# Spitfire Studio Woodwinds - Coming Soon



## Zoot_Rollo (Feb 8, 2019)

https://www.spitfireaudio.com/spitf...344172281&mc_cid=611a5063b5&mc_eid=df2de1c3a7


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Feb 8, 2019)




----------



## Mat (Feb 8, 2019)

Ah! I have long needed to upgrade my WWs (so far I'm mostly just on EW hollywood woodwinds, aside from a few boutique solo instruments here and there). Been eyeing the VE Special Editions just to pad out my WWs, but this looks like a much more robust option without breaking the bank.

Flutes sound wonderful. I'm undecided about the oboes though. From listening to the demos, can anyone with more virtual oboe experience than me give an opinion about how they sound compared to other popular libraries?


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 8, 2019)

Articulation list doesn't seem to be available yet. A bit odd to include alto flute in core but not the English Horn. Most curious about price point.

Edit: oh, there's the price. I just missed it in my initial scan of the site.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Feb 8, 2019)

Easy buy with Strings Pro and Brass Pro on board.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 8, 2019)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> Easy buy with Strings Pro and Brass Pro on board.


How are you liking the Studio Strings and Brass?


----------



## Michael Stibor (Feb 8, 2019)

Seems like they may have finally gotten the legato to sound decent for their studio series. This might be a good option while I wait for CSW.


----------



## mgpqa1 (Feb 8, 2019)

> Spitfire Studio Woodwinds is the _third and final_ release...


Darn... was kind of hoping there'd be a fourth for percussion, but, still looking forward to this release!


----------



## Emmanuel Rousseau (Feb 8, 2019)

It's definitely a very nice collection for the price, and as much as I would like to love this, I don't !
There is something in that sound I find somehow flat and uninspiring, especially in the long notes.

Edit : But if you like that sound, it looks like a great, great choice


----------



## stfciu (Feb 8, 2019)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> https://www.spitfireaudio.com/spitf...344172281&mc_cid=611a5063b5&mc_eid=df2de1c3a7




Felt you would be the one that will start the thread @Zoot_Rollo


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Feb 8, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> How are you liking the Studio Strings and Brass?



Very much.

Like a sharp 2H pencil.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 8, 2019)

For those of you watching the walkthroughs, I’d love to hear your opinions of this versus CineWinds!


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 8, 2019)

whitewasteland said:


> It's definitely a very nice collection for the price, and as much as I would like to love this, I don't !
> There is something in that sound I find somehow flat and uninspiring, especially in the long notes.
> 
> Edit : But if you like that sound, it looks like a great, great choice


Interesting comment about the flatness and I'll pay attention to that in the demos and contextual walkthroughs to come. I'll have to do a side by side comparison with Paul's walkthrough and the Symphonic Winds. My main concern is that the library offer a real complement to the Symphonic Winds. It seems to me the Studio Brass does that very well with respect to the Symphonic Brass. I'm hoping I find the same to be true of the Winds.


----------



## CT (Feb 8, 2019)

Great!

This, and a few other little purchases, should finally give me everything I need for my music. Shouldn't have to spend for quite some time... unless someone makes something revolutionary.


----------



## ism (Feb 8, 2019)

At $150, if I didn't already have SSW, I'd buy this in a heartbeat..

It does have a more ... defined, I think is the word ... sound than SSW. And along these lines, I think - caveat that this is first impression only - maybe a little less lyrical? Which is line with going with dryer sound to give more definition in the mix, and also more in line with the Berlin main library wind approach. For instance, the vibrato seems a little less intense on particularly the bass clarinet (unless theres a vibrato control not being used in the demo).


On the whole I think SSW hits a very nice balance between lyrical enough for exposed solos and seamlessly blending in an orchestral mix. But I also appreciate the Berlin approach of recording lyrical solo instrument separately. (So here's hoping for a lyrical Spifire solo clarinet / oboe etc expansion to SSW).

Really looking forward to the demos, especially curious to see what kind of textures Homay will pull off with this sound, and if Christian will have one of his trade mark virtuosic contextual crazy sonorous mixing videos. And also hoping to understanding how it relates to SSW a bit more.


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 8, 2019)

Just bring on corresponding Bundles (CORE /PRO). Good time to jump in !


----------



## ism (Feb 8, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> Interesting comment about the flatness and I'll pay attention to that in the demos and contextual walkthroughs to come. I'll have to do a side by side comparison with Paul's walkthrough and the Symphonic Winds. My main concern is that the library offer a real complement to the Symphonic Winds. It seems to me the Studio Brass does that very well with respect to the Symphonic Brass. I'm hoping I find the same to be true of the Winds.




Think you could summarize how you feel the studio brass complements the symphonic brass?

I love the Studio strings, but I generally use slosh lots of reverb on them and use them as a kind of "SCS lite". With SSW being brilliant as it is, I don't really need a 'SSW lite'. But since this is woodwinds we're talking about, I'm always open to being confined that I need to buy more. 

So very curious to understand how the might be used as more of an 'SSW exp A'.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 8, 2019)

sostenuto said:


> Just bring on corresponding Bundles (CORE /PRO). Good time to jump in !


I'm curious to see the bundle pricing as well, which I don't see on the website unless I missed it as well. My guess is $499 core, $999 for Pro. I also wonder if they will have intro pricing on the bundle.


----------



## brandowalk (Feb 8, 2019)

Most of my writing for orchestra is for 2 parts for each core WW. Was hoping for two solo instruments for each, since this is the limitation with SSW. I do notice that the instruments are labeled as "Solo 1". Maybe there will be "Solo 2"s in future upgrade?


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 8, 2019)

ism said:


> Think you could summarize how you feel the studio brass complements the symphonic brass?
> 
> I love the Studio strings, but I generally use slosh lots of reverb on them and use them as a kind of "SCS lite". With SSW being brilliant as it is, I don't really need a 'SSW lite'. But since this is woodwinds we're talking about, I'm always open to being confined that I need to buy more.
> 
> So very curious to understand how the might be used as more of an 'SSW exp A'.


I don't have Studio Brass yet, so this is speculation on my part from walkthroughs and demos, and playing SSB along with walkthroughs of Studio Brass. And I'm considering Studio Brass Pro not the core as the complement to SSB. Studio Brass Pro brings a few new instruments that are not in SSB, new soloists that give more expressive options than are available in SSB, muted shorts, and Studio Brass seems to handle certain patterns of shorts better than SSB (this is the hardest one to evaluate without having the library). 

I'm hoping that Studio Woodwinds are similarly complementary. They are not complementary in terms of instruments, which are basically identical (a3 in Studio instead of a2 in SSW). But Studio Woodwinds will bring new soloists, of course, and it seems like quite a few new articulations. So for me it will be a question of expressive range (hearing more demos will be helpful) and the new articulations.


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 8, 2019)

Intro pricing on Studio Orchestra will finally draw me in. 
Hope SF drops a few more details before Valentines Day …. :emoji_love_letter:


----------



## Consona (Feb 8, 2019)

mgpqa1 said:


> Darn... was kind of hoping there'd be a fourth for percussion, but, still looking forward to this release!


Heh, I was basically waiting for their studio timpani.


----------



## axb312 (Feb 8, 2019)

Seems to be a little lacking in dynamic range?

Also wonder how it will handle runs....


----------



## smallberries (Feb 8, 2019)

Consona said:


> Heh, I was basically waiting for their studio timpani.


with _sul tasto_ and add-3 articulations


----------



## Lee Blaske (Feb 8, 2019)

Walkthrough sounds great. Everything sounds very consistent. From my observations, woodwinds are the hardest to get right, and the easiest to identify as being sampled. This looks like it's going to be a serious contender.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Feb 8, 2019)

big plus imo: it has a good consistency, legato sounds descent and everything is meaty and it has a nice vintage sound to me.


----------



## AdamKmusic (Feb 8, 2019)

Hopefully as the owner of Studio Strings & Studio Brass we’ll get a decent discount, maybe £80 to buy the core version of this?


----------



## KerrySmith (Feb 8, 2019)

I like the close mics. That's refreshing. I just don't like the sound of Air 1. It'd be lovely to be able to get one of the close mic options in the standard versions of the studio range. Or if they go the OT app route, and make the mics, and/or arts available ala carte. My drive space is getting tight enough that I don't want to waste it on all 6 mic positions for the Pro version, of which I will probably never use 3-4 of.


----------



## Callum Hoskin (Feb 8, 2019)

Mat said:


> Ah! I have long needed to upgrade my WWs (so far I'm mostly just on EW hollywood woodwinds, aside from a few boutique solo instruments here and there). Been eyeing the VE Special Editions just to pad out my WWs, but this looks like a much more robust option without breaking the bank.
> 
> Flutes sound wonderful. I'm undecided about the oboes though. From listening to the demos, can anyone with more virtual oboe experience than me give an opinion about how they sound compared to other popular libraries?


I have both ew winds and vsl se winds and will maybe get this at some point. The legatos are actually pretty good in the se


----------



## Gerbil (Feb 8, 2019)

Once again, a very generous price for all that content. I love the studio sound and the great choice of mics on offer. Studio Brass pro is one of my favourite libraries and I can hear that same great sound in these. 

Bring on Thursday.


----------



## josephspirits (Feb 8, 2019)

It took so much willpower to resist LCOT, and then just hours after that sale ended they drop this!

Most curious about using this as an expansion to the Bernard Hermann Composer Toolkit. I do wish they would do longer walkthroughs showing the articulations for every sound.


----------



## kevthurman (Feb 8, 2019)

I bet this library will be pretty good, but its almost impossible to even get a little but of a hint of how the spitfire libraries sound because in the walkthrough they always play lines that would absolutely never be written on wind instruments. It's a bit frustrating. I wish they'd do a walk through based on some classical music or something. I'll probably end up buying it either way though haha.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 8, 2019)

The close 2 and tree 2 sound great, not too much room. Love the selection of arts. Great that they covered all the instruments. Will there be some stereo mixes available?


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 8, 2019)

Would love to see an extension with 4 new solo instruments with TM trills up to perfect fifth. Plus E-flat Clarinet, Soprano Alto & Tenor Saxes with identical (classical non-jazz) arts.

Another extention would be cool, with combos: Fl-Ob, Fl-Cl, Ob-Cl, Fl-Ob-Cl, Cl-Bn, Picc-Fl 8va, Fl-Ob 8va, Fl-Cl 8va, all with just the basic 5 arts.


----------



## markleake (Feb 8, 2019)

Overall it sounds pretty good to me!

And the non-Pro version is so amazingly cheap for what it is. For anyone just getting into samples this seems like a great deal. Finally, a good quality, consistent and cheap woods lib for new starters.

Seems like the alt tree / 2nd close mics / outriggers are a bit of a must though (the Pro version) for the best sound. That Air 1 room sound is not my favourite. Bummer that Pro is twice the price & would take up hard drive space for mics that you'd only use half of.

The legatos seem pretty agile and sound good. And like others have said, it sounds very consistent -- across all the the instruments they've demoed too. Runs with the symphonic library sound good already, so let hope that means good things for SStW.

This makes it the first of the Studio series I'm interested in. 

If only I actually "needed" it.


----------



## markleake (Feb 8, 2019)

One (of the few) things I like about the NI symphony woods, is they have some recorded arpeggios. Just a few. But that kind of articulation, if it uses TM to align with the beat, I think is very useful. Would be great to see it in an extended version of libraries like this one.


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 8, 2019)

*^^^^^^^^^^*  ….. frustrating, recurring theme ! Maybe just offer solid, single version with professional mic setup. The CORE /PRO configs are feeling more and more 'cheezy' as currently offered.


----------



## NoamL (Feb 8, 2019)

Looks good. Thumbs up for consistent layout and articulations, sampling all the auxiliaries plus ensembles, four lengths of shorts plus Time Machine, good legato, and varied microphone positions.

I'd like to see

1. Can it do expressive / _molto vib_ melodies & solos
2. How about fast runs

Answers to those two will help me decide between Core and Pro but I think this is a solid buy either way.

Lots of people are still using VSL, BWW or SSW. The potential replacements in the offing include:

BWW Revive
Cinematic Studio Woodwinds
Soundiron Hyperion Woodwinds
Musical Sampling Adventure Woodwinds
8Dio Century Woodwinds
Spitfire Studio Woodwinds
Afflatus Woodwinds?
Synchron Woodwinds?
The thing is, if you really want to program for 9 or 12 woodwinds, consistency between Kontakt instruments is the key. Same articulations, same mics, same performance, same keyswitching, same dynamic programming.

BWW Revive was deliberately inconsistent which was just baffling.

CSW is going to be great (of course!) but it might not be out until Christmas or who knows?

Hyperion isn't on the horizon, they haven't even released the full strings yet and probably brass comes after that.

Adventure Woodwinds is still a big question mark if it even exists but I suspect it will eventually 

Century Woodwinds, same deal.

And finally there's Afflatus and Synchron and so on, but they haven't got to the brass yet.

So Spitfire is in a very good position to release this now...


----------



## jaketanner (Feb 8, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Looks good. Thumbs up for consistent layout and articulations, sampling all the auxiliaries plus ensembles, four lengths of shorts plus Time Machine, good legato, and varied microphone positions.
> 
> I'd like to see
> 
> ...



I do believe that Century Winds is on the horizon...definitely an ensemble winds is coming.


----------



## galactic orange (Feb 8, 2019)

I’m looking forward to having a full Spitfire Studio orchestra, but I’m also bummed that there’s not a percussion library planned. The BHCT set could work for many things. For a full set I’ll probably end up using the NI Symphonic Percussion or Impact Soundworks Percussion with this. But I’m still hoping that there is a new percussion library in the works that will be considered an “option” rather than part of the bundle.


----------



## wilifordmusic (Feb 8, 2019)

I'm using Studio (core) Strings and Brass with BHCT. I think they are the perfect match to get smaller groups and soloists.
I'm on the fence about Pro. The Studio libraries work very well in the Core config, but when I A/B them against BHCT I can hear the usefulness of the extra mics.
The percs in BHCT are actually pretty good for standard orchestral sounds.
Yes, I'm gonna buy the Woodwinds.


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 8, 2019)

wilifordmusic said:


> I'm using Studio (core) Strings and Brass with BHCT. I think they are the perfect match to get smaller groups and soloists.
> I'm on the fence about Pro. The Studio libraries work very well in the Core config, but when I A/B them against BHCT I can hear the usefulness of the extra mics.
> The percs in BHCT are actually pretty good for standard orchestral sounds.
> Yes, I'm gonna buy the Woodwinds.



Also BHCT and ready for SF _ Studio Orchestra Bundle. Have LADD and NI_ Symphony Essentials Perc. 
Feeling some push to grab VSTbuzz _ Impact Soundworks Drums & Percussion Bundle @ $112. and /or 8DIO EPIC Percussion Ensemble Bundle @ $98. 

_Does this seem clear 'overkill' ??_


----------



## wilifordmusic (Feb 8, 2019)

Not necessarily. I have Damage and a couple of "New Epic ....Ensembles" as well as a variety of other noisy stuff.
Just depends on where your music is taking you. I often look at the same things everyone else does and think "Do I need it?"
My buying habits vary with my musical interests.
What does your little inner voice say?


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 8, 2019)

*@ wilifordmusic *…. did quick review and if anything … 8DIO EPIC Perc.
Already have Frame Drum and Solo Taiko. Epic Toms and Dhol Ensemble are reasonable to fill out perc for longer term (at $38. each).

Gravity has eluded me for far too long. Maybe at next promo …..  THX!


----------



## CT (Feb 8, 2019)

wilifordmusic said:


> I'm using Studio (core) Strings and Brass with BHCT. I think they are the perfect match to get smaller groups and soloists.
> I'm on the fence about Pro. The Studio libraries work very well in the Core config, but when I A/B them against BHCT I can hear the usefulness of the extra mics.
> The percs in BHCT are actually pretty good for standard orchestral sounds.
> Yes, I'm gonna buy the Woodwinds.



I'm in the same boat. I'll probably get the Core woodwinds, and then later in the year upgrade everything to Pro. The BHCT percussion is more than enough for my purposes; I'm not that big on percussion to begin with. 

Like you said, BHCT shows how vital some of the extra microphones are, especially the outriggers. I also like being able to dial in some of the first chair strings with the second close mic.

I totally get where people are coming from who think the Studio series has a much more tame, neutral sound than other stuff from Spitfire, and their colleagues. Sure, it's awesome to be able to play one note and have it sound like a nuanced performance in itself, but I kind of like what the vibe of these samples does for my work ethic (such as it is). It's just the honest sound of musicians playing notes. I sit down with them, and they tell me that I'd better do something interesting with them, because there's nowhere to hide.


----------



## Cinebient (Feb 9, 2019)

I still would love a core version with a mic of choice since i mainly want the close mics and the samples as dry as a bone if possible.
Since i already own the Strings Core (and pro) and Brass Core i will for sure upgrade to the bundle.
I wonder if there is then a path to upgrade to the pro bundle for the 2 missing parts then maybe.
Since it also ends with the same price to buy the core and then upgrade to the pro i have a light and a big version for the same price at the end. Nice.
(at least it worked this way with the Studio Strings).


----------



## Grégory Betton (Feb 9, 2019)

Mat said:


> Flutes sound wonderful. I'm undecided about the oboes though. From listening to the demos, can anyone with more virtual oboe experience than me give an opinion about how they sound compared to other popular libraries?



I'm a former oboist, so I may be more harsh regarding the oboe, but I'm not convinced at all by its sounds from both walkthroughs. And the flutes seem perfect to me indeed.


----------



## Floris (Feb 9, 2019)

galactic orange said:


> I’m looking forward to having a full Spitfire Studio orchestra, but I’m also bummed that there’s not a percussion library planned. The BHCT set could work for many things. For a full set I’ll probably end up using the NI Symphonic Percussion or Impact Soundworks Percussion with this. But I’m still hoping that there is a new percussion library in the works that will be considered an “option” rather than part of the bundle.



It's still possible, Spitfire's old percussion library wasn't really part of the Symphonic range either & especially if Studio turns out a success it would be a good thing for SF to consider even outside the bundle.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 9, 2019)

Grégory Betton said:


> I'm a former oboist, so I may be more harsh regarding the oboe, but I'm not convinced at all by its sounds from both walkthroughs. And the flutes seem perfect to me indeed.


Does it sound like a French or Italian Oboe? I'm pretty picky about the double reeds. I wasn't crazy about the Bassoon either. Maybe it's just a question of the individual instruments choosen and personal taste. 

What's your favorite Oboe vi?


----------



## cqd (Feb 9, 2019)

Man..I'm already having enough difficulty waiting for Cinematic studio woodwinds..

This isn't helping..


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 9, 2019)

CSW will undoubtedly sound great, but probably without all these instruments and arts!


----------



## Consona (Feb 9, 2019)

The thing I really like about SA stuff is Time Machine patches, would love other developers to do that.

Otherwise, I'm waiting for all those other woodwinds releases, or to say it more accurately, for some game-changers.


----------



## skythemusic (Feb 9, 2019)

Zoot_Rollo said:


>




“Sub Car Dye Oye Da”


----------



## 5Lives (Feb 9, 2019)

Is the main difference here between this and Berlin Woodwinds the room sound (or lack of room sound)? BWW used to be the "top tier" for woodwind samples a couple of years ago.


----------



## Grégory Betton (Feb 9, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> Does it sound like a French or Italian Oboe?
> [...]
> What's your favorite Oboe vi?



I’m afraid I can’t tell the difference :/

Based on demos (I haven’t pulled the trigger yet), I quite like 8dio’s Claire oboe and Chris Hein’s.


----------



## catibi79 (Feb 9, 2019)

I have Spitfire Symphonic Woodwinds! I like this studio version but I think "Do I need it?


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 9, 2019)

catibi79 said:


> I have Spitfire Symphonic Woodwinds! I like this studio version but I think "Do I need it?


There are some new articulations. I'm hoping the contextual videos and demos will illustrate playing styles a bit more so I can get a better sense of difference between the libraries in terms of the soloists.


----------



## ZeeCount (Feb 9, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> What's your favorite Oboe vi?



As a former Oboe player, my favourite for exposed lyrical parts is the Oboe from BWW Expansion B. The VSL French Oboe is really nice as well, but is more restrained. Spitfire's Symphonic Woodwinds has my favourite Cor Anglais (the cor in BWW Expansion B is really good as well).

This piece by Ben Botkin shows off both the Cor Anglais and the Oboe from BWW Expansion B really well:


----------



## Grégory Betton (Feb 9, 2019)

ZeeCount said:


> As a former Oboe player, my favourite for exposed lyrical parts is the Oboe from BWW Expansion B.



Oh yeah! This one is very impressive. Thanks for the highlight!


----------



## Scamper (Feb 9, 2019)

ZeeCount said:


> This piece by Ben Botkin show's off both the Cor Anglais and the Oboe from BWW Expansion B really well:




I'm not a fan of the oboe sound in most libaries, but this one really sounds lovely.


----------



## jaketanner (Feb 9, 2019)

Grégory Betton said:


> I’m afraid I can’t tell the difference :/
> 
> Based on demos (I haven’t pulled the trigger yet), I quite like 8dio’s Claire oboe and Chris Hein’s.



Just got the Claire bundle..they are really great.


----------



## jonesdip (Feb 10, 2019)

Cinebient said:


> I still would love a core version with a mic of choice since i mainly want the close mics and the samples as dry as a bone if possible.
> Since i already own the Strings Core (and pro) and Brass Core i will for sure upgrade to the bundle.
> I wonder if there is then a path to upgrade to the pro bundle for the 2 missing parts then maybe.
> Since it also ends with the same price to buy the core and then upgrade to the pro i have a light and a big version for the same price at the end. Nice.
> (at least it worked this way with the Studio Strings).


I must be honest - I'd be quite content with the core versions of the Studio series but I really was hoping that all the instruments would be included in the core version both for this and the brass library. I would willingly pay extra for this to be an option at some point. The Pro versions are a step to far for me both in terms of the size of the library and also the number of mics. I admit the close mic in the core version would be another add-on I'd buy.


----------



## Architekton (Feb 10, 2019)

I think these sound good, judging by walkthroughs, would love to hear more suitable lines for each instruments and runs as well...


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 10, 2019)

I've listened to the walk-throughs several times. I'd like to hear some examples with the Tree2, a little close mic and an external reverb. 95% of the video uses mic's that don't make the library sound at its best imo.

Kudos to SF for showing the library raw, but there's nothing "lovely" about that room imo. I need to be sold by the sound I could get with the above mentioned setup. Must say I really dig everything else about the library!


----------



## galactic orange (Feb 10, 2019)

Close 2, Tree 2, and the Outriggers sound pretty great to me. Yeah, the room can sound a bit “present” but that’s what I’m looking for.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 10, 2019)

galactic orange said:


> Close 2, Tree 2, and the Outriggers sound pretty great to me. Yeah, the room can sound a bit “present” but that’s what I’m looking for.


Yeah if that's what your ears like, then this is a good choice for you. Too me, the Tree1, Outriggers & Ambient just have too much of a too-small space baked in.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Feb 11, 2019)

If I buy the core version of this for the $149 promo price, does anybody know if there is an upgrade path to the professional version? 

Has anybody done that with one of the other Spitfire Studio series?


