# Spitfire Audio Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations



## Beans

I figure we should keep certain types of commentary out of the Commercial Announcements board.









Spitfire Audio — Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations






www.spitfireaudio.com


----------



## method1

BBCSO owners: "Oh so THAT'S where the dynamic layers went"


----------



## MA-Simon

I don't know yet...

from what I could gather it does seem to be only a very basic selection of shorts and sustains, no separated sections.

Albion at least had legatos? But it's priced like a full Albion.

For me this release feels weirdly uninspired.


----------



## zeng

no legato??


----------



## robgb

So it's basically Albion One recorded at Abbey Road instead of Air? I do like the slightly drier studio sound, however. I'm hoping they eventually release something that has individual instruments rather than these combined things.


----------



## Beans

This is like that "friendship ended" meme.

Friendship ended with Maida Vale. Now Abbey Road is my best friend.


----------



## MA-Simon

Beans said:


> Friendship ended with BBCSO. Now Abbey Road is my best friend.


Yeah, I have no hope that they will finish either anymore. After all they dropped the BML, Symphonic Series, now BBCSO and want me to now invest in yet another? I can not make music with microphone positions, but with detailed instruments. Which for some reason spitfire decided to stop developing.

Edit: Maybe... not. New quotes suggest there is more underway. Tentatively hopefull.


----------



## MonsieurBasile

From the spitfire page- "Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations is the first in a series of Film Scoring Selections recorded in Studio One. The next titles in this symphonic series will arrive early 2021. These will be smaller, more focused libraries inspired by classic films – offering pre-orchestrated instrument pairings and themes. Each of these Selections is designed to help you accomplish a simple task phenomenally well, such as creating achingly beautiful melodic low string lines with just one simple legato patch. They will work seamlessly alongside Orchestral Foundations as well as on their own."

From this, I get the sense that there will be more specific patches in the future, but all will be ensemble based.


----------



## robgb

MonsieurBasile said:


> From this, I get the sense that there will be more specific patches in the future, but all will be ensemble based.


Ugh. I'm out.


----------



## paulmatthew

robgb said:


> So it's basically Albion One recorded at Abbey Road instead of Air? I do like the slightly drier studio sound, however. I'm hoping they eventually release something that has individual instruments rather than these combined things.


Doubtful. This was on the Foundations page : Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations is the first in a series of Film Scoring Selections recorded in Studio One. The next titles in this symphonic series will arrive early 2021. These will be smaller, more focused libraries inspired by classic films – offering pre-orchestrated instrument pairings and themes. Each of these Selections is designed to help you accomplish a simple task phenomenally well, such as creating achingly beautiful melodic low string lines with just one simple legato patch. They will work seamlessly alongside Orchestral Foundations as well as on their own.

Pre-orchestrated instrument pairings would most likely indicate no individual sections are coming but the addition of legato to certain "pairings".


----------



## axb312

Does anyone actually use so many mics?


----------



## FinGael

zeng said:


> no legato??



IMO, a library like this without a legato is like a car without tires. The sound otherwise is very nice.


----------



## brandowalk

Listening to the demos, it sounds very cinematic and well recorded of course.

I'm thinking they are targeting a wider, more general audience of new music makers with pre-orchestrated instruments. Makes sense from a $s perspective. But like many here I'm sure, was hoping for the next level of detailed individual instrument sampling.

It looks like the future series will also be pre-orchestrated. Hoping that could change with feedback.


----------



## merty

Sounds like SSS layered with BBCSO. The releases are planned from hobbyist to pro? 

Nice sound, more mix options were the right thing to include, proper number of dynamic layers...no wonder although an ensemble library its 70gb.


----------



## styledelk

I'm lamenting the lack of the mangled and loop content already. Not really, since I mostly ignore it, but also that stuff was part of the value package.


----------



## robgb

So, it's clearly a sketching library that could potentially be used for a final product if you aren't too finicky about detail. I am annoyed, however, about the teasing of what the other libraries will be. I know this is Spitfire's never ending marketing at work, but for godsakes just tell us what you have planned so we can determine whether or not we want to dive into this particular ecosystem.


----------



## yiph2

robgb said:


> So it's basically Albion One recorded at Abbey Road instead of Air? I do like the slightly drier studio sound, however. I'm hoping they eventually release something that has individual instruments rather than these combined things.


Paul mentioned that at the end of the video fyi


----------



## redlester

brandowalk said:


> Listening to the demos, it sounds very cinematic and well recorded of course.
> 
> I'm thinking they are targeting a wider, more general audience of new music makers with pre-orchestrated instruments. Makes sense from a $s perspective. But like many here I'm sure, was hoping for the next level of detailed individual instrument sampling.



Exactly my thoughts. I don't think VI-Control regulars are the main target customer for this.
And yes, it sounds really good on the walkthrough.


----------



## alfred tapscott

they lost me a couple of super mega sul tastos ago...


----------



## peladio

zeng said:


> no legato??



Since they imitate Apple with their marketing I wouldn't be surprised if we should provide our own scripting "as a feature" when they release a new product month..or pay $99 for legato functionality..

But yeah..same thing all over again..just different location..

If only some of the actual innovators such as Jasper Blunk or Aaron Venture could get the access to these studios..


----------



## brandowalk

redlester said:


> I don't think VI-Control regulars are the main target customer for this.
> And yes, it sounds really good on the walkthrough.


Haha true. Although I'm sure they are looking at this thread as we type!  With that in mind, and as a big fan of SA as their Mural/Sable series is basically the reason I re-engaged as a composer... 

Congrats Spitfire on a fantastic sounding library! Glad to see the collaboration with Abbey Road Studios (especially with all of those amazing ribbon mics and Neumanns shown in the picture!). Thank you for continuing to push forward.


----------



## jononotbono

MA-Simon said:


> no separated sections.



Except at the end Paul does say they will release a modular part that is more detailed than any previous Spitfire release. Which to me means that this should be more detailed than the SSO. If so, I can't wait for this!

Maybe it's because I'm English.


----------



## Tatu

zeng said:


> no legato??


Who knows. Maybe they include them in an upcoming, game changing expansion.. or maybe they just couldn't get them to work in their player and figured the dumbest will buy it anyways?


----------



## Al Maurice

So this new library is costed at the same price point as BBC SO Core, "the only library you'll ever need...", yet it has less articulations and is almost double the size in capacity. Not sure what that says?

And we now have lots of ensemble libraries from SA, all recorded in different spaces!

Although perhaps some of the shorts, make up from the lack of them elsewhere...


----------



## MA-Simon

jononotbono said:


> Except at the end Paul does say they will release a modular part that is more detailed than any previous Spitfire release.


That would be something I would be very excited about.


----------



## prodigalson

The brass really does sound especially fantastic here. I suppose unsurprising from Abbey Road. But my god if only there was legato...can't wait for 2028 when the full Abbey Road orchestra is complete


----------



## merty

Modeling may be Afflatus inspired but released set-by-step?

First ensembles, then "scene's" ensembles, sections and finally solo's...maybe spice it up with textures, drums from room 2...


----------



## stonzthro

jononotbono said:


> Except at the end Paul does say they will release a modular part that is more detailed than any previous Spitfire release. Which to me means that this should be more detailed than the SSO. If so, I can't wait for this!
> 
> Maybe it's because I'm English.


The last few minutes are muted here, then he comes back in and says "thanks for watching and it ends"...


----------



## muziksculp

Abbey Road One, Orchestral Foundations is new Albion One type of library. Which I don't need. (PASS)>

Now, it all depends on what they release next year that's recorded in Abbey R. One. I hope a professional Strings Library, not ensembles, with very good legatos, and lots short articulation options. That to me is an important foundation of an orchestra, more important that a gazillion mics to me. 

Then release more for the other orchestral families or instruments, this could take another year, or more to complete. So, I guess Orch. Foundations was one way to deliver the entire orchestral sections fast, and ready to play, but in ensemble form.

I'm currently impressed with VSL's latest Strings Library, Synchron Strings Pro (Full version)., and looking forward to see them release VSL Synchron Woodwinds Pro, and Synchron Brass Pro, and then Sordino Strings, and Solo Strings. to have a complete Synchron Stage based Orchestral Library. They already have quite a few Synchron Perc. libraries available.

I'm guessing there are many musicians that will find A.R.1 Orch. Foundations useful, especially if they don't have Albion 1.


----------



## Beans

Al Maurice said:


> So this new library is costed at the same price point as BBC SO Core, "the only library you'll ever need...", yet it has less articulations and is almost double the size in capacity. Not sure what that says?



They're basically saying that Abbey Road and some mics are an equal value with Maida Vale, additional articulations, individual sections (instead of "pre-orchestrated"), and solo instruments.

My niece's fiancé is fresh out of his master's program (film scoring or something) and is looking to build up his libraries (he's actually got quite a nice job as a structural engineer, but has that "write music for video games" dream...).

Unless he's looking for a very pure orchestra, it's tempting to recommend Nucleus at this price (which I don't have, personally). I'd say go BBCSO Core, but it "feels" abandoned.


----------



## tonaliszt

It's not a secret that spitfire has been trying to move out of the film scoring market into other areas of music production. 

I would not be surprised if they made this library only to gain access to Studio 2 to record a Beatles/Rock/Pop library.


----------



## robgb

Beans said:


> I'd say go BBCSO Core, but it "feels" abandoned.


Not sure why you'd say that. It only came out a few months ago.


----------



## Nate Johnson

Pretty sure they’ve shifted their entire focus onto composers who are just starting out. BBCSO basically pointed them in that direction. The original price point (now with sub-options), the ‘universal starting point’ lingo and strong emphasis on education really points to what their road map actually is. 

Most releases since then have been lower price points and lingo clearly targeting the beginner.

This release is no different, with its entire campaign centered around ‘sound like your favorite movies’ and since all of us experienced users value the space these samples are recorded in ‘here’s a legendary space that most humans, musicians or not have actually heard of.’ 

The beginners market will always be the real cash cow as experienced users demand more complex (read: expensive to make) products.


----------



## Beans

robgb said:


> Not sure why you'd say that. It only came out a few months ago.



We've now got focus on a far more nameworthy studio that has come into play with a more-transparent-than-normal message about future development, plus there's been news about Maida Vale potentially (yes, "potentially") being sold off as apartments, which would limit future expansion possibility.

I'm not sure how someone could wonder _*why *_I'd say that. Perhaps disagree, but to not know why... ?

EDIT: In the Abbey Road commercial thread, Paul said the following:



> Just a note to also say _ we haven’t stopped working on SSO or BBC either. These are all really important to us. We want to offer composers as much choice as possible to create your music.



I'm excited to be proven wrong. I'm not even anti-Spitfire. One of my favorite libraries of all time is Eric Whitacre Choir. But there's a big risk in the company feeling like they've found a new toy and forgetting about the rest, or putting their B or C teams on the old ones. It's what software companies do.


----------



## GtrString

Hmm, I would need to hear it. Abbey Road sounds like retro vibe to me. Seems there are «pop» mics in there, I hope that doesnt mean edgy and thin. But with that focus, for me, this might be an alternative to NI Session Strings Pro..


----------



## Akarin

I'm a huge fan of Spitfire. I have nearly everything that they released, but today one word comes to mind: stagnation.


----------



## Beans

Either way, can we all agree to write this out as SAAROOF?


----------



## cqd

What was the highest number they were tweeting the last few days..was it ten?..so even if they are all 50 bucks a pop you'll be looking at another 450 before you have a finished detailed suite?.. yeah, meh anyway.. I'm trying to be nice but I struggle not to be cynical with Spitfire..


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Too many people seem to be assuming that just because they are launching a whole new partnership with Abbey Road, they are suddenly no longer recording in AIR or Maida Vale. Nowhere have they said that or even indicated it. Same goes for supporting existing product lines.

BBCSO is a fantastic library IMO. I use it nearly everyday and it always sounds great. It was never meant to replace SSO or be as detailed (yet people seem to keep trying to make it out like it was). If they add another instrument or two in there or tweak the programming, great. If they don't, it's still VERY usable.

Their new player is their platform for the future. Are they really going to try and re-record all new material for SSO in the Kontakt player? Seems unlikely. In addition, players have changed, instruments have changed, etc. It wouldn't be the same set of recordings anyway. Abbey Road gives them an opportunity to take all that they've learned (and heard) and apply it to their next set of products for the next decade (not surprising given how old most of the Albions and SSO libraries are).

While I may not necessarily buy Orchestral Foundations, I applaud Spitfire for taking big bets and providing the rest of us access to that which is generally inaccessible. That in itself is innovation (not to mention something like Symphonic Motions which is frankly some of the most innovative programming I've seen recently).


----------



## Tice

It seems Homay Schmitz' demo 'Familiar Ground' is knocking it out of the park (again)...


----------



## RonOrchComp

axb312 said:


> Does anyone actually use so many mics?



Pros do, yes. 

Non-pros, probably not so much.


----------



## mscp

jononotbono said:


> Except at the end Paul does say they will release a modular part that is more detailed than any previous Spitfire release. Which to me means that this should be more detailed than the SSO. If so, I can't wait for this!
> 
> Maybe it's because I'm English.


----------



## RonOrchComp

peladio said:


> If only some of the actual innovators such as Jasper Blunk or Aaron Venture could get the access to these studios..



I agree with this. While this library sonds great, it is the furthest thing from innovative, and in many ways, just a different flavor of more of the same.


----------



## Tice

RonOrchComp said:


> I agree with this. While this library sonds great, it is the furthest thing from innovative, and in many ways, just a different flavor of more of the same.


Way I see it, a library isn't going to innovate for me. I have to bring my own innovations to the table. What I do want a library to do is to sound amazing and be flexible.


----------



## reutunes

Tice said:


> It seems Homay Schmitz' demo 'Familiar Ground' is knocking it out of the park (again)...


Yes! Her demo has a fantastic lightness of touch that sounds really great. Although I can easily tell that she's using clever layering to hide some dodgy note attack and release transitions (that I heard in other demos). I guess that's one area where this library needs work with future expansions.


----------



## JeffvR

So first they've created a huge hype around BBCSO, because it was recorded at Abbey Road. It was introduced as a complete orchestra. Now they are making a new hype for an Albion type of product, recorded at Abbey Road, sampling the same instruments. And they are planning to expand this in future recordings of Abbey Road, again sampling the same instruments. Why no major update to the BBSCO to create a "perfect" product, but create a whole new product line?


----------



## RSK

reutunes said:


> Yes! Her demo has a fantastic lightness of touch that sounds really great. Although I can easily tell that she's using clever layering to hide some dodgy note attack and release transitions (that I heard in other demos). I guess that's one area where this library needs work with future expansions.


No legatos.


----------



## Tice

Something I do wish libraries in general would get in the habit of is to include a map of where each instrument was sitting and where each microphone was located. That'd greatly help with blending mics correctly and blending other libraries together well.


----------



## jononotbono

How many pages will this thread get to? I detect a serious VI-C journey incoming.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

JeffvR said:


> So first they've created a huge hype around BBCSO, because it was recorded at Abbey Road. It was introduced as a complete orchestra. Now they are making a new hype for an Albion type of product, recorded at Abbey Road, sampling the same instruments. And they are planning to expand this in future recordings of Abbey Road, again sampling the same instruments. Why no major update to the BBSCO to create a "perfect" product, but create a whole new product line?



BBCSO is recorded at Maida Vale, not Abbey Road.


----------



## Architekton

I am bit disappointed with this release. Ensembles??? No legato on most patches??? I would be happier if they would have sampled this properly ala Symphonic Strings, WW, Brass, but with newer tech and more experience. Looks like those kind of libraries dont make them sense anymore financially wise. Waiting for better days!


----------



## josephspirits

Architekton said:


> I am bit disappointed with this release. Ensembles??? No legato on most patches??? I would be happier if they would have sampled this properly ala Symphonic Strings, WW, Brass, but with newer tech and more experience. Looks like those kind of libraries dont make them sense anymore financially wise. Waiting for better days!



After reading the page and watching the videos it sounds like that is exactly what they are doing. This is just the first introduction to the series of products.


----------



## Architekton

josephspirits said:


> After reading the page and watching the videos it sounds like that is exactly what they are doing. This is just the first introduction to the series of products.



I certainly hope so! We will see...


----------



## Heledir

And the world shrugged.

Having an overwhelming plethora of otherwise unrelated orchestral libraries available from numerous companies is one thing. Having an ever-increasing plethora of otherwise unrelated orchestral libraries all from the _same _company is getting quite ridiculous.

Not to say this is a bad library or anything. From what I've heard, I do like the quality of its sound. And 5 dynamic layers sound like music to my ears (eyy). But then that is "up to" 5 layers, so apparently not consistent throughout. Then it's all the basics. Again. It just feels entirely unnecessary even within their _own _catalogue.

Which is just... silly.


----------



## tabulius

Architekton said:


> I certainly hope so! We will see...



There is no need of hoping, they literally said it in their videos that more detailed sections are coming. The room sounds great, but this release is meh. I'm looking forward to future releases. Although I was also imagining what other developers could create in this iconic stage.


----------



## nolotrippen

FinGael said:


> IMO, a library like this without a legato is like a car without tires. The sound otherwise is very nice.


or lubricants. And you can HEAR the lack or legato. Very clunky note to note.


----------



## curtisschweitzer

Heledir said:


> And the world shrugged.
> 
> Having an overwhelming plethora of otherwise unrelated orchestral libraries available from numerous companies is one thing. Having an ever-increasing plethora of otherwise unrelated orchestral libraries all from the _same _company is quite ridiculous.



This product does not necessarily fit into what I look for in orchestral libraries (don't love pre-orchestrated ensemble patches personally), but I welcome any and all attempts to continue capturing the infinite varieties of sonic quality possible with an orchestra. Whether libraries come from one company or many, it is always a win when more sonic choices are available-- in other words, it is the opposite of ridiculous, IMHO.


----------



## artomatic

This library sounds great to me. Sure, legato is absent but the detailed modular library is coming.
I'm loving the dynamics and that Studio One sound!


----------



## sostenuto

Hoping for big BBCSO promo during BlkFri ! Putting this on list for 2021. 
Seems like time is slowing ..


----------



## Mike Fox

jononotbono said:


> How many pages will this thread get to? I detect a serious VI-C journey incoming.


That all depends on how soon Daniel James exposes all of it's flaws and pisses off the fanboys.


----------



## lumcas

OK, I get it, it's a great sounding, basic, no-nonsense (also no legato) ensemble library recorded at Abbey Road.It is a big deal. A taste of what we'll eventually get as a full blown collection in a few years... But man, no legato and 10 mic positions + 2 mixes? Don't get me wrong, it's an amazing space, but I still think someone had held that list of priorities upside-down...


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Mike Fox said:


> That all depends on how soon Daniel James exposes all of it's "flaws" and rallies all the trolls.



Fixed that for you.


----------



## Mike Fox

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Fixed that for you.


Look! It's already begun!


----------



## Ihnoc

Given the articulation and instrument selection available, the demos sound pretty good - I mean, I'm not writing anything that good with a sum total 8 times the price. Not tools but talent, init! Envious of those starting out with these kinds of options (with the likes of Nucleus, Berlin Inspire and BBC Symphony Orchestra).

I had desired a library recorded in Abbey Road for a long time, but I have other libraries with more detail that have these essentials, and pre-orchestrated expansions isn't something I do either so I will see what the future holds.


----------



## Eric G

Release the IRs so I can drop other instruments in the room and I am in. (That won't happen)

Sorry folks, for me, VSL has a better story here. Synchron Stage IRs via MIR + BBO + Native + Synchronized instruments etc...


----------



## WalterB

Can anyone compare and contrast this to VSL's Big Bang offering?

The approach seems similar - sample packs of pre-orchestrated sections, released monthly (roughly), and the consumer doesn't quite know the details of the product roadmap. After investing in one pack I'll want to complete the set (I've picked up a lot of BBO.)


----------



## Mike Fox

Given the price point, i think it might be worth it for us composers who already have everything (i'd jump on it if i was just starting out). It's at least a different flavor and overall sounds pretty good.

I just wish i didn't hate their player.

But i'm really digging the sound of this room!


----------



## method1

WalterB said:


> Can anyone compare and contrast this to VSL's Big Bang offering?
> 
> The approach seems similar - sample packs of pre-orchestrated sections, released monthly (roughly), and the consumer doesn't quite know the details of the product roadmap. After investing in one pack I'll want to complete the set (I've picked up a lot of BBO.)



It's really too soon to tell how they compare.
What VSL has going for it in it's offerings (If you enjoy the tone) is sweet, sweet consistency and a best in class sample player.

I gotta say though as a starting point the SAAROOF demos sound killer.
Dynamic range, nice! Vibrato that isn't an on/off switch, groundbreaking!

If this new Abbey Road thing is technically better put together than BBCSO was then I'm pretty interested.
There are some (imo) indefensible guffs in BBCSO that so far have not been addressed and hopefully those kinds of problems won't carry accross into this new line.


----------



## ridgero

Hmm, yes it sounds good, but which library doesn't these days?

All about marketing, again...


----------



## Akarin

Found this on Facebook. Made me laugh.


----------



## Mr. Edinburgh

For heaven's sake....SA you've really lost your way guys.

Your rehashing the same stuff - recording in different studios and rebranding. 

You're becoming the BrewDog of the music world ..


----------



## Mr. Edinburgh

axb312 said:


> Does anyone actually use so many mics?



no, it makes up for the lack of imagination of other techniques


----------



## José Herring

RonOrchComp said:


> Pros do, yes.
> 
> Non-pros, probably not so much.


Hmmmm....Not really. 

My only claim to being "Pro" is that on occasion I get paid to compose music. But, for me, too many mics is just a pain in the ass. It has taken me so long to even get to all the mics in JXLB only to find that maybe 2 mic positions actually work well.

I know several Pros that get paid a lot to compose music and too many mics is a pain in the ass.

This, trend towards 1000 mic positions is actually a bit disturbing. But, also, I like having the options. So it's a catch 22 for developers. 

But, just having control over close, decca and surround is really mostly what's needed. 

I think what they did in BBCSO is great. You do have all those mics but you also have 2 mixes ready to go.

I'm hoping they do the same for Abbey Road Modular.


----------



## Mike Fox

José Herring said:


> But, just having control over close, decca and surround is really mostly what's needed.



This.


----------



## AndyP

In contrast to VSL BBO I wait here for the 5 packages before I buy any of them.
Not that in the end essential parts are missing and you are sitting on an incomplete package that takes up a new room exclusively.

Regardless, the sound is beautiful.


----------



## Guffy

lumcas said:


> OK, I get it, it's a great sounding, basic, no-nonsense (also no legato) ensemble library recorded at Abbey Road.It is a big deal. A taste of what we'll eventually get as a full blown collection in a few years... But man, no legato and 10 mic positions + 2 mixes? Don't get me wrong, it's an amazing space, but I still think someone had held that list of priorities upside-down...


Setting up a couple of extra mics and recording legatos are two entirely different things.



Mr. Edinburgh said:


> For heaven's sake....SA you've really lost your way guys.
> 
> Your rehashing the same stuff - recording in different studios and rebranding.
> 
> You're becoming the BrewDog of the music world ..


Rehashing the same stuff.. welcome to orchestral sampling!
You rehash until you get it right.
What exactly would you like to see them do?


----------



## Karma

The microphone thing is something I've never really understood as a negative. At least you have the option right? Can you imagine going to Abbey Road and only recording 3 signals?

You've got to remember that not everyone is in the same boat as each other. There are many MANY people that prefer to use individual mics, and there are some that prefer to have just a mix. If the latter is the case, you can remove the other signals and work with just the mix. I always find myself using Tree, Close, Outriggers, Mids, and more recently Spill, but then I know others who will use completely different. Without the choice that isn't possible.


----------



## lumcas

José Herring said:


> Hmmmm....Not really.
> 
> My only claim to being "Pro" is that on occasion I get paid to compose music. But, for me, too many mics is just a pain in the ass. It has taken me so long to even get to all the mics in JXLB only to find that maybe 2 mic positions actually work well.
> 
> I know several Pros that get paid a lot to compose music and too many mics is a pain in the ass.
> 
> This, trend towards 1000 mic positions is actually a bit disturbing. But, also, I like having the options. So it's a catch 22 for developers.
> 
> But, just having control over close, decca and surround is really mostly what's needed.
> 
> I think what they did in BBCSO is great. You do have all those mics but you also have 2 mixes ready to go.
> 
> I'm hoping they do the same for Abbey Road Modular.



Have to agree 100%. Also any generalization like "Pros do that, Non Pros don't" is really... nonsensical... to put it mildly.


----------



## RSK

WalterB said:


> Can anyone compare and contrast this to VSL's Big Bang offering?



You would have to buy both BBO strings libraries, BBO Neptune (woodwind ensemble), as well as three of the BBO brass libraries (Hercules, Jupiter, and Kopernicus) and Quasar (perc) to get the equivalent. Not sure what that adds up to, but it's probably more than the $350 intro price for this.

I have those (actually I have SyS Pro for strings) so this doesn't do anything for me personally. But for someone who doesn't own them, it could be a great deal.


----------



## lumcas

Karma said:


> The microphone thing is something I've never really understood as a negative. At least you have the option right? Can you imagine going to Abbey Road and only recording 3 signals?
> 
> You've got to remember that not everyone is in the same boat as each other. There are many MANY people that prefer to use individual mics, and there are some that prefer to have just a mix. If the latter is the case, you can remove the other signals and work with just the mix. I always find myself using Tree, Close, Outriggers, Mids, and more recently Spill, but then I know others who will use completely different. Without the choice that isn't possible.



I'm with you but how can you include 12 mic setups including 2 mixes and at the same time you totally omit any legato patches? I thought these two extreme approaches couldn't appear along each other in a single product (save maybe from a percussion library). To me that's a very strange marketing decision.


----------



## Michael Stibor

Guffy said:


> Rehashing the same stuff.. welcome to orchestral sampling!
> You rehash until you get it right.
> What exactly would you like to see them do?


Do it right the first time? And the parts that aren’t right, fix. And then put it out as an update, and not repackage it as a new product.


----------



## Michael Stibor

lumcas said:


> I'm with you but how can you include 12 mic setups including 2 mixes and at the same time you totally omit any legato patches?


Word. Maybe it’s because they can’t do decent legatos. Seriously. I have a few Spitfire products, and not one of them has legatos that are any good. So they bulk up the product with mic options that 95% of its customer base won’t use.


----------



## Guffy

Michael Stibor said:


> Do it right the first time? And the parts that aren’t right, fix. And then put it out as an update, no repackage it as a new product.


Well, obviously they try to get it right the first time, but it's big undertaking, lots of things can go wrong. Over the years i'm sure they've learned alot. SSO is quite a few years old now, so doing a brand new flagship orchestra makes sense. And why not do it in one of the best spaces in the world?
I'm sure they still allocate resources to fixing issues in old libraries and not just leaving them in the dust.


----------



## ridgero

lumcas said:


> I'm with you but how can you include 12 mic setups including 2 mixes and at the same time you totally omit any legato patches? I thought these two extreme approaches couldn't appear along each other in a single product (save maybe from a percussion library). To me that's a very strange marketing decision.



That’s exactly the point I don’t understand.

BBCSO: 16 Mic positions, 3 dynamic layers
Abbey Road: 12 Mic positions, no legato


----------



## Eric G

RSK said:


> You would have to buy both BBO strings libraries, BBO Neptune (woodwind ensemble), as well as three of the BBO brass libraries (Hercules, Jupiter, and Kopernicus) and Quasar (perc) to get the equivalent. Not sure what that adds up to, but it's probably more than the $350 intro price for this.



Whoops. You forgot all the BBO libraries you mentioned have Legatos. Not in the same category right now IMHO.


----------



## RSK

Eric G said:


> Whoops. You forgot all the BBO libraries you mentioned have Legatos. Not in the same category right now IMHO.


Very true. I also forgot to mention that the Synchron Player is much more mature, flexible, and stable than the Spitfire app. 

I like the sound of this new library, but it doesn't meet my needs. Doesn't mean it won't meet someone else's.


----------



## purple

I really love that sound. Shame there's no legato or individual sections. It seems like we can never have all things working at the same time. "good legato, thin sound", "good sound, glitchy samples and legato", "great sound but no solo instruments"... Why is it so hard to do all these things together in one library? That's honestly the most frustrating thing about spitfire to me. I'm always following their products because they've nailed all these parts individually but I am always waiting for them to put it all together!


----------



## sostenuto

RSK said:


> You would have to buy both BBO strings libraries, BBO Neptune (woodwind ensemble), as well as three of the BBO brass libraries (Hercules, Jupiter, and Kopernicus) and Quasar (perc) to get the equivalent. Not sure what that adds up to, but it's probably more than the $350 intro price for this.
> 
> I have those (actually I have SyS Pro for strings) so this doesn't do anything for me personally. But for someone who doesn't own them, it could be a great deal.



Would luv to go this way, especially with BBO offering up through Andromeda already. The list you mention is ~ $786. ( would be ~$550. if purchased at Intro prices. ) still well beyond Abbey Road ONE -Intro.


----------



## Ben

sostenuto said:


> Would luv to go this way, especially with BBO offering up through Andromeda already. The list you mention is ~ $786. ( would be ~$550. if purchased at Intro prices. ) still well beyond Abbey Road ONE -Intro.


Yes, but also with way more articulations!


----------



## Michael Stibor

Guffy said:


> Well, obviously they try to get it right the first time, but it's big undertaking, lots of things can go wrong. Over the years i'm sure they've learned alot. SSO is quite a few years old now, so doing a brand new flagship orchestra makes sense. And why not do it in one of the best spaces in the world?
> I'm sure they still allocate resources to fixing issues in old libraries and not just leaving them in the dust.


I’m not against them coming out with new products in new spaces. Spitfire is very aggressive in that sense. They’re always coming out with new products, and I can’t fault them for that. That’s their own business decisions and business strategy and in that sense, more power to ‘em.

But there is something to be said for companies that offer only base products and keep tweaking them and perfecting them through free updates. Personally I’d rather that, than have Spitfire come out with forgettable offerings five times a year.


----------



## nolotrippen

Michael Stibor said:


> Do it right the first time? And the parts that aren’t right, fix. And then put it out as an update, and not repackage it as a new product.



Are you mad?


----------



## paulmatthew




----------



## lumcas

Michael Stibor said:


> Word. Maybe it’s because they can’t do decent legatos. Seriously. I have a few Spitfire products, and not one of them has legatos that are any good. So they bulk up the product with mic options that 95% of its customer base won’t use.



While I wouldn't be so harsh regarding SA legato in general (there is some good legato implementation in their products) I have to completely agree with the rest of your post, To use BBCSO analogy this is like part Discovery - part Pro product which really doesn't help to make up my mind whether I want to buy into the whole thing or not. Also I honestly think they wanted to release the library few weeks before the BF and it always takes a good amount of time and effort to edit and script legato patches, so that also COULD be the reason why there's none. Anyway, what was generally acceptable 5 years ago isn't acceptable these days IMHO.


----------



## Beans

sostenuto said:


> Would luv to go this way, especially with BBO offering up through Andromeda already. The list you mention is ~ $786. ( would be ~$550. if purchased at Intro prices. ) still well beyond Abbey Road ONE -Intro.



Perhaps we'll see some aggressive VSL sales this Black Friday. There is a lot more content in those BBO libraries, but at a hall that's not a household name and a heck of a higher price. 

Then again, you get the excellent Synchron Player and VSL's unmatched (in my opinion) QA. And a more complete current offer.


----------



## RSK

Beans said:


> Perhaps we'll see some aggressive VSL sales this Black Friday. There is a lot more content in those BBO libraries, but at a hall that's not a household name and a heck of a higher price.
> 
> Then again, you get the excellent Synchron Player and VSL's unmatched (in my opinion) QA. And a more complete current offer.


It may not be a household name, but it sounds damn good. I'm glad VSL decided to release "wet" libraries.


----------



## Beans

RSK said:


> It may not be a household name, but it sounds damn good. I'm glad VSL decided to release "wet" libraries.



Oh, I do agree. I have bought a fair number of Synchron/BBO libraries and am eager to see what's next.


----------



## Michael Stibor

nolotrippen said:


> Are you mad?


Not even a little bit. I cut my losses with Spitfire some time ago. I _am_ a little scared though. That’s the man who lives in my closet!


----------



## RonOrchComp

José Herring said:


> Hmmmm....Not really.
> 
> My only claim to being "Pro" is that on occasion I get paid to compose music. But, for me, too many mics is just a pain in the ass. It has taken me so long to even get to all the mics in JXLB only to find that maybe 2 mic positions actually work well.
> 
> I know several Pros that get paid a lot to compose music and too many mics is a pain in the ass.
> 
> This, trend towards 1000 mic positions is actually a bit disturbing. But, also, I like having the options. So it's a catch 22 for developers.
> 
> But, just having control over close, decca and surround is really mostly what's needed.
> 
> I think what they did in BBCSO is great. You do have all those mics but you also have 2 mixes ready to go.
> 
> I'm hoping they do the same for Abbey Road Modular.



I hear you.

When I say pro, I mean Allan Meyerson, Geoff Foster, etc.

But it is true, that many composers who work out of their home studio who get paid to write music who mix their own stuff (that includes me!) can be considered "pro"


----------



## davidson




----------



## RonOrchComp

Tice said:


> Way I see it, a library isn't going to innovate for me. I have to bring my own innovations to the table.



I hear that. But you can't say that libraries don't innovate, can you? Symphobia was innovative. Evolve was innovative. And so on.

So while you want to do the heavy lifting when it comes to innovation, and while a library isn't going to innovate for you, libraries can guide you and steer you, and as well provide (sometimes much needed) inspiration - especially when they are innovative.


----------



## RSK

davidson said:


>


That's hilarious 

Except he's got AIR, Maida Vale, and now AR all on speed dial.


----------



## Peter Satera

I very much agree with some of the thoughts displayed here and on the commercial announcement. I'm not keen on purchasing a library which is half fulfilled, with no idea what the full product will include. What is the content? Is it separate section articulations? It joint section articulations like symphobia? Is it Abbey Road studio 2 with smaller ensembles?

The price point and selling of this is slightly confusing too. If we take the intro out of it the price is £399, for ensemble articulations and partial breakdown of brass. We have no legato or any other advanced articulations.

But now, Compare that to the BBCSO Core, which is £350, has separate sections and each section has an excellent wealth of articulations.

So I question, other than those who love the room, which is a very niche crowd, who is this for? It makes little sense for someone who is new to scoring to adopt Abbey road, they'll get _*more *_by buying BBCSO Core, for less. And for everyone else, we likely already have ensembles and are now at the point where we want individual section control especially to write for them within this room.


----------



## ridgero

I‘m already bored, looking forward to their next groundbreaking cooperation, maybe Royal Albert Hall?


----------



## purple

Peter Satera said:


> I very much agree with some of the thoughts displayed here and on the commercial announcement. I'm not keen on purchasing a library which is half fulfilled, with no idea what the full product will include. What is the content? Is it separate section articulations? It joint section articulations like symphobia? Is it Abbey Road studio 2 with smaller ensembles?
> 
> The price point and selling of this is slightly confusing too. If we take the intro out of it the price is £399, for ensemble articulations and partial breakdown of brass. We have no legato or any other advanced articulations.
> 
> But now, Compare that to the BBCSO Core, which is £350, has separate sections and each section has an excellent wealth of articulations.
> 
> So I question, other than those who love the room, which is a very niche crowd, who is this for? It makes little sense for someone who is new to scoring to adopt Abbey road, they'll get _*more *_by buying BBCSO Core, for less. And for everyone else, we likely already have ensembles and are now at the point where we want individual section control especially to write for them within this room.


Oh, wow! It's £400? Is that a joke? Hollywood orchestra diamond is cheaper than that! and It's comprehensive with all kinds of articulations and considered by many to be one of the best!


----------



## turnerofwheels

There's nothing in this library I need, but we'll see about the future releases in the series?
My ideal (to solve some problems mentioned in this thread) would be if SA could take their proprietary player and offer something similar to a friendly developer in Berlin: buying/downloading only the articulations and mic positions I know I will use (saving precious SSD space and scratch from going toward things I will never use or already have covered) plus multitimbral support for my larger templates with 500-2500 instruments


----------



## JonS

Peter Satera said:


> I very much agree with some of the thoughts displayed here and on the commercial announcement. I'm not keen on purchasing a library which is half fulfilled, with no idea what the full product will include. What is the content? Is it separate section articulations? It joint section articulations like symphobia? Is it Abbey Road studio 2 with smaller ensembles?
> 
> The price point and selling of this is slightly confusing too. If we take the intro out of it the price is £399, for ensemble articulations and partial breakdown of brass. We have no legato or any other advanced articulations.
> 
> But now, Compare that to the BBCSO Core, which is £350, has separate sections and each section has an excellent wealth of articulations.
> 
> So I question, other than those who love the room, which is a very niche crowd, who is this for? It makes little sense for someone who is new to scoring to adopt Abbey road, they'll get _*more *_by buying BBCSO Core, for less. And for everyone else, we likely already have ensembles and are now at the point where we want individual section control especially to write for them within this room.


At some point there will be Abbey Road ONE through SIX at 50% off or more, so $225 or less seems like a decent price point for Abbey Road ONE, which it will eventually sell for. Look at the long term outlook and be patient.


----------



## Tice

RonOrchComp said:


> I hear that. But you can't say that libraries don't innovate, can you? Symphobia was innovative. Evolve was innovative. And so on.
> 
> So while you want to do the heavy lifting when it comes to innovation, and while a library isn't going to innovate for you, libraries can guide you and steer you, and as well provide (sometimes much needed) inspiration - especially when they are innovative.


Yes, libraries can innovate. But by the time I get my hands on them, they've done their innovative thing, which is now in the hands of anyone who wants to do that thing. In order for what I make to also be innovative, I have to do something new with it, innovate with what was previously innovative itself.


----------



## rottoy

Karma said:


> The microphone thing is something I've never really understood as a negative. At least you have the option right? Can you imagine going to Abbey Road and only recording 3 signals?


I personally find it to be a case of diminishing returns at one point.
3-4 vastly different mic colours feel more worthwhile than upwards of 12 where the signals start to blur together and feel redundant. In my humble opinion.


----------



## turnerofwheels

rottoy said:


> I personally find it to be a case of diminishing returns at one point.
> 3-4 vastly different mic colours feel more worthwhile than upwards of 12 where the signals start to blur together and feel redundant. In my humble opinion.



I find 5-6 optimal. It's nice to have the option of two close mics because depending on the situation, one might work better than the other. Plus a couple different mic configurations (A/B stereo pair, decca tree) and a surround mic or two. Between these, I usually have my bases covered.


----------



## JonS

No one library needs to be the one ring to rule them all library. If a library sounds good then it can expand the palette 🎨 of sounds one can compose with regardless of how many mic mixes or articulations. I certainly greatly prefer at least 4 velocity layers for dynamics, but I can’t control what developers do. Abbey Road ONE sounds very good and I will get it at some point.


----------



## José Herring

Okay listened again. Sounds even more awesome!!!


----------



## Paul Cardon

I really think more mics is rather cool and wish more devs would provide it when they can because you KNOW real sessions are being mic'd up with tons of stuff and then that's all sorted and mixed down custom for each project depending on the needs and context. More mic access just increases the sonic potential.

You're not meant to turn them all on at once; you're gonna choose what best suits the instrument/section/piece/project.


----------



## Lee Blaske

WalterB said:


> Can anyone compare and contrast this to VSL's Big Bang offering?
> 
> The approach seems similar - sample packs of pre-orchestrated sections, released monthly (roughly), and the consumer doesn't quite know the details of the product roadmap. After investing in one pack I'll want to complete the set (I've picked up a lot of BBO.)



VSL's BBO was a good marketing move. I think they made a mistake, though, by starting to repackage already available products into the alphabetically named series. People that already had the repackaged content had no need to re-buy it in its new cut-down, BBO packaging. So, if you'd been collecting all of the letters of the alphabet to have the complete set, you're going to have a break in the sequence. That's an opportunity to consider if you still want to go on to complete the BBO "set," because you have no need to buy the complete set. VSL would have been smart to simply send a copy of the cut-down, repackaged content to the people who already owned the original, full version of the content, so they would't have a potential gap. Might sound silly, but a LOT of people in this biz have a tad of OCD in them.  Not me, though.


----------



## MGdepp

I guess I am late. Everything has been said ... lame! But I suppose we are supposed to be hyped because it's STARW ... er ... Abbey Roads ...


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

There's an interesting aspect of this from Spitfire's business strategy standpoint as well. A lot of people are talking about sampling techniques and asking why does the room matter. The thing is sampling techniques continue to evolve. Compare libraries from 10-15 years ago to ones today. Now fast forward 10 years and we should expect the same leaps in the technology. Sampling techniques and technology are not a moat or a competitive advantage or even what sells libraries. Yes, you will have certain improvements from certain developers but eventually everybody catches up (or at least, it is feasible for others to replicate if desired).

What hasn't changed over that same time though? The rooms that are most coveted for recording. Abbey Road, AIR, Sony, Fox, Eastwood.

And now, Spitfire essentially has exclusivity over two of those - AIR and Abbey Road. Look at AIR where Spitfire has been recording for over a decade now. How many other libraries have been recorded there and of those, how many can even state "AIR" in the product description (I believe the answer is none)? Spitfire will and should continue to improve and evolve their sampling technique, but 10 years from now, "Recorded at Abbey Road" will still carry a massive appeal - and that will allow Spitfire to continue to release updates and new products well into the future. They've ensured the survival of their company into the next decade.


----------



## Peter Satera

JonS said:


> At some point there will be Abbey Road ONE through SIX at 50% off or more, so $225 or less seems like a decent price point for Abbey Road ONE, which it will eventually sell for. Look at the long term outlook and be patient.



I appreciate that it will go on sale and like most here, I'm quite patient.

In all honesty, I find it makes little difference to say it will go on sale, because so will the BBCSO Core and the standoff with their own product will remain with them both discounted. The BBCSO Core will still win in price, separate sections and articulations standoff.

@*ALittleNightMusic*
It's all about the room, and this is why it's been priced high. But I find, what use is a room, when you stifle workflow with a lack of articulations? You won't get the control with whats provided, not with ensembles like this, it's evidently not an evolution of what we have had. Simply look at CSS, the love for it, the following it has. The sound is ace, and the room means much less when the articulations and playability are done right.

I don't think Air is only available to Spitfire. SimpleSamSamples have stated their piano was recorded in a "world class scoring stage" showing this production clip. Owning the piano, the characteristics are so close to Hans Zimmer Piano it's scary at the fraction of the price point. Exclusivity, if it does exist, may be only for a certain term time, I have no idea.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Peter Satera said:


> It's all about the room, and this is why it's been priced high. But I find, what use is a room, when you stifle workflow with a lack of articulations? You won't get the control with whats provided, not with ensembles like this, it's evidently not an evolution of what we have had. Simply look at CSS, the love for it, the following it has. The sound is ace, and the room means much less when the articulations and playability are done right.
> 
> I don't think Air is only available to Spitfire. SimpleSamSamples have stated their piano was recorded in a "world class scoring stage" showing this production clip. Owning the piano, the characteristics are so close to Hans Zimmer Piano it's scary at the fraction of the price point. Exclusivity, if it does exist, may be only for a certain term time, I have no idea.



Simple Sam Samples do not state anywhere on their product material that it was recorded at AIR though. If you don't know, as an average customer of sample libraries, that it is AIR in that photo, you may not find it as appealing as Hans Zimmer Piano (I for one have Simple Sam's piano and absolutely love it). In terms of exclusivity, Spitfire has recorded at AIR for over a decade and none of the other major players (or smaller players) have done much there, if anything.

For all the love of CSS, one of the frequent criticisms is that Trackdown is not an ideal room for strings. Do you think if the same sampling techniques and programming were done at Abbey Road or AIR or Newman that wouldn't be appealing to folks? Now, which one is more likely - Alex being able to record a new library at those stages or Spitfire adopting some of the legato improvements?

Spitfire has stated, many times, that Orchestral Foundations is not meant to serve users that want an exhaustive list of deeply sampled articulations. Complaining about that is like complaining your car doesn't float. What's interesting about the partnership is the access to the studio - Paul has said they are working on deeply sampled sections for users that prefer to work with those. If you don't like ensemble libraries, this is clearly not going to serve you (I for one am probably in that camp as well). But the future of what is coming - and could come - is certainly exciting.


----------



## ScrltPumpernickel

This is how I see this at the moment:
SAAROOF is an Albion Light for the price of a full one (preorder price notwithstanding).
No legato and other articulations, no "electronic stuff" and inferior player (IMO).
On the other hand, we get more dynamic layers (?) and more mic's.
Tell me if I'm wrong.

For me the crux of the matter is what the modular expansions would look like? To put it overly simple, if it's $49 for a section - that's attractive to me; if it's $49 for an articulation - not so much. I have a feeling (nothing more), it would be closer to "Symphobia cut into pieces" approach. Also I fear that in the end it would be the most expensive orchestral suite from SA.


----------



## yiph2

ScrltPumpernickel said:


> This is how I see this at the moment:
> SAAROOF is an Albion Light for the price of a full one (preorder price notwithstanding).
> No legato and other articulations, no "electronic stuff" and inferior player (IMO).
> On the other hand, we get more dynamic layers (?) and more mic's.
> Tell me if I'm wrong.
> 
> For me the crux of the matter is what the modular expansions would look like? To put it overly simple, if it's $49 for a section - that's attractive to me; if it's $49 for an articulation - not so much. I have a feeling (nothing more), it would be closer to "Symphobia cut into pieces" approach. Also I fear that in the end it would be the most expensive orchestral suite from SA.


I'm pretty sure that the modular orchestra and the expansions are different:


----------



## ScrltPumpernickel

This is what I meant by "modular expansions":








Spitfire Audio — Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations






www.spitfireaudio.com





I have no information about any other SA-AR potential products.


----------



## trumpoz

The library sounds beautiful - it is so nice to hear a product demo that is not the same 'big epic bombastic' shit.


----------



## CT

ALittleNightMusic said:


> They've ensured the survival of their company into the next decade.



But... surely the VI-Control backlash has ruined them? They're stagnating, lacking innovation, and they've lost their way! You heard it here first.


----------



## sostenuto

Ben said:


> Yes, but also with way more articulations!



True, and well worth notable incremental cost. Will appreciate a bit of softening in hardline re. 'no better deal that Intro pricing' ..... especially given some truly tough times in 2020. Maybe not a big deal for many, but rapid releases of BBO have made it darn tough to to keep up .... _ever since getting everything through Andromeda._ 
VSL rules ! .... but hoping for some flexibility and generosity this BlkFri !


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen

ALittleNightMusic said:


> A lot of people are talking about sampling techniques and asking why does the room matter. The thing is sampling techniques continue to evolve. Compare libraries from 10-15 years ago to ones today.


Sure, let’s compare:
- Hollywood Strings, released 2010
- Hollywood Brass, released 2011

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/ewql-hollywood-orchestral-percussion (Source)

Those are deeply sampled libraries with sometimes 13 5 velocity layers + multiple RRs.

East West knew how to sample 10 years ago just fine 

Edit:
Double-checked in the Strings Diamond manual...the Sus13 patches, that’s not 13 velocity layers, but 13 voices playing at the same time. The number of velocity layers is 5 (it’s on page 46 in the Hollywood Strings Diamond manual).

Still, many people think that even today, HO Strings and Brass are among the top libraries for their section.


----------



## scoringdreams

As a marketer, seems like this is an issue of targeting too many segments at once without making it sufficiently clear on which product's for whom. It's sort of pushing the tolerance threshold of each customer segment with confusing (overly integrated) campaigns making each segment think that the product was built for them instead of the other. Naming conventions also play a big role here.

Interestingly, each of us places an emphasis on different characteristics of SA's products: either the space, the orchestra players, the instruments, the mic positions, or the articulations. (the points of comparison expands when developers find more ways to confuse our choice-making; looking forward to the day when the diet of the players becomes a point of difference LOL)

I like the modular approach of this product line, but with more and more releases claiming to be 'modular', it sorts of creates more confusion of what 'modular' exactly means...can't wait to try this out with my Garritan CFX - it's gonna be so beautiful!


----------



## axb312

Karma said:


> The microphone thing is something I've never really understood as a negative. At least you have the option right? Can you imagine going to Abbey Road and only recording 3 signals?
> 
> You've got to remember that not everyone is in the same boat as each other. There are many MANY people that prefer to use individual mics, and there are some that prefer to have just a mix. If the latter is the case, you can remove the other signals and work with just the mix. I always find myself using Tree, Close, Outriggers, Mids, and more recently Spill, but then I know others who will use completely different. Without the choice that isn't possible.



My POV is I'd rather Spitfire go into more detail with the sampling than with the editing and mixing of a multitude of mics...If the additional mics don't take up any additional time when the library is being produced then it doesn't matter I guess....


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

hbjdk said:


> Sure, let’s compare:
> - Hollywood Strings, released 2010
> - Hollywood Brass, released 2011
> 
> https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/ewql-hollywood-orchestral-percussion (Source)
> 
> Those are deeply sampled libraries with sometimes 13 5 velocity layers + multiple RRs.
> 
> East West knew how to sample 10 years ago just fine
> 
> Edit:
> Double-checked in the Strings Diamond manual...the Sus13 patches, that’s not 13 velocity layers, but 13 voices playing at the same time. The number of velocity layers is 5 (it’s on page 46 in the Hollywood Strings Diamond manual).
> 
> Still, many people think that even today, HO Strings and Brass are among the top libraries for their section.



Not entirely sure what point you’re making but you’re confusing recording with sampling, which involves more than recording (scripting, recording with scripting in mind, editing, etc.). And those elements have evolved greatly since the Hollywood series was released (and likely will be part of the Opus update).


----------



## VSriHarsha

I told in the Abbey Road Spitfire partnership thread. You see some are feeling it’s kinda Spitfire’s big disappointment, apart from the fact that it collaborated with the Abbey Road. I even checked some posts where people mentioned that there are no legatos. One of the most essential & rather expressive articulations. Although, I somehow felt like it’s good from Spitfire like it’s an example of how dumb they can get, partnering with one of the very oldest & the most sophisticated studios, not just for Film Scoring but many streamlines of Music making. But they also used the term ‘Foundations’ so there are installments.


----------



## Dave Connor

I would think most pro mock-up guys would love to have a full blown Abbey Road orchestral library with all the solo, a2, a4 articulations, legatos etc. Who wouldn’t? Ensembles patches are not nearly as desirable but can be handy for saving time in layering on big sections or even smaller things that don’t require legato.

A superior sound (which may very well be the case here) is always attractive and hard to resist adding to the toolbox. In my case I tend to prefer a complete library but whenever I hear something outstanding I will consider picking it up even if for one or two great instruments.

Jury still out on this one.


----------



## markleake

I think people have mostly said what there is to say, but I'll give my 2c anyway... 

Personally I find myself more interested in VSL's BBO range than this. VSL seem to have a more comprehensive and innovative approach, and the sound of the Synchron hall is like some fresh air to me.

The Abbey room does sound good, but overall tone is still very Spitfire to me... dark and roomy, and lacking clarity. It does sound much better than Albion One all-round, so congrats to them for that - enough that I'd recommend this over Albion One easily, I think (let's see how the string shorts compare though). But there is a lack of clarity and purity that seems like a signature Spitfire tone to me. I have enough of their libraries now to not need anything like this.

However, I think there's some good signs here:

1. Spitfire has finally learned that layering high brass (trumpets) and mid brass (horns) is not what anyone wants or ever asked for. Yes, I know good orchestration and blah blah... but really in the older ensemble SF libs this never worked, and those patches were mostly useless. Why it took them so long to give up on this, I don't know. Maybe this is a small thing, but it shows SF do listen. So yes, the brass being in more separate sections was a good move.

2. The recorded dynamics sound very good here. I like that all of the sections seem to have very good soft dynamics. I mean, SF do this well anyway, and I'm only going by their walk-through & demos, but it seems they've done very well here to focus on this. The softer passages in some of the demos stand out as very nicely done.

3. Their short articulations, like the marcatos, etc. sound far more consistent than SSO. It seems their approach has improved a lot here. I really hope at some point SF go back and fix some of these inconsistencies (and loads of missing articulations) in their older SSO libs, which I still love.

4. The demos sound fantastic for what this lib is.

Not so good signs:

1. The articulations, while covering the basics, are not very inspiring. Compared to VSL's BBO for example, articulations I've found myself using in BBO very often are completely missing here (oh fast repetitions / measured tremolo, how I love thee! ), and dare I mention the missing legatos. Having a few short-ish notes like the marcatos is good, but still... it makes the basic library a bit limited compared to the competition.

2. The tone overall has a in-built muddiness to it that might be hard to control, similar to their Air libraries. There's a lot of lower mid frequencies in those demos. This is just a result of the room and their recording techniques I guess, so is what you are buying into with this new franchise. It makes me a bit nervous the rest of the libs they have planned will be like this also.


----------



## Frederick

I'm happy about the partnership with Abbey Road Studios and I'm looking forward to the detailed modular orchestra. Some of the specialized 49 Euro offerings will enhance that, so that looks good to me.

They have to be careful with the pricing of the modular orchestra though. I'm willing to buy yet another orchestra even though I have six or seven of those already, because it is abbey road, but I'm not going to pay more than for the AIR stuff, unless they offer more as well in content. I think I'm going to wait till it is finished and decide then.

Abbey Road One though is a different story. Ok, ensemble libs are not for me, but besides that. All I see is: There are way too few articulations!! No legato, no trills, etc. They have most of the percussion listed twice in the list of articulations by also putting them in as 'drums' and 'metals' right below 'percussion'. If you'd take those out it would become even more obvious.

IMHO Spitfire's offering is not going to be able to compete head on with BBO because of this. Even more so, because the Synchron player is way ahead of the Spitfire player.

Also, I don't think it can compete with the Arks, the Symphobia's or their own Albions. But it is Abbey Road? Isn't the sound awesome? Yes, it is, but those missing articulations... Man! What were they thinking?

Better to make it more expensive upfront, if this is the result of setting a price and bundling content to match it.


----------



## yiph2

Frederick said:


> They have to be careful with the pricing of the modular orchestra though. I'm willing to buy yet another orchestra even though I have six or seven of those already, because it is abbey road, but I'm not going to pay more than for the AIR stuff, unless they offer more as well in content. I think I'm going to wait till it is finished and decide then.


I think there are going to be more dynamic layers: "a professional modular orchestra unlike any sample library ever created before – more detail, clarity and expression"


----------



## Frederick

yiph2 said:


> I think there are going to be more dynamic layers: "a professional modular orchestra unlike any sample library ever created before – more detail, clarity and expression"


Let's hope so! I would welcome that.


----------



## yiph2

I wonder what will happen to SSO when the Abbey Road orchestra will be released... I assume the order will be BBCSO<SSO<ARO, will they still update those others? (or crossgrade to ARO from SSO  )


----------



## zolhof

Hmmm Foundations is not for me but a new modular orchestra? Most detailed orchestral library Spitfire ever created? In Abbey Road?







However, I gotta say it felt a bit sour to hear about all the new stuff coming out of this partnership with Abbey Road when I was really sold on the whole "this is just the beginning" idea of Spitfire and BBCSO. Abbey Road is cool but there was real magic captured in Maida Vale... I hope that's not abandoned.


----------



## jaketanner

This could have all been flipped around in SF's favor, had they simply not said anything and just released it like OT did...then we would have all been more pleasantly surprised. I think the biggest let down that many have is that the hype was greater than the reveal. If I were starting out with no libraries, I would get this...Albion One was among my first libraries...but as it stands now, I don't really need it. 

I really do hope BBCSO gets some attention now.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

jaketanner said:


> This could have all been flipped around in SF's favor, had they simply not said anything and just released it like OT did...then we would have all been more pleasantly surprised. I think the biggest let down that many have is that the hype was greater than the reveal. If I were starting out with no libraries, I would get this...Albion One was among my first libraries...but as it stands now, I don't really need it.
> 
> I really do hope BBCSO gets some attention now.



Spitfire:
"Announcement — Thursday October 22, 5pm BST" mentioning history won't be repeated. That's it. No other "hype" from them.

Orchestral Tools:
Posted a puzzle here 9 days before announcing Phoenix Orchestra. Continue to post teasers for upcoming releases in the Commercials section.

You can't blame Spitfire for Vi-C getting their pants in a twist.


----------



## Alex Fraser

Mike T said:


> But... surely the VI-Control backlash has ruined them? They're stagnating, lacking innovation, and they've lost their way! You heard it here first.


The forum massively overplays it’s relevance to Spitfires success or decisions. The company today ensured another decade of relevance. Well played I reckon.


----------



## barteredbride

The only question I have is.... @Spitfire Team @christianhenson ...so who was the voice in the trailer ??!!

The "so here´s bar seven" guy !

I don´t care about Abbey Road and legatos and modular orchestras...just tell me for the love of god.




George Martin??


----------



## MaxOctane

Peter Satera said:


> I'm not keen on purchasing a library which is half fulfilled, with no idea what the full product will include.



Everyone really just needs to filter out all the "more expansions are coming" stuff. Same for BBCSO, same for HZ. *None *of the lib developers ever have major free (or paid) add-ons down the line. Even updates are very infrequent. Only exception I can even think of is Strezov Afflatus Strings, who had a _very_ nice free update which added a full set of solo strings. 

But BBCSO... ok we got the bass clarinet. That's nice and I appreciated it, but it didn't change the game.

So always just judge the product for what it is today.

Personally, I have ~30 string libs at last count, but I'm a sucker so here we go again...


----------



## Michael Antrum

MaxOctane said:


> Only exception I can even think of is Strezov Afflatus Strings, who had a _very_ nice free update which added a full set of solo strings.



Project Sam are another, even the origial Symphobia was updated not so long back.....but I digress.....


----------



## Joulupukki

Okay, this library is not for me. I was never a fan of complete solutions but I'm looking for just one of them right now. However I tend towards BBCSO as I tend to prefer concert sounds rather than filmstudio bombast sounds.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Michael Antrum said:


> Project Sam are another, even the origial Symphobia was updated not so long back.....but I digress.....


They've also ***not lowered the prices for years*** (EDIT: oops I'm very wrong about this, don't read this lol)

Spitfire stays relevant by pushing forward with new projects regularly. Project Sam stays relevant by continually updating libraries and keeping new releases rare. Both require strong focus and it's gotta be hard to try and maximize both avenues.

Cinesamples is similar, continually reprogramming the same content from their core series but with varying results.


----------



## MartinH.

Any speculations what the cost of a possible "core" version without separate mic positions might be? 199,- maybe?


----------



## jamwerks

SF probably had big plans with the BBC at Maida Vale, and had maybe even recorded some new instruments and libraries. When Abbey Road decided to let SF record there, that probably changed all their plans.

The fact that SF has been so quite for the last year (VSL, a smaller company, has put out tons more), that only ONE is ready now with expansions only in 2021, makes it seem like plans were changed and some time was lost.

SSO probably will get final updates but the SF player probably not ready to handle them yet (advanced art management, time-stretching, multi-timbral, and other still lacking). Bringing a new player to Synchron level takes years and years.

All speculation, probably...


----------



## TomislavEP

The usual SA hype aside, after skimming through Thomson's playthrough, I must say that I like both the sound and the concept of this library. The broad-stroke approach is the very reason why I've noticed Spitfire in the first place, and why I've spent quite a sum (for me, that is) to get my hands on the Albion Legacy more than five years ago.

Personally, I prefer the sound of the Albion series and the other SA titles recorded in the AIR studios, though this definitely has its own charms and perhaps an even broader scope of applications. It is also an interesting move to focus only on the orchestral instruments without including the additional sound design elements as an alternative to the Albion range.

However, I most likely won't be getting this library in the foreseeable future. For its price, I could expand my SA collection with a few more interesting libraries and I also prefer to work with Kontakt.


----------



## Michael Antrum

Paul Cardon said:


> They've also NEVER lowered the prices over the years. Spitfire stays relevant by pushing forward with new projects regularly. Project Sam stays relevant by continually updating libraries and keeping new releases rare. Both require strong focus and it's gotta be hard to try and maximize both avenues.
> 
> Cinesamples is similar, continually reprogramming the same content from their core series but with varying results.



What are you talking about ? Symphobia I & II now cost 299 euro and Lumina is 399.....

I paid a hell of a lot more than that for them back in the day....


----------



## FinGael

Michael Antrum said:


> What are you talking about ? Symphobia I & II now cost 299 euro and Lumina is 399.....
> 
> I paid a hell of a lot more than that for them back in the day....



They also lowered the prices of Orchestral Essentials 1 & 2 a year or two ago.


----------



## Alex Fraser

The mouth watering prospect for me is the incoming "full fat" orchestral collection. I'm sure the buy-in price will be insane (and out of my reach!) - yet it's great that SF are committing to such a monster. 

I mean, Spitfire alone lets you choose between Maida Vale, Air and now Abbey Road. Other devs have other great halls too. Isn't this great?

I think it's worth stopping for a moment and letting that sink in: That if you want the sound of a triangle being hit from 20m away captured by an array of vintage mics in a world class recording stage...you can have it.


----------



## Paul Jelfs

This library might be the best ever made - I don't know because I have not listened to any demos etc- as I am beginning to get a bit ticked off with the way they start huge "game changing" projects (which are usual are awesome but unfinished) but then very quickly move on to the next thing. 

I really wish they had put the effort in improving their impressive, but still flawed, BBC SO, that was meant to change everything :( 

It does not change the fact their libraries are often among the very best, but I DO FEEL they are not the same company they were back yonder. 

Anyway, I am sure they wont care some nobody is annoyed , and will sell loads of this .


----------



## Peter Satera

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Simple Sam Samples do not state anywhere on their product material that it was recorded at AIR though. If you don't know, as an average customer of sample libraries, that it is AIR in that photo, you may not find it as appealing as Hans Zimmer Piano (I for one have Simple Sam's piano and absolutely love it). In terms of exclusivity, Spitfire has recorded at AIR for over a decade and none of the other major players (or smaller players) have done much there, if anything.



I was showing the picture was of Air. Therefore exclusivity appears to be unlikely.



> For all the love of CSS, one of the frequent criticisms is that Trackdown is not an ideal room for strings. Do you think if the same sampling techniques and programming were done at Abbey Road or AIR or Newman that wouldn't be appealing to folks? Now, which one is more likely - Alex being able to record a new library at those stages or Spitfire adopting some of the legato improvements?



Of course people love recordings in famous studios, and if CSS was produced there. I never said they wouldn't. But you're saying the best of both worlds, all the flexibility and sound. But look at we're discussing, the crutch of a sample library possibly being the reverb, with minimal usability and the promise of great things as a sales pitch for this one.



> Spitfire has stated, many times, that Orchestral Foundations is not meant to serve users that want an exhaustive list of deeply sampled articulations. Complaining about that is like complaining your car doesn't float. What's interesting about the partnership is the access to the studio - Paul has said they are working on deeply sampled sections for users that prefer to work with those. If you don't like ensemble libraries, this is clearly not going to serve you (I for one am probably in that camp as well). But the future of what is coming - and could come - is certainly exciting.



If Orchestral foundations isn't meant to serve the experienced user then the target is indeed as a I pointed out; a very tight niche that *only *care about a reverb sound and not any form of playability. As you say, that's _not even _you. I don't mind ensemble libraries when sketching, but I'm way past the point when I'm satisfied with scoring with them. Spitfire know that is the usual perspective too, that's why the brass has somewhat being separated.

You're excited about what is coming in the future, that's fine. But does your existing excitement for future libraries in this space make you part with your cash for this one? That's not a justifying position spitfire should put themselves in. It's convoluted, especially when comparing to BBCSO Core. We see no official statement what is planned or coming for the next packs to utilise this space to entice us to come on board.

You say it's like complaining your car doesn't float. That's not a true analogy. This is like taking you to the best racing track in the world and then giving you a bicycle. Yes, you have the environment, yes, you can get round the track, but it will never do the job when it comes to the race.


----------



## Alex Fraser

Peter Satera said:


> If Orchestral foundations isn't meant to serve the experienced user then the target is indeed as a I pointed out; a very tight niche that _only _care about a reverb sound and not any form of playability. As you say, that's _not even _you. I don't mind ensemble libraries when sketching, but I'm way past the point when I'm satisfied with scoring with them. Spitfire know that is the usual perspective too, that's why the brass has somewhat being separated.
> 
> You're excited about what is coming in the future, that's fine. But does your existing excitement for future libraries in this space make you part with your cash for this one? That's not a justifying position spitfire should put themselves in. It's convoluted, especially when comparing to BBCSO Core. We see no official statement what is planned or coming for the next packs to utilise this space to entice us to come on board.
> 
> You say it's like complaining your car doesn't float. That's not a true analogy. This is like taking you to the best racing track in the world and then giving you a bicycle. Yes, you have the environment, yes, you can get round the track, but it will never do the job when it comes to the race.


