriFlo @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> Whenever I did ONE negative remark about any SF library, I got a response full of hatred by Christian followed by a [email protected]#t storm of other people.



?

I don't think I've ever read a post by Christian that is 'full of hatred'.

Can you point me in that direction? Or do you just have a bee in your bonnet.

:roll:


----------



## Mahlon (Aug 9, 2014)

Stephen Rees @ Fri Aug 08 said:


> We really need a 'Stubborn EastWest Complainents vs Stubborn EastWest Defenders' thread to keep this stuff out of regular threads that might actually be useful to some people.



Amen, brother.


----------



## Lawson. (Aug 11, 2014)

Just throwing this out there: I run Hollywood Strings Diamond from a Thunderbolt SSD on the comp with specs listed in my signature and I have absolutely no problem with heavy legato patches or multiple mics (or anything at all for that matter).

To go back to the topic of the thread: HS still is the best sounding string library I've heard so far, but Mural/Sable sound pretty nice as well. It has quite a big learning curve, though.


----------



## Vik (Aug 11, 2014)

Lawson. @ 12.8.2014 said:


> HS still is the best sounding string library I've heard so far, but Mural/Sable sound pretty nice as well. It has quite a big learning curve, though.



"It"... as in HS, right?


----------



## wanmingyan (Aug 11, 2014)

Just curious, any recommendations for a 'bigger' sounding string sound compared to Murals? Something flexible to use and reasonably priced perhaps?...

When's Hollywood Percussion coming around?! If it's out by this year, I am so going to buy the entire series!

(I own Murals 1 and find the library to not be like those "grand" sounding strings, but rather more intimate...)


----------



## Lawson. (Aug 12, 2014)

Vik @ Mon Aug 11 said:


> Lawson. @ 12.8.2014 said:
> 
> 
> > HS still is the best sounding string library I've heard so far, but Mural/Sable sound pretty nice as well. It has quite a big learning curve, though.
> ...



Yes.


----------



## Vik (Aug 13, 2014)

Thanks. In which areas, if any, do you think HS sounds better than Sable/Mural?


----------



## Peter Alexander (Aug 13, 2014)

Prodigalson - fyi - the original HS manual recommended using an SSD drive. I don't know about the current manual.


----------



## prodigalson (Aug 16, 2014)

> Prodigalson - fyi - the original HS manual recommended using an SSD drive. I don't know about the current manual.



Thanks Peter. But for what it's worth, you don't get access to the manual until after you purchase the software. Also, it's worth mentioning that other developers also recommend SSD's in their manuals however there's huge variety as to the extent to which they're actually necessary so it's not always clear how imperative that recommendation is.


----------



## rectifried (Aug 31, 2014)

well this poor thread was going /font]to be useful... I guess Ill do a search for a similar
after most of you have more than one lib is pretty easy to say what you go for and why fairly succinctly...
This 
was ..
that conversation...

for the record DJ has a point, and def knows his way about a DAW lib


----------



## Casiquire (Aug 31, 2014)

wanmingyan @ Tue 12 Aug said:


> When's Hollywood Percussion coming around?! If it's out by this year, I am so going to buy the entire series!



It will be interesting when they release Hollywood Percussion now. How will they price it? The problem is you can buy the rest of the series for less than half of what they originally cost. Seems like a poor marketing choice to so deeply discount an entire family of libraries before the last one comes out. Now everyone's primed to value Percussion at closer to the discounted price.


----------



## Mahlon (Sep 1, 2014)

prodigalson @ Sat Aug 16 said:


> > Prodigalson - fyi - the original HS manual recommended using an SSD drive. I don't know about the current manual.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Peter. But for what it's worth, you don't get access to the manual until after you purchase the software. Also, it's worth mentioning that other developers also recommend SSD's in their manuals however there's huge variety as to the extent to which they're actually necessary so it's not always clear how imperative that recommendation is.



Prodigal, 

No, no you can. Try here:

http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs ... Manual.pdf


----------



## andy_i (Sep 4, 2014)

Fascinating list of vitriol here.

Just to get back to the OP's question, I'm also expanding my string libs and was looking for some useful info. 

Some points made here were fair. Daniel on Cinematic Strings 2 was saying that the legato / sustains in CS2 are great, but the staccato / staccatissimo could use a bit of help. I concur. I do think their run mode is pretty awesome though.