----------



## bbunker (Feb 11, 2019)

TigerTheFrog said:


> If I buy the core version of this for the $149 promo price, does anybody know if there is an upgrade path to the professional version?
> 
> Has anybody done that with one of the other Spitfire Studio series?



Just to try it out, I logged in and, having one of the core series already, added the pro version to the cart. The price was the difference between the two, so: yep, there's automatically an upgrade path.

Not sure how any bundle pricing schemes will work out, etc.


----------



## galactic orange (Feb 14, 2019)

Thursday, much? I’m itching to complete my bundle. SSW can’t get here soon enough.


----------



## AdamKmusic (Feb 14, 2019)

Think they usually release at like 6pm GMT? Or maybe 2pm?


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Feb 14, 2019)

AdamKmusic said:


> Think they usually release at like 6pm GMT? Or maybe 2pm?


I think 6PM would make more sense since the UK lot would be heading home from other jobs and the US lot would be awake... along with other countries

Sitting here on my day off in the UK though, so we shall see what happens


----------



## AdamKmusic (Feb 14, 2019)

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> I think 6PM would make more sense since the UK lot would be heading home from other jobs and the US lot would be awake... along with other countries
> 
> Sitting here on my day off in the UK though, so we shall see what happens



I’m in the UK & have a day off too! Snap!


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Feb 14, 2019)

so, who's buyin'?


----------



## Cinebient (Feb 14, 2019)

I will complete the bundle....if they let me.


----------



## KallumS (Feb 14, 2019)

Has Spitfire said that the studio collection would be a trilogy? I would've thought they'd record percussion at some point.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Feb 14, 2019)

After people start using this, I'd be interested to hear how it blends sonically with the Cinematic Studio Series. I'm only considering the Core version, so I realize having only one mic could be a limitation. Would have been nice to at least have a close and far. 

It's probably going to be a long time before CSW comes out. You never know, but I doubt it will be here before 2020.


----------



## mgpqa1 (Feb 14, 2019)

KallumS said:


> Has Spitfire said that the studio collection would be a trilogy?


They did...


> Spitfire Studio Woodwinds is the third and final release in our vital new Studio Orchestra range.


----------



## AdamKmusic (Feb 14, 2019)

I tweeted Christian about a future Studio Solo library and he said it's something they must consider..take from that what you will!


----------



## josephspirits (Feb 14, 2019)

I'm looking forward to this one. I have been really liking the dry Spitfire stuff, and would like to fill out the woodwind section of BHCT with this. Depending on the bundle sale I could lean that way, but more likely will make use of what I have after this and maybe upgrade next Black Friday/Christmas.


----------



## NoamL (Feb 14, 2019)

https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/spitfire-studio-orchestra-professional/
https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/spitfire-studio-woodwinds/
https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/spitfire-studio-woodwinds-professional/


----------



## iMovieShout (Feb 14, 2019)

Looks good 
Did I imagine it, or did I see or hear something that said that if you own the Studio Strings and Studio Brass Pro, then you'd get Woodwinds Studio Pro for free ?


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Feb 14, 2019)

jpb007.uk said:


> Looks good
> Did I imagine it, or did I see or hear something that said that if you own the Studio Strings and Studio Brass Pro, then you'd get Woodwinds Studio Pro for free ?


----------



## AdamKmusic (Feb 14, 2019)

Just added the core version to my basket, looks like I saw myself a whopping total of 23p (I own Studio Strings Core & Studio Brass Pro)


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 14, 2019)

TigerTheFrog said:


> After people start using this, I'd be interested to hear how it blends sonically with the Cinematic Studio Series. I'm only considering the Core version, so I realize having only one mic could be a limitation. Would have been nice to at least have a close and far.
> 
> It's probably going to be a long time before CSW comes out. You never know, but I doubt it will be here before 2020.


Looks like you and I are waiting for the exact same thing!
Once I start hearing reviews I'll make my decision, and it'll be an expensive one:
CSS
CSB
CSP
...and a woodwind library.


----------



## robcollins66 (Feb 14, 2019)

AdamKmusic said:


> Just added the core version to my basket, looks like I saw myself a whopping total of 23p (I own Studio Strings Core & Studio Brass Pro)



Yeah, and if you own the pro versions and want to complete the Collection , the saving is just over £3.

Not to sound greedy and I know Studio Woodwinds is on promotion at the moment, but I was expecting the saving to be more if you own the other two in the collection


----------



## stonzthro (Feb 14, 2019)

AdamKmusic said:


> Just added the core version to my basket, looks like I saw myself a whopping total of 23p (I own Studio Strings Core & Studio Brass Pro)


It is only saving me $4.95, and I own the pro versions of BOTH!

That said $295.02 is a great deal for the library. I wonder why an owner of a 'Core' library would get a deeper discount than a 'Pro' owner?


----------



## robcollins66 (Feb 14, 2019)

stonzthro said:


> It is only saving me $4.95, and I own the pro versions of BOTH!



One of Christians videos last month did hint that owners of the strings and brass libraries in the Studio collection would be looked after when it comes to completing the collection but it’s all a bit disappointing


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Feb 14, 2019)

I like their woodwinds actually the most, they have a nice chocolatey sound and they are captured in a more musical way than they did with their brass / strings imo.


----------



## Cinebient (Feb 14, 2019)

Mmmhhh. Indeed it looks a bit odd at about only €2 i save if i complete my bundle of Studio Orchestra Core (and i have also the strings pro version). So the message was a bit misleading for me to get a "special" price if you own already the brass and strings.


----------



## AdamKmusic (Feb 14, 2019)

Hmm glad to know I'm not the only one, maybe @Spitfire Team @SpitfireSupport can let us know if this is correct or a bug?


----------



## robcollins66 (Feb 14, 2019)

AdamKmusic said:


> Hmm glad to know I'm not the only one, maybe @Spitfire Team @SpitfireSupport can let us know if this is correct or a bug?



I asked the question to Luke on the Zendesk online chat and he confirmed it was correct


----------



## thereus (Feb 14, 2019)

robcollins66 said:


> I asked the question to Luke on the Zendesk online chat and he confirmed it was correct



Not like them to fail to deliver on what they promise...


----------



## redlester (Feb 14, 2019)

Perhaps the price for the bundles will remain as is after the initial promotion for the single product ends? It would then represent a much bigger saving.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 14, 2019)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I like their woodwinds actually the most, they have a nice chocolatey sound and they are captured in a more musical way than they did with their brass / strings imo.


I think the Studio Brass sounds good—though it may not be to everyone's taste—and most important from my standpoint, the pro version appears to be an excellent complement (as opposed to alternative) to the SF Symphonic Brass. For me, the Studio Strings seem good for the price, especially at the Core level for someone just getting started, but the Pro version does not offer much of a complement if you already own SCS and SSS. There are other string libraries available that offer more in terms of complementing SCS and SSS. The Studio Woodwinds Pro does sound good and offers some articulations not available in SSW, but it doesn't seem to be as much a complement to SSW as Studio Brass Pro does SSB. For the Studio Woodwinds it comes down to whether other woodwind libraries offer a better complement for the price. 

That said, as a whole, $479 for the Core series, is a pretty good price for a starter set. (My one reservation: the decision to put the alto flute in the Core instead of the English horn keeps me from being able to recommend it unequivocally.)


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 14, 2019)

redlester said:


> Perhaps the price for the bundles will remain as is after the initial promotion for the single product ends? It would then represent a much bigger saving.


Yes, it looks like the bundle pricing is a bit more aggressive than usual for SF but that there isn't introductory pricing on the bundle. If I'm doing the math right, it seems likely to me that the price point of the bundle shifted downward after CH made his big pitch during the wishlist sale, resulting in smaller differentials for those who are completing the bundle versus those who are just now buying the bundle.


----------



## CT (Feb 14, 2019)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> so, who's buyin'?



Music budget is a little low at the moment, but hopefully I'll be completing my Basic bundle before the end of the month, and then upgrading to Pro not long after.


----------



## Philip Vasta (Feb 14, 2019)

Ah I'm in a bit of a bind - woodwinds are the only major group I don't have a quality library for. I realize this may be a bit of a personal gripe, but the decision to give Core users a single tree mic option seems unnecessarily restrictive. I don't mind forgoing some articulations, less frequently used instruments, and even some mics and the special mic mixes. But give me one close mic to use, please. Even a little extra frustrating that the gulf in price between Core and Pro is so wide. I mean $150 for Core is actually a good deal I think. But to have to spend double for Pro seems like a lot less of a good deal. Sorry, this sounds whinier than I'd like, just having a tough time deciding if it's really worth the extra money.


----------



## josephspirits (Feb 14, 2019)

Philip Vasta said:


> Ah I'm in a bit of a bind - woodwinds are the only major group I don't have a quality library for. I realize this may be a bit of a personal gripe, but the decision to give Core users a single tree mic option seems unnecessarily restrictive. I don't mind forgoing some articulations, less frequently used instruments, and even some mics and the special mic mixes. But give me one close mic to use, please. Even a little extra frustrating that the gulf in price between Core and Pro is so wide. I mean $150 for Core is actually a good deal I think. But to have to spend double for Pro seems like a lot less of a good deal. Sorry, this sounds whinier than I'd like, just having a tough time deciding if it's really worth the extra money.


 
Not whiney, I hear what you're saying. Almost feels like you should just get half the mic options and half the articulations in core, save alternate mic options and some of the more decorative techniques for pro.

That being said, I feel like most of the time I like a Tree on woodwinds anyways, but a close option would be nice.


----------



## jonesdip (Feb 14, 2019)

Philip Vasta said:


> Ah I'm in a bit of a bind - woodwinds are the only major group I don't have a quality library for. I realize this may be a bit of a personal gripe, but the decision to give Core users a single tree mic option seems unnecessarily restrictive. I don't mind forgoing some articulations, less frequently used instruments, and even some mics and the special mic mixes. But give me one close mic to use, please. Even a little extra frustrating that the gulf in price between Core and Pro is so wide. I mean $150 for Core is actually a good deal I think. But to have to spend double for Pro seems like a lot less of a good deal. Sorry, this sounds whinier than I'd like, just having a tough time deciding if it's really worth the extra money.


I must be honest I go the other way. I don't mind the single tree so much as I mind the missing instruments - particularly the woodwinds - contrabassoon, bass clarinet and above all the cor anglais. After all they are standard orchestral instruments (the bass flute would have been a "nice to have". It's particularly galling when Mr Henson (who I have great respect for and whose vlogs and demos I love) sings the praises of the euphonium (missing from core brass) in his contextual demo for the Studio series. Just a tad disappointed. I would be happy to pay for the additional instruments.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 14, 2019)

jonesdip said:


> I must be honest I go the other way. I don't mind the single tree so much as I mind the missing instruments - particularly the woodwinds - contrabassoon, bass clarinet and above all the cor anglais. After all they are standard orchestral instruments (the bass flute would have been a "nice to have". It's particularly galling when Mr Henson (who I have great respect for and whose vlogs and demos I love) sings the praises of the euphonium (missing from core brass) in his contextual demo for the Studio series. Just a tad disappointed. I would be happy to pay for the additional instruments.


I think it makes sense to put the euphonium in the pro. It even makes some sense to me to not include the contrabassoon and bass clarinet if the library needs to be kept to a certain size for price point. But including the alto flute in place of the cor anglais. That's the mark of a marketing department intentionally damaging a collection in the hopes of pushing folks to buy the more expensive collection, and it is not a good look.


----------



## Philip Vasta (Feb 14, 2019)

jonesdip said:


> I must be honest I go the other way. I don't mind the single tree so much as I mind the missing instruments - particularly the woodwinds - contrabassoon, bass clarinet and above all the cor anglais. After all they are standard orchestral instruments (the bass flute would have been a "nice to have". It's particularly galling when Mr Henson (who I have great respect for and whose vlogs and demos I love) sings the praises of the euphonium (missing from core brass) in his contextual demo for the Studio series. Just a tad disappointed. I would be happy to pay for the additional instruments.



Disagreeing without an argument? You must be new to the internet


----------



## Soundhound (Feb 14, 2019)

$4 off? Seriously? I say this with some trepidation as I am very very very very, very glad that Christian has returned to participating here. Plus who am I kidding, I'll be buying it.

It sounds to me like the marketing dept run amok. Having worked in marketing for much too much of my adult life, I'm all too familiar with the tin ear many in that world have to things that will piss off loyal customers. I can imagine Christian and Paul's faces at being told what the discount will be and then having the unfathomable, fractal based psychology explained to them, the two of them grumbling back to their daws shaking their heads. Or, the marketing dept. deciding not to tell them.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Feb 14, 2019)

£409 for the studio core edition. That puts it squarely into temptation territory. I can do a lot with those instruments. Having spoken to support, an upgrade to pro later is simply the price difference. 

I feel the differences between core and pro are fair enough. I'm not too fussed about the mic options at this point and the articulations appear to consistent between versions.

Time to start a two week self-justification process..


----------



## neugens (Feb 14, 2019)

robcollins66 said:


> Yeah, and if you own the pro versions and want to complete the Collection , the saving is just over £3.
> 
> Not to sound greedy and I know Studio Woodwinds is on promotion at the moment, but I was expecting the saving to be more if you own the other two in the collection



I had this discussion today with help desk. If you own studio string pro and brass pro, and you paid full price for them, your collection will cost you more than if you didn’t buy anything and just got all of them today (around 1200 euros instead of 950, give or take). It’s disappointing but not the first time they do this.


----------



## prodigalson (Feb 14, 2019)

they have to use SOMETHING as an incentive to buy the pro edition. It’s not unreasonable to use extra mics and a few instruments as that incentive. 
Just remember the amount of content you’re getting for $150!!


----------



## Brian Nowak (Feb 14, 2019)

Ah and I thought they might do a pro bundle. 

Makes sense they'd want to squeeze the profits out of them... If I'd already purchased the strings and brass (didn't) it would be a no brainer. But I opted for the cinematic series path with CSB and will just have to wait for CWW.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 14, 2019)

Brian Nowak said:


> Ah and I thought they might do a pro bundle.
> 
> Makes sense they'd want to squeeze the profits out of them... If I'd already purchased the strings and brass (didn't) it would be a no brainer. But I opted for the cinematic series path with CSB and will just have to wait for CWW.


They do have a pro bundle. https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/spitfire-studio-orchestra-professional/


----------



## Brian Nowak (Feb 14, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> They do have a pro bundle. https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/spitfire-studio-orchestra-professional/



Bwahaha! Don't know how I missed that! Couldn't find it anywhere on their site. 

Well that bundle is definitely on the possible list for the future.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 14, 2019)

neugens said:


> I had this discussion today with help desk. If you own studio string pro and brass pro, and you paid full price for them, your collection will cost you more than if you didn’t buy anything and just got all of them today (around 1200 euros instead of 950, give or take). It’s disappointing but not the first time they do this.


How does the math work here? $499 for strings, $399 for brass. Doesn't woodwinds then cost $61 to complete the bundle? That's how these things usually work.


----------



## AdamKmusic (Feb 14, 2019)

Hmm seems if I were to get the pro bundle I’d save myself about 50% (£800ish on promo - in cart comes up at £400ish) the core bundle the 23p. Which makes sense as I would just be being the Woodwinds core library at promo price.


----------



## neugens (Feb 14, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> How does the math work here? $499 for strings, $399 for brass. Doesn't woodwinds then cost $61 to complete the bundle? That's how these things usually work.



In euros, with Vat included, my price for bundle is 295 (4 euros saved), I have string and brass (I’m talking about all pro version here). If you sum all up you get 499 + 399 + 295 = 1193, so it’s above discount price of 959. If you got them with some promotion you can level out a bit, but otherwise Spitfire is very happy at you. They mentioned to me that collection work that way, you only save when buying the full bundle otherwise the savings is marginal, I don’t know since that was my first collection, and I’ll probably just wait for Black Friday or something.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 14, 2019)

neugens said:


> In euros, with Vat included, my price for bundle is 295 (4 euros saved), I have string and brass (I’m talking about all pro version here). If you sum all up you get 499 + 399 + 295 = 1193, so it’s above discount price of 959. If you got them with some promotion you can level out a bit, but otherwise Spitfire is very happy at you. They mentioned to me that collection work that way, you only save when buying the full bundle otherwise the savings is marginal, I don’t know since that was my first collection, and I’ll probably just wait for Black Friday or something.


Interestnig, so it looks like they assign each library a value in the proportion strings (5), brass (4), winds (4), and the cost of each library to complete the bundle is that divided by 13. 959*4/13=295 and change.

Interesting. And even more incentive either to buy libraries on sale or buy the whole bundle at once.


----------



## paulwr (Feb 14, 2019)

I own only the studio strings pro. To check, signed in on the site, and added the pro bundle to the cart. Price dropped to about $575 or a little more. Under $600


----------



## josephspirits (Feb 14, 2019)

I downloaded in Spitfire App, installed through Native Access, went to play and... none of the samples downloaded in the folder. Anyone else have this issue? Do I need to do the whole download over again?


----------



## Philip Vasta (Feb 14, 2019)

prodigalson said:


> they have to use SOMETHING as an incentive to buy the pro edition. It’s not unreasonable to use extra mics and a few instruments as that incentive.
> Just remember the amount of content you’re getting for $150!!



Oh don't get me wrong, I agree it's overall a decent deal, I'm just disagreeing a bit with where they drew the line between Core and Pro. For now, I bought Core to see how workable it is for me, then I'll upgrade to Pro if I need to. We'll see - I'm excited to finally have some quality woodwinds to use!


----------



## josephspirits (Feb 14, 2019)

Well 3 hours later, 2 complete downloads, and 4 Spitfire download manager crashes later and I still can't get into the library. Bummer.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 14, 2019)

Brian Nowak said:


> Ah and I thought they might do a pro bundle.
> 
> Makes sense they'd want to squeeze the profits out of them... If I'd already purchased the strings and brass (didn't) it would be a no brainer. But I opted for the cinematic series path with CSB and will just have to wait for CWW.


You might be waiting a while...


----------



## enyawg (Feb 14, 2019)

Zoot_Rollo said:


> Very much.
> 
> Like a sharp 2H pencil.


Sir, what would you use for a semi-blunt HB pencil brass library... hard & bold?


----------



## jonesdip (Feb 14, 2019)

Philip Vasta said:


> Disagreeing without an argument? You must be new to the internet


I confess to being a little conflicted here. I had made up my mind to complete my SA Studio core set with the WW (in spite of my disappointment at the lack of cor anglais and bass WW in core) and I was looking forward to doing this and hopefully with a bonus discount for the collection which I thought (wrongly?) had been hinted at. But then I note that in the EW Valentines Day sale I could upgrade my Silver Hollywood Brass and WW to Gold for $91 (around £70) each which would give me all the Brass and WW instruments. Diamond would give me all the additional mics for approx. $130 each (£100) each. What was a simple decision is now not so simple. I hear good things in this forum about the HW Brass. Any comments about the WW. Apologies if this is a little off point.


----------



## jaketanner (Feb 14, 2019)

jonesdip said:


> I confess to being a little conflicted here. I had made up my mind to complete my SA Studio core set with the WW (in spite of my disappointment at the lack of cor anglais and bass WW in core) and I was looking forward to doing this and hopefully with a bonus discount for the collection which I thought (wrongly?) had been hinted at. But then I note that in the EW Valentines Day sale I could upgrade my Silver Hollywood Brass and WW to Gold for $91 (around £70) each which would give me all the Brass and WW instruments. Diamond would give me all the additional mics for approx. $130 each (£100) each. What was a simple decision is now not so simple. I hear good things in this forum about the HW Brass. Any comments about the WW. Apologies if this is a little off point.



Not sure what you mean by bonus discount? If you purchased the Studio Series as they were introduced, they were already discounted pretty reasonably. $479 for 3 libraries (granted a bit limited, but usable), is pretty good...less than $160 each.

And to answer your last question, the HW Winds are the worst of the bunch. Their brass is good...but not the winds.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Feb 14, 2019)

enyawg said:


> Sir, what would you use for a semi-blunt HB pencil brass library... hard & bold?




that's a pointed question.


----------



## NoamL (Feb 14, 2019)

Y'all realize this is cheaper on release than Hollywood Woodwinds Gold is after 6 years on the market? I think the core winds is a fantastic deal. Bought it this morning but was so busy today I didn't get a chance to test drive it yet.

For starters, you get every standard instrument & ensemble except cor anglais and contrabassoon! And no corners cut on articulations or consistency. Maybe they were even a little underconfident in the market for woodwinds because they made the Core version much more "complete" than it could be if they wanted to drive Pro sales.. like if they had cut articulations, or left out the piccolo or something, I'd be more tempted to upgrade but right now the Core version seems like it has everything I could want. The extra mics would come in handy if this library were really soloistic and expressive like Berlin Exp B, but these seem to be straightforward orch winds for use in context.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 14, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Y'all realize this is cheaper on release than Hollywood Woodwinds Gold is after 6 years on the market? I think the core winds is a fantastic deal. Bought it this morning but was so busy today I didn't get a chance to test drive it yet.
> 
> For starters, you get every standard instrument & ensemble except cor anglais and contrabassoon! And no corners cut on articulations or consistency. Maybe they were even a little underconfident in the market for woodwinds because they made the Core version much more "complete" than it could be if they wanted to drive Pro sales.. like if they had cut articulations, or left out the piccolo or something, I'd be more tempted to upgrade but right now the Core version seems like it has everything I could want. The extra mics would come in handy if this library were really soloistic and expressive like Berlin Exp B, but these seem to be straightforward orch winds for use in context.


Noam, I would be very interested to hear your opinion of how these woodwinds sit in a mix with CSS and CSB. I’m planning on buying all three, as long as they work together well.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 14, 2019)

NoamL said:


> For starters, you get every standard instrument & ensemble except cor anglais and contrabassoon!


And you get the alto flute instead!—you have to admit that's a weird choice compared to the English horn or contrabassoon. Personally, I would place the EH before the bass clarinet as well, but that one is more debatable. (I kind of wonder why they included the alto flute in the Core, since it would have made more sense just to leave out EH, CBssn, and alto Fl and I wouldn't be sitting here second guessing their marketing department.) I agree with your assessment that the library is an excellent deal.


----------



## MOMA (Feb 14, 2019)

More than 100 GB – that was something to handle. And only 10 for the core...


----------



## jonesdip (Feb 15, 2019)

Feeling a lot better about this today having listened to Oliver and CH's demos. May well go for the core and upgrade to the Pro versions of WW Strings and Brass later. Does this mean that I would end up with both core and pro libraries? Thinking that the core would make a great on-the-road lightweight sketching palette. Would also give me a chance to buy some more SSD storage!


----------



## galactic orange (Feb 15, 2019)

Really nice for the people who buy Core and upgrade to Pro. They get to have both. I wish that worked the other way around, where the people who already have Pro could throw Core into their cart and get it at no extra cost. Some instrument creators already do this, for example, with a full version piano and a free Lite version for those who bought the Pro.

It would be a nice gesture, seeing as how we already paid for all the content. Might be nice to put on a laptop, right?


----------



## Alex Fraser (Feb 15, 2019)

Perhaps we need another thread dedicated the the entire studio series but anyway...