Depends on your perspective.
If the goal is a detailed orchestral rendition then sure, these sort of libraries aren't really the best tool.

But I think these sort of products - like Albion ONE - are designed for quick scoring were there simply isn't the time (or need) to crack open the full libraries and get dirty with orchestration.

I've used Albion ONE in a variety of scenarios where I needed an orchestral flavour but there wasn't the need to go beyond the broad strokes. I think this new library is along the same lines. 

VIC is a bit purist (as usual) when it comes to ensemble stuff. As always the right tool for the job/time/budget is best.


----------



## robgb

Beans said:


> I'm not sure how someone could wonder _*why *_I'd say that. Perhaps disagree, but to not know why... ?


And I still wonder why. What exactly is it you think they're abandoning? The project is completed. Other than basic updates I'm not sure what you expect.


----------



## Saxer

I like the sound very much and it seems to be a really useful ensemble library. Finally ensembles with enough velocity layers and string vibrato control. And it seems to avoid the ugly sample build up when playing full tutti. 
I also like the idea of a basic ensemble library that will grow to a full orchestra over time.

But I'm very disappointed to read about the instrument combination approach. I want celli and an horns. But I will never ever use a celli+horn patch. Don't tell me they will sound "togetherer" than two sample tracks. What if I want the horn to end earlier and from there double the celli with a clarinet? Buying the celli+clarinet patch? It's like having a collection of pecils. The green can write "Af" and the blue can write "Am". Want to write "Ass"? Buy the red one.

If they decide to add useful single intruments/sections (Vl1, Vl2, Vla, Vlc, CB's) they can later on add all combinations of the world. I'm fine with that. But they should start with a useful orchestra.


----------



## muadgil

Saxer said:


> I like the sound very much and it seems to be a really useful ensemble library. Finally ensembles with enough velocity layers and string vibrato control. And it seems to avoid the ugly sample build up when playing full tutti.
> I also like the idea of a basic ensemble library that will grow to a full orchestra over time.
> 
> But I'm very disappointed to read about the instrument combination approach. I want celli and an horns. But I will never ever use a celli+horn patch. Don't tell me they will sound "togetherer" than two sample tracks. What if I want the horn to end earlier and from there double the celli with a clarinet? Buying the celli+clarinet patch? It's like having a collection of pecils. The green can write "Af" and the blue can write "Am". Want to write "Ass"? Buy the red one.
> 
> If they decide to add useful single intruments/sections (Vl1, Vl2, Vla, Vlc, CB's) they can later on add all combinations of the world. I'm fine with that. But they should start with a useful orchestra.


That's why we need a clear roadmap before deciding to invest in the SAR orchestra.... 
A "legato module" at 49€ with all individual instrument isn't equal to 
A legato module at 49€ with celli+horns... 
If you have a roadmap , at Spitfire headquarters , you should share it with us . . . 
I'd gladly invest in this library by 49€ steps (a little monthly pleasure ) if the modules are worth it.


----------



## merty

Aren't ensemble lib.s traditionally made of individual section combinations? 

I mean, can we assume they already made the individual sections (maybe working on legato's etc.) but releasing this now as a marketing thing?


----------



## Beans

merty said:


> can we assume they already made the individual sections (maybe working on legato's etc.) but releasing this now as a marketing thing?



The release strategy and schedule can be for many reasons at once. One assumption is that they wanted to get something out within a specific timeframe, and this is what made sense within that timeframe. I'm pretty ignorant as to the process of editing for legatos, but I imagine it could be pretty darn time consuming.

Disappointed with the approach or not, it makes sense as a viable option for the company. While I'm excited about the idea of a "complete" orchestra at Abbey 1, I certainly don't have a burning desire for the _current _state of the offer. Yet, the $149 off (pre-order discount + credit toward future purchase) is difficult to pass up.


----------



## John R Wilson

merty said:


> Aren't ensemble lib.s traditionally made of individual section combinations?
> 
> I mean, can we assume they already made the individual sections (maybe working on legato's etc.) but releasing this now as a marketing thing?



Is Abbey Road One Foundations recorded in sections then pieced together to make the ensembles spread over the keyboard? You can pretty easily make your own ensemble type patches and different combinations with the the BBCSO and Unify.


----------



## merty

Assuming this is true (I don't know details of sampling) and they already announced the 2021 next release will be again ensemble-like, then they have a long time-frame before the bigger release.

This might mean during this time-period they may release expected fixes/additions to previously released libraries.

Reading comments here felt like their famous habbit of delaying fixes/updates is really starting to get to them, a distrust is blocking an excitement we're used to see here when something new and big is released.


----------



## Mike Fox

hbjdk said:


> Still, many people think that even today, HO Strings and Brass are among the top libraries for their section.



They are.


----------



## Ashermusic

This is not for me, but I certainly understand it’s appeal.


----------



## Mike Fox

Paul Cardon said:


> They've also NEVER lowered the prices over the years.



This isn't true at all. When Symphobia first came out, it was like $1500!

Not to mention that SAM's quality control is about as solid as it gets (much more so than SA), so they're updates were focused on minor "fixes", GUI updates, and new content.


----------



## robgb

Joulupukki said:


> I tend to prefer concert sounds rather than filmstudio bombast sounds.


Film studio sounds are not necessarily bombastic. They can also have a more intimate, closer sound, which is what I'm hearing in the demo.


----------



## Beans

Guy Michelmore is going live to discuss this new library:


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Not entirely sure what point you’re making but you’re confusing recording with sampling, which involves more than recording (scripting, recording with scripting in mind, editing, etc.). And those elements have evolved greatly since the Hollywood series was released (and likely will be part of the Opus update).


In your post above you said something like "sample techniques have improved compared to 10-15 years ago", so I just wanted to point out that it's not like there weren't skillful engineers 10 years ago using high quality gear. And I pointed to East West Hollywood Orchestra as an example of a well-recorded and deep sample library.

Ah, I can see I confused recording with sampling again 
You are absolutely right that scripting etc. have improved, no question about it.


----------



## Ruffian Price

Yeah, as far as _sample techniques_ go, it should be clear from the walkthrough that this will be more of the same. They've got a process and are sticking to it, focusing on sound over playability. There is a certain "high-end keyboard workstation" feel to the demos, especially in the pseudo-legato with overlaid notes that's giving me flashbacks to EWQLSO


----------



## Johnny

Mike Fox said:


> This isn't true at all. When Symphobia first came out, it was like $1500!
> 
> Not to mention that SAM's quality control is about as solid as it gets (much more so than SA), so they're updates were focused on both minor "fixes", GUI updates, and new content.


Right on point! And to back this up! Yes, many of us paid dam near $1499.99 for Symphobia 1 and now they are nearly half price now. And I've definitely seen Symphobia 30% or 40% off sales over the years. And not to mention what you do get from Project Sam, is a life time of free updates! Even ten years later, they are usually finding ways to improve their GUI and reinvigorate the old gems- still worth every penny to date! : )


----------



## Zedcars

Inspired by @Alex Fraser from the mega thread last year.


----------



## Johnny

Ruffian Price said:


> Yeah, as far as _sample techniques_ go, it should be clear from the walkthrough that this will be more of the same. They've got a process and are sticking to it, focusing on sound over playability. There is a certain "high-end keyboard workstation" feel to the demos, especially in the pseudo-legato with overlaid notes that's giving me flashbacks to EWQLSO


That being said, what I can see however, (for many of us that might buy into ONE) is for the price this can be a great core sound for the basis of your track to add realism, depth and life into your mix. The sense of depth and space is extremely attractive for any traditional "Williams'esque" film score writing. Even with just sustains and short notes, ONE sounds pretty vibrant and lively; and then of course you can layer in your favorite soaring string libraries within the mix to get those flowing melodic lines out of your composition. Yes, it's just a different sound, but very familiar to us old dogs from the Spielberg generation of classic cinema  ONE is instantly recognizable as just that- a sound that the VI market was kind of missing in my opinion ;p


----------



## Kevperry777

Beans said:


> Guy Michelmore is going live to discuss this new library:




Wow. Ya can’t fault the sound.


----------



## jules

Beans said:


> Guy Michelmore is going live to discuss this new library:



This guy is awsome ! He totally sold me on this lib although i absolutely don’t need it. Stellar sound !


----------



## Al Maurice

Looking at Guy Michelmore's assement, right now as this library stands, we probably shouldn't see this anything more than a sketching library. And that being said, it should certainly be compared with other such libraries instead. Then the only question comes what libraries to marry this with.

And this all depends on where it might go next, but that's only a wait and see for now.

So do you invest in this now, or wait for the inevitable price reduction later?


----------



## jaketanner

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Spitfire:
> "Announcement — Thursday October 22, 5pm BST" mentioning history won't be repeated. That's it. No other "hype" from them.
> 
> Orchestral Tools:
> Posted a puzzle here 9 days before announcing Phoenix Orchestra. Continue to post teasers for upcoming releases in the Commercials section.
> 
> You can't blame Spitfire for Vi-C getting their pants in a twist.


It's not a blame, it's an observation as things unfold...but this is typical for any hyped up release, not just SFA...and I also didn't mean that SF hyped it up, but in general.


----------



## Beans

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Spitfire:
> "Announcement — Thursday October 22, 5pm BST" mentioning history won't be repeated. That's it. No other "hype" from them.



While I don't have a problem with it, there was also the countdown that Spitfire Audio kept posting to Twitter, with each number revealing more of the recording room. Some people on twitter seemed set off by that, but I think a good few people here had fun with the guessing game.


----------



## JohnG

axb312 said:


> Does anyone actually use so many mics?



Not necessarily all at once, but last time I recorded there the engineer put out 89 mics (if I remember right). It gives maximum flexibility to mix and bring out details.

IDK if this is the "right" number of mic positions or not but I do like the pre-baked stereo mixes provided for speedy comparisons. If you have to work fast, being able to change the sound quickly can be a nice advantage; I've used quite a few different mic positions on HZ Strings, for example.


----------



## JohnG

Al Maurice said:


> Looking at Guy Michelmore's assement, right now as this library stands, we probably shouldn't see this anything more than a sketching library.



I don't see it that way, exactly. More like a Symphobia, which sometimes absolutely ends up in the mix even today (how old is that library anyway??)

Some of the shorts are so soft and tight -- really I can't think of anything quite like them.


----------



## NoamL

Beans said:


> Guy Michelmore is going live to discuss this new library:




Awesome! Gonna watch this closely. Congrats Guy M on getting an early copy


----------



## Mike Fox

JohnG said:


> I don't see it that way, exactly. More like a Symphobia, which sometimes absolutely ends up in the mix even today (how old is that library anyway??)
> 
> Some of the shorts are so soft and tight -- really I can't think of anything quite like them.


Exactly. And even if it is more of a "sketch" library, there could be some gems that become a go-to.


----------



## Mike Fox

Beans said:


> Guy Michelmore is going live to discuss this new library:



There ya have it folks, an off the cuff go at the library, and it sounds excellent.

As much as I hate the Spitfire player, I'll probably end up buying this. That's how much i like the sound, especially the room.


----------



## Alex Fraser

JohnG said:


> I don't see it that way, exactly. More like a Symphobia, which sometimes absolutely ends up in the mix even today (how old is that library anyway??)
> 
> Some of the shorts are so soft and tight -- really I can't think of anything quite like them.


Agree. And with a couple of choice expansions (legato?) there's a lot of possibilities. Perfect underscore tool, for example.


----------



## Mike Fox

I just hope Spitfire doesn't pull a fast one like they did with Aperture.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Beans said:


> While I don't have a problem with it, there was also the countdown that Spitfire Audio kept posting to Twitter, with each number revealing more of the recording room. Some people on twitter seemed set off by that, but I think a good few people here had fun with the guessing game.



The list of things that people are set off by on Twitter is endless  You also do know that you have *follow* Spitfire on Twitter in order to see their posts? You're opting in!


----------



## NoamL

And the walkthrough has been published with the fixed audio at the end:


----------



## Kevperry777

Beans said:


> Guy Michelmore is going live to discuss this new library:




Cut that man a check....that was very helpful. Sounds fantastic in use. Sold me more than the walkthrough.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

One of the more amusing things about Spitfire threads at Vi-C is all the keyboard warriors going "Spitfire doesn't know priorities", "what dummies for making these choices", "who are these products even for", etc., etc. I find it amusing because it seems these folks don't actually know what Christian Henson does - that is, he's a *working composer* with quite a long list of credits (for those little known networks like the BBC and Channel 4). He and Paul are not some random guys with a microphone that decided they wanted to record a cowbell or something. No other commercial sample developer (outside of maybe Mike Patti) are quite in the same boat from what I've found. Spitfire's whole start was making bespoke sample libraries for both themselves and their A-list friends. To claim that this product is useless for working composers unless X/Y/Z is added or that Spitfire has no idea how people use samples or whatever is such ignorance, it boggles the mind. If it doesn't suit your workflow, that's fine. To claim Spitfire doesn't know what composers need and are looking for, is just plain wrong.


----------



## Alex Fraser

ALittleNightMusic said:


> One of the more amusing things about Spitfire threads at Vi-C is all the keyboard warriors going "Spitfire doesn't know priorities", "what dummies for making these choices", "who are these products even for", etc., etc. I find it amusing because it seems these folks don't actually know what Christian Henson does - that is, he's a *working composer* with quite a long list of credits (for those little known networks like the BBC and Channel 4). He and Paul are not some random guys with a microphone that decided they wanted to record a cowbell or something. No other commercial sample developer (outside of maybe Mike Patti) are quite in the same boat from what I've found. Spitfire's whole start was making bespoke sample libraries for both themselves and their A-list friends. To claim that this product is useless for working composers unless X/Y/Z is added or that Spitfire has no idea how people use samples or whatever is such ignorance, it boggles the mind. If it doesn't suit your workflow, that's fine. To claim Spitfire doesn't know what composers need and are looking for, is just plain wrong.


Exactly. The idea that you finesse each individual instrument of the orchestra every time you score picture is insane.
At least at my “d list” level anyway. 😉


----------



## RSK

Kevperry777 said:


> Cut that man a check....that was very helpful. Sounds fantastic in use. Sold me more than the walkthrough.



Good God, that sounds wonderful.


----------



## dzilizzi

I definitely like the sound. But this was the year I was hoping to get BBCSO Pro during the wishlist sale. I can see this as being the basis for a more modular library, similar to how SSO/BML was originally, I would get it now. But I generally prefer the individual sections. 

Though Guy was saying this will mix well with BBCSO room-wise, which makes it an option for the ensemble parts and loud horns. Well, there's another week to think about it. And eventually, it will be on sale. 

Got to say, after watching Guy's video, I was really disappointed at my first look at Abby Road Studios. All the graffiti and the building looked so small. Where's the big studio???? Is it all a fake done with some fancy reverb?


----------



## Paul Cardon

Michael Antrum said:


> What are you talking about ? Symphobia I & II now cost 299 euro and Lumina is 399.....
> 
> I paid a hell of a lot more than that for them back in the day....


Big egg on my face moment, I was hilariously wrong, edited my post


----------



## Paul Cardon

Mike Fox said:


> This isn't true at all. When Symphobia first came out, it was like $1500!
> 
> Not to mention that SAM's quality control is about as solid as it gets (much more so than SA), so they're updates were focused on minor "fixes", GUI updates, and new content.


Yup lol, I was just straight-up wrong about this... Edited my post !


----------



## Michael Antrum

Paul Cardon said:


> Big egg on my face moment, I was hilariously wrong, edited my post



It's funny how one's memory plays tricks. I'm still convinced i'm in my 30's.....


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen

Michael Antrum said:


> It's funny how one's memory plays tricks. I'm still convinced i'm in my 30's.....


It would be some plot twist if you really are in your 30’s!


----------



## mscp

jononotbono said:


> How many pages will this thread get to? I detect a serious VI-C journey incoming.



58.  
Or 69.


----------



## Geoff Grace

dzilizzi said:


> Well, there's another week to think about it. And eventually, it will be on sale.



I wouldn't be surprised to see it back at intro price in a couple of months during the wish list sale; and of course, if you're willing to wait until the following Christmas, a 40% off sale would bring it down to $269.40.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## dzilizzi

Geoff Grace said:


> I wouldn't be surprised to see it back at intro price in a couple of months during the wish list sale; and of course, if you're willing to wait until the following Christmas, a 40% off sale would bring it down to $269.40.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Geoff


That's kind of what I was thinking. And in another year, I will have an idea of what the modules are.


----------



## Peter Satera

ALittleNightMusic said:


> One of the more amusing things about Spitfire threads at Vi-C is all the keyboard warriors going "Spitfire doesn't know priorities", "what dummies for making these choices", "who are these products even for", etc., etc. I find it amusing because it seems these folks don't actually know what Christian Henson does - that is, he's a *working composer* with quite a long list of credits (for those little known networks like the BBC and Channel 4). He and Paul are not some random guys with a microphone that decided they wanted to record a cowbell or something. No other commercial sample developer (outside of maybe Mike Patti) are quite in the same boat from what I've found. Spitfire's whole start was making bespoke sample libraries for both themselves and their A-list friends. To claim that this product is useless for working composers unless X/Y/Z is added or that Spitfire has no idea how people use samples or whatever is such ignorance, it boggles the mind. If it doesn't suit your workflow, that's fine. To claim Spitfire doesn't know what composers need and are looking for, is just plain wrong.



We know exactly what Paul/Christian do, thanks. I'm sure it's gratifying to point the finger at those not enticed by a product for reasons which have been justified, such as lack of articulations or sections for price point, and generalising those composers simply as *keyboard warriors* can make your perspective come across with greater validity.

These users voicing this opinion have just as much credibility in what they think about a product as you do, there's no need to defame because their opinion do not align with yours, nor do you need to go down this route before it becomes ironic.


----------



## dcoscina

Peter Satera said:


> We know exactly what Paul/Christian do, thanks. I'm sure it's gratifying to point the finger at those not enticed by a product for reasons which have been justified, such as lack of articulations or sections for price point, and generalising those composers simply as *keyboard warriors* can make your perspective come across with greater validity.
> 
> These users voicing this opinion have just as much credibility in what they think about a product as you do, there's no need to defame because their opinion do not align with yours, nor do you need to go down this route before it becomes ironic.


You must admit that there seems to be no pleasing some people Here, regardless of the developer or product. It begs the question as to what are they doing if all these products are flawed?


----------



## Ashermusic

dcoscina said:


> You must admit that there seems to be no pleasing some people Here, regardless of the developer or product. It begs the question as to what are they doing if all these products are flawed?



Everyone should always _begin_ with the assumption that ANY sample library has empirical flaws as well as things that are flaws in some peoples' opinions. 

As do all users


----------



## lewisinkpress

Can I sorta ask a tangetial question. If one was looking for a sketching library, or a library that had full section high/lows - would Abbey Road 1 be comparable or ... to Albion 1? If you were going to purchase one of them first, which one -- (if you already had BBCSO)... thanks!


----------



## ism

Ashermusic said:


> Everyone should always _begin_ with the assumption that ANY sample library has empirical flaws as well as things that are flaws in some peoples' opinions.
> 
> As do all users


The problem of course isn’t that we don’t know this, it’s that some critiques are articulated in ways that are - rightly and/or wrongly - read as also to be attacking the judgement of people who don’t share those critiques. Hence the dumpster fire that is the internet. :( Good thing I have sample libraries to distract me from how the terrible the whole dynamic of it is


----------



## purple

I


lewisinkpress said:


> Can I sorta ask a tangetial question. If one was looking for a sketching library, or a library that had full section high/lows - would Abbey Road 1 be comparable or ... to Albion 1? If you were going to purchase one of them first, which one -- (if you already had BBCSO)... thanks!


I don't know why anyone would want to spend $400 to sketch out music, plenty of free piano patches out there. That said, judging by the demos we've seen it seems to me this library is a little more niche than the albions. I could be wrong. I get the sense that while I prefer this sound, the albions are more flexible.


----------



## RSK

dcoscina said:


> You must admit that there seems to be no pleasing some people Here, regardless of the developer or product. It begs the question as to what are they doing if all these products are flawed?


If they whined about the precision of the shorts, or the lack of portamento, I would agree that it's quibbling over minor details. But really, no legato? 

The library sounds great in the demos, but if you listen, all the demos are structured in a way to avoid legato. Even Guy Michelmore's.

Is there value to be found in it? At the intro price I'd have to say yes. But a credible argument can be made that they are simply trading on the studio's name. It sounds good, but it's usefulness is severly hampered by the lack of one of the most essential articulations of all.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Peter Satera said:


> We know exactly what Paul/Christian do, thanks. I'm sure it's gratifying to point the finger at those not enticed by a product for reasons which have been justified, such as lack of articulations or sections for price point, and generalising those composers simply as *keyboard warriors* can make your perspective come across with greater validity.
> 
> These users voicing this opinion have just as much credibility in what they think about a product as you do, there's no need to defame because their opinion do not align with yours, nor do you need to go down this route before it becomes ironic.



Ooo...touched a nerve, did I? 

I wasn't referring to you in the slightest, but I hope you feel better soon. It's Friday after all and plenty of wine to be had. Hopefully with your friends (unless you were using the royal "we").

Criticism of the product surely is not only interesting but likely quite helpful for Spitfire. Claiming Spitfire lacks awareness of what composers do / need doesn't seem quite as productive.

As I stated before, I'm not particularly enticed by the product for some of the reasons you pointed out. So I guess that makes me part of your keyboard warrior club? Oh the irony.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand.


----------



## ism

purple said:


> I
> 
> I don't know why anyone would want to spend $400 to sketch out music, plenty of free piano patches out there. That said, judging by the demos we've seen it seems to me this library is a little more niche than the albions. I could be wrong. I get the sense that while I prefer this sound, the albions are more flexible.




It also has more dyanmic layers, much more extensive percussion, but most importantly, it has that same quality of ‘coherence’ that everyone was struggling to express when BBCSO first came out.

Could be the spill mics. Could be the Jake Jackson mix from all 12 mics. Could be Spitfire‘s decade or Abby Road’s decades of sound engineering experience. Or it could be the room itself (and the decades of experience in acoustic treatment, mic placement). Or the Virtuosic musicians who have somehow collectively developed an intimate attunement to playing to the sweet spots of the room. 

Whatever it is - and I think I’m going to keep calling it ‘coherence’ without being able to quite define the term (Guy talks about ‘glue’ in his video , by which he maybe means something similar).

This probably isn’t even the library for me ... BBCSO’s sonority probably better fits my own sonic ambitions at the moment. But from the first notes of the first demo, I think you can really hear that this is some virtuosic work with sound, and the emotion that sound evokes and that level of sheer sonority.

Not that every llibrary needs this virtuosity at this level - Fluffy Audio‘s Venice strings has a quality that I absolutely love. But it’s an emotional quality in the performances, and there’s no pretense that the recording enginnering or mic setup is on the same level of virtuosity of recent SF llibs. But for what I would write with Venice Strings, it’s in that distinctively ‘fluffy-esque’ emotional quality of the performance would be where I’d aim for the musicality of the work to land. Very different from the sweet spots of Tundra or SCS or BBCSO or this library. (Or Light and Sound Chamber Strings which have a sonority and include ‘bleed‘ mics, which perhaps anticipate the importance of the spills). 



I guess I just really love sample libraries. And sound.


----------



## dcoscina

Peter Satera said:


> If these people are not up for meaningful discussion there's no point in engaging in it, nor fueling it with a direct message on their credibility. It turns personal and I'd like to think we're all spending way too much money to go to such lengths to make it about each other, rather than what is important, the product. I don't want to argue, I want to get excited.
> 
> I am enticed by this, truly, I am. And I am absolutely up for hearing why it is a good investment over my concerns voiced at this point. But I'm not up for sweeping generalisation in aim to discredit my opposing opinion, to deter me from making contrasting thoughts, with aim to be perceived solely as a 'keyboard warrior'.
> 
> As I said, we're all spending way too money to disregard peoples perspective as disingenuous uninformed drivel. We need to get back on track.
> 
> For one, I'm interested in what we think these packs will really contain, and does this make the existing ensemble library worth the investment?


I don’t like calling people names and wouldn’t use that terminology. Perhaps I’ve been spending too much time on this forum and social media in general and I’m finding it all very negative. 
At this stage, it’s likely we all have more than enough libraries to compose good music on. Back in 2005 all I had was EWQL Gold XP and some VSL via Kontakt factory library. And those libraries were not cheap. 
Compared to today. So I still marvel at the level of quality and pricing for these libraries nowadays.


----------



## prodigalson

That brass. that brass. that brass!

@christianhenson Slap some legato transitions on those Horn longs and you can slap my ass and call me Sally


----------



## robgb

Honestly, if you want a great "sketch pad," take a look at the Amadeus Symphonic Orchestra library. It includes an ensemble "symphony" patch that's pretty amazing sounding and is perfect for sketching. You can even separate the patch into winds, strings, brass, percussion & choir—or combine them however you like. Probably not something you'd ever use for a final production (then again, maybe), but certainly an inspiring enough sketch pad for most composers.


----------



## Beans

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Criticism of the product surely is not only interesting but likely quite helpful for Spitfire. Claiming Spitfire lacks awareness of what composers do / need doesn't seem quite as productive.



For most of my career, I've been in software product management. For most of that, I've worked within one industry or what we call a "vertical." I know my space damn well. 

But I still rely on the "complainers." The people who rile each other up on Facebook because an update wiped out a few small settings, or because one word changed on a button. The people who have screenshots from a roadmap webinar from 2016 (when I was on a dang hiatus, no less) pointing to a single bullet point that we haven't delivered on because we changed strategy.

Their feedback, despite the tone and bandwagoning, is extremely helpful. It may make for a less enjoyable user community at times, but it's not permanent and it doesn't permeate all topics.

I'm disappointed about AROOF, but I'm disappointed because* it's not for me and I was hoping it would be* (at least not yet). It's such a cool thing, to be recording at Abbey Road One, and I imagine _some _frustrated users are simply in the same boat as I am. And maybe they're just expressing it with some extra vigor.


----------



## sostenuto

Will add quickly when Abbey Road Studios hires a local dude to paint the low front wall .... as needed. 
Large /small building ... both can look sleazy with that passerby intro .....


----------



## Geoff Grace

Beans said:


> I'm disappointed about AROOF, but I'm disappointed because* it's not for me and I was hoping it would be* (at least not yet).


Perhaps then, for those who are disappointed, SARO might be a more appropriate acronym than AROOF. 

Best,

Geoff


----------



## szczaw

I have doubts that further 100 bucks off would have completely resolved


----------



## Ashermusic

Beans said:


> I'm disappointed about AROOF, but I'm disappointed because* it's not for me and I was hoping it would be* (at least not yet). It's such a cool thing, to be recording at Abbey Road One, and I imagine _some _frustrated users are simply in the same boat as I am. And maybe they're just expressing it with some extra vigor.



There is expressing it “with some extra vigor” and there is being a jerk because it is on a forum with no consequences.


----------



## Ashermusic

ism said:


> The problem of course isn’t that we don’t know this, it’s that some critiques are articulated in ways that are - rightly and/or wrongly - read as also to be attacking the judgement of people who don’t share those critiques. Hence the dumpster fire that is the internet. :( Good thing I have sample libraries to distract me from how the terrible the whole dynamic of it is



I try, and admittedly sometimes fail, to remind myself to never write anything from a device that I would not say to the person if he/she was standing in front of me and was bigger and tougher.


----------



## Michael Antrum

Just watched Guy Michelmore's take on it (now there's a man who quite clearly loves what he does.....)

It does sound rather good indeed - but the intro price is just a bit more that my impulse purchase limit. Nor do I really need an ensemble library....

I think what might have sold it to me would have been a very clear indication of what is coming in terms of the new 'Extensively Sampled Orchestra', and how it would all fit together with the new release, rather than some rather vague statements. 

But all I know for sure is it seems we are going to get the odd instrument dropping now and then, which (like the 'build your own R2D2' type magazine) week by week builds up into - well - we don't really know what at this point. 

When Spitfire said earlier they've already recorded '9 Selections' it seems that is likely to be more ensembles - much like some of the excellent BBO offerings from VSL, perhaps.

It all seems rather unclear, and I'm still highly unimpressed that the long promised SSO reboot is stil not here, and there is no clear statement on whether or not this has in fact been canceled or not. 

However, if I were looking at a first library, BBCSO and Abbey One would be near the top of the list, though oddly they seem to be in direct competition with each other. 

BBCSO is complete, but it seems likely it won't be expanded further with more detailed samples / articulations / layers. (Thought I'm sure there will be bug fixes and player updates).

Abbey One is an ensemble library, with expansions (which I am guessing arr more ensembles - possibly with legatos) being added in the future. 

Plus a new deeply sampled orchestra that is coming but when and how it fits in with what they are selling today is unclear.

I must say, however, that it is a tremendous coup for Spitfire to be doing this at Abbey Road, and it really does sound very nice indeed.......

So congratulations to the Spitfire team on an impressive new library, but when you are selling a library series based on what it will become, you really need to be a bit more clear about where everything is going, even if its just an outline...

(... And I know I probably won't get an answer, but are you still planning to reboot SSO, or is that now dead in the water !)


----------



## Frederick

I think it's a fair to say at the very least Spitfire failed in their communications here.

Instead of repeating over and over on their product page how great Abbey Road Studios is and which soundtracks have been recorded there, they should have used that space to explain the lack of legato and other basic articulations.

They should have revealed more about the 9 upcoming selections, so it would be more clear if those are going to fix what seems to be missing in foundations. My fear is, based on their 'pre-orchestrated' comment on the product page, that you're going to get high strings legato, but combined with other instruments so it would not be a generic fix for the lack of legato in the foundation.

They should have more attention for what actually is in it. E.g.: How about those 3 options for the release of the short notes? They sure listened to the user feedback on the shorts in SSO there! Why not write about that? If you blinked in the wrong spot you may have missed it in Paul's walkthrough...

Fortunately they can still fix the communication...


----------



## easyrider

Michael Antrum said:


> (... And I know I probably won't get an answer, but are you still planning to reboot SSO, or is that now dead in the water !)





paulthomson said:


> Thanks Alex!
> 
> Just a note to also say _ we haven’t stopped working on SSO or BBC either. These are all really important to us. We want to offer composers as much choice as possible to create your music.
> 
> P


----------



## Michael Antrum

Yes, but was does that mean ?

It's easy enough to say 'yes, we are still planning on rebooting SSO as previously promised' or 'no, we are cancelling the SSO reboot to concentrate on a new Abbey Road Orchestra.'.

Saying 'we haven't stopped working on in SSO or BBC either' is PR speak and means nothing. It's the kind of answer you expect from a politician.....


----------



## easyrider

Mike Fox said:


> There ya have it folks, an off the cuff go at the library, and it sounds excellent.
> 
> As much as I hate the Spitfire player, I'll probably end up buying this. That's how much i like the sound, especially the room.




I knew you would break


----------



## JonS

My guess is SSO Pro will eventually exist and so will an entire long list of traditional libraries recorded at Abbey Road; some will be Evolutions, some will be ensemble sections, some solo instruments, some orchestrated combos, and some will be soundscapes. Spitfire is a very successful developer so it’s only a matter of time before what you wanted magically appears as a library. Everyone just needs to be patient. We will probably see more BBC based libraries too at some point. Just like CSW and CSP will eventually exist as well to go with people who own CSS and CSB.


----------



## scoringdreams

Having time to think and watch through the videos on the Abbey Road One product, I feel that this is the Masse that we all need. It's probably one of the only few advanced libraries (with all the mic positions / layers etc.) within the ensemble market.

Unsure if these questions have been answered, but I am just gonna ask them here:

- Is this a portable-rig (low RAM) friendly high quality library? - within 10GB RAM usage?
- Is this going to blend well with my Garritan CFX? - the piano player in me needs to know..
- Is this series going to introduce more detailed ensembles or detailed instruments? - not sure what the definition of fidelity is for this product line
- Is this collaboration going to last for future developments? - longevity of the collaboration for future innovations (the marketer in me needs to know too)

If anyone has answers on ^, would be really interested to know. If any 2.5 of these are a yes, I am pulling the pre-order trigger immediately!


----------



## mcalis

jamwerks said:


> SF probably had big plans with the BBC at Maida Vale, and had maybe even recorded some new instruments and libraries. When Abbey Road decided to let SF record there, that probably changed all their plans.
> 
> The fact that SF has been so quite for the last year (VSL, a smaller company, has put out tons more), that only ONE is ready now with expansions only in 2021, makes it seem like plans were changed and some time was lost.
> 
> SSO probably will get final updates but the SF player probably not ready to handle them yet (advanced art management, time-stretching, multi-timbral, and other still lacking). Bringing a new player to Synchron level takes years and years.
> 
> All speculation, probably...


Somehow almost everyone seems to miss/forget that Maide Vale is closing its doors for good (possibly already has, I don't remember the exact date). The changes of BBCSO getting new instruments is next to zero for that reason, unless SA already recorded it.
So, no, I don't think they had big plans with it and then shifted.


----------



## dcoscina

Peter Satera said:


> The irony is nothing to do with you not purchasing the library after seeing benefits of it. The irony is in your comment to side-track the discussion on a product to create general and non-direct smear on individuals, to classify their statements as non-productive.
> 
> As you say, though back on topic.
> 
> 
> Can't agree more about the internet comments, they're exhaustive. You're spot on about the quality and pricing, maybe this is something I have overlooked? That compared to the likes of where we were 10 year ago, the pricing has made top halls like Abbey accessible, to anyone really.
> 
> With regards to today's expectations and options I'd be quite interested in knowing in some sort of poll if the lack of legato is a make or break decision on the purchase. Even if it's a sample of like 200 - 300 votes. It gives us an idea, as well as sample library developers how much people regard articulations v room. Hmm, maybe i'll put something up on a group I run on facebook.


Here are my thoughts on legato-there was a time when we did not have them at all. Or else they were reserved for people with lotsa dough to buy the VSL collection back 15 years ago. That made composers more cognizant about phrasing and how to get the most out of the sounds they had. 

the other thing that puzzles me is a lot of music I hear is based on ostinatos or repeated figures with chordal material or else long notes played over it with a massive unison section. There doesn’t seem to be much need for expressive legatos with what’s popular stylistically these days...just have a listen to what it popular in film and tv scores. It’s mostly atmospheric, sound textures. Maybe some ominous chords. If you write a melody or theme, it’s likely to be thrown out or mixed down.

My sense is Spitfire is responding to whats popular. And also they have indicated that more expansions are coming for ARO which will include legatos. So it appears that this is just the beginning for this line and it sounds very promising.

regarding the name calling, I make every effort to articulate something in a manner that I would feel comfortable saying to that person face to face. The internet makes us all a little bolder than we would be in a live setting and I look back at some of my posts from a decade ago and shake my head.

I decided a few years back that if I didn’t have anything nice to say about a composer, a score or a sample library, I wouldn’t say it at all, or else find some diplomatic way of articulating why it didn’t appeal to me. Yes, everyone has a right to say whatever they want but it doesn’t mean they always should, especially in the caustic manner that seems rife in Internet forums. Anyway, that’s my take on all this...who knows if it’s right or wrong but I’ve said my peace.

i personally cannot wait until November 5th!!


----------



## dcoscina

Peter Satera said:


> @dcoscina
> 
> Don't you find it interesting though, that on one hand we've just seen Modus released, which has these transition phases, Vista which has lush legato and even Tina Guo Legato was just updated which is still a very welcomed library. It's still popular. Maybe because I still really like these sorta themes. I get the huge amount of work which has to be done for legato, and that increases the price point. And if they are segmented out, i'm find with that. But by keeping what is coming secretive, it feels if I bought into this, I'd be buying into half a library, without knowing if the rest _complete it_, or not.
> 
> Damn it spitfire! What are the packs!? lol


And that's completely understandable. Totally. Since I don't work for Spitfire, I don't know what motivates them to release their products at the time they do. I would LOVE hearing those horns with legato because I too write music that is thematically driven. But I guess my feeling is "all in good time". There is that offer about getting a free sound pack if one orders or pre orders or whatever. My feeling is that pack will contain legatos.... but I'm speculating.. I don't know for certain.




Nowadays, I try to assess whether I NEED something, or WANT something. ARO sits between both. It's something that I could benefit from because I don't feel I have that sound in my current set up. And it's something I really WANT.


----------



## prodigalson

dcoscina said:


> Nowadays, I try to assess whether I NEED something, or WANT something. ARO sits between both. It's something that I could benefit from because I don't feel I have that sound in my current set up. And it's something I really WANT.



+100


----------



## Ashermusic

Exactly. I think we all suffer from gear lust here and are attracted to shiny new toys, but in the end we perhaps should ask ourselves, “will this make the music I like/ need to compose sound enough better or achieve more quickly enough to justify the expense vs other ways that money can be utilized?”

With Symphonic Motions, I feel the answer is clearly yes, because it definitely does help create some popular devices in commercial music far more effortlessly and rather better sounding than anything else I had. This, great as it sounds, my reaction is that I can’t say the same.

But it _does_ sound really nice.


----------



## Mike Fox

easyrider said:


> I knew you would break


"Probably" doesn't mean definitely.


----------



## holywilly

I do get inspired and motivative by new sample libraries, I spent quite a lots of time study each library and blend them together for new sound, for each film project.
I can’t wait to get hands on on the new Abbey Road series.


----------



## Ashermusic

holywilly said:


> I do get inspired and motivative by new sample libraries, I spent quite a lots of time study each library and blend them together for new sound, for each film project.
> I can’t wait to get hands on on the new Abbey Road series.



So essentially you are a crack addict


----------



## easyrider

Mike Fox said:


> "Probably" doesn't mean definitely.



In the world of sample library purchases it does!


----------



## Mike Fox

easyrider said:


> In the world of sample library purchases it does!


You might be onto something there!


----------



## TintoL

I don't understand why to expend soo much money recording in Abbey Road and NOT having a performance legato articulation. That's a deal breaker to me. Who wants to put all the work to get a whole piece done with long notes and attaching them together. Unless this idea is to do the mood pad thing for modern film.


----------



## easyrider

TintoL said:


> I don't understand why to expend soo much money recording in Abbey Road and NOT having a performance legato articulation. That's a deal breaker to me. Who wants to put all the work to get a whole piece done with long notes and attaching them together. Unless this idea is to do the mood pad thing for modern film.



There will be addons for legato...


----------



## RSK

Michael Antrum said:


> BBCSO is complete, but it seems likely it won't be expanded further with more detailed samples / articulations / layers. (Thought I'm sure there will be bug fixes and player updates).



I highly doubt there will be more recorded material in the BBCSO series as the BBC have closed down Maida Vale and have no intention of opening it back up.


----------



## easyrider

BBC-owned Maida Vale Studios given Grade-II listed status by Historic England


The historic BBC Studios building in Maida Vale has been given Grade II-listed status by Historic England.




www.hamhigh.co.uk


----------



## Hendrixon

dzilizzi said:


> That's kind of what I was thinking. And in another year, I will have an idea of what the modules are.



But by that time SA will move to record their next thing in MGM thus will make you feel that Abby was abandoned...


----------



## RSK

easyrider said:


> BBC-owned Maida Vale Studios given Grade-II listed status by Historic England
> 
> 
> The historic BBC Studios building in Maida Vale has been given Grade II-listed status by Historic England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hamhigh.co.uk











Maida Vale studios: BBC fights listed status to cash in


BBC opposes grade II listing for Maida Vale recording studios it wants to sell off as apartments




www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## easyrider

RSK said:


> Maida Vale studios: BBC fights listed status to cash in
> 
> 
> BBC opposes grade II listing for Maida Vale recording studios it wants to sell off as apartments
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



If they can’t sell it...they might upgrade it...BBC is strapped for cash these days...


----------



## JTB

This looks promising.

"Each Selections library is focussed on accomplishing certain performance elements of orchestral movie music brilliantly - from heroic brass themes, or sparkling woodwind runs, to emotional violin love scenes with a legato patch created using our new recording techniques"

I just hope this doesn't mean a Violins 1 and 2 combined octave patch because that is useless to me.


----------



## VSriHarsha

JTB said:


> This looks promising.
> 
> "Each Selections library is focussed on accomplishing certain performance elements of orchestral movie music brilliantly - from heroic brass themes, or sparkling woodwind runs, to emotional violin love scenes with a legato patch created using our new recording techniques"


That link’s not workin.


----------



## JTB

It's not a link. I just underlined it. It's a few paragraphs up from the articulations list for ABO on the Spitfire site.


----------



## StefVR

I like the spitfire libraries but one thing is very clear for me here. I am very confident spitfire didn’t sell enough bbc orchestra m. They just didn’t make enough money from it as they hoped. So first they segmented into core and starter and now they don’t want to repeat the mistake.

only way to sustain Cashflow is deep product segmentation. So this is just a big starter yryibg to get everyonekn nord. to sell the add in packs. Very much many don’t like the approach next will be strings woodwinds brass percussion all separated at least in 4 packages potentially more for different player size. How else can they ensure new products going forward when more or less they did everything already.

A subscription model has one big advantage btw: it incentivize developer to update andkeep their products up to date because otherwise people cancel. What is sold is a sink cost all you can get is customers not switching brands but let’s be honest mostof us are so addicted we buy anyways


----------



## VSriHarsha

JTB said:


> It's not a link. I just underlined it. It's a few paragraphs up from the articulations list for ABO on the Spitfire site.


lol! Damn I was confused🤣


----------



## tjr

RSK said:


> I highly doubt there will be more recorded material in the BBCSO series as the BBC have closed down Maida Vale and have no intention of opening it back up.



As I understand, they were at Maida Vale recording a year+ before they released their first BBCSO product. It seems conceivable that they already have some additional BBCSO sample content that hasn't been packaged up into finished software yet.


----------



## robgb

So when we buy these libraries that have name brands like ABBEY ROAD and BBC, aren't we also paying for that branding? I'm happy to pay the musicians their due, but what percentage of the price tag does the branded corporation get, and is it absolutely necessary to actually use that branding to create a solid library? With the BBC I get it—since it's the actual BBC orchestra—but couldn't Spitfire have simply hired the Abbey Road studio, recorded their library, and been done with it? What is the value to the consumer for having that brand ABBEY ROAD on the instrument? How much extra are we paying to see a logo? Branding isn't innovation, it's marketing.

EDIT: I have subsequently read that ABBEY ROAD doesn't allow sample libraries to be recorded in their space unless they're part of the deal. I don't know if this is true or not, but in that case I KIND OF get it. Still, I'm not sure that space is worth paying extra for. Especially since most on the other end won't know the difference anyway.


----------



## JonS

easyrider said:


> BBC-owned Maida Vale Studios given Grade-II listed status by Historic England
> 
> 
> The historic BBC Studios building in Maida Vale has been given Grade II-listed status by Historic England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hamhigh.co.uk


They moved to a state-of-the-Art facility so I am sure BBC libraries will continue to get recorded in the new space.


----------



## jbuhler

JonS said:


> They moved to a state-of-the-Art facility so I am sure BBC libraries will continue to get recorded in the new space.


Great excuse to go back, re-record them, and release BBCSO2 in a few years’ time.


----------



## sostenuto

....  question? Personally place some value in having SFA recordings @ Maida Vale, now Abbey Road. What is 'best' SFA _Air - Lyndhurst Hall Library_ to place in similar category, to compare and learn subtleties ?

Well-seasoned ears may never discern true detail ....


----------



## JonS

StefVR said:


> I like the spitfire libraries but one thing is very clear for me here. I am very confident spitfire didn’t sell enough bbc orchestra m. They just didn’t make enough money from it as they hoped. So first they segmented into core and starter and now they don’t want to repeat the mistake.
> 
> only way to sustain Cashflow is deep product segmentation. So this is just a big starter yryibg to get everyonekn nord. to sell the add in packs. Very much many don’t like the approach next will be strings woodwinds brass percussion all separated at least in 4 packages potentially more for different player size. How else can they ensure new products going forward when more or less they did everything already.
> 
> A subscription model has one big advantage btw: it incentivize developer to update andkeep their products up to date because otherwise people cancel. What is sold is a sink cost all you can get is customers not switching brands but let’s be honest mostof us are so addicted we buy anyways


I will not partake in any subscription model, they suck!!


----------



## Hendrixon

Here is my view on SAR ONE:

The first Fundamentals library is what it is, a product, and I have NO problem with what it does or doesn't contain.
The question any one should ask him/her self is if the lib content - as it is - worth him/her the asking price.

That's it. done

All these discussions are pointless, cause if this lib, AS IT IS, no legato, no other advanced articulations, just those ensemble pre orchestrated instruments that you all hate so much, sold for $100?
Who here wouldn't buy it today?
I know I would, without blinking.

So sit with your self and decide whether its worth it for you, don't waste time on vi-c endless threads to give you a collective decision.

Like it and its worth it for you? Buy it.
Like it but its not worth it for you? Don't buy it.
Don't like it and its worth it for you? You're an idiot.

For me? I like it a lot!!!
But without nice legato in all instruments, the *asking price* is not worth it.
To be clear, with legato, for me, the intro price is kind of borderline but I think I might get it... the full price is totally not worth it even with legato.
Since there is no legato, then for me sadly its a pass.


----------



## Hendrixon

p.s.

In my native language if you combine SAR and AROOF you get SAROOF, which translates to:

BURNED


----------



## Marsen

SAROOF, SAROOF, SAROOF is on fire!
SAROOF,...


----------



## jbuhler

JonS said:


> I will not partake in any subscription model, they suck!!


And I don’t see that companies that have adopted the model have been incentivized to more frequent updates.


----------



## Drumdude2112

I dunno , i really wasnt in the market for an ensemble library by ANY stretch (like many here i own most of the 'usual suspects' ) but it DOES sound fantastic and looks HELLA Fun to write with .I can think of WAY worse ways to spend 350 bucks.
Think i may just indulge this one lol.
There goes part of my BF budget .


----------



## easyrider

robgb said:


> So when we buy these libraries that have name brands like ABBEY ROAD and BBC, aren't we also paying for that branding? I'm happy to pay the musicians their due, but what percentage of the price tag does the branded corporation get, and is it absolutely necessary to actually use that branding to create a solid library? With the BBC I get it—since it's the actual BBC orchestra—but couldn't Spitfire have simply hired the Abbey Road studio, recorded their library, and been done with it? What is the value to the consumer for having that brand ABBEY ROAD on the instrument? How much extra are we paying to see a logo? Branding isn't innovation, it's marketing.
> 
> EDIT: I have subsequently read that ABBEY ROAD doesn't allow sample libraries to be recorded in their space unless they're part of the deal. I don't know if this is true or not, but in that case I KIND OF get it. Still, I'm not sure that space is worth paying extra for. Especially since most on the other end won't know the difference anyway.



Are we paying extra though ? Looks to me that AROOF falls in line with other libraries of its ilk...Albion One, BBC Core etc...


----------



## scoringdreams

Value perceived is highly individualistic.


----------



## jaketanner

easyrider said:


> Are we paying extra though ? Looks to me that AROOF falls in line with other libraries of its ilk...Albion One, BBC Core etc...


Not close to BBC core at all...Core is at least all split out, it's along the lines of Albion One for sure.


----------



## dzilizzi

Hendrixon said:


> But by that time SA will move to record their next thing in MGM thus will make you feel that Abby was abandoned...


I'm okay with being behind the curve. I do hope they do an SSO-type library at AR before they stop. I'm doubting they will do MGM any time soon. It isn't British. Royal Albert Hall makes much more sense.


----------



## jbuhler

Hendrixon said:


> Here is my view on SAR ONE:
> 
> The first Fundamentals library is what it is, a product, and I have NO problem with what it does or doesn't contain.
> The question any one should ask him/her self is if the lib content - as it is - worth him/her the asking price.
> 
> That's it. done
> 
> All these discussions are pointless, cause if this lib, AS IT IS, no legato, no other advanced articulations, just those ensemble pre orchestrated instruments that you all hate so much, sold for $100?
> Who here wouldn't buy it today?
> I know I would, without blinking.
> 
> So sit with your self and decide whether its worth it for you, don't waste time on vi-c endless threads to give you a collective decision.
> 
> Like it and its worth it for you? Buy it.
> Like it but its not worth it for you? Don't buy it.
> Don't like it and its worth it for you? You're an idiot.
> 
> For me? I like it a lot!!!
> But without nice legato in all instruments, the *asking price* is not worth it.
> To be clear, with legato, for me, the intro price is kind of borderline but I think I might get it... the full price is totally not worth it even with legato.
> Since there is no legato, then for me sadly its a pass.


the value proposition here is the difficulty, and so while I don’t have much sympathy for folks complaining about how this isn't for them (if it’s not for you don’t buy it but why waste pixels convincing others they shouldn’t buy it because it doesn’t fit your needs?), I do have sympathy for those trying to assess what the future of this new line looks like. Is the promised modular library going to be a standard full orchestra? (It seems so but it’s not entirely clear.) What will the nine add-on libraries contain in terms of legatos and other things? (one imagines they are legatos (because they were hinted at), repetitions like Symphonic Motions, and perhaps something akin to Aperture, but again we don’t know except the promise of legatos). But the difficulty is that we don’t have anything but hints and guesses for the future development, and it’s hard to assess the value of Abbey Road One without knowing this, or at least without a better sense of that future. The other thing I’d like to know is how well ARO sits with other libraries. Can it be used as with SSO as what Masse should have been? Can you write with ARO and then use SSO/SCS to add detail to it the way you can with the Albions? Or will you need the add-ons and ultimately the new modular library to do that successfully? One thing I want to try to assess through the walkthroughs is just how well this library plays with others, and so how useful the library might be until the other pieces of it arrive.


----------



## robgb

easyrider said:


> Are we paying extra though ? Looks to me that AROOF falls in line with other libraries of its ilk...Albion One, BBC Core etc...


I don't know. That's why I asked.


----------



## easyrider

jbuhler said:


> Can it be used as with SSO as what Masse should have been? Can you write with ARO and then use SSO/SCS to add detail to it the way you can with the Albions? Or will you need the add-ons and ultimately the new modular library to do that successfully? One thing I want to try to assess through the walkthroughs is just how well this library plays with others, and so how useful the library might be until the other pieces of it arrive.




Guy talks about using other libraries here...click on it to play at the right place.


----------



## Beans

jbuhler said:


> if it’s not for you don’t buy it but why waste pixels convincing others they shouldn’t buy it because it doesn’t fit your needs?



Discussion and opinions are all valid unless they break community rules. I don't think it's up to anyone except for the Powers That Be to gatekeep here.


----------



## dzilizzi

jbuhler said:


> the value proposition here is the difficulty, and so while I don’t have much sympathy for folks complaining about how this isn't for them (if it’s not for you don’t buy it but why waste pixels convincing others they shouldn’t buy it because it doesn’t fit your needs?), I do have sympathy for those trying to assess what the future of this new line looks like. Is the promised modular library going to be a standard full orchestra? (It seems so but it’s not entirely clear.) What will the nine add-on libraries contain in terms of legatos and other things? (one imagines they are legatos (because they were hinted at), repetitions like Symphonic Motions, and perhaps something akin to Aperture, but again we don’t know except the promise of legatos). But the difficulty is that we don’t have anything but hints and guesses for the future development, and it’s hard to assess the value of Abbey Road One without knowing this, or at least without a better sense of that future. The other thing I’d like to know is how well ARO sits with other libraries. Can it be used as with SSO as what Masse should have been? Can you write with ARO and then use SSO/SCS to add detail to it the way you can with the Albions? Or will you need the add-ons and ultimately the new modular library to do that successfully? One thing I want to try to assess through the walkthroughs is just how well this library plays with others, and so how useful the library might be until the other pieces of it arrive.


Guy did say in his video that he believes it will blend well with BBCSO. He has both. I think the horns will definitely make up for some deficiencies in BBCSO's horn loudness that people complained about. I understand the studios are similar sizes. If they blend well without a lot of extra work, it will definitely be a reason to get it if you already have BBCSO.


----------



## easyrider

robgb said:


> I don't know. That's why I asked.



There will be licencing deal struck with AR and Spitfire...this could be a percentage of the payment per lib sold or something else...but it still falls in line with other ensemble libraries like Albion One that costs the same...

I think a pre-order price of £299 with a free add on is reasonable imo.

Cinesamples had a deal with AR for the pianos for 5 years IIRC and now they are not allowed to sell it...

No idea if SF has this limitation or not...


----------



## jbuhler

Beans said:


> Discussion and opinions are all valid unless they break community rules. I don't think it's up to anyone except for the Powers That Be to gatekeep here.


No one’s stomping on your right to whine. But likewise I have a right to whine right back at you.


----------



## Beans

dzilizzi said:


> If they blend well without a lot of extra work, it will definitely be a reason to get it if you already have BBCSO.



It could be a brilliant, short-term move by Spitfire Audio to put out some videos on how to most easily blend the two libraries. 

I quite enjoy that task with each new purchase, and have slowly (sloooowly) picked up such skills over time. But I assume that many people buying into BBCSO and/or ARO(OF) are even more "beginner" than I am (poor souls).


----------



## Beans

jbuhler said:


> No one’s stomping on your right to whine. But likewise I have a right to whine right back at you.



I don't think I'm whining (heck, I'm the one who created this thread, primarily because the Commercial one was getting nasty), but have at it! A computer keyboard can express as many emotions as a midi controller.


----------



## dzilizzi

Beans said:


> Discussion and opinions are all valid unless they break community rules. I don't think it's up to anyone except for the Powers That Be to gatekeep here.


I think it really comes down to those who are trying to talk others out of it actually really want to buy it. They just don't have the money/hate ensemble libraries/can't write without legato/some other reason and want others to support their decision so they don't feel like they just missed out on the next best thing all by themselves.


----------



## jbuhler

dzilizzi said:


> Guy did say in his video that he believes it will blend well with BBCSO. He has both. I think the horns will definitely make up for some deficiencies in BBCSO's horn loudness that people complained about. I understand the studios are similar sizes. If they blend well without a lot of extra work, it will definitely be a reason to get it if you already have BBCSO.


I don’t have BBCSO. So my interest is in how it might fit with SSO/SCS/HZS and if it offers enough compared to the various Albions that serve a similar function For me.


----------



## Levon

StefVR said:


> I like the spitfire libraries but one thing is very clear for me here. I am very confident spitfire didn’t sell enough bbc orchestra m. They just didn’t make enough money from it as they hoped. So first they segmented into core and starter and now they don’t want to repeat the mistake.
> 
> only way to sustain Cashflow is deep product segmentation. So this is just a big starter yryibg to get everyonekn nord. to sell the add in packs. Very much many don’t like the approach next will be strings woodwinds brass percussion all separated at least in 4 packages potentially more for different player size. How else can they ensure new products going forward when more or less they did everything already.
> 
> A subscription model has one big advantage btw: it incentivize developer to update andkeep their products up to date because otherwise people cancel. What is sold is a sink cost all you can get is customers not switching brands but let’s be honest mostof us are so addicted we buy anyways


My guess is that BBCSO in all its forms is probably one of their most successful commercial releases to date.


----------



## easyrider

dzilizzi said:


> I think it really comes down to those who are trying to talk others out of it actually really want to buy it. They just don't have the money/hate ensemble libraries/can't write without legato/some other reason and want others to support their decision so they don't feel like they just missed out on the next best thing all by themselves.



The haters are gonna hate mate...wasted energy imo...if they’re not interested then move on...plenty of other things to go and do like write some music.


----------



## dzilizzi

jbuhler said:


> I don’t have BBCSO. So my interest is in how it might fit with SSO/SCS/HZS and if it offers enough compared to the various Albions that serve a similar function For me.


I'm thinking you may need to play with them a bit more, as the rooms are different. It would be interesting to see. Do you have the full SSO mic mix? I just missed out on getting it, as I bought SSO the Xmas after they discontinued the extra mic addition.


----------



## jaketanner

dzilizzi said:


> If they blend well without a lot of extra work, it will definitely be a reason to get it if you already have BBCSO.


Not really...in order to make up for the BBC brass, it would need to include solo instruments, not ensembles...the ensemble patches are fine I think, it's the solo that are the issue (mostly).


----------



## Alex Fraser

robgb said:


> I don't know. That's why I asked.


I think it might be more of a joint venture (like the BBC project) so its not a straight up hire the studio type of deal. At least that’s the impression I got.


----------



## dzilizzi

easyrider said:


> The haters are gonna hate mate...wasted energy imo...if they’re not interested then move on...plenty of other things to go and do like write some music.


See this is where I get confused. Write music? Why do people keep saying that??? You mean we are actually supposed to use these libraries? Mine all sit in beautiful glass cases with alarm systems and lights and everything.


----------



## Gingerbread

My take is that Spitfire is now at a place where they must continually repeat themselves, in order to sustain the business.

I'm sure this new library will be....fine. Perfectly nice.

Most of us are already saturated with good orchestral libraries. This new one won't bring anything very novel to the bunch. It seems quite bread-and-butter. Oh, a different hall!!! Meh.

For myself, I see no essential reason to buy it, as it brings nothing particularly new to the plate. But that's just me.


----------



## jbuhler

dzilizzi said:


> I'm thinking you may need to play with them a bit more, as the rooms are different. It would be interesting to see. Do you have the full SSO mic mix? I just missed out on getting it, as I bought SSO the Xmas after they discontinued the extra mic addition.


Yeah, I have SSO/SCS with all of the mics, and most importantly with the Jake Jackson stereo mixes that simplify so much. But I imagine that I’d need to make my own mix if I was going to have SSO sit with ARO, and I’m not sure if it makes sense to do the converse unless there was some need for a bit of supplementation, to say firm up the low brass of SSB (where I sometimes now use Iceni for reinforcement). 

But I could see where ARO might take the place of how I am currently using a combination of Albion One, SCS (ensemble patch), Neo, and Originals for sketching. The increased number of dynamic layers for ARO might allow for the use of even fewer tracks in my minimum track orchestra template that I use to sketch before overlaying with (or recomposing for) section libraries.


----------



## axb312

jbuhler said:


> Yeah, I have SSO/SCS with all of the mics, and most importantly with the Jake Jackson stereo mixes that simplify so much. But I imagine that I’d need to make my own mix if I was going to have SSO sit with ARO, and I’m not sure if it makes sense to do the converse unless there was some need for a bit of supplementation, to say firm up the low brass of SSB (where I sometimes now use Iceni for reinforcement).
> 
> But I could see where ARO might take the place of how I am currently using a combination of Albion One, SCS (ensemble patch), Neo, and Originals for sketching. The increased number of dynamic layers for ARO might allow for the use of even fewer tracks in my minimum track orchestra template that I use to sketch before overlaying with (or recomposing for) section libraries.



What is ARO? Thought it was AR1


----------



## easyrider

axb312 said:


> What is ARO? Thought it was AR1



Is it not AROOF !


----------



## TintoL

easyrider said:


> There will be addons for legato...



Honestly I don't trust any of those promises. That's what they said with other products.... and there is a high ratio of that falling through the cracks. (and SF is one of the good ones by the way)

I can buy when they do the whole thing. 

Thanks for the info BTW.


----------



## Hendrixon

dzilizzi said:


> See this is where I get confused. Write music? Why do people keep saying that??? You mean we are actually supposed to use these libraries? Mine all sit in beautiful glass cases with alarm systems and lights and everything.



I can name on the spot at least 10 guys on vi-c that are not far from that  
But they are all nice and friendly and if it makes them happy then its all good!
But they do exist lol


----------



## OleJoergensen

The sound is wonderful! 
Congratulation Spitfire team.


----------



## RonOrchComp

MA-Simon said:


> All I want is DATES. Give me Dates. I want Dates



*






*

Seriously, your post is spot on.  Especially with this:

_I am excited about the sound! I am exiced about another orchestra playing my mediocre stuff. I just... want it to be proper. is that really to much to ask? _

Then there is this:



TintoL said:


> Honestly I don't trust any of those promises. That's what they said with other products.... and there is a high ratio of that falling through the cracks.



That is spot on as well.


----------



## Hendrixon

MA-Simon said:


> Also, I did preorder this library because I am a masochist. I hope for salvation, but I am about 50% shure there will be no return on my investment.



Did you do that before or after the spritz?


----------



## tjr

Gingerbread said:


> My take is that Spitfire is now at a place where they must continually repeat themselves, in order to sustain the business.
> 
> I'm sure this new library will be....fine. Perfectly nice.
> 
> Most of us are already saturated with good orchestral libraries. This new one won't bring anything very novel to the bunch. It seems quite bread-and-butter. Oh, a different hall!!! Meh.
> 
> For myself, I see no essential reason to buy it, as it brings nothing particularly new to the plate. But that's just me.



I reckon this is true in any musical instrument business. For most players, there's a limit to how much of a given type of instrument you can really get use out of. I play electric bass, and have four very nice Fender basses. Fender just revamped their "American Professional" line this past month. I suspect that the new 2020 American Professional bass is marginally better than my 2018 American Professional bass, but I'm happy with what I have, and very well may never buy a 2020+ American Professional Fender bass, no matter how good they are.

But someone else who is just starting might be thrilled to buy a 2020 model. Or someone who has fewer basses than I do might be thrilled to buy a 2020 model.

Then there are bassists who don't like Fenders at all! Probably no matter what Fender does, those people won't be interested.

So indeed, any new Fender release is not going to capture all of the bass-playing market. It probably won't capture half of it. I can imagine they might -- MIGHT -- sell something from any given product line to 10% of bass players, but suspect it's even less than that.


----------



## MA-Simon

Hendrixon said:


> Did you do that before or after the spritz?


Before lol. I only get the urges on the weekends when I am not blinded by work.


----------



## NoamL

jbuhler said:


> I’d like to know how well ARO sits with other libraries.



I downloaded Paul's walkthrough and played along using my template, which contains a lot of SSO instruments; alongside HWS, CSS, CS2 and CSB generally plugin'd-up to match SSO.

I found that just *the standard Mix 1 of AR1 would blend nicely with SSO* and (post-plugins) those other libraries.

This is maybe not too surprising since the following was recorded at Abbey Road:



and this at AIR:



They are both QUALITY spaces to record an orchestra 

I found that AR1 has a slightly more accurate out of the box sound than SSO. I've got different volume tags on nearly all the SSS articulations (the tremolos are too loud, for instance; I've confirmed that comparing to real scores). In AR1 the native balance seems better. To the point that I even adjusted my volume tags on SSW a bit to match AR1 more closely, because it's clear that AR1 is accurate.

The dynamic range of all the AR1 instruments is fantastic & generally equals the more expensive collection of instruments I'm using now; only the CSB 4hns give me a BIT more blasting fortissimo but otherwise AR1 feels impressively complete, maybe even outstanding, in dynamics. Nothing held back here on the heavy brass, and all the instruments have an amazing _pp_ tone.

The percussion section of AR1 is a standout. The timpani, piatti and sus cymbals feel as good as Spitfire Percussion performed by Joby Burgess which still costs $400.

This could be a positive or a negative: the brass section of AR1 is definitely "big bollocks filmscore" proportioned as a horn triad will add up to 12 horns, and the low brass is 8 instruments orchestrated across the keyboard.

After really listening closely this starts to feel more like a stripped-down SSO than a goosed-up Albion. For example there is a variety of shorts for all the brass instruments, which ends up being very comparable to CSB and actually _more_ consistent & interchangeable than SSB... The number of mics is also above what you get with a typical ensemble library even these days. On the other hand you have missing legatos, trills and a few other articulations. I don't think the various faux-legato passages in the demos sound very realistic at all (and the demos are written around the library's features). So, this can't do everything, but it can do an exciting range of stuff.

Feels like a solid and exciting foundation for their upcoming Abbey Road "pro" series. I think I'm all set for now with SSO (especially after spending some time setting up all the articulations at accurate volume balances). But when those pro instruments start coming out... I think we will all be blown away. If I didn't own SSO, I'd leap right on this.


----------



## CT

NoamL said:


> But when those pro instruments start coming out... I think we will all be blown away. If I didn't own SSO, I'd leap right on this.



I'm feeling similarly because of BBCSO. I will no doubt be there for what's to come, but I'm still unsure about how I might fit this introductory collection into things.

Yeah, I prefer not to use ensemble libraries, but I do like that the brass has been split sensibly. That may actually tip the scales for me. The dynamics are the main draw though. Spitfire seems committed now to a certain level of sampling detail that is only found in more niche libraries and from some developers who, shall we say, don't have the sound of Abbey Road working in their favor.... 

That's immensely exciting to me, more than anything about Abbey Road itself, really. A developer who I trust to get the best sound possible finally going all in on the details. Hell, I might get this just to know I'm supporting a venture like that.