I use CS2 and Hollywood Strings Gold currently and I'm very happy with both. I had some issues with Play 3, but 4 is solid in my experience with several instances open running loads of HS, HB and stormdrum 2.

I am seriously looking at 8dio Adagio bundle as my next lib. The clincher for me is the new trial of Agitato Grandiose. I really loved what that does. The full versions of the Agitato bundle are apparently in the Adagio bundle along with Adagietto, so that draws me in too.

I generally base my buying decisions on demos and other users' projects. I also place a lot of emphasis on "cool-headed" reviews here and at Gearslutz. I'm keen to hear about other users' experiences with the 8dio strings. My other contender is LASS (and maybe VSL), but I'm keen on a library which is easy to use and deploy, and I've heard that the 8dio stuff is easier to get up and running fast by comparison to LASS and VSL. I'm doing a fair bit of tight deadline TV stuff now and speed is paramount and translates into bottom line profits.

Any advice on that?


----------



## muk (Sep 4, 2014)

There's a good video by Guy Rowland about how he set up LASS. Maybe that's an interesting watch for you. I can comment on VSL Dimension Strings: it's an incredible library. It needs time to set it up the way you want it. But you only need to do this once. After that, it's very easy and fast to use.


----------



## clarkus (Sep 5, 2014)

While we're talking about Berlin Strings, there was a thread (possibly even one I started) 5 or 6 weeks ago where opinions were solicited about Symphonic Sphere, and some users really LIKED that library. I'm curious if the "Berlin strings are a waste" faction also feels this way about Symphonic Sphere, which sounds amazing in the demos, and offers a collection of articulations (ponticello, for example) that are hard to find.


----------



## Vik (Dec 5, 2015)

Zhao Shen said:


> Los Angeles Scoring Strings
> PROS: realistic sound, ARC makes it very versatile, includes divisi sections, low RAM load, LASS Lite upgrade path
> CONS: pretty expensive, no sales, out-of-the-box sound often needs tweaking


 I'd probably add auto-divisi/auto-arranger here, which is about more than just having divisi sections.


Re. Berlin Strings: AFAIK you can also control legato manually, plus another positive thing about it is that is has an "integrated" legato patch with marcato and other stuff included, which eg Mural doesn't have (Marcato and "Rach" artics are in another section.

Re. Mural: A main con for me (in addition to the above) is that many of the controllers haven't anything assigned to them (in many of the patches). Either or there's a bug in there, in many of the presets because Speed, Intensity etc doesn't do anything at all; at least not here. Also - and this is some kind of "con": its' a rather new library which doesn't seem to develop really fast, so many of things I hoped to see in Mural 3 (which is in Sable 3), simply isn't in there. Also: Mural is about large sections, and there's no discount for Mural users whio


Re. Adagio, o con that I've seen mentioned several times is that one often seem to have to rely on prerecorded dynamic changes (and vibrato changes), so the manual control isn't as extended as in libraries who mainly rely on separate controllers for vibrato and dynamics. 

A main con for Cinestrings that it has more dynamic layers (4? 5?) than most other libraries and included Ensemble patches, and "rebowing", which not all libraries have.

Btw, I don't own all these libraries, so please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Dec 5, 2015)

Vik said:


> I'd probably add auto-divisi/auto-arranger here, which is about more than just having divisi sections.
> 
> 
> Re. Berlin Strings: AFAIK you can also control legato manually, plus another positive thing about it is that is has an "integrated" legato patch with marcato and other stuff included, which eg Mural doesn't have (Marcato and "Rach" artics are in another section.
> ...


Hi, thanks for your feedback, this thread is somewhat outdated so I'd check out my new post on orchestral libraries in general here: http://vi-control.net/community/threads/buyers-basic-guide-to-orchestral-sample-libraries.49450/


----------



## procreative (Dec 5, 2015)

Vik said:


> Re. Adagio, o con that I've seen mentioned several times is that one often seem to have to rely on prerecorded dynamic changes (and vibrato changes), so the manual control isn't as extended as in libraries who mainly rely on separate controllers for vibrato and dynamics.



Adagio does indeed have controls for dynamics and vibrato in the main Sustain patch, then separate Dynamic Bowing patches that have varying levels of crescendos and arcs baked in.