When the strings first came out, I wasn't sure what Spitfire were trying to achieve with the studio series. It sounded like "strings minus the air hall" to me. Having heard the complete series, I now "get it." Especially interesting was how Christian made the strings almost Hollywood in size in his contextual.

It appears there's a massive amount of flexibility in the pro version of the collection. Small and intimate to big and epic. I had my heart set on the symphonic collection, but it's dawning on me that the studio series might well be a better bet for the work I need. And it'll cost less too..


----------



## iMovieShout (Feb 15, 2019)

Ok I've gone for the Orchestra Studio Pro, and saved myself a whopping £3-02. 
OMG - I've never been so impressed by Spitfire's generosity!!! Lol. I guess it demonstrates that they are now a corporate business looking to maximise their profits. Gone are the old days of rewarding their long standing fans and followers when they used to put loyal customers first.


----------



## jaketanner (Feb 15, 2019)

jpb007.uk said:


> Ok I've gone for the Orchestra Studio Pro, and saved myself a whopping £3-02.
> OMG - I've never been so impressed by Spitfire's generosity!!! Lol. I guess it demonstrates that they are now a corporate business looking to maximise their profits. Gone are the old days of rewarding their long standing fans and followers when they used to put loyal customers first.



I think what they're doing is just being competitive. There are many more libraries out there that can easily give SF a run for their money, so they seem to be undercutting the competition to acquire new customers, while at the same time, also giving existing customers a decent price. What I hope is not happening, is that they are rushing to get a product out before the next guy, and cutting corners with bugs and tuning...etc. There are still some minor flaws in Chamber Strings, that have never been addressed, and they are $700. But as a starter orchestral pack, at less than $500, for most people is a steal.


----------



## josephspirits (Feb 15, 2019)

Has anyone been able to get their core download to work yet? I’ve installed many Spitfire libraries without problem but I have tried everything this time and every time it says it downloaded the 90gigs the sample folder ends up being only about 49mb. Still nothing back from support since yesterday. Any ideas?


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Feb 15, 2019)

I looked at some of the other Woodwind packages I either own or have been looking into while waiting for CSW:

*Fluffy: *Clarinet, Flute, Oboe, and Bassoon (I love this, but limited arcs on Oboe and Bassoon)
*8Dio Claire:* Piccolo, Flute, Alto Flute, English Horn, Oboe, Clarinet, Bassoon
*NI:* Flute, Oboe, Clarinet, Bassoon, Contrabassoon, Saxophone, plus ensembles on everything
*VSL SE 1*: Piccolo, Concert Flute, French Oboe, English horn, Bb Clarinet, Bass Clarinet, Bassoon, Contrabassoon
*VSL SE 2* Flute 2, Alto flute, Viennese oboe, Oboe d’Amore, Small Clarinet, Basset Horn, Alto, Tenor and Baritone Saxophones - Flute, Oboe, Clarinet, and Bassoon ensembles
*Sonokinetic* is all ensembles.

*Conclusion 1:* the Spitfire Studio Woods Core comes with a lot of articulations as well as ensembles for Flutes, Oboes, Clarinets, and Bassoons. Compared to other reasonably priced woods, this seems to me a very good deal for $150, despite the fact that it lacks an English Horn and a Contrabassoon and only has one mic. And you can get those instruments and more mics. if you want to pay more later, something that isn't available from most other companies. 

*Conclusion 2:* Based on the above, it seems every company has different ideas about what a Woodwind library is. Therefore, assuming it plays like it sounds in the demos, this is IMHO a good purchase even if you're waiting for CSW. No matter how good it sounds, there are likely to be complaints. Spitfire Studio Woods will fill in some of the blanks, and more if you upgrade. 

*Question: * How can Spitfire release this on Valentine's Day without an Oboe d'Amore?


----------



## AllanH (Feb 15, 2019)

I ended up getting the "core" studio woodwinds. I have several solo woodwinds, so I primarily got it for the ensembles. I very much like the huge variety of articulations. Everything seems well recorded and sounds clean with only nominal room (as I would expect). This will end up in my template later today.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 15, 2019)

josephspirits said:


> Has anyone been able to get their core download to work yet? I’ve installed many Spitfire libraries without problem but I have tried everything this time and every time it says it downloaded the 90gigs the sample folder ends up being only about 49mb. Still nothing back from support since yesterday. Any ideas?


First idea is, do you have enough space on your drive? The one time I had problems installling a library was when I didn’t have twice the space of the download to unpack the library properly and there was never an error message to help diagnose the issue.


----------



## Philip Vasta (Feb 15, 2019)

Does anyone know how exactly to upgrade from Core to Pro? I purchased Core, but when I add Pro to my cart, it still says $299.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 15, 2019)

$150 for Core is an _amazing_ price.

I currently use BWW Legacy and Orchestral Tools wanted €200 just to _upgrade_ to Revive. And only offered that price for two weeks, and now won't even allow existing owners to buy that deal even if they want to.

This whole Spitfire Studio line, even though I don't own any of it, seems like such a positive development for VI consumers. Life is good, and it just keeps getting better.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Feb 15, 2019)

Hey people,

I am looking at getting either Studio Woodwinds Core or Pro

I currently have NI Symphony Woodwinds Bundle (Full Edition) and EW Hollywood Woodwinds Diamond.

For Strings, I have 8Dio Adagio, Agitato, Anthology and Century Bundle, EW Hollywood Strings Diamond
Brass is Cinebrass Bundle and EW Hollywood Brass Diamond

As a complimentary to these I was looking at Studio Woodwinds, but am unsure if they would be the best fit for those Libraries, or would I want Symphonic Woodwinds?

Tough ask I know, but any advice would be appreciated

Thanks


----------



## AdamKmusic (Feb 15, 2019)

Picked up the core library & U-He Diva whilst that’s on offer, might update to the pro version later down the line but I’ve been using the core studio strings library and tbh that’s been more than enough control for me


----------



## josephspirits (Feb 15, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> First idea is, do you have enough space on your drive? The one time I had problems installling a library was when I didn’t have twice the space of the download to unpack the library properly and there was never an error message to help diagnose the issue.



Thanks for chiming in, yes, I do have enough space, over 1TB. Tried downloading the folder to two different drives just in case, but no luck. It's just weird because the download is taking 45mins - hour each time, but then the resulting folder is under 1 gig.


----------



## robcollins66 (Feb 15, 2019)

Philip Vasta said:


> Does anyone know how exactly to upgrade from Core to Pro? I purchased Core, but when I add Pro to my cart, it still says $299.



Are you sure you were logged in to your account at the time?


----------



## Philip Vasta (Feb 15, 2019)

robcollins66 said:


> Are you sure you were logged in to your account at the time?


Yeah, positive. I checked several times. I did email support, so we'll see what they say - thanks though!


----------



## redlester (Feb 15, 2019)

Decided to hold fire on this even though I have the pro strings and brass. I decided it would be little more than an extavagance for me, I don't really *need* it even though it would be nice to complete the collection.

But Friday lunchtimes at work are dangerous times. Bought it.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Feb 15, 2019)

redlester said:


> But Friday lunchtimes at work are dangerous times. Bought it.


Seriously Lol'd there!


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 15, 2019)

redlester said:


> Decided to hold fire on this even though I have the pro strings and brass. I decided it would be little more than an extavagance for me, I don't really *need* it even though it would be nice to complete the collection.
> 
> But Friday lunchtimes at work are dangerous times. Bought it.


Maybe your heart knew better. Enjoy!


----------



## KallumS (Feb 15, 2019)

So the regular price for the core bundle is £449, currently discounted to £409... I want this but I can wait until the 30% off sale.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 15, 2019)

Can someone compare the studio series to the symphony series? Is the symphony series that much better? SF has quite a difference in price between the two.


----------



## CT (Feb 15, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Y'all realize this is cheaper on release than Hollywood Woodwinds Gold is after 6 years on the market? I think the core winds is a fantastic deal. Bought it this morning but was so busy today I didn't get a chance to test drive it yet.
> 
> For starters, you get every standard instrument & ensemble except cor anglais and contrabassoon! And no corners cut on articulations or consistency. Maybe they were even a little underconfident in the market for woodwinds because they made the Core version much more "complete" than it could be if they wanted to drive Pro sales.. like if they had cut articulations, or left out the piccolo or something, I'd be more tempted to upgrade but right now the Core version seems like it has everything I could want. The extra mics would come in handy if this library were really soloistic and expressive like Berlin Exp B, but these seem to be straightforward orch winds for use in context.



Hey Noam, how do you feel about the balances between the three sections of the Studio line? Pretty natural?


----------



## Alex Fraser (Feb 15, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Can someone compare the studio series to the symphony series? Is the symphony series that much better? SF has quite a difference in price between the two.


Good question. Off the top of my head, the Symphony collection has the "air" sound, performance legatos. Also, there's Masse included. I'm sure someone else can think of more reasons.

Unless there's a hidden cost (like royalties) that push Symphonic price up, I think there's a chance that Spitfire is testing the market with a new price point. My half thought out theory anyway.


----------



## Silentspace2000 (Feb 15, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Good question. Off the top of my head, the Symphony collection has the "air" sound, performance legatos. Also, there's Masse included. I'm sure someone else can think of more reasons.
> 
> Unless there's a hidden cost (like royalties) that push Symphonic price up, I think there's a chance that Spitfire is testing the market with a new price point. My half thought out theory anyway.


I posed the same question to Spitfire directly yesterday and they echoed the same thing stating that they were recorded in a much "drier" studio but not all the way dry, namely Air Studio One where as all of the Albion and Symphonic libraries (which I already have) were recorded in the hall at Air Lyndhurst which has considerably more room reverb. They said that each one provides an ambience for a different type of production.


----------



## CT (Feb 15, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Unless there's a hidden cost (like royalties) that push Symphonic price up, I think there's a chance that Spitfire is testing the market with a new price point. My half thought out theory anyway.



I think it's probably a little bit of both. They want to offer something for the more entry-level market, and I'd imagine the difference in cost between large sessions at Studio 1 vs. The Hall is pretty significant, and is part of them being able to set things at a lower price.

Obviously, the biggest difference is the sound. Other than the divisi functionality in the strings, I think that's probably the main thing to weigh between them. Raw and precise on the one hand, lush and silky on the other.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 15, 2019)

miket said:


> Obviously, the biggest difference is the sound. Other than the divisi functionality in the strings, I think that's probably the main thing to weigh between them



So with that said.....the studio series strings and bass have been out for awhile...would love to hear some comparisons to the symphony series on the sound and playability.


----------



## NoamL (Feb 15, 2019)

jonesdip said:


> Feeling a lot better about this today having listened to Oliver and CH's demos. May well go for the core and upgrade to the Pro versions of WW Strings and Brass later. Does this mean that I would end up with both core and pro libraries? Thinking that the core would make a great on-the-road lightweight sketching palette. Would also give me a chance to buy some more SSD storage!



Yep I believe you get both.



boxheadboy50 said:


> Noam, I would be very interested to hear your opinion of how these woodwinds sit in a mix with CSS and CSB. I’m planning on buying all three, as long as they work together well.



Only had the briefest look at it last night but it looks really solid. Needs some reverb to sit with CSS/CSB I think. And maybe a little EQ to lower the proximity effect. The sampling seems a lot better and cleaner than Eastwest HWW which was what I compared it to (and the tree mic in SStW is also further back than the mic in HWW Gold). Not a big fan of the onboard reverb - note that the patches load up with Spitfire's easy-mix thingamajig (the close-far slider) but all it does in the core edition is add onboard reverb. I'm gonna resave all the nki's with maxed close settings.



miket said:


> Hey Noam, how do you feel about the balances between the three sections of the Studio line? Pretty natural?



Only own Winds


----------



## Mr. Ha (Feb 15, 2019)

I have a part of symphonic woodwinds (flute consort and reeds). I have been looking to upgrade to the full symphonic winds library for a while (I have symphonic brass and most of the mural libraries) but even at a discount it’s rather expensive. I’m concidering getting studio winds core instead. 

Is this a bad idea, given that I only use the symphonic libraries for the rest of the orchestra?


----------



## enyawg (Feb 15, 2019)

redlester said:


> Decided to hold fire on this even though I have the pro strings and brass. I decided it would be little more than an extavagance for me, I don't really *need* it even though it would be nice to complete the collection.
> 
> But Friday lunchtimes at work are dangerous times. Bought it.


On the work account?


----------



## neugens (Feb 15, 2019)

Mr. Ha said:


> I have a part of symphonic woodwinds (flute consort and reeds). I have been looking to upgrade to the full symphonic winds library for a while (I have symphonic brass and most of the mural libraries) but even at a discount it’s rather expensive. I’m concidering getting studio winds core instead.
> 
> Is this a bad idea, given that I only use the symphonic libraries for the rest of the orchestra?



It will be more detailed, but you can add reverb to match and lower the dry vs wet ratio so the appear more distant, the ambient mic is your friend here. Christian has a demo on matching dry and wet libraries that is worth to watch, I personally don’t have much trouble blending things together, I only have one example that isn’t great but can give you some hints (strings only though): 

This used Albion V and Studio Strings Pro, Chris Hein solo cello for the cello and the Arturia V piano.


----------



## neugens (Feb 15, 2019)

Mr. Ha said:


> I’m concidering getting studio winds core instead.



Ops, I didn’t read with attention, Core only has the tree mic, however it does have a dry/wet slider so you are still able to fake a sense of space, which you can also simulate yourself with a reverb anyway. The way I see it is that those dry libraries are tools that need work to sound good and blend, but they can do in a variety of different situations, while the rest of the symphonic offer is more ready to sound good, but targeted at that sound specifically. This difference is very valid when you find in need of a dry sound (for a pop song for example), however it’s also the main drawback of those library, when left totally dry they expose being samples more than their counterpart. It is a bit like running a guitar through a load box as opposed to record the moving air from an amp with a microphone, in the first case you have to add some reverb, even just a fraction, to make it realistic.


----------



## Sovereign (Feb 16, 2019)

I bought the core edition. What they offer for the price is certainly not bad at all, but I'm not too fond of the room sound these were recorded in and I'll have to see if I can get them to blend in well with other libraries. Also noticed some phasing in some of the legato patches with the modwheel/expression maxed, don't think that should be happening with only the top layer playing? Anyway, I'm guessing these woodwinds will do fine if buried in a mix, for solo work these don't come close to e.g. OT EXP B and C.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 16, 2019)

There's no mystery why the Studio Series are cheaper than Symphonic or Chamber - they were significantly cheaper to record. The main hall at Air is bloody expensive plus SSS and SCS went through a tape stage that the SStS didn't. The Studio series is now my default template - cleaner, newer recording, rawer more versatile sound. Stacking 16's, 8's and 4's can get lush if required. Divisi's are super-useful. People will complain that the Woods in particular don't sound 'nice' out of the box but that is kind of the point. The full raw sound of the instrument is there but you will need your production chops with EQ, compression and reverb to get what you need. The room sound is not 'nice' but it's very important as an initial ambience for your reverb of choice. The strings are like the anti-Zimmer Strings which is bloody perfect as far as I am concerned.


----------



## ism (Feb 16, 2019)

I’m actually really happy with the Studino strings core tree mic only. I tend to throw lots of reverb on the strings , and in any event I seldom use close mics even for strings in spitfire libraries recorded in AIR Lyndhurst. I’d rather have the full SCS - it’s obviously much more advanced - but SStS does perfectly well as a SCS-lite for the moment.

But the Symphonic winds are completely different. I almost always use a mix of close and tree with SSW, and it’s not something I see as a nuance of mixing - it’s become fundamental to what I love about the whole spitfire sound when it comes to winds. So I wonder if the absence of close mics would limit the usefulness of The core studio winds in this regard?



And in general, I’m curious, and a bit puzzled by the studio woodwinds (and whether I need them). They seem to have much the same articulations as SSW (the extras shorts and the swells would be nice to have, but not enough to merit buying the library just for them), I really don’t care about the ambient mics, and I wonder if the tree in SstW is close enough to the close mics in SSW (or the blend of close and tree that I like) that the absence of the other mics in core won’t matter too much.

And while the demos really do sound great, and Christian’s contextual demo in particular shows how to make use of the dryness in crafting a sound, I’m not really sure how the Studio winds compare with the symphonic winds. especially since I probably wouldn’t be too interested into getting stuck into complexities of mixing - I’d just through on lots of reverb to get it to mix with AIR Lyndhurst libs.


I also don’t have have much sense from the demos of how the instruments work as solo instruments? The clarinet for instance - we get a couple of nice passages in the demos, and it sounds great. But I have no real sense of the dynamic layers, or how seamlessly you can craft phrases from multiple articulations or the speed of legato compared to SSW and so on. The solo clarinet is probably the weakest point in SSW, though it’s a merit that it’s recorded as an orchestral instrument and not as a virtuosic soloist - which is why comparisons with 8dio Claire don’t really make a lot of sense, and why I’d really love a spitfire equivalent to the soloists of Berlin Winds exp B).

So looking forward to more demos. Especially ones that show the depth of playability of the solo instruments, or that bring out any ways that they might complement SSW, beyond simply being dry.

Regardless, a wind library of this sound and quality for $150 is completely unbeatable in my estimation.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 16, 2019)

ism said:


> They seem to have much the same articulations as SSW (the extras shorts and the swells would be nice to have, but not enough to meric buying the library just for them),


The Studio Brass Pro is a more obvious complement to SSB than Studio WW Pro is a complement to SSW. Whereas I'm almost certain to buy Studio Brass Pro at some indefinite point in the near future. I'm not sure about Studio WW Pro. So I'll likely get the core version of the winds to try with SSW. Do they offer good alternatives to the SSW soloists? Do they blend well with SSW and can they serve as second players if you want one on a part? Are they reasonably easy to mix with the other SF libraries. Unless someone does a thorough walkthrough exploring the issues, it seems like getting the core version myself will be the only way to really answer those questions at a reasonable cost.


----------



## AllanH (Feb 16, 2019)

After a day with the Studio WW Core, I'm very happy with the purchase. The recordings are clear and not "super" dry. The little room in the Tree is fine and the WWs blend nicely with everything else I have; which primarily is Hollywood orchestra, SCS, Albions, and OT. 

The extensive set of articulations for the ensembles is sort of unique, not to mention excellent, and I will surely use them. The solo instruments are nice but not necessarily any better than the Solo WWs I have from EW and Auddict; they are simply different.


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 16, 2019)

I wonder how Spitfire's Symphonic Woodwinds (Close Mic) compares to Studio Woodwinds ?


----------



## Matt Riley (Feb 16, 2019)

If I hold out for the usually spring sale, what price could I expect for Studio Orchestra Pro?


----------



## neugens (Feb 17, 2019)

Matt Riley said:


> If I hold out for the usually spring sale, what price could I expect for Studio Orchestra Pro?



Who knows... and they usually don’t put in sale the last library released (although they are releasing two a month at this point, so by the time of the sale we’ll get probably overloaded with a lot more stuff on the table).


----------



## wblaze (Feb 17, 2019)

Can anyone compare/contrast the Full versions of the VSL Solo Woodwinds with these Spitfire Studio Woods?

I am looking at using the VSL 2+2 deal to finish building a woodwind quintet with Full versions of solo instruments for ~$300. Alternatively I can complete my Spitfire Studio bundle for ~$300.

My primary librarys are:
VSL SE 1 plus
VSL Chamber Strings
A couple standard VSL solo woodwinds.
Spitfire Studio Strings

I want to develop my small ensemble writing with high quality sounds. All the articulations of VSL Full are probably overkill for me, but I want more velocity layers/RR. I prefer the VSL player. Completing the Spitfire bundle would also give me ensembles (don’t have an immediate need for that).


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Feb 17, 2019)

Matt Riley said:


> If I hold out for the usually spring sale, what price could I expect for Studio Orchestra Pro?


I don't know what the full price for SOP will be when the promo periods end, but the Woodwinds studio libraries are 25% off.

I believe that this 25% discount will return, if not during the spring/summer Wish List then during Black Friday.

The question is whether there will be an even better deal this year during the Christmas Wish List, either 30% or 40% off. You won't know until you add it to your list. But certainly, if you waited long enough, I believe you can get any of the Studio libraries for a bit less than today through a Wish List promo.

And if you wait a few years, there might be a really good deal in a Spitfire Flash Sale.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 17, 2019)

TigerTheFrog said:


> I don't know what the full price for SOP will be when the promo periods end, but the Woodwinds studio libraries are 25% off.
> 
> I believe that this 25% discount will return, if not during the spring/summer Wish List then during Black Friday.
> 
> ...


Oddly, the usual price will be $549 for core and $999 for professional, according to the bundle sheet: 
https://d1t3zg51rvnesz.cloudfront.net/p/images/cms2/126/bmc_20190214_us_2000.jpg

The discount for the core is among the lowest they offer on bundles. I wonder if it will be bundled at higher discount as part of a Starter kit 2, with core replacing Albion One.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 17, 2019)

VinRice said:


> There's no mystery why the Studio Series are cheaper than Symphonic or Chamber - they were significantly cheaper to record. The main hall at Air is bloody expensive plus SSS and SCS went through a tape stage that the SStS didn't.



My bad. The Studio Series were also recorded to tape! Definitely a cleaner path to my ears though.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 17, 2019)

The cost of the recording space (hall) is probably like 5% of the cost of doing a library imo. Total production cost on this one is probably higher than the SSWW library (more instruments, more arts, etc.).


----------



## ironbut (Feb 17, 2019)

I bought the core Studio Winds and Brass.
If I decide that I just have to have the upgrade, I'll do that during one of the sales later this year.
I am getting to the point that I kinda wish some of these libraries were a little more compact.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 17, 2019)

Just purchased a few minutes ago; downloads should start soon and hopefully will end early enough tonight that I can do some trial runs.

Heads up that I will likely focus on oboe first, as that has generally not been my favourite in the VSL collection and as a result I often use english horn, oboe d'amore, or other members of the double reed family, to get more of the timbre I'm going for, even if I had in mind a standard oboe originally.

I've always been thrilled with the flutes and bassoons in VSL. I rarely use the clarinets as that's my main instrument (aside from the one I picked up as an adult to get more gigs: bass guitar ).

As I now use the Horns and other brass from the Spitfire Studio series in a few projects, I am especially looking forward to seeing how the woodwinds layer with the brass. That can often be tricky with any library, and I sometimes switch to a different voicing of one instrument or another to get a better overall balance.

One thing I might try with the clarinets though, just for kicks, is the "John Adams technique", which is to have a clarinet double the attacks only, of a phrase otherwise carried by flute, trumpet, or horn. I have never found articulation combinations in VSL that pull this off convincingly, but I do not claim to have as much time to spend on these details as a lot of people on this forum, as I have LOTS of gigs and as my technical day job (in the music/audio industry) takes 60+ hours of my time each week.


----------



## jaketanner (Feb 17, 2019)

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> Hey people,
> 
> I am looking at getting either Studio Woodwinds Core or Pro
> 
> ...



First, I think the NI winds are not good at all...maybe only good for layering way in the background. HW Winds are also their worst library, so wouldn't really count on them at all either, but better than NI. Do you need a new winds library, or are you just looking to replace the two you have?