----------



## jbuhler

NoamL said:


> I downloaded Paul's walkthrough and played along using my template, which contains a lot of SSO instruments; alongside HWS, CSS, CS2 and CSB generally plugin'd-up to match SSO.
> 
> I found that just *the standard Mix 1 of AR1 would blend nicely with SSO* and (post-plugins) those other libraries.
> 
> This is maybe not too surprising since the following was recorded at Abbey Road:
> 
> 
> 
> and this at AIR:
> 
> 
> 
> They are both QUALITY spaces to record an orchestra
> 
> I found that AR1 has a slightly more accurate out of the box sound than SSO. I've got different volume tags on nearly all the SSS articulations (the tremolos are too loud, for instance; I've confirmed that comparing to real scores). In AR1 the native balance seems better. To the point that I even adjusted my volume tags on SSW a bit to match AR1 more closely, because it's clear that AR1 is accurate.
> 
> The dynamic range of all the AR1 instruments is fantastic & generally equals the more expensive collection of instruments I'm using now; only the CSB 4hns give me a BIT more blasting fortissimo but otherwise AR1 feels impressively complete, maybe even outstanding, in dynamics. Nothing held back here on the heavy brass, and all the instruments have an amazing _pp_ tone.
> 
> The percussion section of AR1 is a standout. The timpani, piatti and sus cymbals feel as good as Spitfire Percussion performed by Joby Burgess which still costs $400.
> 
> This could be a positive or a negative: the brass section of AR1 is definitely "big bollocks filmscore" proportioned as a horn triad will add up to 12 horns, and the low brass is 8 instruments orchestrated across the keyboard.
> 
> After really listening closely this starts to feel more like a stripped-down SSO than a goosed-up Albion. For example there is a variety of shorts for all the brass instruments, which ends up being very comparable to CSB and actually _more_ consistent & interchangeable than SSB... The number of mics is also above what you get with a typical ensemble library even these days. On the other hand you have missing legatos, trills and a few other articulations. I don't think the various faux-legato passages in the demos sound very realistic at all (and the demos are written around the library's features). So, this can't do everything, but it can do an exciting range of stuff.
> 
> Feels like a solid and exciting foundation for their upcoming Abbey Road "pro" series. I think I'm all set for now with SSO (especially after spending some time setting up all the articulations at accurate volume balances). But when those pro instruments start coming out... I think we will all be blown away. If I didn't own SSO, I'd leap right on this.



Thanks for this report. Thus is what is planned to do myself. Well, not exactly because my template is not nearly as well organized as yours as after basic balancing of the instruments I then work by ear on balancing articulations against themselves. But the inconsistencies in SSO are one of the struggles with it and it’s one reason is been considering BBCSO. This new line has me excited because it seems like it will be both more deeply sampled and more consistent And coherent than SSO. But I’m still trying to decide if AROOF will offer immediate improvement over what I have.

Like you, if I didn’t already have SSO, the Albions and a bunch of other libraries I’d be all over this. As it is, if I can use AROOF to streamline my minimum track orchestral template and I can easily swap in sections as needed for details then it would probably be worth it to me to get it now, as I think it will suit my workflow.


----------



## axb312

NoamL said:


> I downloaded Paul's walkthrough and played along using my template, which contains a lot of SSO instruments; alongside HWS, CSS, CS2 and CSB generally plugin'd-up to match SSO.
> 
> I found that just *the standard Mix 1 of AR1 would blend nicely with SSO* and (post-plugins) those other libraries.
> 
> This is maybe not too surprising since the following was recorded at Abbey Road:
> 
> 
> 
> and this at AIR:
> 
> 
> 
> They are both QUALITY spaces to record an orchestra
> 
> I found that AR1 has a slightly more accurate out of the box sound than SSO. I've got different volume tags on nearly all the SSS articulations (the tremolos are too loud, for instance; I've confirmed that comparing to real scores). In AR1 the native balance seems better. To the point that I even adjusted my volume tags on SSW a bit to match AR1 more closely, because it's clear that AR1 is accurate.
> 
> The dynamic range of all the AR1 instruments is fantastic & generally equals the more expensive collection of instruments I'm using now; only the CSB 4hns give me a BIT more blasting fortissimo but otherwise AR1 feels impressively complete, maybe even outstanding, in dynamics. Nothing held back here on the heavy brass, and all the instruments have an amazing _pp_ tone.
> 
> The percussion section of AR1 is a standout. The timpani, piatti and sus cymbals feel as good as Spitfire Percussion performed by Joby Burgess which still costs $400.
> 
> This could be a positive or a negative: the brass section of AR1 is definitely "big bollocks filmscore" proportioned as a horn triad will add up to 12 horns, and the low brass is 8 instruments orchestrated across the keyboard.
> 
> After really listening closely this starts to feel more like a stripped-down SSO than a goosed-up Albion. For example there is a variety of shorts for all the brass instruments, which ends up being very comparable to CSB and actually _more_ consistent & interchangeable than SSB... The number of mics is also above what you get with a typical ensemble library even these days. On the other hand you have missing legatos, trills and a few other articulations. I don't think the various faux-legato passages in the demos sound very realistic at all (and the demos are written around the library's features). So, this can't do everything, but it can do an exciting range of stuff.
> 
> Feels like a solid and exciting foundation for their upcoming Abbey Road "pro" series. I think I'm all set for now with SSO (especially after spending some time setting up all the articulations at accurate volume balances). But when those pro instruments start coming out... I think we will all be blown away. If I didn't own SSO, I'd leap right on this.




This comes back to what I was saying earlier. Wish spitfire would stop mucking about and making people waste money (imo) instead of just releasing the whole orchestra when it's ready. 

This release feels unnecessary.


----------



## Werty

amazing recording, top quality. It's the first time I really like something from Spitfire. Pure luck? I don't know, what counts is the final result.


----------



## jbuhler

axb312 said:


> This comes back to what I was saying earlier. Wish spitfire would stop mucking about and making people waste money (imo) instead of just releasing the whole orchestra when it's ready.
> 
> This release feels unnecessary.


Not if it’s going to be modular. If the concept is truly modular it makes more sense (I think) to release each of the parts separately than to overwhelm everyone with a foundations library, a dozen add-on packs, and 15 to 30 solo instrument and/or a2/a3/a6 modules, all told coming in around $2500-$3000 (or higher). And if they are keeping SSO around I can’t see that the new modular library will be much less than $2500 list price when it’s all totaled up. It may well be considerably higher.


----------



## paulwr

I'm still waiting, without much hope for, the completion of Studio Strings. I thought it was going to be a solid step up from LASS. No such luck, no slides for the smaller groups, so in essence, not a great choice for writing divisi. The slides is what puts a divisi over the top in realism. I got in touch with them at the time it came out after I purchased and asked about that. A guy said they would be working on that. But not a peep. I've got a bunch of string libraries, know what I make the most money with? LASS hands down.


----------



## John R Wilson

jbuhler said:


> Great excuse to go back, re-record them, and release BBCSO2 in a few years’ time.



That's what I thought they would end up doing with the BBCSO.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

ALittleNightMusic said:


> There's an interesting aspect of this from Spitfire's business strategy standpoint as well. A lot of people are talking about sampling techniques and asking why does the room matter. The thing is sampling techniques continue to evolve. Compare libraries from 10-15 years ago to ones today. Now fast forward 10 years and we should expect the same leaps in the technology. Sampling techniques and technology are not a moat or a competitive advantage or even what sells libraries. Yes, you will have certain improvements from certain developers but eventually everybody catches up (or at least, it is feasible for others to replicate if desired).
> 
> What hasn't changed over that same time though? The rooms that are most coveted for recording. Abbey Road, AIR, Sony, Fox, Eastwood.
> 
> And now, Spitfire essentially has exclusivity over two of those - AIR and Abbey Road. Look at AIR where Spitfire has been recording for over a decade now. How many other libraries have been recorded there and of those, how many can even state "AIR" in the product description (I believe the answer is none)? Spitfire will and should continue to improve and evolve their sampling technique, but 10 years from now, "Recorded at Abbey Road" will still carry a massive appeal - and that will allow Spitfire to continue to release updates and new products well into the future. They've ensured the survival of their company into the next decade.



Confirmed by Audio Ollie:



> I tried! I had wanted to record the first Scoring Synths at AIR but sadly got denied due to "Loyalty to Spitfire". I then reached out to Abbey Road to pitch a large scale orchestral/choir project in collaboration with Alan Meyerson and Performance Samples. That also got turned down. Went back to AIR a year later and met with the same result. I don't hold any grudges against either SF or the studios, but it is unfortunate because I think we could have done some pretty cool things with that team, the London Players and the great rooms. LA is awesome, but a logistical nightmare to get players together with the union situation and it's also extremely expensive. I'd love to see an end to the monopoly on the big London Studios one day, but hey, I guess that's just business!



Spitfire outmaneuvering everybody else. Got to admire the forward looking strategy.


----------



## JTB

So it sounds good, OK, but what about playability, consistency of dynamic layers, how complete will the articulations set be, will they all be ensemble patches, how long we have to wait to complete the articulation set, how consistent will the number of articulations be, how large the full library will be (with 10 mics), how much it will cost to complete the library, why should I take the gamble on building an expensive new orchestral library without seeing what the finished product might look like?.

If I was going to get a house built by an architect, I would want to see a couple of drafts before I paid him. If the architect said 'hey, there's the foundation, now give me your money' I would probably be quite hesitant.

All the secrecy is breeding a culture of gambling which might be why so many people are getting hooked on orchestral libraries.


----------



## lgmcben

BBCSO Core:
- Same price ($449)
- Great sound
- Great recording stage
- Probably superior players
- Legato + all the articulations you'll ever want
- Separate sections
- Leaders patches for all sections except Strings
- Super complete percussion
- Wonderful harp

I wonder why it's the same price. It clearly a FAR superior product. Just personal opinion though. I'm not a fanboy of Spitfire or bbc though so this is completely neutral facts.

Although I may be a fanboy of, and bias towards certain company which name starts with S and ended with trezov sampling.


----------



## borisb2

For me that was a funny development:

- when the email with that countdown came I thought, ok Spitfire what now?
- then I saw the announcement about Abbey Road and all the fuzz about it and felt ... meeh, dont need it
- then I listened to Guys video and instantly was super impressed, thinking OMG that sounds amazing, and it fits perfectly in my template. And I was puzzled, why didnt I need i before? Life was fine without.. but I knew, I do need it now.
- then I listened today to the demos on SA website and fell back to, meeh its just another sketching library, have already Inspire 1+2, Adagietto and a million other sketching patches,..

Congrats to Guy, almost sold me - I shouldnt have listened to the other demos.


----------



## Frederick

All that emphasis on the room made me buy EastWest Symphonic Orchestra Platinum as it is the only one that's recorded in a concert hall. Also considering it's only 235 Euro and still has lots of articulations, instruments, different ensemble sizes and even solo strings and a string quartet. A nice addition to the 6 or 7 section based orchestras I already have.


----------



## Al Maurice

There's a lot to like with this library, but to be honest, at present there isn't much to go on.

So that just leaves everyone here guessing, how great this may be -- as it's been associated with a recording space with the pedigree of Abbey Road.

I just hope that in the end, it can live up to the hype.


----------



## yiph2

lgmcben said:


> BBCSO Core:
> - Same price ($449)
> - Great sound
> - Great recording stage
> - Probably superior players
> - Legato + all the articulations you'll ever want
> - Separate sections
> - Leaders patches for all sections except Strings
> - Super complete percussion
> - Wonderful harp
> 
> I wonder why it's the same price. It clearly a FAR superior product. Just personal opinion though. I'm not a fanboy of Spitfire or bbc though so this is completely neutral facts.
> 
> Although I may be a fanboy of, and bias towards certain company which name starts with S and ended with trezov sampling.


AR1:

- 5 dynamic layers at least
- great room
- more percussion
- more variety of shorts
- more mics

It’s not as 1 sided as you think


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen

Frederick said:


> All that emphasis on the room made me buy EastWest Symphonic Orchestra Platinum as it is the only one that's recorded in a concert hall. Also considering it's only 235 Euro's and still has lots of articulations, instruments, different ensemble sizes and even solo strings and a string quartet. A nice addition to the 6 or 7 section based orchestras I already have.


I was listening to some EWSO Platinum demos the other day as well. The hall sounds incredible!


----------



## Frederick

yiph2 said:


> AR1:
> 
> - 5 dynamic layers at least
> - great room
> - more percussion
> - more variety of shorts
> - more mics
> 
> It’s not as 1 sided as you think


 More percussion?

BBCSO:

*PERCUSSION



TUNED

CELESTE*

Sustained
Damped
Damped Medium

*HARP*

Sustained
Damped
Damped Medium
Bisbigliando Trem
Gliss FX

*MARIMBA*

Hits
Rolls

*CROTALES*

Hits
Hits Bowed

*GLOCKENSPIEL*

Hits
Rolls

*TIMPANI*

Hits
Rolls
Hits Soft
Rolls Soft
Hits Hotrods
Long Rolls Hotrods
Hits Damped
Hits Super Damped
Hotrods Hits Damped
Hits Damped Soft

*TUBULAR BELLS*

Hits
Rolls
Hits Damped

*VIBRAPHONE*

Hits

*XYLOPHONE*

Hits
Rolls



*UNTUNED

ANVIL*

Hit
Hit Choked

*BASS DRUM 1*

Hit
Hard Sticks
Hit Damped
Hand Muted Hit
Roll Hard
Roll Soft

*BASS DRUM 2*

Hit
Hit Damped
Roll
Super Ball

*CYMBAL*

Crash
Crash Muted
Crash Hard Stick
Crash Hard Stick Muted
Roll
Bowed
Crescendo

*MILITARY DRUM*

Hit
Rimshot
Short Ruff
Side Stick Hit
Roll

*PIATTI*

Choked Hit
Clash Hit
Short Roll

*SNARE 1*

Hit
Rimshot
Short Ruff
Side Stick Hit
Roll

*SNARE 2*

Hit
Rimshot
Short Ruff
Side Stick Hit
Roll

*TAM TAM*

Hit Damped
Hit
Roll
Bowed
Crescendo

*TAMBOURINE*

Hit
Shake
Roll

*TENOR DRUM*

Hit
Rimshot
Short Ruff
Side Stick Hit
Roll

*TOYS*

Castanets
Woodblock
Vibraslap
Cowbell
Sleigh Bells
Short Guiro
Long Guiro

*TRIANGLE*

Open Hit
Hit Muted
Roll


----------



## JTB

yiph2 said:


> AR1:
> 
> - 5 dynamic layers at least
> - great room
> - more percussion
> - more variety of shorts
> - more mics
> 
> It’s not as 1 sided as you think



5 dynamic layers at least? How might you have come across this information?. I must have missed this on their site. Is this for every instrument, does this mean there is more than 5 dynamic layers for some instruments?.


----------



## easyrider

yiph2 said:


> AR1:
> 
> - 5 dynamic layers at least
> - great room
> - more percussion
> - more variety of shorts
> - more mics
> 
> It’s not as 1 sided as you think






Frederick said:


> More percussion?
> 
> BBCSO:
> 
> *PERCUSSION
> 
> 
> 
> TUNED
> 
> CELESTE*
> 
> Sustained
> Damped
> Damped Medium
> 
> *HARP*
> 
> Sustained
> Damped
> Damped Medium
> Bisbigliando Trem
> Gliss FX
> 
> *MARIMBA*
> 
> Hits
> Rolls
> 
> *CROTALES*
> 
> Hits
> Hits Bowed
> 
> *GLOCKENSPIEL*
> 
> Hits
> Rolls
> 
> *TIMPANI*
> 
> Hits
> Rolls
> Hits Soft
> Rolls Soft
> Hits Hotrods
> Long Rolls Hotrods
> Hits Damped
> Hits Super Damped
> Hotrods Hits Damped
> Hits Damped Soft
> 
> *TUBULAR BELLS*
> 
> Hits
> Rolls
> Hits Damped
> 
> *VIBRAPHONE*
> 
> Hits
> 
> *XYLOPHONE*
> 
> Hits
> Rolls
> 
> 
> 
> *UNTUNED
> 
> ANVIL*
> 
> Hit
> Hit Choked
> 
> *BASS DRUM 1*
> 
> Hit
> Hard Sticks
> Hit Damped
> Hand Muted Hit
> Roll Hard
> Roll Soft
> 
> *BASS DRUM 2*
> 
> Hit
> Hit Damped
> Roll
> Super Ball
> 
> *CYMBAL*
> 
> Crash
> Crash Muted
> Crash Hard Stick
> Crash Hard Stick Muted
> Roll
> Bowed
> Crescendo
> 
> *MILITARY DRUM*
> 
> Hit
> Rimshot
> Short Ruff
> Side Stick Hit
> Roll
> 
> *PIATTI*
> 
> Choked Hit
> Clash Hit
> Short Roll
> 
> *SNARE 1*
> 
> Hit
> Rimshot
> Short Ruff
> Side Stick Hit
> Roll
> 
> *SNARE 2*
> 
> Hit
> Rimshot
> Short Ruff
> Side Stick Hit
> Roll
> 
> *TAM TAM*
> 
> Hit Damped
> Hit
> Roll
> Bowed
> Crescendo
> 
> *TAMBOURINE*
> 
> Hit
> Shake
> Roll
> 
> *TENOR DRUM*
> 
> Hit
> Rimshot
> Short Ruff
> Side Stick Hit
> Roll
> 
> *TOYS*
> 
> Castanets
> Woodblock
> Vibraslap
> Cowbell
> Sleigh Bells
> Short Guiro
> Long Guiro
> 
> *TRIANGLE*
> 
> Open Hit
> Hit Muted
> Roll




AR1


*PERCUSSION*

Soft Boom
Bass Drums
Verdi Drums
Toms
Bass & Snare
Toms & Octobans
Snares
Octobans
Piccolo Snares
Piatti
Suspended Cymbals
Tam-Tam
Ribbon Crashers
Anvil

*DRUMS*

Soft Boom
Bass Drums
Verdi Drums
Toms
Bass & Snare
Toms & Octobans
Snares
Octobans
Piccolo Snares

*METALS*

Piatti
Suspended Cymbals
Tam-Tam
Ribbon Crashers
Anvil

*TUNED*

Glockenspiel
Xylophone
Timpani Hits


----------



## yiph2

Frederick said:


> More percussion?


Sorry, I meant drums, AR1 has a lot more of those.


----------



## Frederick

easyrider said:


> AR1
> 
> 
> *PERCUSSION*
> 
> Soft Boom
> Bass Drums
> Verdi Drums
> Toms
> Bass & Snare
> Toms & Octobans
> Snares
> Octobans
> Piccolo Snares
> Piatti
> Suspended Cymbals
> Tam-Tam
> Ribbon Crashers
> Anvil
> 
> *DRUMS*
> 
> Soft Boom
> Bass Drums
> Verdi Drums
> Toms
> Bass & Snare
> Toms & Octobans
> Snares
> Octobans
> Piccolo Snares
> 
> *METALS*
> 
> Piatti
> Suspended Cymbals
> Tam-Tam
> Ribbon Crashers
> Anvil
> 
> *TUNED*
> 
> Glockenspiel
> Xylophone
> Timpani Hits



AR1: Perussion = Drums + Metals. 

Listing them twice doesn't make them more.


----------



## jamessy

I really want to know what these $50 packs are going to be


----------



## Alex Fraser

JTB said:


> So it sounds good, OK, but what about playability, consistency of dynamic layers, how complete will the articulations set be, will they all be ensemble patches, how long we have to wait to complete the articulation set, how consistent will the number of articulations be, how large the full library will be (with 10 mics), how much it will cost to complete the library, why should I take the gamble on building an expensive new orchestral library without seeing what the finished product might look like?.
> 
> If I was going to get a house built by an architect, I would want to see a couple of drafts before I paid him. If the architect said 'hey, there's the foundation, now give me your money' I would probably be quite hesitant.
> 
> All the secrecy is breeding a culture of gambling which might be why so many people are getting hooked on orchestral libraries.


Sure, but there has to be a balance. We’ve got to give the company a bit of flexibility to change course as the product evolves. The forum continually pops at Spitfire over statements made years ago, unfulfilled.

Also, SF isn’t asking anyone for money or investment upfront.

Really, the libraries will come when they come. There’s lots of other wonderful toys to play with in the meantime.

In fact, there’s only one guarantee when it comes to the new Spitfire orchestra: We all need to start saving. 😉


----------



## Fry777

yiph2 said:


> AR1:
> 
> - 5 dynamic layers at least
> - great room
> - more percussion
> *- more variety of shorts*
> - more mics
> 
> It’s not as 1 sided as you think



I only see Spicc and Pizz listed for the string sections, was there an announcement for more coming for this product ?


----------



## JonS

borisb2 said:


> For me that was a funny development:
> 
> - when the email with that countdown came I thought, ok Spitfire what now?
> - then I saw the announcement about Abbey Road and all the fuzz about it and felt ... meeh, dont need it
> - then I listened to Guys video and instantly was super impressed, thinking OMG that sounds amazing, and it fits perfectly in my template. And I was puzzled, why didnt I need i before? Life was fine without.. but I knew, I do need it now.
> - then I listened today to the demos on SA website and fell back to, meeh its just another sketching library, have already Inspire 1+2, Adagietto and a million other sketching patches,..
> 
> Congrats to Guy, almost sold me - I shouldnt have listened to the other demos.


I have Inspire 1 & 2 as well as all the Arks, but there’s an issue with noise floor just like Cinesamples libraries that I don’t have with VSL and Spitfire.


----------



## JonS

Frederick said:


> All that emphasis on the room made me buy EastWest Symphonic Orchestra Platinum as it is the only one that's recorded in a concert hall. Also considering it's only 235 Euro and still has lots of articulations, instruments, different ensemble sizes and even solo strings and a string quartet. A nice addition to the 6 or 7 section based orchestras I already have.


HOD still sounds good and is a very useable library which when on sale can be had for around $270 at a dealer.


----------



## JTB

Alex Fraser said:


> Sure, but there has to be a balance. We’ve got to give the company a bit of flexibility to change course as the product evolves. The forum continually pops at Spitfire over statements made years ago, unfulfilled.
> 
> Also, SF isn’t asking anyone for money or investment upfront.
> 
> Really, the libraries will come when they come. There’s lots of other wonderful toys to play with in the meantime.
> 
> In fact, there’s only one guarantee when it comes to the new Spitfire orchestra: We all need to start saving. 😉


By calling it 'Foundation' they are asking us to start paying for a product we have almost no idea what will be on it's completion. That's a gamble.


----------



## JonS

JTB said:


> By calling it 'Foundation' they are asking us to start paying for a product we have almost no idea what will be on it's completion. That's a gamble.


It’s just a title. They could have called it dinosaur 🦖 soup and it would sound the same and I would still purchase it.


----------



## Alex Fraser

JTB said:


> By calling it 'Foundation' they are asking us to start paying for a product we have almost no idea what will be on it's completion. That's a gamble.


Huh? Probably best to think of it as a complete product with add ons. You can always wait until the extra bits are released and splash the cash accordingly.


----------



## JTB

JonS said:


> It’s just a title. They could have called it dinosaur 🦖 soup and it would sound the same and I would still purchase it.


Well some of us like to gamble and some of us do not. I personally could not call any orchestral library in 2020 "complete" without legatos.


----------



## JonS

JTB said:


> Well some of us like to gamble and some of us do not.


Always read reviews and listen to the demos, as marketing and titling of libraries aren’t what matters.


----------



## JTB

JonS said:


> Always read reviews and listen to the demos, as marketing and titling of libraries aren’t what matters.


Tell that to the marketing department at Spitfire. They will probably disagree.


----------



## ed buller

hbjdk said:


> I was listening to some EWSO Platinum demos the other day as well. The hall sounds incredible!



yeah still an incredible feat that Library . Great combo of the Prof Keith O Johnson and Benaroya Hall. 

best

e


----------



## JonS

JTB said:


> Tell that to the marketing department at Spitfire. They will probably disagree.


In America it is very common for companies to market their products as the best, it’s how they market most movies, cars, trucks, restaurants, sports teams, you name it. Because other developers are not doing what Spitfire is doing SA tends to stand out, but how many movie trailers begin with “in a world” or some obvious cliche overused phrase? Spitfire’s marketing could be for almost any product in any industry. I suggest people don’t take it so literally. They get excited about their products, that’s all. I don’t think it’s a big deal.


----------



## jamessy

Alex Fraser said:


> Huh? Probably best to think of it as a complete product with add ons. You can always wait until the extra bits are released and splash the cash accordingly.



Agreed, I don't think the prospect of saving $50 on an upcoming add on can justify paying ahead of time for something that you aren't satisfied with by itself. 



If OF is worth it to you as is, I say grab it at the discounted price and enjoy the perk of a free pack in the future. If not, no harm in holding out. The SF demos and Guy M's video he just released sure do make a compelling argument. I love this sound and I never knew it was because it's Studio 1 but it's definitely that signature sound I recognize.

The nine upcoming packs could provide some serious value that make this an easy purchase. They would bring the price to $900, which places it in the ballpark of BBCSO pro. I'm hoping for performance legato patches and solo instruments, and maybe some cool grid stuff like they gave us in Tundra and the OA stuff. If that's what we get, I'm in. 

I like the idea of modular packs, it makes it much more flexible for consumers to pick and choose the things they want and also have the option to test how they like a single pack before investing in more. Nine might be just the first wave of many, I don't know. But I'm going to hold out because I have so many ScoreClub tutorials to go through that I don't think I'm going to be in position to need anything that I don't already have until I get my act together :D


----------



## yiph2

JTB said:


> 5 dynamic layers at least? How might you have come across this information?. I must have missed this on their site. Is this for every instrument, does this mean there is more than 5 dynamic layers for some instruments?.


I think Paul mentioned it on the official thread. Also I think the percussion can have 7 dynamic layers (don’t quote me on that)


Fry777 said:


> I only see Spicc and Pizz listed for the string sections, was there an announcement for more coming for this product ?


I mean for the trumpets and horns there are marcatos and tenutos, and Im pretty sure the string spiccatos are better than the ones in BBCSO


----------



## JonS

Peter Satera said:


> If this is true, from a business perspective, _sure, _it's sensible for Spitfire to go around having exclusivity in Air and Abbey.
> 
> But from a customer perspective, I don't admire it at all. Look at what was potentially on the table. A large orchestra / choir by Audio Ollie, Performance Samples and Alan Meyerson recorded in Abbey. No doubt there's so many others as well that were interested in recording in these Halls. It means if you want _that _sound for your commercial library, as a developer you're not even permitted at even attempting it.
> 
> So, no, as a consumer, I don't admire the decision from Spitfire to tie other developers hands and in the end it's only us that lose out.


It very well could be Abbey Road making this decision not Spitfire. You don't know. And, in truth it appears that it is Abbey Road that made this decision or they would be allowing other developers to record new libraries. Don't blame Spitfire.


----------



## ism

And don't forget that ensemble libs like Tundra, the Olafur Chamber Evo, Time Macro and such give you a palette with sounds that you're just not going to get anywhere else with samples.


----------



## Hendrixon

yiph2 said:


> I think Paul mentioned it on the official thread. Also I think the percussion can have 7 dynamic layers (don’t quote me on that)
> 
> I mean for the trumpets and horns there are marcatos and tenutos, and Im pretty sure the string spiccatos are better than the ones in BBCSO



Paul answered my question regarding dynamic layers with this:


> for example, 5 dynamic layers in the main Strings Longs, and 5 in the Spiccatos, Tpts and High Woods longs again 5dyn, and so on: it varies across the library (according to sensibility)


----------



## JonS

Peter Satera said:


> Well if you say you don't know either. You can't claim _in truth_ it is abbey road only to outlet to Spitfire.


We don't know exactly what happened, BUT Abbey Road could have simply told Spitfire they can record their sample libraries at Abbey Road and then said YES to other developers as well. So though we don't know for sure how this played out, Abbey Road could have not given exclusivity to Spitfire. This means that though we don't know the particulars we DO KNOW Abbey Road had no problem giving Spitfire exclusivity. So if anyone wants to blame anyone, blame Abbey Road not Spitfire.


----------



## JonS

Peter Satera said:


> And you think the same for Air? That Air only have eyes for Spitfire, and they should be blamed too?


I have no clue about Air, but if Air does not let any other sample library developer record their libraries and use the Air brand on their products then once again blame Air not Spitfire as Spitfire cannot force Abbey Road or Air for exclusivity rights. It's the soundstage who has all the power to determine which developers can record at their spaces not the developer.


----------



## Karma

As Paul has mentioned previously in the announcement thread, this is the deepest we've gone for any of our ensemble libraries, so yes there are significantly more dynamics recorded.

I've seen the word sketching library used a couple times also, and this really isn't that in my opinion. Not to say you can't get ideas down fast, but there's a bit of an assumption made that ensemble library often means sketching library, as if you quickly lay down parts and then flesh it out with individuals later. The quality and depth of the recordings, performances, and microphone options alone make this library so much more than that. I understand the limitation of less individual instruments, and that's why we're going into even more detail for the modular range. The upcoming selections will give a lot more unique choice in that regard also.

To further clarify the level of depth going on as per discussion above... the Trumpet longs are indeed 5 dynamic layers, Woodwinds 5 dynamics, and the same with Strings. Percussion is up to 7! The Trumpets in this are already my favourite sampled Trumpets, and the shorts in particular are SO good for fanfare stuff. I'm using it alongside BBCSO and SSO, and the same will be the case when the selections come along.


----------



## Hendrixon

As a drummer that use vdrums it baffles me that ppl here are excited about "Percussion is up to 7!" velocity layers
And that's deep sampling!

Guys you live in the stone age...


----------



## JonS

Peter Satera said:


> @JonS just letting you know I'm moving my posts to another thread, which I see is already discussing what I brought up, with halls having "loyalty to spitfire".


----------



## Simon Ravn

I actually really like the sound of this. But doing trumpet and horn ensembles without legato is just beyond me. It is really evident when Paul plays the long trumpets and horns patches that this is not going to work very well for dominant lead lines for either. Just seems like a missed opportunity for me to make this even more useful. But maybe you will be able to pay a $49 fee later to add legato to those sections.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

JonS said:


> We don't know exactly what happened, BUT Abbey Road could have simply told Spitfire they can record their sample libraries at Abbey Road and then said YES to other developers as well. So though we don't know for sure how this played out, Abbey Road could have not given exclusivity to Spitfire. This means that though we don't know the particulars we DO KNOW Abbey Road had no problem giving Spitfire exclusivity. So if anyone wants to blame anyone, blame Abbey Road not Spitfire.



Spot on - was confirmed by Audio Ollie. This was primarily Abbey Road's decision - they control their room after all. I'm sure Spitfire wanted and will benefit from exclusivity, but AR is the decision maker here. If they thought they could make more money by letting every developer record there, they could've gone that route. Probably wasn't how they calculated things and they didn't want their name used to shill any old sample library.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

ism said:


> And don't forget that ensemble libs like Tundra, the Olafur Chamber Evo, Time Macro and such give you a palette with sounds that you're just not going to get anywhere else with samples.



This is why the notion that Spitfire is stagnant or doesn't innovate is confusing. Look at the breadth of their catalog. Evos, Tundra, synths, LABS, artist series, symphonic motions, prepared pianos, Earth DNA, Orbis, Ricotti mallets, etc. They are offering a sonic palette that no other developer even comes close to, outside of maybe EW. If anything, somebody like OT is now trying to emulate Spitfire's strategy with their recent foray into Creative Soundpacks.


----------



## jbuhler

ALittleNightMusic said:


> This is why the notion that Spitfire is stagnant or doesn't innovate is confusing. Look at the breadth of their catalog. Evos, Tundra, synths, LABS, artist series, symphonic motions, prepared pianos, Earth DNA, Orbis, Ricotti mallets, etc. They are offering a sonic palette that no other developer even comes close to, outside of maybe EW. If anything, somebody like OT is now trying to emulate Spitfire's strategy with their recent foray into Creative Soundpacks.


OT needs a bigger catalogue to cover the cost of Sine development, especially if they are to maintain their policy of limited sales. So I expect to see a lot more libraries from OT. I’m all for that. I also think SF has been plenty innovative. But it’s like folks who say SF never updates their libraries, when they update more than most.


----------



## Casiquire

robgb said:


> So, it's clearly a sketching library that could potentially be used for a final product if you aren't too finicky about detail. I am annoyed, however, about the teasing of what the other libraries will be. I know this is Spitfire's never ending marketing at work, but for godsakes just tell us what you have planned so we can determine whether or not we want to dive into this particular ecosystem.


Never...EVER buy a library based on future plans. *Ever*


----------



## SupremeFist

JTB said:


> This looks promising.
> 
> "Each Selections library is focussed on accomplishing certain performance elements of orchestral movie music brilliantly - from heroic brass themes, or sparkling woodwind runs, to emotional violin love scenes with a legato patch created using our new recording techniques"
> 
> I just hope this doesn't mean a Violins 1 and 2 combined octave patch because that is useless to me.



I may be reading this wrong but to me it says "buy this library now and at some point in the future you will have the OPPORTUNITY! to pay another £49 for horns legato and another £49 again for strings legato". Will woodwind legato or trumpets legato be another £49 each on top of that? Will they all still be ensemble/8va patches? Who knows?


----------



## SupremeFist

lgmcben said:


> BBCSO Core:
> - Same price ($449)
> - Great sound
> - Great recording stage
> - Probably superior players
> - Legato + all the articulations you'll ever want
> - Separate sections
> - Leaders patches for all sections except Strings
> - Super complete percussion
> - Wonderful harp
> 
> I wonder why it's the same price. It clearly a FAR superior product. Just personal opinion though. I'm not a fanboy of Spitfire or bbc though so this is completely neutral facts.
> 
> Although I may be a fanboy of, and bias towards certain company which name starts with S and ended with trezov sampling.


But BBC Core sounds to me horribly wet, and the ambience of Abbey One is just perfect...


----------



## lgmcben

But after doing simple math. Even all 9 add-ons combined + the $450 base package:

(9 x $50) + $450 = $900 still cheaper than BBCSO pro...


----------



## Vladimir Bulaev

Let's be honest. We won't be able to write romantic melodies with AR yet. Spitfire is still deprived of romantics. hahaha! It's also been a long time since we've heard demos from Andy Blaney. Which is very sad. However, it's a good thing that we still have Alex and Jasper in our midst. Oh, and Aaron Venture too!


----------



## ridgero

lgmcben said:


> But after doing simple math. Even all 9 add-ons combined + the $450 base package:
> 
> (9 x $50) + $450 = $900 still cheaper than BBCSO pro...



And you really think the „Add Ons“ will only be $50? :D Is there any official statement about that?


----------



## ScrltPumpernickel

ridgero said:


> And you really think the „Add Ons“ will only be $50? :D Is there any official statement about that?











Spitfire Audio — Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations






www.spitfireaudio.com





in bold text, under the picture.


----------



## SupremeFist

ScrltPumpernickel said:


> Spitfire Audio — Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spitfireaudio.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> in bold text, under the picture.


Nope, that only says the first one will be £49.

EDIT : actually I guess it implies that there will be a first tranche of several at £49 to choose from early next year, but it says nothing about prices after that.


----------



## Hendrixon

I don't like BBCSO, not that there is something wrong in it, it simply doesn't click with me.
But, who ever compares AR1 + those 9 add ons to BBCSO just because they cost roughly the same, means he/she has no clue.

BBCSO is a complete orchestra library, with sections and solos.
In concept its just like SSO.

AR1 + all 9 add ons will be an Albion Plus.


----------



## Vladimir Bulaev

We'll wait and see...


----------



## dcoscina

My only criticism of Spitfire is they are making us wait until Nov 5th for this! Damn them!!!... _keeps opening Spitfire downloader in the desperate hope Abbey Rd 1 is waiting for download_.. LOL


----------



## easyrider

Hendrixon said:


> AR1 + all 9 add ons will be an Albion Plus.



And now you know the internal pre planned mechanics of spitfire audio and the contents of the addon packs that do not currently exist?

BS alert post....


----------



## Vladimir Bulaev

dcoscina said:


> My only criticism of Spitfire is they are making us wait until Nov 5th for this! Damn them!!!... _keeps opening Spitfire downloader in the vain hope Abbey Rd 1 is waiting for download_.. LOL


What a patient person you are, and you're not a Russian by any chance?


----------



## Hendrixon

easyrider said:


> And now you know the internal pre planned mechanics of spitfire audio and the contents of the addon packs that do not currently exist?
> 
> BS alert post....



Just read what Paul wrote and you shall know.
And even if you don't want to read his words, take a logical trip:

AR1 is already mostly pre-orchestrated with few single section (Albion Plus)
SA works on another library that WILL BE modular (SSO/BBCSO)
In that case, do you think there is ANY logic in producing 9 add ons in order to turn AR1 to be modular?
Now breath, think, respond


----------



## ScrltPumpernickel

SupremeFist said:


> Nope, that only says the first one will be £49.
> 
> EDIT : actually I guess it implies that there will be a first tranche of several at £49 to choose from early next year, but it says nothing about prices after that.


Indeed. Very well spotted.


----------



## szczaw

SupremeFist said:


> Nope, that only says the first one will be £49.
> 
> EDIT : actually I guess it implies that there will be a first tranche of several at £49 to choose from early next year, but it says nothing about prices after that.



VSL had too much of a good thing going with BBO, time to start all-out war of ensemble packs


----------



## Jan V

Michael Stibor said:


> Word. Maybe it’s because they can’t do decent legatos. Seriously. I have a few Spitfire products, and not one of them has legatos that are any good.



I'm starting to question Spitfire's ability to program decent legatos as well... Maybe that's the reason why AR1 doesn't have them at all?

The legatos for the violins in BBCSO are unfortunately so temperamental that they are almost unusable. It takes A LOT of patience to make them sound right, unfortunately. 

The issue has been raised by others in this forum many times but we haven't seen any updates of the legato scripting and the last update for BBCSO was such a long time ago (6th June 2020) that I've given up on the hope that Spitfire will go back an fix it. It looks like Spitfire rather starts selling a shiny new library with a headline name instead.

To put my comments into perspective, I actually love the sound of the BBCSO and I like working with it a lot, but the legato issue makes me wonder if Spitfire actually...

... a) doesn't want to invest in fixing the violin legato scripts for the BBCSO or 

... b) if they just don't have the skills to do it. 

The former would be a poor business decision as it leaves many users like me upset and hesitant to buy any new spitfire products (I guess that's understandable when you've spent EUR 1000 on a library that was advertised as THE flagship produce for the foreseeable future just to see it abandoned moments later) and the later would point to a significant skill issue in the company's team of developers. 

Again, I'm not hating on the BBCSO (I love the sound) nor the AR1 (the demos sound nice and there is definitely room for more great ensemble libraries) but I just won't consider buying any new Spitfire library before they don't show more commitment to product maintenance and demonstrate that they actually have their legato scripting under control. 

I hope you hear us Spitfire. Please convince me that I'm wrong. 


PS: Just as another point to highlight the legato issue with the BBCSO, go and check out the introduction video from Spitfire on Youtube, called "BBC Symphony Orchestra Overview," which was posted by the company on 21st September 2019. Go to 1:10 and you will hear Paul Tomson saying "I won't show you the string legatos as we'll be doing a separate video for the legatos" and then moves on to the other sounds. Now go and try to find that dedicated legato video... That's right, it was never released...


----------



## Daniel James

@paulthomson Sorry mate thought I would ask this here rather than commercial. Firstly will it be possible to get a strings ensemble, or basically just the low and high strings in one patch, Just so I can grab a fistful of chords to get the tone, rather than needing to load two players (same for woodwinds).

And secondly, and more randomly. Can I ask if the recording was done pre or during Covid. The only reason I ask is seat placement. I saw a bunch of videos of covid sessions of people sitting miles apart here in LA, wasnt sure if they were doing that too over there. Listening to that staccato section of Christians demo you really get a sense of the depth of the room and it sounded fantastic so it ultimately doesn't matter how they were sitting because it sounds great. More just a curiosity.

BTW Your demo is actually stellar, it also gives a 3d sense of the space.

-DJ


----------



## dcoscina

Vladimir Bulaev said:


> What a patient person you are, and you're not a Russian by any chance?



Нет, но я сочиняю русскую музыку.

LOL.


----------



## Michael Stibor

Jan V said:


> I'm starting to question Spitfire's ability to program decent legatos as well... Maybe that's the reason why AR1 doesn't have them at all?
> 
> The legatos for the violins in BBCSO are unfortunately so temperamental that they are almost unusable. It takes A LOT of patience to make them sound right, unfortunately.
> 
> The issue has been raised by others in this forum many times but we haven't seen any updates of the legato scripting and the last update for BBCSO was such a long time ago (6th June 2020) that I've given up on the hope that Spitfire will go back an fix it. It looks like Spitfire rather starts selling a shiny new library with a headline name instead.
> 
> To put my comments into perspective, I actually love the sound of the BBCSO and I like working with it a lot, but the legato issue makes me wonder if Spitfire actually...
> 
> ... a) doesn't want to invest in fixing the violin legato scripts for the BBCSO or
> 
> ... b) if they just don't have the skills to do it.
> 
> The former would be a poor business decision as it leaves many users like me upset and hesitant to buy any new spitfire products (I guess that's understandable when you've spent EUR 1000 on a library that was advertised as THE flagship produce for the foreseeable future just to see it abandoned moments later) and the later would point to a significant skill issue in the company's team of developers.
> 
> Again, I'm not hating on the BBCSO (I love the sound) nor the AR1 (the demos sound nice and there is definitely room for more great ensemble libraries) but I just won't consider buying any new Spitfire library before they don't show more commitment to product maintenance and demonstrate that they actually have their legato scripting under control.
> 
> I hope you hear us Spitfire. Please convince me that I'm wrong.
> 
> 
> PS: Just as another point to highlight the legato issue with the BBCSO, go and check out the introduction video from Spitfire on Youtube, called "BBC Symphony Orchestra Overview," which was posted by the company on 21st September 2019. Go to 1:10 and you will hear Paul Tomson saying "I won't show you the string legatos as we'll be doing a separate video for the legatos" and then moves on to the other sounds. Now go and try to find that dedicated legato video... That's right, it was never released...


I’m willing to bet money that it’s option A and Spitfire won’t go back to fixing anything from ANY previous program. That’s not how they function. Their MO is to just keep churning out new libraries and marketing the hell out of them, rather than make past libraries more stable.


----------



## Peter Satera

JonS said:


>



OOof Video ownage, I'm rolling with the big boys now.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Jan V said:


> I'm starting to question Spitfire's ability to program decent legatos as well... Maybe that's the reason why AR1 doesn't have them at all?
> 
> The legatos for the violins in BBCSO are unfortunately so temperamental that they are almost unusable. It takes A LOT of patience to make them sound right, unfortunately.
> 
> The issue has been raised by others in this forum many times but we haven't seen any updates of the legato scripting and the last update for BBCSO was such a long time ago (6th June 2020) that I've given up on the hope that Spitfire will go back an fix it. It looks like Spitfire rather starts selling a shiny new library with a headline name instead.
> 
> To put my comments into perspective, I actually love the sound of the BBCSO and I like working with it a lot, but the legato issue makes me wonder if Spitfire actually...
> 
> ... a) doesn't want to invest in fixing the violin legato scripts for the BBCSO or
> 
> ... b) if they just don't have the skills to do it.
> 
> The former would be a poor business decision as it leaves many users like me upset and hesitant to buy any new spitfire products (I guess that's understandable when you've spent EUR 1000 on a library that was advertised as THE flagship produce for the foreseeable future just to see it abandoned moments later) and the later would point to a significant skill issue in the company's team of developers.
> 
> Again, I'm not hating on the BBCSO (I love the sound) nor the AR1 (the demos sound nice and there is definitely room for more great ensemble libraries) but I just won't consider buying any new Spitfire library before they don't show more commitment to product maintenance and demonstrate that they actually have their legato scripting under control.
> 
> I hope you hear us Spitfire. Please convince me that I'm wrong.
> 
> 
> PS: Just as another point to highlight the legato issue with the BBCSO, go and check out the introduction video from Spitfire on Youtube, called "BBC Symphony Orchestra Overview," which was posted by the company on 21st September 2019. Go to 1:10 and you will hear Paul Tomson saying "I won't show you the string legatos as we'll be doing a separate video for the legatos" and then moves on to the other sounds. Now go and try to find that dedicated legato video... That's right, it was never released...



June 2020 was "such a long time ago"? Interesting perspective.

Paul has stated in other threads that they are continuing to work on BBCSO and SSO. Now, your opinion on what needs to be fixed / changed may be different from their opinion. There's another thread here about Spitfire legatos and a number of folks have already said they enjoy BBCSO's legato for example.

In regards to b) in your comment, I believe Andy Blaney programs most of their legato scripts. Whether you think he has skills or not is a separate question of course.


----------



## paulthomson

Daniel James said:


> @paulthomson Sorry mate thought I would ask this here rather than commercial. Firstly will it be possible to get a strings ensemble, or basically just the low and high strings in one patch, Just so I can grab a fistful of chords to get the tone, rather than needing to load two players (same for woodwinds).
> 
> And secondly, and more randomly. Can I ask if the recording was done pre or during Covid. The only reason I ask is seat placement. I saw a bunch of videos of covid sessions of people sitting miles apart here in LA, wasnt sure if they were doing that too over there. Listening to that staccato section of Christians demo you really get a sense of the depth of the room and it sounded fantastic so it ultimately doesn't matter how they were sitting because it sounds great. More just a curiosity.
> 
> BTW Your demo is actually stellar, it also gives a 3d sense of the space.
> 
> -DJ


Hi Dan,

Thanks for your kind words re my demo! I’m glad you like it. I had a lot of fun writing it and sometimes you know when it just drops out? I was also nervous about giving Simon something good enough to mix lol...

the recordings were all done pre COVID, so normal seating.

hope you’re well and keeping safe out on the west coast! Doesn’t seem like yesterday I was living there - 8 years tho!

cheers,
P


----------



## Daniel James

paulthomson said:


> Hi Dan,
> 
> Thanks for your kind words re my demo! I’m glad you like it. I had a lot of fun writing it and sometimes you know when it just drops out? I was also nervous about giving Simon something good enough to mix lol...
> 
> the recordings were all done pre COVID, so normal seating.
> 
> hope you’re well and keeping safe out on the west coast! Doesn’t seem like yesterday I was living there - 8 years tho!
> 
> cheers,
> P



Yeah man its great, you can tell that one was flow state, its got a vibe that carries you throughout. Really loved the sound of the room. The shorts REALLY show it off.

Well the west coast is being the west coast.....this about sums up where we are 😂





Stay safe lads 

-DJ


----------



## maestro2be

That sure is a beautiful sounding room. Watching Guys demo really threw me how wonderfully and easily they glued together and sounded world class level quality. That's a very high standard of sound to begin working with during the mixing and finalizing stage.

I don't know anything about their plans to update older libraries but at least the ones I have owned have had several iterations of updates and I don't believe I ever spent a dime for the updates. They just sent me an email out of the blue with new downloads and licenses in my account. Hopefully one day that's coming for all you waiting if that was what was promised.


----------



## JTB

I walk into a café, on the board there is a sandwich special for $25.
I ask the guy at the counter "what's in it"
he says "bread and butter" then pauses
I ask "what else?"
he says "I can't tell you anything other than it is part of our marketing strategy"
I ask "how do you expect to sell any sandwiches?"
he says "there are a lot of stupid people out there"


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

JTB said:


> I walk into a café, on the board there is a sandwich special for $25.
> I ask the guy at the counter "what's in it"
> he says "bread and butter" then pauses
> I ask "what else?"
> he says "I can't tell you due to the guidelines outlined by our marketing department"



The full articulation list is listed here https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/abbey-road-one-orchestral-foundations/

So, you know exactly what you are buying for the product announced for the price listed. If you are complaining you don’t know what is in unreleased products, seems pretty standard for any company to not go into details there.


----------



## bvaughn0402

I'm excited about this, and ordered it.

But I just realized ... the sound of the room is iconic and great ... but if you mix in other instruments, you end up losing that.


----------



## JTB

It should probably be called Abbey Road O.1
This seems very incomplete IMO for USD$450
I can't see how anyone could construct any realistic passage of orchestral music with this number of articulations. And without any sought of roadmap provided by Spitfire, it's a gamble.

High Strings

Long
Long Con Sord
Tremolo
Short Spiccato
Short Pizzicatto 
What about these? Are they going to be in the next 9 $50 add on's? 
Or can't they say?

Staccato short and regular, bold and agile
Staccato short and regular, fortissimo and harsh
Détaché

Sustained, regular vibrato, molto vibrato, senza vibrato
Espressivo piano
Very soft (pianissimo and flautando)

Legato, regular vibrato, molto vibrato, senza vibrato
Espressivo piano
Very soft (pianissimo and flautando)
Legato agile with attack and release variants
Auto-speed option with regular legato

Portamento with attack and release variants

Sforzato
Soft swell with normal and soft release
Crescendo short and long
Diminuendo short and long

Tremolo sustained, marcato option and regular sustains crossfading option
Measured tremolo, 120/130/140/160 BPM, normal and cut release

Half tone trills
Whole tone trills

Regular pizzicato
Snap (Bartók) pizzicato
Col legno

Harmonics Sustained
Tremolo sustained

Ponti cello Short notes, bold and agile
Sustained
Legato
Tremolo sustained, with marcato


----------



## Daniel James

bvaughn0402 said:


> I'm excited about this, and ordered it.
> 
> But I just realized ... the sound of the room is iconic and great ... but if you mix in other instruments, you end up losing that.



Using closer mics on other libraries and bigger verby mics on AR1 would mix quite well I think.


----------



## yiph2

JTB said:


> It should probably be called Abbey Road O.1
> This seems very incomplete IMO for USD$450
> I can't see how anyone could construct any realistic passage of orchestral music with this number of articulations. And without any sought of roadmap provided by Spitfire, it's a gamble.
> 
> High Strings
> 
> Long
> Long Con Sord
> Tremolo
> Short Spiccato
> Short Pizzicatto
> What about these? Are they going to be in the next 9 $50 add on's?
> Or can't they say?
> 
> Staccato short and regular, bold and agile
> Staccato short and regular, fortissimo and harsh
> Détaché
> 
> Sustained, regular vibrato, molto vibrato, senza vibrato
> Espressivo piano
> Very soft (pianissimo and flautando)
> 
> Legato, regular vibrato, molto vibrato, senza vibrato
> Espressivo piano
> Very soft (pianissimo and flautando)
> Legato agile with attack and release variants
> Auto-speed option with regular legato
> 
> Portamento with attack and release variants
> 
> Sforzato
> Soft swell with normal and soft release
> Crescendo short and long
> Diminuendo short and long
> 
> Tremolo sustained, marcato option and regular sustains crossfading option
> Measured tremolo, 120/130/140/160 BPM, normal and cut release
> 
> Half tone trills
> Whole tone trills
> 
> Regular pizzicato
> Snap (Bartók) pizzicato
> Col legno
> 
> Harmonics Sustained
> Tremolo sustained
> 
> Ponti cello Short notes, bold and agile
> Sustained
> Legato
> Tremolo sustained, with marcato


Is this a joke? Literally no string library has this many articulations. And if there is, its definitely not $450


----------



## Tatu

yiph2 said:


> Is this a joke? Literally no string library has this many articulations. And if there is, its definitely not $450


That seems to be the articulation list for VSL's Synchron Strings Pro:




__





SYNCHRON STRINGS PRO - Vienna Symphonic Library


Synchron Strings Pro represents the next generation of sampled string ensembles, fusing artistic expression, a wealth of detailed articulations, natural note transitions and sonic excellence within a resource-friendly, easy-to-use product.




www.vsl.co.at


----------



## scoringdreams

Just found this really interesting and perhaps relevant to all the trending Spitfire Audio AR1 threads now. Including those who try to predict the future or become pseudo product experts.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/imperi...hen-youre-more-likely-to-buy-it/#518c171b3f94

I guess many of us are really keen on potentially getting our hands on AR1!  (me included) No harm intended here, this was just really amusing to me as I read through the article today and found a real-life context to apply it to.


----------



## Alex Fraser

JTB said:


> It should probably be called Abbey Road O.1
> This seems very incomplete IMO for USD$450
> I can't see how anyone could construct any realistic passage of orchestral music with this number of articulations. And without any sought of roadmap provided by Spitfire, it's a gamble.
> 
> High Strings
> 
> Long
> Long Con Sord
> Tremolo
> Short Spiccato
> Short Pizzicatto
> What about these? Are they going to be in the next 9 $50 add on's?
> Or can't they say?
> 
> Staccato short and regular, bold and agile
> Staccato short and regular, fortissimo and harsh
> Détaché
> 
> Sustained, regular vibrato, molto vibrato, senza vibrato
> Espressivo piano
> Very soft (pianissimo and flautando)
> 
> Legato, regular vibrato, molto vibrato, senza vibrato
> Espressivo piano
> Very soft (pianissimo and flautando)
> Legato agile with attack and release variants
> Auto-speed option with regular legato
> 
> Portamento with attack and release variants
> 
> Sforzato
> Soft swell with normal and soft release
> Crescendo short and long
> Diminuendo short and long
> 
> Tremolo sustained, marcato option and regular sustains crossfading option
> Measured tremolo, 120/130/140/160 BPM, normal and cut release
> 
> Half tone trills
> Whole tone trills
> 
> Regular pizzicato
> Snap (Bartók) pizzicato
> Col legno
> 
> Harmonics Sustained
> Tremolo sustained
> 
> Ponti cello Short notes, bold and agile
> Sustained
> Legato
> Tremolo sustained, with marcato


With respect JTB, I think there's a fundamental mismatch between what AB01 is _designed_ to be and what you want from it.

Sounds like you'd be happier with the modular library coming next year. Why not wait for that instead?
Best - A


----------



## prodigalson

JTB said:


> I walk into a café, on the board there is a sandwich special for $25.
> I ask the guy at the counter "what's in it"
> he says "bread and butter" then pauses
> I ask "what else?"
> he says "I can't tell you anything other than it is part of our marketing strategy"
> I ask "how do you expect to sell any sandwiches?"
> he says "there are a lot of stupid people out there"



This is insane. Here's the more appropriate analogy:

You walk into a café, on the board there is a sandwich special for $25.
you ask the guy at the counter "what's in it"
he says "artisan home made bread and butter with oven baked honeyed ham and Irish Cheddar cheese"
You scream "THAT'S ALL!!! THATS NOT A SANDWICH!! NO SELF-RESPECTING SANDWICH EATER WOULD EVER EAT A SANDWICH WITH ONLY HAM AND CHEESE!!! WHERES THE RELISH AND THE MAYO AND THE TOMATOES AND THE ONIONS AND THE BEEF. I NEED MOOOOOOOOORE!!!"
he says "well, there are more sandwiches coming, they're just not ready yet. They have more gourmet options and you may like them more if you're still hungry. But this sandwich just has ham and cheese."
You ask "how do you expect to sell any sandwiches?"
he says "I've been selling sandwiches successfully for 10 years"

TL;DR They're telling you whats in the sandwich, you just don't like it.


----------



## Zero&One

From their site it seems the future releases are like smaller BHCT style, at least how I read it? 
I'd be up for those as I love BHCT! I'm not sure they are add-ons to make this more complete if you know what I mean.

"The next titles in this symphonic series will arrive early 2021. These will be smaller, more focused libraries inspired by classic films – offering pre-orchestrated instrument themes. Each Selections library is focussed on accomplishing certain performance elements of orchestral movie music brilliantly..."


----------



## JTB

So pre recorded riffs are on the menu but no portamento or glissandi? 
Mmmm sounds delicious, albeit pre digested.


----------



## Vladimir Bulaev

Has anyone ever wondered why Andy Blaney didn't write any demos for Spitfire Audio Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations? I just hope that he didn't leave and stayed in their team.


----------



## dcoscina

Michael Stibor said:


> I’m willing to bet money that it’s option A and Spitfire won’t go back to fixing anything from ANY previous program. That’s not how they function. Their MO is to just keep churning out new libraries and marketing the hell out of them, rather than make past libraries more stable.



They have updated BBCSO several times since its launch. I've also seen updates on several products I own of their's, like Bernard Herrmann, BDTK, etc.


prodigalson said:


> This is insane. Here's the more appropriate analogy:
> 
> You walk into a café, on the board there is a sandwich special for $25.
> you ask the guy at the counter "what's in it"
> he says "artisan home made bread and butter with oven baked honeyed ham and Irish Cheddar cheese"
> You scream "THAT'S ALL!!! THATS NOT A SANDWICH!! NO SELF-RESPECTING SANDWICH EATER WOULD EVER EAT A SANDWICH WITH ONLY HAM AND CHEESE!!! WHERES THE RELISH AND THE MAYO AND THE TOMATOES AND THE ONIONS AND THE BEEF. I NEED MOOOOOOOOORE!!!"
> he says "well, there are more sandwiches coming, they're just not ready yet. They have more gourmet options and you may like them more if you're still hungry. But this sandwich just has ham and cheese."
> You ask "how do you expect to sell any sandwiches?"
> he says "I've been selling sandwiches successfully for 10 years"
> 
> TL;DR They're telling you whats in the sandwich, you just don't like it.


best analogy ever.


----------



## GtrString

I agree there could have been more instruments in the library, and creating scarcity to make us buy expansions, feels like being taken hostage. Especially not knowing whats coming. Allthough I do like the idea that the expansions will be themed after famous scores. I just hope there is a Christmas classic in there, because this is that sound!

However, getting all of those mic options is great for the price. It seems like an orchestral library that can be tweaked to fit into a lot of use cases. That appeals to me for sure. Its more about the sound than the 1000 articulations. I think it will be my first Spitfire library.

Anyone knows how Spitfire’s holiday offers works? The intro offer on this ends Dec 1st - so will it be cheaper to wait until Christmas? I have a truckload of cash to spend on software, after the travelling restraints lately.


----------



## yiph2

Tatu said:


> That seems to be the articulation list for VSL's Synchron Strings Pro:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SYNCHRON STRINGS PRO - Vienna Symphonic Library
> 
> 
> Synchron Strings Pro represents the next generation of sampled string ensembles, fusing artistic expression, a wealth of detailed articulations, natural note transitions and sonic excellence within a resource-friendly, easy-to-use product.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vsl.co.at


I’m pretty sure VSL’s library doesn’t have winds, brass and percussion, and isn't recorded at Abbey Road


----------



## Tatu

yiph2 said:


> I’m pretty sure VSL’s library doesn’t have winds, brass and percussion, and isn't recorded at Abbey Road


No, but indeed there is a string library with that many articulations. It's not a joke and it's currently rather temptingly priced below 450.

😉


----------



## scoringdreams

Just found this on the Spitfire Support Centre: https://spitfireaudio.zendesk.com/h...fference-Orchestral-Foundations-vs-Albion-ONE

Comparison between Albion ONE, BBCSO Core, and AR1


----------



## Frederick

My current thoughts are that we should wait for the promised extra information on the upcoming releases. I think they said they would make that available BEFORE Nov 5th, when the deal ends, so I'm looking forward to that.

The problem without the extra information is that for many of us it is not possible to determine if this is going to be very useful, which creates anxiety, because almost all of us like what is in it a LOT and we don't want to miss out, especially because it seems the deal in itself is VERY good. It seems to me that for many it's not that there's not enough content for the price, but rather whether or not after getting the upcoming releases there will be enough BASIC articulations to make it more usefull than it is now. Let's say 5 more per instrument, e.g.: legato, staccato, half tone and whole tone trills and a marcato attack for high strings. If not, then maybe it's better to sit this one out and wait for the modular orchestra. Those special themed releases will also work great with the modular orchestra.

Although I'm into section based orchestras, I still might choose this one, because I do not want to miss out on the sound and that modular orchestra might end up too expensive. Especially considering I own so many already... But what if those missing articulations are only coming mixed with extra instruments that are only fitting that themed approach?

On the other hand how bad would it be if it's not going to work out? I could still use this one for layering... So I keep going between "Maybe I will buy this" and "NEVER, I'm not up for a gamble on this one!"

Anyhow, for now let's just wait for the much coveted extra info!


----------



## Beans

Frederick said:


> The problem without the extra information is that for many of us it is not possible to determine if this is going to be very useful, which creates anxiety, because almost all of us like what is in it a LOT and we don't want to miss out, especially because it seems the deal in itself is VERY good.



I don't intend to gatekeep the emotions you can feel, but I believe you are a hobbyist like me, right? So, I'm curious... from where does this anxiety come? There's not really anything "riding" on this release, yeah? Our livelihoods are not at stake in any way, so *my *personal feelings are vacillating between excitement (at the potential) and hesitation. 

Sure, I'm still waffling on whether to save that $149 (intro price plus pre-order "voucher" for the next purchase), but on my part, anxiety isn't really a factor here.

Again, I'm not trying to tell you how to feel, but if there's room to reset our barometers a bit, then perhaps we can make some logical decisions sans anxiety.


----------



## Frederick

Beans said:


> I don't intend to gatekeep the emotions you can feel, but I believe you are a hobbyist like me, right? So, I'm curious... from where does this anxiety come? There's not really anything "riding" on this release, yeah? Our livelihoods are not at stake in any way, so *my *personal feelings are vacillating between excitement (at the potential) and hesitation.
> 
> Sure, I'm still waffling on whether to save that $149 (intro price plus pre-order "voucher" for the next purchase), but on my part, anxiety isn't really a factor here.
> 
> Again, I'm not trying to tell you how to feel, but if there's room to reset our barometers a bit, then perhaps we can make some logical decisions sans anxiety.



You are absolutely right! Anxiety should not be taken seriously, beyond what people are expressing in threads like these. I'm not loosing any sleep over this. It's just that if I don't buy it, and it turns out I should have, that it would be annoying. Would have to wait for an opportunity to buy it at the same price in the more long term. A Luxery problem, nothing more.

Still, the emotion is there if only on a small scale...

Edit: And how about this? Losing thousands of dollars in the stock market on a bad day is no problem. It's all part of the game. Other days will be better. But paying 10 bucks for something that's for sale at the same moment somewhere else for 5 is annoying as hell!


----------



## Peros

prodigalson said:


> This is insane. Here's the more appropriate analogy:
> 
> You walk into a café, on the board there is a sandwich special for $25.
> you ask the guy at the counter "what's in it"
> he says "artisan home made bread and butter with oven baked honeyed ham and Irish Cheddar cheese"
> You scream "THAT'S ALL!!! THATS NOT A SANDWICH!! NO SELF-RESPECTING SANDWICH EATER WOULD EVER EAT A SANDWICH WITH ONLY HAM AND CHEESE!!! WHERES THE RELISH AND THE MAYO AND THE TOMATOES AND THE ONIONS AND THE BEEF. I NEED MOOOOOOOOORE!!!"
> he says "well, there are more sandwiches coming, they're just not ready yet. They have more gourmet options and you may like them more if you're still hungry. But this sandwich just has ham and cheese."
> You ask "how do you expect to sell any sandwiches?"
> he says "I've been selling sandwiches successfully for 10 years"
> 
> TL;DR They're telling you whats in the sandwich, you just don't like it.




“This is insane. Here's the more appropriate analogy:”

You’re not the sandwich buyer but the sandwich maker…you need utensils to make sandwiches to sell to your clients…X brand says YOO we made the best ever sandwich utensil product line like no one else before with a material no one else had access before and obviously our product line is complimentary (cuz thats the whole point of a recording and selling a SPACE/ROOM). And you’re like like great, i’d love that…then X brand goes ohhh but we only made the 1st few utensils which makes about 50% of the sandwich, buy them now and then you’ll get to purchase the rest afterwards…so normally you say but can i know what other utensils you plan on providing as part of that product line?? you know cuz i need to know if what i’m investing into will fit with the sandwiches i sell to my clients…and they say don’t worry its gonna be what you need but we can’t give you any specifics yet…

Now out of the analogy but let’s be honest we wouldn’t accept that kind of strategy from our landlords, banks, car manufacturers or universities…”take this Music course with us and we’ll let you know along the way what subjects we’re gonna cover”

Now don’t get me wrong, it’s their right to do so and one can simply wait till everything is out to know if the product fits their needs or not but for some ppl with lower income OR ppl living in countries with very weak currencies - it would be nice to know whats the plan beforehand cuz that price can be expensive when you’re paid in rupees and not USD, EUR or BP…being able to plan your expenditures is essential.

and finally : “I've been selling sandwiches successfully for 10 years” - sure mate but your shitty marketing strategy started about 2/3 years ago and the 7 years prior, you were you being honest and more down to earth…so let’s see where you are 10years from now keeping the same attitude…Yeah ppl like spitfire but one has to be deaf not to see the negative comments getting louder.

Again, it’s their right and i respect it but don’t blame ppl for reacting they way they do either…

All that being said as an owner of SSS, SCS, HZS, Apperture Strings, SStS, SStW, BBCSO Pro, Symphonic Motions and a few others…so yeah like i said i like Spitfire products..It’s just that my trust in them keeps going down as the years go on.


----------



## scoringdreams

Super anxious excited about what's to come for this product!

It would be cool if they release like 'Indiana Jones strings' or 'Final Fantasy brass' etc.

Had realised that Joe Hisaishi recorded in Studio One before too, so do we get any patches of his?