I have mixed feelings about them, they do sound great, however the only really work for blocked lines as if you try to change individual notes they re-trigger the arcs.


----------



## dannymc (Nov 26, 2016)

this thread is a little dated now i' wondering if there are now others to add to the list? i'm looking for a good strings library that does good pointy spiccatos/staccatos. my go to library at the moment for this is cinematic strings 2 but i find it lacks at the very top velocities if i really want to push it that bit further. i have albion one too but this seems better for the long strings stuff imo. 

Danny


----------



## tack (Nov 26, 2016)

dannymc said:


> i'm looking for a good strings library that does good pointy spiccatos/staccatos.


You've probably already heard this?

http://vi-control.net/community/thr...tic-studio-strings-short-articulations.54344/

CSS comes with 4 different short (bowed) articulations. Sable's spiccati are also fairly biting, IMO. Much more so than CSS.


----------



## Vik (Jan 23, 2017)

Zhao Shen said:


> Berlin Strings
> PROS: lovely sound, adaptive legato, 24x RR?!
> CONS: can't change the sound very much, lack of divisi options, no customization of legato, high RAM usage (24xRR?!)
> (NOTE: BST's smaller sections has at times been quoted as a plus to simulating divisi with their ensemble patches)


24 RRs are AFAIK only for the spiccatos, and they don't use much RAM. And I've lately found out that one actually can do a lot with the sound (more than I thought) by experimenting with the mic positions - which in some cases also include a separate "noise" mic and both close and concert master mics.


----------



## ctsai89 (Jan 23, 2017)

SSS:

pros: quite an instant good sounding library. Instantly sound like a piece played by a professional orchestra recorded at those halls and likes. Performance Legato patch is extremely useful. Relatively less resource hog compared to hollywood or berlin.

Cons: spiccato sounds drunk. Some bugs and inconsistencies still need to be fixed. Performance legato patch sometimes behave randomly weird when you're playing at a speed thats on the fence of triggering the run legato. It would be helpful to be able to keyswitch on and off on the run legato triggers. Viola's performance legato patch is worse than the rest of the library's (sloppily programmed) but if you play aroudn with the velocity during the legato the results should almost match the other patch's results.


----------



## JohnG (Jan 23, 2017)

dannymc said:


> i'm looking for a good strings library that does good pointy spiccatos/staccatos.



Hi Danny -- questions: 

1. What do you own already for strings (maybe you have one someone could help with)?

2. By "pointy" do you mean
a. harsh, aggressive, attack-battle-death;
b. Mozart-graceful, dance, light, ballerina; or
c. stilted, dry, death-like?

Or something else in the way of sound?


----------



## dannymc (Jan 23, 2017)

> Hi Danny -- questions:
> 
> 1. What do you own already for strings (maybe you have one someone could help with)?
> 
> ...



hi John thanks, in the mean time i think i found what i was after. i bought LA scoring strings and it has a great hard aggressive sound to it to my ears without being too washed out like the other libraries i mentioned. allows we to stick it in a room and dial out as much of that dry signal that i need but keeping the aggressive sound. i'll work with this library for now i see how i get on.

Danny


----------



## JohnG (Jan 23, 2017)

perfect! LASS indeed can bring it on.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jan 23, 2017)

Hollywood Strings all the way for me as far as ensembles go. The downside? There still isn't a Play engine that is completely aggravation-free imo, and I'm including all the updates, there are still striking problems with it, and I fully understand folks who just don't want to deal with the headache and dry sound.

I've messed about with tons of other libraries, and though you can certainly get more articulations and perhaps overall control with several others, I simply adore the sound of the HS. I never got over it, same with the EWH Brass. I've heard people criticize EW for old libraries and just crack up. It's kind of like people who talk about Beethoven being an "old composer" as if that makes him any less


----------



## Living Fossil (Jan 23, 2017)

@dannymc : By the way, LASS comes with some great Early reflections Impulse Responses. I recommend to take some time in exploring them...


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jan 23, 2017)

Living Fossil said:


> @dannymc : By the way, LASS comes with some great Early reflections Impulse Responses. I recommend to take some time in exploring them...



LASS can be extremely cool imo. That's one I'd seriously consider if I wasn't fan-girling out on EW all the time lol!


----------