I have a lot of 8Dio stuff as well, and they hinted at possibly releasing a Century Winds soon. * did does make some really great sounding winds...that also includes a second tone, so that you can blend them together for a larger sound.

Having said that, if you really want the SF winds, definitely get the Pro version while it's on sale...it's worth the extra options I think.

Also, symphonic winds are much more expensive from SF, and unless you have their strings, and brass I think having a more flexible library is a better option.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 17, 2019)

I almost bought the 8DIO stuff during the recent sale, as the timbre is quite good on most of them, but then revisited the ones I bought for practically free last year, Claire Alto Flute and Clarinet, and was reminded of their inflexibility for phrasing and how few useful articulations they have.

One of the fatal issues with those libraries is that you can't gain access to everything you need programmatically, which makes MIDI rendering impossible unless you stick to a subset of articulations. As I don't like splitting my tracks anymore (especially if the different articulation groupings happen frequently within a phrase vs. within specific sections of the music), I just can't work that way, and though it can be OK to do all the "hand tricks" to get access while live playing, I will ALWAYS want the ability to do a FINAL rendering via MIDI.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Feb 17, 2019)

wblaze said:


> Can anyone compare/contrast the Full versions of the VSL Solo Woodwinds with these Spitfire Studio Woods?
> 
> I am looking at using the VSL 2+2 deal to finish building a woodwind quintet with Full versions of solo instruments for ~$300. Alternatively I can complete my Spitfire Studio bundle for ~$300.
> 
> ...



Many of the VSL woodwinds (with the exception of Bassoon 2, and Clarinet 2) are VERY old now. Originally done for GigaSampler (anybody remember that?  ). VSL WW samples are all totally dry, and need reverb. They were good in their time, and I got a lot of use out of them. But, IMO, it's time to move on. YMMV. I still do like the character of the VSL Bassoon 1, though. There's something about it, especially the short notes, that makes it very playful.


----------



## lp59burst (Feb 17, 2019)

I wish they would upgrade their download servers...

I have a 250Mbps pipe and it's been crawling at around 10Mbps for hours on SStW and it's barely half done...


----------



## jaketanner (Feb 17, 2019)

Mark Schmieder said:


> I almost bought the 8DIO stuff during the recent sale, as the timbre is quite good on most of them, but then revisited the ones I bought for practically free last year, Claire Alto Flute and Clarinet, and was reminded of their inflexibility for phrasing and how few useful articulations they have.
> 
> One of the fatal issues with those libraries is that you can't gain access to everything you need programmatically, which makes MIDI rendering impossible unless you stick to a subset of articulations. As I don't like splitting my tracks anymore (especially if the different articulation groupings happen frequently within a phrase vs. within specific sections of the music), I just can't work that way, and though it can be OK to do all the "hand tricks" to get access while live playing, I will ALWAYS want the ability to do a FINAL rendering via MIDI.



I haven’t written anything extensive for woodwinds da yet, but what do you feel are missing articulations from the Claire library that SF studio has?


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 17, 2019)

I haven't compared 8DIO to Spitfire Studio Woodwinds yet in terms of total articulation sets; the comparison was to VSL. But the workflow is the main thing. I did put a lot of time into it, but others may have spent more time than I did and found a way to access every single articulation from the same VI instance and MIDI track.

I'm only 2/3 done downloading Spitfire Woods, so I have a feeling I won't get a chance to try it out tonight, as installation will take a while also.

I hope they have a user manual this time; my biggest annoyance with that developer is the dependance on browser-hosted videos, which run against my workflow in terms of maximizing CPU and memory efficiency as well as available screen real estate when doing production work.

Also, videos aren't exactly random access, unless they have a gazillion labeled markers and can be pre-buffered.

I often lack confidence in my assumptions about what stuff does in Spitfire libs, depending on my ears to be the judge but noticing inconsistencies between libraries that make me wonder if I guessed correctly. The situation has been improving a good deal with recent releases.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 17, 2019)

I love this library . Best woods yet . 
Igor.mp3

best

e

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/igor-mp3.18545/][/AUDIOPLUS]

[AUDIOPLUS=https://www.vi-control.net/community/attachments/igor-mp3.18545/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 17, 2019)

The reason I bought into the Spitfire model a few years ago, is that I have always loved the British orchestral sound, and especially the strings and woodwinds, but also the brass in a fairly large number of contexts. It didn't quite play out that way for me initially due to the wetness, but later releases have been more flexible in that regard, and I'm now starting to hear the timbre I've wanted rather than hearing the room as the main sound. 

Your demo may be the warmest and most pastoral bassoon I've ever heard.  Not sure I like that sound on Stravinsky, but there's plenty of other material where I need that character.

My download slowed down considerably an hour ago. I guess everyone is awake in the UK now and bogging down the server. :-(


----------



## CT (Feb 17, 2019)

Mark Schmieder said:


> I hope they have a user manual this time;



All their libraries have PDF manuals on their respective website pages, in the "Product Info" pane.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 17, 2019)

Thanks, last time I checked a couple of years ago, I couldn't find (m)any user manuals at their site. I'll try again shortly.

Update: I see that I did download some a few years back (some of which I think were removed later during a website restructuring). I forgot I had them, because I installed them separately from the libraries in order to protected against possible erasure during library updates. I'm used to looking for my manuals in my Kontakt library folders.

I am out of date though, so will see if I can find user manuals for the newer libraries, which I did search for at the time but maybe it was too early as I usually do the pre-orders and rarely visit the website.

It does look like the very newest libraries are installing documentation folders, so probably the woodwinds will as well.

I should also check for updated user manuals for some of the older products.

Part of the confusion was likely caused by the frequent restructuring of product ranges, so documents and the like might not have made it during some of the strange stitching we had to do to "transform" our older libraries into new versions that used different naming and organizational schemes. It looks like I had more manuals installed than I thought though.

OK, now I see that I drew a false conclusion based on some cherry-picking of desperately needed manuals that STILL are not there. Combining that with frequent statements about video tutorials being better than user manuals (not for me they aren't), I probably falsely assumed that actual user manuals (such as for Ricotti Mallets, which I just checked again right now) remained a "work in progress", when actually a fair number of libraries have manuals and have kept them up to date.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 17, 2019)

Installation is complete! It's missing the user manual, but I found that on the website and downloaded it just now, with a quick skim to familiarize myself with the available articulations and how they're handled.

I like how the swells can be adjusted in length via a control vs. having to select one of many swell variation patches. It's not a huge articulation list, but I'm about to play with it now and see what all can be done to expand from the core list, which in itself seems sufficient as it covers overblowing and trills as well as dealing with the different "character" of softly played notes.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 17, 2019)

The oboe and cor anglais alone, are worth the price of admission! I think these are now going to be my favourite choices for the upper double reeds.

I did not find a direct statement in the manual about which mics were used for the close work, although other mics are named. They are valve mics, and C2 is said to be for a "leader", which I guess means "section leader" or maybe for solos only. Whatever the case, I much prefer it to C1, which is the default, as the C1 mic is just a bit too warm and pastoral for most of my projects.

There are a huge number of articulations, and lot of user-friendly control.

As VSL doesn't have CC-based vibrato control, I'm always picking specialized vibrato patches and switching them, or using other tricks to get more realistic overall vibrato within a phrase. regrettably, I deleted all of my vibrato CC's from earlier sound source renditions, so I'd probably have to replay those parts using my Yamaha WX5 wind controller, to take advantage of Spitfire's vibrato control.

I need to get deep on this library, as it may well replace VSL in my template, for most of the winds (where there's overlap; VSL is more extensive in its coverage).

The only instrument I don't like is the clarinet, which doesn't sound right to me, with any setting or mic mix, like there's some weird resonance thing going on there. Possibly the player is using a Boosey & Hawkes instrument vs. a Buffet (or even Selmer), as those have long been popular in British orchestras (they're no longer made). I tried one a few years ago and found it a bit honky overall.

The bass clarinet fared a bit better, but I'd need more time with it to be sure. Certainly it has the most realistic lower-velocity response of any I've tried. But I own seven members of the clarinet family (Bass, Alto, G, A, Bb, C, and Eb), so I do all of those parts myself anyway.

I had barely had time to get into the Brass library when this came out, but already over the holiday week I was finding it likely that I would start swapping in this library for Horns. Now I'm eager to see how the Brass and Woodwinds blend together on harmonically reinforced parts, or even contrapuntal parts. With VSL, I often find that bassoon doesn't stack well with the brass.


----------



## NoamL (Feb 17, 2019)

I bought them and have made them the go-to winds in my template. But previously I was making do with a hodgepodge of Albion 1+3 and Berlin Orchestra Inspire (such is life for an LA assistant - you get asked to take winds out more often than you get asked to put winds in) so it wasn't hard to consider these an upgrade. Doing some quick comparisons with EastWest Hollywood Winds (which I have through CCloud but haven't used much) also clarifies that these are some nice, well sampled winds without obvious flaws and hiccups. At the current price it's surely hard to say no to at least the Core edition. I think these winds cover almost all the bases except romantic, soulful solos. In typical Spitfire/OT fashion, there's a classical/symphonic attitude permeating all these performances and if you try to go "full Hollywood" with your woodwind solos you won't find that extra yard in this library. But everything else here is solid, consistent, musical, responsive and usable. I'm surprised people compare these to VSL. Dry as they are, they do sound like tree recordings of a real orchestra. VSL will always have that "close recordings re-played in a space" sound to it which I strongly dislike. I wasn't tempted at all by Studio Strings, and Studio Brass lost out to CSB in my view, but this woodwind library is a solid entry into an undersampled space.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 18, 2019)

I'm personally comparing them to VSL only because that's the library I am by far the deepest on, and my go-to for almost everything. But lack of vibrato control is a real killer, and some of the instruments have that Vienna timbre that isn't my first choice (including when I buy classical recordings). So I'm always open to other stuff, with Chris Hein's recent foray the first to really pull me away from VSL (and likewise pretty dry if you turn off a bunch of built-in defaults).

The Spitfire Studio series isn't really dry like those other two, and is a bit closer to VSL's new Synchron series if you pull down some of that one's defaults. I've only partially switched some stuff here and there (such as pianos) to Synchron.

I go very light on reverb in final production, but do feel that one can get a bit more natural air from original mics, depending on how things were recorded and how they are blended. The problem often is in competing images, especially if taking a grow-your-own approach to section positioning.

MIR Pro alleviates some of this, but I haven't had time to go as deep on it as I'd like, so I often find myself using Vienna Suite's various hybrid reverbs and convolution as well as the dumbed down version of MIR. I rarely use Altiverb anymore except for soundscape stuff.

The type of projects where I see myself possibly switching over to the new Spitfire Studio series, are ones that are not symphonic in nature but have a lot of orchestral instruments augmenting synths, rock instruments, jazz, world instruments, etc. And I also want to try it on some Broadway style arrangements (which I've done over 100 of, over the years), as I do find VSL too dry for that stuff.


----------



## jaketanner (Feb 18, 2019)

Mark Schmieder said:


> I haven't compared 8DIO to Spitfire Studio Woodwinds yet in terms of total articulation sets; the comparison was to VSL. But the workflow is the main thing. I did put a lot of time into it, but others may have spent more time than I did and found a way to access every single articulation from the same VI instance and MIDI track.
> 
> I'm only 2/3 done downloading Spitfire Woods, so I have a feeling I won't get a chance to try it out tonight, as installation will take a while also.
> 
> ...



Sorry, I thought you were replying to my post about 8Dio's offerings. Because I thought they had a decent enough articulation set to create some pretty good mockups.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 18, 2019)

Doing the Rips for the WW's was a great idea. Hopefully other dev's will do the same!


----------



## reutunes (Feb 18, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> Doing the Rips for the WW's was a great idea. Hopefully other dev's will do the same!


Did you see what you can do with the Red Room Audio Runs and Arps?


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 18, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Life is good, and it just keeps getting better.


Life just got even better! If you are starting out today with a blank slate, you could buy the Spitfire Studio Orchestra for $480 and Rhapsody Percussion for $50 and pretty much rule the world for $530.


----------



## styledelk (Feb 18, 2019)

Has anyone tried to use this with an EWI or Roland Aerophone yet?


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 18, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Sorry, I thought you were replying to my post about 8Dio's offerings. Because I thought they had a decent enough articulation set to create some pretty good mockups.



Actually, I was indeed replying to the 8DIO discussion. If you have found a way to access all of the Claire articulations from one MIDI track, is it something you can summarize easily? It might help compare the workflow vs. Spitfire Studio Woodwinds, for those on the fence.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 18, 2019)

I owned the EWI for a while and couldn't get on with it, as the mouthpiece is a hard plastic tube with no flexibility, so doesn't even feel like an oboe (an instrument I have played a bit, but don't currently own, and certainly never mastered as with clarinet and hopefully eventually flute).

The other thing I couldn't adjust to, was the electrical impulse trigger, vs. physical keys, as trained wind players prep their key changes in advance and that causes false triggers on the EWI. And yet Michael Brecker swore by it, and I had some discussions with him in the mid to late 80's about various playing techniques to get around its approach (I didn't actually buy one until the 2000's, when the new series came out).

I have been following specialty forum discussions on the Roland controller, and it seems to hold out some hope for eventually being a good replacement for the Yamaha WX-series. Due to Euro laws, the WX-5 can no longer be sold, unfortunately, and Yamaha seems to have given up on that market and gone instead for super-beginner models (recently) and the "Silent Violin/Trumpet/etc." approach (those are extremely expensive and designed for schools so students can practice without bothering neighbours, vs. oriented towards MIDI musicians).

A number of us came up with tweaks for the Yamaha WX-5 and WX-7, to improve the responsiveness and overall playability. I haven't used mine in a few years but got it out yesterday to encourage further use. It was a perfect match for the VL70m physically modeled synth module with the improved patch set from Patchman in the ROM replacement chip. But time marches on, and Sample Modeling came along with what I feel results in even better renditions, also receptive to wind controller input.

Roland just came out with a cheaper/smaller version of the Aerophone, but I haven't yet sussed out if it is overly crippled to meet the price point. I still may try one of their models eventually. I don't like breath controllers -- even the better ones. As a trained wind player, I do much better with an actual wind controller. But of course breath controllers are preferred if you're dealing with polyphony.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 18, 2019)

I forgot to comment on the Alto Flute in the new Spitfire library earlier. This is the first time I have heard an alto flute library that has a warm timbre (maybe the 8DIO Claire as well; I forget as I couldn't get it to match the complex phrasing that I had previously mapped to VSL). I have to do tricks with VSL's Alto Flute to get close to the timbre I want, and to properly seat it with Concert Flute.

Alto Flute is one of my most used instruments. I do a lot of latin jazz, where flute is king, so I often have dual lead lines, weaving in and out of each other, and usually throw the second part (sometimes even the first) to Alto Flute. And I have a nice Pearl Concert Flute and Alto Flute, but haven't yet gotten to where I'm good enough to play my own parts.  I write in my head vs. at the instrument, in order to not be limited by ability, and often write parts that are a huge challenge to play (even for a full-time pro symphony player) -- on every instrument, not just flute.


----------



## gussunkri (Feb 18, 2019)

I absolutely love Oliver's "Purgatory" track on the Spitfire page. I think it will make me finally cave in and buy it.

(Oliver's "Black Obelisk" was what finally pushed me over the edge with BHCT as well. That man ends up costing me a lot of money!)


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 18, 2019)

The 8DIO Claire series was on sale during Black Friday. It's not as complete a set as this new Spitfire range, but for those who can't yet afford this new one and who keep getting pulled towards the Claire range due to audio demos, reviews, price, etc., I would like to point out that the timbre of those libraries is to my ears one of the finest.

I haven't checked yet to see whether the players are identified, but one of the things I love about living in the SF Bay Area is that the woodwind players in every performance organization whose concerts I attend, to my ears have the most pleasing timbre (dark and warm) of any US city -- a bit closer to what you hear in Europe.

Likewise, I do not yet know whether Spitfire pulled players from one of the London orchestras, other individuals, or perhaps those supporting film and TV work.

It is easy to overlook the importance of the players in a sample library, and not just the miking and other choices.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Feb 18, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> First, I think the NI winds are not good at all...maybe only good for layering way in the background. HW Winds are also their worst library, so wouldn't really count on them at all either, but better than NI. Do you need a new winds library, or are you just looking to replace the two you have?
> 
> I have a lot of 8Dio stuff as well, and they hinted at possibly releasing a Century Winds soon. * did does make some really great sounding winds...that also includes a second tone, so that you can blend them together for a larger sound.
> 
> ...


Thank you for this concise breakdown 

I would like to replace the ones I have yes, because I also feel the HWW are the weakest of the bunch
NI ones are not properly balanced in number of players either. Most got those for the Ensembles...

I also heard about Century Woodwinds coming and that would really bring me some joy, but alas it could be a couple of years away yet! And you are right those Claire Series ones are nice, but add up in price once you have them all (I have Alto Flute only)

Think I will take the dive and get the Pro Studio Woodwinds. Need to download them at work though HAHAHA

Not going to cut it on my Uncle's 12Mb/s home broadband :(
By the time that finishes Century or Cinematic Studio Woodwinds would be out


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 18, 2019)

I haven't heard any demos showing the Oboe, or Eng. Horn, in a lyrical, emotional, type track, with the Oboe, or Eng. Horn being well exposed in the mix.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 18, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> I haven't heard any demos showing the Oboe, or Eng. Horn, in a lyrical, emotional, type track, with the Oboe, or Eng. Horn being well exposed in the mix.


Hell, I'd just love to hear more demos in general!


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 18, 2019)

Regarding the NI Winds, it's a bit strange that the Symphony Series has a uniform "house look" to it, when a different vendor was used for each orchestra section.

The woodwind section comes from Soundiron, who are the other local-to-me guys who split off from Tonehammer, so there's clearly no association with the 8DIO Claire or Century series, as all of this material came after the split.


----------



## madfloyd (Feb 18, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Life just got even better! If you are starting out today with a blank slate, you could buy the Spitfire Studio Orchestra for $480 and Rhapsody Percussion for $50 and pretty much rule the world for $530.



Where do you see Rhapsody Percussion for $50?


----------



## stfciu (Feb 18, 2019)

madfloyd said:


> Where do you see Rhapsody Percussion for $50?



https://vi-control.net/community/th...estral-percussion-by-impact-soundworks.79780/


----------



## madfloyd (Feb 18, 2019)

Thank you, purchased!


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 18, 2019)

https://audioplugin.deals/rhapsody-orchestral-percussion-by-impact-soundworks/

Highly recommended library. Not the deepest compared to some smaller collections that don't try to do it all, but there are plenty of instruments in this collection that are now part of my regular palette due to the instruments chosen (vs. toys), correct technique, and good dry/wet balance.

I use its orchestral bass drum and castanets, off the top of my memory. I'd have to check my notes to see what else made the cut above the competition. For those who don't own 10 TB of samples like I do, the ratio of use would be higher.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Feb 18, 2019)

Hey @Mark Schmieder, good to see you here! 

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 18, 2019)

So for those who are using the regular (not professional) version, how are you finding it being restricted to 1 mic? My question extends to the brass and strings too.


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 18, 2019)

Thanks, Geoff. It's only because the Keyboard Corner and MOTUnation aren't very active anymore, that I finally had time to join and participate here, after lurking daily since the forum's inception.  I do not think that I will ever honour GearSlutz with my presence though.


----------



## CT (Feb 18, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> So for those who are using the regular (not professional) version, how are you finding it being restricted to 1 mic? My question extends to the brass and strings too.



I don't have the winds yet, but I'm a little frustrated being restricted to Tree 1 with the strings and brass. I imagine most people would be, unless that is the one sound they're ever going to want.

Based on how much of a difference they make in BHCT, I'm very impatient to get the additional mic positions in the Pro collection, especially the Outriggers.


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 19, 2019)

Hi,

SA Studio Woodwinds Pro is showing with a content of *432.0 GB UNCOMPRESSED .WAV*
From the product page info. 

* Download size : 102. GB 
* 102.0 GB DISK SPACE REQUIRED DURING INSTALL

Wow...That's 1:4 ratio data compression. Can someone confirm that the library uncompressed size when installed is 432.0 GB ? or is their an error in this info.

I'm still trying to decide if I should buy this library, I passed on all other Studio Titles from Spitfire, but feel the Studio Woodwinds are done very well, would also like to hear more demos showing the Oboe, English Horn, and Flute in a more exposed, lyrical composition.

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## Silentspace2000 (Feb 19, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> SA Studio Woodwinds Pro is showing with a content of *432.0 GB UNCOMPRESSED .WAV*
> From the product page info.
> ...



I second that. I'm also about ready to pull the trigger but this info would help me decide.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 19, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> SA Studio Woodwinds Pro is showing with a content of *432.0 GB UNCOMPRESSED .WAV*
> From the product page info.
> ...


Woah, 432GB is a lot. Are you worried about filling up a hard drive? 432 is uncompressed, but assuming all the files are in .ncw format they won't actually take up that much space.


----------



## Gerbil (Feb 19, 2019)

It's 94.1GB on my hard drive. The extra mics are 100% worth it though. Same with the brass.


----------



## neugens (Feb 19, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> SA Studio Woodwinds Pro is showing with a content of *432.0 GB UNCOMPRESSED .WAV*
> From the product page info.
> ...



I don't have it, but generally the compressed size is the one you need to care about, as the samples are encoded in the NI proprietary format, the rest is just marketing nonsense.


----------



## babylonwaves (Feb 19, 2019)

neugens said:


> generally the compressed size is the one you need to care about, as the samples are encoded in the NI proprietary format, the rest is just marketing nonsense


why? uncompressed indicates how much recording time the library features. more recording time = more RR, more detail etc - does it hurt to know?


----------



## Matt Riley (Feb 19, 2019)

I bought Studio Orchestra Pro and now would like to download from my MacBook Pro to my external SSD and then transfer the raw files to my PC to install there. Does anyone see any technical issues with that?


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 19, 2019)

It's funny, I misinterpreted that as well, and cleared out some disc space ahead of time, thinking I actually needed half a terabyte for the unzipped files! I was relieved when that turned out to just be the size of the original recorded WAV files.


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 19, 2019)

Thanks for the feedback regarding the woodwinds Pro disc space requirement. 

I'm glad it's not around half a terabyte 

So, is it safe to say the library needs around 102. GB of disc space (after installation) ?


----------



## Mark Schmieder (Feb 19, 2019)

I think someone else already confirmed the actual on-disc size, which should be roughly what you just said. I can't check from the office though. I was surprised how quickly it installed, after the download, as I thought it would take an hour to unzip etc.


----------



## neugens (Feb 19, 2019)

babylonwaves said:


> why? uncompressed indicates how much recording time the library features. more recording time = more RR, more detail etc - does it hurt to know?



Yes, but that's hardly meaningful. First of all, the same indication could be derived from the compressed size, it doesn't matter to know which is which. Then, perhaps some instruments have lots of RR some have less, some have detailed articulations some are cheaply constructed, you can't infer any meaningful information from the size of the uncompressed library alone. Also, since better compression happens usually means more redundant data in the file, a 75% reduction may indicate a lower quality of the recording, and if I were to judge from that alone I would probably be wrong. Also, in the pro version there are 8 microphone positions, so that's 8 times the same sample for each instrument. The truth is that we can't derive any of that from the file size alone, it's just not a measure that gives any valued information. Compressed is only meaningful because it tells you how much space is required for the library.