----------



## muadgil

Daniel James said:


> @paulthomson Sorry mate thought I would ask this here rather than commercial. Firstly will it be possible to get a strings ensemble, or basically just the low and high strings in one patch, Just so I can grab a fistful of chords to get the tone, rather than needing to load two players.
> 
> -DJ


I'm quite interested by this too. 
As I'm not familiar with the Spitfire player, is there a way to make a multi?If there is no possibility to make a low+high patch...


----------



## easyrider

muadgil said:


> I'm quite interested by this too.
> As I'm not familiar with the Spitfire player, is there a way to make a multi?If there is no possibility to make a low+high patch...



You could use unify to make a multi patch.


----------



## easyrider

GtrString said:


> I agree there could have been more instruments in the library, and creating scarcity to make us buy expansions, feels like being taken hostage.



But you’re not being held captive and you have complete freedom NOT to buy it...


----------



## Alex Fraser

Anyone else hungry with all this talk of sandwiches? 🥪


----------



## dcoscina

easyrider said:


> But you’re not being held captive and you have complete freedom NOT to buy it...


Nailed it. It's not like we don't have a plethora of options within Spitfire's catalog or from other developers.


----------



## easyrider

Alex Fraser said:


> Anyone else hungry with all this talk of sandwiches? 🥪


:emoji_hamburger:


----------



## prodigalson

Peros said:


> You’re not the sandwich buyer but the sandwich maker



I didn't come up with that ludicrous analogy so sure, whatever. 



Peros said:


> X brand says YOO we made the best ever sandwich utensil product line like no one else before with a material no one else had access before and obviously our product line is complimentary (cuz thats the whole point of a recording and selling a SPACE/ROOM). And you’re like like great, i’d love that…then X brand goes ohhh but we only made the 1st few utensils which makes about 50% of the sandwich, buy them now and then you’ll get to purchase the rest afterwards…so normally you say but can i know what other utensils you plan on providing as part of that product line?? you know cuz i need to know if what i’m investing into will fit with the sandwiches i sell to my clients…and they say don’t worry its gonna be what you need but we can’t give you any specifics yet…



Both this analogy and the other bonkers one are based on the same faulty premise; that you're being sold a product that will only do the job if you buy future installments. Thats simply not the case. This product is a single tool, not a suite of tools. It may not do what you want, based on what music you write and how you write music, and thats fine. If you need legato, fine, then don't buy it. To use YOUR analogy, they're not selling you a suite of tools each of which you'll need to make a single sandwich, they're selling you a knife. Its a great knife for cutting the bread but its not going to slice the meat the way you need. Fine, don't buy it and buy a Deli meat slicer. Or buy both if you need both. Think its too expensive if it doesnt cut your bread AND your deli meats? Fine...DONT BUY IT. 

Just like most of us, I use legato a lot in my tracks and productions, so of course, it would be nice if it had it but some of the most used patches in my template are the Albion WW Shorts, Mid Brass Longs and Low Strings. I've created some really successful productions with those ensemble patches and use other libraries for legato so I'm perfectly fine with this library if it just has great options for similar patches. Is it worth $400? Maybe, maybe not. Some knives with great materials are very expensive...they still won't slice your deli meat. 



Peros said:


> ”take this Music course with us and we’ll let you know along the way what subjects we’re gonna cover”



Again, this is an inaccurate comparison because you're not paying for a single product the contents of which they're keeping hidden. You're buying a single product that doesn't do what YOU think it SHOULD do. They're selling you a music course that only covers harmony and orchestration but no production skills. You think it should have productions skills too for $400, Fine, but then you shouldn't buy it. 



Peros said:


> it would be nice to know whats the plan beforehand cuz that price can be expensive when you’re paid in rupees and not USD, EUR or BP…being able to plan your expenditures is essential.



It would be nice but thats capitalism in a global economy. Its not the job of a company to consider your budget and international currency fluctuations in the marketing of their products.


Peros said:


> Again, it’s their right and i respect it but don’t blame ppl for reacting they way they do either…



I didn't blame anyone for anything. I just rebutted why I believed to be a flawed analogy.


----------



## GtrString

easyrider said:


> But you’re not being held captive and you have complete freedom NOT to buy it...



But you don't understand. I was caught by the marketing, and now the crazy wonderful sound keeps my mind inside a studio in the UK! WTF!!!

Can I choose not to buy it.. maybe, but what kind of person would that turn me into? I would be set back in denial for years. After all, this library is cheaper than a shrink!


----------



## lgmcben

Plot twitst: They're not aiming at selling this $449 package at all. They know too well it's unusable for professional composers. The Abbey Road orchestral sound is rare enough. Why not create an even rarer product: Legato at Abbey Road.

Now everyone will buy those $49 packs like there's no tomorrow.


----------



## GtrString

Le-ga-to, does that mean let-it-go in Italian?


----------



## easyrider

GtrString said:


> Le-ga-to, does that mean let-it-go in Italian?



No.

Its Pizza









Coming Soon Page






legatopizza.com


----------



## Michel Simons

I thought we had decided that we were going to stick to cat analogies?


----------



## Noeticus

So.... the Sample Library Conundrum is that as a sample library producer and purveyor you can never produce a library that fulfills what everyone wants, and as a sample library producer and purveyor you would never actually want to produce a library that fulfills what everyone wants because if it did they would have no reason to ever buy a library from you again.

Obviously the above statement is not meant to be taken literally. 

As a side note. I truly love Spitfire Audio, but believe that Vienna Symphonic Library has more articulations presently than any other company in the world. But, I could be wrong.


----------



## CT

Just bought a bunch of deli equipment instead of pre-ordering this INCOMPLETE product. But let me tell you all a little more about how ANGRY I am about that INCOMPLETENESS.


----------



## Beans

At this point, I'm seeing far more posts complaining about people complaining than I do actual complaint posts about the upcoming library.


----------



## scoringdreams

Beans said:


> At this point, I'm seeing far more posts complaining about people complaining than I do actual complaint posts about the upcoming library.



A tongue twister!


----------



## Frederick

I'm still too worked up about how Disney ruined the Star Wars franchise with The Last Jedi. Not to mention how angry I still am at the writers of the last season of Game Of Thrones for ruining the whole series.

Just saying in the grand scheme of things the Abbey Road One Orchestral Foundations release really doesn't matter.


----------



## Casiquire

Beans said:


> At this point, I'm seeing far more posts complaining about people complaining than I do actual complaint posts about the upcoming library.


At this point, I'm seeing far more posts about sandwiches


----------



## Michael Stibor

Frederick said:


> I'm still too worked up about how Disney ruined the Star Wars franchise with The Last Jedi.



You know that film came out like four years ago, right? Surely you can think of more pressing issues in 2020 than this. 

Also, TLJ is the best Star Wars film since Empire - real fans know this - but I digress. Let’s stay on topic. Back to deli sandwiches.


----------



## Michael Stibor

Casiquire said:


> At this point, I'm seeing far more posts about sandwiches


Exactly. An odd analogy about sandwiches snowballed into even weirder subsequent analogies about sandwiches.

Hey, that gives me an idea though. _Snowball_ _sandwiches_! I’m gonna be rich! Screw this composer stuff.


----------



## Peter Satera

I guess we're all thinking the same thing then. @paulthomson, what sandwiches do you got back there? 🤤


----------



## Peros

prodigalson said:


> I didn't come up with that ludicrous analogy so sure, whatever. - *yet you went with it and used something very similar - so thats why i said what i said*
> 
> Both this analogy and the other bonkers one are based on the same faulty premise; that you're being sold a product that will only do the job if you buy future installments. Thats simply not the case. This product is a single tool, not a suite of tools. It may not do what you want, based on what music you write and how you write music, and thats fine. If you need legato, fine, then don't buy it. To use YOUR analogy, they're not selling you a suite of tools each of which you'll need to make a single sandwich, they're selling you a knife. Its a great knife for cutting the bread but its not going to slice the meat the way you need. Fine, don't buy it and buy a Deli meat slicer. Or buy both if you need both. Think its too expensive if it doesnt cut your bread AND your deli meats? Fine...DONT BUY IT. - *thats why i said one could WAIT and see at the end if the product suits them or not. Never said it was not complete, never said it was too expensive for what it is...only said if there gonna make it a SERIES, they could let us know whats coming so we can make an informed decision..It's called FOUNDATIONS for a reason, its clearly a Series, can be a stand alone for sure but still part of something so no i don't think my analogy is bonkers either...
> 
> Example : i would be interested in the whole thing if we end up getting sections V1, V2 , Vla, etc... if it's going to end up being mixed instruments like Cellos & Trombones as a patch with no control, then i'm less interested...they are selling the room and the sound of the room as a Series, i agree it's a single product that works on its own, never said the opposite but its a FOUNDATION, investing in a foundation without knowing what the whole is seems kind of bonkers to me...*
> 
> Just like most of us, I use legato a lot in my tracks and productions, so of course, it would be nice if it had it but some of the most used patches in my template are the Albion WW Shorts, Mid Brass Longs and Low Strings. I've created some really successful productions with those ensemble patches and use other libraries for legato so I'm perfectly fine with this library if it just has great options for similar patches. Is it worth $400? Maybe, maybe not. Some knives with great materials are very expensive...they still won't slice your deli meat. - *again mate, i never criticised the product itself, did not talk about legatos or the price at any point in my reply*
> 
> Again, this is an inaccurate comparison because you're not paying for a single product the contents of which they're keeping hidden. You're buying a single product that doesn't do what YOU think it SHOULD do. They're selling you a music course that only covers harmony and orchestration but no production skills. You think it should have productions skills too for $400, Fine, but then you shouldn't buy it. - *I don't completely agree but yet if you read what i said, i never said it was too expensive or that the product was not complete, my point AGAIN was that they could at least let us know before hand what the addons would be. - if it's a series, let us know what we're investing in with more details that simply pre-orchestrated sections which does not really say much... a better comparison to what i said would be someone selling a Orchestration Foundation Course and only showing how to write for strings, not clearly stating if we're going to have the topic of brass and WW...*
> 
> It would be nice but thats capitalism in a global economy. Its not the job of a company to consider your budget and international currency fluctuations in the marketing of their products. - *never said it was there job, only said it would be nice and shows a company that cares (at least to me) - see Aaron Venture for an example of a totally honest and forthcoming developer.*
> 
> I didn't blame anyone for anything. I just rebutted why I believed to be a flawed analogy. - *yeah and i did the same for your analogy*
> 
> I'm going to stop here cause the last time i dared to enter a discussion with someone here it ended up in the drama zone so to each his own...and let's agree to disagree


----------



## CT

Beans said:


> At this point, I'm seeing far more posts complaining about people complaining than I do actual complaint posts about the upcoming library.



Don't worry. Soon the majority will be complaints about complaints about complaints. That is the life cylce of a VI-Control thread.


----------



## Michael Antrum

Peter Satera said:


> I guess we're all thinking the same thing then. @paulthomson, what sandwiches do you got back there? 🤤



At this point it's less of a sandwich and more of a nothingburger......


----------



## Michel Simons

I am afraid your reply has been sandwiched between the QUOTE tags.


----------



## Michael Antrum

Michel Simons said:


> I am afraid your reply has been sandwiched between the QUOTE tags.




​


----------



## Alex Fraser




----------



## Peter Satera

Michael Antrum said:


> At this point it's less of a sandwich and more of a nothingburger......


Hmm... I've never been a fan of vegan.


----------



## jon wayne

Peter Satera said:


> Hmm... I've never been a fan of vegan.


Levon Helm was asked in one of his last interviews, after cancer diagnosis, what words of wisdom he could impart as a life lesson. His response was "Enjoy every sandwich". Might just do that!


----------



## Peter Satera

jon wayne said:


> Levon Helm was asked in one of his last interviews, after cancer diagnosis, what words of wisdom he could impart as a life lesson. His response was "Enjoy every sandwich". Might just do that!


Hmmm, maybe I will pick up Abbey...


----------



## Frederick

So what if the seemingly irrelevant summing up of movie titles and photos of certain soundstracks on the Abbey Road One product page are actually a hint of what the upcoming selections will be about?
Star Wars: Return of the Jedi? Lord Of The Rings?

Better not wait too long with pressing that pre order button...


----------



## Casiquire

Michel Simons said:


> I am afraid your reply has been sandwiched between the QUOTE tags.


I am LIVID


----------



## jaketanner

Frederick said:


> So what if the seemingly irrelevant summing up of movie titles and photos of certain soundstracks on the Abbey Road One product page are actually a hint of what the upcoming selections will be about?
> Star Wars: Return of the Jedi? Lord Of The Rings?


I do believe this is exactly the case...I think there is reference to this very thing on their site. The small modules are modeled after movie score themes/styles.


----------



## Frederick

jaketanner said:


> I do believe this is exactly the case...I think there is reference to this very thing on their site. The small modules are modeled after movie score themes/styles.



Yes, yes, and in the spitfire legato thread that Spitfire Audio Karma dude sort of confirmed a new killer legato in one of the selections... I'm going to order this right now! I've probably been an idiot about this.

Edit: Pre-ordered it!

Edit 2: I'm guessing ostinato brass for Raiders of the Lost Ark.


----------



## Jan V

ALittleNightMusic said:


> June 2020 was "such a long time ago"? Interesting perspective.
> 
> Paul has stated in other threads that they are continuing to work on BBCSO and SSO. Now, your opinion on what needs to be fixed / changed may be different from their opinion. There's another thread here about Spitfire legatos and a number of folks have already said they enjoy BBCSO's legato for example.
> 
> In regards to b) in your comment, I believe Andy Blaney programs most of their legato scripts. Whether you think he has skills or not is a separate question of course.



Here is the update history for BBCSO:

- From October to December 2019: 7 updates
- From January to June 2020: 11 updates
- From June 2020 to now: 0 updates

So my hopes for further BBCSO updates is relatively low as they seem to have dried up.

Having said that, I totally agree with your point that what needs fixing in the first place is a highly subjective affair. Point taken.

However, I find the violin legatos off BBCSO very tricky to work with and the results I get are somewhat unsatisfactory compared to what I can achieve with other libraries. Others may really like how they work and that's great, but I feel there are plenty of others who share my concern from what I've read in the forums.

For my part, I would just like to see the BBSO legatos work better, meaning closer to some libraries Spitfire did in the past which I enjoyed a lot more.

And I will repeat the point from my last post that I find it highly suspicious that the BBCSO legato video was never published, which leads me to believe that Spitfire wasn't entirely happy about their legatos either, but that's just my gut feel. 

And I appreciate that you pointed out that @paulthomson said that they are continuing to work on the BBCSO. I saw the that post now and like I said, I actually really like that library, so I'd be more than happy to see more updates and even new BBCSO products from them. Their products are definitely good and worth checking out!

However, for now, I do have some reservations with regards to how playable the BBCSO violin legatos are (again, personal opinion which might differ from others) and unfortunately, the violin legatos are such an essential element of any orchestral library that it's VERY frustrating when you struggle to make them work for you.

Maybe as a development idea for a future updates (or future libraries), instead of adding more mic positions (which I do actually like, so no criticism), just give users a bit more control over how the legatos work/respond/feel so they can tailor them to their playing styles which would make them work better for everyone.


----------



## Nemoy

And meanwhile BBCSO users are still waiting for those Muted Brass...and a piano. Remember, you said this is "A universal starting point." Don't let it end where it started. Let's get the muted brass for BBCSO! C'mon Man!


----------



## lumcas

Nemoy said:


> And meanwhile BBCSO users are still waiting for those Muted Brass...and a piano. Remember, you said this is "A universal starting point." Don't let it end where it started. Let's get the muted brass for BBCSO! C'mon Man!


I think you understand it wrong - everybody has to work around the same flaws/bugs in the library, hence "A universal starting point"...


----------



## RSK

Jan V said:


> Here is the update history for BBCSO:
> 
> - From October to December 2019: 7 updates
> - From January to June 2020: 11 updates
> - From June 2020 to now: 0 updates
> 
> So my hopes for further BBCSO updates is relatively low as they seem to have dried up.



I have to agree with this; BBCSO is probably done, but by no fault of Spitfire's. I think they had every intention of following through and were caught by surprise with the closure of Maida Vale.

Will they do the same with Abbey Road? Don't bet on it. As a matter of fact, theyre probably betting the farm on this one.


----------



## jaketanner

RSK said:


> I think they had every intention of following through and were caught by surprise with the closure of Maida Vale.


I actually think they recorded the BBCSO as a means of having the sound of Maida Vale around for years to come. Threat of closure has been around since 2007 and officially announced in 2018 if I read correctly...so I seriously doubt that it was a surprise it was closing.


----------



## jtnyc

How many variations of an orchestral sample library can one company make? I guess as many as they can until people stop buying them... 

It's funny that people flock to buy these and then so many are somewhat disappointed or have issues with sloppy shorts, finicky, bumpy legato, over the top vibrato (solo strings), slow fixes etc, then get caught up in the latest hype and dig into their wallets even deeper hoping this new one will be the ultimate... at least that is what I did a few times

I own quite a few Spitfire products and like some of them very much, but I'm not totally satisfied a lot of the time for the issues listed above. These products are on the high end price wise and while they can sound really great, I often find myself scratching my head wondering how or why they missed those flat notes, or those very sloppy round robins on shorts. I just don't get it.

I absolutely love the sound of Spitfire Solo Strings, but the vibrato on the longs and legato just sounds awful to me. It's so over the top, it sounds like it's trying to sound humorous, and when engaging it, it's like turning on a switch. It goes from 0 to 100 in less than a second. Why they didn't at least have it gradually ramp up eludes me. The legatos are very clumsy under the fingers and not very agile either. Same with Alternative Solo Strings. 

When i saw BBCSO came out I was sure these things would not be an issue, but then I started seeing those very complaints (sloppy shorts). It leaves me highly skeptical and very careful with my money when it comes to SA


----------



## barteredbride

JTB said:


> I walk into a café, on the board there is a sandwich special for $25.



And I walk straight out of that cafe!

What´s special about a $25 sandwich??!

Blimey.

$50 for 2 sandwiches? Bargin! That´s like, $1 more expensive than the upcoming legato sandwich.


----------



## Geoff Grace

GtrString said:


> Anyone knows how Spitfire’s holiday offers works? The intro offer on this ends Dec 1st - so will it be cheaper to wait until Christmas? I have a truckload of cash to spend on software, after the travelling restraints lately.



Based on the past, there will likely be a Black Friday sale and a deeper Christmas sale. The best prices on individual items usually happen about a year after the library has been released. If that pattern holds true, the current price may be equalled but not surpassed in sales during the next year. 

You'll probably see a better price (likely 40% off) on December 25, 2021.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## dcoscina

Frederick said:


> Yes, yes, and in the spitfire legato thread that Spitfire Audio Karma dude sort of confirmed a new killer legato in one of the selections... I'm going to order this right now! I've probably been an idiot about this.
> 
> Edit: Pre-ordered it!
> 
> Edit 2: I'm guessing ostinato brass for Raiders of the Lost Ark.


Raiders trombones would be nice too.


----------



## method1

If you play this thread backwards it says "Paul is a dead man" 🕵️‍♂️


----------



## Nemoy

Many BBCSO users have been asking for Muted Brass for quite some time now. And if anyone here are JW Star Wars fans since they made it a point to mention Star Wars in the AR One video that it had been recorded there, then you'll know you absolutely need some Muted Brass to do proper mockups. Spitfire, Muted Brass for BBCSO please! Not Muted Customers! We need to get through the finish line...completion, before we have yet another starting point.


----------



## Vladimir Bulaev

Don't you understand? If you have everything, they will have nothing else to offer you. So shut up and buy all these new libraries, now!


----------



## Jan V

Nemoy said:


> Spitfire, Muted Brass for BBCSO please! Not Muted Customers! We need to get through the finish line...completion, before we have yet another starting point.



Nicely said and exactly how I feel.

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with putting out a shiny new library like AR1 but as a customer of BBCSO (which is not a cheap library), I feel Spitfire still needs to deliver on what they said they would. The job is not done yet.

For as long as Spitfire doesn’t follow through with their promises for BBCSO, I won’t buy any new library from them. And I believe a few other customers feel the same way.

Again, I do like the BBCSO a lot and would simply love to see it improve. And if it does, I’ll become a full promoter of Spitfire again because they do create interesting products.

Since I know that Spitfire is reading this forum, I just hope I can be another voice that pushes them to allocate a few more resources to keeping current customers happy by investing into product maintenance instead of putting all their resources into churning out new products.


----------



## dzilizzi

I'm worried that when Paul says they've had to bin projects that weren't working out, they were talking a lot of these BBCSO extras. They may have recorded them and planned to add them, but they didn't work out for some reason? They can't go back and rerecord stuff on that project.


----------



## easyrider

dzilizzi said:


> I'm worried that when Paul says they've had to bin projects that weren't working out, they were talking a lot of these BBCSO extras. They may have recorded them and planned to add them, but they didn't work out for some reason? They can't go back and rerecord stuff on that project.




@paulthomson has already confirmed they are still working on BBCSO and SSS


----------



## dcoscina

I still don't understand to see the train of thought here... it's as though people think Spitfire has only 1 development team working out of a shack in someone's back yard. 

They have multiple development teams all working on various projects at any given time. Like someone said a million posts ago, the updates on existing products can take longer to fix than the teams who are working on new stuff. For any business to stay solvent, they have to balance addressing existing product lines but also continue to release new sellable product.


----------



## jbuhler

Jan V said:


> Here is the update history for BBCSO:
> 
> - From October to December 2019: 7 updates
> - From January to June 2020: 11 updates
> - From June 2020 to now: 0 updates
> 
> So my hopes for further BBCSO updates is relatively low as they seem to have dried up.
> 
> Having said that, I totally agree with your point that what needs fixing in the first place is a highly subjective affair. Point taken.
> 
> However, I find the violin legatos off BBCSO very tricky to work with and the results I get are somewhat unsatisfactory compared to what I can achieve with other libraries. Others may really like how they work and that's great, but I feel there are plenty of others who share my concern from what I've read in the forums.
> 
> For my part, I would just like to see the BBSO legatos work better, meaning closer to some libraries Spitfire did in the past which I enjoyed a lot more.
> 
> And I will repeat the point from my last post that I find it highly suspicious that the BBCSO legato video was never published, which leads me to believe that Spitfire wasn't entirely happy about their legatos either, but that's just my gut feel.
> 
> And I appreciate that you pointed out that @paulthomson said that they are continuing to work on the BBCSO. I saw the that post now and like I said, I actually really like that library, so I'd be more than happy to see more updates and even new BBCSO products from them. Their products are definitely good and worth checking out!
> 
> However, for now, I do have some reservations with regards to how playable the BBCSO violin legatos are (again, personal opinion which might differ from others) and unfortunately, the violin legatos are such an essential element of any orchestral library that it's VERY frustrating when you struggle to make them work for you.
> 
> Maybe as a development idea for a future updates (or future libraries), instead of adding more mic positions (which I do actually like, so no criticism), just give users a bit more control over how the legatos work/respond/feel so they can tailor them to their playing styles which would make them work better for everyone.


If their other products are any guide from here out you’ll see 1-2 updates per year.


----------



## barteredbride

The thing is, I've heard loads of people on VI Control say they want things added to the BBCSO library, like a piano, alto flute, choir, muted brass section, extra dynamics recorded, etc.

I dunno if people are just saying things so much it kind of becomes truth, when Spitfire didn't even plan for that stuff!!

And now it's 'unfinished' and abandoned.

I thought the BBCSO product was complete to be honest. It says universal starting point because everyone starts from the same place, not because starting point where they keep adding loads of free stuff forever.

Can anyone actually remember what Spitfire said, not what was just made up?!


----------



## dzilizzi

easyrider said:


> @paulthomson has already confirmed they are still working on BBCSO and SSS


But working on improving the library due to technical aspects and actually having additional content to work on are different things. 



barteredbride said:


> The thing is, I've heard loads of people on VI Control say they want things added to the BBCSO library, like a piano, alto flute, choir, muted brass section, extra dynamics recorded, etc.
> 
> I dunno if people are just saying things so much it kind of becomes truth, when Spitfire didn't even plan for that stuff!!
> 
> And now it's 'unfinished' and abandoned.
> 
> I thought the BBCSO product was complete to be honest. It says universal starting point because everyone starts from the same place, not because starting point where they keep adding loads of free stuff forever.
> 
> Can anyone actually remember what Spitfire said, not what was just made up?!


There was definite mention of an Alto Flute and even a picture of one being recorded. Which is what started a lot of this. I know nothing about a muted brass section. There were indications of a piano from Christian.


----------



## Alex Fraser

barteredbride said:


> The thing is, I've heard loads of people on VI Control say they want things added to the BBCSO library, like a piano, alto flute, choir, muted brass section, extra dynamics recorded, etc.
> 
> I dunno if people are just saying things so much it kind of becomes truth, when Spitfire didn't even plan for that stuff!!
> 
> And now it's 'unfinished' and abandoned.
> 
> I thought the BBCSO product was complete to be honest. It says universal starting point because everyone starts from the same place, not because starting point where they keep adding loads of free stuff forever.
> 
> Can anyone actually remember what Spitfire said, not what was just made up?!


I believe there were a couple of instruments that didn't make the first cut (due to time?)
One was a bass flute - since added I think - and another was a piano that was accidentally outed in one of CH's vlogs.

But my impression is the BBCSO is more or less complete from an instrument perspective. Nothing to say that other improvements or additions aren't incoming, but a lot of posts on the subject are a combo of wish fulfilment and VIC echo chamber.

As a Brit (cup of tea in hand) I've followed the development of the BBCSO fairly closely. I really don't think Spitfire made any unfulfilled promises and the demands of "more" constantly surprise me.
CH gave the impression (somewhere) that BBCSO sold very well so I guess there's a new group of Spitfire customers who want the focus to remain there. It is what it is.


----------



## ism

[/QUOTE]


jtnyc said:


> How many variations of an orchestral sample library can one company make? I guess as many as they can until people stop buying them...
> 
> It's funny that people flock to buy these ...



Just to point out you're using a metaphor of sheep for people who do buy libraries that aren't for your. 

You critiques of why this maybe isn't for you are valid and interesting - it's probably not for me either, at least right now.

But when you let insulting metaphors slip into your language - however inadvertently (though seriously, you have to know that the sheep metaphor is invariably going to be read as insult) - I start to wonder if it might not be better to just accept that we all have our own aesthetic sensibilities, critical perspectives, financial realities, return on investment calculations?

Peace and love.


----------



## barteredbride

But also, it's really cool for people to have the freedom to say what they like on any forum, I'm totally for that.

But I've come here to find out about the Abbey Road library, and even though the BBC people have got an 8k thread and numerous other threads about BBCSO, half the comments on the two 'official' Abbey Road threads are about people complaining about the BBC library.

I guess I'm just getting a bit bored of it all now.


----------



## Frederick

I'm hoping they will add the three options for handling releases of shorts to BBCSO. If they have a new legato in Abbey Road One, then maybe it's possible they can add that as well to BBCSO. As long as their recordings for BBCSO allow it...


----------



## jamwerks

Hendrixon said:


> As a drummer that use vdrums it baffles me that ppl here are excited about "Percussion is up to 7!" velocity layers
> And that's deep sampling!
> 
> Guys you live in the stone age...


Yeah, one of the VSL piano libraries has over 50 iinm.


----------



## prodigalson

Frederick said:


> I'm hoping they will add the three options for handling releases of shorts to BBCSO. If they have a new legato in Abbey Road One, then maybe it's possible they can add that as well to BBCSO. As long as their recordings for BBCSO allow it...



BBCSO already has the option of handling short releases. off the top of my head I can't remember if its just specific instruments but it does exist.


----------



## barteredbride

Frederick said:


> I'm hoping they will add the three options for handling releases of shorts to BBCSO. If they have a new legato in Abbey Road One, then maybe it's possible they can add that as well to BBCSO. As long as their recordings for BBCSO allow it...









Hello I´m BBCSObot, I think you might be lost.

May I direct any moaning about the Spitfire BBCSO library to here:

https://vi-control.net/community/th...london-calling”-bbc-symphony-orchestra.84345/

Or here: @SpitfireSupport

Did I solve your problem?

YES NO


----------



## jamie8

jon wayne said:


> Levon Helm was asked in one of his last interviews, after cancer diagnosis, what words of wisdom he could impart as a life lesson. His response was "Enjoy every sandwich". Might just do that!


Funny my mom was mary helm and he was my first cousin lol😎🤘


----------



## Frederick

prodigalson said:


> BBCSO already has the option of handling short releases. off the top of my head I can't remember if its just specific instruments but it does exist.


You are right, so that is excellent news! I had missed that completely, thinking there is nothing of interest in BBCSO in the top corner "...". Just velocity curves and all that...


----------



## dzilizzi

barteredbride said:


> But also, it's really cool for people to have the freedom to say what they like on any forum, I'm totally for that.
> 
> But I've come here to find out about the Abbey Road library, and even though the BBC people have got an 8k thread and numerous other threads about BBCSO, half the comments on the two 'official' Abbey Road threads are about people complaining about the BBC library.
> 
> I guess I'm just getting a bit bored of it all now.


Part of the problem is, that until there is actually anything to talk about - i.e. the product has been released, discussion tends to go off on a tangent. Since BBCSO is being brought up as a potential product that will work with SAAROOF, complaints start coming out. 

I'm starting to feel like a government worker with all the acronyms here.


----------



## dcoscina

barteredbride said:


> But also, it's really cool for people to have the freedom to say what they like on any forum, I'm totally for that.
> 
> But I've come here to find out about the Abbey Road library, and even though the BBC people have got an 8k thread and numerous other threads about BBCSO, half the comments on the two 'official' Abbey Road threads are about people complaining about the BBC library.
> 
> I guess I'm just getting a bit bored of it all now.


you and me both brother.


----------



## easyrider

SOS


----------



## Jan V

dzilizzi said:


> But working on improving the library due to technical aspects and actually having additional content to work on are different things.



I agree with this. You can't just ask for additional content to be added and be unhappy if it doesn't happen. What's included in the product when you buy it is what you'll get, unless otherwise promised.

So I am asking for the improvement of a) the technical aspects (as you call it) to be "corrected" (using brackets here as my violin legato requests have been seen as subjective, and I will have to agree with this) and that a product that is marketed as the ultimate library that they will support for years to come (BBCSO), to be updated and upgraded along the way (for example, like ProjectSAM has done with Symphobia).

Also, I have to agree with another user that this is actually a post about AR1 and not BBCSO. However, I just waned to voice my frustration with the maintenance of BBSO in this sepcific section for two reasons:

1.) I know Spitfire cares about how their new products sell and forums like this influence people to buy products. So what's written here matters to Spitfire and I hope that they will decide that making users like me happy (read: stop complaining about their products in this forum) by investing into maintenance would be a wise business decision.

2.) I want to let other users know that Spitfire is really good at marketing and hyping their products (it's a skill and they do it really well) so don't just blindly buy into "this is the best product ever" (and especially not promises beyond what you buy at the time of purchase) as you will most likely have issues with at least some aspects of their products and the maintenance track-record has left other users like me and others a bit frustratedd (see point 1).

Anyways, I will shut up now and let you continue discussing how great AR1 is and I hope that everyone who has put in an order already will be super happy with it.


----------



## SupremeFist

I just watched the Guy Michelmore demo and it made me more interested in this again: the sound out of the box really is terrific and even though it's "only" an ensemble library I can totally see how useful it could be for busy media composers. To be fair to the arguments over whether it is "incomplete", though: it is being marketed as not only a standalone library but also part of a future ecosystem, so it sure would be interesting to know more about what that ecosystem will look like. 

Also, will the forthcoming full-fat "modular" library be an expansion to this or a totally separate product line?


----------



## dcoscina

@Jan V I don't cave to marketing hype. I just assess based on what I hear and both Paul's and Guy's walkthrough reveals a very enticing sound. I don't care if hype promises to make you as famous as John Williams, if the sound doesn't cut it, I'm not buying it.


----------



## Sean

SupremeFist said:


> Also, will the forthcoming full-fat "modular" library be an expansion to this or a totally separate product line?


Seems like it will be a separate product, so 2 products:

Orchestral Foundations + the expansion packs like legato, etc.
Modular orchestra coming in 2021


----------



## jtnyc

ism said:


> Just to point out you're using a metaphor of sheep for people who do buy libraries that aren't for your.
> 
> You critiques of why this maybe isn't for you are valid and interesting - it's probably not for me either, at least right now.
> 
> But when you let insulting metaphors slip into your language - however inadvertently (though seriously, you have to know that the sheep metaphor is invariably going to be read as insult) - I start to wonder if it might not be better to just accept that we all have our own aesthetic sensibilities, critical perspectives, financial realities, return on investment calculations?
> 
> Peace and love.



Didn't mean to insult anyone with the word flock, and I never used the word sheep, and I included myself in that paragraph.

_verb_
gerund or present participle: *flocking*
congregate or mass in a flock or large group.
"students flocked to spring break sites"

Should those students be insulted by that example? I don't think so. I refer to the people lined up at Trader Joe's ever morning here in NYC as people flocking to Trader Joe's.

Anyhow, if it insulted you or anyone else, I apologize.


----------



## ism

jtnyc said:


> Didn't mean to insult anyone with the word flock, and I never used the word sheep, and I included myself in that paragraph.
> 
> _verb_
> gerund or present participle: *flocking*
> congregate or mass in a flock or large group.
> "students flocked to spring break sites"
> 
> Should those students be insulted by that example? I don't think so. I refer to the people lined up at Trader Joe's ever morning here in NYC as people flocking to Trader Joe's.
> 
> Anyhow, if it insulted you or anyone else, I apologize.


No not insulted, and I quite like sheep, personally 

Just that these are the kinds of subtleties of languge and metaphor that do add up, resonate with past insults, and set off tensions that no one is looking for.

And yes, in your example, the word “flocking“ is being used to suggest, at the very least a group mentality, or a collective phenomenon. Which is surely true of a certain type of trend-chasing consumer behavior, and not necessarily offensive in the context.

But I also think that anyone here thinking about buying a $350 library is being individually critical. Or failing to be sufficient critical some of my early purchases being a case in point. But not chasing trends in a sheep-like flocking pattern.

But I entirely dispute the very existance of the alleged ‘Spitfire Fanboyism’ phenomenon that insinuates - often unconsiously, or at least with plausible deniability, that there’s some kind of uncritical collective identity at play.

Anyway, there are lots of other examples of this being coded in the subtlties of languge. Sorry to single out your particular post. I have no doubt that there was no offense was intended, nor was any taken. I just thought it was a nice example throught with to make the more abstract semiotic point.


Back to drooling over sample libraries ...


----------



## SamC

Ihnoc said:


> Envious of those starting out with these kinds of options (with the likes of Nucleus, Berlin Inspire and BBC Symphony Orchestra).



And affordable! I remember when I started out and the only choice was basically Hollywood Strings for ten thousand dollars.


----------



## dcoscina

SamC said:


> And affordable! I remember when I started out and the only choice was basically Hollywood Strings for ten thousand dollars.


It was $1399 I think when it first came out but yeah, expensive. I bought it back then too.


----------



## Paul Cardon

jtnyc said:


> How many variations of an orchestral sample library can one company make? I guess as many as they can until people stop buying them...
> 
> It's funny that people flock to buy these and then so many are somewhat disappointed or have issues with sloppy shorts, finicky, bumpy legato, over the top vibrato (solo strings), slow fixes etc, then get caught up in the latest hype and dig into their wallets even deeper hoping this new one will be the ultimate... at least that is what I did a few times
> 
> I own quite a few Spitfire products and like some of them very much, but I'm not totally satisfied a lot of the time for the issues listed above. These products are on the high end price wise and while they can sound really great, I often find myself scratching my head wondering how or why they missed those flat notes, or those very sloppy round robins on shorts. I just don't get it.
> 
> I absolutely love the sound of Spitfire Solo Strings, but the vibrato on the longs and legato just sounds awful to me. It's so over the top, it sounds like it's trying to sound humorous, and when engaging it, it's like turning on a switch. It goes from 0 to 100 in less than a second. Why they didn't at least have it gradually ramp up eludes me. The legatos are very clumsy under the fingers and not very agile either. Same with Alternative Solo Strings.
> 
> When i saw BBCSO came out I was sure these things would not be an issue, but then I started seeing those very complaints (sloppy shorts). It leaves me highly skeptical and very careful with my money when it comes to SA


I think this is rather interesting because all companies producing orchestral VIs are investing lots of money into something with the hope of making something good, and regardless of who's doing it, there's LOTS of time put into the process from planning to recordings to editing to final product.

NO VI is perfect. All of them have drawbacks and everyone has their own expectations that different libraries satisfy. Almost every library has problems except for ones with a narrow scope that allows intense tweaking and lots of recording and re-recording time. There will never be the perfect library because everyone and every project have different needs. There will never be the perfect legato patch because there are a million ways to perform two connected notes.

So you weigh price against personal wishes. Is this library overpriced but it has something I can't get anywhere else? Is it cheap but I can't overcome the pitfalls? Is my ear trained well enough that I can even tell something is good or bad, realistic or unrealistic? Are my programming skills good enough that I can actually utilize this library to its fullest or am I throwing bad MIDI at it? Does this library require a unique way of programming that I need to learn?

There's millions and millions of questions, and a lot of the rub on these forums come from people having their own narrow expectations of what a good VI should do, how it should act, what it should sound like, how much effort they should require to program it, and then duking it out like their perspective is fact, when it turns out every library's gonna be different for a million reasons and everyone's hopes and dreams and tastes are unique.

*That's why there can be a million string libraries, not just from Spitfire, and everyone has really strong and differing opinions about all of them.*


----------



## pawelmorytko

Would love to know if owning the Abbey Road One Foundations would make you eligible for a discount/crossgrade for the modular orchestra coming later. It would make Abbey Road One Foundations much more appealing to anyone else who doesn't really need another all-in-one, especially with pre orchestrated ensembles, if it was sort of like what Masse is to SSO.


----------



## scoringdreams

barteredbride said:


> But also, it's really cool for people to have the freedom to say what they like on any forum, I'm totally for that.
> 
> But I've come here to find out about the Abbey Road library, and even though the BBC people have got an 8k thread and numerous other threads about BBCSO, half the comments on the two 'official' Abbey Road threads are about people complaining about the BBC library.
> 
> I guess I'm just getting a bit bored of it all now.



I think it's really amusing and interesting. We're all driven by anxiety or excitement here; which makes us voice our thoughts (and concerns) without fully processing them logically. These threads are perfect as future case studies in consumer behaviour for:

Social Comparison Theory (Festinger, 1954)
Equity Theory (Adams, 1965)
Self-Expansion Theory (Aron et al., 1986)
Social Exchange Theory (Fiske, 1992)
Attachment Theory (Park et al., 2010)


----------



## scoringdreams

pawelmorytko said:


> Would love to know if owning the Abbey Road One Foundations would make you eligible for a discount/crossgrade for the modular orchestra coming later. It would make Abbey Road One Foundations much more appealing to anyone else who doesn't really need another all-in-one, especially with pre orchestrated ensembles, if it was sort of like what Masse is to SSO.



I think at the $49 price point, it would probably be unlikely. SFA seemed to / might have tested the concept of modularity with Spitfire Originals and BBCSO; and probably derived that the price point they currently have would not be too much of a barrier in terms of the value they would potentially offer.

But that doesn't rule out the option of a discounted 'complete the bundle' price; like with the Albion / SSO bundles etc.


----------



## dzilizzi

I would think even if the OF + extensions library and symphonic modular libraries are separate entities, because they are/will be recorded in the same space, they should be as compatible as Albion and SSO. So even if you want the full orchestra, you may want OF and some of the extensions to fill out the sound. Frankly, if I hadn't planned on getting BBCSO this wishlist, I would jump on this for the sound. But because I've planned my big purchase for this holiday season, I will wait for the next big sale on these things.

Of course, if BBCSO isn't included in the Xmas wishlist 40% sale, I'm going to be annoyed I skipped this.


----------



## Frederick

dzilizzi said:


> I would think even if the OF + extensions library and symphonic modular libraries are separate entities, because they are/will be recorded in the same space, they should be as compatible as Albion and SSO. So even if you want the full orchestra, you may want OF and some of the extensions to fill out the sound. Frankly, if I hadn't planned on getting BBCSO this wishlist, I would jump on this for the sound. But because I've planned my big purchase for this holiday season, I will wait for the next big sale on these things.
> 
> Of course, if BBCSO isn't included in the Xmas wishlist 40% sale, I'm going to be annoyed I skipped this.


My thoughts when I read your post are that BBCSO is still within its first year after the second "modular" release, so it might be only like a 50% chance that it will be 40% off during the wishlist sale - could be 25% off AGAIN. That's why I caved myself during the summer sale. The Abbey Road One Foundations choice is less money, assuming you're going for Pro, so if you'll end up craving "the ton" during the BF sale you may be in a better position to get that too. And then in early 2021 when those selections are coming and everyone is raving about the new legato you are in a better position for that as well. BBCSO will be 40% off during the May sale almost for sure...


----------



## barteredbride

scoringdreams said:


> I think it's really amusing and interesting. We're all driven by anxiety or excitement here; which makes us voice our thoughts (and concerns) without fully processing them logically. These threads are perfect as future case studies in consumer behaviour for:
> 
> Social Comparison Theory (Festinger, 1954)
> Equity Theory (Adams, 1965)
> Self-Expansion Theory (Aron et al., 1986)
> Social Exchange Theory (Fiske, 1992)
> Attachment Theory (Park et al., 2010)



You forgot one:


Chocolate, intrigue and mild procrastination (Fraser, Alex et al., Maida Vale Press 2019)


----------



## Peter Satera

What I find interesting is what they'll offer for £50 each. It's easy to fall into the trap of...'oh it's only £50'. And spitfire are at the point where their pricing 29usd, 29euro and 29pounds as the same, which isn't accurate. But I hope they pay attention to other devs, because if it's a single instrument legato is £50, as Paul says in the video, sweeping romantic cello, this can instantly become increasingly a fortune, for full playability.

Looking at other modular packs, Orchestral Tools offer the same sort of idea at the same price point, and it includes way more than a single idea. And it's always cheaper to buy it altogether.

High strings: Metro Ark1 €59

Legato 8va
Sustains 8va
Sustains Unison
Tremolo Unison
Spiccato 8va
Spiccato Unison
Spiccato Blurred 8va
Portato Long Unison
Portato Short Unison
Bartok Pizzicato Col Legno 8va
Crescendo Long Unison
Crescendo Short Unison
Swell Unison
Tremolo Decrescendo Unison
Glissandi Up 8va
Glissandi Cluster 8va


----------



## Frederick

Peter Satera said:


> What I find interesting is what they'll offer for £50 each. It's easy to fall into the trap of...'oh it's only £50'. And spitfire are at the point where their pricing 29usd, 29euro and 29pounds as the same, which isn't accurate. But I hope they pay attention to other devs, because if it's a single instrument legato is £50, as Paul says in the video, sweeping romantic cello, this can instantly become increasingly a fortune, for full playability.
> 
> Looking at other modular packs, Orchestral Tools offer the same sort of idea at the same price point, and it includes way more than a single idea. And it's always cheaper to buy it altogether.
> 
> High strings: Metro Ark1 €59



With VAT included it's 71 Euro. Abbey Road One has also more mics... But I still agree with your point.


----------



## Peter Satera

Frederick said:


> With VAT included it's 71 Euro. Abbey Road One has also more mics... But I still agree with your point.



Yeah, true. I did miss-price it. It's likely we're going to see people on the on the fence about the entire thing. These modular packs create uncertainty at getting a good price. They appear to be coming out intermittently, if you buy one by one, then you might end up paying more overall than you would as a final collection. 

It's interesting to see OT release it all, then segment it up for you and you can easily do the maths, rather than Spitfire's approach which is segment the packs with the lead up to a fully comprehensive product.


----------



## Alex Fraser

barteredbride said:


> You forgot one:
> 
> 
> Chocolate, intrigue and mild procrastination (Fraser, Alex et al., Maida Vale Press 2019)


Interesting that I'm known primarily for being a clown on the forum! I suppose it's better than being the "guy who grumbles about everything."
Best start posting some music I guess. 😂


----------



## Frederick

Peter Satera said:


> Yeah, true. I did miss-price it. It's likely we're going to see people on the on the fence about the entire thing. These modular packs create uncertainty at getting a good price. They appear to be coming out intermittently, if you buy one by one, then you might end up paying more overall than you would as a final collection.
> 
> It's interesting to see OT release it all, then segment it up for you and you can easily do the maths, rather than Spitfire's approach which is segment the packs with the lead up to a fully comprehensive product.


I wonder if the preceived risk is as high as some might think (as I thought before myself)... I don't believe they would deliberately offer too little content for the asking price. I think they want the community to be happy with their purchase. Why build relationships with a community, vlogging your thoughts at a regular basis and then screw them over? Why offer the composer magazine and the LABS? It just doesn't sound like Christian or Paul. It's possible they'll miscalculate and since we don't know what the cost is for them, it might not even be THAT unfair when they would...


----------



## easyrider

Frederick said:


> With VAT included it's 71 Euro. Abbey Road One has also more mics... But I still agree with your point.



When I add an essentials the price for me is £29 inc of Tax....


----------



## Frederick

easyrider said:


> When I add an essentials the price for me is £29 inc of Tax....


That price of 71 Euro is for the Metr. Ark 1 High Strings...


----------



## GtrString

Why would anybody be interested if they don't have any use-cases for this?

I am interested because I have 3 mixes where I can see this might fit. I have tried other strings options and not happy so far (CS2, Symphobias, NI Session Strings). The Abbey Road sound would fit these styles of music (Americana, soft rock, scandi-epic) like a glove, and I will be able to audition different mics in the mix.

That is actual use-cases. Dont confuse the jovial word plays with fan'ism, that is just fun.

If you have what you need for your stuff, don't clutter up your work space. Wait till you need it. Personally Id rather spend money on food, family, guitars and travel long before software. But I can finish stuff with this lib (hopefully, its a shame no demo option).


----------



## easyrider

Frederick said:


> That price of 71 Euro is for the Metr. Ark 1 High Strings...



Apologies...I thought you were referencing the new addon for AR1


----------



## Al Maurice

GtrString said:


> Why would anybody be interested if they don't have any use-cases for this?......
> 
> If you have what you need for your stuff, don't clutter up your work space. Wait till you need it. Personally Id rather spend money on food, family, guitars and travel long before software. But I can finish stuff with this lib (hopefully, its a shame no demo option).



I agree here, before investing ensure it's going to fit the bill. Quite often we reach out to buy something, thinking perhaps I might have a use for this at some point, but what quite often happens is that it just gets hidden away in your collection.

It's more than likely, for many here once we have some more mock ups and demos, possibly produced by other forum users on VI-Control, then some of that uncertainty may melt away. In the meantime listen to the walk through, check out the demos available, and read the FAQ; then decide for yourself.


----------



## barteredbride

Alex Fraser said:


> Interesting that I'm known primarily for being a clown on the forum! I suppose it's better than being the "guy who grumbles about everything."
> Best start posting some music I guess. 😂


*All* your posts are cool


----------



## jazzbozo

Well, they got me. Pre-order bonus plus demo by Guy showing off some really well-crafted sounds was too much for me to resist...


----------



## barteredbride

Soooo...do people actually use ensemble libraries with section libraries?

For example, to use Albion One alongside with say, spitfire symphonic strings?

I'm thinking if I bought AR1 foundations then I might never use it again once I get the modular series!


----------



## Alex Fraser

barteredbride said:


> Soooo...do people actually use ensemble libraries with section libraries?
> 
> For example, to use Albion One alongside with say, spitfire symphonic strings?
> 
> I'm thinking if I bought AR1 foundations then I might never use it again once I get the modular series!


Yep!

Also, my understating is that some of the foundation "packs" might do tricks that the main modular libraries won't - whole orchestra tutti or octave legatos in situ, for example. In fact I think even AR1 already does stuff that won't feature in the modular stuff. Best of both worlds! But worse for the bank balance..


----------



## Beans

barteredbride said:


> Soooo...do people actually use ensemble libraries with section libraries?



If you're aiming for absolute realism and richness of sound, sections recorded together will sound more true to life than those combined from separate recordings.


----------



## Craig Sharmat

You are buying this library for the sound and ensemble dynamics, not for articulations as there are very few. Buy for what is here now, we are in the middle of a pandemic so no idea when people can safely record again (hopefully these recordings were made before the pandemic and maybe others?)...my 1cents.


----------



## dcoscina

First you guys want a la carte.. then you complain about the prospect of how expensive it will be...


----------



## tjr

Craig Sharmat said:


> You are buying this library for the sound and ensemble dynamics, not for articulations as there are very few. Buy for what is here now, we are in the middle of a pandemic so no idea when people can safely record again (hopefully these recordings were made before the pandemic and maybe others?)...my 1cents.



Spitfire (Paul, I think) said they already have a bunch of the expansion packs recorded, with recordings done prior to the pandemic.


----------



## jazzbozo

barteredbride said:


> Soooo...do people actually use ensemble libraries with section libraries?
> 
> For example, to use Albion One alongside with say, spitfire symphonic strings?
> 
> I'm thinking if I bought AR1 foundations then I might never use it again once I get the modular series!



You'll always have use for an ensemble section if it sounds good. I have BBCSO, which is wonderful in many ways but needs help with dynamics transitions in the horn ensembles and could use more consistent violin spiccatos. These two components already sound great in AR1, so I can drop those right in and have the best of both worlds. There are many folks that use patches from the Albions and Metropolis Ark ensemble libraries because they have more oomph than the section patches in traditional modular libraries.


----------



## dzilizzi

Frederick said:


> I wonder if the preceived risk is as high as some might think (as I thought before myself)... I don't believe they would deliberately offer too little content for the asking price. I think they want the community to be happy with their purchase. Why build relationships with a community, vlogging your thoughts at a regular basis and then screw them over? Why offer the composer magazine and the LABS? It just doesn't sound like Christian or Paul. It's possible they'll miscalculate and since we don't know what the cost is for them, it might not even be THAT unfair when they would...


Well, it is a partnership with AR, so I'm guessing there is extra profits included in the price to pay them on top of whatever Spitfire normally plans to make. This is in addition to paying for studio time and engineers, etc....


----------



## dzilizzi

Craig Sharmat said:


> You are buying this library for the sound and ensemble dynamics, not for articulations as there are very few. Buy for what is here now, we are in the middle of a pandemic so no idea when people can safely record again (hopefully these recordings were made before the pandemic and maybe others?)...my 1cents.


Paul said they were.


----------



## GNP

GtrString said:


> Why would anybody be interested if they don't have any use-cases for this?
> 
> I am interested because I have 3 mixes where I can see this might fit. I have tried other strings options and not happy so far (CS2, Symphobias, NI Session Strings). The Abbey Road sound would fit these styles of music (Americana, soft rock, scandi-epic) like a glove, and I will be able to audition different mics in the mix.
> 
> That is actual use-cases. Dont confuse the jovial word plays with fan'ism, that is just fun.
> 
> If you have what you need for your stuff, don't clutter up your work space. Wait till you need it. Personally Id rather spend money on food, family, guitars and travel long before software. But I can finish stuff with this lib (hopefully, its a shame no demo option).



Yep. Family, cigarettes and alcohol for me.


----------



## dzilizzi

GNP said:


> Yep. Family, cigarettes and alcohol for me.


Depending upon where you live and how much you smoke, giving up cigarettes can pay for a lot of libraries.


----------



## ennbr

I finally gave in yesterday and pre ordered the free expansion pack finally pushed me and Guy's video didn't help


----------



## Beans

Paul's walkthrough of his demo track:


----------



## Peter Satera

Beans said:


> Paul's walkthrough of his demo track:




*rocks holding himself*
MustNotBuyMustNotBuyMustNotBuyMustNotBuyMustNotBuyMustNotBuy...


----------



## prodigalson

barteredbride said:


> Soooo...do people actually use ensemble libraries with section libraries?
> 
> For example, to use Albion One alongside with say, spitfire symphonic strings?
> 
> I'm thinking if I bought AR1 foundations then I might never use it again once I get the modular series!



All the time. Not every thing requires super-detailed-every-section-recorded-individually orchestration. I especially use Albion brass and WW ensemble patches with legatos from SCS and/or SSS for solos and featured lines. (And many other non-SF libraries)

EDIT: Also, even if I replace them some of my most used sketching patches are the Full ensemble patches from SCS. They are phenomenal. I’m assuming the modular library won’t include any ensemble patches (like Spitfire Studio Orchestra) so, depending on ones workflow, this AR1 library may never be redundant even if you do replace most things with sections. Could be wrong and just convincing myself to buy it though...


----------



## easyrider

I think I’m in love with @paulthomson


----------



## pbobcat

Do these guys rest?


----------



## CT

barteredbride said:


> Soooo...do people actually use ensemble libraries with section libraries?



Yeah it's a tricky thing. As pointed out, when you need a particular combination that's offered by one of these libraries, it's always going to sound better than stacking the individual parts. When you don't want that exact combination, of course it's less useful. 

I've generally avoided ensemble libraries because the cost has always seemed to outweigh that occasional edge they give over normal stuff, but given the detailed sampling behind this, the sound, and where it all seems to be going, I think I can open myself up more to working that way with this first installment.


----------



## barteredbride

Mike T said:


> Yeah it's a tricky thing. As pointed out, when you need a particular combination that's offered by one of these libraries, it's always going to sound better than stacking the individual parts. When you don't want that exact combination, of course it's less useful.
> 
> I've generally avoided ensemble libraries because the cost has always seemed to outweigh that occasional edge they give over normal stuff, but given the detailed sampling behind this, the sound, and where it all seems to be going, I think I can open myself up more to working that way with this first installment.


I see your points.

Maybe I'm a bad orchestrator, but I'd never think when I play a C note on my keyboard, to orchestrate violins 1 and 2 plus violas all playing the note C (doubling or in octaves). 

I'd always split out the chord instead.

But ! Like you and a few others have said, it just sounds that bit better.

Maybe this is going a bit off topic!


----------



## CT

barteredbride said:


> Maybe I'm a bad orchestrator, but I'd never think when I play a C note on my keyboard, to orchestrate violins 1 and 2 plus violas all playing the note C (doubling or in octaves).



All the time? No, definitely not. But when you do want that, it'll sound better to have the actual recorded ensemble available than it would layering the separate sections. Same with the low brass, say. There are lots of moments to have them stacked in octaves, and when that's what you want, the real recorded octave low brass will just sound better than the individual instruments/sections layered. This is what's intriguing to me about the upcoming add-ons. There are a lot of common doublings that could be provided. Similar to how BHCT can work with SStO... the latter for the bulk of writing, and the former for those moments when you want those specific orchestrations. Or the Albions/other AIR stuff with SSO. Specific/specialized sounds for those moments when you need them.

Of course, this is just how I look at fitting ensemble libraries in as someone who cares about "real" orchestration etc. Plenty of people use ensemble libraries just for what they are, without worrying about any of this, as Paul talks about in that newest video.


----------



## jaketanner

If you are still on the fence about getting this library, it truly comes down to three simple questions and a bonus question...this is especially true if you already have a few ensemble type libraries.

Ask yourself this: 

*If it weren't for Abbey Road, would you buy it?* If SF released this library and didn't tell you where it was recorded would it still appeal to you? Because in the end it comes down to the sound and if it fits your current needs. If someone let you hear this library and asked your opinion without any further details, would you still want it? 

*Does the library do ANYTHING better than what you have already? *Are there better articulations, is it a better workflow, are the shorts better, are there unique ensemble blends that you currently don't have?

*Is the library more "playable" then what you already own?* Given that it's Spitfire, and we are familiar with their scripting, is it still appealing?...again, forget that it's Abbey Road, because the SOUND of Abbey Road won't fix any playability issue for you.

Lastly: Think about your favorite composer...would they get this library simply for the fact it was recorded at Abbey Road, or for it's sound, playability, uniqueness...etc. 

If you answered yes, then get it...otherwise you might regret the purchase or have fallen into the hypnotics of Abbey Road.


----------



## barteredbride

Mike T said:


> All the time? No, definitely not. But when you do want that, it'll sound better to have the actual recorded ensemble available than it would layering the separate sections. Same with the low brass, say. There are lots of moments to have them stacked in octaves, and when that's what you want, the real recorded octave low brass will just sound better than the individual instruments/sections layered. This is what's intriguing to me about the upcoming add-ons. There are a lot of common doublings that could be provided. Similar to how BHCT can work with SStO... the latter for the bulk of writing, and the former for those moments when you want those specific orchestrations. Or the Albions/other AIR stuff with SSO. Specific/specialized sounds for those moments when you need them.
> 
> Of course, this is just how I look at fitting ensemble libraries in as someone who cares about "real" orchestration etc. Plenty of people use ensemble libraries just for what they are, without worrying about any of this, as Paul talks about in that newest video.


Cheers for the explanation. This makes more sense now!


----------



## davidson

pbobcat said:


> Do these guys rest?




Subscription service.


----------



## barteredbride

jaketanner said:


> If you are still on the fence about getting this library, it truly comes down to three simple questions and a bonus question...this is especially true if you already have a few ensemble type libraries.
> 
> Ask yourself this:
> 
> *If it weren't for Abbey Road, would you buy it?* If SF released this library and didn't tell you where it was recorded would it still appeal to you? Because in the end it comes down to the sound and if it fits your current needs. If someone let you hear this library and asked your opinion without any further details, would you still want it?
> 
> *Does the library do ANYTHING better than what you have already? *Are there better articulations, is it a better workflow, are the shorts better, are there unique ensemble blends that you currently don't have?
> 
> *Is the library more "playable" then what you already own?* Given that it's Spitfire, and we are familiar with their scripting, is it still appealing?...again, forget that it's Abbey Road, because the SOUND of Abbey Road won't fix any playability issue for you.
> 
> Lastly: Think about your favorite composer...would they get this library simply for the fact it was recorded at Abbey Road, or for it's sound, playability, uniqueness...etc.
> 
> If you answered yes, then get it...otherwise you might regret the purchase or have fallen into the hypnotics of Abbey Road.



But...

But...

The Beatles were there and stuff.

Look, here's George and Ringo at Abbey Road with a moog modular


----------



## easyrider

davidson said:


> Subscription service.



Its another Originals library...clearly stated on Twitter....


----------



## Hendrixon

jaketanner said:


> If you are still on the fence about getting this library, it truly comes down to three simple questions and a bonus question...this is especially true if you already have a few ensemble type libraries.
> 
> Ask yourself this:
> 
> *If it weren't for Abbey Road, would you buy it?* If SF released this library and didn't tell you where it was recorded would it still appeal to you? Because in the end it comes down to the sound and if it fits your current needs. If someone let you hear this library and asked your opinion without any further details, would you still want it?
> 
> *Does the library do ANYTHING better than what you have already? *Are there better articulations, is it a better workflow, are the shorts better, are there unique ensemble blends that you currently don't have?
> 
> *Is the library more "playable" then what you already own?* Given that it's Spitfire, and we are familiar with their scripting, is it still appealing?...again, forget that it's Abbey Road, because the SOUND of Abbey Road won't fix any playability issue for you.
> 
> Lastly: Think about your favorite composer...would they get this library simply for the fact it was recorded at Abbey Road, or for it's sound, playability, uniqueness...etc.
> 
> If you answered yes, then get it...otherwise you might regret the purchase or have fallen into the hypnotics of Abbey Road.



I'll bite 

*If it weren't for Abbey Road, would you buy it?*
I couldn't care less if it was recorded in AR studio one or the basement of Paul's mom house.
Its the sound, I either like it or I don't.
My feeling is that a big part of the price of AR1 is in the name, because it is overpriced.

*Does the library do ANYTHING better than what you have already?*
Its obviously a hypothetical question, but from careful listening I think the only thing that my other libs don't do well like AR1 is the smooth transition of vibrato.
The rest (4-5 dynamic layers, smooth cross fades), its nice that SA can say they got it right in AR1, but its not something unheard of... weird thing to be proud of when you are not a beginning developer.

*Is the library more "playable" then what you already own?*
No way to answer that.

*Lastly: Think about your favorite composer...would they get this library simply for the fact it was recorded at Abbey Road, or for it's sound, playability, uniqueness...etc.*
The only thing that AR1 has going for it is the sound, it sounds sublime.
I don't have a favorite composer, but if I was a pro that makes money from composing, I would get it for $350, because good sounds inspire me. I learned to play everything by ear (guitars, drums, keyboards, flutes, bass) so my ear is what guides me when I compose.
If I was a composer that compose by writing a score? I wouldn't.



And here lies my problem, as I wrote above my ears are my leading factor and AR1 sound, to me, great!... but it will make zero $ for me cause I'm at best a prosumer and as a hobbyist I don't feel there is enough value for the asked price

(still, it sound so good that I want it.... damn you SA)

p.s. If this library, as it is with what it has in it, for the same $450, was recorded in Air, with the old known washed sound, who here would have bought it for that price? imagine the comments...


----------



## easyrider

jaketanner said:


> If you are still on the fence about getting this library, it truly comes down to three simple questions and a bonus question...this is especially true if you already have a few ensemble type libraries.
> 
> Ask yourself this:
> 
> *If it weren't for Abbey Road, would you buy it?* If SF released this library and didn't tell you where it was recorded would it still appeal to you? Because in the end it comes down to the sound and if it fits your current needs. If someone let you hear this library and asked your opinion without any further details, would you still want it?
> 
> *Does the library do ANYTHING better than what you have already? *Are there better articulations, is it a better workflow, are the shorts better, are there unique ensemble blends that you currently don't have?
> 
> *Is the library more "playable" then what you already own?* Given that it's Spitfire, and we are familiar with their scripting, is it still appealing?...again, forget that it's Abbey Road, because the SOUND of Abbey Road won't fix any playability issue for you.
> 
> Lastly: Think about your favorite composer...would they get this library simply for the fact it was recorded at Abbey Road, or for it's sound, playability, uniqueness...etc.
> 
> If you answered yes, then get it...otherwise you might regret the purchase or have fallen into the hypnotics of Abbey Road.



I sometimes feel that people on this forum have serious issues....It’s a sample library for £299.....if you have the money and want some Abbey Road orchestral sounds in your life...then buy it...

If you don’t have the money then don’t buy it...

If you do have the money then don’t buy it....

Its really not that complicated...

I am allowed to buy a library just for the sake of it....regardless of any real fundamental reason...

There are a plethora of purchase or none purchase justification decisions for every individual and putting an arbitrary 3 questions to try to rationalise it is total nonsense...

sorry.

All libraries have their own USP...that’s how the market works....


----------



## Alex Fraser

The forum narrative that Spitfire's stuff is "great sounding but poorly scripted"..
🙄


----------



## prodigalson

Hendrixon said:


> p.s. If this library, as it is with what it has in it, for the same $450, was recorded in Air, with the old known washed sound, who here would have bought it for that price? imagine the comments...



While I agree with the rest of your post, this particular point is kind of a red herring because price and value are decided by supply and demand. Its precisely BECAUSE we have had access to samples from AIR for 10 years that this library (as it is with what it has in it) might feel overpriced at $450 if recored there. If AIR Lyndhurst had not allowed orchestral sampling until now and suddenly a company was saying here is a full orchestra of samples from the same room Hans Zimmer recorded The Dark Knight, Inception, Angels and Demons, where John Powell recorded How To Train Your Dragon and the Bourne Supremacy, where Dario Marianelli recorded Atonement etc etc whether that $450 feels overpriced starts to change.

AIR Lyndhurst may only feel "old" and "washed out" as you call it because this exact company has been providing samples of it for a decade. In 10 years, will the sound of Abbey Road and these samples be worth $450? Likely not, but today? 

If EW tried to charge $1200 for Hollywood Strings today people would lose their minds. But 10 years ago?


----------



## RonOrchComp

jaketanner said:


> Ask yourself this:
> 
> *If it weren't for Abbey Road, would you buy it?*



Yeah - but it IS Abbey Road.


----------



## Paul Cardon

barteredbride said:


> Soooo...do people actually use ensemble libraries with section libraries?
> 
> For example, to use Albion One alongside with say, spitfire symphonic strings?
> 
> I'm thinking if I bought AR1 foundations then I might never use it again once I get the modular series!


The trap that some of this forum falls into a lot is the idea that VI's are in pursuit of creating beautiful perfect realistic mockups but..... are consistent working composers really doing that? Or is it the hobbyists obsessed with that craft?

What working professionals really need are tools that allow them to create good music more efficiently. I LOVE using ensemble libraries alongside section stuff when I'm not being pressed to write realistic works for a proper orchestra, and even when I am, ensemble libraries are great for filling out the deficiencies in writing and programming individual sections.

And believe me; when you're working and delivering fast, good ensemble libraries are KEY unless you have a swarm of assistants behind you or you're working on shorter-form content.

It's cool when you can spend weeks writing a piece and delicately program every part, but that's just not realistic all the time.