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 19, 2019)

What's also fascinating, (I think), is how much data-compression has been improved lately, we are talking a 1:4 ratio here, without losing anything data wise. (at least that's what I'm expecting). The compression-decompression algorithms must be doing some logical magic.


----------



## neugens (Feb 19, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> What's also fascinating, (I think), is how much data-compression has been improved lately, we are talking a 1:4 ratio here, without losing anything data wise. (at least that's what I'm expecting). The compression-decompression algorithms must be doing some logical magic.



I agree, I've been trying to find some details on the NI file format but I didn't (anyone with pointers to public info?). FLAC can do up to 70% and is one of the best compression methods, I guess the NI algorithm may derive from that in some ways. I'm sure their algorithms are fine tuned for samples, where you generally expect samples to be ordered by pitch but otherwise stable in timbre and length.


----------



## babylonwaves (Feb 19, 2019)

neugens said:


> Yes, but that's hardly meaningful. First of all, the same indication could be derived from the compressed size, it doesn't matter to know which is which. Then, perhaps some instruments have lots of RR some have less, some have detailed articulations some are cheaply constructed, you can't infer any meaningful information from the size of the uncompressed library alone.


i didn't say that, i've said it is an indicator of the recording time. and also, it allows you to compare with libraries which are compressed in a different way. the compressed size you cannot compare.

but we're digressing ...


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 19, 2019)

Any guesses how SA Studio Woodwinds Pro compares to OT-Berlin Woodwinds/Revive. ? Would it make sense having both ? 

Also ... What are the highlight/Star instruments of SA Studio Woodwinds ?


----------



## gussunkri (Feb 19, 2019)

I caved and bought the core version. I look forward to trying it out tonight. 

I realise it won’t happen, but I would have loved an intermediate version between core and pro with one close mic and the cor angles and the contrabass bassoon.


----------



## Gerbil (Feb 19, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Any guesses how SA Studio Woodwinds Pro compares to OT-Berlin Woodwinds/Revive. ? Would it make sense having both ?
> 
> Also ... What are the highlight/Star instruments of SA Studio Woodwinds ?



Well it's very early days (in so far as I've only spent an hour with the library) but I'll straight off say that I think it's more consistent than SSW patch to patch. Standouts: the flutes are fantastic and I really like the bassoons. The contrabassoon is wonderfully grumpy.

I bought them to use for ensemble work rather than for extravagant solo passages and they appear to gel really well together and with the studio brass. The mic options are excellent and there seems to be a very organic quality to them, much like all of the other Spitfire libraries I own.

I probably wouldn't use them all for exposed solos. Some of the legatos are not great, many with sluggish, synthetic attacks to each note, a bit like the studio horns. Fine for a contrabassoon but strange with an oboe. It makes it sound a bit like a squeezebox. Not my favourite. The SSW are better here. But playing two-parts using the longs can be very effective.

Some of the stacc round robins don't work as intended, with notes an 8va below being triggered etc. Early days though. I'm sure Spitfire will iron these things out with an update or two.

There are the usual generous range of arts and for the price I think it's a really good library.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 19, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Any guesses how SA Studio Woodwinds Pro compares to OT-Berlin Woodwinds/Revive. ? Would it make sense having both ?
> 
> Also ... What are the highlight/Star instruments of SA Studio Woodwinds ?



They are better recorded for a start. Very clear and precise sound. The clarinets are warm and woody. The flutes are fab. Lot's of articulations and more consistency in the sound than Berlin. The only thing I don't like is the room. I've never liked that room and always avoided recording in it but the library doesnt suffer as the decca and close sound fine. Just can't use the ambience....

best

e


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 19, 2019)

ed buller said:


> They are better recorded for a start. Very clear and precise sound. The clarinets are warm and woody. The flutes are fab. Lot's of articulations and more consistency in the sound than Berlin. The only thing I don't like is the room. I've never liked that room and always avoided recording in it but the library doesnt suffer as the decca and close sound fine. Just can't use the ambience....
> 
> best
> 
> e



Hi @ed buller ,

Thanks for the helpful feedback. I'm watching/listening to Paul's walkthrough video of the Studio WWPro version, and have to say that it sounds pretty good, but Paul doesn't do much to drive these instruments, even for a few seconds. I think it's just a first impression thing I guess. 

I'm close to buying SA-Studio Woodwinds Pro, but not 100% there yet. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Architekton (Feb 20, 2019)

Where can we hear some runs? Can someone make a short demo?


----------



## JohannesR (Feb 20, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Hi @ed buller ,
> 
> Thanks for the helpful feedback. I'm watching/listening to Paul's walkthrough video of the Studio WWPro version, and have to say that it sounds pretty good, but Paul doesn't do much to drive these instruments, even for a few seconds. I think it's just a first impression thing I guess.
> 
> ...


Sadly, Berlin Woodwinds is in pretty bad shape at the moment. I have BWW, Revive and all the expansions, and I went with Spitfire Studio Woodwinds + added reverb.


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 20, 2019)

I’m wondering why SStW has a selection of different short arts but SStS only has one short art (excluding Pizz and Col Leg)? I do hope SStS gets updated with more short arts. Other than that, SStW sounds great!


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 20, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> I’m wondering why SStW has a selection of different short arts but SStS only has one short art (excluding Pizz and Col Leg)? I do hope SStS gets updated with more short arts. Other than that, SStW sounds great!



Yes, totally agree that SStS needs more shorts. The Time Machine patches are not enough to provide short variations with what's included. 

This was the main reason I didn't buy SStS, but just went forward, and purchased SStW-Pro


----------



## Monkberry (Feb 20, 2019)

Recently purchased BWW with all expansions and I like it despite the high cost but I love the Spitfire Studio Woodwinds Pro drier sound so will definitely get this before the promo ends. I love the Spitfire Studio Strings Pro also. Simon Rhodes did a fantastic job recording these.


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 20, 2019)

Monkberry said:


> Recently purchased BWW with all expansions and I like it despite the high cost but I love the Spitfire Studio Woodwinds Pro drier sound so will definitely get this before the promo ends. I love the Spitfire Studio Strings Pro also. Simon Rhodes did a fantastic job recording these.



Hopefully when OT releases BWW and it's expansions on their new Sample Player platform, they will also fix/improve the Revive patches. Having both Spitfire Studio WW-Pro and BWW with expansions, gives you a huge selection of great WW instruments.


----------



## jaketanner (Feb 20, 2019)

gussunkri said:


> I caved and bought the core version. I look forward to trying it out tonight.
> 
> I realise it won’t happen, but I would have loved an intermediate version between core and pro with one close mic and the cor angles and the contrabass bassoon.



What would be better is to just have added more to the core version...they should have kept it uniform across the board with the Professional versions. They added the Pro version of Chamber strings and only added extra mics. Why not just do that for everything then? Give us all the instruments and articulations, and just leave out the extra mic positions...would have been far better I think.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 20, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> What would be better is to just have added more to the core version...they should have kept it uniform across the board with the Professional versions. They added the Pro version of Chamber strings and only added extra mics. Why not just do that for everything then? Give us all the instruments and articulations, and just leave out the extra mic positions...would have been far better I think.


Maybe they don't like the way the pro model they used for the SCS and the Symphony series works. Maybe because they were looking for a way to offer a lower entry level price point than what they could give using the model of their previous libraries. What is clear to me is that if they'd done it the way you suggest they would have had to offer the core at a significantly higher price. And if that would not have been a problem for you, that's telling you that you are not who Spitfire sees as the principal market for the core library.


----------



## jaketanner (Feb 20, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> Maybe they don't like the way the pro model they used for the SCS and the Symphony series works. Maybe because they were looking for a way to offer a lower entry level price point than what they could give using the model of their previous libraries. What is clear to me is that if they'd done it the way you suggest they would have had to offer the core at a significantly higher price. And if that would not have been a problem for you, that's telling you that you are not who Spitfire sees as the principal market for the core library.



Well even their pro versions are dirt cheap for most people who buy libraries...so what would the big deal have been to jack up the price an extra $50-75 for the couple extra instruments? I do get what you are saying...they're targeting a certain market with the core editions in order to gain more customers, since their other offerings are a bit out of reach for entry level.

As for Chamber, they're trying to get $300 more for the extra mic positions on an already $700 library...I don't need the extras, as the Chamber already comes with 3 positions. And if they felt they'd made a mistake, they would have lowered the price of the pro to $100, like when it first came out, it's nothing but mic positions...no additional instruments or articulations. 

Having said all that, had I waited an extra day before getting the Claire series from 8Dio, I would have probably gotten SF's winds core library, and then supplemented it with the Claire. And truth be told, I might still end up with the winds library at some point, but the pro version. I also feel that for the $200 more that they are asking for the pro version, you are getting far more value than if you got the pro Chamber for $300.


----------



## Monkberry (Feb 20, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Hopefully when OT releases BWW and it's expansions on their new Sample Player platform, they will also fix/improve the Revive patches. Having both Spitfire Studio WW-Pro and BWW with expansions, gives you a huge selection of great WW instruments.


Totally agree. One does not exclude the other. I have to look into their new sample player. I have only looked at one video when it was announced and it looked interesting. Just wondering what the upgrade price will be on that.


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 20, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Yes, totally agree that SStS needs more shorts. The Time Machine patches are not enough to provide short variations with what's included.
> 
> This was the main reason I didn't buy SStS, but just went forward, and purchased SStW-Pro



Well yeah, the TM patches are very useful but they are only great to add a bit of variety to take the ear off a possible machine gun type effect from using same note length over and over. Using TM patches doesn’t change the playing style of the art so a bigger selection of shorts would be great.

I’ll definitely buy the whole Pro collection when I have some more SSDs (on a roll haha). The Mic Positions are always worth the money rather than just using a built in Reverb to simulate the depth of field.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 20, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Well even their pro versions are dirt cheap for most people who buy libraries...so what would the big deal have been to jack up the price an extra $50-75 for the couple extra instruments? I do get what you are saying...they're targeting a certain market with the core editions in order to gain more customers, since their other offerings are a bit out of reach for entry level.
> 
> As for Chamber, they're trying to get $300 more for the extra mic positions on an already $700 library...I don't need the extras, as the Chamber already comes with 3 positions. And if they felt they'd made a mistake, they would have lowered the price of the pro to $100, like when it first came out, it's nothing but mic positions...no additional instruments or articulations.
> 
> Having said all that, had I waited an extra day before getting the Claire series from 8Dio, I would have probably gotten SF's winds core library, and then supplemented it with the Claire. And truth be told, I might still end up with the winds library at some point, but the pro version. I also feel that for the $200 more that they are asking for the pro version, you are getting far more value than if you got the pro Chamber for $300.


I get what you are saying as well and I do think there’s a space for an intermediate level with more mics (CTA) and the English Horn and contrabassoon. 

I do think we might see a different arrangement with SCS and the symphonic line similar to what they are trying with the Studio series. They said they would be doing something this year when they offered the special on all the mics last year. Details are vague however.


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 20, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> ********
> I’ll definitely buy the whole Pro collection when I have some more SSDs (on a roll haha). The Mic Positions are always worth the money rather than just using a built in Reverb to simulate the depth of field.



For sure ! Cost for required new SSD's is major concern. Understand large lib size is true for all top-tier providers, but need is SStOrch and lib size (426GB ) is real barrier. 

CORE is possible now, but then '_they got me_' for long haul ….


----------



## Silentspace2000 (Feb 20, 2019)

sostenuto said:


> For sure ! Cost for required new SSD's is major concern. Understand large lib size is true for all top-tier providers, but need is SStOrch and lib size (426GB ) is real barrier.
> 
> CORE is possible now, but then '_they got me_' for long haul ….


Yup. I spent a good amount of time trying to free up enough space to install SStOrch Pro and still have some breathing room....not happening. Adding the purchase of a new SSD onto it makes you stop and think. It's going to have to be the CORE for me for now until I add drive space and fuse some cash into my emaciated wallet.


----------



## jonathanparham (Feb 20, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> I’ll definitely buy the whole Pro collection when I have some more SSDs (on a roll haha). The Mic Positions are always worth the money rather than just using a built in Reverb to simulate the depth of field.


You can buy it on hard drive. But you do . . . seem. . . to . . have . . a lot lol


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 20, 2019)

sostenuto said:


> For sure ! Cost for required new SSD's is major concern. Understand large lib size is true for all top-tier providers, but need is SStOrch and lib size (426GB ) is real barrier.
> 
> CORE is possible now, but then '_they got me_' for long haul ….


That’s what’s needed during installation. The space needed on the SSD is smaller (oddly the SF product page doesn’t say how big but it’s ususlly about half the size). The usual method I use is to download to a scratch disk and unpack it there. Then once I have the library unpacked, I move it to the SSD. This has the advantage of cutting down the number of writes to the SSD as well as allowing me to fill the SSD somewhat more.


----------



## jononotbono (Feb 20, 2019)

jonathanparham said:


> You can buy it on hard drive. But you do . . . seem. . . to . . have . . a lot lol



Not a drop in the sample ocean compared to some of the fiends that lurk in these parts... but I’m getting there haha.The hard drive is just for storage. It’s not meant for sample streaming.


----------



## Sovereign (Feb 20, 2019)

sostenuto said:


> For sure ! Cost for required new SSD's is major concern. Understand large lib size is true for all top-tier providers, but need is SStOrch and lib size (426GB ) is real barrier.
> 
> CORE is possible now, but then '_they got me_' for long haul ….


A 500 GB SSD is like what, 70 bucks on Amazon?


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 20, 2019)

Sovereign said:


> A 500 GB SSD is like what, 70 bucks on Amazon?



Constantly sorting optimum configs for (2) Win10 Pro /Reaper /Desktop PC DAW(s). 
Running out of SATA slots and space even in nicely cooled, Server cases. Rather add now in 2TB SSD increments, as libs keeping expanding ….


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 20, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> That’s what’s needed during installation. The space needed on the SSD is smaller (oddly the SF product page doesn’t say how big but it’s ususlly about half the size). The usual method I use is to download to a scratch disk and unpack it there. Then once I have the library unpacked, I move it to the SSD. This has the advantage of cutting down the number of writes to the SSD as well as allowing me to fill the SSD somewhat more.



(edit) SF confirms new unzipping process which does not require 2x space.
426GB is correct.


----------



## CT (Feb 20, 2019)

Just had a quick playthrough of this.

It's incredibly satisfying how these three libraries (plus BHCT percussion) all just lock together. No fuss. Tree 1 responds well to all types of reverb environments, but the additional mics would definitely help.

Can't wait to really dig into it, and eventually get the Pro version of the orchestra.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 20, 2019)

How does spitfires upgrade work? If i buy the core now do sales count on upgrades? Is the upgrade dollar for dollar or does spitfire charge a premium?


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 20, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> How does spitfires upgrade work? If i buy the core now do sales count on upgrades? Is the upgrade dollar for dollar or does spitfire charge a premium?



afaik ….. Upgrade is 'difference' price _ 'at time of Upgrade'. 
SF system (when logged in) will calculate your specific 'difference cost' at the time you do the Upgrade.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 20, 2019)

sostenuto said:


> afaik ….. Upgrade is 'difference' price _ 'at time of Upgrade'.
> SF system (when logged in) will calculate your specific 'difference cost' at the time you do the Upgrade.



Cool....some companies dont give full credit on what youve already paid...so if you upgrade you ended up paying more than if you purchased the full version from the start


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 20, 2019)

In the walk-through, we really didn't get much with just the T2 mic's. I'd love to hear a couple passages by say a Flute or Oboe, using both shorts and longs!


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 20, 2019)

sostenuto said:


> (edit) SF confirms new unzipping process which does not require 2x space.
> 426GB is correct.


That would explain why they didn’t have the actual size of the library listed. Good to know.


----------



## AllanH (Feb 20, 2019)

I "gave in" and upgraded from Core to Pro. The studio woodwinds are really well done! Very agile, easy to play, and sounds fantastic.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Feb 21, 2019)

Just in case anyone from Spitfire is listening in...a Studio Percussion library would be most welcome. 

Also, throw in a drum kit and my Mike Post fantasy will be complete.


----------



## thereus (Feb 21, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Just in case anyone from Spitfire is listening in...a Studio Percussion library would be most welcome.
> 
> Also, throw in a drum kit and my Mike Post fantasy will be complete.



And a piano...


----------



## Stillneon (Feb 21, 2019)

Noticed something unexpected - but useful. I had SStS Core as part of WList sale and also had SStB Pro on the promo price. I put SStOrch Core in the basket to get SStW Core and got the small discount people had mentioned. HOWEVER, I now have the option to download SStB Core as well as SStW Core. Much kinder for my laptop config.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Feb 21, 2019)

thereus said:


> And a piano...


Joking aside, I think a more expanded "studio" range would be useful. I love the larger Air Hall sound, but it does tend to skew towards the cinematic and epic. 
Also, at the lower price point, I reckon Spitfire are doing gangbusters on the sale numbers for the studio series.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Feb 21, 2019)

How would you compare Spitfire Studio Winds Core to Chris Hein Winds Compact in terms of sound? The price is very similar. 

The Hein Woods feature have much fewer articulations and no ensembles, but you get

Piccolo, 2 c-flutes, and alto flute
E flat, B flat and Bass Clarinets
Oboe, Oboe d'Amore, and English Horn
Bassoon, Bassoon Barock, and Contrabassoon.


----------



## CT (Feb 21, 2019)

I used to have the Chris Hein winds. To me, they were more soloistic. A much tighter and more lyrical sound, which is nice for prominent parts. 

I never felt that they worked as true ensemble woodwinds in an orchestral context, though. Too closely recorded, and not able to tone down their expressiveness. Sort of like a bunch of diva soloists singing together, as opposed to a proper choir.


----------



## gussunkri (Feb 21, 2019)

Ok, here goes my first test of SStW.
I consider the following to be a sort of stress test. "Stress test", not in the sense of a sophisticated composition (I leave that to Andy Blaney and others), but in the sense that each instrument is exposed, there is absolutely no reverb (so just a dry tree 1 mic), and I am an amateur. 

In this file we hear the same musical snippet played on each instrument in the core version. I used the same midi file for all instruments, but I transposed the notes to fit the instrument (more or less). I use both mod wheel dynamics and vibrato control.

In order of appearance we hear: piccolo, solo flute, flute a3, alto flute, solo clarinet, clarinet a3, bass clarinet, oboe solo, oboe a3, solo bassoon, bassoon a3.
Each instrument first plays a short staccato line (using the staccato articulation, with apologies to Stravinsky), and then it plays some legato lines (using the legato articulation), and finally it plays some simple three voice chords.

The file ends with a short orchestrated thing. Melody in piccolo and flutes. Chordal backing by clarinets, bass clarinet, oboe and bassoon.

Hopefully this can be of some help to someone. Think of it as a worst case scenario (amateur composer + no reverb + exposed solo passages).

http://parentes.nu/Woodwind stress test.mp3


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 21, 2019)

gussunkri said:


> Hopefully this can be of some help to someone.


Thank you kindly! This is very helpful.


----------



## Henu (Feb 22, 2019)

@gussunkri 

Thanks, really appreciated! I was wondering, would it be too much trouble to put the same midi through the T2 mic setting also? My thing is that I don't personally like that much the T1 sound, and will not buy the core version because of that. I was disappointed, because I liked the library otherwise.

But from the walkthrough of Pro I could pick up the sound of T2 which I liked _way_ more, making me think to buy the Pro version. So I was thinking if it would be possible to show how the T2 mic sounds in the same file. If it's too much of stress, don't bother- I just needed to ask about it.


----------



## gussunkri (Feb 22, 2019)

Henu said:


> @gussunkri
> 
> Thanks, really appreciated! I was wondering, would it be too much trouble to put the same midi through the T2 mic setting also? My thing is that I don't personally like that much the T1 sound, and will not buy the core version because of that. I was disappointed, because I liked the library otherwise.
> 
> But from the walkthrough of Pro I could pick up the sound of T2 which I liked _way_ more, making me think to buy the Pro version. So I was thinking if it would be possible to show how the T2 mic sounds in the same file. If it's too much of stress, don't bother- I just needed to ask about it.


I would, but I only have the core version.


----------



## Henu (Feb 22, 2019)

Ah, I see. Well, thanks anyway!


----------



## axb312 (Feb 22, 2019)

@Daniel James ,@Dirk Ehlert ,@donbodin ,@reutunes - would love to see at least one of you fine gentlemen do a review on this before the intro pricing ends....


----------



## ism (Feb 22, 2019)

axb312 said:


> @Daniel James ,@Dirk Ehlert ,@donbodin ,@reutunes - would love to see at least one of you fine gentlemen do a review on this before the intro pricing ends....



I'd add @Cory Pelizzari - his Studio strings review was by far the most helpful (and the most fun).


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 22, 2019)

* ^^^^^^^^^^ ++ 1 __ * and would enjoy *@ ChrisSiuMusic * views as well.


----------



## rhye (Feb 22, 2019)

Hey guys and gals! Here's a piece I just wrote and programmed just using the Spitfire Studio Orchestra (strings, brass and WW) and the Bernard Herrmann Composer Toolkit (mostly for percussion).


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 22, 2019)

*meraviglioso ! * 

_Big push to SStOrch already on shortlist. _


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 22, 2019)

Hi,

I just began discovering SA-Studio Woodwinds Pro, and so far I'm liking what it offers. I started with the Flute, and I'm still checking the various mics, and other ways of using it. 

One thing I like to do is to layer the stacc. Flute articulation, with the Legato flute articulation, via shift clicking on both the legato & Stacc. articulations in the GUI. 

This gives me a more agile legato instrument, since I can introduce the flute's initial more audible attack sound playing with more wind-force at the start of a note. If I don't want the Stacc. attack sound, I play med-soft dynamics, since the Stacc. sample is only triggered at higher velocities.

I will be having fun discovering the instruments of this library, how they sound, playability, blending, dynamics, timbre, ...etc. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## Alex Fraser (Feb 22, 2019)

rhye said:


> Hey guys and gals! Here's a piece I just wrote and programmed just using the Spitfire Studio Orchestra (strings, brass and WW) and the Bernard Herrmann Composer Toolkit (mostly for percussion).



Mind just blown. Whilst everyone else was picking the libraries apart, you go and make that.


----------



## jonathanparham (Feb 22, 2019)

rhye said:


> Hey guys and gals! Here's a piece I just wrote and programmed just using the Spitfire Studio Orchestra (strings, brass and WW) and the Bernard Herrmann Composer Toolkit (mostly for percussion).



Impressive writing


----------



## PerryD (Feb 23, 2019)

I purchased SStWW yesterday. Nice. I am still thinking of getting a supplement for exposed solos. Embertone Herring Clarinet works well for me. Perhaps Chris Hein vol 3 Oboes? An English Horn is included in that collection. CH works well with a breath controller...important to me for expressive, real time playing.


----------



## markleake (Feb 23, 2019)

PerryD said:


> I purchased SStWW yesterday. Nice. I am still thinking of getting a supplement for exposed solos. Embertone Herring Clarinet works well for me. Perhaps Chris Hein vol 3 Oboes? An English Horn is included in that collection. CH works well with a breath controller...important to me for expressive, real time playing.


Fluffy Audio woods are good for this also. I only have the clarinet, but if the others are like it, they'd all be great for solos.
And there is Berlin woods expansions.


----------



## paulwr (Feb 23, 2019)

Purchased SStWW Pro based on the great demos at Spitfire, the walk through video, and all the positive comments in this tread. It will be a week before I can install and integrate into my template, but as soon as it is, there will be some work leaning towards the woods! I also have SStStrings Pro and though I like the sound, was disappointed that they didn't really go as fully divisi as my LASS is by not including important playing techniques in the smaller groups to go with the fullness of the large group of each section. LASS, what a work horse, stands up today VERY well. I held off on the Brass to hear first what AudioBro has to offer with their new Brass when it is released. I'd like to here from anyone on how the Brass is working with the Strings and Woods... if it seems worth it for the common recording space and anything else.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Feb 24, 2019)

rhye said:


> Hey guys and gals! Here's a piece I just wrote and programmed just using the Spitfire Studio Orchestra (strings, brass and WW) and the Bernard Herrmann Composer Toolkit (mostly for percussion).




Incredible!


----------



## Monkberry (Feb 24, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> I just began discovering SA-Studio Woodwinds Pro, and so far I'm liking what it offers. I started with the Flute, and I'm still checking the various mics, and other ways of using it.
> 
> ...


Great tip! Will have to try this. I've been comparing these to Berlin Woodwinds this week and the one thing I've found is the need for a more pronounce attack with the wind on Studio Woodwinds. These definitely compliment the Berlin series being that they are drier.


----------



## re-peat (Feb 24, 2019)

I have all three — the so-called _professional _versions — and I'm sorry to have to say: both the musician and the Spitfire-fan in me are abyssopelagically disappointed in this set. (Sorry, Luke.) It was the fact that, on paper, the Studio Series contains exactly the sort of libraries that I have been waiting for, combined with the many very satisfying experiences I've had with Spitfire in the past, plus, to a lesser extent, Paul's shrewdly luring walkthroughs, that made me want to see for myself what the Studio Series is all about.

Having now spent some time with these libraries however, I not only understand why all the demos done with them sound so unconvincing — the reason is simple: these are seriously flawed sample libraries — but I'm also filled with a sort of dread when contemplating if this is going to be the new standard of quality for Spitfire products from now on. Because, if it is, the increasingly misfiring outfit will instantly drop in my list of most respected and favoured orchestral library developers, from the top spot (which it shares with one or two other developers) to somewhere far, far below the average, if not the very bottom.

I could go into detail about what it is that puts me off so much in these libraries — musically and technically —, but it would become a very long-winded post during the writing of which I'm not sure I'll be able to contain my disillusionment and not start writing some rather unpleasant and unfriendly sentences, as is my wont when upset.

Let me just say that, in my opinion (and all of this is just my opinion of course), this material is neither worthy of the name Spitfire and most certainly not of the tag 'professional'. Not even close. Not even when the meaning of the word 'professional' is stretched to also include 'semi-'. All three libraries are severely under-sampled — as a consequence of which the programmers had to resort to some very questionable solutions trying, but failing, to mask the void —, many of the instruments don't sound convincing at all to my ears (there are couple of reasonably good ones, sure, but most of them seem to beg to be described as 'disturbingly average' or worse), the instruments are capable of only a very limited range of performances and expressions, and there's an all-pervading and very un-Spitfire-ish superficiality and sloppyness affecting this set which makes working with it a constant struggle and source of frustration and irritation. And whatever you do with these libraries, it'll always scream 'sampled', 'unnatural' and 'fake', as all the demos do, as all my own experiments with them do, and as Rhye's in-every-other-respect-very-impressive-and-applause-deserving piece does.

Not the worst, but certainly the saddest purchase I've ever made in nearly 2 decades of buying sample libraries. I can't for the life of me understand how whoever is in charge these days at Spitfire ever gave their fiat for this inferior product to be released. A veto would have been a decision far more in line and in character with the uncompromising and high-quality past achievements of the company.

_


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Feb 24, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I have all three — the so-called _professional _versions — and I'm sorry to have to say: both the musician and the Spitfire-fan in me are abyssopelagically disappointed in this set. (Sorry, Luke.) It was the fact that, on paper, the Studio Series contains exactly the sort of libraries that I have been waiting for, combined with the many very satisfying experiences I've had with Spitfire in the past, plus, to a lesser extent, Paul's shrewdly luring walkthroughs, that made me want to see for myself what the Studio Series is all about.
> 
> Having now spent some time with these libraries however, I not only understand why all the demos done with them sound so unconvincing — the reason is simple: these are seriously flawed sample libraries — but I'm also filled with a sort of dread when contemplating if this is going to be the new standard of quality for Spitfire products from now on. Because, if it is, the increasingly misfiring outfit will instantly drop in my list of most respected and favoured orchestral library developers, from the top spot (which it shares with one or two other developers) to somewhere far, far below the average, if not the very bottom.
> 
> ...



I actually liked their woodwind range here a lot better than their strings and brass, though reading that tells me to stay away from the whole studio series. Very unfortunate because I felt the room and resonance with the samples had some nice oldschool vintage vibe to it. But when so many things you described are flawed it makes no sense to me to try them out and I 100 percent trust your remark here.


----------



## tack (Feb 24, 2019)

re-peat said:


> abyssopelagically


----------



## robgb (Feb 24, 2019)

re-peat said:


> Not the worst, but certainly the saddest purchase I've ever made in nearly 2 decades of buying sample libraries. I can't for the life of me understand how whoever is in charge these days at Spitfire ever gave their fiat for this inferior product to be released. A veto would have been a decision far more in line and in character with the uncompromising and high-quality past achievements of the company.


So... Let me understand this. After Spitfire FINALLY does a mostly dry collection (which I've been waiting for), it's basically crap (in your opinion)? This is disheartening, to say the least. I really wish you WOULD go into detail. That would be immensely helpful.


----------



## tack (Feb 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> I really wish you WOULD go into detail.


Piet has shared more over on The Sound Board (free registration required) including audio examples if you're so inclined.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> So... Let me understand this. After Spitfire FINALLY does a mostly dry collection (which I've been waiting for), it's basically crap (in your opinion)? This is disheartening, to say the least. I really wish you WOULD go into detail. That would be immensely helpful.


Yes, it would be far more helpful than the long-winded innuendos of that post. Especially since I’ve been hearing a lot of decent mock ups using these libraries.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Feb 24, 2019)

tack said:


>



Re-peats vocabulary is exquisite and and a joy to read. That having said, it still hurts to read that but from the first day I heard their studio range I wasn´t convinced either. Also recently purchased their solo string library and man..I better shut my mouth because it is off topic but it was such a dissapointment. (triggering overlay shorts on a performance patch at velocity at 9 (in words: N-I-N-E) is just where I started thinking they smoked some weed while programming the patches) and its just clunky you even can´t perform the most simplistic patterns with the instruments as they just don´t do it, so you have to programm around their flawed programmed patches which is utterly annoying. My advice: They should give Aaron Venture all the sampled content and let him do the programming..

In the end: Expensive equipment, super room acoustics doesn´t make a good sample library, in fact I believe that sampling with intention of musical context in mind and bad ass programming from the viewpoint of a composer not trying to write to the favor to samples strengths can create a descent result, but therefore you need to switch perspective and not trying to tailor towards a market which is satisfied with long notes and spiccato pattern driven tracks.


----------



## tack (Feb 24, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> Especially since I’ve been hearing a lot of decent mock ups using these libraries.


@re-peat do you think those happy with the demos would be happy with the library?

Like re-peat, I'm unconvinced by the demos and to my ears even rhye's impressive and herculean compositional effort was -- if I may channel my inner Verta -- enormously let down by the samples. Piet's examples on TSB were a mix of some decent sounds with some instantly cringeworthy ouch-that's-a-sample-library reactions.


----------



## robgb (Feb 24, 2019)

tack said:


> Piet has shared more over on The Sound Board (free registration required) including audio examples if you're so inclined.


Thanks. I just listened to the samples. While not as horrible sounding (IMO) as re-peat believes, I heard nothing that leads me to believe I'd be getting anything superior to what I already have on the woodwind front, and, in fact, is probably inferior. That's a shame. But thank you to re-peat for saving me some money.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 24, 2019)

tack said:


> Piet's examples on TSB were a mix of some decent sounds with some instantly cringeworthy ouch-that's-a-sample-library reactions.


I do not own a sample library for which this is not the case. They all have severe limitations, many of them have nasty, unfixed bugs that you discover at the worst possible moment, and much of finding your way through this world is figuring out which set of limitations you can best live with. The question to ask with something like Rhye’s piece is whether it would have worked better with another set of libraries?


----------



## robgb (Feb 24, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> They all have severe limitations, many of them have nasty, unfixed bugs that you discover at the worst possible moment,


The nice thing is that, in many cases, you can go in and fix the bugs if you don't mind going behind the wrench (spanner). Unfortunately, it sounds as if this isn't possible with the legato patches in this library.


----------



## star.keys (Feb 24, 2019)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Re-peats vocabulary is exquisite and and a joy to read. That having said, it still hurts to read that but from the first day I heard their studio range I wasn´t convinced either. Also recently purchased their solo string library and man..I better shut my mouth because it is off topic but it was such a dissapointment. (triggering overlay shorts on a performance patch at velocity at 9 (in words: N-I-N-E) is just where I started thinking they smoked some weed while programming the patches) and its just clunky you even can´t perform the most simplistic patterns with the instruments as they just don´t do it, so you have to programm around their flawed programmed patches which is utterly annoying. My advice: They should give Aaron Venture all the sampled content and let him do the programming..
> 
> In the end: Expensive equipment, super room acoustics doesn´t make a good sample library, in fact I believe that sampling with intention of musical context in mind and bad ass programming from the viewpoint of a composer not trying to write to the favor to samples strengths can create a descent result, but therefore you need to switch perspective and not trying to tailor towards a market which is satisfied with long notes and spiccato pattern driven tracks.



Exactly my thoughts and exactly the trigger point (new solo strings library) when I stopped spending my money on their libraries. Studio series never convinced me. Most of their walkthroughs and demos don’t sound musical to my ears, which is probably an indicator that they aren’t producing libraries to make mainstream music but more of texture sound with weird chords and with a desperate attempt to make it sound something different. It’s sad to see them going this route. I was a big fan until that happened...


----------



## rottoy (Feb 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> The nice thing is that, in many cases, you can go in and fix the bugs if you don't mind going behind the wrench (spanner). Unfortunately, it sounds as if this isn't possible with the legato patches in this library.


This is a dealbreaker for me these days when it comes to Kontakt libraries.
If I can't go under the hood and make my own adjustments, I'll take my money elsewhere. 
The one exception I make is for Alex Wallbank's "Cinematic Studio" series. 
I have COMPLETE faith in his programming skills, contracted musicians and engineers.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> The nice thing is that, in many cases, you can go in and fix the bugs if you don't mind going behind the wrench (spanner). Unfortunately, it sounds as if this isn't possible with the legato patches in this library.


the bug I encountered last night—in an old venerable Spitfire library not the Studio series—was in a locked legato patch so no fixing. In my experience the vast majority of bugs I find are in legato patches, probably due to all the scripting.

The Studio series, like all libraries, has limitations. They are not the ones @re-peat wants to deal with. I get that. But other people are evidently finding success with it, even with the Core version, and finding the limitations manageable. That needs to be remembered too.


----------



## AllanH (Feb 24, 2019)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Re-peats vocabulary is exquisite and and a joy to read. That having said, it still hurts to read that but from the first day I heard their studio range I wasn´t convinced either. Also recently purchased their solo string library and man..I better shut my mouth because it is off topic but it was such a dissapointment. ....



I happen to like the new Studio WWPro. I very much like the tone, and it's certainly better than what I used to use. 

EDIT: I deleted an off-topic comment about the Solo Strings.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 24, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I have all three — the so-called _professional _versions — and I'm sorry to have to say: both the musician and the Spitfire-fan in me are abyssopelagically disappointed in this set. (Sorry, Luke.) It was the fact that, on paper, the Studio Series contains exactly the sort of libraries that I have been waiting for, combined with the many very satisfying experiences I've had with Spitfire in the past, plus, to a lesser extent, Paul's shrewdly luring walkthroughs, that made me want to see for myself what the Studio Series is all about.
> 
> Having now spent some time with these libraries however, I not only understand why all the demos done with them sound so unconvincing — the reason is simple: these are seriously flawed sample libraries — but I'm also filled with a sort of dread when contemplating if this is going to be the new standard of quality for Spitfire products from now on. Because, if it is, the increasingly misfiring outfit will instantly drop in my list of most respected and favoured orchestral library developers, from the top spot (which it shares with one or two other developers) to somewhere far, far below the average, if not the very bottom.
> 
> ...


This is extremely disappointing.
As a guy with no real WW library to speak of (I don’t count my Albion ONE and CineSymphony Lite) and a very limited budget, I was planning on picking up the core woodwind library as my go-to. I trust @re-peat’s review as much as anyone’s, and I also trust what @NoamL had to say (which were pretty differing opinions, I must say). Now I’m stuck. Do I pick this up, or scrounge for CineWinds Core... or wait 6-7 months to buy Berlin or, even better, wait presumably forever for Cinematic Studio Woodwinds? Uggghhhh


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 24, 2019)

Deleted because post to which I was responding was deleted.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 24, 2019)

Once everything is ported over to their new player, they will be able to do countless bug fixes with ease.

The Studio series to me seems to be low cost libraries meant to have lots of bang for the buck. Maybe not even meant for top pros like Piet.

I'm hoping SF will soon do yet another "Elite" line of standard orchestral libraries. This time at maybe 3 times the price, but with no limits on quality, kind of like what Audiobro seems to be doing with their upcoming Brass. And done in a med-large space like Century & Cinematic Studio.


----------



## rottoy (Feb 24, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> Now I’m stuck. Do I pick this up, or scrounge for CineWinds Core... or wait 6-7 months to buy Berlin or, even better, wait presumably forever for Cinematic Studio Woodwinds? Uggghhhh


If you want a set of winds with a similarly dry acoustic space as these Studio Woodwinds, look no further than Cinewinds. Wonderfully lyrical and easy to massage into a mix with other libraries! (IMO)

(I have not received any free products from Cinesamples. If Mike Patti feels so inclined, feel free to hit me up!)


----------



## tack (Feb 24, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> The Studio series to me seems to be low cost libraries meant to have lots of bang for the buck. Maybe not even meant for top pros like Piet.


Which I think even Piet would be perfectly fine with if they didn't brand it as _Professional_.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 24, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> This is extremely disappointing.
> As a guy with no real WW library to speak of (I don’t count my Albion ONE and CineSymphony Lite) and a very limited budget, I was planning on picking up the core woodwind library as my go-to. I trust @re-peat review as much as anyone, and I also trust what @NoamL had to say (which were pretty differing opinions, I must say). Now I’m stuck. Do I pick this up, or scrounge for CineWinds Core... or wait 6-7 months to buy Berlin or, even better, wait presumably forever for Cinematic Studio Woodwinds? Uggghhhh


If you read around you’ll see folks have severe issues with Berlin woodwinds as well.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 24, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> Now I’m stuck. Do I pick this up, or scrounge for CineWinds Core... or wait 6-7 months to buy Berlin or, even better, wait presumably forever for Cinematic Studio Woodwinds? Uggghhhh


If you haven't yet done so, give Piet's audio examples a listen.

Also, Cinematic Studio Winds is aiming to release by the end of 2019 and possibly even as early as this summer, according to Alex. Personally, I have BWW Legacy and can probably just make do until CSW is out.

One more thought. It might be good to differentiate between using using winds for more lyrical solos, or in context in a full orchestra. When I read people's opinions, I wonder which they are looking to get. @markleake had an interesting post in this regard. In a way, they can be opposite goals, since you want the soloists to have character that makes them stand out, but in context you want things to be uniform so they blend more convincingly.

Even though it's getting a decent amount of criticism, I think that if you step back and look at what you get in the Core for just $150 it's still a deal.


----------



## star.keys (Feb 24, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> If you read around you’ll see folks have severe issues with Berlin woodwinds as well.



Berlin Woodwinds has issues but it sounds far, and by a huge margin, musical to my ears (and I own it, including all expansions). It is possible to get convincing passages written using Berlin.


----------



## Silentspace2000 (Feb 24, 2019)

re-peat said:


> I have all three — the so-called _professional _versions — and I'm sorry to have to say: both the musician and the Spitfire-fan in me are abyssopelagically disappointed in this set. (Sorry, Luke.) It was the fact that, on paper, the Studio Series contains exactly the sort of libraries that I have been waiting for, combined with the many very satisfying experiences I've had with Spitfire in the past, plus, to a lesser extent, Paul's shrewdly luring walkthroughs, that made me want to see for myself what the Studio Series is all about.
> 
> Having now spent some time with these libraries however, I not only understand why all the demos done with them sound so unconvincing — the reason is simple: these are seriously flawed sample libraries — but I'm also filled with a sort of dread when contemplating if this is going to be the new standard of quality for Spitfire products from now on. Because, if it is, the increasingly misfiring outfit will instantly drop in my list of most respected and favoured orchestral library developers, from the top spot (which it shares with one or two other developers) to somewhere far, far below the average, if not the very bottom.
> 
> ...


Thanks for you honest assessment. I wish I would have had this info earlier since I bought the Studio Orchestra core late yesterday. I haven't had a chance to really work with them yet but I too was very skeptical about what I heard in the demos. I was going to upgrade to the pro if I liked what I heard so I'm even more curious now... mixed with a lot apprehension. It's a shame if what you say is true, Spitfire's brand and reputation is what prompted me to purchase even with the concerns I had after viewing their demos. At least my wallet wasn't totally depleted by starting with the core.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Feb 24, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> If you read around you’ll see folks have severe issues with Berlin woodwinds as well.



Thats true, no library is without flaws. So I


Land of Missing Parts said:


> If you haven't yet done so, give Piet's audio examples a listen.
> 
> Also, Cinematic Studio Winds is aiming to release by the end of 2019 and possibly even as early as this summer, according to Alex. Personally, I have BWW Legacy and can probably just make do until CSW is out.
> 
> One more thought. It might be good to differentiate between using using winds for more lyrical solos, or in context in a full orchestra. When I read people's opinions, I wonder which they are looking to get. @markleake had an interesting post in this regard. In a way, they can be opposite goals, since you want the soloists to have character that makes them stand out, but in context you want things to be uniform so they blend more convincingly.



Can you post a direct link maybe?


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 24, 2019)

Silentspace2000 said:


> Thanks for you honest assessment. I wish I would have had this info earlier since I bought the Studio Orchestra core late yesterday. ***** At least my wallet wasn't totally depleted by starting with the core.



Was very close to same decision. Not put-off, just delayed now. Perfection never expected, yet level of flawed content experienced thus far is perplexing.
When experienced spanner tweakers are concerned, I am best advised to step back, watch and learn.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 24, 2019)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Can you post a direct link maybe?


Oops, sorry about that. I guess my link only works if you have an account and are logged in. It might be possible for me to share his audio files, but I'd want to get his permission first.


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 24, 2019)

@re-peat ,

What is your favorite/most used woodwinds library at this time ?


----------



## CT (Feb 24, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> But other people are evidently finding success with it, even with the Core version, and finding the limitations manageable That needs to be remembered too.



Get out of here with this common sense. It is now time for everyone to get on board with the prettily-written critique.

Imagine if developers would just offer demos. No more need for some to float back and forth on the winds of VI-Control opinion.


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 24, 2019)

miket said:


> Get out of here with this common sense. It is now time for everyone to get on board with the prettily-written critique.
> 
> Imagine if developers would just offer demos. No more need to float back and forth on the winds of VI-Control opinion.



Really !! Several top providers provide 'limited' demos now (e.g. u-he, Pianoteq, RedRoomAudio) with satisfactory self-protection.
Large Libs can surely be cut down to practical size with adequate demo content.
_
Always open to instruction if I am poorly informed._


----------



## robgb (Feb 24, 2019)

jamwerks said:


> The Studio series to me seems to be low cost libraries meant to have lots of bang for the buck. Maybe not even meant for top pros like Piet.


If true, I'm not sure I understand this sentiment. What's the point in targeting only middle-line pros or hobbyists?


----------



## CT (Feb 24, 2019)

sostenuto said:


> Really !! Several top providers provide 'limited' demos now (e.g. u-he, Pianoteq, RedRoomAudio) with satisfactory self-protection.
> Large Libs can surely be cut down to practical size with adequate demo content.
> _
> Always open to instruction if I am poorly informed._



Well, there are significant financial reasons not to do it, of course.

Think about the trajectory that many, if not most, VI experiences follow:

- hear demos and walkthroughs; it's great

- start using it yourself; there are some issues

- why isn't this perfect? unusable. want money back

- remember that these are all fake Frankenstein's monster instruments in one way or another

- learn to live with the limitations and make great music

If you give people the chance to jump ship in the third phase, many will.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 24, 2019)

star.keys said:


> Berlin Woodwinds has issues but it sounds far, and by a huge margin, musical to my ears (and I own it, including all expansions). It is possible to get convincing passages written using Berlin.


I don't doubt it. I imagine people will get very convincing passages writing using the Studio series woodwinds too along with many unconvincing passages because these are sample libraries. I imagine, however, the expressive range of the Berlin woodwinds is quite different from that of the Studio series (they are optimized to do different things and the Berlin series is designed to be more comprehensive), and I remember someone complaining that the Berlin winds are sometimes too expressive and so less than ideal for ensemble playing.

My recollection is that the main complaint against Berlin is that there are too many inconsistencies across the library, not being matched in terms of articulations or even available mics positions. I don't have any of the Berlin woodwind libraries, so this is solely by memory of what I've read.


----------



## ism (Feb 24, 2019)

With all respect to re-peat’s Uber hyper high-end demands of sample libraries, and the decades of skill and experience that it takes to ascend to this level of connoisseurship, for a $150 wind library this sounds completely unbeatable to me.

And the context I read this insinuation of terrible criticque is that utter savaging he gave the studio strings - which I have - was ultimately unhelpful and made very little sense to me in that a) I usually can’t even audibly reproduce most of the reported horrendous ‘issues’, and even when I can, b) they’re more niggles that death spirals of suckitude that they escalated into within vi-c discourse. 



Which is why Corey’s review was so good - it’s not uncritical he doen’t hides the flaws/limitations , it’s that he elucidates what the library actually is - which is not all things to all people. But a rather wonderful library judged by the standard of understanding just what kind of library it it. 


So I certainly respect that this is maybe a bit entry level for some people (remember that SSW combines years of sampling across 4 separate libraries) and also that there’s a clear design choice of depth of sonority over depth of sampling here’s - ie CSS, for instance, is more deeply sampled (4 dynamic layers vs 2, 4 legatos vs 2) but has far fewer articulations that’s SStS, and a much more homogeneous sound palette. And that different libraries and approaches to sampling of course serve different people in different ways at different times. 


That said, I hope we can keep the discussion here aware of what SStW *is* and not descend into savaging it for something it isn’t (and was never designed to be). 