----------



## Hendrixon

prodigalson said:


> AIR Lyndhurst may only feel "old" and "washed out" as you call it



Maybe I didn't word it correctly?
I certainly don't think and didn't mean its old or dated, I personally like it a lot "where it fits".
I have a nice collection of top reverbs in the rack behind me, yet I prefer a natural recorded hall sound over all of them (not IRs, real recorded hall). what I meant is that this actual sound that you get from Air, at least in samples made there, has that huge room reverberation imprinted even in the close mics is we all know.

There are a lot of ppl that don't like this abundance of imprinted hall reflections, but I don't think I read a *single comment* in all the threads regarding AR1 that said anything other than praise the sound.

My p.s. was "what if you'll take just the sound away?" lets say give the library the sound of Albion ONE, not the worst sound out there but not the best job of SA. how then ppl will see a $450 asking price for that content?

Something to think about


----------



## dpasdernick

If only one of these developers would sample some sort of orchestra with strings, brass, woodwinds and percussion. It would be great to have some kind of orchestral library where we could play the sounds of an orchestra on some kind on keyboard. I know it sounds crazy but someday there may be a library like this.


----------



## scoringdreams

pbobcat said:


> Do these guys rest?




Just saw that on Instagram and loved it!

If a piano had to be paired with AR1, I would still recommend Garritan's CFX - recorded within the same space and sounds simply amazing (to me).


----------



## easyrider

Hendrixon said:


> My p.s. was "what if you'll take just the sound away?" lets say give the library the sound of Albion ONE, not the worst sound out there but not the best job of SA. how then ppl will see a $450 asking price for that content?
> 
> Something to think about



So let’s me get this straight...you're now asking what if SF take the sound away on their latest library?

Then you wouldn’t have a library...


----------



## jaketanner

RonOrchComp said:


> Yeah - but it IS Abbey Road.


So you'd buy it sink because it was BR? LOL


----------



## jaketanner

barteredbride said:


> Look, here's George and Ringo at Abbey Road with a moog modular


Too bad they didn't sample the Moog...LOL


----------



## jaketanner

Hendrixon said:


> p.s. If this library, as it is with what it has in it, for the same $450, was recorded in Air, with the old known washed sound, who here would have bought it for that price? imagine the comments...


precisely... Although I did get Albion One years ago...but at 40% off


----------



## jaketanner

easyrider said:


> I am allowed to buy a library just for the sake of it....regardless of any real fundamental reason...


This is called G.A.S.


----------



## jaketanner

easyrider said:


> There are a plethora of purchase or none purchase justification decisions for every individual and putting an arbitrary 3 questions to try to rationalise it is total nonsense...


What else other than the three I asked are relevant then? To composers that is...unless of course you are a collector.


----------



## easyrider

jaketanner said:


> What else other than the three I asked are relevant then? To composers that is...unless of course you are a collector.



well for starters you asked...

Is the library more "playable" then what you already own?

Considering it’s not even out yet....it’s a meaningless question...

Sample libraries are just tools...AR1 gives you a sound...that’s it really...if you want that sound then buy it...if you don’t then don’t...

Others here who are working composers have said that AR1 would be a useful tool to add to their arsenal.


----------



## easyrider

jaketanner said:


> This is called G.A.S.



I don’t think it’s up to anyone to decide how anyone spends their hard earned money...whatever floats your boat...some people drink their money away, gamble, spend hundreds in fancy restaurants...each to their own.


----------



## jaketanner

easyrider said:


> I don’t think it’s up to anyone to decide how anyone spends their hard earned money...whatever floats your boat...some people drink their money away, gamble, spend hundreds in fancy restaurants...each to their own.


I agree, and I am not trying to dictate it, just something to think about as people are on the fence about buying it. Could be for any library really, just insert a different space. I wasn't trying to sway one way or another...just a few things to think about.


----------



## jaketanner

easyrider said:


> Is the library more "playable" then what you already own?


True...forgot it's not released yet, but I thought I eluded to that by saying we all know SF's playability reputation...maybe didn't come across that way.


----------



## CT

jaketanner said:


> SF's playability reputation



What, that it's not nearly as bad as people like to pretend?


----------



## easyrider

jaketanner said:


> I agree, and I am not trying to dictate it, just something to think about as people are on the fence about buying it. Could be for any library really, just insert a different space. I wasn't trying to sway one way or another...just a few things to think about.



Are you going to get it?


----------



## easyrider

Mike T said:


> What, that it's not nearly as bad as people like to pretend?



I think the majority of people who bring this up don’t actually have the said library in question


----------



## jaketanner

easyrider said:


> Are you going to get it?


no...don't need it and doesn't appeal to me at all. I was hoping that they would have released an Abbey Road type BBC first...when they do, I'll probably get that, but don't need more ensembles.


----------



## jaketanner

Mike T said:


> What, that it's not nearly as bad as people like to pretend?


nothing bad or good...just that you know what you're getting into if you already own their other libraries. I have BBCSO...and I have SCS...nothing really changed in their playability since SCS...not sure how much different AR1 will be, but as mentioned, it's not out yet but we can certainly speculate based off their recent releases.


----------



## easyrider

jaketanner said:


> no...don't need it and doesn't appeal to me at all. I was hoping that they would have released an Abbey Road type BBC first...when they do, I'll probably get that, but don't need more ensembles.



I have a feeling that AR1 will be fleshed out over time to become a comprehensive library that gives the consumer choice based on need...or want....


----------



## RonOrchComp

The sound and the scripting are the great parts about SFA's libraries. The


jaketanner said:


> So you'd buy it sink because it was BR? LOL



I know what LOL is, but I do not know what "buy it sink" means, nor do I know what "BR" is. Maybe there is a language barrier here?


----------



## jaketanner

RonOrchComp said:


> The sound and the scripting are the great parts about SFA's libraries. The
> 
> 
> I know what LOL is, but I do not know what "buy it sink" means, nor do I know what "BR" is. Maybe there is a language barrier here?


Damn typos...LOL. AR...Abbey Road, and "sink" was supposed to be JUST...LMAO


----------



## jaketanner

easyrider said:


> I have a feeling that AR1 will be fleshed out over time to become a comprehensive library that gives the consumer choice based on need...or want....


oh they said as much already...just might not be for a while yet.


----------



## easyrider

I think a lot of people will buy cause it’s Abbey Road....is there another orchestral library available recorded in Abbey Road other than AR1?


----------



## jaketanner

easyrider said:


> I think a lot of people will buy cause it’s Abbey Road....is there another orchestral library available recorded in Abbey Road other than AR1?


don't think a full library no...instruments yes, like the CFX Garritan piano if not mistaken...but actually don't know of any other. So then it DOES actually come down to the room...LOL The strings actually remind me a little of the new BBO Lyra and Musca that VSL released (I have those)...very similar concept I think that VSL is doing...but they're doing it first and faster, so the main thing really setting them apart is Abbey Road versus the Synchron Stage.


----------



## easyrider

Well I’ve already setup my PayPal pool to make Christmas presents buying for me a breeze this year...I don't want my family going out into crowed shops to buy socks and smellies...They can Chuck me a buck into my AR1 PayPal pool and that’s what my gift for Christmas will be off everyone...

I ran this idea by everyone and everyone said what a great idea... 

My daughter is relieved as she never knows what to get me....My sister was ecstatic ! She hates Christmas shopping especially for her brother so she’s ticked me off her list...


----------



## dzilizzi

dpasdernick said:


> If only one of these developers would sample some sort of orchestra with strings, brass, woodwinds and percussion. It would be great to have some kind of orchestral library where we could play the sounds of an orchestra on some kind on keyboard. I know it sounds crazy but someday there may be a library like this.


What a great idea. It will probably cost way too much.


----------



## dzilizzi

jaketanner said:


> If you are still on the fence about getting this library, it truly comes down to three simple questions and a bonus question...this is especially true if you already have a few ensemble type libraries.
> 
> Ask yourself this:
> 
> *If it weren't for Abbey Road, would you buy it?* If SF released this library and didn't tell you where it was recorded would it still appeal to you? Because in the end it comes down to the sound and if it fits your current needs. If someone let you hear this library and asked your opinion without any further details, would you still want it?
> 
> *Does the library do ANYTHING better than what you have already? *Are there better articulations, is it a better workflow, are the shorts better, are there unique ensemble blends that you currently don't have?
> 
> *Is the library more "playable" then what you already own?* Given that it's Spitfire, and we are familiar with their scripting, is it still appealing?...again, forget that it's Abbey Road, because the SOUND of Abbey Road won't fix any playability issue for you.
> 
> Lastly: Think about your favorite composer...would they get this library simply for the fact it was recorded at Abbey Road, or for it's sound, playability, uniqueness...etc.
> 
> If you answered yes, then get it...otherwise you might regret the purchase or have fallen into the hypnotics of Abbey Road.


This is why I haven't bought Cinematic Strings. Everyone says it's great. I've yet to really hear anything made with it that I get excited about sound wise. And the straight sound? Yeah no. But others love it and have no problem fixing it. 

I like baked in reverb. it sounds so much better than added on to me, especially if I'm doing the adding on. If AR1 was recorded in position? I think I will love it even more, as I won't have to do much to sit it in place. Yes it's GAS, I will probably not make money from music any time soon. And the way the industry is going, probably never. But right now, I'm not seeing anything I really want to buy either. Unless OT puts the Kontakt version of Berlin Strings on sale for 40% off. But that's not going to happen.


----------



## prodigalson

Hendrixon said:


> My p.s. was "what if you'll take just the sound away?" lets say give the library the sound of Albion ONE, not the worst sound out there but not the best job of SA. how then ppl will see a $450 asking price for that content?
> 
> Something to think about



Hmm well here's an example of Albion One with and without the sound. First with, then without...


----------



## Hendrixon

Well this thread officially reached the discussion level of 12 y/o🏆

Enjoy


----------



## prodigalson

Hendrixon said:


> Well this thread officially reached the discussion level of 12 y/o🏆
> 
> Enjoy



Lol. Im just making the point (only a little facetiously) that you can’t separate the room from the product. Both these examples are real Samples of trumpets, horns and trombones voiced the same way, one is recorded at AIR Lyndhurst, the other is recorded anechoically. 

And yes, AIR is very washed out and at this point a very well known and ubiquitous sound. But it does sound different to AR1 and up to this point orchestral samples at AR1 have been unavailable so I don’t think you can separate the sound from the perceived value. 

But I do take your point that if the brand names associated were removed many people would likely think this sounds great but $450 is overpriced. Likely others wouldn’t. But that’s sadly marketing and why people buy BMWs instead of Volvo’s


----------



## dzilizzi

One thing. It could be that Spitfire thinks of this as a $350 library. If you think about it, BBCSO has been on sale a lot at the intro price. Yes, a few may have paid full price for it, but I would guess most of their sales to non-pros have been at the sale or student price. This may change how they price things.


----------



## easyrider

With sample libraries the room is one of the Unique Selling points...

OT its Recorded at the Teldex Scoring Stage
VSL its SS vienna
Heavocity its skywalker ranch
cinesamples MGM Scoring Scoring Stage at Sony Pictures Studio
Spitfire it’s Air and now abbey road....

I really don’t know what all the fuss is about ?


----------



## Alex Fraser

dzilizzi said:


> One thing. It could be that Spitfire thinks of this as a $350 library. If you think about it, BBCSO has been on sale a lot at the intro price. Yes, a few may have paid full price for it, but I would guess most of their sales to non-pros have been at the sale or student price. This may change how they price things.


You're right I think.
The "real" price of any given library is somewhere between the full retail and discounted price. Splits (and grows) the customer base between those who want it "now" and have the available credit, and those who are on a budget and will wait for sale price.

On my own site I have two customer groups who follow this pattern.


----------



## dcoscina

easyrider said:


> With sample libraries the room is one of the Unique Selling points...
> 
> OT its Recorded at the Teldex Scoring Stage
> VSL its SS vienna
> Heavocity its skywalker ranch
> cinesamples MGM Scoring Scoring Stage at Sony Pictures Studio
> Spitfire it’s Air and now abbey road....
> 
> I really don’t know what all the fuss is about ?


Fair enough but there is an inherent tonal quality to Abbey Rd and so many seminal film scores were recorded there that it's very attractive to buy into an ecosystem that possesses these same attributes. Convo reverb can only get so close- the way an instrument sounds, the reflections of the sound waves inside the hall, those key factors distinguish the sound of AB1 compared to other libraries. 

But hey, as others have said, no one is pointing a gun to anyone's head to buy this library. I've passed on a million libraries because they didn't suit my compositional style or aesthetic. "Free will brother... free will."


----------



## easyrider

dzilizzi said:


> One thing. It could be that Spitfire thinks of this as a $350 library. If you think about it, BBCSO has been on sale a lot at the intro price. Yes, a few may have paid full price for it, but I would guess most of their sales to non-pros have been at the sale or student price. This may change how they price things.



I think most people wait for the spitfire sales...unless you’re a pro earning decent money from your investment...

AR1 falls in line with with Albion and BBC core just fine imo...


----------



## Ashermusic

aI wonder how much psychoacoustics plays a role in our perceptions of the different libraries and FX from all the developers. I try not to let it affect mine but I am sure I am subject to it.

Probably should be another thread.


----------



## sostenuto

Ashermusic said:


> aI wonder how much psychoacoustics plays a role in our perceptions of the different libraries and FX from all the developers. I try not to let it affect mine but I am sure I am subject to it.
> 
> Probably should be another thread.



Maybe extra emphasis on _psycho_acoustics ??


----------



## danwool

NI just announced an Orchestral Tools sale. Including Berlin Orchestra Inspire...which appears, to me anyway, somewhat similar to AR1. Any thoughts? Before I buy AR1, would it be worth comparing to OTI? 

Any other similar packages to Abbey Road One I should check out, or should I just give in and send Spitfire my money?


----------



## dzilizzi

danwool said:


> NI just announced an Orchestral Tools sale. Including Berlin Orchestra Inspire...which appears, to me anyway, somewhat similar to AR1. Any thoughts? Before I buy AR1, would it be worth comparing to OTI?
> 
> Any other similar packages to Abbey Road One I should check out, or should I just give in and send Spitfire my money?


You really have to buy both 1 & 2 to get the full orchestra. It is a weird setup for me a lot of the time. I actually would find AR1 to be more useful. Or really, BBCSO Core. For example, the Hi Strings come as 8va only. You have legatos, sustains and spiccato. The low strings are the same. There's also a violin/viola combo patch and first chairs combo patch with the same. And I only see one mix mic. 

Inspires are a good basic library. I don't think AR1 is supposed to meet the same goal as being a basic starter library. It is being made for fast composing for media composers. Start with the foundation and add the extras and maybe a few other things. Boom, you're done. Background for a TV show complete.


----------



## Daniel James

danwool said:


> NI just announced an Orchestral Tools sale. Including Berlin Orchestra Inspire...which appears, to me anyway, somewhat similar to AR1. Any thoughts? Before I buy AR1, would it be worth comparing to OTI?
> 
> Any other similar packages to Abbey Road One I should check out, or should I just give in and send Spitfire my money?



Huh I wonder if now that SF and others are moving away from Kontakt, NI will get more agressive with sales around the launch of competing products. I mean, damn they must have quite the mailing list by this point. One to put even SFA to shame xD

-DJ


----------



## RonOrchComp

jaketanner said:


> Damn typos...LOL. AR...Abbey Road, and "sink" was supposed to be JUST...LMAO



Ah.

Well, no, I would not buy it _just_ because it was AR, but the point I was trying to make is that's a _huge_ selling point.


----------



## JonS

Daniel James said:


> Huh I wonder if now that SF and others are moving away from Kontakt, NI will get more agressive with sales around the launch of competing products. I mean, damn they must have quite the mailing list by this point. One to put even SFA to shame xD
> 
> -DJ


I don't think NI has to change anything, Daniel, since buying NI's Komplete Ultimate CE is so much cheaper than buying Spitfire's Everything Collection. These products are not anywhere near the same price point, so people can continue to buy NI Komplete and any of the Spitfire libraries without feeling that one replaces the other. NI Komplete Ultimate certainly has its usage even if you own all the Spitfire libraries, and Spitfire excels at orchestral instruments. It's ideal if you own both.


----------



## RSK

easyrider said:


> Are you going to get it?


It's Jake. Of course he is.


----------



## jaketanner

RSK said:


> It's Jake. Of course he is.


Not this time. Lol


----------



## Geoff Grace

danwool said:


> NI just announced an Orchestral Tools sale. Including Berlin Orchestra Inspire...which appears, to me anyway, somewhat similar to AR1. Any thoughts? Before I buy AR1, would it be worth comparing to OTI?
> 
> Any other similar packages to Abbey Road One I should check out, or should I just give in and send Spitfire my money?


I'm going to guess that Metropolis Ark 4 might be the most similar product (of Native Instruments' Orchestral Tools sale) to Abbey Road One. Both products are supposed to have a wide dynamic range and are currently priced in the same ballpark. 

Ark 4 has smaller ensembles and "power legatos," though; and of course, it was recorded in a different space.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## alchemist

Michael Stibor said:


> Word. Maybe it’s because they can’t do decent legatos. Seriously. I have a few Spitfire products, and not one of them has legatos that are any good.



I think it's more that they don't, not can't, which makes it even worse imo haha. The legatos in their recent offerings I've bought like Studio Strings Pro have been terrible, but at the same time, Chamber Strings have some of the best legato offerings out there, so they're definitely capable, they just don't do it anymore. I would find their stuff much more useful with less mics and more dynamic layers, short variations and detailed legato transitions. I think the disregard for basic short consistency is even worse than the subpar legatos of late. Even AR1 for example:

Strings: Spiccato
Trumpets: Staccatissimo, Marcato, Tenuto
Horns: Staccatissimo, Marcato, Tenuto
Low Brass: Staccatissimo, Marcato, Tenuto
High Woods: Staccatissimo, Marcato, Tenuto
Low Woods: Staccatissimo, Marcato

I really don't understand this kind of thing, makes no sense the strings not having marc or tenuto, and low woods not having tenuto, to complete a consistent palette in a library that only has like 5 - 7 articulations per section 0_o


----------



## dzilizzi

alchemist said:


> I think it's more that they don't, not can't, which makes it even worse imo haha. The legatos in their recent offerings I've bought like Studio Strings Pro have been terrible, but at the same time, Chamber Strings have some of the best legato offerings out there, so they're definitely capable, they just don't do it anymore. I would find their stuff much more useful with less mics and more dynamic layers, short variations and detailed legato transitions. I think the disregard for basic short consistency is even worse than the subpar legatos of late. Even AR1 for example:
> 
> Strings: Spiccato
> Trumpets: Staccatissimo, Marcato, Tenuto
> Horns: Staccatissimo, Marcato, Tenuto
> Low Brass: Staccatissimo, Marcato, Tenuto
> High Woods: Staccatissimo, Marcato, Tenuto
> Low Woods: Staccatissimo, Marcato
> 
> I really don't understand this kind of thing, makes no sense the strings not having marc or tenuto, and low woods not having tenuto, to complete a consistent palette in a library that only has like 5 - 7 articulations per section 0_o


It makes sense if the $49 extras have these articulations. Won't know until it comes out though.


----------



## alchemist

dzilizzi said:


> It makes sense if the $49 extras have these articulations. Won't know until it comes out though.


It really doesn't, $49 for a low winds tenuto patch when the brass and high winds already have tenuto? lol uh, what?


----------



## RogiervG

As Christian says about the partnership with Abbey Road Studios: "This is a massive creative Partnership. We are developing *a number* of *new ranges*, the *FIRST* of which is called Abbey Road ONE film scoring selections. The first product within *THIS* range is called: Orchestral foundations"

That would mean, all those mini libs soon to be released is all *part of* the ONE *range* .
After the ONE range is completed, or during releasing the extra's, *ANOTHER* *range *will be introduced, *also recorded* in abbey road studios.

tldr:
I think listening to his words carefully, the future scenario will be (how many ranges isn't said, so i just pound in some amount):


- *Abbey Road Studio ONE range* -> a main library + extra addons (announced and main lib is ready for preordering. The addons will be announced when ready)
- Abbey Road Studio <fill in name> range -> ?? + ??? (to be announced in the future)
- Abbey Road Studio <fill in name> range -> ?? + ??? (to be announced in the future)
- Abbey Road Studio <fill in name> range -> ?? + ??? (to be announced in the future)

etc...

it might be that there, in the future besides the ONE range, will be a Film orchestra (with individual sections + solos) range, or a studio focus series (smaller space of studio two), etc....

if that is indeed the case, it might become very nice, having all their future libraries recorded in the same studio, and having a great mic setup/recording engineers etc...

So i guess they waved their partnership with Air goodbye, and started the new one with Abbey Road for the future of products.


----------



## GtrString

sostenuto said:


> Maybe extra emphasis on _psycho_acoustics ??



Dang, there are psychoacoustics around here?! Watch out and take care, man!


----------



## danwool

Do people really buy libraries based on the space the samples were recorded in?


----------



## Beans

danwool said:


> Do people really buy libraries based on the space the samples were recorded in?



Absolutely, for several reasons.

First, it's an important aspect to the tone, natural reverb, etc. There's a reason why people want to record live works at AR1, AIR, and so on. They're quite suitable for modern orchestral works. 

Second, places with legit pedigree and heavy use often have mic'ing that's been perfected over the years, with staff who know the space well.

Third, the more great libraries that are provided from the same space, the less effort you likely have to put into getting your separate instruments to complement each other in a mix.

I'm not interested in AROOF, but I'm expecting to be heavily tempted by a future, top shelf release.


----------



## danwool

Thanks! My question reads as a bit snarky, but I'm legitimately curious. The second answer here makes a lot of sense to me. In my own practice, at the end of the day, the ambience of the space of one of the elements in a project is a very small consideration compared to other features a library might offer.


----------



## ism

Depends on the kind of music also. A lot of orchestral hybrid usics works well with a very stylized reverb added by plugin on dry or dry-ish samples (8dio, and Audio imepria, it seems to me, are more catering to this aesthetic than Spitfire or Orhestral tools, for instance).

The reason you buy a SF library recorded in AIR, for instance, is for the sound of the tree mics. The close mics, in my estimation, are there to add detail and nuance to the (glorious), and deeply spatially embodied sonority of the tree mics. The way the close mics are recorded, apparently, isn’t how you’de record dry-ish samples for use in a stylized hybrid mix starting from dry samples. 

It also depends on the instrument. Picolos - probably, all things being equal, not that big a difference between AIR and Teldex or Abbey Road or Meida Vale.

Cellos ... where you record, and how you record, the tree mics put you in entirely different musical universes. 

So yes, even though no one who would ever listen to one of my compsitions (and you could count these people on your fingers) is ever likely to have heard of AIR or even Abbey Road One, the room matters enormously. Even to my wholly amateur self.


----------



## andyhy

Three years ago Spitfire posted a video on youtube about blending the recordings made in different places. I took this as advance notice of the subsequent move to a wider recording location platform. Maida Vale was clearly a one-off but Abbey Road came as no surprise to me and imho there could easily be more as SA doesn't own a studio - maybe they should - and as a consequence is entirely dependent on the management policies of the ones it does use. Business and the arts must try to co-exist but sometimes the choices can be challenging. For all we know AL could even be up for sale.

Abbey Road seems likely to be an exclusive deal of an as yet unspecified term. I've pre-ordered AR1 as my own collection of libraries is still in its early stages and I'm impressed by the opportunities AR1 represents in terms of both the Studio One ambiance and AR's technology like the vast range of microphones at their disposal, some extremely rare vintage models with amazing dynamics. I acknowledge that it's a bit different if you already have a number of Air-recorded libraries but there are other solutions. At some stage I'll be adding altiverb to address any residual blending issues and to assist the sound image I want to achieve with my own compositions. I could well end up with a cross-section of libraries so the ability to blend is essential.


----------



## Al Maurice

Comparing AR1 to some of Cinesamples offerings, they both seem to dishing up the same sort of platas.

Shorts -- staccato or equivalent, marcato and something like tenuto -- one patch.

Legato -- another (albeit as a separate module for AR1).


Also the main melodic component of AR1, could be compared to Cinebrass (Core).

The rest follows their Albion and BBC SO strategy. Leaving AR1 to be a kind of hybrid effort.


Those looking for an all in one orchestral ensemble may want to seek out other alternatives, as this seems to be aimed at a very specific market segment.


So now if you want a single track that does it all, look elsewhere, as the preference of similar developers with all these players almost follows like articulations on one track. And lots of microphone positions -- who knows how deeply sampled these libraries are.


One good thing going for Spitfire, at least they tell you the consistency of their instrument sections, which helps to plan out your orchestrations.


----------



## cloudbuster

danwool said:


> Do people really buy libraries based on the space the samples were recorded in?


Definitely. Beans already mentioned some factors above but I'm a hopeless sucker for spatial precision in recordings and have definite limits for 'wetness' or spatial mushiness.


----------



## ed buller

danwool said:


> Do people really buy libraries based on the space the samples were recorded in?


Not just where , but also played and recorded by. With this collection your going to be getting top notch players who are already on many film scores. A studio where a ridiculous list of classy films where made. A mic collection Zeus would envy . Engineers and technicians that do this day in day out...etc..etc...etc....

IMHO it's a steal

best

e


----------



## Alex Fraser

ed buller said:


> Not just where , but also played and recorded by. With this collection your going to be getting top notch players who are already on many film scores. A studio where a ridiculous list of classy films where made. A mic collection Zeus would envy . Engineers and technicians that do this day in day out...etc..etc...etc....
> 
> IMHO it's a steal
> 
> best
> 
> e


Totally. This is mouth watering.

Not wanting to sound like an old fart, but if you've been writing music with orchestral samples for a number or years, it's easy to take this all this for granted. Always easy to see on the forum those who are relatively new to all of this and those who had to work with the first hardware romplers and early noughties libraries.

Now, where are my slippers? My feet are cold.


----------



## scoringdreams

Has Spitfire announced the future releases for the Abbey Road ONE series? - I remembered Paul saying that they would at least tell us (or hint) what's coming next before the end of the pre-order intro date.

Correction: intro date, not the pre-order (though pre-order date would be highly preferred if possible)


----------



## Beans

scoringdreams said:


> Has Spitfire announced the future releases for the Abbey Road ONE series? - I remembered Paul saying that they would at least tell us (or hint) what's coming next before the end of the pre-order date.



Note "intro period" and not "pre-order":





AVAILABLE NOW — Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations


Logo? I only care about sound, playability and functionality. Why does a logo matter at all? If it sounds great they could have called it Nihilism and it would be just as valuable as a library. I don’t care what the title of a library is let alone the logo. Music is about sound not visual...




vi-control.net







> I know whats in the first two selections and their planned release date, and we'll share that info soon, before the end of the intro period, and also some info on the other selections that are in progress (being built). I'm not quite ready to yet, as we are doing a final build on a few patches this week.



@paulthomson ? Is this still feasible? Thanks!


----------



## daan1412

He said they'll share that info before the end of the intro period and the intro period ends on December 1.


----------



## MaxOctane

Am I the only one who's been on absolute _pins and needles_ for this upcoming week?


ed buller said:


> you're going to be getting top notch players who are already on many film scores.



This is one argument I just can't wrap my brain around. How can it possibly matter that this collection of players performed together on Harry Potter or whatever, when now they're just playing through the chromatic scale one note at a time, one articulation at a time?


----------



## ed buller

MaxOctane said:


> Am I the only one who's been on absolute _pins and needles_ for this upcoming week?
> 
> 
> This is one argument I just can't wrap my brain around. How can it possibly matter that this collection of players performed together on Harry Potter or whatever, when now they're just playing through the chromatic scale one note at a time, one articulation at a time?



Seriously ?....your paying money and you don't want the best players. People who know the room. staff , are there all the time ?

of course you do...the players make a big difference

best

e


----------



## Fry777

Something that potential buyers should check, from the Spitfire website :
"Pre-order Abbey Road One and claim a second title in this series for free when available in early 2021 – worth £49 $49 49€. *This offer must be claimed by March 31, 2021*."

I don't think the 10 addons will be released by march, and since some are hoping to get their legatos with this offer, it could be that Spitfire will release something totally unrelated to that first... A roadmap would help of course


----------



## MaxOctane

ed buller said:


> Seriously ?....your paying money and you don't want the best players. People who know the room. staff , are there all the time ?
> of course you do...player make a big difference



Eh. I think any competent professional group should be able to deliver G, G♯, A, A♯, B, C, C♯, D, D♯, E, F, F♯, G, G♯, ... in tune and in sync. I'm sure the Asheville, North Carolina Symphony Orchestras could deliver an equal performance to this crew from Abbey Road.

This notion of "_these players gave us Harry Potter and that'll help you get that sound_!" Spitfire always promotes, that really stretches credibility.

I would imagine also that the producer matters much more than the specific group of players, as the person who determine the amount of vibrato, and who would call the shots on when to re-record, e.g., mistimed shorts.


----------



## ed buller

We disagree. I have spent the last 40 years working with musicians . The ones that can really play sound very different to the ones that can't....no matter what they are playing. It just sounds different . In some cases...very

best

e


----------



## MaxOctane

ed buller said:


> We disagree. I have spent the last 40 years working with musicians . The ones that can really play sound very different to the ones that can't....no matter what they are playing. It just sounds different . In some cases...very



Well, I'm not super convinced that this library bottles the magic as Spitfire's marketing always likes to suggest, but I will say this: many years ago, it crossed my mind that despite my years of study, Wynton Marsalis would be able to hit, hold, and release a plain middle C much more beautifully that I ever could. A great musician's greatness does come through in even simple things.

Can we at least agree that it's ridiculous to brag about the "performer" of a sampled _piano_, like Spitfire just did for their Firewood Piano?



> Performed by Jeremiah Fraites of The Lumineers



Um, ok.... the guy from Lumineers hit each note, one at a time and slowly, with his highly-trained index finger!


----------



## ed buller

MaxOctane said:


> Can we at least agree that it's ridiculous to brag about the "performer" of a sampled _piano_, like Spitfire just did for their Firewood Piano?
> 
> Um, ok.... the guy from Lumineers hit each note, one at a time and slowly, with his highly-trained index finger!



it's silly but it's marketing. One of the many things Spitfire are very good at

e


----------



## styledelk

ed buller said:


> it's silly bit it's marketing. One of the many things Spitfire are very good at
> 
> e



It's silly completely disconnected, maybe. But that's literally his piano. He knows its nuances front and back. No one better to get the ppp A1 out of it. Especially with a character upright where notes and their resonances start to get really fun. Even if it's just recording a note at a time.

(But I totally get where this is coming from).

Also, that bit of marketing on a $29 product is pretty ridiculous; attaching a name for real marketing purposes likely would have allowed the cost to be much higher than that.


----------



## tjr

I was once at a recording session with one of LA's top studio drummers. Someone else there remarked, "Is that the same drum kit you played on such-and-such album? Because it sounds exactly the same."

He said, "No, it's a different kit. The sound is all in the touch."


----------



## ed buller

tjr said:


> I was once at a recording session with one of LA's top studio drummers. Someone else there remarked, "Is that the same drum kit you played on such-and-such album? Because it sounds exactly the same."
> 
> He said, "No, it's a different kit. The sound is all in the touch."



So my first outside engineering gig was on a Jim Capaldi session. I was an in-house engineer at Island Records. Working mostly downstairs in the Fallout Shelter. I mainly made tea, lined up the tapemachine and sometimes punched in on the lead vocal. Eventually I was allowed to engineer and one of the first sessions was Jim Capaldi. The album was being "executively" Produced by George Harrison. We were supposed to go to his studio to record Eric Clapton but something happened and we had to find an alternative venue nearby. Eric was banned from driving nevertheless rocked up in his Ferrari , driven by his roady , and wandered into the studio. He had no gear with him. This had all been delivered by fender that morning. A brand new, still in plastic Twin reverb and a boxed up strat. This too had never been played. If memory serves it was an 89 Eric Clapton blackie. Now I was nervous. Eric didn't touch a thing. I ran a long cable from the control room to the live room. Turned it up full. Put a 57 on the speaker, came back , slapped a 1176 across the channel and let him play.......even with a shitty guitar....a crap amp...fairly ordinary Board ( soundcraft i think ) and me...( first timer ) he sounded just like eric clapton :




Best

ed


----------



## scoringdreams

Thanks @Beans and @daan1412 for the correction. Was too excited about the release that I probably mis-read that part.

I guess those who seek the forbidden knowledge of the releases will not get to enjoy the AR1 pre-order discount...


----------



## scoringdreams

Fry777 said:


> I don't think the 10 addons will be released by march, and since some are hoping to get their legatos with this offer, it could be that Spitfire will release something totally unrelated to that first... A roadmap would help of course



I recall the times when OT had the observatory; a visual map of future releases for their Berlin range.

Perhaps @Spitfire Team could consider one for theirs? - maybe a trial with the BBCSO first?


----------



## Kevperry777

MaxOctane said:


> Eh. I think any competent professional group should be able to deliver G, G♯, A, A♯, B, C, C♯, D, D♯, E, F, F♯, G, G♯, ... in tune and in sync. I'm sure the Asheville, North Carolina Symphony Orchestras could deliver an equal performance to this crew from Abbey Road.
> 
> This notion of "_these players gave us Harry Potter and that'll help you get that sound_!" Spitfire always promotes, that really stretches credibility.
> 
> I would imagine also that the producer matters much more than the specific group of players, as the person who determine the amount of vibrato, and who would call the shots on when to re-record, e.g., mistimed shorts.



Asheville is a KILLER town! Great food, art and beautiful.


----------



## MaxOctane

Kevperry777 said:


> Asheville is a KILLER town! Great food, art and beautiful.



And Moog HQ and the Biltmore.


----------



## paulthomson

ed buller said:


> Seriously ?....your paying money and you don't want the best players. People who know the room. staff , are there all the time ?
> 
> of course you do...the players make a big difference
> 
> best
> 
> e



Absolutely 100% agreed!! The Players are vital - its not just three yards of Violins, or a brace of Trumpets, these are incredible humans who perform each and every note of every articulations with care and a quite staggering degree of skill and musical sensitivity. Of course, its amazing to hear them interpret a piece of your music while sight reading (!) and really bring everything to life - but that’s also how we record samples and always have done, “like a film score, but one note at a time”.. *Everything has an intention and a performance behind it.* And that performance is of course informed by every session they have done for films, albums, TV shows, games - but not only that - the unique melting pot we are lucky to have with Symphony Orchestras, Colliery Bands, Ballet, Theatre, the West End, Chamber concerts, Liturgical music, Jazz and Big Band, I could go on but you get the drift. They will flip from one genre and one gig to the next, seamlessly. I’m always floored by the level of skill and musicianship on display.

I’m going to be back later with more info for you on the forthcoming Selections. We’ve done a lot of research and experimentation before we started recording these. Trying out all kinds of different ways to record and *perform* legato to get specific end results. It’s been really fascinating, and we’ve got some awesome results already. Excited to share!!

P


----------



## Kevperry777

MaxOctane said:


> And Moog HQ and the Biltmore.
> [/QUOT



some amazing breweries....probably 100 great and quirky potential sample libraries in that town.

Sorry, back to topic.....


----------



## GNP

Alex Fraser said:


> Totally. This is mouth watering.
> 
> Not wanting to sound like an old fart, but if you've been writing music with orchestral samples for a number or years, it's easy to take this all this for granted. Always easy to see on the forum those who are relatively new to all of this and those who had to work with the first hardware romplers and early noughties libraries.
> 
> Now, where are my slippers? My feet are cold.



True. I noticed that it's usually the folks who take it all for granted, are always the useless ones sitting around expecting others to come up with something new. They don't access the situation nor provide any solutions themselves - they just sit around expecting others to do it.

Meanwhile, the ones who truly come up with something else just simply do it at the right time and space. Before you know it, tons of others are copying them. And then when these guys get copied so much, the SAME 'sit-around' fellas will go, _"Yeah yeah so what if he/she came up with something original/new? There's too much of it now! Can somebody else please come up with something else??"_


Gotta looove life. More like the cycle of life.


----------



## axb312




----------



## JonS

alchemist said:


> @paulthomson definitely agree about the players performance making a difference, even if it is a note at a time!
> 
> Maybe you could help me understand what's holding me back from this library, which is that I can't see a reason why the strings don't have the marcato and tenuto articulations the brass have, and why the low winds don't have tenuto while the high winds do. This is the only reason I haven't hit pre-order yet, especially considering there are only a few articulations per section anyway, why not offer a consistent core palette?


My bet is that once all the modules exist every major articulation will exist too. You can always wait till more modules come out to see what I’m talking about.


----------



## dcoscina

paulthomson said:


> Absolutely 100% agreed!! The Players are vital - its not just three yards of Violins, or a brace of Trumpets, these are incredible humans who perform each and every note of every articulations with care and a quite staggering degree of skill and musical sensitivity. Of course, its amazing to hear them interpret a piece of your music while sight reading (!) and really bring everything to life - but that’s also how we record samples and always have done, “like a film score, but one note at a time”.. *Everything has an intention and a performance behind it.* And that performance is of course informed by every session they have done for films, albums, TV shows, games - but not only that - the unique melting pot we are lucky to have with Symphony Orchestras, Colliery Bands, Ballet, Theatre, the West End, Chamber concerts, Liturgical music, Jazz and Big Band, I could go on but you get the drift. They will flip from one genre and one gig to the next, seamlessly. I’m always floored by the level of skill and musicianship on display.
> 
> I’m going to be back later with more info for you on the forthcoming Selections. We’ve done a lot of research and experimentation before we started recording these. Trying out all kinds of different ways to record and *perform* legato to get specific end results. It’s been really fascinating, and we’ve got some awesome results already. Excited to share!!
> 
> P


Thanks for posting about this exciting new line Paul. I'm looking forward to what you chaps will be offering moving forward.


----------



## Bear Market

paulthomson said:


> hat’s also how we record samples and always have done, “like a film score, but one note at a time”.. *Everything has an intention and a performance behind it.* And that performance is of course informed by every session they have done for films, albums, TV shows, games



Hi Paul, thanks for engaging with us on this platform. It's much appreciated that you share your experience. (also love your Youtube channel by the way!)

With reference to the quote above, have you ever considered a performance- or phrase-based sampling approach for your comprehensive symphonic libraries? Some smaller developers have produced some stellar (in my opinion) instruments using this approach lately.


----------



## paulthomson

Ok just made this quickly to give some more info.


----------



## jazzbozo

paulthomson said:


> Ok just made this quickly to give some more info.




Excellent work Paul! Both selections sound great.


----------



## Ruffian Price

Will the selections have the exact same mixes and mic positions available? I know a Pop Close mix of the low string octaves might be weird, but it'd be nice if it was still all there


----------



## styledelk

Thank you for going rogue!


----------



## Beans

Not only was this provided before the end of the intro period, it was done so before the end of the pre-order period. Props for that.


----------



## paulthomson

Ruffian Price said:


> Will the selections have the exact same mixes and mic positions available? I know a Pop Close mix of the low string octaves might be weird, but it'd be nice if it was still all there



Yes all the same!


----------



## José Herring

I love the sound, fantastic! but it is still unclear to me if this is leaning towards a more section type library or will there be individual instrument patches as well. Will we get a Vlc section patch or are we just going to get a low strings patch (vlc+ double bass) ect...? Is it going to be more of an Albion type library or a more SSO/BBCSO type library? Or, maybe somewhere in between combining the best of both.


----------



## funnybear

paulthomson said:


> Ok just made this quickly to give some more info.




Ok, those basses are officially gorgeous!


----------



## Kevperry777

paulthomson said:


> Ok just made this quickly to give some more info.




Very cool of you Paul for taking time. Thanks!


----------



## Scamper

paulthomson said:


> Ok just made this quickly to give some more info.




Great, the low strings sound like they could be the ultimate version of the good old Albion legacy String Lo octave patches.


----------



## Alex Fraser

Sounds great.
So...anyone care to venture how much the complete Abbey Road Studio 1 Collection will run to? Foundation + Expansions + Modular. The Emperor of orchestral collections. 😀


----------



## paulthomson

José Herring said:


> I love the sound, fantastic! but it is still unclear to me if this is leaning towards a more section type library or will there be individual instrument patches as well. Will we get a Vlc section patch or are we just going to get a low strings patch (vlc+ double bass) ect...? Is it going to be more of an Albion type library or a more SSO/BBCSO type library? Or, maybe somewhere in between combining the best of both.



Thanks José!

There won’t be any soloists if that’s what you mean - it’s all sections. Sometimes single section, sometimes orchestrated.


----------



## AdamKmusic

paulthomson said:


> Ok just made this quickly to give some more info.




Those low strings


----------



## Peter Satera

*opens wallet*
Yup.


----------



## dzilizzi

I was going to wait. But darn it, the winds .... I love winds...

(Just not the 35 with gusts to 70 mph we get out here where I live.  )


----------



## prodigalson

José Herring said:


> I love the sound, fantastic! but it is still unclear to me if this is leaning towards a more section type library or will there be individual instrument patches as well. Will we get a Vlc section patch or are we just going to get a low strings patch (vlc+ double bass) ect...? Is it going to be more of an Albion type library or a more SSO/BBCSO type library? Or, maybe somewhere in between combining the best of both.



I BELIEVE that for the Abbey Road Foundations selections there will be no individual section patches. BUT there will also be a separate modular line of Abbey Road products that will be individual sections a la SSO. Perhaps @paulthomson can confirm because this continues to be a point of confusion.

The selections in this recent video and the Abbey Road ONE library are part of a line of products ("foundations") that are DIFFERENT from another future line of dedicated section libraries?


----------



## paulthomson

prodigalson said:


> I BELIEVE that for the Abbey Road Foundations selections there will be no individual section patches. BUT there will also be a separate modular line of Abbey Road products that will be individual sections a la SSO. Perhaps @paulthomson can confirm because this continues to be a point of confusion.
> 
> The selections in this recent video and the Abbey Road ONE library are part of a line of products ("foundations") that are DIFFERENT from another future line of dedicated section libraries?



You do have eg: Trumpets - which technically is a section on its own! But - otherwise - 
Absolutely correct. These are the line “Film Scoring Selections” - the super detailed sectional libraries are a separate line - the modular orchestra.


----------



## AdamKmusic

@paulthomson will there be any bundles for the selections? e.g just buying the strings saves like £10 or something instead of buying them seperately (£49 is already very cheap!)


----------



## ism

Still anxiously awaiting any and all flautando-related announcements.


----------



## Kevperry777

Feathery Flautando Selection. (Flutey is too obvious)


----------



## dzilizzi

ism said:


> Still anxiously awaiting any and all flautando-related announcements.


If Christian is involved, you know there will be flautandos!


----------



## ism

dzilizzi said:


> If Christian is involved, you know there will be flautandos!


And so I live in hope.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

I like the approach - not sure I'll jump in at the moment, but it is an innovative path compared to say just releasing a legato library (like one such lauded innovator is doing). Seems similar to VSL BBO, but pushing the idea of "a palette" even further. For media composers where time is money (Trevor Morris had a great video recently of needing to write 6-10 minutes of music per day for a TV show), this seems like a very helpful piece of kit.


----------



## JonS

paulthomson said:


> Ok just made this quickly to give some more info.



How cool was that!! Paul, read and listened to VI-C and responds directly with this very cool video. Well done, Paul!! Sounds spectacular!! I will buy all of the Abbey Road libraries as each of them come to life!!


----------



## Peter Satera

JonS said:


> How cool was that!! Paul, read and listened to VI-C and responds directly with this very cool video. Well done, Paul!! Sounds spectacular!! I will buy all of the Abbey Road libraries as each of them come to life!!



Agreed, @paulthomson. Thanks for the follow up video, it was what I wanted to see to make my decision. Can't wait now! Pre-ordered.


----------



## andrzejmakal

WW&bells patch? All these 8va patches...Really?? Give me good flute and good oboe and I can mix/orchestrate it as I like...
Will we have Nucleus bis? I’m rather disappointed...... I was just about preordering, this video put me offfff...


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

andrzejmakal said:


> WW&bells patch? All these 8va patches...Really?? Give me good flute and good oboe and I can mix/orchestrate it as I like...
> Will we have Nucleus bis? I’m rather disappointed...... I was just about preordering, this video put me offfff...



As they've stated many, many times, they are building a detailed modular library where you will get all of the individual instruments, deeply sampled. But that is not the focus for Orchestral Foundations / Selections.


----------



## andrzejmakal

Ok...maybe I’m slow a bit.

but again...preorchestrated ww&bells?


----------



## Sean

andrzejmakal said:


> Ok...maybe I’m slow a bit.
> 
> but again...preorchestrated ww&bells?


The whole point of this library is everything is pre orchestrated, you clearly misunderstood the point of it.


----------



## Beans

Think of it like this (in my understanding):

Phase 1 = ensemble patches, doubling, and perhaps some special stuff

Phase 2 = something more like SSO, BBCSO

Foundations and these Selections are all phase 1.


----------



## andrzejmakal

Well...ok.


----------



## Macrawn

That was helpful to get an idea of what the future packs will be like.


ALittleNightMusic said:


> As they've stated many, many times, they are building a detailed modular library where you will get all of the individual instruments, deeply sampled. But that is not the focus for Orchestral Foundations / Selections.


Is that being done at Abby Road as well?


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Macrawn said:


> Is that being done at Abby Road as well?



Yes.


----------



## dcoscina

paulthomson said:


> Ok just made this quickly to give some more info.



Fantastic sound Paul. Thanks for doing that walkthru for us VI folks.
Btw- I almost thought you were going to break into Shostakovich’s 12 symphony opening section with those low strings. They sound amazing as do the sparkling winds. If you guys come out with Raiders Trombones or Final Conflict Horns I’m gonna lose it!


----------



## daan1412

paulthomson said:


> Ok just made this quickly to give some more info.



Thank you very much @paulthomson for this reveal! Didn't expect to actually hear some of it now, very cool.

It all sounds great and interesting. Really looking forward to Selections. I'm just bummed out that the releases are stretched out in time this much. By the looks of it, it's going to take a lot of time until Abbey Road One is evenly expanded.

I'm sure Spitfire has reasons - perhaps purely business reasons and that's fair - but it would be so damn cool to have all those Selections available at launch or at least all 9 in Q1 of 2021. It just might feel a bit frustrating at one point to have the foundations plus super advanced low strings and woodwinds, but nothing corresponding on the brass side until Q2, Q3 or whatever. 

If I were Spitfire, I would at least make sure that all orchestral sections are pushed forward equally - for example legatos first, additional techniques as the next step, then effects, additional percussion and so on. Well, I'm sure this was on the table and they decided otherwise - perhaps what I described would make less interesting standalones. It would be more practical, though, if we look at this as an upgrade path for this range as a whole.

Anyway, I can't wait to finally start using it on Thursday!


----------



## reids

So all of these expansions for AR One are going to be coming out one by one first before we get any further information regarding the more detailed sections of the modular orchestra? I am interested but if its going to be 3-5+ years before we get there to the release of themore detailed orchestra (strings, brass, woods, perc), I would like to know since that would be a really long time waiting for them. Did they mention if the full modular series have already all been recorded or if there is still recording that needs to take place. I would imagine the covid situation would cause further delays if more recording needs to be done.


----------



## dzilizzi

reids said:


> So all of these expansions for AR One are going to be coming out one by one first before we get any further information regarding the more detailed sections of the modular orchestra? I am interested but if its going to be 3-5+ years before we get there to the release of the more detailed orchestra (strings, brass, woods, perc), I would like to know since that would be a really long time waiting for them. Did they mention if the full modular series have already all been recorded or if there is still recording that needs to take place. I would imagine the covid situation would cause further delays if more recording needs to be done.


I believe it is at least started. At least that was the impression I got. I think there are still some things that either need to be re-recorded or haven't been done. Paul or Christian discussed it in one of their posts/videos. It will probably be minimum end of 2021 to 2022 before it starts coming out. Maybe later. The film scoring one is all recorded.


----------



## daan1412

reids said:


> Did they mention if the full modular series have already all been recorded or if there is still recording that needs to take place. I would imagine the covid situation would cause further delays if more recording needs to be done.


I'm pretty sure it was mentioned that they have finished recording one of the modules.


----------



## scoringdreams

Thanks for the sneak peek! Really excited for what's to come.

For now, Albion 3: Iceni could be my decent stand-in for the low strings. But the sparkling woodwinds are truly wonderful...might probably redeem that unless a high strings library gets released.


----------



## Peter Satera

This reminds me of the Afflatus Route, which is really interesting, because when you need that sound you go for it. Therefore, I felt the video of Paul's message added way more perspective to the aims of Abbey Road, (for me, anyway). That we all have these libs already, but these performance patches aren't generic legato with spiccato layered on top. They are designed for familiar passages of music which are difficult within existing libraries. 

Yes, I agree, bread and butter legato is great. But a single legato patch doesn't capture the movement and transition in every score. Users took the likes of JXL brass and took Williams' passages and it didn't really work (imo), but write like Tom Holkenborg and the brass is f'kn incredible. Same with HZ Strings, which are perfect for that HZ approach, which used non conventional setups. I'll buy on day one if HZ Brass comes.

So yeah, it's like artist libraries to me, only it's with small iconic passages.


----------



## muziksculp




----------



## Vladimir Bulaev

ALittleNightMusic said:


> but it is an innovative path compared to say just releasing a legato library (like one such lauded innovator is doing)


Legato is overrated, yeah.


----------



## JonS

good work, Christian!!


----------



## StefVR

Like the video. Somehow just not for me the AR One even tho it sounds great.


----------



## Kevperry777

muziksculp said:


>




Well....this much is indisputable- Christian and Paul are fantastic communicators. 

Albion One still sounds great.


----------



## Vladimir Bulaev

Kevperry777 said:


> Albion One still sounds great.


Still? And how can he blow out over time in his sound? This is not a sportsman who loses his skills and abilities over the years. But you're right, because EWQLSO still sounds great too!


----------



## muadgil

This is just fascinating... and a great real use demo.


----------



## Sean J

peladio said:


> Since they imitate Apple with their marketing I wouldn't be surprised if we should provide our own scripting "as a feature" when they release a new product month..or pay $99 for legato functionality..
> 
> But yeah..same thing all over again..just different location..
> 
> If only some of the actual innovators such as Jasper Blunk or Aaron Venture could get the access to these studios..



I've never wanted a boat, big TV, or anything else. I couldn't care less about all the junk people focus on. I'd pour every dime of my millions I'll make sometime in the next 50 years (cough) into sampling. I've joked many times that I wished I could buy Lyndhurst and hire/enslave Aaron to work with it. I'd feed him well, at least. 

1 - Good rooms matter... a lot
2 - Good playable agility matters... a lot
3 - Agility that can take on extended techniques matters... a lot

Spitfire raised the bar from where we were. Others are trying to raise it. Soon enough, we'll see it happen (or make it happen ourselves...... wink). I just hope we don't get to the point where people are sampling Yo-Yo Ma in a Pyramid at Giza. I wouldn't buy it, no matter how nice the marketing poster looked.


----------



## RogiervG

muadgil said:


> This is just fascinating... and a great real use demo.



No to be negative towards the person in the video.. no not at all..
but i really miss the legatos here... i really do. (as it is now, it's sounding quite still/stiff, emotionless)


----------



## muziksculp

Kevperry777 said:


> Albion One still sounds great.



Yes, and it has Legato 

Now, why did they not bother including Legato articulations in AR-S1 Foundations ?

Very odd decision.


----------



## Sean J

Vladimir Bulaev said:


> Legato is overrated, yeah.



Well, if 80% of HZ-copyca....erm... Spitfire users don't know what a slur is...

j/k j/k

I like everyone and am not hostile. I just wonder why instrument agility doesn't matter to people. Is ostinato and sustain the only thing people can write? From DAW workflow limitations (sequencer events are useless next to notation) and tweaking MIDI to sound realistic... we've put too much emphasis on the ingredients and not enough on the chef having a clue how to manipulate ingredients well enough.


----------



## dzilizzi

Sean J said:


> Well, if 80% of HZ-copyca....erm... Spitfire users don't know what a slur is...
> 
> j/k j/k
> 
> I like everyone and am not hostile. I just wonder why instrument agility doesn't matter to people. Is ostinato and sustain the only thing people can write? From DAW workflow limitations (sequencer events are useless next to notation) and tweaking MIDI to sound realistic... we've put too much emphasis on the ingredients and not enough on the chef having a clue how to manipulate ingredients well enough.


I can only speak for myself and my computer, but a lot of the time the advertised playability isn't as playable as I expected. I'd rather use sustain that works than deal with a funky legato. For instance, I really love my Tina Guo, but my Joshua Bell is only okay. It is very likely my playing and learning to work with the library rather than against it. So, for me, legato doesn't matter as much.


----------



## Sean J

dzilizzi said:


> I can only speak for myself and my computer, but a lot of the time the advertised playability isn't as playable as I expected. I'd rather use sustain that works than deal with a funky legato. For instance, I really love my Tina Guo, but my Joshua Bell is only okay. It is very likely my playing and learning to work with the library rather than against it. So, for me, legato doesn't matter as much.



Right... I get it.

We'd all only ever sample what we'd find useful. I'd sample legato, tenuto, portato, stac, spic, trem, trill, harm, sustain... and RR's of sustain & legato. Wide mics for strings, etc, etc. Yet, some wouldn't want the wide mics. We all pick and choose. I just pick legato cause I often (not always) enjoy writing faster melodies. To each their own.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Sean J said:


> Well, if 80% of HZ-copyca....erm... Spitfire users don't know what a slur is...
> 
> j/k j/k
> 
> I like everyone and am not hostile. I just wonder why instrument agility doesn't matter to people. Is ostinato and sustain the only thing people can write? From DAW workflow limitations (sequencer events are useless next to notation) and tweaking MIDI to sound realistic... we've put too much emphasis on the ingredients and not enough on the chef having a clue how to manipulate ingredients well enough.



My perspective is agility does matter - but it also comes into play more or less depending on the music you write. Not everybody is writing concert music. Similarly, not everybody is writing HZ-copyca...  And there's also a question of how much it matters to the end product in terms of what the audience will hear or what will work for the project. I think the stance that a library is useless without legato would be similar to taking a stance that a library is useless without staccatos...or short articulations of any sort (to allude to a couple of recently announced string libraries the forum seems to be going crazy over). It's all down to personal preference and personal application.

Dan's demo shows that you can indeed write music with AR1 (and wow does the room make a difference) - whether or not it is the type of music you want to write or need to write is a separate story.


----------



## Mike Fox

dzilizzi said:


> I'd rather use sustain that works than deal with a funky legato.



This.


----------



## Beans

Y'all are crazy. A funky legato sounds amazing and like something actually innovative.


----------



## dzilizzi

Beans said:


> Y'all are crazy. A funky legato sounds amazing and like something actually innovative.


Funky as in not easy to work with, portamentos when I want smooth transitions, hangs on fast runs, etc.... Strange sounding? I could work with that.


----------



## Beans

dzilizzi said:


> Funky as in not easy to work with, portamentos when I want smooth transitions, hangs on fast runs, etc.... Strange sounding? I could work with that.



Oh, I totally get what you were saying in the original post. Just a joke.


----------



## dzilizzi

Beans said:


> Oh, I totally get what you were saying in the original post. Just a joke.


I was going to laugh at first, but then thought "oops! he might be serious!"


----------



## maestro2be

Those low strings sound really good.


----------



## easyrider

I've Pre-ordered....


----------



## Alex Fraser

muadgil said:


> This is just fascinating... and a great real use demo.



😂 It's like watching myself work, albeit with far less coffee and swearing..

All fairness to Dan, this is a great demonstration of what this sort of product is designed for. 

Also - considering how few of us are willing to post our finished masterpieces on the forum - Dan is being massively brave here, showing us a warts-and-all writing session. Props where due.


----------



## Levon

Alex Fraser said:


> 😂 It's like watching myself work, albeit with far less coffee and swearing..
> 
> All fairness to Dan, this is a great demonstration of what this sort of product is designed for.
> 
> Also - considering how few of us are willing to post our finished masterpieces on the forum - Dan is being massively brave here, showing us a warts-and-all writing session. Props where due.



I could resist no more. Ordered!


----------



## dzilizzi

Yes, I gave in also. The winds got me.


----------



## Michel Simons

Yes, the wind gets to me too.


----------



## star.keys

I have preordered but honestly, if I would have watched that video comparing the three libraries, I would not have pre-ordered for one reason alone: Not a fan of their marketing gimmicks. Something is for "these" guys, that is for "someone else", and "THIS is for everyone". Really?!! And people (who don't use their ears) do still fall for it?


----------



## Sean

star.keys said:


> I have preordered but honestly, if I would have watched that video comparing the three libraries, I would not have pre-ordered for one reason alone: Not a fan of their marketing gimmicks. Something is for "these" guys, that is for "someone else", and "THIS is for everyone". Really?!! And people (who don't use their ears) do still fall for it?


Agreed the video felt like just a marketing video, there was barely any real comparison between the libraries.


----------



## MaxOctane

Sean said:


> there was barely any real comparison between the libraries.



I very much appreciated the intent of the video, but indeed it had very few audio examples.


----------



## Mackieguy

I downloaded it this morning and have been playing around with it. Love the overall sound!! I still wish it had some legato but by playing around a bit the the tightness and release controls, I can make it work to a point. The only thing that negatively surprised me was that that the trumpet only went to high C. If you want to mock up the Star Wars theme (which felt like an obvious thing to do with this library) then you'll have a problem as that high note is a D and apparently wasn't sampled. Grrrrr!!!!!


----------



## shropshirelad

Next time I purchase a sample library, I'll find a way to send the purchase price 1p at a time over the course of 12 hours. Perhaps then, download speeds may improve!


----------



## lgmcben

Mackieguy said:


> The only thing that negatively surprised me was that that the trumpet only went to high C. If you want to mock up the Star Wars theme (which felt like an obvious thing to do with this library) then you'll have a problem as that high note is a D and apparently wasn't sampled. Grrrrr!!!!!


Perhaps in future module... (Star Wars high D trumpet - $49)


----------



## Mackieguy

Dude, I hope so...


----------



## Mackieguy

Aaaaand I'm an idiot. I thought the theme was in D but it's not. It's in Bb which ARO handles just fine. 

This is what several months of an endless American election cycle will do to your brain. lol!


----------



## prodigalson

Posted this on the commercial thread but probably should have posted here. First very brief outing with the library. all CC dynamics, no Swells. Everything from AR1. The dynamic range is really great. The strings at the beginning are just the lowest layers of the basic longs. Poor man's HTTYD.


----------



## JohnG

Beans said:


> Guy Michelmore is going live to discuss this new library:




Guy's demo iced it. Just ordered it.


----------



## GPlowman

Mackieguy said:


> I downloaded it this morning and have been playing around with it. Love the overall sound!! I still wish it had some legato but by playing around a bit the the tightness and release controls, I can make it work to a point. The only thing that negatively surprised me was that that the trumpet only went to high C. If you want to mock up the Star Wars theme (which felt like an obvious thing to do with this library) then you'll have a problem as that high note is a D and apparently wasn't sampled. Grrrrr!!!!!


I'd be shocked if it was anyway possible to get even close to a good Star Wars mock up with this. As it stands the troms appear to only go to middle C (the low brass), and runs are out. I did a quick test using Adventures on Earth for the laugh, and yeah, there's a big hole in the middle of the brass.


----------



## Halfstar

Guys, you gotta try Abbey Road one, I had a play with it today, I think it's astounding. The cohesiveness of the library is brilliant, and the percussion. My lord. It's fantastic imho!


----------



## Halfstar

paulthomson said:


> You do have eg: Trumpets - which technically is a section on its own! But - otherwise -
> Absolutely correct. These are the line “Film Scoring Selections” - the super detailed sectional libraries are a separate line - the modular orchestra.





paulthomson said:


> You do have eg: Trumpets - which technically is a section on its own! But - otherwise -
> Absolutely correct. These are the line “Film Scoring Selections” - the super detailed sectional libraries are a separate line - the modular orchestra.



Paul, I had to get in touch with you to say congratulations in regards to Abbey Road One. I bought it today and I think it's astounding. The cohesiveness of the library is brilliant and the percussion section with all of it's dynamic layers are out of this world. This is the first time I've really "felt" an orchestral plugin while I've been playing it. It's what I hoped it would be. Great work.


----------



## Nakano Crow

prodigalson said:


> Posted this on the commercial thread but probably should have posted here. First very brief outing with the library. all CC dynamics, no Swells. Everything from AR1. The dynamic range is really great. The strings at the beginning are just the lowest layers of the basic longs. Poor man's HTTYD.



Sounds great - thanks for sharing!


----------



## rlundv




----------



## GtrString

muziksculp said:


>




I am surprised how much I liked BBC Pro in this comparison.. aaaargh! 

(Self talk, keep focused on use cases,keep focused on use cases,keep focused on use cases,keep focused on use cases,keep focused on use cases...)


----------



## Al Maurice

The beauty of some of Spitfire's latest libraries, is that they have surround sound baked in.

And AR1 has the additional magic from dimensionality of the room.

Yet that means more work in balancing out all the mikes too.

Anyhow those who have made the leap, enjoy this library it sounds like fun.

I'm looking forward to hearing all the mockups and demos as they come through.


----------



## Christopher Rocky

Finally finished downloading and have been playing around with it for an hour, just went through every patch, mics and fiddled (with the instruments ) no sequencing yet just played, here's my initial thoughts.

-WOW Its very good, possibly one of the best out of the box cinematic sounds. It really does sound so good, and playing it feels great too.

-I'm very surprised by the mics this time around (as opposed to BBC) they actually seem to add a lot of flavour, both the pop close and close mic really does bring it in, which is what i was worried about in terms of uncontrollable wet noise, I turned off the mix mics and made my own sound which was different to the mix mics, the close/spot widener is very handy for this too, then you can add reverb as you please from in the player and still have the abbey sound, the vintage mics are very nice too.
I did run into CPU crackles when I had all the mics loaded apart from the 2 mix mics, but otherwise i was fine (i have a 6600k and was running off SSD evo)

-The brass/wind shorts can be played very quickly and still sound real and natural

-the scripting on ALL the longs across the patches is silky smooth, very clean and natural, both the lowest and highest dynamic cover the range so well, you can go from putting little baby yoda to sleep to blaring across the death star.

-The percussion doesn't have any rolls on anything, which surprised me because it seems to be common practice for any base perc library these days, the close mics give the perc a very different sound again.

-really missing the legato/solo/groupings of instruments. it sounds so amazing and not having it really makes you feel blue balled by SA.
****This kind of worries me because sometimes what we imagine something to be is better than what it really is, and being that the additions no one has heard yet, the standard is so goddamn high for everything in abbey road now, I hope the legatos/solo/more articulations, can actually live up to it***

TLDR/ Cinematic sound out of the box, Very happy so far, I can see its place amongst the other SA libs but it does come with a caveat: 
we don't have the whole thing yet so its too hard to say this will be the next best thing. 

PS. A good trick to playing longs like legato, leave a small gap in between each note you play, then it sounds as real as the instrument can get trying to mimic a legato line.


----------



## EricValette

Just for fun, because it was too tempting, I made a short comparative mockup on a LOTR theme.

There are three extracts:
- first is all BBCSO : sound good to my ears, there is an attitude in these samples that fits very well with this specific kind of music,
- second is all AR1 (Mix 2 for strings, Mix 1 for brass and woodwinds ; same MIDI data than BBCSO and exact same mix settings on my DAW ... overall tone is gorgeous and fits even better the intended style ... but the lack of legato patche IMHO is a pity...
- third is all AR1 + Violin 1st desk legato from SSoS to make the violins 1 melody more credible, the best of both worlds...







Edit : For those who had pointed out a phase problem to me at 00:24, it is not the library that has the problem but it was entirely my fault ... it is fixed now. Sorry guys!


----------



## GPlowman

EricValette said:


> Just for fun, because it was too tempting, I made a short comparative mockup on a LOTR theme.
> 
> There are three extracts:
> - first is all BBCSO : sound good to my ears, there is an attitude in these samples that fits very well with this specific kind of music,
> - second is all AR1 (Mix 2 + spill on strings and brass, Mix 1 + spill on woodwinds, no percs ; same MIDI data than BBCSO and exact same mix settings on my DAW ... overall tone is gorgeous and fits even better the intended style ... but the lack of legato patche IMHO is a pity...
> - third is all AR1 + Violin 1 leader legato patch from BBCSO to make the violins 1 melody more credible, the best of both worlds...



Could be just me but apart from the lack of legato, there's very little difference. Certainly not enough to suggest the room is making any real difference. Which on one hand is good for blending, on the other hand what is Abbey Road bringing to the table? The room sound is gone the moment you put reverb on it. Did you use extra reverb? I like Abbey Road but it's going to be a basic support library only. A patch here or there added to a bigger template of more performance capable patches from other vendors. Just my opinion.

Nice mock up by the way - my favourite score!