Of course, it’s valid and helpful critical discourse to point out what’s it isn’t and what it’s limitations are. 

But as we’ve seen over and over in these pages, buyer’s remorse very often gives editorial cartoon like expressions of bitterness rather than helpful critical discussion. Not saying it is isn’t valid emotionally, just saying it not ultimately all that helpful.

But I really do hear some quite brilliant music being made by this library, and with a sonority I don’t think I wuite hear from anything else. And I’d like to hear it discussed more. (Also, I don’t think I have the energy for another death spiral of a thread like the studio strings which amplified re-peat’s criticisms far beyond what I believe he even intended dominating mostly of thread)

I guess the point is that it’s easy to savage *any* sample library, especially when you bought it wanting it to be a different library. But there’s a point at which this become is the sample library reviewing equivalent of an editorial cartoon - grotesquely charicaturing a deficiency or limitation of a libary rather than a helpful critical discourse towards understanding what the library actually is.

(Same thing with the Spitfire strings - i7ts a hard library to figure out, but understood for what it is, it’s a uniquely brilliant library. Unless you bought it think it was the Tina Guo cello, in which case it’s uniquely awful - and vice versa)

So, with this caveat, looking forward to more constructively critical discussion.


----------



## ism (Feb 24, 2019)

star.keys said:


> Berlin Woodwinds has issues but it sounds far, and by a huge margin, musical to my ears (and I own it, including all expansions). It is possible to get convincing passages written using Berlin.



There’s a lot to love about Berlin. Where SSW (and I think SStW) differ is, to my ear, the approach lyrical dimension.

I find main line BWW sound a bit flat compare to SSW, when exposed. Which is of course by design, since Exp B & C give you wonderfully lyrical lines.

And on the whole, apart from how much I love the Spitfire sound in general, I think SSW hits a very nice, and very fine balance between lyricality and that ability to blend in an ensemble. 

Contrast this to 8dio Claire - which are wonderful for hyper-lyrical moments. but outside those hyper lyrical moments, I find them badly behaved prima donnas who just won’t play well with others - both because of the mics and the sound engineering and because of the baked in dynamics arcs - wonderful for soloists, horrendous for ensembles, or even in some contrapuntal settings.

I’m seriously considering the Belin exp B though. Which to my ear adds a ‘restrained lyricism’ that you don’t get from either spitifre or Claire - though at the cost of arcs baked in on a single dynamic layer. With is a limitation that becalmed pronounced, for insance, when you contrast the Berlin Exp C bass clarinet with SSW (and SStW?) - which has a lovely lyricism in the vibrato, but which also brings a much larger dynamic range to its lyricism than the Berlin expansions single dynamic layer is capable of.

If there’s a weakness in SSW, it’s how lyrical the solo clarinet, and to a lesser extent the oboe, can go. Which is why I’ve been looking towards Berlin B and the Claire instruments.

That said, there are are a few passage in SStW demos in which the clarinet sounds really great. The walkthrough doesn’t really do justice to what it can do, so i’m Interested to learn more about this dimensional of expressiveness.

So much great stuff out there.


----------



## dogdad (Feb 24, 2019)

rhye said:


> Hey guys and gals! Here's a piece I just wrote and programmed just using the Spitfire Studio Orchestra (strings, brass and WW) and the Bernard Herrmann Composer Toolkit (mostly for percussion).




Bravo! Excellent Work!


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 24, 2019)

ism said:


> Contrast this to 8dio Claire - which are wonderful for hyper-lyrical moments. but outside those hyper lyrical moments, I find them badly behaved prima donnas who just won’t play well with others - both because of the mics and the sound engineering and because of the baked in dynamics arcs - wonderful for soloists, horrendous for ensembles, or even in some contrapuntal settings.



Claire was designed for solo concerto....I wouldnt even try them in essembles. As for solo, imho claire is the best there is. The clarinet is really nice and stands out. So i agree. Claire doesnt play nice with others....but it doesnt need to. 8dio CSW will probably be phenominal if it takes after CSS and CSB


----------



## muk (Feb 24, 2019)

From what I have heard of Spitfire Studio Woodwinds, I personally think that for about the same price you will be better off with VSL Woodwinds SE and SE+.


----------



## thereus (Feb 24, 2019)

Hard to know who to trust on here, sometimes...


----------



## tack (Feb 24, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> 8dio CSW will probably be phenominal if it takes after CSS and CSB


8dio?

Edit: Ah, Century Solo?

This whole industry is a minefield of acronym soup. I pine for the days of Sable and Mural.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 24, 2019)

tack said:


> 8dio?
> 
> Edit: Ah, Century Solo?



Actually im assuming 8dio CSW will have essemble of some sort.....unless someone knows otherwise?


----------



## rottoy (Feb 24, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Claire was designed for solo concerto....I wouldnt even try them in essembles. As for solo, imho claire is the best there is. The clarinet is really nice and stands out. So i agree. Claire doesnt play nice with others....but it doesnt need to. 8dio CSW will probably be phenominal if it takes after CSS and CSB


It's funny that you mention the Claire clarinet as a standout, I've always found it to be the weakest of the lineup. 
The shorts, arcs and general articulations are lovely, but I've always found the legato patch to be a tad pitchy in the transitions.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 24, 2019)

rottoy said:


> It's funny that you mention the Claire clarinet as a standout, I've always found it to be the weakest of the lineup.
> The shorts, arcs and general articulations are lovely, but I've always found the legato patch to be a tad pitchy in the transitions.



Probably because the clarinet is the hardest ww to sample. I struggle to find a clarinet that i like...and 8dio made a good attempt on theirs. Minor pitch issues can be worked around in most cases.


----------



## rottoy (Feb 24, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Probably because the clarinet is the hardest ww to sample. I struggle to find a clarinet that i like...and 8dio made a good attempt on theirs. Minor pitch issues can be worked around in most cases.


If you want a clarinet library as close to perfection as is currently possible, give the Fluffy Audio one a go.
It's tone and playability is fucking stellar, pardon my French.

https://fluffyaudio.com/shop/johndiamantifox-soloclarinet/


----------



## Geoff Grace (Feb 24, 2019)

thereus said:


> Hard to know who to trust on here, sometimes...


Ultimately, you need to trust yourself. No one else has your taste, set of needs, nor pair of ears; so no one else can decide what library will suit you best.

Don't get me wrong, other people's experience and opinions are valid and often worth considering; but I always take "the buck stops here" approach when deciding how to spend my bucks.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## ism (Feb 24, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Claire was designed for solo concerto....I wouldnt even try them in essembles. As for solo, imho claire is the best there is. The clarinet is really nice and stands out. So i agree. Claire doesnt play nice with others....but it doesnt need to. 8dio CSW will probably be phenominal if it takes after CSS and CSB



I'm guessing here, but my feeling is that the Claire instrument are more designed for the 8dio-esque in your face hybrid kind of sound. 

Nothing wrong with that of course, and it's great that there are soloist and concerto-like orchestral situations in which they work well. But before I realized just where the fit, I was very disappointed with the Claire oboe. 

It retrospect I was looking for something to augment the SSW oboe for more lyrical moments, but without going hyper in-your-face lyrical. I now think the Berlin exp B oboe is far more what I was looking for.

I've since come to love the Claire instrument, when used in the context they're designed for (though it would have been nice if the marketing could have been a little more helpful in sorting out exactly where this expressive space is). And in general its great to have so many options covering so much expressive space.

If only it wasn't so hard to figure out what goes where.


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 24, 2019)

rottoy said:


> If you want a clarinet library as close to perfection as is currently possible, give the Fluffy Audio one a go.
> It's tone and playability is fucking stellar, pardon my French.
> 
> https://fluffyaudio.com/shop/johndiamantifox-soloclarinet/



*SOLD !!* Can't wait for next $18./$28 'Deal' !!


----------



## Silentspace2000 (Feb 24, 2019)

Well I did get a chance to play around with the Studio Orchestra core after downloading it today and while I haven't had time to extensively go through it all, it doesn't reach the depths of awfulness described earlier. High expectations that fall short usually steer the rudder of discontent and maybe that fueled the other reviewers diatribe. I don't know...it's kind of what I expected given all the demos I listened to. I don't see this library as dragging compositions down because of a blatant lack of realism. While nothing is perfect, it add variety...another arrow in my quiver.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 24, 2019)

rottoy said:


> If you want a clarinet library as close to perfection as is currently possible, give the Fluffy Audio one a go.
> It's tone and playability is fucking stellar, pardon my French.
> 
> https://fluffyaudio.com/shop/johndiamantifox-soloclarinet/



It is amazing... but pretty expensive for 1 singular solo ww considering this is a hobby for me. It also comes down to how much id use it. I dont use a solo clarinet as often as say a solo violin....but when i need a solo clarinet.....the 8dio one is good enough.


----------



## chapbot (Feb 24, 2019)

I LOVE the sound of Spitfire Studio Strings (I have professional) but don't care for the programming - it seems uneven. I can get a good sound though if I blend them with a library that has programming I like but sound I'm not crazy about. I feared the same would be true for the brass and woodwinds so I passed and will stick with my VSL woodwinds and sample modeling brass.


----------



## Monkberry (Feb 25, 2019)

I think this library will benefit nicely from a midi breath controller. I just went online to purchase the TEControl BBC2. Not only Spitfire Studio Woodwinds, but all my other woodwind and brass libraries need this. There are so many nuances in the human performance and scripting can only get you so far.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 25, 2019)

Now that I've listened to more demos, I'm really thinking I might take this off my purchase list. Which is a huge bummer. The demos I've heard were great compositionally, but the woods just sound synthy and fake.

One thing I haven't heard, however, is an example of the woods drenched in reverb (to fit them into a hall with, say, CSS and CSB).

If anyone has any examples to share, I'm all ears!


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 25, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> Now that I've listened to more demos, I'm really thinking I might take this off my purchase list. Which is a huge bummer. The demos I've heard were great compositionally, but the woods just sound synthy and fake.
> 
> One thing I haven't heard, however, is an example of the woods drenched in reverb (to fit them into a hall with, say, CSS and CSB).
> 
> If anyone has any examples to share, I'm all ears!


I honestly don't hear this synthy quality when the instruments are being used right. I'm not fond of what I've heard of the clarinet (though @ism likes it), but I don't like the clarinet in the SSW either.


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 25, 2019)

Here is Paul's video using the Studio Woodwinds (mostly low-woodwinds), with other Sections like Studio Brass, ...etc.

I love the texture, and timbral detail in the low-woods. I would use the low woods quite a bit based on his video, It is more the mid-high range woodwinds that are harder to get right. I wonder why Paul skipped showing the Flute, Oboe, English Horn, and Clarinet in the Studio Series Video (below).

I think with some dsp treatments, and a good controlled performance (i.e. use of a breath controller), the Studio Woodwinds Pro mid-range instruments can sound quite good. I plan to experiment with various mid-range Studio Woodwinds instruments, and see how close I can get them to sound very good, and realistic, and to have the sound character that suits my taste.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 25, 2019)

muziksculp said:


> Here is Paul's video using the Studio Woodwinds (mostly low-woodwinds), with other Sections like Studio Brass, ...etc.


I found Paul's video a little weird. "Here, are a few patches from the libraries I like as well as some random multis I made with it." I think he would have done better talking through the use of the libraries in a composition. Partly because Paul's playing is often not very idiomatic for the instruments he has loaded up. This is a problem in his walkthroughs as well.


----------



## muziksculp (Feb 25, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> I found Paul's video a little weird. "Here, are a few patches from the libraries I like as well as some random multis I made with it." I think he would have done better talking through the use of the libraries in a composition. Partly because Paul's playing is often not very idiomatic for the instruments he has loaded up. This is a problem in his walkthroughs as well.



Yes, I agree.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 25, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> [...]Paul's playing is often not very idiomatic for the instruments he has loaded up. This is a problem in his walkthroughs as well.


I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this!


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 28, 2019)

Welp... I think I've decided to hold off on this one and limp by with Composer Cloud and Albion ONE.
Out of all the demos I've heard of this library, only one *kinda* puts the library in a good light - Oliver's "Purgatory." It's really unfortunate, because I had high hopes for this library.
Fingers still crossed for CSW before the end of the year!


----------



## Silentspace2000 (Feb 28, 2019)

After putting Studio Orchestra through the paces for a few days, I must say that the smaller room and close miking gives this library a totally different ambience. It's really takes a while to get acclimated to it and figure out how and where it fits. I don't have any other library that sounds like it. I'm not sure how to describe it but this library invades your space with an "in your face" sonic approach. I have Symphonic Strings and Albion One and when I listen to them side by side with Studio Orchestra....the different room and vibe really jumps out at you.


----------



## wst3 (Feb 28, 2019)

two more cents worth...

I have great respect for Piet, and many others here, but I read reviews with a filter - that is, not everyone is looking for the sound I am.

I love Alex's studio strings and studio brass, they are really good, and very useful libraries.

What I was looking for with these Spitfire libraries was something akin to studios in which I've worked - that is a smaller, dryer recording. I only own the Studio Strings thus far, but they have lived up to my expectations, and they fit in well. For reference I use 8Dio Adagio/Agitato, Cinematic Strings, Cinematic Studio Strings, Cinematic Studio Solo Strings, and Spitfire Alternative Solo Strings. And now Spitfire Studio Strings Core.

I have similarly odd collections of brass and winds libraries, and I am leaning towards purchasing the rest of their Studio Orchestra because I think it will be a useful addition. The only way to know for sure, unfortunately, is to purchase. I do with it were otherwise, but I do not begrudge developers the opportunity to protect their efforts.


----------



## NoamL (Feb 28, 2019)

Hey all,

I've been using these as my main template winds and unlike re-peat, have few complaints. The stuff I'm working on doesn't have featured winds very often, more like orchestral-context winds in Goldsmith/Williams style mockups, but I think these are fairly good instruments, at a fantastic intro price, with some important holes in the lineup (no cor anglais in core version, no esp / molto vib across the library are my two main issues).

That said, I had the morning off and spent it listening to the back half of _Firebird_ (the 50-minute ballet version) and are these winds in that ballpark? Not even close. Neither are any sampled winds I've ever heard, except perhaps VSL in the hands of @Guy Bacos .

I'm not sure the lyrical-solos approach to sampling makes a lot of sense. And I mean this across the instrument range, encompassing solo strings and so on. If you're on a project where they're actually letting you use winds and you're not cringing every time you open your email waiting for the infamous "Why can't it sound more like..." email, then you probably have the budget to record live winds. Same with live solo strings. They're cheap to get and will always sound better than samples, even samples of Tina Guo or Joshua Bell.

BTW when you look at the Firebird score you can see why we maybe don't use winds so much anymore. Every player with a beautiful individual part, quite detailed and with ever-changing nuances of color and articulation. That's a lot of work, and expertise. Then I look at my own use of winds in recent mockups and it's mostly doubling melody lines to soften brass or brighten strings, as well as creating runs or accents in action pieces. At 3 AM in the morning because the mockup has to get done. Being realistic, how good of a woodwinds library do I need? I'm not gonna be writing Swan Lake any time soon unfortunately. I need winds that just "get it done" fast and consistently. These winds have replaced HWW in my template for three reasons - it's Kontakt not PLAY, there's good & consistent articulation management, and they sound decent.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 28, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I've been using these as my main template winds and unlike re-peat, have few complaints. The stuff I'm working on doesn't have featured winds very often, more like orchestral-context winds in Goldsmith/Williams style mockups, but I think these are fairly good instruments, at a fantastic intro price, with some important holes in the lineup (no cor anglais in core version, no esp / molto vib across the library are my two main issues).
> 
> ...


I'm curious, Noam, because I know you're probably using these alongside CSS and CSB, how you make these fit? Do you have to drench them in reverb?
I've yet to hear a demo where this library is placed behind wet strings & brass, and maybe that's why I've gone from "yes!" to "meh." I plan on getting CSS and CSB soon, so your opinion is super valuable.
I think the dry room I hear in some of the demos actually brings out some of the programming that to me sounds icky (flute legato, for example). I'd really like to hear more of your opinion (or examples, if you have any!) Thanks, Noam!


----------



## NoamL (Feb 28, 2019)

Definitely put some Valhalla Room or other similar space on there. Woodwinds will sound okay with reverb because they don't excite the room as much as cellos, tubas etc. I think the levels of SSTW are pretty hot, I have them at -9 in my current template relative to CSS but that might change because I haven't written a ton with them. I think the onboard reverb is not so great so if you have the Core version, watch out because each instr loads with the reverb half on. Killing or enveloping the dry sound inside the wet sound is key instead of having a dry in your face sound and then a reverb tail. For that reason I always bus dry and wet returns separately to manage the levels.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 28, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Definitely put some Valhalla Room or other similar space on there. Woodwinds will sound okay with reverb because they don't excite the room as much as cellos, tubas etc. I think the levels of SSTW are pretty hot, I have them at -9 in my current template relative to CSS but that might change because I haven't written a ton with them. I think the onboard reverb is not so great so if you have the Core version, watch out because each instr loads with the reverb half on. Killing or enveloping the dry sound inside the wet sound is key instead of having a dry in your face sound and then a reverb tail. For that reason I always bus dry and wet returns separately to manage the levels.


You're making this decision pretty tough y'know 
Are you using the Pro version? If anything, I would only get Core at the moment. Would that still hold up as a go-to?


----------



## NoamL (Feb 28, 2019)

I only got core as well. Missing the EH, but I thought it was a good deal for the price  didn't get any other Spitfire Studio library.

My woodwinds folder is tiny compared to strings and brass, it was pretty much just Hollywood Winds and then a few freebies and cheap libraries. I would probably have got Adventure Woodwinds, Cinematic Studio Woodwinds or Hyperion Winds if those had come out before Spitfire. Overall, when you look at the competition available _rightnow_, e.g. Berlin Revive, Spitfire Symphonic Winds, or older libraries like VSL, I'm happy with these, and'm also curious what @re-peat is using that he likes.


----------



## MisteR (Feb 28, 2019)

rhye said:


> Hey guys and gals! Here's a piece I just wrote and programmed just using the Spitfire Studio Orchestra (strings, brass and WW) and the Bernard Herrmann Composer Toolkit (mostly for percussion).



Love it! ... I can hear the camera movement.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 28, 2019)

Paul's video here gives some good examples of the Studio Woodwinds in action. I think it's much more informative than his walkthrough.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 28, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> Paul's video here gives some good examples of the Studio Woodwinds in action. I think it's much more informative than his walkthrough.



I’m literally watching this as I type! He’s using the Pro version with some extra mics, but I think I’m getting a much better idea of how these really sound. Will report back once I finish it


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 28, 2019)

Damn. That video really did do a better job of showcasing the library than his own walkthrough. He played idiomatically (for once) and shows how one would actually use it in a practical context, and with reverb. I think it would do Spitfire a lot of good to do something like this for the rest of the studio lineup. I’m guessing that’s already in the works.

I’m probably gonna buy it now, based off of that video alone.

...and Noam’s opinions, of course


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 28, 2019)

Easily confused here ….  
What is this saying /inferring about CORE vs PRO ? 
Ready to purchase SF _ SSt Orchestra CORE, but PRO is not possible … and now less than 24 hours for Intro pricing. HELP !


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 28, 2019)

sostenuto said:


> Easily confused here ….
> What is this saying /inferring about CORE vs PRO ?
> Ready to purchase SF _ SSt Orchestra CORE, but PRO is not possible … and now less than 24 hours for Intro pricing. HELP !


I don't think you need pro for the basic sound. Paul shows how the variety of mics is useful for positioning the sound, giving it width, depth, and detail in context, but the basic sound is in the tree mic. What you could hear well in this video was the legato was fine when played reasonably idiomatically. He also gave a much better run through of some of the shorts, especially differences in velocity. Core looks like a solid buy at this price. Pro looks really flexible with the additional mics if you need that sometime in the future.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 28, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> Damn. That video really did do a better job of showcasing the library than his own walkthrough. He played idiomatically (for once) and shows how one would actually use it in a practical context, and with reverb. I think it would do Spitfire a lot of good to do something like this for the rest of the studio lineup. I’m guessing that’s already in the works.


I don't know. This was released on Paul's channel, after he did that weird video a couple of days ago on his favorite patches and idiosyncratic multis as added content for the Studio Orchestra. That makes me think that Paul was doing what he said here, simply illustrating how to write and not write for samples. He was using the Studio Woodwinds no doubt because he thought it might help promote them, but I really doubt that illustrating them was his principal aim, even though this video was like 1000% better on that count than the official walkthrough.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 28, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> I don't think you need pro for the basic sound. Paul shows how the variety of mics is useful for positioning the sound, giving it width, depth, and detail in context, but the basic sound is in the tree mic. What you could hear well in this video was the legato was fine when played reasonably idiomatically. He also gave a much better run through of some of the shorts, especially differences in velocity. Core looks like a solid buy at this price. Pro looks really flexible with the additional mics if you need that sometime in the future.


I absolutely agree. I don’t quite have the budget (and maybe not the need) for Pro either. But Paul shows off the main tree mic alone here quite a bit and it sounds pretty good!!


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 28, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> I don't know. This was released on Paul's channel, after he did that weird video a couple of days ago on his favorite patches and idiosyncratic multis as added content for the Studio Orchestra. That makes me think that Paul was doing what he said here, simply illustrating how to write and not write for samples. He was using the Studio Woodwinds no doubt because he thought it might help promote them, but I really doubt that illustrating them was his principal aim, even though this video was like 1000% better on that count than the official walkthrough.


You’re probably right, his aim is, like you said, to illustrate how not to write with samples, and how to make them sound good in a space. I inferred that he’s planning more of these based off this one just being woodwinds (so it’d make sense to release videos for brass, strings, etc.). I imagine, however, he’ll show off both ranges of libraries in each subsequent video (symphonic and studio) like he did here. Or...at least I hope he will.


----------



## jbuhler (Feb 28, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> You’re probably right, his aim is, like you said, to illustrate how not to write with samples, and how to make them sound good in a space. I inferred that he’s planning more of these based off this one just being woodwinds (so it’d make sense to release videos for brass, strings, etc.). I imagine, however, he’ll show off both ranges of libraries in each subsequent video (symphonic and studio) like he did here. Or...at least I hope he will.


I agree. I have very much liked his videos doing this kind of thing. Have you looked at the one he did for Junkyard Sortie, which also features the Studio Woodwinds (since it was his demo)? (His midi doesn't always sound so good in that one, if you want to give yourself doubts again. The whole mix for that sounds somewhat askew to my ear.) 



He did a similar video for Ravine Chase, which was his demo for the Studio Brass, but also used a beta version of the woodwinds (I recall the woodwinds sounding good in that one).


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Feb 28, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> (His midi doesn't always sound so good in that one, if you want to give yourself doubts again.)


Ha! 

Yeah, I’ve watched all his videos. Ravine Chase was great, but I agree the whole mix of Junkyard Sortie is goofed somehow, and you’re right that I can’t stand the woodwinds there!!

However, watching his process is super informational and inspiring. But I’ll avoid re-watching the Junkyard Sortie one


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Mar 1, 2019)

Welp...
I bought the Core version.
Hoping to have some fun with it this weekend!


----------



## axb312 (Apr 28, 2019)

Owners of Studio Woodwinds, could you post some demos/ examples?