----------



## Paul Cardon

GPlowman said:


> Could be just me but apart from the lack of legato, there's very little difference. Certainly not enough to suggest the room is making any real difference. Which on one hand is good for blending, on the other hand what is Abbey Road bringing to the table? The room sound is gone the moment you put reverb on it. Did you use extra reverb? I like Abbey Road but it's going to be a basic support library only. A patch here or there added to a bigger template of more performance capable patches from other vendors. Just my opinion.
> 
> Nice mock up by the way - my favourite score!


All I can say is open up those ears bud! Actually, I can say something else. A very smooth, pad-like sequence like the examples above aren't a great way to pick out the room.The room opens up more in the spaces between notes, especially shorter articulations, but just from my point of view, I can easily hear the slight boxiness of Maida Vale in the BBC examples, a bit of low to mid buildup, and a more balanced tone in AROOF, but those examples right above do pin them closer than most other examples.

And omg, try putting reverb on Spitfire’s Studio series and tell me the room sound is gone the moment you do.


----------



## GPlowman

Paul Cardon said:


> All I can say is open up those ears bud! Actually, I can say something else. A very smooth, pad-like sequence like the examples above aren't a great way to pick out the room.The room opens up more in the spaces between notes, especially shorter articulations, but just from my point of view, I can easily hear the slight boxiness of Maida Vale in the BBC examples and a more balanced tone in AROOF, but those examples right above do pin them closer than other examples.


Listening on headphones so that might be why - I mean there can be differences, drier versus wetter, but is one better than the other, that's what I don't really hear or notice. Subjective really.


----------



## Paul Cardon

GPlowman said:


> Listening on headphones so that might be why - I mean there can be differences, drier versus wetter, but is one better than the other, that's what I don't really hear or notice. Subjective really.


Yes it’s all a bit subjective, but take a peek at Blakus’ video on the library. He puts the sound into words better than I can and shows off a good bit of it at the same time, and that’s a dude who’s REALLY good at pinning what makes good scores sound good.


----------



## fayez

Nate Johnson said:


> Pretty sure they’ve shifted their entire focus onto composers who are just starting out. BBCSO basically pointed them in that direction. The original price point (now with sub-options), the ‘universal starting point’ lingo and strong emphasis on education really points to what their road map actually is.
> 
> Most releases since then have been lower price points and lingo clearly targeting the beginner.
> 
> This release is no different, with its entire campaign centered around ‘sound like your favorite movies’ and since all of us experienced users value the space these samples are recorded in ‘here’s a legendary space that most humans, musicians or not have actually heard of.’
> 
> The beginners market will always be the real cash cow as experienced users demand more complex (read: expensive to make) products.


is BBCSO pro good in your opinion? am asking as a newbie who's about to buy it on Black Friday


----------



## GPlowman

Paul Cardon said:


> Yes it’s all a bit subjective, but take a peek at Blakus’ video on the library. He puts the sound into words better than I can and shows off a good bit of it at the same time, and that’s a dude who’s REALLY good at pinning what makes good scores sound good.


Yeah - I've been playing with Abbey Road and I agree with Blakus on the trumpets. It was the one patch I went straight for and noticed I could very well be doing the same - replacing trumpet shorts with those in AR.


----------



## Nate Johnson

fayez said:


> is BBCSO pro good in your opinion? am asking as a newbie who's about to buy it on Black Friday



I don't own it - but I would totally go for it! Just about everything Spitfire puts out sounds great, in my opinion!


----------



## fayez

Nate Johnson said:


> I don't own it - but I would totally go for it! Just about everything Spitfire puts out sounds great, in my opinion!


alright thx


----------



## Oliver

EricValette said:


> Just for fun, because it was too tempting, I made a short comparative mockup on a LOTR theme.
> 
> There are three extracts:
> - first is all BBCSO : sound good to my ears, there is an attitude in these samples that fits very well with this specific kind of music,
> - second is all AR1 (Mix 2 + spill on strings and brass, Mix 1 + spill on woodwinds, no percs ; same MIDI data than BBCSO and exact same mix settings on my DAW ... overall tone is gorgeous and fits even better the intended style ... but the lack of legato patche IMHO is a pity...
> - third is all AR1 + Violin 1 leader legato patch from BBCSO to make the violins 1 melody more credible, the best of both worlds...




I have to say i like BBCSO much more. Also there is phasing around 0:24 in the Abbey Road example.

I don't get it why people would spend nearly 400$ for such few articulations and just for a room.
Like one user mentioned, go for the pyramids, sample there an orchestra, and sell it for 2000...

BTW i have many Spitfire Libraries, do like smany of them really a lot, but this is not for me...
IMHO


----------



## andrzejmakal

Oliver said:


> I have to say i like BBCSO much more. Also there is phasing around 0:24 in the Abbey Road example.
> 
> I don't get it why people would spend nearly 400$ for such few articulations and just for a room.
> Like one user mentioned, go for the pyramids, sample there an orchestra, and sell it for 2000...
> 
> BTW i have many Spitfire Libraries, do like smany of them really a lot, but this is not for me...
> IMHO




Spot on with that phasing. 
I don’t get the idea of the library as well...


----------



## EricValette

GPlowman said:


> Could be just me but apart from the lack of legato, there's very little difference. Certainly not enough to suggest the room is making any real difference. Which on one hand is good for blending, on the other hand what is Abbey Road bringing to the table? The room sound is gone the moment you put reverb on it. Did you use extra reverb? I like Abbey Road but it's going to be a basic support library only. A patch here or there added to a bigger template of more performance capable patches from other vendors. Just my opinion.
> 
> Nice mock up by the way - my favourite score!



Thanks!

Indeed, I applied a tail reverb on both examples (Cinematic rooms), this may explain why the respective tone of each library is less accentuated. Also, I applied the same mix settings as for BBCSO (EQ, compression, delays, etc.) because my final goal is to blend well thsese two libraries... 

I will soon edit my post with 2 additional examples: BBCSO and AR1 out of the box, without pre mix settings. The difference will be quite obvious.

And indeed, for the moment, I see this library more as a way to enrich a more detailed library, a kind of "super Albion One" for passages where separate sections sometimes sound less realistic.


----------



## jonathanwright

Playing with it now. The room really, really does sound great.

In the process of composing, I tried incorporating a few instruments from SSO, and was surprised how different the room tone is.

AR is just as 'verby' but manages to do so without a loss of clarity and focus, and the room tail is so smooth.

Downsides? Yes, there aren't many articulations, and it really does need legatos in future updates/releases.

But as it stands, it's an incredible sound out of the box, and a great was of quickly laying down convincing orchestral ideas.


----------



## SZK-Max

Really beautiful. I'm just grateful to the Spitfire for recording this.


----------



## easyrider

From a learning perspective could you message me the project file so I can see what you did?

Pro tools, Studio one or cubase...I have all three

THanks!


----------



## GPlowman

I did a test where I replace the trumpets and horns with Abbey Road One. Scherzo for X-Wings. I think with a little bit more mixing time it would be better. I'm liking the trumpets more and more.


----------



## Peter Satera

beyd770 said:


>




I think that is exactly my thoughts on it. The consistency in mix and mic'ing is incredible, and something we battle with from library to library to make it feel that they belong together. I'm excited for more of Abbey One to be released.


----------



## method1

Oliver said:


> Also there is phasing around 0:24 in the Abbey Road example.
> IMHO



Yikes! I guess that's the psychedelic legacy of Abbey Road coming through 

Hopefully SFA will fix this.

Technical aspects aside AR1 sounds pretty damn sweet to me though.


----------



## ed buller

Spitfire have their detractors I know, But I have to say they are really making some stunning Libraries. This really sounds fantastic. None of the normal fiddling you have to do. Just play and a shit eating grin instantly materialises. Can't wait for the next bit !.....

I urge anyone debating this to buy it whilst they save 100 quid. 

Best

e


----------



## styledelk

Before I file a bug report, anyone else have a problem in Komplete Kontrol with AR1 not letting you expand the articulation list/microphones?






Button just doesn't light up on hover and won't let you click it. Works fine as a VST in Cubase on its own.


----------



## prodigalson

In my continued exploration of the softer dynamic layers heres another quick snippet. Also exploring how it blends with the Garritan CFX also recorded at AR.

All Abbey Road ONE with Berlin Harp and Garritan CFX for piano. No reverb or processing. That fat low end is just from the Low Strings, Brass and WW...


----------



## Kevperry777

So....changed my mind and ordered. Thanks a LOT ya'll. Ha!

Here is quick and dirty using just Abbey Road with a lot of staccatos to hear the room. And I didn't touch a mix fader or use any other plugins besides Abbey Road.


----------



## MaxOctane

Peter Satera said:


> The consistency in mix and mic'ing is incredible, and something we battle with from library to library to make it feel that they belong together.



This is exactly why I shelled out $749 last November for *BBCSO* (and $2K for SSO before that)-- they promised to bring that automatic cohesiveness to the table. Did BBCSO fail and AR1 now finally succeeds, or did BBCSO succeed but AR1 just takes a leap forward (or maybe a step forward)... or do I just fall for the same line every time?

I think the real answer: these new libraries mostly make sense if you're starting out empty, but they aren't a great value if you already own a full set of top-tier libs. The delta improvement isn't gonna be there. So the lib developers are telling the truth when they say their latest product is amazing and the best they've ever done... it's just that "last year's model" already got you 98.3% of the way there.


----------



## prodigalson

OK! Just because I couldn't resist and wanted to be the first one to do this!!


----------



## andrzejmakal

prodigalson said:


> OK! Just because I couldn't resist and wanted to be the first one to do this!!




Tail in timpani (F I guess) is clearly out of tune. The same as in BBC Discovery


----------



## Kevperry777

andrzejmakal said:


> Tail in timpani (F I guess) is clearly out of tune. The same as in BBC Discovery



yeah between the tone and the lack of rolls the timpani is maybe the low point of the library.


----------



## prodigalson

andrzejmakal said:


> Tail in timpani (F I guess) is clearly out of tune. The same as in BBC Discovery



Hmmm...Hearing the tail exposed like that you do hear the dip in pitch thats often natural to hitting a timpani in a large room, its common to almost all the timp samples I have and in this library it doesn't really bother me in context. I agree the BBCSO is especially obvious though. 

FWIW, I just analyzed the tails of a bunch of timp samples (of this pitch, F1) through melodyne and:

Abbey Road dips in pitch to between -15 and -21 cents 
BBCSO dips to -45 cents ()
Cinesamples is sharp +24 cents
Hollywood Orch Perc dips to -20 cents
Strezov Orch Perc dips to -32 cents before settling

Actually the only sample I have that seems to hit and stay on pitch dead on through its tail is Spitfire Joby Burgess Percussion...


----------



## andrzejmakal

It may be common (??) to almost all timp samples, but this is uncommon to real timpani. Ask any serious timpanist. Here F goes down/flat almost until Eb. It's sick.
Cheers


----------



## prodigalson

andrzejmakal said:


> It may be common (??) to almost all timp samples, but this is uncommon to real timpani. Ask any serious timpanist. Here F goes down/flat almost until Eb. It's sick.
> Cheers



Lol, here it dips literally barely 1/5th of a step to E, not Eb. Lol. Cheers


----------



## Macrawn

andrzejmakal said:


> It may be common (??) to almost all timp samples, but this is uncommon to real timpani. Ask any serious timpanist. Here F goes down/flat almost until Eb. It's sick.
> Cheers


What causes it? The room reverb or the resonance in the timp? How does a timp guy control that? Anyway, I hear the slight detuning because people pointed it out, but it sounds natural to me as the sound gets quieter.


----------



## Paul Cardon

styledelk said:


> Before I file a bug report, anyone else have a problem in Komplete Kontrol with AR1 not letting you expand the articulation list/microphones?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Button just doesn't light up on hover and won't let you click it. Works fine as a VST in Cubase on its own.


Won't fix the bug, but if you go into the plugin's settings, you can set it up to always open a new instance with the dropdown already expanded. If you do that then reload Kontrol, I imagine it would fix the issue.


----------



## prodigalson

Macrawn said:


> What causes it? The room reverb or the resonance in the timp? How does a timp guy control that? Anyway, I hear the slight detuning because people pointed it out, but it sounds natural to me as the sound gets quieter.



Both, I believe overtones in the initial hit combined with a room node emphasizing them. For example, on further listening to this hit, it seems to me that the pitch fluctuation that is most offensive (?) here is actually a pretty strong 3rd partial (5th) flattening a bit to B causing a dissonance


----------



## Macrawn

prodigalson said:


> Both, I believe overtones in the initial hit combined with a room node emphasizing them. For example, on further listening to this hit, it seems to me that the pitch fluctuation that is most offensive (?) here is actually a pretty strong 3rd partial (5th) flattening a bit to B causing a dissonance


That is what I thought. 

It's just a natural state of the instrument then. Find me a perfect world. If one did it would be dry and boring honestly. A timp without those imperfections and "wobbles" isn't a timp.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Macrawn said:


> What causes it? The room reverb or the resonance in the timp? How does a timp guy control that? Anyway, I hear the slight detuning because people pointed it out, but it sounds natural to me as the sound gets quieter.


Someone with more timpani knowledge than a high school percussionist correct me if I'm wrong about any of this, but:

When the skin is stretched, pitch changes. Playing louder will cause the skin to stretch farther as it oscillates in and out, causing a higher pitch. You'll notice a distinct swoop in pitch on the loudest dynamics as the note decays. It's all just physics. All drums do this, and most stringed instruments do this as well, to varying degrees.

So while it's not the room, the room will carry more of the front of the note.

You could retune the timps for every hit in a sampling session but that's less realistic and causes some decay issues.

Timpanists also tend to tune quietly between passages in a piece, so it can be difficult to know where louder hits will end up on the front end. I'm sure some may compensate slightly if they know the next passage will have them railing on it repeatedly for a period, but even if the front of the note swoops up a bit, the decay will always settle back down as it rings out to the pitch it was tuned to at quieter levels.


----------



## Paul Cardon

prodigalson said:


> Hmmm...Hearing the tail exposed like that you do hear the dip in pitch thats often natural to hitting a timpani in a large room, its common to almost all the timp samples I have and in this library it doesn't really bother me in context. I agree the BBCSO is especially obvious though.
> 
> FWIW, I just analyzed the tails of a bunch of timp samples (of this pitch, F1) through melodyne and:
> 
> Abbey Road dips in pitch to between -15 and -21 cents
> BBCSO dips to -45 cents ()
> Cinesamples is sharp +24 cents
> Hollywood Orch Perc dips to -20 cents
> Strezov Orch Perc dips to -32 cents before settling
> 
> Actually the only sample I have that seems to hit and stay on pitch dead on through its tail is Spitfire Joby Burgess Percussion...



And to add a little more, tightness of the head will influence how quick this "return" to tuned note is. Lower notes (loose) on the same head will take longer to return to their tuned pitch, while higher notes (tight) will return quicker. If you've ever drop-tuned a guitar, you'll know what I mean.

So this makes the entire process of testing these libraries like you did moot because the range of the heads and the timpanis used relative to the note you're testing, the point along the decay that you check tune or, in your case, whatever way Melodyne measures and averages center of a bending note, etc. will all change your outcome.


----------



## prodigalson

Paul Cardon said:


> So this makes the entire process of testing these libraries like you did moot because the range of the heads and the timpanis used relative to the note you're testing, the point along the decay that you check tune or, in your case, whatever way Melodyne measures and averages center of a bending note, etc. will all change your outcome.



Thanks for this, but I wasn’t checking them for any kind of objective measurement as a general reflection of pitch stability within a library (i.e. “BBCSO timps are all -45 cents flat”) but just to say that these kind of imperfections exist in all libraries and this particular note flunctuates to these extents in these libraries.

To me, it all sounds very natural. It is interesting though that in the Star Wars rendering I posted, this subjectively fruity timpani tail sparked this much discussion when, IMO, there’s quite a bit more remarkable about it than that!


----------



## jamie8

This lib sounds amazing especially the stings on short when you use the pop mics! they just feel right.


----------



## Paul Cardon

prodigalson said:


> Thanks for this, but I wasn’t checking them for any kind of objective measurement as a general reflection of pitch stability within a library (i.e. “BBCSO timps are all -45 cents flat”) but just to say that these kind of imperfections exist in all libraries and this particular note flunctuates to these extents in these libraries.
> 
> To me, it all sounds very natural. It is interesting though that in the Star Wars rendering I posted, this subjectively fruity timpani tail sparked this much discussion when, IMO, there’s quite a bit more remarkable about it than that!


Ah sure thing then! Sorry about that. Then I'm glad to make sure others don't think it good to use those "issues" in timp tuning as metrics for measuring library quality. Thanks for the clarity.


----------



## SonOfPeter

styledelk said:


> Before I file a bug report, anyone else have a problem in Komplete Kontrol with AR1 not letting you expand the articulation list/microphones?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Button just doesn't light up on hover and won't let you click it. Works fine as a VST in Cubase on its own.



Yes same here. The button doesn’t expand the UI. If I load it stand-alone it’s expanded by default but nevertheless won’t collapse.


----------



## SpitfireSupport

SonOfPeter said:


> Yes same here. The button doesn’t expand the UI. If I load it stand-alone it’s expanded by default but nevertheless won’t collapse.



Hi All, this issue has been logged with our developer team. For a quick fix please do the following:

1) Unload the plugin from your instrument track and go to one of the following locations depending on your OS:

Mac OS: User/Music/Spitfire Audio/Settings/
Windows: C:/Users/[username]/AppData/Roaming/Spitfire Audio/Settings/

2) In this folder you will find an AbbeyRoadOne.Settings file. Open this with a text editor app, such as text edit on Mac. 

3) Change the following line: 

*<VALUE name="defaultCollapsed" val="1"/> *

to 

*<VALUE name="defaultCollapsed" val="0"/>*

4) Save that document and reload the plugin. 

My apologies for any inconvenience caused.

Best Wishes 
Jack


----------



## jonathanwright

My first go with AR One, something a bit slower. Beautiful library to work with. I had to cheat a little and use Hollywood Strings for the legato violins though.


----------



## AudioLoco

Had a play yesterday. Here are my first impressions:
Once I started testing rapidly a few sounds, the qualities of this library weren't jumping at me right away... mmmm...

As I continued recording parts and the arrangement came together I was really impressed by the cohesive nature of the lib. Everything came together and got glued together by the recognizable room sound. A stupid grin was all over my face. (A stupid grin is the best sign of a quality product)

What I like most apart from the room, is the dynamic range especially of the brass. Short notes rip your face on 127v and sit well with lower velocity ranges.
The percussion is useful, if not complete (no timp rolls), and the bass drum sound is the best I ever heard sampled!
So this is, as the name suggest (Foundations) is what it is. It is just one, first, layer of a bigger product and once the legato patches are in as add-ons, it will become a really really amazing and refined and classy workhorse. As it is now, it surely needs other libs to complete it for proper use. (legato, legato, legatoooo!)
Looking forward to the add-ons, I guess solo instruments, runs, legato (did I mention legato?).

The Spitfire player is not a bad user experience too, compared to Kontakt. I would say faster to work with and rather enjoyable.

I would say a great "foundation work" has been done, I am waiting eagerly for the whole spaceship to be ready. 
Thanks Spitfire, to have "that" sound at the tip of my fingers is special.


----------



## bongoman

Has anyone tried AR1 alongside Spitfire Symphonic library? I'm keen to get this but would be good to hear input for this combo.


----------



## Beans

bongoman said:


> Has anyone tried AR1 alongside Spitfire Symphonic library? I'm keen to get this but would be good to hear input for this combo.



That's my big question right now: how is it blending? It's such a unique, thick sound. I'm only seeing people focus on BBCSO as its pairing.

I'm mostly interested in AR1 with Synchron libraries, such as Synchron Strings Pro. That might be a tough one.

I don't imagine Teldex libraries being a problem. Sony/MGM is probably not a huge pain, but I'm still curious which reverb plug-in and/or hall suits the pairing best.

I appreciate any thoughts that people have on this topic!


----------



## jonathanwright

I did try and mix some SSO in with my track, but (in this case, it may work fine in other situations), SSO felt a little too distant and wet to blend in.

That's why I ended up using a little Hollywood strings, as they're dry enough to be EQ'd and verb'd into place.


----------



## Frederick

I've been playing with it for a while yesterday, and I feel the sound is great, but the articulations are even more limited than expected - no rolls. (Compare that to BBO Quasar for 65 Euro intro price...) 

My thoughts are to shelve this library till it's more complete instead of blending it with others. I've plenty of other stuff that's complete and adding reverb to this sound seems to be defeating the purpose IMHO.


----------



## retroreel

jonathanwright said:


> My first go with AR One, something a bit slower. Beautiful library to work with. I had to cheat a little and use Hollywood Strings for the legato violins though.



Love this. Superb!.


----------



## GPlowman

I tried it out using a snippet of Harry's Wonderous World. Of course, I had to use Cinematic Studio Strings for the legato, but the woods and brass and glock are all AR1, and also, just to see what it'd be like, I used String Spill mics only to play behind CSS.


----------



## jonathanwright

retroreel said:


> Love this. Superb!.



Thanks @retroreel 🙂


----------



## dcoscina

jonathanwright said:


> My first go with AR One, something a bit slower. Beautiful library to work with. I had to cheat a little and use Hollywood Strings for the legato violins though.



nice piece. Did you use the horns in AR1 or legatos from another library? You seemed to get a nice note transition if that lead line was AR1 horns.


----------



## jonathanwright

dcoscina said:


> nice piece. Did you use the horns in AR1 or legatos from another library? You seemed to get a nice note transition if that lead line was AR1 horns.



Thanks @dcoscina. Yes the horns are all AR1. The only other library I used was legato violins from Hollywood strings.

I did double them with the horns at some points though, which may have helped with the overall transitions.

I’ve found the only instruments I miss a legato articulation on are the trumpets and high strings.


----------



## Zedcars

This has been driving me crazy for days, but there was a tiny section in Paul's brilliant Journey Across the Red Planet piece that reminded me of something I'd heard long ago. Specifically at 00:47, and 2:47. Accidental I'm sure, as it's such a small bit. But I finally figured it out (the motif at 41 seconds):


----------



## Alex Fraser

jonathanwright said:


> My first go with AR One, something a bit slower. Beautiful library to work with. I had to cheat a little and use Hollywood Strings for the legato violins though.



Jonathan - having caught an extract of this on my phone, I've had to abandon family movie night and abscond to the studio for a proper listen. When I return to the living room, I'll be in trouble and it's all on you.

(Great tune, BTW.)


----------



## Zedcars

This place is bad news for my wallet, that’s all I’ll say on the matter.


----------



## dcoscina

jonathanwright said:


> Thanks @dcoscina. Yes the horns are all AR1. The only other library I used was legato violins from Hollywood strings.
> 
> I did double them with the horns at some points though, which may have helped with the overall transitions.
> 
> I’ve found the only instruments I miss a legato articulation on are the trumpets and high strings.


I like your chord choices. Has some Goldsmith vibes to it in places.


----------



## RogiervG

GPlowman said:


> I tried it out using a snippet of Harry's Wonderous World. Of course, I had to use Cinematic Studio Strings for the legato, but the woods and brass and glock are all AR1, and also, just to see what it'd be like, I used String Spill mics only to play behind CSS.


Very nicely done.. oooh that room sound ... i want the upcoming range (not the "one" libs, but that other library: modular orchestra, with solo's, sections, like bbc so or sso). Because i want to have full control over instruments and orchestration.


----------



## Kevperry777

So here is a quick little test of Mix 1 vs Mix 2 to compare. No other plugins used...no expression data...faders at at unity.


----------



## Go To 11

Sounds like a third upcoming expansion module will be based around, or called 'Epic Brass'. Exciting!


----------



## JohnG

bongoman said:


> Has anyone tried AR1 alongside Spitfire Symphonic library? I'm keen to get this but would be good to hear input for this combo.



Well, I sort of did. Had already written a nine minute piece for a theatrical thing and it ranges from quiet (harp and cello) to monstrous / action / battle. 

Since the piece was mostly done, I grafted some of the brass and percussion from Abbey Road One onto it and it certainly made it sound more authoritative.

So now I have quite a lot of French Horns (virtually) on this one!

I think the library sounds wonderful so I'm a fan.


----------



## Marsen

I got it.

5 dynamic layers, microphones, AR1 sound!

Versus, no legatos, no sections (but horns & trumpets), no hybrid synth sounds.
No kontakt, but SA Player.
A lot of people said ( like me) ehm what?
And no, ...no bashing following. 

As I understand the innovation lays in playability, sound and sound possibilties ( in mixing these microphones), consistence, out of the box Hollywood (in London).

Blakus review showed the close mics, like no one did.
It's the close mics , I had problems with on SA Air Hall libraries. 
And I don't wanna blame anyone on this, as Jake Jackson easily could provide this.

I love Air Lyndhurst as one of the world's main scoring stage and have deep respect for their team. Some of the best sounding movies are recorded at Air!
Kingsman - The golden circle was recorded at Air Lyndhurst. 
For me, one of the best sounding soundtracks in the last years.

But it seems, that Spitfire did an amazing job on the close mics. 
And so, combined with Abbey Road One Room Sound, this seems to be a great step forward. Seems like the next step.
And I also do love the more controlled decay on AR 1, as it is a bit like Sony Scoring Stage, but with bigger room feeling.
I just realize that, though foundation might not be the right library for me, in case of useability, it's like Heavyocity ' s step from Damage 1 to 2.
So, exciting things coming up.


----------



## GPlowman

I think a lot of people have their own set ups and elaborate routing, so I decided to see what it would sound like loading a blank DAW project, loading some patches from Abbey Road One and just doing something and listen to the room. This is how the room sounds with nothing else. (I prefer 'Mix 2' mic by far). Snare is Close Mic - I think that makes it actually sound like it does on many scores.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Damn it, this sounds so good. I don’t need an ensemble library but now contemplating picking this up.


----------



## slidemasterx

I just ordered AR1 and I can't wait to try it out once the download finishes. Is it possible to update sample pool or purge samples with the Spitfire player?


----------



## Mike Fox

ed buller said:


> Just play and a shit eating grin instantly materialises.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

DJ did a walkthrough - ran into a few issues. Wondering if other folks are running into them:

Increasing the release knob on strings replays the sample on release (seems like a bug?)
CPU spikes when using multiple mics
Liked the sound overall but felt it was practically unusable (quoting him).


----------



## ed buller

ALittleNightMusic said:


> DJ did a walkthrough - ran into a few issues. Wondering if other folks are running into them:
> 
> Increasing the release knob on strings replays the sample on release (seems like a bug?)
> CPU spikes when using multiple mics
> Liked the sound overall but felt it was practically unusable (quoting him).


Don't have any issues what so ever !

e


----------



## Simon Ravn

OK my quick take on it. Recording quality is sublime! Sound is really detailed, warm and nice!

Best stuff: High strings, low woods, percussion. The percussion is really, really good. Great sound here!

The bad stuff: Horns are not loud enough and has a "delay" until they hit full strength in f(f) layer. The staccatos, marcatos etc are nice, the longs are just not as loud which is a bit silly. Would have prefered an accented long ff layer on top that has bite in the attack and then goes into ff. As it is now you have to do layering to do ff sustains.

High woods are not really doing it for me. I mean... it will probably be nice for tutti where the woodwinds don't do anything "important", but it is not very lyrical/musical sounding. So it won't be nice exposed. I have a bit of the same feeling with the low strings unfortunately: Staccatos etc are nice, longs are just a bit rough and not very lyrical. Here the stuff SF did for Albion seems more suited for leading lines in the low strings.

Then there is the choice of articulations...well... I would have much preferred something else than swells for anything but brass. I think trills, runs etc are much more useful for high woods and strings for example. I know this creates consistency for this first release, so hopefully it is something that will come later.

Highlights for me are percussion and generally the short articulations for all sections. Looking forward to what the next releases for this series will bring!


----------



## Kevperry777

ALittleNightMusic said:


> DJ did a walkthrough - ran into a few issues. Wondering if other folks are running into them:
> 
> Increasing the release knob on strings replays the sample on release (seems like a bug?)
> CPU spikes when using multiple mics
> Liked the sound overall but felt it was practically unusable (quoting him).



The release thing is happening for me...just doesn't sound quite right.

But I get no spike with multiple mics. In fact, 7 mics on my Mac laptop runs just fine.


----------



## paulmatthew

Go To 11 said:


> Sounds like a third upcoming expansion module will be based around, or called 'Epic Brass'. Exciting!



Did you notice anything else in the video? Longs and con sordino for individual string sections and a cello solo articulation.


----------



## reutunes

Daniel's just 'avin a look now...


----------



## davidson

reutunes said:


> Daniel's just 'avin a look now...




Is the 'double note' issue daniel's having around 25 mins in, just the release volume being too high for some notes? Stupid question, but is it possible to get in there and alter that yourself?


----------



## jonathanwright

Alex Fraser said:


> Jonathan - having caught an extract of this on my phone, I've had to abandon family movie night and abscond to the studio for a proper listen. When I return to the living room, I'll be in trouble and it's all on you.
> 
> (Great tune, BTW.)



😁 Thanks. Hope you managed to finished your movie in peace!



dcoscina said:


> I like your chord choices. Has some Goldsmith vibes to it in places.



_Gremlins 2: The New Batch_ was the first soundtrack I ever bought, so it must be that influence. 😁


----------



## Francis Bourre

paulmatthew said:


> Did you notice anything else in the video? Longs and con sordino for individual string sections and a cello solo articulation.


It's just naming convention for better composition/writing workflow.


----------



## Beans

reutunes said:


> Daniel's just 'avin a look now...




Daniel's final comments that start around 2:08:50 onward are spot on. I agree with every single word of it, except I didn't experience the CPU issues.

I went ahead and picked it up, because I heard enough things that I liked. The percussion, for me, is almost worth the price of the library alone, despite missing some key elements like rolls. It's not the only good thing about the library, but it's a stand-out.

But, in my opinion, it's not a good *library*. It's a sometimes-bad-often-frustrating library with some great patches, in a room that's giving people starry eyes.


----------



## Mike Fox

It's too bad the player isn't really up to par and lacks some seriously critical features.

I probably would have bought the library, but i'll wait until Spitfire irons out those engine kinks first.

Happy to hear the library sounds good overall.


----------



## easyrider

If I got an expression pedal can I control the dynamics while playing two handed ?


----------



## prodigalson

ALittleNightMusic said:


> DJ did a walkthrough - ran into a few issues. Wondering if other folks are running into them:
> 
> Increasing the release knob on strings replays the sample on release (seems like a bug?)
> CPU spikes when using multiple mics
> Liked the sound overall but felt it was practically unusable (quoting him).



Im not sure the issue with his system but I don't get any CPU spikes here. I just redid my Star Wars rendering with 4 mics loaded on every track (15 instances of Abbey Road) and my CPU barely hit 25%. (Macbook Pro 16" 2.3 Ghz 8-core i9, 64GB RAM). Its actually really efficient for me.

The release triggers are a bug I've noticed but only in the string longs when you increase the release length and mostly they don't bother me and aren't a deal breaker by any means in a 1.0.

Here's my Star Wars rendering again but with a 4 mic mix. CTA+Spills


----------



## jonathanwright

No issues here either. 

iMac 3.5 Ghz Quad Core i7, 32 GB RAM. Running Logic X 10.5.1.


----------



## prodigalson

Beans said:


> But, in my opinion, it's not a good *library*. It's a sometimes-bad-often-frustrating library with some great patches, in a room that's giving people starry eyes.



I couldn't disagree more. For me, it's a generally-great-but-not-perfect-and-has-its-quirks-just-like-any-library-on-initial-release library recorded in a room that objectively sounds really good.

It's generally far more consistent than some other spitfire libraries (Studio Orch mainly) and, honestly, most of the libraries I have from OT (bar JXL Brass)


----------



## JonS

reutunes said:


> Daniel's just 'avin a look now...



Constructive criticism is very helpful for all developers so Daniel's first look should really help Spitfire improve the Player and the library. Most of the Spitfire libraries sound fantastic!! Like all new libraries, each developer usually has one or many glitches, bugs or issues to deal with so I am sure over time Spitfire will address many problems and concerns. 

The only criticism that is not fair is that it's not for any developer to force a soundstage for exclusive rights, this falls directly onto each soundstage if they want to grant exclusivity to a developer. So it's not Spitfire's fault if Abbey Road or Air is giving them exclusivity over other developers. Christian and Paul have shown that they are keenly aware of any constructive criticism that people have which can help them improve their libraries so as long as the comments are helpful and specific this should create a better product to emerge over time. I am patient myself, and I am sure the Abbey Road line from Spitfire will be thoroughly terrific once the kinks are dealt with.

Regardless if Spitfire released Abbey Road first as a complete collection and then slimmed down off shoot libraries or the way they are releasing it currently does not really matter. I assume that the don't have the entire collection finished to be able to release just yet so they are selling the part of the Abbey Road series that is finished enough for an initial release.


----------



## Beans

prodigalson said:


> I couldn't disagree more. For me, it's a generally-great-but-not-perfect-and-has-its-quirks-just-like-any-library-on-initial-release library recorded in a room that objectively sounds really good.
> 
> It's generally far more consistent than some other spitfire libraries (Studio Orch mainly) and, honestly, most of the libraries I have from OT (bar JXL Brass)



I'm glad you're enjoying it! Again, there are things I like/love about it, and by no means was there deceit about what Orchestral Foundations is, as a package. For what I paid for it, I'm pleased with the patches that I like, several of which are replacing others in my template.

And keep in mind that I'm merely a former composer with only six years of professional writing experience who is now purely a hobbyist. Now, I'm like the grandparent who forces people to sit around and listen to them play piano while singing Christmas songs. It's just for my own enjoyment.

This actually feels like several recent releases from multiple developers, in that I'm aligned well with the pre-order/intro/loyalty/whatever pricing, but the "full list price" seems excessive to me. AR1, Phoenix Orchestra, Oceania II as some examples.

FWIW, I'm a Spitfire fan. Two of favorite libraries are Eric Whitacre Choir and LCO, happy from day one.


----------



## prodigalson

JonS said:


> The only criticism that is not fair is that it's not for any developer to force a soundstage for exclusive rights, this falls directly onto each soundstage if they want to grant exclusivity to a developer. So it's not Spitfire's fault if Abbey Road or Air is giving them exclusivity over other developers. Christian and Paul have shown that they are keenly aware of any constructive criticism that people have which can help them improve their libraries so as long as the comments are helpful and specific this should create a better product to emerge over time. I am patient myself, and I am sure the Abbey Road line from Spitfire will be thoroughly terrific once the kinks are dealt with.



I watched Daniels conclusions and overall his assessment of the actual library seemed pretty fair (though the concern about dynamics is subjective, these are probably the most dynamic patches I have from SF and more than enough for the music I write). I do agree strongly with the need for multi-timbral support for the SF player generally. If this library was intended to be a sketch pad library then they should have full Ensemble patches instead of Hi and Lo. Without multi-timbral support, needing to load up 2 players to sketch out full ideas is not great.

That said, he seems to experience some pops and licks and then decides that the library is de facto unusable as delivered without taking time to explore that in more detail. Maybe its the screen capture software or something else? maybe not? But its working for other people just fine (on seemingly lower specced machines). so it's MAYBE unusable for him. But its not "unusable". (and I dont receive free products from anyone lol.). I do understand though that it can be very frustrating and if you've had similar experiences with other products in this engine its easy to just assume its the same problem and write off the whole library. I had frustrating CPU issues with Symphonic Motions but I don't have any issues with AR One. Hopefully, SFA will be able to help isolate the issue and improve, either with Daniel or in future development.

Also, I am curious about the exclusivity deal and whether that is a preference for spitfire or for Abbey Road. It is interesting that many of the big rooms people record in don't have other developers record there also. You can of course understand why if the room sound is one of the main selling points in a line of products. One would assume there's an exclusivity deal but, to be fair, it doesn't seem unique to Spitfire. Only Cinesamples record at Sony/MGM, only Orchestral Tools record at Teldex. While there may be an argument that preventing other companies from recording in a room limits competition, it seems Daniel is laying that burden solely at the feet of Spitfire when it seems all other large developers do the same thing if they're recording in well-known spaces with desirable acoustics. And it is worth noting that other developers have sampled in AIR Lyndhurst and AIR Studio 1, at least recently.

On the subject of competition, it seems to me there is plenty of competition in the sample industry as a whole that should keep Spitfire and any other company moving forward without needing to worry so much about the need for everyone to be able to record in the same room! Between OT, SF, EW, Cinesamples, Alex Wallbank, AudioOllie, Strezov etc etc I think the competition is pretty healthy right now!


----------



## ed buller

Beans said:


> But, in my opinion, it's not a good *library*. It's a sometimes-bad-often-frustrating library with some great patches, in a room that's giving people starry eyes.



I must have downloaded a Different Library. The one I have is perhaps the best sounding commercially available Orchestral library I own. Albeit just an ensemble One. It works effortlessly ....I have loaded 20 instances on Mix 1( and a few that use more mics ) without any grief . I have noticed a couple of patches with odd sticking reverb trails. I suspect this is bug that will be fixed very quickly. The dynamic Crossfades are very impressive. I wonder why Daniel went through the mod wheel so quickly on the horn patch ?...if you do it slowly it's soooooo smooth. As to the recording quality and the sound of the room....Again this Library is very very different to it's predecessors. Just listen to the mics. Very different sounds from all of them. It can get very close and dry and be huge !......And it's NOT a room that gives "Starry Eyes"......it's Ears !!!!!!!!...............Its a fucking gorgeous sounding room. Hence it's constant use. I have rooms i trust , places I know if I put the kit right here...room mics here.....it will sound fantastic......It seems that John Williams and a few others think that about Abbey Road studio One !

best

e


----------



## JonS

prodigalson said:


> I watched Daniels conclusions and overall his assessment of the actual library seemed pretty fair (though the concern about dynamics is subjective, these are probably the most dynamic patches I have from SF and more than enough for the music I write). I do agree strongly with the need for multi-timbral support for the SF player generally. If this library was intended to be a sketch pad library then they should have full Ensemble patches instead of Hi and Lo. Without multi-timbral support, needing to load up 2 players to sketch out full ideas is not great.
> 
> That said, he seems to experience some pops and licks and then decides that the library is de facto unusable as delivered without taking time to explore that in more detail. Maybe its the screen capture software or something else? maybe not? But its working for other people just fine (on seemingly lower specced machines). so it's MAYBE unusable for him. But its not "unusable". (and I dont receive free products from anyone lol.). I do understand though that it can be very frustrating and if you've had similar experiences with other products in this engine its easy to just assume its the same problem and write off the whole library. I had frustrating CPU issues with Symphonic Motions but I don't have any issues with AR One. Hopefully, SFA will be able to help isolate the issue and improve, either with Daniel or in future development.
> 
> Also, I am curious about the exclusivity deal and whether that is a preference for spitfire or for Abbey Road. It is interesting that many of the big rooms people record in don't have other developers record there also. You can of course understand why if the room sound is one of the main selling points in a line of products. One would assume there's an exclusivity deal but, to be fair, it doesn't seem unique to Spitfire. Only Cinesamples record at Sony/MGM, only Orchestral Tools record at Teldex. While there may be an argument that preventing other companies from recording in a room limits competition, it seems Daniel is laying that burden solely at the feet of Spitfire when it seems all other large developers do the same thing if they're recording in well-known spaces with desirable acoustics. And it is worth noting that other developers have sampled in AIR Lyndhurst and AIR Studio 1, at least recently.
> 
> On the subject of competition, it seems to me there is plenty of competition in the sample industry as a whole that should keep Spitfire and any other company moving forward without needing to worry so much about the need for everyone to be able to record in the same room! Between OT, SF, EW, Cinesamples, Alex Wallbank, AudioOllie, Strezov etc etc I think the competition is pretty healthy right now!


Don't forget VSL, their new BBO and Synchron series sound excellent!! Every developer probably would prefer exclusivity with a soundstage, but in the end each soundstage can simply choose for itself if they feel exclusivity offers them something or not.


----------



## Beans

prodigalson said:


> Between OT, SF, EW, Cinesamples, Alex Wallbank, AudioOllie, Strezov etc etc I think the competition is pretty healthy right now!



This is so true, for me. I can count 16 individual developers that have received my money this year, as large as Spitfire or NI, and as small as Xperimenta or Ben Osterhouse.



ed buller said:


> I must have downloaded a Different Library. The one I have is perhaps the best sounding commercially available Orchestral library I own.



That's great! Glad you're happy with it. Sincerely.



ed buller said:


> Just listen to the mics. Very different sounds from all of them.



I am totally pleased with this aspect of AR1. I enjoy a good chunk of the mics from BBCSO Pro, but man, it's a bit too much without big changes in sound. AR1 really does a good job of having different mics for truly different purposes, which excites me for the future releases.


----------



## muadgil

easyrider said:


> If I got an expression pedal can I control the dynamics while playing two handed ?


Yes you can. But you have to choose, it will be modwheel OR expression pedal. You can't assign a cc to 2 controllers in the Spitfire player. In kontakt, you can...


----------



## Kevperry777

prodigalson said:


> I watched Daniels conclusions and overall his assessment of the actual library seemed pretty fair (though the concern about dynamics is subjective, these are probably the most dynamic patches I have from SF and more than enough for the music I write). I do agree strongly with the need for multi-timbral support for the SF player generally. If this library was intended to be a sketch pad library then they should have full Ensemble patches instead of Hi and Lo. Without multi-timbral support, needing to load up 2 players to sketch out full ideas is not great.
> 
> That said, he seems to experience some pops and licks and then decides that the library is de facto unusable as delivered without taking time to explore that in more detail. Maybe its the screen capture software or something else? maybe not? But its working for other people just fine (on seemingly lower specced machines). so it's MAYBE unusable for him. But its not "unusable". (and I dont receive free products from anyone lol.). I do understand though that it can be very frustrating and if you've had similar experiences with other products in this engine its easy to just assume its the same problem and write off the whole library. I had frustrating CPU issues with Symphonic Motions but I don't have any issues with AR One. Hopefully, SFA will be able to help isolate the issue and improve, either with Daniel or in future development.
> 
> Also, I am curious about the exclusivity deal and whether that is a preference for spitfire or for Abbey Road. It is interesting that many of the big rooms people record in don't have other developers record there also. You can of course understand why if the room sound is one of the main selling points in a line of products. One would assume there's an exclusivity deal but, to be fair, it doesn't seem unique to Spitfire. Only Cinesamples record at Sony/MGM, only Orchestral Tools record at Teldex. While there may be an argument that preventing other companies from recording in a room limits competition, it seems Daniel is laying that burden solely at the feet of Spitfire when it seems all other large developers do the same thing if they're recording in well-known spaces with desirable acoustics. And it is worth noting that other developers have sampled in AIR Lyndhurst and AIR Studio 1, at least recently.
> 
> On the subject of competition, it seems to me there is plenty of competition in the sample industry as a whole that should keep Spitfire and any other company moving forward without needing to worry so much about the need for everyone to be able to record in the same room! Between OT, SF, EW, Cinesamples, Alex Wallbank, AudioOllie, Strezov etc etc I think the competition is pretty healthy right now



And given the discussion about dynamics...it’s very interesting that in his AR video Oliver mentions an “epic brass” expansion selection.


----------



## easyrider

muadgil said:


> Yes you can. But you have to choose, it will be modwheel OR expression pedal. You can't assign a cc to 2 controllers in the Spitfire player. In kontakt, you can...



Thanks for the info...


----------



## Paul Cardon

ALittleNightMusic said:


> DJ did a walkthrough - ran into a few issues. Wondering if other folks are running into them:
> 
> Increasing the release knob on strings replays the sample on release (seems like a bug?)
> CPU spikes when using multiple mics
> Liked the sound overall but felt it was practically unusable (quoting him).


The release thing has gotta be a bug, feels like it's playing too much of something or the start point of the RT is messed up.

The way Spitfire release control has HISTORICALLY worked in Spitfire's Kontakt libraries (when the wrench is open for peaking inside) is that 0-25% release uses a short note tail (staccato or spic) as the RT, 25-50% uses a long note tail as the RT, and 50-100% uses the same long note tail but with the start point set a little farther into the note. It's a very intentional programming choice to do it that way and with the right fades on each range, you can get some cool variance in release options. You'll notice that in Spitfire's Kontakt libraries, the range indicator is "stepped", indicating you're getting different RT techniques on each step. Can be fun to automate the CC for release control to match what the "performance" needs when you're getting really into your programming.

So based on how most of the Spitfire Player RTs have felt, I'm sure they carried over that design decision.

In AROOF, it sounds like that start point in the 50-100% range either got pushed too far back into the long note tail or there are some issues with the fades making the note-off an unnatural bump which should be totally fixable since that bump is consistent on every single release when you're up past 50%.


----------



## Paul Cardon

In addition, one thing that DJ showed off in the video is how you can get some really smooth releases in something like CSS, but the difference is that CSS, when legato is turned off, doesn't even have RTs. It simple fades the current notes out with a regular release curve. Spitfire generally only goes the RT route, meaning when a note is let off, the longs transition into a real recorded note end, retaining the performance of a note release and the decay of the hall.

It's a bummer in that it doesn't give you fine control over release length, but when you're playing CSS in non-legato mode, those looooong releases are not really a proper "note end", rather they're a fade in volume. They're also not realistic, because if you're up at ff on your mod wheel, the players aren't trailing out, the dynamics layers aren't transitioning, rather the ff sample is simply fading down in volume.

So for simplistic pad playing on a keyboard, Spitfire long RTs are not suitable, so it would be a bit cool if Spitfire could add a "Disable RTs" button in the release settings that turns the release knob into a simple release fade control, but like I said above, kind of unrealistic. What's even BETTER to do is to make those shapes with your dynamics controller so the notes are actually fading through the dynamics as they would in real life. Not as good for a simplistic bit of improvisation on the keyboard when you aren't able to touch your mod wheel controller, but AROOF has some especially good dynamic layer fades in most of its longs so the result is pretty nice if you can put in the effort.


----------



## AudioLoco

I don't mind at all the player not being multi-timbral. I tend to open new instances of Kontakt for almost every instrument anyway (because my computer lets me on most projects), so...not an issue for me. Actually it makes for less scrolling and a faster experience.

I heard a couple of uneven velocity jumps on the low strings tremolo patch, I am sure this (and other couple of things people mentioned, but I haven't encountered) is going to get easily ironed out in a little update soon.
Also, here I'm having zero problems when using multiple mics and all is flowing without hick-ups.

I am exploring the various mics etc for each instrument, these are my impressions:
I have found that personally the "Mix 1" setting that loads by default is not the most flattering to the STRINGS (for MY taste, that is). I found the combination chosen is a bit too in your face and makes less use of the incredible room sound as it should. Apart from ostinatos that benefit from some close mics for power, the "Tree 2" sounds just right and blends much better in a full arrangement, especially if you are aiming for delicate, IMHO.

The percussion and brass "Mix 1" settings are amazing though and any mic combo I was trying wasn't sounding as balanced as that.
In general I really enjoy the "Vintage 1" mics sound too.

So performance patches on their way the soonest hopefully I see! That's is great, and I don't mind them being ensemble patches as opposed to solo instruments (for now). I think AR1 owners are awaiting eagerly for those in order to be able to write a complete piece just with AR1 and make use of its cohesive nature.


----------



## Mike Fox

Out of curiosity, has Spitfire ever made any changes/improvements to their player that was requested by customers?


----------



## styledelk

Mike Fox said:


> Out of curiosity, has Spitfire ever made any changes/improvements to their player that was requested by customers?



If I remember right, HZ Strings has support for multiple outs for the mics, which was definitely requested.

I'll generally argue any good product manager there will listen to customer feedback, but also not have it be the only source of development priorities. Customers are pretty bad at articulating what they actually want/need, and you'll lose some ability to innovate if you just spend your time on that.


----------



## EricValette

AudioLoco said:


> I don't mind at all the player not being multi-timbral. I tend to open new instances of Kontakt for almost every instrument anyway (because my computer lets me on most projects), so...not an issue for me. Actually it makes for less scrolling and a faster experience.
> 
> I heard a couple of uneven velocity jumps on the low strings tremolo patch, I am sure this (and other couple of things people mentioned, but I haven't encountered) is going to get easily ironed out in a little update soon.
> Also, here I'm having zero problems when using multiple mics and all is flowing without hick-ups.
> 
> I am exploring the various mics etc for each instrument, these are my impressions:
> I have found that personally the "Mix 1" setting that loads by default is not the most flattering to the STRINGS (for MY taste, that is). I found the combination chosen is a bit too in your face and makes less use of the incredible room sound as it should. Apart from ostinatos that benefit from some close mics for power, the "Tree 2" sounds just right and blends much better in a full arrangement, especially if you are aiming for delicate, IMHO.
> 
> The percussion and brass "Mix 1" settings are amazing though and any mic combo I was trying wasn't sounding as balanced as that.
> In general I really enjoy the "Vintage 1" mics sound too.
> 
> So performance patches on their way the soonest hopefully I see! That's is great, and I don't mind them being ensemble patches as opposed to solo instruments (for now). I think AR1 owners are awaiting eagerly for those in order to be able to write a complete piece just with AR1 and make use of its cohesive nature.



I totally agree with your comment about the string mixes. I quickly tested here:

In the first extract, the strings, brass and woodwinds are all MIX1.
In the second extract, the strings are MIX2 and the brass and woodwinds are MIX1.
In the third extract, the strings are Tree2 only and the brass and woodwinds are MIX1.


The difference may seem subtle, but indeed, for relatively calm musical passages, Tree2 for the strings seems more appropriate. The sound of the room is also better emphasized. I also like a lot the Mix2 for the strings (personal taste here...).

There is nothing other than AR1 here except an SSoS patch (violin 1 first chair, mic tree only) to help the melody due to the lack of IMHO legato and a bit of reverb for the tail ( fabfilter pro R, Vienna Hall, 60 ms of predelay and "space" set to 0.87s, and a bit of compression (SSL G comp) on the master bus ... and nothing else!


----------



## Mike Fox

styledelk said:


> If I remember right, HZ Strings has support for multiple outs for the mics, which was definitely requested.
> 
> I'll generally argue any good product manager there will listen to customer feedback, but also not have it be the only source of development priorities. Customers are pretty bad at articulating what they actually want/need, and you'll lose some ability to innovate if you just spend your time on that.



In that case, what improvements have they made not requested by customers?


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Mike Fox said:


> In that case, what improvements have they made not requested by customers?



I imagine quite a lot under the hood to support things like Symphonic Motions (which also required a new UI) and their upcoming new advanced legato that's been mentioned. It's also a very stable player IMO (compared to say SINE which was a crash fest for the better part of a year).

Paul just mentioned on another thread that multi-timbral support is on their list.


----------



## styledelk

Mixer presets, the 'mode switcher' on BBC SO, the techniques editor (arguably also aligned with requests, but probably not exactly the way it was requested). Most of these things will likely continue to be refined (I imagine having mixer presets was a pre-req for having default mic mix settings). All of the stuff for Evos, symphonic motions, etc. (which arguably was born out of necessity for bringing those libraries over).

I don't remember exactly what wasn't in HZ Strings when it was first released, but I do remember it being a lot more barebones in features. I'll also agree that they're probably too focused on the libraries and content than the player, but I imagine that's because selling libraries is what funds the ability to dedicate time to work on the player. Everything's a tradeoff.


----------



## Laddy

It would be nice to have a single multitimbral plugin that could load all the spitfire instruments.


----------



## styledelk

SpitfireSupport said:


> Hi All, this issue has been logged with our developer team. For a quick fix please do the following:
> 
> 1) Unload the plugin from your instrument track and go to one of the following locations depending on your OS:
> 
> Mac OS: User/Music/Spitfire Audio/Settings/
> Windows: C:/Users/[username]/AppData/Roaming/Spitfire Audio/Settings/
> 
> 2) In this folder you will find an AbbeyRoadOne.Settings file. Open this with a text editor app, such as text edit on Mac.
> 
> 3) Change the following line:
> 
> *<VALUE name="defaultCollapsed" val="1"/> *
> 
> to
> 
> *<VALUE name="defaultCollapsed" val="0"/>*
> 
> 4) Save that document and reload the plugin.



So I went and checked this file on the PC, and I find that defaultCollapsed is already set to "0", and yet it's opening collapsed still in KK (that's true of all of my libraries there, too, which don't open uncollapsed). Is that setting maybe being overridden somewhere else?


----------



## Beans

EricValette said:


> I totally agree with your comment about the string mixes. I quickly tested here:
> 
> In the first extract, the strings, brass and woodwinds are all MIX1.
> In the second extract, the strings are MIX2 and the brass and woodwinds are MIX1.
> In the third extract, the strings are Tree2 only and the brass and woodwinds are MIX1.
> 
> 
> The difference may seem subtle, but indeed, for relatively calm musical passages, Tree2 for the strings seems more appropriate. The sound of the room is also better emphasized. I also like a lot the Mix2 for the strings (personal taste here...).



Thanks for putting this together!

Scanning through your Soundcloud account, you are obviously skilled, but this track shows me that

AROOF is not suited to this level of agility in the strings (which is not surprising); and/or
You really love reverb; and/or
You're using a fairly wet mix in an effort to cover up something at which AROOF isn't suitable.
It's a good sound, however, and I'd love to see what you come up with when some expansions are out.


----------



## EricValette

Beans said:


> Thanks for putting this together!
> 
> Scanning through your Soundcloud account, you are obviously skilled, but this track shows me that
> 
> AROOF is not suited to this level of agility in the strings (which is not surprising); and/or
> You really love reverb; and/or
> You're using a fairly wet mix in an effort to cover up something at which AROOF isn't suitable.
> It's a good sound, however, and I'd love to see what you come up with when some expansions are out.


Thank you so much for your kind words 

Indeed, AR1 is not yet fully usable for the creation of music which contains melodic developments requiring good agile transitions... Can't wait to try the extensions and even more the modular series for more detailed work!

Regarding the reverb, I did a last test, this time purely "out of the box" (absolutely no effects activated in my DAW; MIX2 for strings + a bit of close mic on V1 for definition, MIX1 for brass and woodwinds). Without reverb, agility is a bit better, rendering is a little less "messy" even if it remains largely perfectible... nevertheless the general sound of the library is really superb and this last "naked" test is maybe the one that sounds the best of the series...


----------



## CT

styledelk said:


> the techniques editor



This on its own is enough for me to prefer their player to Kontakt.


----------



## Kevperry777

Here is some silly fun.....since you can shift click articulations in the Spitfire player, its easy to quickly layer articulations. (Helpful to make quick n' dirty performance patches). So here is every drum turned on...first section without snares; second section with. Just one track...no other plugins used. Mix 1. It's just a big sounding room.

Warning...watch your volume:


----------



## Peter Satera

I watched Daniels stream yesterday on twitch - it was a long one, for sure. His discussion regarding the strings in which he heard the release was quite evident, but not something I have experienced.

As for the CPU spikes. I pushed Abbey on my end to see how hard it would go before it gave out. I loaded up the same, Low and High longs, playing both at once. To me, I had to push it *extremely *hard before it did give. I started to get drop outs when I played 10 keys at once, 7 which were triggered on the Long High strings, 6 which were on the low strings. While, the Close, Tree 1, Tree 2, Amb, Out and Spill mics all were active (6 mics each). Personally, I was comfortable with what occurred, and also, like Daniel on a 12 core 64Gb Ram, although I'm using a Threadripper with Win10 pro. This is likely to differ from person to persons hardware.

I've not always agreed with the 'sucking effect' Daniel dislikes or when he prefers slow attacking on sustains. I think when you need strings sustains to suddenly halt at the point of crescendo a long release is not what I'd want and long attacks can make sustains sound very pad-like. I do agree, the control would be good, of course, like you find in Sine. He did point out, in which I _am _in agreement with, that CSS has varied attack control. And I use the advanced attack / legato velocity every time.

I do like Daniels streams and that he can voice his opinion. He's indeed in support of the composers perspective, especially when talking about exclusivity in these halls, and I do find FFF still not as bold as other libs I have but other than that the dynamics are awesome. Overall, I really like Abbey Road One. I've been really busy as of late, but have spent the time setting it up for my modular workflow and then did a quick play about it.

All Abbey, Mix 1 Mic Only, out of the box.


----------



## Alsonic

Hi All, I was wondering if this Abbey Road One Foundations would be comparable to Sonuscore The Orchestra Complete 2? It obviously has the Abbey Road sound but as far as the usability - would it be similar? Many are saying that it is not detailed enough for full deep orchestration, but more for quick mock up section work or maybe just enhancing or supplementing other libraries. Therefore I wonder if people could comment on which would be a better buy - or if having both would be useful?
Many thanks


----------



## Raphioli

Kevperry777 said:


> it’s very interesting that in his AR video Oliver mentions an “epic brass” expansion selection.


I hope they go very detailed in terms of articulations on that one.
Because while I'm interested in comprehensive section libraries, I definitely would be interested in an epic brass library after listening to those shorts in the Foundation library.


----------



## M_Helder

Honestly, the mic array and the sound that a little mix & match between them gives has stunned me. I almost cried a little.

However, as with Daniel's tests my own system begins to crackle a bit when using up to 3 patches with 4 mics enabled in each (Vint, Tree1, Amb, Out). Mix1 is solid as a rock, but I guess we can all agree that the whole point of this library is to use the additional mics provided for that heavenly lush sound.

@paulthomson I wonder if it is actually possible to implement the 'mic-merging' (see Orchestral Tools SINE player) feature for the Spitfire player, so that we could all produce custom mixes and save a ton of CPU resources in the meantime? That would be such a huge step forward and a major selling point for current and future libraries, imho.


----------



## SomniatorSound

Did some testing around, I remade the asteroid chase in Abbey Road. The sound gets super close to the original, but have to admit long strings and lack of legato are obvious. Brass staccatos are perfectly on point when comparing to the original.

Dont like the xylophone either that much, but otherwise it gets close to the original.


----------



## PuerAzaelis

You guys with these mockups you are so beyond my level ... love it, brilliant


----------



## JonS

SomniatorSound said:


> Did some testing around, I remade the asteroid chase in Abbey Road. The sound gets super close to the original, but have to admit long strings and lack of legato are obvious. Brass staccatos are perfectly on point when comparing to the original.
> 
> Dont like the xylophone either that much, but otherwise it gets close to the original.



Very reminiscent of the Jaws score. Great work!!


----------



## CT

Mike T said:


> This on its own is enough for me to prefer their player to Kontakt.



hey deej i am glad u find my priorities with samplers funny hope all is well thx


----------



## andrealoverde84

Hi guys! I'm new to this forum but I wanted to give my contribution to this thread.
I'm mediocre piano player, surely not a pro musician / producer but this is what I manage to get out of the new Spitfire Abbey Road One library, after playing with it an hour or so...
My aim was not faithfully reproducing the original "Flight to Neverland" musical piece, but just playing with the library, doing an ear training exercise at the same time...

The attached file (mp3) is the result of me playing all the orchestral parts with a midi keyboard.
No mixing / mastering has been performed other than volumes balance.
I didn't use the original scores, just played the piece by ear...hence, this is for sure full of mistakes.

....but...it sounds pretty convincing to me, considering there is a loooot of room for improvements...
and most important, it was easy to achieve that! Good job Spitfire Audio!!!!!!

Greetings from Italy


----------



## KeyMaestro

SpitfireSupport said:


> Hi All, this issue has been logged with our developer team. For a quick fix please do the following:
> 
> 1) Unload the plugin from your instrument track and go to one of the following locations depending on your OS:
> 
> Mac OS: User/Music/Spitfire Audio/Settings/
> Windows: C:/Users/[username]/AppData/Roaming/Spitfire Audio/Settings/
> 
> 2) In this folder you will find an AbbeyRoadOne.Settings file. Open this with a text editor app, such as text edit on Mac.
> 
> 3) Change the following line:
> 
> *<VALUE name="defaultCollapsed" val="1"/> *
> 
> to
> 
> *<VALUE name="defaultCollapsed" val="0"/>*
> 
> 4) Save that document and reload the plugin.
> 
> My apologies for any inconvenience caused.
> 
> Best Wishes
> Jack



Jack,
Thanks for the tip, but when I opened the .Settings file the defaultCollapsed value was already "0". I changed it to "1". saved, opened, changed it to "0" again, saved and reopened - still nothing.

I also see no Cog for settings in Komplete Control.

In Logic, I see the Cog and the plugin opens expanded, but I can't collapse it (not that I want to... lol.

Should I submit this the the Spitfire Support page?

Thanks again!


----------



## MaxOctane

andrealoverde84 said:


> The attached file (mp3) is the result of me playing all the orchestral parts with a midi keyboard.
> No mixing / mastering has been performed other than volumes balance.
> I didn't use the original scores, just played the piece by ear...hence, this is for sure full of mistakes.



Very nice. Any chance you'd share the midi or DAW file? I'd like to take a crack with the Arks or BBCSO.

@andrealoverde84


----------



## andrealoverde84

MaxOctane said:


> Very nice. Any chance you'd share the midi or DAW file? I'd like to take a crack with the Arks or BBCSO.
> 
> @andrealoverde84


Sure I can...
which file do you prefer? Midi file or Studio One 5 session?
just bear in mind that it's written by ear...not even close to the original scores 

Andrea


----------



## SpitfireSupport

KeyMaestro said:


> Jack,
> Thanks for the tip, but when I opened the .Settings file the defaultCollapsed value was already "0". I changed it to "1". saved, opened, changed it to "0" again, saved and reopened - still nothing.
> 
> I also see no Cog for settings in Komplete Control.
> 
> In Logic, I see the Cog and the plugin opens expanded, but I can't collapse it (not that I want to... lol.
> 
> Should I submit this the the Spitfire Support page?
> 
> Thanks again!



Hey, 

I should have been a little bit more expansive for Komplete Kontrol users, my apologies! 

In Komplete there is not away to fix this issue as the plugin always opens in the "collapsed" state regardless of our settings file. 

I'd like to reassure that we've escalated this to an urgent issue and our team are now prioritising it. 

Best Wishes 
Jack


----------



## tabulius

If I remember correctly Spitfire told this will be one of the biggest and detailed collection to date. I wonder when do we get samples for 1st violins, 2nd violins, flutes, clarinets, trombones, tubas, solo instruments etc. etc. separately. I like the sound, but I really would like to have total control of my arrangements. Upcoming two expansions sound cool, but again - I don't like to be locked into pre-orchestrated instruments. If this sort of bigger library comes within a few years, then I might consider getting this thing. And more percussion in this great sounding room, please!


----------



## Sean

tabulius said:


> If I remember correctly Spitfire told this will be one of the biggest and detailed collection to date. I wonder when do we get samples for 1st violins, 2nd violins, flutes, clarinets, trombones, tubas, solo instruments etc. etc. separately. I like the sound, but I really would like to have total control of my arrangements. Upcoming two expansions sound cool, but again - I don't like to be locked into pre-orchestrated instruments. If this sort of bigger library comes within a few years, then I might consider getting this thing. And more percussion in this great sounding room, please!


Seems like the speculation is late 2021/early 2022, but I don't believe Spitfire has said anything regarding it.


----------



## RogiervG

tabulius said:


> If I remember correctly Spitfire told this will be one of the biggest and detailed collection to date. I wonder when do we get samples for 1st violins, 2nd violins, flutes, clarinets, trombones, tubas, solo instruments etc. etc. separately. I like the sound, but I really would like to have total control of my arrangements. Upcoming two expansions sound cool, but again - I don't like to be locked into pre-orchestrated instruments. If this sort of bigger library comes within a few years, then I might consider getting this thing. And more percussion in this great sounding room, please!


Yes there will, it's a different range though. the Abbey Road consists of several ranges, the ONE productline (including the addons) are the first range, there will also be a very detailed range product line (think SSO but then bigger and more detailed and recorded in abbey road), and a product in a range recorded in studio 2 (the smaller studio). At least that is what Paul discussed in one of the abbey road videos.

release dates are the coming years.. might be all released next year, two years before we see it being available.. nobody knows but SA themselves.


----------



## Sean

RogiervG said:


> Yes there will, it's a different range though. the Abbey Road consists of several ranges, the ONE productline (including the addons) are the first range


Are you sure this is correct? I assume all products recorded in Studio One will be under the ONE product line, so that would include the modular orchestra. It's all semantics of course and doesn't actually matter. So AR1: Orchestral Foundations, and AR1: Modular Orchestra or whatever.


----------



## RogiervG

Sean said:


> Are you sure this is correct? I assume all products recorded in Studio One will be under the ONE product line, so that would include the modular orchestra. It's all semantics of course and doesn't actually matter. So AR1: Orchestral Foundations, and AR1: Modular Orchestra or whatever.


No, he clearly talked about several ranges of products recorded at abbey road, the ONE product line being the first range (including the addons).
then he said things about upcoming products from different ranges, one of them being the most detailed orchestra they've done.. (must be the SSO like library) and at the very end he teased "and ofcourse we didn't forget studio 2" (which is another range, guessing the studio orchestra like library)


----------



## sinkd

Kevperry777 said:


> So here is a quick little test of Mix 1 vs Mix 2 to compare. No other plugins used...no expression data...faders at at unity.