----------



## Bluemount Score (Apr 29, 2019)

rottoy said:


> If you want a clarinet library as close to perfection as is currently possible, give the Fluffy Audio one a go.
> It's tone and playability is fucking stellar, pardon my French.
> 
> https://fluffyaudio.com/shop/johndiamantifox-soloclarinet/


Do you have a similiar recommendation for Piccolo?


----------



## rottoy (Apr 29, 2019)

Meetyhtan said:


> Do you have a similiar recommendation for Piccolo?


 I don't have a standalone piccolo library, unfortunately. Currently using the one in Cinewinds Core and I'm loving it. The softest dynamic of Cinewinds Core is something the demos never really showcase and it's too bad, because it's by far the best part of the library.
This is the close mic, using the 'articulations' patch. Sustain to trigger legato and one keyswitch to trigger the trills. External reverb is ValhallaRoom.

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/cw-core-piccolo-test-close-mic-with-external-reverb-mp3.19677/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## Bluemount Score (Apr 29, 2019)

rottoy said:


> Currently using the one in Cinewinds Core and I'm loving it.


That's actually the one I had in mind whatsoever. Thanks, the demo is great!


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 29, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> I agree. I have very much liked his videos doing this kind of thing. Have you looked at the one he did for Junkyard Sortie, which also features the Studio Woodwinds (since it was his demo)? (His midi doesn't always sound so good in that one, if you want to give yourself doubts again. The whole mix for that sounds somewhat askew to my ear.)
> 
> 
> 
> He did a similar video for Ravine Chase, which was his demo for the Studio Brass, but also used a beta version of the woodwinds (I recall the woodwinds sounding good in that one).




Wow, I never saw this video before. The mix does sound a bit odd to my ears.

Still happy with my Hein woodwinds, though videos like this are kind of swaying me to give the SStWW a try. Simple, but effective...and I really like the glassy sound.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Apr 29, 2019)

this sounds like an snes rpg to me. Already got magicbox for that. 

swam woodwinds are a better bet imo


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Apr 29, 2019)

axb312 said:


> Owners of Studio Woodwinds, could you post some demos/ examples?


Here's a little tune, the solo flute and clarinet are from SStW (the core version, so only the main tree mic):



rottoy said:


> I don't have a standalone piccolo library, unfortunately. Currently using the one in Cinewinds Core and I'm loving it. The softest dynamic of Cinewinds Core is something the demos never really showcase and it's too bad, because it's by far the best part of the library.
> This is the close mic, using the 'articulations' patch. Sustain to trigger legato and one keyswitch to trigger the trills. External reverb is ValhallaRoom.
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/cw-core-piccolo-test-close-mic-with-external-reverb-mp3.19677/][/AUDIOPLUS]


Well this is just friggin' pretty! I really should invest in CineWinds, too...


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 29, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> this sounds like an snes rpg to me. Already got magicbox for that.
> 
> swam woodwinds are a better bet imo



I feel really dumb. Could you tell me what is a snes rpg, please?

FWIW, I think the video sounds excellent.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 29, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> Here's a little tune, the solo flute and clarinet are from SStW (the core version, so only the main tree mic):
> 
> 
> Well this is just friggin' pretty! I really should invest in CineWinds, too...




I'm wondering if the flute could have used a little bit of compression but nice! Did you use the onboard reverb (if any at all) on the individual instruments?


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Apr 29, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I'm wondering if the flute could have used a little bit of compression but nice! Did you use the onboard reverb (if any at all) on the individual instruments?


Thanks! Yeah, the flute is kind of all over the place dynamically. Drawing better CCs probably would've helped a bit too!
If memory serves me right (I'm not on my studio computer at the moment), I think I just used ChromaVerb within Logic. The Studio Woodwinds library really comes to life with reverb. However, I don't like the sound of the one that's included with the library.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Apr 29, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I feel really dumb. Could you tell me what is a snes rpg, please?


The poster is likening the sound to something produced by a 90's videos game console. Which I guess is an insult or compliment depending on your perspective!


----------



## constaneum (Apr 29, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> Here's a little tune, the solo flute and clarinet are from SStW (the core version, so only the main tree mic):
> 
> 
> Well this is just friggin' pretty! I really should invest in CineWinds, too...




Actually, not too bad. Btw, what's that solo violin? What library is that ?


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Apr 29, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> The poster is likening the sound to something produced by a 90's videos game console. Which I guess is an insult or compliment depending on your perspective!


magicbox cost me like 7$ and it's pretty awesome.

that said - its like absolute perfect pitch combined with the unnatural closeness and lifeless performance. Something just sounds like sampling from the mid 90s here, and not in a nostalgia inducing way.

maybe I was too harsh, and it's closer to n64


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 29, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> magicbox cost me like 7$ and it's pretty awesome.
> 
> that said - its like absolute perfect pitch combined with the unnatural closeness and lifeless performance. Something just sounds like sampling from the mid 90s here, and not in a nostalgia inducing way.
> 
> maybe I was too harsh, and it's closer to n64



Hokay, I think I know this one! Nintendo 64, right? (I feel like Cap in the first Avengers movie lol!)

I must have really bad ears, because I honestly thought that video was a very good (if unintentional) ad for the library.


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 29, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Still happy with my Hein woodwinds, though videos like this are kind of swaying me to give the SStWW a try. Simple, but effective...and I really like the glassy sound.


I’ve thought about picking up the core version as second chairs to use with SSW and have different players on the parts when writing for woodwinds in pairs. I can’t say that I like the sound of the library for solo work but from the examples I've heard the library does seem to blend reasonably well.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Apr 29, 2019)

constaneum said:


> Actually, not too bad.


Thank you!


constaneum said:


> Btw, what's that solo violin? What library is that ?


It's actually the free violin from Performance Samples! It's niche, but in the right context it's amazing.
https://performancesamples.com/soloviolinlegato/


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 29, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> I’ve thought about picking up the core version as second chairs to use with SSW and have different players on the parts when writing for woodwinds in pairs. I can’t say that I like the sound of the library for solo work but from the examples I've heard the library does seem to blend reasonably well.



I'm actually more interested in SSW now that you mentioned the blending. If SSW has a similar tone/sheen (were they each recorded in the same hall/room? Forgive me if this is a dumb question) I might have to pick them both up Wish List day.


----------



## axb312 (Apr 29, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> Here's a little tune, the solo flute and clarinet are from SStW (the core version, so only the main tree mic):
> 
> 
> Well this is just friggin' pretty! I really should invest in CineWinds, too...



Nice. Thank you! More please if you have them...


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Apr 29, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I'm actually more interested in SSW now that you mentioned the blending. If SSW has a similar tone/sheen (were they each recorded in the same hall/room? Forgive me if this is a dumb question) I might have to pick them both up Wish List day.


They were not recorded in the same room. They were both recorded at AIR Studios, but SSW (and the rest of the "symphonic" series, chamber, and solo strings) was recorded in Lyndhurst Hall, while SStW (and the rest of the "studio" series) was recorded in Studio 1.


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 29, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I'm actually more interested in SSW now that you mentioned the blending. If SSW has a similar tone/sheen (were they each recorded in the same hall/room? Forgive me if this is a dumb question) I might have to pick them both up Wish List day.


No, SSW was recorded in the big Air hall; SStW, like all of the Studio series, was recorded in Air Studio One. So SStW is a much drier sound and would need to be worked to get it to sit with the stuff recorded in the big hall. Mixing other stuff Spitfire has recorded in Studio One with the libraries recorded in the big hall hasn't proved much of a problem to me, so I don't foresee an issue, but you never know for sure until you have to do it—at least I never know for sure until I have to do it.

There is to my ears an evenness of sound to SStW library that I think would make them work well as second chairs.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 29, 2019)

I've found SStWW works great with other dry libraries like the Hein and EWH. I just slap Spaces II ib the bus and work from there. Try it out, you might find yourself delighted with _both_ the solo and ensemble wws!


----------



## Alex Fraser (Apr 29, 2019)

To me, SStWW sounds amazing one minute, dull and flat the next.
So my takeaway - once again - is that the sound all depends on who's in the driving seat. I guess props to Spitfire for creating such a pliable library.


----------



## axb312 (Apr 29, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> They were not recorded in the same room. They were both recorded at AIR Studios, but SSW (and the rest of the "symphonic" series, chamber, and solo strings) was recorded in Lyndhurst Hall, while SStW (and the rest of the "studio" series) was recorded in Studio 1.


How does having only the T1 mic in the core version affect mixes? Do you miss the close mic perspective?


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Apr 29, 2019)

axb312 said:


> How does having only the T1 mic in the core version affect mixes? Do you miss the close mic perspective?


Since I don't have the other mic options, I'm only going off of other demos I've heard, but...
In my opinion, if you're just using this library in an orchestral setting, where you intend on having the winds placed in the back of the orchestra, the core version is fine.
The other mics would come in handy for solo things, where you want to place the player in front of the orchestra, or in some chamber ensemble settings, etc. But for what I need, the main tree mic is enough.


----------



## Apostate (Apr 29, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> Since I don't have the other mic options, I'm only going off of other demos I've heard, but...
> In my opinion, if you're just using this library in an orchestral setting, where you intend on having the winds placed in the back of the orchestra, the core version is fine.
> The other mics would come in handy for solo things, where you want to place the player in front of the orchestra, or in some chamber ensemble settings, etc. But for what I need, the main tree mic is enough.



Sounds like the Professional SStWW is going to be staying on my Wish List...SALE COMING!


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Apr 30, 2019)

boxheadboy50 said:


> Since I don't have the other mic options, I'm only going off of other demos I've heard, but...
> In my opinion, if you're just using this library in an orchestral setting, where you intend on having the winds placed in the back of the orchestra, the core version is fine.
> The other mics would come in handy for solo things, where you want to place the player in front of the orchestra, or in some chamber ensemble settings, etc. But for what I need, the main tree mic is enough.




if you plan on using this in an orchestral setting - why wouldn't you just buy SSW for pete's sake? The one actually recorded for orchestral stuff. The woodwinds are easily some of the best tones(despite poor legato) and the symphonic winds using sustain patches with no legato will probably sound better than any combination of reverb + SStww


----------



## Denkii (Apr 30, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> if you plan on using this in an orchestral setting - why wouldn't you just buy SSW for pete's sake? The one actually recorded for orchestral stuff. The woodwinds are easily some of the best tones(despite poor legato) and the symphonic winds using sustain patches with no legato will probably sound better than any combination of reverb + SStww


Because some people see WW as an add on to their palette and SSW is 3x the price of SStWW core?


----------



## ism (Apr 30, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> if you plan on using this in an orchestral setting - why wouldn't you just buy SSW for pete's sake? The one actually recorded for orchestral stuff. The woodwinds are easily some of the best tones(despite poor legato) and the symphonic winds using sustain patches with no legato will probably sound better than any combination of reverb + SStww



@Parsifal666 offers some helpful insight to more or less this question on this thread:

https://vi-control.net/community/th...wish-list-announced.81613/page-2#post-4380828


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

Denkii said:


> Because some people see WW as an add on to their palette and SSW is 3x the price of SStWW core?



I'm finding the main reason I'm losing my interest in SSW because I just simply don't need another wet SA library. If I go wet I'm going for BWW.

SStW is also apparently terrific to mix and match with both BHCT and pretty much any one of the EWH and Chris Hein libraries...the dryness is second only to the excellent tone I'm hearing (in friend and members' demos) in solidifying my decision to purchase SStW.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Apr 30, 2019)

ism said:


> @Parsifal666 offers some helpful insight to more or less this question on this thread:
> 
> https://vi-control.net/community/th...wish-list-announced.81613/page-2#post-4380828


vague terms like "dimension and direction" over his CHWW?

From what it sounds like, he appreciates his drier sound because of it's flexibility - but I can't see the purpose in buying another less flexible library than he has for terms like "dimension and direction". It might sound more like an acoustic instrument than CHWW at the sample level, but CH instruments are much more sophisticated than SFA's when it comes to programming/scripting. 

If he wants a real orchestral sound with some flexibility - then SSW has a great tone. 

If he wants flexibility AND a real orchestral sound - he's already planning on purchasing BWW, which comes with 2 different close microphones and a rather near sounding ORTF That gives him a lot more tonal options over SSW which sounds great, but only has 3 microphones to play with. 

On one hand you could argue SStWW is cheap right now, but if you're going to replace it - it's not saving you any money. If you like the sound of the samples as is - by all means, get it. But the strategy of buying something for 3 digits to hold you over while you dump reverbs on it to make it sound like something you'd be almost halfway to if you just saved your money - seems like a decision I can't really suggest. Especially those on a budget.


----------



## Denkii (Apr 30, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> I'm finding the main reason I'm losing my interest in SSW because I just simply don't need another wet SA library. If I go wet I'm going for BWW.
> 
> SStW is also apparently terrific to mix and match with both BHCT and pretty much any one of the EWH and Chris Hein libraries...the dryness is second only to the excellent tone I'm hearing (in friend and members' demos) in solidifying my decision to purchase SStW.


Plus it's only a third of the price.
Accept this statement as a valid option for people to consider!


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

I think the terms I used are quite understandable, including by you.

However, out of respect I'll agree to disagree. I ultimately buy what I'm really liking for sound, and this library has that, all day money, for me.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

Denkii said:


> Plus it's only a third of the price.
> Accept this statement as a valid option for people to consider!



Money is no problem on this end, my friend.

I stand by what I say.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Apr 30, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> SStW is also apparently terrific to mix and match with both BHCT


This is honestly the most compelling reason I've heard anyone put forward. In your specific case - I know you have much love for BHTC, and the tone of SStWW would probably be a better pairing than paying for SSW just to use close mics

I think either spitfire winds are a better pair for the BH library than BWW.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> This is honestly the most compelling reason I've heard anyone put forward. In your specific case - I know you have much love for BHTC, and the tone of SStWW would probably be a better pairing than paying for SSW just to use close mics
> 
> I think either spitfire winds are a better pair for the BH library than BWW.



I think you're completely right on that last...but I do have Ark 1 and 2 to mix and match with BWW, as I stated earlier.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

And yes, I'm ridiculously cuckoo for BHCT, still!


----------



## Denkii (Apr 30, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Money is no problem on this end, my friend.
> 
> I stand by what I say.


Patronize me harder, daddy.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Apr 30, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> vague terms like "dimension and direction" over his CHWW?
> 
> From what it sounds like, he appreciates his drier sound because of it's flexibility - but I can't see the purpose in buying another less flexible library than he has for terms like "dimension and direction". It might sound more like an acoustic instrument than CHWW at the sample level, but CH instruments are much more sophisticated than SFA's when it comes to programming/scripting.
> 
> ...


It sounds like you're dismissing SStW as a sub-par library. Also, saying SSW has a great tone may be less vague than saying dimension and direction, but it's not a more valid reason to buy a library.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Apr 30, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> Money is no problem on this end, my friend.


Maybe I'll send *you* my wishlist


----------



## Denkii (Apr 30, 2019)

I don't understand why we feel personally attacked by someone saying that they like the sound of one library over another only because we might disagree. If they know what they want to get and they feel good about it just give them your blessings.

If it turns out differently you can always have that nice feeling of "told you so" (you don't have to say it though).


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Apr 30, 2019)

I have no problem if someone actually likes the sound. I've expressed that I don't - but that's not my criticism.

I only have to say something when people are literally playing on trying to douse it in reverb to make it an orchestral library - instead of just buying an orchestral library.

Parsiboi, this is a reminder of what the SSW close(with a tree actually blended in - believe it or not) sounds like

And even the tree for SSW sounds drier than you'd expect. That said - I only blended enough tree in to give it a 3d feel(instead of mono close mic) and if you're absolutely needing a version with just close I'm sure I can export it tomorrow when I get off work. Only posting this because despite the general hit/miss with the legatos(hence why some patches I prefer just using sustains) the library isn't untamable ambience - it's actually just a really good room for woodwinds(its actually the only SS series that I like the tone of)

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/sswclose-mp3.19706/][/AUDIOPLUS]

that's clarinet, bass flute, bassoon.


----------



## boxheadboy50 (Apr 30, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> [...] to make it an orchestral library - instead of just buying an orchestral library.


What makes an "orchestral library" in your opinion?


----------



## ism (Apr 30, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> vague terms like "dimension and direction" over his CHWW?
> 
> From what it sounds like, he appreciates his drier sound because of it's flexibility - but I can't see the purpose in buying another less flexible library than he has for terms like "dimension and direction". It might sound more like an acoustic instrument than CHWW at the sample level, but CH instruments are much more sophisticated than SFA's when it comes to programming/scripting.
> 
> ...





Well I agree with you about the merits of SSW - it absolutely one of my favorite libraries of all times.

And yes, the concept of "dimension" is a bit vague. But I also think it captures a concept that I think I'm starting to just about get my head around from my experience with LCO, L&SCS and StSS. There's *some* kind of place that the dryness (and lots of other related engineering choices probably) lets you get to with these libraries (and SStW) that SWW and the other Air Lyndhurst libraries.


So I wasn't negating your point at all, just that I'm trying to understand myself why someone woulld either justify buying SStW either when they already have SSW (ie myself) or choose SStW over SSW, and the discussion on that thread has been helpful to me, so maybe its helpful to others.

But you're right a lot of this is vague - or maybe, abstract and subjective would be helpful words here also - so its good that there's lots of discussion on just what any of this might actually mean


----------



## ism (Apr 30, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> I have no problem if someone actually likes the sound. I've expressed that I don't - but that's not my criticism.
> 
> I only have to say something when people are literally playing on trying to douse it in reverb to make it an orchestral library - instead of just buying an orchestral library.
> 
> ...




Yes - this echoes the point I was trying to make, if rather more impressionistically, on that other thread. The close mics on SSW are, well pretty close, and I find them indispensable. Not like the close mics in, well the extreme case is Albion 5 where the close mics, on the strings at least, are no so much indistinguishable from the other mics as so equally beautiful as to be virtually irrelevant.

(Or, less hyperbolically, where the concept behind the library seems to have a very different idea of what a close mic needs to do.).


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

ProfoundSilence said:


> I have no problem if someone actually likes the sound. I've expressed that I don't - but that's not my criticism.
> 
> I only have to say something when people are literally playing on trying to douse it in reverb to make it an orchestral library - instead of just buying an orchestral library.
> 
> ...



Me likey!  \m/


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

Oh no! Now I want SSW lol!

Hmmm, Wish List day less than a week away....


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 30, 2019)

[


Parsifal666 said:


> Oh no! Now I want SSW lol!
> 
> Hmmm, Wish List day less than a week away....


It's a good library. I like everything except the solo clarinet. Personally, I also have not had any issues with the legato for the kinds of things I write.


----------



## ism (Apr 30, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> [
> 
> It's a good library. I like everything except the solo clarinet. Personally, I also have not had any issues with the legato for the kinds of things I write.



The solo bass clarinet is amazing though.


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 30, 2019)

ism said:


> The solo bass clarinet is amazing though.


Agreed, the bass clarinet is excellent. The clarinets a2 is generally fine as well. It's just the solo clarinet that rarely plays the way I think it should. Sometimes I end up substituting clarinets a2 for the solo clarinet, though that's often not a great substitute either. I also have the Herring clarinet, which sounds great, but I've found it hard to get it to sit in the orchestra for spot solo work. It's a bit like the Virharmonic solo strings in that respect.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

I just really like how crisp those WW samples are. There's an enchanting bite to them that I don't hear in most other libraries (though the Hein is pretty damn good at cutting through a mix). 

Now I'm flummoxed lol! I just really, _really_ like these woodwinds (_both_ camps).


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> Agreed, the bass clarinet is excellent. The clarinets a2 is generally fine as well. It's just the solo clarinet that rarely plays the way I think it should. Sometimes I end up substituting clarinets a2 for the solo clarinet, though that's often not a great substitute either. I also have the Herring clarinet, which sounds great, but I've found it hard to get it to sit in the orchestra for spot solo work. It's a bit like the Virharmonic solo strings in that respect.



When you say Clarinets A2 do you mean there are ensembles in SSW? I ask because the SSTWW ensembles go by A3. That's one of the reasons I avoided SSW, as I've wanted a couple of good ensemble ww library for months now.


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 30, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> When you say Clarinets A2 do you mean there are ensembles in SSW? I ask because the SSTWW ensembles go by A3. That's one of the reasons I avoided SSW, as I've wanted a couple of good ensemble ww library for months now.


The ensemble patches in SSW are all a2. In SStW they are a3. Flutes, oboes, clarinets and bassoons all have a2 patches as well as the solo patches, and the a2 patches all have legato, long, at least two shorts, and major and minor trills. 

Random additional comment: I also really like the bass and alto flute patches.


----------



## ism (Apr 30, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> Agreed, the bass clarinet is excellent. The clarinets a2 is generally fine as well. It's just the solo clarinet that rarely plays the way I think it should. Sometimes I end up substituting clarinets a2 for the solo clarinet, though that's often not a great substitute either. I also have the Herring clarinet, which sounds great, but I've found it hard to get it to sit in the orchestra for spot solo work. It's a bit like the Virharmonic solo strings in that respect.



My takeaway is that its just not possible to have too many clarinet.

I bought the 8dio oboe and the fluffy clarinet to augment SSW for more lyrical passages. I've actually since discovered that with a bit more skill the SSW oboe can actually do quite beautiful lyrical lies, including ones that the Claire oboe can't (though it has its own very significant strengths). 

Clarinets though. The fluffy clarinet is great. But I still want the Claire. And BWW Exp B. And a (hypothetical future) spitfire version of a virtuosic clarinet soloist. They all do such different things. And I've also since discover some great strengths in the SSW clarinet - the short are unparalleled, for instance, and you can coax lyrical squeaks with a bit of practice, though not quite a squeaky as the 8dio Claire. 

Which is what make be wonder if the 'harshness' (again, not quite the right word) of the dry SStW might be fun to also have for a very particularly type of, lets call it a 'fragile yet strong' variant of a lyrical clarinet line.


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 30, 2019)

ism said:


> My takeaway is that its just not possible to have too many clarinet.
> 
> I bought the 8dio oboe and the fluffy clarinet to augment SSW for more lyrical passages. I've actually since discovered that with a bit more skill the SSW oboe can actually do quite beautiful lyrical lies, including ones that the Claire oboe can't (though it has its own very significant strengths).
> 
> ...


I very much like the SSW oboe, though I gather many find it problematic. It's always behaved well doing the things I ask it to do. I also think the English horn is nice. I may have to try the Fluffy clarinet.


----------



## ism (Apr 30, 2019)

I think my initial difficult with the SSW oboe was largely that I didn't understand oboes. But it has really repaid the time I've spent working with it, and I think I'de consider it something of a highlight now.

And yes, the Cor Anglais is another highlight.

Also the Contrabassoon.

And the Contrabass Clarinet.

Easily one of my top 1 or two desert island libraries. 

Could it be even better augmented with SStW? If any one has demos, I'd love to hear them...


----------



## Parsifal666 (Apr 30, 2019)

Argh! Oh well, I might just have to buy both...hey, it's a _sale_ right? 

That fact that there are ensembles in SSW changes the ballgame for me. I thought they were all solo patches. Plus all those mics....


----------