Mix One sounds, hands down, like the real deal. Less depth somehow with mix 2?


----------



## dzilizzi

Sean said:


> Are you sure this is correct? I assume all products recorded in Studio One will be under the ONE product line, so that would include the modular orchestra. It's all semantics of course and doesn't actually matter. So AR1: Orchestral Foundations, and AR1: Modular Orchestra or whatever.


This is my understanding. The ONE product line is geared towards media composers and is based on the ensemble with a number of additional mix and match libraries that do things like the EVOs and 8va instrument mixes. Kind of like Project Sam libraries, but in Abbey Road. The ONE product line is pretty much recorded already prior to the quarantine. They may need to go back to fix some things but minimal further recording is planned. The plan is to release most of this in 2021, unless there are unforeseen problems. 

The modular orchestra will be like SSO in pieces. Maybe more like BML was before it was SSO. The ONE library will work with the modular orchestra, just like Albion ONE works with SSO. Recording on the modular orchestra has been started, but is not completed. Not sure how COVID will affect this. Because it isn't fully recorded and with the current situation, I don't know if they have really given out a date. Since it is modular, they may release modules that are complete. 

They are also planning on recording in Studio 2, but it is not clear if this will be more towards an Albion style library or a Studio Orchestra type library. I don't believe any recording on this has been started. 

That is pretty much all I remember from everything said during videos and posts here.


----------



## Sean

dzilizzi said:


> This is my understanding. The ONE product line is geared towards media composers and is based on the ensemble with a number of additional mix and match libraries that do things like the EVOs and 8va instrument mixes. Kind of like Project Sam libraries, but in Abbey Road. The ONE product line is pretty much recorded already prior to the quarantine. They may need to go back to fix some things but minimal further recording is planned. The plan is to release most of this in 2021, unless there are unforeseen problems.
> 
> The modular orchestra will be like SSO in pieces. Maybe more like BML was before it was SSO. The ONE library will work with the modular orchestra, just like Albion ONE works with SSO. Recording on the modular orchestra has been started, but is not completed. Not sure how COVID will affect this. Because it isn't fully recorded and with the current situation, I don't know if they have really given out a date. Since it is modular, they may release modules that are complete.
> 
> They are also planning on recording in Studio 2, but it is not clear if this will be more towards an Albion style library or a Studio Orchestra type library. I don't believe any recording on this has been started.
> 
> That is pretty much all I remember from everything said during videos and posts here.


Yea the marketing/product naming is all I'm confused about. Just seems like anything recorded in studio one should be called Abbey Road One to me, but whatever.


----------



## dzilizzi

Sean said:


> Yea the marketing/product naming is all I'm confused about. Just seems like anything recorded in studio one should be called Abbey Road One to me, but whatever.


I think it is supposed to be more like Albion ONE, rather than any relation to the studio.


----------



## Sean

dzilizzi said:


> I think it is supposed to be more like Albion ONE, rather than any relation to the studio.


That makes more sense, thanks!


----------



## zimm83

paulthomson said:


> You do have eg: Trumpets - which technically is a section on its own! But - otherwise -
> Absolutely correct. These are the line “Film Scoring Selections” - the super detailed sectional libraries are a separate line - the modular orchestra.


Will those exps be merged in the foundations UI or will they be apart ?


----------



## paulthomson

zimm83 said:


> Will those exps be merged in the foundations UI or will they be apart ?



They will appear in the same plug-in, but you’ll be able to clearly see that they are additional.

Similarly, if you don’t own foundations but just want to buy a selection, you’ll load that into the same “Abbey Road ONE” plug-in.


----------



## StefVR

So how I understand it: Its a little big like bbo orchestra in vsl -> ARO Foundations plus addons and Synchron Strings Pro -> AR Detail String, Brass etc. modules.


----------



## zimm83

paulthomson said:


> They will appear in the same plug-in, but you’ll be able to clearly see that they are additional.
> 
> Similarly, if you don’t own foundations but just want to buy a selection, you’ll load that into the same “Abbey Road ONE” plug-in.


Thanks a lot .


----------



## AEF

There are some absolutely stellar sounds in this. The Horns are ridiculously good I would kill for the matching Legato. The percussion is astounding. The trumpet, woodwinds and low brass shorts are perfect. 

Weakest links for me are all of the longs. The strings have a lovely sound but I actually prefer Originals Intimate Strings to these ones. All in all, a great library. Wish this had been done in full, but I assume COVID ruined such plans at it has so many things.


----------



## dzilizzi

AEF said:


> There are some absolutely stellar sounds in this. The Horns are ridiculously good I would kill for the matching Legato. The percussion is astounding. The trumpet, woodwinds and low brass shorts are perfect.
> 
> Weakest links for me are all of the longs. The strings have a lovely sound but I actually prefer Originals Intimate Strings to these ones. All in all, a great library. Wish this had been done in full, but I assume COVID ruined such plans at it has so many things.


From what I understand, this is just the foundations library for a number of ensembles of instruments that will do specific things. Two have been announced - Legendary Low Strings and Sparkling Woodwinds. I'm sure there will be something with horns. I seem to remember hearing there were at least 10 ensembles coming at about $49 each. Buy what you want.

However, they also have planned a modular orchestra in the same space. AR1 isn't technically a part of this, but should blend well. The modular orchestra should have all the instruments and articulations. Probably the same musicians? So, if you wait, you should get what you want eventually.


----------



## dcoscina

I adore this library. I’m having so
Much fun composing wth it. The sounds are inspiring so many musical ideas.


----------



## TintoL

Peter Satera said:


> I watched Daniels stream yesterday on twitch - it was a long one, for sure. His discussion regarding the strings in which he heard the release was quite evident, but not something I have experienced.
> 
> As for the CPU spikes. I pushed Abbey on my end to see how hard it would go before it gave out. I loaded up the same, Low and High longs, playing both at once. To me, I had to push it *extremely *hard before it did give. I started to get drop outs when I played 10 keys at once, 7 which were triggered on the Long High strings, 6 which were on the low strings. While, the Close, Tree 1, Tree 2, Amb, Out and Spill mics all were active (6 mics each). Personally, I was comfortable with what occurred, and also, like Daniel on a 12 core 64Gb Ram, although I'm using a Threadripper with Win10 pro. This is likely to differ from person to persons hardware.
> 
> I've not always agreed with the 'sucking effect' Daniel dislikes or when he prefers slow attacking on sustains. I think when you need strings sustains to suddenly halt at the point of crescendo a long release is not what I'd want and long attacks can make sustains sound very pad-like. I do agree, the control would be good, of course, like you find in Sine. He did point out, in which I _am _in agreement with, that CSS has varied attack control. And I use the advanced attack / legato velocity every time.
> 
> I do like Daniels streams and that he can voice his opinion. He's indeed in support of the composers perspective, especially when talking about exclusivity in these halls, and I do find FFF still not as bold as other libs I have but other than that the dynamics are awesome. Overall, I really like Abbey Road One. I've been really busy as of late, but have spent the time setting it up for my modular workflow and then did a quick play about it.
> 
> All Abbey, Mix 1 Mic Only, out of the box.


Holy shit.... that sounds awesome....


----------



## dcoscina

TintoL said:


> Holy shit.... that sounds awesome....


yeah the brass and percussion are friggin phenomenal.


----------



## TintoL

I have said before in this thread that I hate they didn't put the legatos here...But man, the sound is one in a million...... the shorts are AMAZING. 

I am actually tempted to pull the trigger because I find this could definitely blend well with the Spitfire symphonic orchestra which is my main workhorse. 

Also really hoping that the "sparkling woodwinds" expansions has a structure of articulations or design similar to hollywood woodwinds from ciensamples or at least a gazilion of run shapes that we can use.


----------



## dcoscina

TintoL said:


> I have said before in this thread that I hate they didn't put the legatos here...But man, the sound is one in a million...... the shorts are AMAZING.
> 
> I am actually tempted to pull the trigger because I find this could definitely blend well with the Spitfire symphonic orchestra which is my main workhorse.
> 
> Also really hoping that the "sparkling woodwinds" expansions has a structure of articulations or design similar to hollywood woodwinds from ciensamples or at least a gazilion of run shapes that we can use.


Well, it's only gonna cost $49 so I wouldn't expect a million articulations. But I'm hoping it follows the layout of the existing AR1. I also hope they add tenuto/marc to the strings to match the horns/brass.


----------



## TintoL

dcoscina said:


> it's only gonna cost $49


Is this for real? are you solid on that number? That can't be right.....


----------



## Sean

TintoL said:


> Is this for real? are you solid on that number? That can't be right.....


This price is confirmed by spitfire


----------



## TintoL

Sean said:


> This price is confirmed by spitfire


mmm, then at that price I am not expecting much really.....


----------



## Sean

TintoL said:


> mmm, then at that price I am not expecting much really.....


They'll likely only be a few articulations, like a new legato patch in an expansion, or something like that.


----------



## AudioLoco

A legato patch on the strings and brass would make this a totally different beast.
Hopefully it is the first ones on their list.
At the moment I am only integrating those great percussion and short brass to my stuff.


----------



## TintoL

AudioLoco said:


> A legato patch on the strings and brass would make this a totally different beast.
> Hopefully it is the first ones on their list.
> At the moment I am only integrating those great percussion and short brass to my stuff.


I agree that the legatos will make this library a killer monster. But judging by the timing of the next products, I would not count with those legato inclusions any time soon.

It will be great if Spitfire could chime in here and mention their schedule to make legatos available (if it exists)


----------



## Peter Satera

TintoL said:


> Holy shit.... that sounds awesome....



Thank you so much! I think the consistency is what is really impressive about this. Actually re-looking at this session, there's a touch and of VSS3 on it and a bit of a volume boost. NoEQ or anything. I thought it's worth mentioning this as I don't want to give the wrong impression on how wet mix 1 is.

I'm thinking once the modules come in, it'll really help give the control we're used to, to use within many scenarios. I'm finding the library good for this sort of demo. But obviously I'd never do an adagio or a lyrical melody with foundations though.

I agree with the comments above. Legato is something I'm looking forward to.


----------



## paulthomson

In case you missed the exclusive VI sneak peek....! 


ARselectionsSneakPeek


----------



## Garlu

paulthomson said:


> In case you missed the exclusive VI sneak peek....!
> 
> 
> ARselectionsSneakPeek




Wow! They do sound gorgeous! 

My main concern would be to stay "attached" to the orchestration offered, considering many of us would want THAT playability and quality of samples without being attached to sound always in octaves...!


----------



## paulthomson

Garlu said:


> Wow! They do sound gorgeous!
> 
> My main concern would be to stay "attached" to the orchestration offered, considering many of us would want THAT playability and quality of samples without being attached to sound always in octaves...!



it’s a good point - why I started doing octaves in the low strings back in the dawn of time (Albion legacy) was that after I flicked through about 50!of my favourite works, it became clear that most of the time they were playing on octaves...

As for the sparkling woods - it’s a specific arrangement that I saw appearing fairly frequently in (ahem) melodic blockbuster scores...!

Breaking out to design your own orchestration will be coming in the AR modular series.


----------



## jdrcomposer

Peter Satera said:


> Thank you so much! I think the consistency is what is really impressive about this. Actually re-looking at this session, there's a touch and of VSS3 on it and a bit of a volume boost. NoEQ or anything. I thought it's worth mentioning this as I don't want to give the wrong impression on how wet mix 1 is.
> 
> I'm thinking once the modules come in, it'll really help give the control we're used to, to use within many scenarios. I'm finding the library good for this sort of demo. But obviously I'd never do an adagio or a lyrical melody with foundations though.
> 
> I agree with the comments above. Legato is something I'm looking forward to.



Absolutely fantastic!!!


----------



## TintoL

paulthomson said:


> In case you missed the exclusive VI sneak peek....!
> 
> 
> ARselectionsSneakPeek




Thanks so much Paul for chime in here and post more info. Indeed I didn't know about that video. It explains a lot. And it does sound gorgeous. 

Deam, I am going to have to buy it !!!!!


----------



## Peter Satera

jdrcomposer said:


> Absolutely fantastic!!!


Thank you Jdr!


----------



## Kevperry777

paulthomson said:


> Breaking out to design your own orchestration will be coming in the AR modular series.


Allow me to pre-congratulate you. If the modular libraries carry over the sound and attention to detail in Foundations, it will be a big success and a massively useful library.


----------



## AudioLoco

paulthomson said:


> In case you missed the exclusive VI sneak peek....!
> 
> 
> ARselectionsSneakPeek




I did miss this.
Sounds great and truly expressive!
I'm really excited about these next releases, the overall A.R.F. sound is just impressive.
The mic options are all amazing, but Tree 2 is the one I crank up the most.


----------



## AEF

paulthomson said:


> In case you missed the exclusive VI sneak peek....!
> 
> 
> ARselectionsSneakPeek




This is probably the best sampling Spitfire has ever done. Gorgeous. Wow.


----------



## Hendrixon

Marsen said:


> Blakus review showed the close mics, like no one did.



This!



Do you and Blakus want to be my best friends?!
I felt alone in the world until now


----------



## Hendrixon

I'm in the middle of watching DJ's video (the part with the performance issues) and just wanted to put here some numbers I picked up when slowing down the video.

First of all, it seems that he hits the limit of 512 voices in each of the two SA player instances, because non of them manages to go above that. regardless, when he reaches around 350-400 voices on each instances that's when the crackling starts. when he's in the 400-500 range (so 800-1000 combined), each instance reports about 50% cpu load (like one could be 40% and the other 60%) and each player instance reports a disk load of around 25%-35%... at that stage the audio is completely chocked.

When he loaded multiple instances of CSS to a single kontakt instance, he got some crackling at above 2400 voices, though even then nothing like in the SA players, and that seems logical because at that moment kontakt reported a cpu load of 29% and disk load of 3%.

Just numbers of SA player (at 800-1000 voices) vs kontakt (at 2400 voices):
cpu: 100% vs 30%
disk: 60% vs 3%

From that it seems obvious that the SA player is the limiting factor he had and not his system.
Maybe its the pre load buffer size? the sub mixer? or a thread scheduling issue? either way the player's disk streaming engine still needs considerable work, at least compared to kontakt.

* I have no idea how Sine compares to kontakt.

Back to the video.


----------



## JohnG

I haven't had any problems with crackling using the library in a composition that's about 9-10 minutes long. It's a very dense orchestration; Abbey Road One plays a medium / supporting role, not the whole piece.


----------



## Hendrixon

JohnG said:


> I haven't had any problems with crackling using the library in a composition that's about 9-10 minutes long. It's a very dense orchestration; Abbe Road One plays kind of a medium / supporting role, not the whole piece.



Without stating how many voices you have on the SA player, and what is your setup, that doesn't tell much

Well, I've done a quick test on my soon to be retired system:
Windows 7 64bit
48GB DDR3 at 800 or 1066 MHz
6 core 12 thread Intel Xeon X5675 (from 2011), stock 3GHz o/c to 4.6GHz
Asus motherboard from 2009, support just up to pcie 2.0, all pcie lanes go thru the chipset
all sample drives are nvme thru a pcie adapter (they are pcie 3.0 but going thru a pcie 2.0 lane)
RME Babyface pro (usb goes thru the chipset... a 2009 chipset!)

I don't have AR1 but have the Originals SA libs that are on the same player.
Tested with Epic Strings, player voice limit set to 999.
Daw is Reaper. it uses 1 thread per track.

Voice count (in total) where crackling started:
1 Epic on 1 track at 64 samples = 400
1 Epic on 2 tracks at 64 samples = 700
1 Epic on 3 tracks at 64 samples = 900
1 Epic on 1 track at 2048 samples = 600
1 Epic on 2 tracks at 2048 samples = 1100 (barely crackling)
1 Epic on 3 tracks at 2048 samples = 1100 without any crackling... but can't get more voices
**It's weird, at 2048 samples no matter if I add a 4th track, I still get 1100 voices combined, the 1100 voices just spread thru all the Epic tracks... but without any crackling.
It's like at 2048 samples there is a soft limiter, a bottle neck that doesn't create crackling

For comparison I loaded CSS in kontakt:
1 kontakt on 1 track at 64 samples = 700
1 kontakt on 2 tracks at 64 samples = 1000
1 kontakt on 3 tracks at 64 samples = 1200
** The max I get at 64 samples without crackling even with a 4th track is 1200 voices
1 kontakt on 1 track at 2048 samples = 1000 (no crackling... just a weird soft limit)
1 kontakt on 2 tracks at 2048 samples = 2000 (no crackling... just this soft limit)
1 kontakt on 3 tracks at 2048 samples = 3000 (no crackling... just soft limit)
1 kontakt on 4 tracks at 2048 samples = 4000!!! (no crackling... again just soft limit)
** I didn't expect this...........................^^^^!!!!!!!!
This scaling is off the charts, I had no idea its like that since I never used such a large buffer
I can only assume this will end when I'll go above 6 tracks, as in above 6 threads (real 6 cores).
For some reason I can get about 1000 voices from a single kontakt instance at 2048 samples, without crackling, even though max voices is set to 5000.


The numbers tell the story.


----------



## JohnG

Hendrixon said:


> The numbers tell the story



Well applause for the effort but I think what this confirms is that you need substantial resources to run a full orchestral template, maybe including more than one computer. Mine includes three PC satellites a Mac and a separate iMac pro tools rig.

I like to be able to run multiple mic positions and really go all out, so I just swamp whatever limits there are in the libraries or software with excess capacity. Considering how inexpensive a satellite PC is now, particularly in relation to the cost of a single semester of university classes, it seems like a good use of funds.

If you want to use Kontakt, knock yourself out, but too many companies with excellent sounds are abandoning it. No surprise, as it appears the Kontakt libraries get pirated in no time.


----------



## andyhy

Apart from finding my way around AROOF I've been reminding myself what a real orchestra sounds like in Abbey Road Studio One - see link below. Also Christian Henson's latest video demonstrates the vital role of the mod and exp wheels or, in my case on an old Roland Fantom G8, sliders and knobs.


----------



## Saxer

My favorite score soundwise in Abbey is this


----------



## andyhy

I learn so much from watching a live performance in AR1. I am writing for humans not robots so how I modulate the sound is as important as the library itself. In fact I won't get the value from any sample library unless I appreciate how musicians breath life into their performances. Out of the box instant playability is worthless if one is incapable of making it sound real.

Enjoy


----------



## andyhy

This is the new Christian Henson orchestral programming video I was referring to above. A number of very relevant tips for getting the best out of AROOF.


----------



## Hendrixon

JohnG said:


> I think what this confirms is that you need substantial resources to run a full orchestral template



Really, that's your conclusion?
One of your favorite cars manufacturer changed its engine from 3rd party supplier to an in house developed engine, an engine that you just found out is about 30% slower on high octane gas and what, 80% slower on low octane gas then the previous engine, and your logic says:
"No problem, I'll just buy the same car but with an engine twice as large, sure I'll pay more insurance, more for gas, more for maintenance... but hey, I'll have the same performance as before. that seems like a good use of funds".

I think you're the best customer in the world.


Maybe I'm wrong but somehow I have a feeling you wouldn't do that, you will probably tell your favorite car manufacturer that you love his cars, but demand they'll improve their in house engine if they want to to keep you as a loyal and happy customer.


* Honestly I think I burned a gray cell


----------



## dcoscina

A new radio intro spot I composed using AR1


----------



## JohnG

Hendrixon said:


> Maybe I'm wrong but somehow I have a feeling you wouldn't do that, you will probably tell your favorite car manufacturer that you love his cars, but demand they'll improve their in house engine if they want to to keep you as a loyal and happy customer.



No, I would not do that. It's not "the same car." It's a very different car.

I couldn't care less about the efficiency of the playback engine -- it's all about the sound-sound-sound. Nothing else is important.

I've been at this composer wheeze for some time, but I stopped for a while because I was so frustrated at the limitations of the sound palette. I have very good speakers / amp / converter and all that so I am able to hear fairly subtle differences. 

*I Like It*

That said, I don't think this is a subtle difference on offer from this library. Like @Blakus I have been trying to get this exact sound for absolutely ages. Plus, I've recorded a number of times at Abbey Road with a large orchestra and had gleaned from that a decent idea of what it sounds like.

Moreover, I think Spitfire have gotten better and better at recording, scripting, and editing samples. The HZ Strings, for instance, are superb. This also is very well done.

*Why Bother?*

I'm not in music to be "efficient," or merely to make money. Like many here, I'm smart enough to know other ways that would reliably generate more money than most composers make. We didn't have a proper record player until I was about 14 and then we received a stereo as a gift, along with three albums, one of which was Beethoven's third symphony, which I wore out playing. A revelation.

So, at the risk of repetition, I am fine throwing whatever computer resources necessary to get the best sound I can, and I think Abbey Road One looks like a great addition.


----------



## Mike Fox

I'm still a bit torn on this library. While the room sounds excellent (obviously), I'm not entirely sold on the instruments themselves.

The percussion sounds crazy wet to me, but probably serves as a great way to add depth to the room?

I've also yet to hear any spiccato examples that really did anything for me.

Would love to hear what some of you guys can whip up! Maybe win me over just in time for Black Friday.


----------



## easyrider

Mike Fox said:


> I'm still a bit torn on this library. While the room sounds excellent (obviously), I'm not entirely sold on the instruments themselves.
> 
> The percussion sounds crazy wet to me, but probably serves as a great way to add depth to the room?
> 
> I've also yet to hear any spiccato examples that really did anything for me.
> 
> Would love to hear what some of you guys can whip up! Maybe win me over just in time for Black Friday.



The price won’t change for Black Friday as the intro pricing is good through November.

just buy it already...you know you will anyway....


----------



## Mike Fox

easyrider said:


> The price won’t change for Black Friday as the intro pricing is good through November.



True, true, but i was thinking about the possible free gift.


----------



## TintoL

Mike Fox said:


> I'm still a bit torn on this library. While the room sounds excellent (obviously), I'm not entirely sold on the instruments themselves.
> 
> The percussion sounds crazy wet to me, but probably serves as a great way to add depth to the room?
> 
> I've also yet to hear any spiccato examples that really did anything for me.
> 
> Would love to hear what some of you guys can whip up! Maybe win me over just in time for Black Friday.


I also feel the same. I feel I am struggling not to push the buy button. Mainly because there are two things that bother me.

The first one is that once the modular series come out, (if they come out), I have the feeling this full range / sections ensamble might feel like the old mural and sable ensembles? I remember everybody hated them. What I mean is that once you get all the diferent instruments and independent parts in other modules, probably this rough pallete of patches will feel redundant? Not sure what I would feel then ......

Second, I don't like giving such a leap of faith on the legatos and buy expecting to get them. I see there is a woodwinds and a low string legato coming judging by the video posted, but, not having legatos for brass solos in this space is kind of a sacrilege.

But, really, I am struggling convincing myself not to buy it....


----------



## JohnG

Mike Fox said:


> The percussion sounds crazy wet to me,



Hi Mike,

Not going to try selling you! Promise!

If you have a good listening setup I think you would agree that the percussion does have that AR sound, which is 'uge. But the decay of the room is very fast. That's one of the unique aspects of that room.

If you don't like it, definitely don't waste your money! There is so much else to enjoy. Personally, I think the price of the library is worth it for the percussion alone but it's not everyone's cup of tea. 

Kind regards,

John


----------



## ed buller

e


----------



## JohnG

fun video, Ed. Thanks!

Don't think I've ever seen an engineer wearing a necktie!


----------



## ed buller

JohnG said:


> fun video, Ed. Thanks!
> 
> Don't think I've ever seen an engineer wearing a necktie!


 Oh all My engineers are in Tails !

e


----------



## styledelk

ed buller said:


> Oh all My engineers are in Tails !
> 
> e



So *that's *how the reverb works there.


----------



## Hendrixon

JohnG said:


> No, I would not do that. It's not "the same car." It's a very different car.
> 
> I couldn't care less about the efficiency of the playback engine -- it's all about the sound-sound-sound. Nothing else is important.



I agree with everything you wrote between the above and below quotes.



> So, at the risk of repetition, I am fine throwing whatever computer resources necessary to get the best sound I can, and I think Abbey Road One looks like a great addition.



What I think you miss is that this is something beyond Abbey Road One and its sound.
This whole _"I couldn't care less about the efficiency of the playback engine"_ I think comes from your personal experience with that single 9 min project, where with your test case you didn't reach any limit on your setup. that's fine, but you can't say that this shows there is no issue.

You say its all about the sound? 
Well from what you wrote I assume you have many/most of SA's libraries. what will you do when SA will port all their back catalog to their player? will you download all the libs now in the player format and replace your kontakt versions with them? now that _you know_ there is a big performance hit?
Well if you'll do that, you will lose at least 30% or more of your polyphony on all your already existing libs (SSS, SSW, SCS etc). To gain back the level of performance you have now, you will need to buy about 1.5 more PC slaves.
This is just because you will replace the engine... not the sounds... those will be the same.

I'm really intrigued what will you do


Me personally?
I didn't even give this a thought until yesterday, I assumed the SA player performance was on par or at least very close to kontakt.
I wrote before I don't have any Sine library so don't know how the performance is there, but I will sure want to check it out before installing Sine.
I'm now building a new PC for dedicated audio use, cost $4k-$5k, amount of research hours probably around 100. I'm not sure I want to through 30% of that just like that.


----------



## Hendrixon

Mike Fox said:


> True, true, but i was thinking about the possible free gift.



I'm with you on that one
I love the sound of AR1 but with all that's missing (who said legato?) I decided to pass.
But now with the Aperture Orchestra option? if it will be good I think I'll cave in


----------



## Mike Fox

Hendrixon said:


> I'm with you on that one
> I love the sound of AR1 but with all that's missing (who said legato?) I decided to pass.
> But now with the Aperture Orchestra option? if it will be good I think I'll cave in


Do you have Aperture Strings? It's seriously one of my favorite string libraries!


----------



## Hendrixon

Mike Fox said:


> Do you have Aperture Strings? It's seriously one of my favorite string libraries!



Sadly no, I loved the sound and play ability in the walk through but funds ran out before this deal was offered. since then I forgot about it, but once this Aperture Orchestra thing popped up, I immediately watched the old walk through again... and well... that was a mistake lol

I hope the Orchestra will include the 2019 strings.


----------



## Mike Fox

Hendrixon said:


> Sadly no, I loved the sound and play ability in the walk through but funds ran out before this deal was offered. since then I forgot about it, but once this Aperture Orchestra thing popped up, I immediately watched the old walk through again... and well... that was a mistake lol
> 
> I hope the Orchestra will include the 2019 strings.


I also hope that Spitfire makes Aperture Strings readily available. It's just too cool of a product to not be available to everyone.


----------



## jbuhler

Mike Fox said:


> Do you have Aperture Strings? It's seriously one of my favorite string libraries!


It is very cool and I also reach for Aperture strings frequently. But I do wonder how well the concept will translate to the orchestra as a whole.


----------



## MaxOctane

Hendrixon said:


> But now with the Aperture Orchestra option? if it will be good I think I'll cave in



I missed the announcement of Aperture Orchestra... is that same thing as the "modular" Abbey One orchestra (with individual instruments) that they announced?


----------



## Mike Fox

jbuhler said:


> It is very cool and I also reach for Aperture strings frequently. But I do wonder how well the concept will translate to the orchestra as a whole.


Definitely an interesting question! I'm really looking forward to seeing what kinda tricks Spitfire pulls outta their hat with this one!

Aperture Strings has got to be Spitfire's best achievement I've come across so far when it comes to playability and balance. I mean, there's not even any mic positions, and I don't even feel like I'm missing them.

SCS and SSS just feel like a chore compared to this, as much as i hate to say it. The irony is that I bought both SCS and SSS because I liked Aperture so much, lol! I don't regret buying them, but they aren't getting as much use as Aperture.


----------



## Hendrixon

MaxOctane said:


> I missed the announcement of Aperture Orchestra... is that same thing as the "modular" Abbey One orchestra (with individual instruments) that they announced?


----------



## LamaRose

Hendrixon said:


>




Ah, one of the most beloved and surely most hated of SF libraries. Lord knows how much money they pissed away from the backlash, not to mention future sales. Was a good popcorn moment for me though!


----------



## alchemist

paulthomson said:


> They will appear in the same plug-in, but you’ll be able to clearly see that they are additional.



Will we be able to slot the articulations into the main patches? With the player not supporting multi timbral I can see this getting messy as the collection grows. Please consider making it so for example we can add the articulations from Legendary Low Strings to the Low Strings Foundation patch. Maybe by having them all show up in the Techniques Editor, to let us create a single low strings patch  being able to load more than one patch in the player would also be a solution. A must for expression map users.


----------



## paulthomson

alchemist said:


> Will we be able to slot the articulations into the main patches? With the player not supporting multi timbral I can see this getting messy as the collection grows. Please consider making it so for example we can add the articulations from Legendary Low Strings to the Low Strings Foundation patch. Maybe by having them all show up in the Techniques Editor, to let us create a single low strings patch  being able to load more than one patch in the player would also be a solution. A must for expression map users.




Yes you can do this.


----------



## alchemist

paulthomson said:


> Yes you can do this.



Hell yeah, put me down for all the selections haha  can't wait!


----------



## shropshirelad

I'm still a bit miffed that I bought Abbey Road a couple of weeks ago - I'd have much rather have had Aperture Strings than the free add on pack next year. Any chance that early adopters of AR could get paid access to Aperture [email protected]


----------



## Brasart

shropshirelad said:


> I'm still a bit miffed that I bought Abbey Road a couple of weeks ago - I'd have much rather have had Aperture Strings than the free add on pack next year. Any chance that early adopters of AR could get paid access to Aperture [email protected]



Aperture Strings was offered as part of last year's BF, this year is Aperture Orchestra — for which there isn't any official info yet


----------



## dcoscina

New mix/version


----------



## dcoscina

LamaRose said:


> Ah, one of the most beloved and surely most hated of SF libraries. Lord knows how much money they pissed away from the backlash, not to mention future sales. Was a good popcorn moment for me though!


I dunno it sounds very cool. The tone of the strings sounds great.


----------



## LamaRose

dcoscina said:


> I dunno it sounds very cool. The tone of the strings sounds great.


I agree... it does sound good... I was referring to the backlash from people who either couldn't get it or simply had issues with the sales tactic. Check the YT comments:


----------



## Hendrixon

Aperture Orchestra walk through is online at SA site.

Sadly it doesn't include the prior 2019 strings and its very very different...
The 2019 strings were, well, strings. they were very usable as an evolving string ensemble.
The 2020 Orchestra has strings woods and brass, but you don't get each section in the evolving style of 2019... here they are all layered together and the general vibe suit mostly horror/trailer styles.

It's nice, but not for me
So again I lost the incentive to pickup AR1.


----------



## José Herring

Hendrixon said:


> Aperture Orchestra walk through is online at SA site.
> 
> Sadly it doesn't include the prior 2019 strings and its very very different...
> The 2019 strings were, well, strings. they were very usable as an evolving string ensemble.
> The 2020 Orchestra has strings woods and brass, but you don't get each section in the evolving style of 2019... here they are all layered together and the general vibe suit mostly horror/trailer styles.
> 
> It's nice, but not for me
> So again I lost the incentive to pickup AR1.


Awe that's too bad. I was going to wait because I thought they were rereleasing AS. But, a whole orchestral ensemble library is like my least favorite type of library down there with the Roland Sound Canvas.


----------



## ed buller

https://www.spitfireaudio.com/aperture-orchestra/?fbclid=IwAR0zsMV6u1MfJ-b5qSVqkbrh1GHEoM4IbE1S3qE11DfhgRitbSnQPii34GQ

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

e


----------



## ed buller




----------



## MaxOctane

Some of those longs sound like Masse, which I’ve never been a fan of. The “cloud” patches sound lovely though.


----------



## Mike Fox

Considering Abbey as my $350 purchase to get Aperture, but am wondering how the CPU performance has been for others, especially after watching DJ's walkthrough and seeing all those pops and clicks.


----------



## holywilly

I throw Abbey Road ONE inside VEP and all the issues that DJ had mentioned are gone. Assigning two AR instance to the same midi channel (strings H & L, 3 mics enable) and polyphonic playing without any issue.


----------



## Hendrixon

holywilly said:


> I throw Abbey Road ONE inside VEP and all the issues that DJ had mentioned are gone. Assigning two AR instance to the same midi channel (strings H & L, 3 mics enable) and polyphonic playing without any issue.



Its all a question of how many voices you produce from a single instance of the player.
At least on windows with ASIO (my platform) at 64 samples kontakt will give you 30% more voices, and as you increase the buffer the performance gap will double and quadruple.


----------



## Mike Fox

holywilly said:


> I throw Abbey Road ONE inside VEP and all the issues that DJ had mentioned are gone. Assigning two AR instance to the same midi channel (strings H & L, 3 mics enable) and polyphonic playing without any issue.


So, basically what you're saying is, if you don't use VEP, then you'll experience the same cpu issues we saw Daniel James have?


----------



## holywilly

Mike Fox said:


> So, basically what you're saying is, if you don't use VEP, then you'll experience the same cpu issues we saw Daniel James have?


yes.


----------



## Mike Fox

holywilly said:


> yes.


Dang. That's an easy pass for me then. Thanks for the info!


----------



## holywilly

Hendrixon said:


> Its all a question of how many voices you produce from a single instance of the player.
> At least on windows with ASIO (my platform) at 64 samples kontakt will give you 30% more voices, and as you increase the buffer the performance gap will double and quadruple.


200 voices without glitch and pop


----------



## Hendrixon

200? And you need VEP for this???
My 10 y/o pc does that and more...

Do 500 and above without a glitch in a single player, then it will mean something real.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Mike Fox said:


> So, basically what you're saying is, if you don't use VEP, then you'll experience the same cpu issues we saw Daniel James have?



No - I asked this question earlier and a number of owners chimed in saying they were not experiencing any CPU issues, even with multiple mics engaged - without VEP.


----------



## Mike Fox

ALittleNightMusic said:


> No - I asked this question earlier and a number of owners chimed in saying they were not experiencing any CPU issues, even with multiple mics engaged - without VEP.


Hm...

I wonder what's up with the mixed experiences.


----------



## Jett Hitt

Mike Fox said:


> Hm...
> 
> I wonder what's up with the mixed experiences.


I am most definitely experiencing this without VEP. (I haven't tried it with it.) It seems to happen in particularly busy places. One instance of High Strings playing 16th notes in octaves at 108 BPM overloads my 5,1 12 Core. Something isn't right.


----------



## Mike Fox

Jett Hitt said:


> I am most definitely experiencing this without VEP. (I haven't tried it with it.) It seems to happen in particularly busy places. One instance of High Strings playing 16th notes in octaves at 108 BPM overloads my 5,1 12 Core. Something isn't right.


Yeah, that seems off to me, and these kinds of cpu issues are happening to enough users to make it a turn off. 

I also have a 5,1, but it's only 8 cores, so I doubt it would handle Abbey any better than your machine. 

Crazy, i have zero issues with every sample lib i own (thats 4 SSD's worth!)


----------



## Jett Hitt

Mike Fox said:


> Yeah, that seems off to me, and these kinds of cpu issues are happening to enough users to make it a turn off.
> 
> I also have a 5,1, but it's only 8 cores, so I doubt it would handle Abbey any better than your machine.
> 
> Crazy, i have zero issues with every sample lib i own (thats 4 SSD's worth!)


I really don't get it. I too have many SSDs full of libraries, and this is the only one I have any problems with. I watched the DJ video before I bought it, and I saw it happening. But others said it wasn't an issue. I assure you that it is an issue, and I have yet to see Spitfire acknowledge the problem.

Having said that, the brass is stunning. It is the most beautiful brass Spitfire has ever recorded. The sound is really incredible. They just gotta fix the problem.


----------



## ag75

Hendrixon said:


> Aperture Orchestra walk through is online at SA site.
> 
> Sadly it doesn't include the prior 2019 strings and its very very different...
> The 2019 strings were, well, strings. they were very usable as an evolving string ensemble.
> The 2020 Orchestra has strings woods and brass, but you don't get each section in the evolving style of 2019... here they are all layered together and the general vibe suit mostly horror/trailer styles.
> 
> It's nice, but not for me
> So again I lost the incentive to pickup AR1.


I got the strings last year and honestly I opened them once and haven’t touched them since. I would sell them if you were allowed to do so.


----------



## Hendrixon

Mike Fox said:


> Hm...
> 
> I wonder what's up with the mixed experiences.



No one listening here??
Its a matter of *LOAD.*
You could have perfect life on a slow laptop at 2048 samples buffer with Berlin if all you do is play a single note.
All those who don't have a problem need to report the *"voice count"* and "buffer size" while they use AR1.
Saying "it runs fine on my machine" without those numbers is meaningless.


----------



## Mike Fox

Hendrixon said:


> No one listening here??
> Its a matter of *LOAD.*
> You could have perfect life on a slow laptop at 2048 samples buffer with Berlin if all you do is play a single note.
> All those who don't have a problem need to report to *"voice count"* and "buffer size" while they use AR1.
> Saying "it runs fine on my machine" without those numbers is meaningless.


I don't know if it's really that simple. I mean, that's kinda day 1 toubleshooting stuff.

Btw, DJ actually did mention his buffer being appropriately set in the walkthru. He was just playing some basic chords, so If Abbey can't produce that without causing cracks on pops, ESPECIALLY since it's an ensemble library? C'mon.

I mean, if all your libraries work just fine, except for one? I'd probably blame the library (or some other strange anomaly).

Every string library I have I'm able to play 2 handed chords, and have ZERO issues, so when I hear that a computer more powerful than mine is getting clicks and pops with Abbey, It makes me pretty skeptical about the library...or some obscure setting.


----------



## Hendrixon

Mike Fox said:


> I don't know if it's really that simple. I mean, that's kinda day 1 toubleshooting stuff.
> 
> Btw, DJ actually did mention his buffer being appropriately set in the walkthru. He was just playing some basic chords, so If Abbey can't produce that without causing cracks on pops, ESPECIALLY since it's an ensemble library? C'mon.
> 
> I mean, if all your libraries work just fine, except for one? I'd probably blame the library.
> 
> Every string library I have I'm able to play 2 handed chords, and have ZERO issues, so when I hear that a computer more powerful than mine is getting clicks and pops with Abbey, It makes me pretty skeptical about the library.



Its that simple Mike.
I slowed the video down to get a reading of the voice/cpu/disk readings he had.
He used 2 players (strings high, strings low), like 4-5 mics each, and played few cords.
That gave him +400 voices on each player, which pulled cpu 50% and heavy disk load for each instance.

His buffer was 2048 samples.

I recreated this on my end with Epic Strings.


----------



## Hendrixon

On my geriatric machine with 2048 I could get no more than 450 voices with Epic on a single track+instance, and 1200 with several tracks.

With Kontakt and CSS I got +4000 voices without a struggle (didn't try to get more since I don't use 2048 samples buffer).


----------



## Hendrixon

Mike Fox said:


> Every string library I have I'm able to play 2 handed chords, and have ZERO issues



Again, saying something like that, doesn't say much  
One lib will give you 10 voices with 10 fingers, another will do 230 voices.... or 400...
Apples and Bananas.


----------



## Mike Fox

Hendrixon said:


> Its that simple Mike.
> I slowed the video down to get a reading of the voice/cpu/disk readings he had.
> He used 2 players (strings high, strings low), like 4-5 mics each, and played few cords.
> That gave him +400 voices on each player, which pulled cpu 50% and heavy disk load for each instance.
> 
> His buffer was 2048 samples.
> 
> I recreated this on my end with Epic Strings.


OK. So his buffer was set the highest it would go. He had 2 patches open, was playing some basic chords, and Abbey craps out? That's insane to me. 

I could do that with any other library i have and not have a single hangup. 

I do see your point about the voice count, but are the people who aren't experiencing any cpu issues only playing single notes at a time? Seems highly unlikely to me.

I'm at a loss on this one.


----------



## Mike Fox

Hendrixon said:


> Again, saying something like that, doesn't say much
> One lib will give you 10 voices with 10 fingers, another will do 230 voices.... or 400...
> Apples and Bananas.


What it tells me is that Abbey is highly inefficient, and incredibly cpu hungry, which makes it unusable for some.


----------



## Hendrixon

Mike Fox said:


> What it tells me is that Abbey is highly inefficient.



Same as Epic, which means really the SA player.



> are the people who aren't experiencing any cpu issues only playing single notes at a time?


Exactly 
They use mix 1 or mix 2, its a single "mic", they play chords, get 100-200 voices and say:
"hey for me its all fine"


----------



## Mike Fox

Hendrixon said:


> Same as Epic, which means really the SA player.
> 
> 
> Exactly
> They use mix 1 or mix 2, its a single "mic", they play chords, get 100-200 voices and say:
> "hey for me its all fine"


Yeah, the SA player is exactly what's prevented me from buying their libraries.

Well, i did buy Epic Strings, only to find out that the only thing epic about them is the amount of reverb they're drenched in, lol.

Nevermind the fact that when i went to go load them up one day i got an error telling me that the library was corrupt (or some shit like that) and told me to contact customer support. 

Stupid spitfire player.


----------



## Hendrixon

Mike Fox said:


> the only thing epic about them is the amount of reverb they're drenched in, lol.



I thought I mixed you with someone else on this, but no it is you. I mean you don't like wet libs, right?
But you wrote you bought SCS and SSS...


----------



## ed buller

ALittleNightMusic said:


> No - I asked this question earlier and a number of owners chimed in saying they were not experiencing any CPU issues, even with multiple mics engaged - without VEP.


I have about 30 instances of AROOF open in Cubase 11...not a single problem

e


----------



## Karma

Just to address some of the discussion above somewhat:

The High Strings and Low Strings Long patches in ARO are both 5 dynamic layers each, meaning that with 4 mics on each instance, 2 vibrato layers, playing 6-8 notes at once, with 2 tracks armed at once, you're going to very quickly max out the voices. And that's not even factoring releases triggering either when moving to another chord.

There's a lot to be said for having 2 tracks armed at once playing in live also. It's significantly more taxing on your machine. This is where things like ASIO Guard and Dropout Protection come in so useful, but even those have different results for each machine. One person may have issues with ASIO Guard at Low or off, but as soon as it's bumped up to High the issues could go away.

Then there's the other factors. System specs, plugin settings, DAW settings. There's far too many things at play here and it's certainly not as black and white as is being portrayed above.

For the record, I'm personally having no issues myself either. And if anyone is, I'd strongly recommend contacting support, as currently it sounds like there's little to no reports gone into support in regards to this.


----------



## Hendrixon

ed buller said:


> I have about 30 instances of AROOF open in Cubase 11...not a single problem
> 
> e



1. Buffer size
2. Voice count per instance (3? 41? 700?)


----------



## paulthomson

Was Dan running off SSD or spinning drive? I know that was an issue on the previous first look video. 

For what it’s worth - you can watch my YT vid where I go into my demo, and see clearly I’m playing live from logic - tons of tracks, dense orchestration etc.. no stutters or dropouts at all.

As Karma mentions above, diff Daws handle load playing in record differently - and especially when comparing across Mac / PC you can get quite diff results.

But like I say - don’t just take my word for it - watch it on my Yt vid live!


----------



## Hendrixon

Karma said:


> Just to address some of the discussion above somewhat:
> 
> The High Strings and Low Strings Long patches in ARO are both 5 dynamic layers each, meaning that with 4 mics on each instance, 2 vibrato layers, playing 6-8 notes at once, with 2 tracks armed at once, you're going to very quickly max out the voices. And that's not even factoring releases triggering either when moving to another chord.



In the end its all condensed to voice count, which is the load factor on a system.
It could be AR1, kontakt, UVI etc... single instance, multiple instances.



> There's a lot to be said for having 2 tracks armed at once playing in live also. It's significantly more taxing on your machine.


In modern multithread DAWs its the other way around, as they dedicate a thread per track.
You will get more performance if you spread the load over more tracks, up to the count of physical cores.



> Then there's the other factors. System specs, plugin settings, DAW settings. There's far too many things at play here and it's certainly not as black and white as is being portrayed above.


When you compare two exact test environments where only a single parameter is changed, the relative difference is black and white.



> For the record, I'm personally having no issues myself either.


System spec?
Buffer size?
Voice count per instance?


----------



## Hendrixon

paulthomson said:


> Was Dan running off SSD or spinning drive? I know that was an issue on the previous first look video.
> 
> For what it’s worth - you can watch my YT vid where I go into my demo, and see clearly I’m playing live from logic - tons of tracks, dense orchestration etc.. no stutters or dropouts at all.
> 
> As Karma mentions above, diff Daws handle load playing in record differently - and especially when comparing across Mac / PC you can get quite diff results.
> 
> But like I say - don’t just take my word for it - watch it on my Yt vid live!




Hey Paul, on the vid he stated a buffer of 2048 samples and SSD.
I think he said he has a 12 core mac pro with 64gb.

I'll watch your vid now, will try to catch your AR1 load  
DJ had 2 instances, as he reached +400 voices on each, his system choked.
I can confirm on my system at 2048 samples with Epic I can't get more then 450 voices on a single instance. with kontakt I get 1000 easily.
On multiple tracks Epic max at 1200 voices, but kontakt scales to 4000 and more...

The relative difference is obvious.


----------



## Karma

Hendrixon said:


> In modern multithread DAWs its the other way around, as they dedicate a thread per track.
> You will get more performance if you spread the load over more tracks, up to the count of physical cores.


I won't get into this too much as I just wanted to chime in with my 2 cents. But exactly as you've clarified, there are multiple factors at work.

It may be a thread per track, but how a DAW responds to playing in live vs. playing back an unarmed track is very different. Hence ASIO Guard, hence Dropout Protection.

It also comes down to practical use. I don't think I've ever needed to even come close to triggering 1000 voices on a longs patch myself!


----------



## babylonwaves

Jett Hitt said:


> One instance of High Strings playing 16th notes in octaves at 108 BPM overloads my 5,1 12 Core. Something isn't right.


which DAW? which buffer size? how much RAM do you have installed? which mics are on in SF player?


----------



## Hendrixon

@paulthomson
Your load that works fine is above
DJ's is bellow


----------



## ed buller

Hendrixon said:


> 1. Buffer size
> 2. Voice count per instance (3? 41? 700?)


buffer is a 256. I haven't touched the Voice count so it's "as is"...Also they are all in surround so 3 mic stems used. Close Decca (LF RF ) and Surround for ( RL RR ). Drive is the BBCSO drive I bought from SPITFIRE. It's been housed internally. 

Computer is:
Intel i9 10980XE 18 Core 36 Threads 4.6GHz
Asus X299-A II
256GB DDR4 RAM 3200MHz




best

e


----------



## Hendrixon

ed buller said:


> I haven't touched the Voice count so it's "as is"



Ed, look on the picture I've posted.
We're talking about the real time generated voice count, not the limit setting in the player config.


----------



## TintoL

How it has been the experience for the owners of the BBCSO? Are there known performance factors in that library? because it also sounds stunningly awesome.


----------



## ed buller

TintoL said:


> How it has been the experience for the owners of the BBCSO? Are there known performance factors in that library? because it also sounds stunningly awesome.


not a one...other than some nonsense in the early stages with the APP and repairs...but that got fixed very quickly.

e


----------



## ed buller

Hendrixon said:


> Ed, look on the picture I've posted.
> We're talking about the real time generated voice count, not the limit setting in the player config.


varies.....but not in triple figures

e


----------



## lucor

I've also had performance issues with Abbey Road (though not nearly as bad as DJ), but dropping the 'Preload Size' in the SF player from 12288 to 30000 now allows me to have some fairly dense orchestration with 2 active mics at a 128 buffer. It also nearly doubled the RAM usage, but that for me isn't a problem fortunately.

Overall the performance of the SF is still much worse than Kontakt though, I hope they'll continue to improve it.

EDIT: I should also mention that my biggest problem wasn't CPU (though that's also far worse than Kontakt), but simply voices dropping out.


----------



## Hendrixon

ed buller said:


> varies.....but not in triple figures
> 
> e



Viola


----------



## Mike Fox

Hendrixon said:


> I thought I mixed you with someone else on this, but no it is you. I mean you don't like wet libs, right?
> But you wrote you bought SCS and SSS...


No, i like wet libraries, just not overly wet libraries that lack the options to control it.

You gonna get off my balls now?


----------



## Mike Fox

Hendrixon said:


> @paulthomson
> Your load that works fine is above
> DJ's is bellow



Pretty hefty voice count difference!


----------



## ed buller

Hendrixon said:


> Viola



But TBH i'm curious...How would you get to triple figures with an orchestral composition. ?

best

e


----------



## prodigalson

Are we sure that it's not a result of the screen recording/streaming software he was likely using at the same time?

If so, I wonder if this is a Logic vs. Cubase and/or PC vs Mac issue. As I posted earlier in this thread, I created the first 6 bars of the Star Wars Opening with 14 instances of AR1 with 4 mics on each. Playing back my CPU barely hits 25%. Buffer is at 256. Most demanding patches hit no higher than 150-200 voices.

Thats on Logic 10.5.1. Daniel uses Cubase on a Mac.

I just tried to recreate his issues by pulling up his patches (Hi and Low strings) with 2 mics and playing dense chords both tracks armed, my CPU tickles 50% and voice count gets up to about 200 without any issues. Added in 2 more mics (4 total) and CPU gets pretty close to 100% occasionally hitting over 500 voices per track but I don't get any dropouts and no clicks Still on 256.

I then did the same test in Cubase 10.5 (also on Mac) with buffer of 256. Interestingly, I had no issues on 2 mics though it was making my CPU work harder. It required loading up the 4 mics to get the issues Daniel was experiencing. I then increased the buffer to 2048 and while I no longer got any pops or clicks and my meters looked OK, I was getting a lot of dropped voices (each track hitting over 500)

My machine is 16" Macbook Pro with 2.3Ghz 8-core i9. samples on SSD and 64gb RAM

TL;DR: Abbey Road One seems significantly more efficient for me on Logic on my Mac than on Cubase. But still had to push it harder to experience what Daniel was experiencing.


----------



## Hendrixon

ed buller said:


> But TBH i'm curious...How would you get to triple figures with an orchestral composition. ?
> 
> best
> 
> e



In kontakt? its super easy, building a multi.
For example I have one I've built for CSS with each section using my own mics mix. that one can get to 200-300 voices easily in a single kontakt instance.
I either use it as an ensemble for sketching (all on a single midi channel), or break it anyway I want.


----------



## paulthomson

OK I'm not going to get too deep into this as I've got an absolute ton of work to do lol!

However I just ran a very quick test and to get to 100% CPU and my first crackle took 4 instances of the AR full orchestra patch - 3 with 3 mics, one with 2 mics, playing every single key on the keyboard over the whole range (C1 to C7)

This is so clearly absurd in terms of real use, but seems at least to demonstrate that you can get plenty of voices out before you hit problems. I'm sure splitting the voice load over more instances would yield higher voice counts but thats a rabbit hole I don't presently have time to explore!

HTH

edit: oh and spec - 2017 imac pro


----------



## dcoscina

I'm using AR1 in Studio One 5 but my initial demo "Race to Oblvion" was done all on LPX. All demos have been done on my MP 6,1 6 core with 64gb ram. All streaming from TB SSD. Using multiple mics (Mix 1, Vintage, Spill, Close).. No clicks, stutters, pops or whatever....

@prodigalson I also thought the same thing- screen capture or record programs using SoundFlower or whatever could impact any real time quality of playing


----------



## paulthomson

and yes - if you run screencast / screenflow software it massively reduces performance in real terms - thats why I use an outboard screen recorder now from Black Magic for my video capture.


----------



## ed buller

Hendrixon said:


> In kontakt? its super easy, building a multi.
> For example I have one I've built for CSS with each section using my own mics mix. that one can get to 200-300 voices easily in a single kontakt instance.
> I either use it as an ensemble for sketching (all on a single midi channel), or break it anyway I want.


all I'm saying...is in real life applications ALL the composers I work with have No problems with spitfire player and voice counts . Neither do I...not a one...And believe me when Hans's strings came out I was " why not Kontakt ?"....but it's fine.......Also ....you are better having LOT's of instances of Kontakt rather than a few running lot's of samples.

e


----------



## Kevperry777

Mike Fox said:


> Considering Abbey as my $350 purchase to get Aperture, but am wondering how the CPU performance has been for others, especially after watching DJ's walkthrough and seeing all those pops and clicks.



Great here on a 16 inch MacBook Pro. 7 and 8 mics with no clicks.


----------



## jbuhler

ed buller said:


> I have about 30 instances of AROOF open in Cubase 11...not a single problem



I don’t have AROOF but have plenty of SF Player libraries and never have had an issue with it aside from occasionally needing to repair them for unexplained reasons. It’s true I don’t tend to use 4 or 5 mics on the same instance. But I’ve greatly exceeded 400-500 voices across instances on many occasions. Symphonic Motions sometime causes issues I presume because of time stretching of the samples. Kepler and the total performance patch of the solo strings (both Kontakt instruments) also give me issues. Mine is not a super advanced machine: 2015 i7 quad iMac with 64GB, no VEP.


----------



## Jett Hitt

Here is an example of what happens to me with Abbey Road One.

Abbey Road Example

This is on a Mac 5,1 12 Core 64BG RAM buffer setting 256. It does this whether I have screen record enabled or not. The error message says that there is a conflict with an external device. My external devices are SSDs and Apogee Duet. I find it difficult to believe that it is truly an external conflict because no other libraries have ever had this sort of conflict, including BBCSO Pro. If this is the SA player, it is the first trouble I have ever had with it. This is a fairly simple example, and note that the top note isn't even sounding. Mostly this file will play fine until I get quite a bit of movement in the High Strings. I have also had this problem with Woodwinds.

There may just be some sophomoric error that I am making here, but I have used this system for years and never experienced anything like it.

Edit: This is Mix 1


----------



## Peter Satera

Hendrixon said:


> In kontakt? its super easy, building a multi.
> For example I have one I've built for CSS with each section using my own mics mix. that one can get to 200-300 voices easily in a single kontakt instance.
> I either use it as an ensemble for sketching (all on a single midi channel), or break it anyway I want.



Is that not comparable to what we're getting in Abbey? It seems we're pushing a single instance, to see how far it can go, as there's no problem if we were to break it up. 

Five instruments of CSS, played at once, 3 mics with no struggle at 200-300 voices. Sure. Here, I have 3 mics brushing 480 voices (which is seen at release), no drops. I'm struggling to think of another library which can fairly compare _5 Mic_ ensemble in kontakt with the same voice count.

It's real world usage as Paul said. Do you need _all the mics and_ have all your fingers playing at the same time? It's a lot of work for a single core at any buffer rate.

View attachment 2020-11-25 16-37-38.mp4


----------



## Hendrixon

Its so hard putting across stuff like that in a text forum, but I'll try 

Just to give context, in my professional life I've also designed server farms, couple of them had to support +10,000 concurrent users (one in BSkyB and another in Deutsche Telekom).
I've programmed and ran hundreds of stress tests, designed load balancing layers, fail-safes you name it... and all that in the end filled an excel sheet that breaks down cost vs load.

The main thing is, don't think in absolutes like "I'm triggering 150 voices, I get no clicks, so all is fine".
Its not about getting 150 or 500 voices from a single instance or if its at all logical as an actual user user experience.
I hope this comparison will _show_ things better then words:





1. Epic Strings playing 100 voices: [email protected]% / [email protected]%
2. Kontakt CSS playing 100 voices: [email protected]% / [email protected]%

** Epic uses x2.6 more cpu for the same performance.
** Also pay attention to the disk utilization, the SA player keeps streaming from disk all the time as notes are held. in kontakt there is an initial load as notes are pressed and then it drops to 0 (zero), probably streamed from ram. bottom line disk utilization is dynamically optimized, leading to less cpu and mem i/o controller load.

3. I tried to match the cpu load of Epic (13%) in kontakt, to see how many voices my system can produce at that load. at just 10% cpu load I got over 250 voices... so easily more then x2.5 (probably like x3) voices per same load. remember the disk utilization, it dropped to zero again while Epic was 13% constant.

4. Here I wanted to match what will be the system load of Epic Strings when doing 250 voices:
[email protected]% / [email protected]% (compared to [email protected]% / [email protected]% in kontakt)
We have x3 the cpu load... and the disk utilization... well its in front of you.

That's it, this should be clear to anyone

But to make it even clearer:
Assume a score, all in kontakt, that loads a whole VEP slave.
If you will run that SAME score, all with the SA player, you will need between 2.5 to 3 slaves.

Clearer?

Honestly, I don't care if anyone here gets this, but I will be disappointed if Paul or Karma or Christian who ever is the CTO in SA won't get it and acknowledge this.

Cheers


----------



## thesteelydane

Hendrixon said:


> Its so hard putting across stuff like that in a text forum, but I'll try
> 
> Just to give context, in my professional life I've also designed server farms, couple of them had to support +10,000 concurrent users (one in BSkyB and another in Deutsche Telekom).
> I've programmed and ran hundreds of stress tests, designed load balancing layers, fail-safes you name it... and all that in the end filled an excel sheet that breaks down cost vs load.
> 
> The main thing is, don't think in absolutes like "I'm triggering 150 voices, I get no clicks, so all is fine".
> Its not about getting 150 or 500 voices from a single instance or if its at all logical as an actual user user experience.
> I hope this comparison will _show_ things better then words:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Epic Strings playing 100 voices: [email protected]% / [email protected]%
> 2. Kontakt CSS playing 100 voices: [email protected]% / [email protected]%
> 
> ** Epic uses x2.6 more cpu for the same performance.
> ** Also pay attention to the disk utilization, the SA player keeps streaming from disk all the time as notes are held. in kontakt there is an initial load as notes are pressed and then it drops to 0 (zero), probably streamed from ram. bottom line disk utilization is dynamically optimized, leading to less cpu and mem i/o controller load.
> 
> 3. I tried to match the cpu load of Epic (13%) in kontakt, to see how many voices my system can produce at that load. at just 10% cpu load I got over 250 voices... so easily more then x2.5 (probably like x3) voices per same load. remember the disk utilization, it dropped to zero again while Epic was 13% constant.
> 
> 4. Here I wanted to match what will be the system load of Epic Strings when doing 250 voices:
> [email protected]% / [email protected]% (compared to [email protected]% / [email protected]% in kontakt)
> We have x3 the cpu load... and the disk utilization... well its in front of you.
> 
> That's it, this should be clear to anyone
> 
> But to make it even clearer:
> Assume a score, all in kontakt, that loads a whole VEP slave.
> If you will run that SAME score, all with the SA player, you will need between 2.5 to 3 slaves.
> 
> Clearer?
> 
> Honestly, I don't care if anyone here gets this, but I will be disappointed if Paul or Karma or Christian who ever is the CTO in SA won't get it and acknowledge this.
> 
> Cheers



Ah, but isn't the issue here RAM vs disk streaming, if we're being honest? I mean we all know a lower memory buffer means less RAM taken, but higher CPU load and vice versa? Look at the numbers, 194 MB vs 3,6 GB. That's a huge discrepancy!


----------



## muadgil

Hendrixon said:


> Its so hard putting across stuff like that in a text forum, but I'll try
> 
> Just to give context, in my professional life I've also designed server farms, couple of them had to support +10,000 concurrent users (one in BSkyB and another in Deutsche Telekom).
> I've programmed and ran hundreds of stress tests, designed load balancing layers, fail-safes you name it... and all that in the end filled an excel sheet that breaks down cost vs load.
> 
> The main thing is, don't think in absolutes like "I'm triggering 150 voices, I get no clicks, so all is fine".
> Its not about getting 150 or 500 voices from a single instance or if its at all logical as an actual user user experience.
> I hope this comparison will _show_ things better then words:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Epic Strings playing 100 voices: [email protected]% / [email protected]%
> 2. Kontakt CSS playing 100 voices: [email protected]% / [email protected]%
> 
> ** Epic uses x2.6 more cpu for the same performance.
> ** Also pay attention to the disk utilization, the SA player keeps streaming from disk all the time as notes are held. in kontakt there is an initial load as notes are pressed and then it drops to 0 (zero), probably streamed from ram. bottom line disk utilization is dynamically optimized, leading to less cpu and mem i/o controller load.
> 
> 3. I tried to match the cpu load of Epic (13%) in kontakt, to see how many voices my system can produce at that load. at just 10% cpu load I got over 250 voices... so easily more then x2.5 (probably like x3) voices per same load. remember the disk utilization, it dropped to zero again while Epic was 13% constant.
> 
> 4. Here I wanted to match what will be the system load of Epic Strings when doing 250 voices:
> [email protected]% / [email protected]% (compared to [email protected]% / [email protected]% in kontakt)
> We have x3 the cpu load... and the disk utilization... well its in front of you.
> 
> That's it, this should be clear to anyone
> 
> But to make it even clearer:
> Assume a score, all in kontakt, that loads a whole VEP slave.
> If you will run that SAME score, all with the SA player, you will need between 2.5 to 3 slaves.
> 
> Clearer?
> 
> Honestly, I don't care if anyone here gets this, but I will be disappointed if Paul or Karma or Christian who ever is the CTO in SA won't get it and acknowledge this.
> 
> Cheers


I think you should take a deep breathe and have a warm tea with biscuits


----------



## Peter Satera

I get your point Hendrixon. Voice to Voice in your example the spitfire app is more expensive on CPU load. You are showing a massive difference in ram usage. In comparison to Kontakt though, it's obviously more mature. .

There was talk about an advanced spitfire player I'm not sure if it's still in progress though. I think what we're seeing here, is even though it is more expensive, it's still very operable.


----------



## ed buller

Peter Satera said:


> I get your point Hendrixon. Voice to Voice in your example the spitfire app is more expensive on CPU load. You are showing a massive difference in ram usage. In comparison to Kontakt though, it's obviously more mature. .
> 
> There was talk about an advanced spitfire player I'm not sure if it's still in progress though. I think what we're seeing here, is even though it is more expensive, it's still very operable.


THIS

it works fine !!. And TBH I really really don't want people to be put off by a new member (no disrespect honest !) saying this plug-in has problems when it just doesn't . The thing is Abbey Road really is a fantastic sounding Library, and well worth having.

best

e


----------



## babylonwaves

@Hendrixon 

playing a single note in CSS/Kontakt results in a display of 30 voices. Doing the same in SF player, result is a display of 1 voice. shouldn't you factor that in a little before you compare voices vs cpu hit?


----------



## JohnG

Peter Satera said:


> I think what we're seeing here, is even though it is more expensive, it's still very operable.



Exactly.

I never saw so much heat over something so inconsequential. Get VE Pro, raise your buffer, make music.



ed buller said:


> Abbey Road really is a fantastic sounding Library, and well worth having.



yes indeed.


----------



## drews

ed buller said:


> THIS
> 
> it works fine !!. And TBH I really really don't want people to be put off by a new member (no disrespect honest !) saying this plug-in has problems when it just doesn't . The thing is Abbey Road really is a fantastic sounding Library, and well worth having.
> 
> best
> 
> e


No offense to you either but you own a computer that has an 18 core CPU and 256gb of RAM so i'd imagine there would be a very very large issue if you noticed performance issues.


----------



## Hendrixon

thesteelydane said:


> Ah, but isn't the issue here RAM vs disk streaming, if we're being honest? I mean we all know a lower memory buffer means less RAM taken, but higher CPU load and vice versa? Look at the numbers, 194 MB vs 3,6 GB. That's a huge discrepancy!



That's because Epic is a 2.4GB lib and CSS is 32GB 

But good catch, that got me to check the SA player config, and it seems the default pre-load buffer size is 12kb while kontakt's is 60kb. massive difference, right?
So I set Epic's pre-load to 60kb, and also changed CSS to Performance Con Moto Violins A (2.5GB) to make a level comparison.

Well, to my disappointment the performance remained the same

The SA player has another parameter, which kontakt doesn't have (or its not exposed to users) and that's the Stream Buffer Size. default is 64kb, I set it to max (976kb).
Sad to report, cpu reported the same load (12%-13%).
The disk utilization? it fluctuated between 0% to +30% like a sine wave!
I lowered the buffer size and tested again and again... no effect on cpu load and best stable disk load was at default 64kb.


I'm open to more ideas as I'm now a self nominated QA in SA


----------



## Hendrixon

babylonwaves said:


> @Hendrixon
> 
> playing a single note in CSS/Kontakt results in a display of 30 voices. Doing the same in SF player, result is a display of 1 voice. shouldn't you factor that in a little before you compare voices vs cpu hit?



Your system doesn't care how many keys you pressed, it sees voices (audio streams) that it needs to process. imagine dumping tape tracks from real to pc, does it matter if you stream 8 tracks from a single tape or 4 tracks from two tape machines?
No, your pc will just see 8 tracks coming in... same with voices.


----------



## ed buller

drews said:


> No offense to you either but you own a computer that has an 18 core CPU and 256gb of RAM so i'd imagine there would be a very very large issue if you noticed performance issues.


True..but it worked fine on my last computer too...that was a 10 year old i3

best

e


----------



## Hendrixon

thesteelydane said:


> Sorry, what?



lol
You said the memory size is different "194 MB vs 3,6 GB".
In order to make comparisons even, I replaced CSS (32GB) with another library that will match Epic Strings (2.4GB). so I chose Violins A from Con Moto library (performance samples) which is 2.5GB in total.

Memory pre-load now was the same.


----------



## Jett Hitt

ed buller said:


> The thing is Abbey Road really is a fantastic sounding Library, and well worth having.



No one is saying it isn’t. It is in fact the best thing I’ve ever heard from Spitfire. I’m terribly excited about it, and I’ll be first in line to buy the modules when they come out. However, when one patch can bring a 12 core machine to its knees playing two voices, something’s not right.


----------



## Mike Fox

JohnG said:


> ExGet VE Pro



John, are you suggesting you should buy VEP to get Abbey to perform optimally?


----------



## ed buller

Jett Hitt said:


> No one is saying it isn’t. It is in fact the best thing I’ve ever heard from Spitfire. I’m terribly excited about it, and I’ll be first in line to buy the modules when they come out. However, when one patch can bring a 12 core machine to its knees playing two voices, something’s not right.


it can't !!!

e


----------



## Jett Hitt

ed buller said:


> it can't !!!
> 
> e


I have clearly demonstrated that it can.


----------



## babylonwaves

Hendrixon said:


> Your system doesn't care how many keys you pressed, it sees voices (audio streams) that it needs to process. imagine dumping tape tracks from real to pc, does it matter if you stream 8 tracks from a single tape or 4 tracks from two tape machines?
> No, your pc will just see 8 tracks coming in... same with voices.


if you take synths for example, a voice can be one or many oscillators. with sample libs you might play one note and that note might require 3 stereo streams. or only one. still you can call all this one voice or 6 six voice. that's why your comparison is off. the point is that you cannot compare the costs of a voice from different players because you don't know what a voice really means.

I could go on and take apart the details of your posts but since you don't strike me as a person who listens a lot, let's just agree to disagree. good luck.


----------



## ed buller

Jett Hitt said:


> I have clearly demonstrated that it can.


this:  ?


you are playing two notes at a time yes? so something else must be causing this because your voice count and CPU load is insane. Just be reasonable for a second...how on earth could they sell this if this is what happens when somebody plays a basic patch in Octaves ?

it does NOT make sense. The fault lies elsewhere NOT the software

best

e


----------



## JohnG

Mike Fox said:


> John, are you suggesting you should buy VEP to get Abbey to perform optimally?



IDK why anyone who does this thing doesn't already own VE Pro. Some DAWs run far, far more efficiently with it, leaving aside Abbey Road. 

@Ashermusic is always recommending it, for one. I have it on all my computers (except the Pro Tools rig -- unnecessary as I don't use PT for midi or VSTs).

Or raise your buffer. I use whatever it takes to get the best sound I can. It's hard enough to write good music, hard enough to make it sound good; computers are cheap.


----------



## Kevperry777

This is just curious. I’m very much a rookie and I don’t have VE pro. I have a MacBook Pro with 32gb of ram. My samples sit on my system drive. I use Logic and Studio One. AROOF has been solid with no issues. Heck, if you remember from another thread, I even loaded up every percussion sound in AROOF in one instance to make a “mega drum.” Sounded amazing...and played smoothly.


----------



## ed buller

Jett Hitt said:


> I have clearly demonstrated that it can.








you have a clock / sample rate issue. The external playback device sound card is causing you grief....NOT the plug-in

Best

e


----------



## Mike Fox

JohnG said:


> IDK why anyone who does this thing doesn't already own VE Pro. Some DAWs run far, far more efficiently with it, leaving aside Abbey Road.
> 
> @Ashermusic is always recommending it, for one. I have it on all my computers (except the Pro Tools rig -- unnecessary as I don't use PT for midi or VSTs).
> 
> Or raise your buffer. I use whatever it takes to get the best sound I can. It's hard enough to write good music, hard enough to make it sound good; computers are cheap.


I simply don't need VE Pro. I have 4 SSDs loaded with samples, and have ZERO issues with performance, so spending more money on 3rd party software just so I can get _one _sample library (AR1) to run properly is kinda silly.

Besides, there's a huge fundamental difference between adjusting your buffer size, and then having to buy extra software just to get a sample library to properly work. It shouldn't have to be a requisite, requirement, or recommendation, imo.

It's not like this is a newer library that needs the latest version of Kontakt, or some other update.


----------



## Hendrixon

ed buller said:


> And TBH I really really don't want people to be put off by a new member (no disrespect honest !)



<- None taken  

Just to be clear, I think AR1 sounds sublime and if Aperture Orchestra was like the 2019 strings, I would have bought AR1 now.

The perception that the SA player is "good enough"? is valid and realistic, as Paul showed.
But the fact that the SA player is not even half as efficient as the platform that it replaced? is reality.
I own SA products, I plan to own more, but I don't think that good enough is good because good enough means I need to invest more in hardware.

Would anyone complain if the SA player outperformed kontakt? ed? john?
*drinking tea with biscuits*


----------



## ed buller

Hendrixon said:


> <- None taken
> 
> Just to be clear, I think AR1 sounds sublime and if Aperture Orchestra was like the 2019 strings, I would have bought AR1 now.
> 
> The perception that the SA player is "good enough"? is valid and realistic, as Paul showed.
> But the fact that the SA player is not even half as efficient as the platform that it replaced? is reality.
> I own SA products, I plan to own more, but I don't think that good enough is good because good enough means I need to invest more in hardware.
> 
> Would anyone complain if the SA player outperformed kontakt? ed? john?
> *drinking tea with biscuits*


maybe I'm weird but I really don't like Kontakt ! I think it sounds crap too...It works yes but really in 15 years it's not that different. I actually think the spitfire app sounds better ! It's so easy to clip Kontakt and to my ears things sound kinda grainy.

best

e


----------



## method1

Cubase 11, i7-8700k hackintosh, 128 buffer and cpu hitting around 45% and disk 30% (SSD), 3 instances each at a 500ish voice count.

In standard use though I never get anywhere close to this.

The SF player clearly isn't as efficient as Kontakt or especially Synchron player, and I'm sure we're all hoping it'll see some improvements, but that said AR1 has been plenty workable for me so far!


----------



## Jett Hitt

ed buller said:


> you have a clock / sample rate issue. The external playback device sound card is causing you grief....NOT the plug-in
> 
> Best
> 
> e


I have read that message and considered this possibility. However, this happens in no other library, and I have many, including SSO, BBCSO, CSS, EastWest Hollywood, etc. Why would the Apogee Duet only have issues with this library? Furthermore, I can play all of these libraries together and have no issue. In this instance, I can't play one patch.

Edit: So long as the part doesn't get too busy, it plays just fine. If this were a sample rate issue, this would not be the case.


----------



## ed buller

Jett Hitt said:


> I have read that message and considered this possibility. However, this happens in no other library, and I have many, including SSO, BBCSO, CSS, EastWest Hollywood, etc. Why would the Apogee Duet only have issues with this library? Furthermore, I can play all of these libraries together and have no issue. In this instance, I can't play one patch.



so you don't have this with BBC ?.....same player no ?

again its NOT the library. I'd remove it completely and do a fresh instal

e


----------



## Hendrixon

method1 said:


> The SF player clearly isn't as efficient as Kontakt or especially Synchron player, and I'm sure we're all hoping it'll see some improvements



In order to have hope, Spitfire needs to acknowledge that they are aware of this huge efficiency gap and that they will work to improve that. at the current state of things, Karma of Spitfire (I have no idea what his position is in the company) stated that on his system it works fine, and Paul also thinks that in a normal project it works fine so everything is fine.

In other words, if according to them the efficiency is fine, then hope won't get us far


----------



## Jett Hitt

ed buller said:


> so you don't have this with BBC ?.....same player no ?
> 
> again its NOT the library. I'd remove it completely and do a fresh instal
> 
> e


I do not have this problem with BBC. Just out of curiosity, I loaded the patch into VePro 7, and it was much much better. However, there is a consistent pop on the last note of that run at the end. Somehow, Abbey Road is not playing nice with Logic is my best guess.


----------



## ed buller

Jett Hitt said:


> I do not have this problem with BBC. Just out of curiosity, I loaded the patch into VePro 7, and it was much much better. However, there is a consistent pop on the last note of that run at the end. Somehow, Abbey Road is not playing nice with Logic is my best guess.


it makes no sense. as the player is identical to BBC i think. Also there is not a known issue with Abbey Road and logic. I repeat . re-instal

e


----------



## ed buller

Jett Hitt said:


> I Somehow, Abbey Road is not playing nice with Logic is my best guess.



that is the DAW of choice though for the people who built it ?

best

e


----------



## Jett Hitt

ed buller said:


> it makes no sense. as the player is identical to BBC i think. Also there is not a known issue with Abbey Road and logic. I repeat . re-instal
> 
> e


Well, yeah I might eventually. The brass is working fine. The thing is, if you go to the end of the world, I live about 20 miles past that, and the gerbil that is powering my internet is resting and being fed an extra ration to download Berlin Strings, which I estimate will finish sometime in late April.


----------



## method1

Hendrixon said:


> In order to have hope, Spitfire needs to acknowledge that they are aware of this huge efficiency gap and that they will work to improve that. at the current state of things, Karma of Spitfire (I have no idea what his position is in the company) stated that on his system it works fine, and Paul also thinks that in a normal project it works fine so everything is fine.
> 
> In other words, if according to them the efficiency is fine, then hope won't get us far



100% agree with you there, I have held off on SF products for a long time due to technical issues, but I caved on this one!


----------



## Rory

I started at page 1 and quickly realised that reading all 48 pages of this thread will be a mind-numbing experience. As an owner of BBC Pro, I'd really appreciate input on three questions from people who already have, and are using, Abbey Road:

1. Why would an owner of an orchestral library, in my case BBC Pro*, purchase this? What does it add? I am aware of Christian Henson's video on this issue, but would appreciate the views of owners.

2. Would you purchase the library if there wasn't a promise of future modules; in other words, does it stand on its own as a useful tool?

3. As the owner of a 2018 Mac mini with a 3.2Ghz 6 Core i7 CPU and 64GB of RAM, should I expect processing problems and, if so, at what stress point? Yes, I also started to read this thread backwards from page 48, which is when I realised that I will not survive reading all 48 pages.

I really appreciate input. Brief replies are great. Thanks.


* I also own Joby Burgess Percussion and Frank Ricotti Mallets.


----------



## jdrcomposer

Rory said:


> I started at page 1 and quickly realised that reading all 48 pages of this thread will be a mind-numbing experience. As an owner of BBC Pro, I'd really appreciate input on three questions from people who already have, and are using, Abbey Road:
> 
> 1. Why would an owner of an orchestral library, in my case BBC Pro*, purchase this? What does it add? I am aware of Christian Henson's video on this issue, but would appreciate the views of owners.
> 
> 2. Would you purchase the library if there wasn't a promise of future modules; in other words, does it stand on its own as a useful tool?
> 
> 3. As the owner of a 2018 Mac mini with a 3.2Ghz 6 Core i7 CPU and 64GB of RAM, should I expect processing problems and, if so, at what stress point? Yes, I also started to read this thread backwards from page 48, which is when I realised that I will not survive reading all 48 pages.
> 
> I really appreciate input. Thanks.
> 
> 
> * I also own Joby Burgess Percussion and Frank Ricotti Mallets.




1. I have HO as a full orchestra library, but use AROOF as a glue and bedding (really just 2-3 HO tracks and the rest are AROOF). I just can't get that sound with anything else. It breathes and has a sense of space that is unbelievable, and you can pretty easily get your HO patches to mix with it with a bit of Spaces. 

2. Before I used it, I wouldn't have bought without the promise of future modules. Now that I've been using it every day on 95% of jobs, I can say I don't feel the need for the additional modules for what I do (legato for strings and horns would be nice, but those trumpets and low strings...man they're good)

3. I have a 2016 Mac Pro with 16 GB of RAM and a 3.5 Ghz six-core processor. No processing problems thus far. I've been stress testing with John Williams stuff and have run into zero dropouts while using 2 mic positions (mix and spill)

Even though you own the JB percussion, I think you'll find that the percussion in this have much more oomph. The bass drum/snare patch has been used on every project I've done since getting it, and the glock has replaced any other glock I've used previously.


----------



## Rory

Thanks @jdrcomposer. Your post is really helpful.


----------



## David Kudell

I’m fortunate to own almost every Spitfire library and I much prefer the Spitfire player. The interface is so much better and is a pleasure to work with compared to the tiny Kontakt window.

Performance has never been an issue. It just isn’t. I’m on an iMac running Cubase.

Looking forward to purchasing my copy of Abbey Road One this Black Friday weekend.


----------



## Jett Hitt

David Kudell said:


> I’m fortunate to own almost every Spitfire library and I much prefer the Spitfire player. The interface is so much better and is a pleasure to work with compared to the tiny Kontakt window.
> 
> Performance has never been an issue. It just isn’t. I’m on an iMac running Cubase.
> 
> Looking forward to purchasing my copy of Abbey Road One this Black Friday weekend.


Mostly, I agree with this. Prior to Abbey Road One (AR1), I never ever had a problem. I find the user interface to be very pleasant and intuitive. I like it much better than Kontakt. I have been hearing people dump on it since forever, and largely I think these complaints are unfounded and faddish. I find it to be an elegant and well laid out interface.

As for efficiency, well that's another matter. I can load any patch and play it so long as my playing doesn't become too animated. This suggests to me that there is nothing wrong with my sample rate (as suggested above), and there is nothing wrong with the copy I downloaded (also suggested above). It also seems quite odd that AR1 works much better in VePro 7 than Logic. Something is amiss, and I do hope that Spitfire addresses it after they've stuffed their pockets during the holiday sales.


----------



## CT

Jett Hitt said:


> Mostly, I agree with this. Prior to Abbey Road One (AR1), I never ever had a problem. I find the user interface to be very pleasant and intuitive. I like it much better than Kontakt. I have been hearing people dump on it since forever, and largely I think these complaints are unfounded and faddish. I find it to be an elegant and well laid out interface.
> 
> As for efficiency, well that's another matter. I can load any patch and play it so long as my playing doesn't become too animated. This suggests to me that there is nothing wrong with my sample rate (as suggested above), and there is nothing wrong with the copy I downloaded (also suggested above). It also seems quite odd that AR1 works much better in VePro 7 than Logic. Something is amiss, and I do hope that Spitfire addresses it after they've stuffed their pockets during the holiday sales.



I haven't read this entire conversation, but you've surely contacted support about this right?

My computer is more than eight years old at this point, and has never struggled with any of Spitfire's player libraries, whereas others with cutting edge machines have been absolutely crippled. There are so many variables involved in why something may or may not work with a given system specification, you really need to be in touch directly to arrive at the right solution for your situation.


----------



## ed buller

Mike T said:


> I haven't read this entire conversation, but you've surely contacted support about this right?
> 
> My computer is more than eight years old at this point, and has never struggled with any of Spitfire's player libraries, whereas others with cutting edge machines have been absolutely crippled. There are so many variables involved in why something may or may not work with a given system specification, you really need to be in touch directly to arrive at the right solution for your situation.


good advice

e


----------



## babylonwaves

Jett Hitt said:


> This suggests to me that there is nothing wrong with my sample rate (as suggested above), and there is nothing wrong with the copy I downloaded (also suggested above). It also seems quite odd that AR1 works much better in VePro 7 than Logic.



I know the sampling rate error. And if I remember correctly, you mostly get it when the last CPU core is overloading. Logic renders the channel strip in focus (the one you select and record) + the summing chain on a single core with a lower latency whereas it distributes things on a channel strip to various cores when a track is not in focus. You know that from benchmarks, there is a single and a multi core figure. This is a situation where the single core performance of your CPU is important.

This is a guitar track with a couple of plugins solo'ed and in focus:






Same track solo'ed and not in focus;






See the difference? I could imagine that your setup does something similar. A good way to make this better is to use the low latency recording switch in logic. it'll bypass some of the plug-ins on the channel (and the summing channel) and you'll get less (or no crackles). you engage the switch when a channel causes you trouble.

I don't know if above will solve you issue but it might help.


----------



## drews

So got a question (or issue) for some of the more tech savvy people here. I got HZ strings that used the spitfire player, well when I select multiple techniques, and then also select multiple mic positions in a single instance I can’t play more than a few notes without audio/buffer/CPU getting overloaded. Specifically it’s the same issue that Daniel James was having in his video of abbey road one, and I can link it in a bit if I need to.

Specs of my computer is a Ryzen 3950x 16 core CPU, 32gb DDR4, and all my sample libraries are on NVME SSD’s. Looking at task manager, CPU 1 spikes to 100% which is what’s causing it but everything else stays pretty baseline, and after CPU 7 out of 32 nothing is being utilized at all and my overall CPU package usage is only 8-10%.

I’m using Reaper, but have tested it in Cubase and ableton and those have the same behavior, and all my daws are running under max performance power plan and all that on windows 10.

In theory I have to have a setting wrong because spitfire player should be able to offload processes to other CPU cores/threads before CPU 1 hits 100%, but I don’t know if I just don’t have some weird setting on that would allow that to happen. In a bit I’m going to test a few more things like disabling SMU, disabling different CCX’s, or even I guess might try to disable a CCD.

Appreciate any advice or help! I just want to get this figured out before I decide to buy abbey road one


----------



## drews

HZ Strings Problems on PC


So I’ve had HZ Strings for a while, and have sadly found it almost unusable due to sample playback issues. Im running on a Windows 10 machine with 8 core i7, 64 gb of Ram, SSDs, Apollo Twin Thunderbolt set to 44.1 with 512 buffer and this is an issue I only encounter with HZ Strings...




vi-control.net





A person in that thread was having the same issue a year ago. He never posted a solution or that he fixed the problem.

Also it’s kind of funny. Literally every thread about any spitfire performance issues has John G come and say “works great for me no issues here” and doesn’t help anything. So I’m watching Daniel James latest twitch stream and he literally says in his stream “yeah there’s this member on VI control named John G, every other post he does is just works great for me, I like it”

so I’m glad I’m not the only one that noticed and it seems he’s a bit of a meme.


----------



## zolhof

Jett Hitt said:


> It also seems quite odd that AR1 works much better in VePro 7 than Logic. Something is amiss, and I do hope that Spitfire addresses it after they've stuffed their pockets during the holiday sales.



VEPro defaults to 2x buffer, perhaps that's why? The higher you set the buffer multiplier, the less CPU load you will get, at the expense of extra latency (which I hardly notice at 2x, Vienna voodoo). Set the buffer to "none" and test again.

In any case, I'd contact support and troubleshoot it to exhaustion. After the initial BBCSO hiccups, I was sorted out pretty quickly. The Spitfire player runs like butter on my 8-year-old CPU. Their marketing may not be everyone's cup of tea and the QA a bit on the lacking side, but their support is really helpful.


----------



## dcoscina

drews said:


> HZ Strings Problems on PC
> 
> 
> So I’ve had HZ Strings for a while, and have sadly found it almost unusable due to sample playback issues. Im running on a Windows 10 machine with 8 core i7, 64 gb of Ram, SSDs, Apollo Twin Thunderbolt set to 44.1 with 512 buffer and this is an issue I only encounter with HZ Strings...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> vi-control.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A person in that thread was having the same issue a year ago. He never posted a solution or that he fixed the problem.
> 
> Also it’s kind of funny. Literally every thread about any spitfire performance issues has John G come and say “works great for me no issues here” and doesn’t help anything. So I’m watching Daniel James latest twitch stream and he literally says in his stream “yeah there’s this member on VI control named John G, every other post he does is just works great for me, I like it”
> 
> so I’m glad I’m not the only one that noticed and it seems he’s a bit of a meme.


Maybe he’s just trying to provide contrast to the avalanche of complaining that has overtaken this site. And he’s a professional composer so he’s providing some real world experience regarding how these libraries work...


----------



## Hendrixon

drews said:


> HZ Strings Problems on PC
> 
> 
> So I’ve had HZ Strings for a while, and have sadly found it almost unusable due to sample playback issues. Im running on a Windows 10 machine with 8 core i7, 64 gb of Ram, SSDs, Apollo Twin Thunderbolt set to 44.1 with 512 buffer and this is an issue I only encounter with HZ Strings...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> vi-control.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A person in that thread was having the same issue a year ago. He never posted a solution or that he fixed the problem.
> 
> Also it’s kind of funny. Literally every thread about any spitfire performance issues has John G come and say “works great for me no issues here” and doesn’t help anything. So I’m watching Daniel James latest twitch stream and he literally says in his stream “yeah there’s this member on VI control named John G, every other post he does is just works great for me, I like it”
> 
> so I’m glad I’m not the only one that noticed and it seems he’s a bit of a meme.



You have performance problems? on a 3950X system?! ....that's weird
Ohhh... I guess you didn't get the latest vi-c memo, well, according to several well established members of our community, it seems that:

Everything is just fine👌


----------



## drews

Hendrixon said:


> You have performance problems? on a 3950X system?! ....that's weird
> Ohhh... I guess you didn't get the latest vi-c memo, well, according to several well established members of our community, it seems that:
> 
> Everything is just fine👌


Yep...i should at least have a 5950x to be able to get 400 voices lol. This CPU graph really tells a lot, thats the kind of CPU usage thats causing super dropouts and stutter.


----------



## Jett Hitt

Many thanks to Marc @babylonwaves. That was a very helpful illustration, and to @zolhof for the VePro pointers. Also to @ed buller and @Mike T. I fully agree and intend to contact support, but it seems to me with this being Black Weekend, they are probably pretty inundated at the moment. I have a temporary workaround, and I can likely solve all of my problems just by creating a VePro template, which I abandoned when I started using BBCSO just because it worked so smoothly in Logic. Furthermore, @paulthomson is reading and posting in this thread. He is certainly aware of the issue, and if he had a quick fix, he would have already said so. I trust this will work itself out in the near future, just as it did for those with BBCSO issues last year. It is a stunning library on the whole, and I am looking forward to the next installments.


----------



## drews

Troubleshooting update.

I did every other possible CPU core configuration and same thing although I got slightly more performance when I disabled multithreaded which was expected.

I opened a bunch of different reaper instances as a way to force it to use other cores. That also helped a bit but was nowhere near acceptable. It started utilizing other cores but still would spike to 100% briefly on core 1 and have the same issue.

although doing that introduced another problem, having all those instances spiked my SSD to 100% too which would kill everything for a bit until everything got reinitialized. Kinda inside to me it managed to max my NVME speed at 2500mbps. I actually have a PCI gen 4 that I use at a boot drive. I cleared that drive to make room for the library and am currently downloading it. If the library doesn’t max out my 5000mbps SSD then I’ll know it’s an issue with CPU performance.


----------



## Fitz

Can anyone comment on the shorts in this library?


----------



## jdrcomposer

Fitz said:


> Can anyone comment on the shorts in this library?



Lively, full of depth, love the ability to choose the tightness (I usually leave it at zero unless I’m trying to simulate runs). Wind shorts really sparkle and the low brass have a fantastic bite.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

If there are any Logic users out there, here are some articulation maps so you don't need to set them up yourself (or buy them). Hope they're helpful!


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Also, did a test on my iMac and VEP7 does not have pops and crackles when playing a huge amount of voices compared to Logic, but I imagine it has a higher buffer too (still re-familiarizing myself with VEP). However, I don't think I'll use my VEP template for this. I set up another one in Logic that just was disabled tracks with the plugin loaded directly into Logic and practically speaking, even with every instrument playing at the same time with multiple lines going, I'm not even getting close to that upper voice limit on my machine.


----------



## dcoscina

ALittleNightMusic said:


> If there are any Logic users out there, here are some articulation maps so you don't need to set them up yourself (or buy them). Hope they're helpful!


Ha, I did a AR1 template for Studio One 5 a little while back. One with 1 art per track and then another with KS all on one track.


----------



## jbuhler

ed buller said:


> you have a clock / sample rate issue. The external playback device sound card is causing you grief....NOT the plug-in
> 
> Best
> 
> e


I’ve had this sample error issue with Logic and Sine player and I never was able to track down what was causing the issue. I will say that it does manifest as a problem with the plugin because it doesn't happen with any other plugins. And it would continue to happen with new projects. And with all peripherals, including the audio interface, disconnected. Until it stopped happening. For reasons I never was able to figure out. I bring this up here because it seems like this might not be a SA player issue at all but something with Logic.


----------



## jbuhler

babylonwaves said:


> I know the sampling rate error. And if I remember correctly, you mostly get it when the last CPU core is overloading. Logic renders the channel strip in focus (the one you select and record) + the summing chain on a single core with a lower latency whereas it distributes things on a channel strip to various cores when a track is not in focus. You know that from benchmarks, there is a single and a multi core figure. This is a situation where the single core performance of your CPU is important.
> 
> This is a guitar track with a couple of plugins solo'ed and in focus:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same track solo'ed and not in focus;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See the difference? I could imagine that your setup does something similar. A good way to make this better is to use the low latency recording switch in logic. it'll bypass some of the plug-ins on the channel (and the summing channel) and you'll get less (or no crackles). you engage the switch when a channel causes you trouble.
> 
> I don't know if above will solve you issue but it might help.


Yeah, I was getting the issue even when the Sine Player wasn’t in focus and when the core wasn’t saturated.


----------



## drews

Gonna put a warning here. You should probably just read the conclusion at the bottom as everything in between is mostly just commentary of me troubleshooting.

Going through troubleshooting now after I loaded it onto my NVME. I’m going to keep it at 999 voices and 32 maximum pitch voices for consistency and going to keep memory mapping off and I’m turning on every mic position on the first page so I can easily max out the voices and I’m using the 60 cellos all in one patch on hans zimmer strings.

so default values it is using 2.88GB of ram, but quickly gets to 999 voices and CPU 1 which is thread 2 of the first core quickly hits 100% before falling, no other core is being used at all and the disk isn’t doing too badly.

Changing the preload to 50000 makes it play a bit better, load 8GB to memory but still that momentarily CPU spike but when it hits 999 voices it doesn’t freeze up for 15 seconds. Changing preload to 100000 loads 16GB to memory and the weird thing that happens is disk gets super close to 100% even though most of everything should be loaded to memory. 125000 is close to maxing my memory and same behaviour as before. Preload to 1000 (minimum) puts 900MB on my memory and it actually seems to run better and smoother, it doesn’t destroy the audio when it reaches 999 voices and it’s weird because my disk usage is super low, maybe it was put onto a paging file?

so testing it out further I put preload back to default and stream to 1000 which is the minimum. Disk goes up a bit but everything is the same, and changing it to near max destroys everything so I’m keeping stream buffer low. Maximum pitch voices doesn’t seem to change performance in any way. Enabling memory mapping makes it to where I get a minute long hang up any time it hits 999 so I’m going to leave that off.

So at this point the issue really doesn’t seem to be in CPU spikes or memory/SSD performance, but it’s the way spitfire player handles reaching max voices. In Daniel James videos he seems to have the same issue when he hits 500 voices so I’m assuming he has his maximum set to 500 voices. So my real question here, is there any way to set maximum voices above 999? If i had to guess I could handle much much more.

gonna test one more thing. I opened up 6 different tracks and have each track a different mic position to simulate the same thing, I’m curious if this is able to get around the voice limit.

so first impression. It seems to only have an issue when every track gets to 256 voices exactly which based on that number I’m assuming that’s the most voices a single mic position can play without stealing voices. Should be in theory over 1500 voices total though and it plays pretty great and only hangs up if I mash keys to get as many voices as quick as possible. Preloading size set to 100000 gets my memory close to max but still a safe buffer and that seems to be playing better with the 6 different tracks so I’m going to keep it at that from now on. Adding a second mic position from the next page on every tracks gets me over that 256 voices per track but it cuts out super quick, definitely hitting a bottleneck super quick but on my resource monitor it’s not really showing it hit any limits. Putting stream buffer size to minimum so in theory max strain on my SSD actually gives the best result, issues when I hit 320 voices per track across 6 tracks but it doesn’t hang up. Interestingly enough for whatever reason when I put stream buffer size to zero, it ends up using all more cores. Also while maximum pitch voices didn’t change performance when I had the 1 pitch with 6 mics, having 6 tracks with 1 mic each turning maximum pitch voices down helps a lot, I end up being able to load/play 50% more voices. Also turning memory mapping on actually helped this time too.

also just for the fun of it to test performance with it loaded basically all to my SSD and only 900MB on my memory, I’m able to reach about 700 voices before it starts having issues, which in theory means it’s drawing over 4000mbps.

CONCLUSION! for those who are having issues and found this comment or anyone that doesn’t want to read the full thing. In Daniel James video I’m 90% sure his issue was that even though he had the library in his SSD, it still wasn’t fast enough and I say this because I was able to get 2x the voices as him with a NVME SSD about twice as fast as what his would be.

the behavior of slight crackles with a lot of voices would indicate a CPU issue, while lots of voices with major crackles or cut outs is an issue with hard drive. Like I saw Paul say in this thread earlier, gotta put it on an SSD. And the fact is it’s 2020 and a regular SSD isn’t going to cut it. If you’re on PC you should load your best sample libraries on an NVME SSD, and if you’re on Mac you can get an NVME connected to a thunderbolt enclosure that’s still going to be 5x faster than a normal SSD.

unless you have more RAM than the total size of the library, you’re going to be streaming off your SSD. And a regular SSD is going to be a bottleneck if you’re throwing a ton of voices at it and samples are constantly going from memory to SSD. You’re going to have a way better and more fluid experience if you can just put the whole library on an NVME and be able to just stream the samples from the NVME.

so is the spitfire player bad or poorly optimized? No, not in my opinion. You can’t compare voice counts across different libraries and in the case of the Hans zimmer strings, you’re trying to simultaneously pull 1500+ super high quality samples all at once when you’re enabling 5 or more mic positions. Can spitfire make it better? Yeah probably, but as I saw earlier in the thread, there’s no real reason you’d need over 999 voices in one patch other than for the reason of “it sounds good though”. If you require multiple mic positions, separate it into however many patches you need to run smoothly according to your SSD/RAM speed, and just deal with “only” being able to a few mic positions in a record enabled track.


----------



## babylonwaves

jbuhler said:


> I bring this up here because it seems like this might not be a SA player issue at all but something with Logic.


you're right. it's a generic issue. once you start having plug-ins on subgroups and you master, the chance of running into this goes up. and, it depends on the CPU as well. the Mac Pro 2013 12-core for instances has not a great single core performance.


----------



## SpitfireSupport

Jett Hitt said:


> Many thanks to Marc @babylonwaves. That was a very helpful illustration, and to @zolhof for the VePro pointers. Also to @ed buller and @Mike T. I fully agree and intend to contact support, but it seems to me with this being Black Weekend, they are probably pretty inundated at the moment. I have a temporary workaround, and I can likely solve all of my problems just by creating a VePro template, which I abandoned when I started using BBCSO just because it worked so smoothly in Logic. Furthermore, @paulthomson is reading and posting in this thread. He is certainly aware of the issue, and if he had a quick fix, he would have already said so. I trust this will work itself out in the near future, just as it did for those with BBCSO issues last year. It is a stunning library on the whole, and I am looking forward to the next installments.



Hi All,

Firstly, I would like to say I'm sorry to anyone who is experiencing CPU issues and is perhaps becoming frustrated with the performance of AR1.

Whilst it is the Black Weekend, to share some insight, we have have a dedicated technical team who are working a little bit separately to the sales team. This ensures we can support existing issues separately to the sale. I would encourage all suffering CPU / dropout issues to contact us directly and we will work through each case individually.

This really is the best way to sound the alarm as we can spot similarities between users hardware / DAW configurations / plugin formats and so forth on the technicals. Please do contact us.

Cheers
Jack


----------



## drews

also only a little related but my hopes and dreams of getting abbey road one + the free library are shattered as a RTX 3080 just came in stock and I managed to snag one. There goes my “fun” budget for the rest of the year.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Anybody have Cubase expression maps that they'd be willing to share?

Edit: Made some myself. Here you go!


----------



## scoringdreams

I had another go with AR1 and made a track!

The only foreign elements are: 1) the Grand Piano (Garritan CFX), 2) the Horns A6 and Trumpets A6 (Spitfire Symphonic Brass) legato patches that come in from 00:38 and 3) the High Strings (Albion ONE) legato that comes in from 00:58.

For reverb, I used Fabfilter Pro-R (sends) and 2C B2 (master track).


----------



## drews

Okay guys final verdict on the game of “is it spitfire player’s fault or is my PC just bad”

I uh...found the funds to get abbey road one and also decided that since it was the perfect size to fit all the samples on 64gb of ram at once I decided to also go to best buy and pick up two more sticks of RAM to get up to 64gb.

So I’m pleased to report that with a preload size setting of 150000, pretty much everything you could do fits on my RAM and plays flawlessly. I can say with confidence that the before mentioned Daniel James video, his issue is that his voice limit was set to default, and he was trying to play too many voices, hitting the limit and that’s what we were hearing.

I loaded up the BBC core template in reaper, set preload to 150000, and selected 4-5 techniques per track and ended up with about 34GB of ram being taken up. Sustaining three chords got most every track up to 400-600 voices per track, so around a total of 4-5k voices and I experienced zero audio cutouts.

loaded up hans zimmer strings and it was a bit tougher to get an insane amount of voices for the library. Because it’s so large, obviously I’d need 256GB of ram to load everything at once onto RAM, so I selected mics and techniques until I loaded 50GB worth of samples. The issue I was running into is if you select too much, which we are talking multiple tracks with every single mic position selected, eventually it will load onto a page file so it’ll experience issues because a part of the samples loaded onto your “memory” is actually loaded to your SSD. And then if you remove tracks to get the memory usage total down, even though you might have a decent amount of RAM left, some of the samples seem to stay on your paging file which still causes issues. So I suppose that’s really the only “real” issue I found with the spitfire player, is that if you load more samples to memory than the actual amount of memory you have, you’ll have to start deleting tracks to remove them from your paging file completely. At 5000 total voices spread across 14 tracks, my CPU was at 50%, memory at 23GB. I hit a definite hard limit at 8000 voices where I’d get CPU spikes to 100% which would cause massive audio cutouts. Also some fun bonus screenshots because I’m happy with myself and the tests I’ve conducted, might even print out that 5k voice screenshot and hang it above my desk!


----------



## Al Maurice

Wow -- it seems Spitfire has some ace products, but their player still needs some work.

As the community requests more features, and options, the spec requirements just escalate.

So to my mind I prefer, a solution that just works straight out of the box.

Which allows the user to tweek the settings to get the best performance from their rig.

Once they do that, I'm sure their newer libraries will just fly and work for all concerned.

But until then, I'm going to hold off, and resist the temptation of buying older recycled equivalents from them.


In the meantime, I've given Iconica a whirl just to see what the fuss is about, and with Halion adjusting the settings I get better performance too. Even tried it with VEPro but that leads to a tonne of latency.


Hopefully Spitfire comes up with a fix soon, before they launch any new libraries on their player!


----------



## TintoL

scoringdreams said:


> I had another go with AR1 and made a track!
> 
> The only foreign elements are: 1) the Grand Piano (Garritan CFX), 2) the Horns A6 and Trumpets A6 (Spitfire Symphonic Brass) legato patches that come in from 00:38 and 3) the High Strings (Albion ONE) legato that comes in from 00:58.
> 
> For reverb, I used Fabfilter Pro-R (sends) and 2C B2 (master track).





It has good sound. I would probably break up the begining with some variation. 
If you don't mind me asking, what woodwinds are you using? They stand out because they feel like if they are in a bigger room. 

Curious to know if it will be the spitfire symphonic woodwinds. 

Sounds like the blend with SSB was good. 

Thanks for sharing.


----------



## scoringdreams

TintoL said:


> It has good sound. I would probably break up the begining with some variation.
> If you don't mind me asking, what woodwinds are you using? They stand out because they feel like if they are in a bigger room.
> 
> Curious to know if it will be the spitfire symphonic woodwinds.
> 
> Sounds like the blend with SSB was good.
> 
> Thanks for sharing.



Thanks for the feedback, I will take that to consideration!

For woodwinds, I used the ones from AR1 straight out of the box. I might have pushed the reverb sends a little too far for the winds.


----------



## TintoL

scoringdreams said:


> Thanks for the feedback, I will take that to consideration!
> 
> For woodwinds, I used the ones from AR1 straight out of the box. I might have pushed the reverb sends a little too far for the winds.



Thanks a lot for your answer. 

I am still deliberating if it makes sense to get AR1 right now or wait..... the sustains ONLY put me off a bit. And the fact that these are only ensambles. 

Thanks a lot again.


----------



## scoringdreams

TintoL said:


> Thanks a lot for your answer.
> 
> I am still deliberating if it makes sense to get AR1 right now or wait..... the sustains ONLY put me off a bit. And the fact that these are only ensambles.
> 
> Thanks a lot again.



That's true, I find myself really limited on staple articulations. It might be worth waiting for the other expansions to be released before considering the dive.


----------



## johjoh

Hendrixon said:


> Paul answered my question regarding dynamic layers with this:


A "bit" late to the discussion , but do you have the link to that official thread ?
Haven't found it yet (have been off the forum for couple of months).
Thx !


----------



## Hendrixon

johjoh said:


> A "bit" late to the discussion , but do you have the link to that official thread ?
> Haven't found it yet (have been off the forum for couple of months).
> Thx !



Enjoy


----------



## johjoh

Hendrixon said:


> Enjoy


Thanks alot !! 🙏


----------



## spacepluk

FWIW I'm having zero issues with the player on my machine. I don't have to be careful with what I'm playing or anything, and it's as smooth as anything else. I haven't had a single glitch and my buffer is at 64 samples.


----------



## Zedcars

Erm...somehow...I don't know how...but it let me still buy this at £299! 

I had left it open in my browser from like 2 days ago, and the website didn't even seem to notice. This morning I checked and it had gone up to £399. Checked in a different browser just now too and it also said £399 before I hit the buy button.

So, not sure if I'm going to get found out or not. Maybe if I keep my head down, and don't make any sudden movements it will all be ok.


----------



## muziksculp

I wonder what we can expect next year from SA as far as dedicated, and detailed libraries recorded in AR-Studio One ? 

i.e. I decided not to purchase AROOF, I would rather wait for more comprehensive/detailed libraries for the different orchestral sections to be released next year, is this what we could expect to see from SA ? or is AROOF considered their base library, and all of their upcoming additions are based on what is in AROOF, so the new libraries will function as complementing the core sampled instruments in AROOF ? 

Any thoughts on this ?

Thanks.


----------



## Sean

muziksculp said:


> I wonder what we can expect next year from SA as far as dedicated, and detailed libraries recorded in AR-Studio One ?
> 
> i.e. I decided not to purchase AROOF, I would rather wait for more comprehensive/detailed libraries for the different orchestral sections to be released next year, is this what we could expect to see from SA ? or is AROOF considered their base library, and all of their upcoming additions are based on what is in AROOF, so the new libraries will function as complementing the core sampled instruments in AROOF ?
> 
> Any thoughts on this ?
> 
> Thanks.


There's a separate modular orchestra coming from Spitfire, as confirmed multiple times by them. It's a separate, non-ensemble based library, so AR1 would not be required.


----------



## muziksculp

Sean said:


> There's a separate modular orchestra coming from Spitfire, as confirmed multiple times by them. It's a separate, non-ensemble based library, so AR1 would not be required.



OK, that's what I was hoping. But wasn't sure. That's why I asked about this detail. 

Thanks.


----------



## dzilizzi

Sean said:


> There's a separate modular orchestra coming from Spitfire, as confirmed multiple times by them. It's a separate, non-ensemble based library, so AR1 would not be required.


AR1 would be useful as an ensemble addition to the modular orchestra. Otherwise, it isn't really necessary.


----------



## SupremeFist

I've been using Aroof some more and, once one has made one's peace with the lack of legatopodes, the one thing that really sticks out for me is the lack of timp rolls. It's the single thing that feels kind of cynical, like they have deliberately held something as necessary as timp rolls back for the "pumping percussion" add-on in the future. Still, overall I'm glad I got it because of _that sound... _


----------



## Musicalnut2004

Sean said:


> There's a separate modular orchestra coming from Spitfire, as confirmed multiple times by them. It's a separate, non-ensemble based library, so AR1 would not be required.


Have you (or anyone else) heard caught wind of the modular orchestra Paul was referring to in the announcement video? I'm so curious if there is a rough timeline on that one. Probably super premature to ask this now, but thought I would give it a try for those in-the-know. : )


----------



## Dave Connor

dzilizzi said:


> AR1 would be useful as an ensemble addition to the modular orchestra. Otherwise, it isn't really necessary.


Wouldn’t you need AR1 for things such as a4 French Horns? Do you think that patch would also be available in a separate Modular release? I’ve been thinking everything to come will be in _addition _to what’s in AR1. Making it’s purchase now the first group of instruments from an eventual complete orchestra. I hope that’s the case.

Be nice to get this cleared up by our Spitfire friends.


----------



## José Herring

Sean said:


> There's a separate modular orchestra coming from Spitfire, as confirmed multiple times by them. It's a separate, non-ensemble based library, so AR1 would not be required.


True, but it's going to be an all ensemble based library. No solo instruments from what I heard. There was a video floating around of the next release but can't seem to find it any more. I guess things changed but that old video had pre orchestrated ensemble woodwinds. I'm not a big fan of that approach but I must admit the ensemble patches in AROOF are getting some pretty good use.


----------



## dzilizzi

There are two different products. I think people are getting them mixed up. 

Orchestral Foundations is ARO plus a bunch of ensemble expansions that can be combined together for quick composing for film and trailer music. Think along the lines of Project Sam's Symphobias. 

Then there is the modular orchestra that will be closer to SSO style orchestra. Not quite sure if it will be sold in sections like SSO or more broken down like flutes or horns. ARO is not part of this, other than how you would use Albion One with SSO. Because sometimes you want the full orchestra.


----------



## MaxOctane

So how’s everyone getting along with AR1 now that it’s been a month?


----------



## holywilly

I love it so far, I assign the low and high sections into one midi channel to created two handed ensemble patch for sketch. Totally love the lushness sound from Abbey Road Studio. Can’t wait to collect all modules in 2021!

One of the best investments ever made. 

Merry Christmas and happy, healthy new year to every VI sluts


----------



## Sean

José Herring said:


> True, but it's going to be an all ensemble based library. No solo instruments from what I heard. There was a video floating around of the next release but can't seem to find it any more. I guess things changed but that old video had pre orchestrated ensemble woodwinds. I'm not a big fan of that approach but I must admit the ensemble patches in AROOF are getting some pretty good use.



The sparkling woodwinds is part of AROOF/AR1, not the modular orchestra. From my understanding the modular orchestra will be like SSO, so yes individual instruments, not pre orchestrated ensembles.


----------



## kelexys

Is 12 Gig ram enough to play with AR1 without having problems?


----------



## ridgero

kelexys said:


> Is 12 Gig ram enough to play with AR1 without having problems?



No

Abbey Road ONE has 5-7 dynamic layers per instrument


----------



## spacepluk

I'm using it with 16Gb and it's working fine... But I have it on an NVMe disk.


----------



## Bman70

kelexys said:


> Is 12 Gig ram enough to play with AR1 without having problems?


MAC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Mac OS X 10.10 or later Minimum: 2.8GHz i5 minimum (quad-core), 8GB RAM. Recommended: 2.8GHz I7 (six-core), 16GB RAM


----------



## kelexys

Bman70 said:


> MAC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Mac OS X 10.10 or later Minimum: 2.8GHz i5 minimum (quad-core), 8GB RAM. Recommended: 2.8GHz I7 (six-core), 16GB RAM


I'm running on a 2.3 Ghz intel core i7, 16 GB RAM. I suppose my macbook is a bit outdated to enjoy this fine library without any problems


----------



## Peter Satera

ridgero said:


> No
> 
> Abbey Road ONE has 5-7 dynamic layers per instrument


I have every instrument and articulation loaded on Mix 1, just over 4GB being used. I think the issue is the core speed.


----------



## Peter Satera

MaxOctane said:


> So how’s everyone getting along with AR1 now that it’s been a month?


I like it, it can produce a very bold sound. I get there's no Legato, that's fine for now.

What I do feel is missing is Marcato strings and Marcato on the full orchestra. I'm needing a go between the Sustain and Spiccato/staccato. The articulations, in the likes of the high WW, low WW, trumpet, horn, etc are great, where you can use Stacatissimo, Marcato, Tenuto, Sustain, swells to write and overlay moving melodies. 

I think once this has the legato / playable combined sections, and more articulations with segmented individual sections this will be a beast. If they go all out like they did for the BBC, I imagine everyone will want this.


----------



## JohnG

it's great


----------



## South Thames

> Then there is the modular orchestra that will be closer to SSO style orchestra. Not quite sure if it will be sold in sections like SSO or more broken down like flutes or horns.



I've been reading that here off and on for a while; can anyone pin-point (link to) the official source for this?


----------



## styledelk

There isn’t an official source besides some explanation from the founders here on the forum, as far as I know. Which is why people should stop considering it so seriously.


----------



## dzilizzi

South Thames said:


> I've been reading that here off and on for a while; can anyone pin-point (link to) the official source for this?


Paul has said it multiple times in both the videos and in posts. Plus I have stated it a few times and have gotten likes from Christian and Paul, indicating I am saying the correct thing.


----------



## BasariStudios

I own a lot of Sections and to the Point Libraries but i am in a bad need
of an Ensembled Orchestra, 2 hands playing for Sketches something like
ARO or AO...but i read too many problems and too many negative reviews
about ARO so i am stuck, few more hours for the sale left.


----------



## paulthomson

Hi Basari -

In case you haven’t seen it, I show how I put my demo together and play with the library in real time here:



Might be useful!

have a great NYE!

Paul


----------



## BasariStudios

paulthomson said:


> Hi Basari -
> 
> In case you haven’t seen it, I show how I put my demo together and play with the library in real time here:
> 
> 
> 
> Might be useful!
> 
> have a great NYE!
> 
> Paul



Thank you very much Paul. I watched it once already, i am just too scared, 
i hope few things get fixed in the future.


----------



## MGdepp

I would have bought AR 1 for some of the sounds I heard in the walkthrough if it was Kontakt ... so many problems with the engine! That feels to risky for an investment to me.


----------



## Trash Panda

BasariStudios said:


> I own a lot of Sections and to the Point Libraries but i am in a bad need
> of an Ensembled Orchestra, 2 hands playing for Sketches something like
> ARO or AO...but i read too many problems and too many negative reviews
> about ARO so i am stuck, few more hours for the sale left.


The problems are overblown. I’m as far from a Spitfire fanboi as it gets and AROOF is becoming one of my favorite libraries.


----------



## John R Wilson

Trash Panda said:


> The problems are overblown. I’m as far from a Spitfire fanboi as it gets and AROOF is becoming one of my favorite libraries.



Abbey Road One is great sounding. First impressions is that the percussion sounds pretty dam good, brass sounds really good. Also, it seems to blend together very nicely. Although I do need to have more of a play around with it before coming to any conclusions. However, I do think that I do prefer the drier sound of the BBCSO over Abbey Road One but overall once some of the selections have been released it'll be a very nice library and a good addition to use with other libraries.


----------



## South Thames

> There isn’t an official source besides some explanation from the founders here on the forum, as far as I know. Which is why people should stop considering it so seriously.



Yeah, that was my impression also -- it's all pretty vague, not helped by the fact that the term 'modular' is used to describe the upcoming add ons as well. Pity. I suspect there is a disincentive to provide a proper roadmap for these products, as it might deter early purchases (certainly was the case for the BBCSO). But at the same time people acting like there is a formal road map with these products on it may well end up disappointed.


----------



## John R Wilson

South Thames said:


> Yeah, that was my impression also -- it's all pretty vague, not helped by the fact that the term 'modular' is used to describe the upcoming add ons as well. Pity. I suspect there is a disincentive to provide a proper roadmap for these products, as it might deter early purchases (certainly was the case for the BBCSO). But at the same time people acting like there is a formal road map with these products on it may well end up disappointed.



Seems like the modular orchestra is going to take a similar approach to the original BML series that became SSS and SCS. I'm not sure how I feel about that!


----------



## South Thames

> Seems like the modular orchestra is going to take a similar approach to the original BML series that became SSS and SCS. I'm not sure how I feel about that



Again, I see no official basis for that. And given that Spitfire have spent the last few years mopping up the residue of that early approach so that none of their products remain in this (convenient but often confusing) form, I find it a bit hard to believe. Although I guess I can see the sense of it from a cashflow POV whilst you're building a product set and need to see a return as you go along.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

MGdepp said:


> I would have bought AR 1 for some of the sounds I heard in the walkthrough if it was Kontakt ... so many problems with the engine! That feels to risky for an investment to me.


Works perfectly well for a great number of us. Not that risky. Try LABS first and if those work fine, it is running a similar engine.


----------



## paulthomson

The only problem I’m aware of is the occasional person “stuck in collapsed view” which is already fixed for the next update.

Certainly not “so many problems” MGDepp! Fake news! 😂 

happy new year everyone!

Paul


----------



## MGdepp

paulthomson said:


> The only problem I’m aware of is the occasional person “stuck in collapsed view” which is already fixed for the next update.
> 
> Certainly not “so many problems” MGDepp! Fake news! 😂
> 
> happy new year everyone!
> 
> Paul


I said that I would have bought it, if it was Kontakt, because I prefer Kontakt over your Player. Is that a reason to accuse someone of fake news? 

Happy new year and maybe a suggestion for the new year resolution: have some "Ommm" for breakfast every day and chill a bit, please. No need to be mad at everyone that doesn't like your player.


----------



## styledelk

I read nothing mad there.


----------



## antanasb

MGdepp said:


> I would have bought AR 1 for some of the sounds I heard in the walkthrough if it was Kontakt ... so many problems with the engine! That feels to risky for an investment to me.



Well, doesn’t this statement of “so many problems” sortof imply that was not preference, but the flaws that kept you away?

I’m just genuinely confused?


----------



## Bman70

JohnG said:


> it's great



As someone who owns all of them, which can more easily replace the others? (i.e. if I had to keep only one of the three)... Abbey Road One (strings only), Symphonic Strings, or Hans Zimmer Strings? 

Having Nucleus and HWO Gold, what I'm mostly after is more depth, hugeness, and variety in my strings. I am considering the Diamond mics as well.


----------



## Russell Anderson

kelexys said:


> Is 12 Gig ram enough to play with AR1 without having problems?


Yes, I only have 8gb. You will need to freeze tracks, or save their midi information and bounce to audio. This is so for basically any sample library work on computers such as ours. Expect more complicated mic setups to use 2-4gb ram per instrument or more depending on mic count, or .6-1gb for mix 1 or 2. It is certainly tedious without the ram.



kelexys said:


> I'm running on a 2.3 Ghz intel core i7, 16 GB RAM. I suppose my macbook is a bit outdated to enjoy this fine library without any problems


I have a dual-core 2.9ghz processor and it plays well. But heed my comment to the other user above: when it gets too complex, bounce.


----------



## Wunderhorn

In my experience the Spitfire Player is causing a feeling of unease.

After using it with a number of LABS instruments the bottom line is that every once in a while things break mysteriously. Moving libraries to a new location/drive does not always go smooth. Then there are numbered error messages that have to be researched (the pop-up window does not tell you in plain English what the issue is), sometimes Spitfire support has to be contacted. Sometimes a library randomly decides it has to be "repaired" for no apparent reason (again, why does the application not communicate the reasons?), sometimes it all has to be re-downloaded even though you already have all necessary data. Of course it can get sorted out but it adds extra hassle that I don't need.

What it boils down to is that there is something more complicated going on under the hood where it is not just a matter to place the files into the correct location (like Kontakt) and then the player will find it and work with it. Installing a Kontakt library (especially non-Player ones) feels more logical and straight forward. Most times it is a clear user error and chances are, you can get it all done and fixed yourself at the end. With the Spitfire Player I just don't feel that 'safe'.
It is one deciding factor why I am (still) staying away from buying libraries that run on the Spitfire Player.


----------



## Bman70

kelexys said:


> I'm running on a 2.3 Ghz intel core i7, 16 GB RAM. I suppose my macbook is a bit outdated to enjoy this fine library without any problems


Not sure which i7 yours is, but some i5 are faster than i7, some i7 are faster than i5 (with more cores). 16 RAM should be fine. I would think you can run it, but this is where a trial version would of course be ideal.


----------



## styledelk

Wunderhorn said:


> In my experience the Spitfire Player is causing a feeling of unease.
> 
> After using it with a number of LABS instruments the bottom line is that every once in a while things break mysteriously. Moving libraries to a new location/drive does not always go smooth. Then there are numbered error messages that have to be researched (the pop-up window does not tell you in plain English what the issue is), sometimes Spitfire support has to be contacted. Sometimes a library randomly decides it has to be "repaired" for no apparent reason (again, why does the application not communicate the reasons?), sometimes it all has to be re-downloaded even though you already have all necessary data. Of course it can get sorted out but it adds extra hassle that I don't need.
> 
> What it boils down to is that there is something more complicated going on under the hood where it is not just a matter to place the files into the correct location (like Kontakt) and then the player will find it and work with it. Installing a Kontakt library (especially non-Player ones) feels more logical and straight forward. Most times it is a clear user error and chances are, you can get it all done and fixed yourself at the end. With the Spitfire Player I just don't feel that 'safe'.
> It is one deciding factor why I am (still) staying away from buying libraries that run on the Spitfire Player.



That's not the player. That's the Sptifire Installer and their DRM/license management. That's a different issue entirely, but I can see how it gets conflated together.


----------



## MGdepp

styledelk said:


> I read nothing mad there.


Fake news!


----------



## JohnG

Bman70 said:


> As someone who owns all of them, which can more easily replace the others? (i.e. if I had to keep only one of the three)... Abbey Road One (strings only), Symphonic Strings, or Hans Zimmer Strings?
> 
> Having Nucleus and HWO Gold, what I'm mostly after is more depth, hugeness, and variety in my strings. I am considering the Diamond mics as well.


If you could only have one, I'd recommend Symphonic Strings because it has more control and variety. That said, in any "huge" track I almost always have something from HZ Strings and (most likely) will be adding something from ARO to the strings as well going forward.

If you are only interested in strings, I'd recommend SSS and HZ Strings. The Abbey Road strings are good too but not as much "more good" than the brass and percussion in Abbey Road.

I have hardly touched the winds yet.

I think where you really hear the ARO difference is in a big cue. Substitute something from ARO for what you have -- then you really hear what you are getting. Played solo they sound good, but not as "outstanding" as in an arrangement.


----------



## Russell Anderson

MGdepp said:


> maybe a suggestion for the new year resolution: have some "Ommm" for breakfast every day and chill a bit, please. No need to be mad at everyone that doesn't like your player.


Have you done this yet today? You might read that comment differently afterwards...



paulthomson said:


> The only problem I’m aware of


The ball is currently in my court with a support ticket about the sample start times of some high strings shorts that are hidden in the round robins. Besides that and the redundant clicks on the main “Reverb/Release/etc” knob module thing on the interface (as DJ pointed out, there is empty space to the right - it would be good to just let the menu exist there without clicking the button to expand it), I have not been having issues otherwise.

And my computer is a dinosaur.


----------



## JohnG

Wunderhorn said:


> In my experience the Spitfire Player is causing a feeling of unease.


haven't had any problems with it at all, fwiw.

I'm using it with HZ Strings, Abbey Road, and Eric Whitacre Choirs (that I can remember off the top of my head).

Any new player takes a bit of getting used to. I didn't like it at first but meh -- once I load stuff up and set the mic positions, it's over with. And now I am used to it.


----------



## Trash Panda

paulthomson said:


> The only problem I’m aware of is the occasional person “stuck in collapsed view” which is already fixed for the next update.
> 
> Certainly not “so many problems” MGDepp! Fake news! 😂
> 
> happy new year everyone!
> 
> Paul


I often have release samples cut out in AROOF during playback when there’s a lot of voices playing at once. Strangely, it got worse after increasing the max voices, preload and streaming buffers. It renders fine, so I consider it a small annoyance that requires freezing more often than I like, but not a deal breaker.


----------



## Russell Anderson

Trash Panda said:


> I often have release samples cut out in AROOF during playback when there’s a lot of voices playing at once. Strangely, it got worse after increasing the max voices, preload and streaming buffers. It renders fine, so I consider it a small annoyance that requires freezing more often than I like, but not a deal breaker.


I experience this as well, but with my 10-year-old refurbished HP laptop, I was chalking it up to hardware limitations.


----------



## Peter Satera

Same as JohnG, as an owner of Abbey Road One:OF, Hans Zimmer Strings and Symphonic Motions the player has been very good for me and I can throw quite a bit at it. I've commonly used 3 or 4 mics on HZ Strings.

I've not had any issues regarding moving libraries or drop outs. In ARO, I do have the sections split into long articulations and short articulations to be friendly on core distribution and allow layering of shorts on longs. I'm running 17 instances of spitfire ARO, and with one mic the DAW shows 3.4Gb RAM usage.

I came across a hiccup within an Abbey Road One sample, but the team have already implemented a fix, due in the update.


----------



## John R Wilson

South Thames said:


> Again, I see no official basis for that. And given that Spitfire have spent the last few years mopping up the residue of that early approach so that none of their products remain in this (convenient but often confusing) form, I find it a bit hard to believe. Although I guess I can see the sense of it from a cashflow POV whilst you're building a product set and need to see a return as you go along.



That's the impression I'm getting, especially with the way they are doing the selections and abbey road one and they are calling it modular.


----------



## prodigalson

South Thames said:


> I've been reading that here off and on for a while; can anyone pin-point (link to) the official source for this?


Watch from where I time-stamped this and also from 14:46 where he clearly differentiates the “easy gratification packs” from the more detailed “modular system”



And see this comment 







and also this interaction on this thread


----------



## Trash Panda

Russell Anderson said:


> I experience this as well, but with my 10-year-old refurbished HP laptop, I was chalking it up to hardware limitations.


I’m on a Surface Book 2 with an i7 and 16 gigs of RAM. The library lives on an SD card and the issue seems to happen when it is loading in more from disk even though it’s loading in 8.5 gigs of samples already. Maybe they don’t store all the release samples in memory?


----------



## mussnig

Trash Panda said:


> I’m on a Surface Book 2 with an i7 and 16 gigs of RAM. The library lives on an SD card and the issue seems to happen when it is loading in more from disk even though it’s loading in 8.5 gigs of samples already. Maybe they don’t store all the release samples in memory?


Obviously I cannot tell what exactly is causing your issues, but in general I wouldn't recommend having such a library on an SD Card ...


----------



## Trash Panda

mussnig said:


> Obviously I cannot tell what exactly is causing your issues, but in general I wouldn't recommend having such a library on an SD Card ...


Not much choice since I opted for the 256 gig SSD version of the computer back before getting into orchestral libraries. Kontakt doesn’t have these issues with way more instruments running.


----------



## mussnig

Trash Panda said:


> Not much choice since I opted for the 256 gig SSD version of the computer back before getting into orchestral libraries. Kontakt doesn’t have these issues with way more instruments running.


I use an external NVME - very small and very fast. But I understand it's not as comfortable as an SD Card.


----------



## Aldo_arf

Trash Panda said:


> Not much choice since I opted for the 256 gig SSD version of the computer back before getting into orchestral libraries. Kontakt doesn’t have these issues with way more instruments running.


I believe you’ll do better with a HDD. I don’t know what specs your SD card must have but they are usually not design for multiple source streaming. Obviously the best choice is an SSD or nvme.


----------



## South Thames

> Watch from where I time-stamped this and also from 14:46 where he clearly differentiates the “easy gratification packs” from the more detailed “modular system”



Thanks! I guess that's pretty clear, although no mention of timing or much detail on how they'll be packaged.


----------



## Russell Anderson

South Thames said:


> Thanks! I guess that's pretty clear, although no mention of timing or much detail on how they'll be packaged.


I believe it’s in the thread where Paul first posted the brief demo of the first two Selections (incl. playthrough) that “2022” was mentioned for first sogns of the modular orchestra dropping.


----------



## BasariStudios

I went on and pulled the plug. 1 Problem and 1 Subjective thing.
The problem is the Release as usual. the subjective thing is there
is no (as Paul says) Sizzle or FF on the Longs...you keep going up
and the natural instinct is waiting for something but its not there.
What i mean by Release is like its not Natural, it sound more like
Sustain or Decay than a Release.
Overall its a good library.


----------



## dzilizzi

I was under the impression that, as of the beginning of COVID shutdowns, only the ARO and extensions were completely recorded. They started on the modular but it wasn't anywhere near done. I'm sure they have gotten it all done by now, using reasonable concessions. But I don't know how much it has delayed everything


----------



## SupremeFist

JohnG said:


> haven't had any problems with it at all, fwiw.
> 
> I'm using it with HZ Strings, Abbey Road, and Eric Whitacre Choirs (that I can remember off the top of my head).
> 
> Any new player takes a bit of getting used to. I didn't like it at first but meh -- once I load stuff up and set the mic positions, it's over with. And now I am used to it.


I tried to orchestrate a 200-track composition on my ZX Spectrum and got nothing but weird beeps and then the keyboard melted, I hate Spitfire.

(But seriously, zero problems with their player on i7 Mini with 64Gb RAM.)


----------



## Justin L. Franks

Russell Anderson said:


> Besides that and the redundant clicks on the main “Reverb/Release/etc” knob module thing on the interface (as DJ pointed out, there is empty space to the right - it would be good to just let the menu exist there without clicking the button to expand it), I have not been having issues otherwise.


That is definitely one of the things I don't like about the Spitfire player. I haven't experienced any issues at all, but having to make two extra clicks to adjust a setting (one to bring up the menu, and another to click on which parameter to assign to the 'big knob') is annoying.

With the Kontakt libraries, everything is right there already. Just click and drag, instead of click, click, click and drag. The secondary controls should all get their own medium-sized knob, instead of one giant knob that has to be constantly re-assigned.

Make it an option in the Interface settings – the big knob as it is now, or multiple smaller knobs with everything immediately available – and it would be great.


----------



## styledelk

Justin L. Franks said:


> That is definitely one of the things I don't like about the Spitfire player. I haven't experienced any issues at all, but having to make two extra clicks to adjust a setting (one to bring up the menu, and another to click on which parameter to assign to the 'big knob') is annoying.
> 
> With the Kontakt libraries, everything is right there already. Just click and drag, instead of click, click, click and drag. The secondary controls should all get their own medium-sized knob, instead of one giant knob that has to be constantly re-assigned.
> 
> Make it an option in the Interface settings – the big knob as it is now, or multiple smaller knobs with everything immediately available – and it would be great.


They are available as small knobs on the other page past mics, but yeah. I don’t use the big knob at all, ever. At least with NKS they’re all individual on NI keyboards.


----------



## Russell Anderson

styledelk said:


> They are available as small knobs on the other page past mics, but yeah. I don’t use the big knob at all, ever. At least with NKS they’re all individual on NI keyboards.


I don't either. It's also weird that it defaults to a "circular" drag motion instead of vertical, which is what I'm used to despite being a knob. With so much empty space, I don't think there's really a good enough reason for me to have those options tucked away in menus.


----------



## Rctec

tonaliszt said:


> It's not a secret that spitfire has been trying to move out of the film scoring market into other areas of music production.
> 
> I would not be surprised if they made this library only to gain access to Studio 2 to record a Beatles/Rock/Pop library.


Have you actually recorded in Abbey Studio 2?


----------



## ridgero

Justin L. Franks said:


> That is definitely one of the things I don't like about the Spitfire player. I haven't experienced any issues at all, but having to make two extra clicks to adjust a setting (one to bring up the menu, and another to click on which parameter to assign to the 'big knob') is annoying.
> 
> With the Kontakt libraries, everything is right there already. Just click and drag, instead of click, click, click and drag. The secondary controls should all get their own medium-sized knob, instead of one giant knob that has to be constantly re-assigned.
> 
> Make it an option in the Interface settings – the big knob as it is now, or multiple smaller knobs with everything immediately available – and it would be great.



There should be an alternative „pro“ view in development. Can you confirm that? @paulthomson

Thx!


----------



## Russell Anderson

I agree and would like to see the redundant clicks for reverb/tightness/vibrato/release to instead be knobs on the main screen that occupy the large empty space to the right of the big knob thing. Or to just take the place of the big knob, even though it’s “the spitfire app look”... I understand the appeal of the big knob. It does look nice and simple, but maybe it could be a toggle, to have instead the full menu of knobs to turn a la spitfire kontakt interfaces.


----------



## Robert Kooijman

Never use this big knob either. The Spitfire player should just provide direct, easy access to commonly used controllers. There's plenty of space for that. If they for whatever reason want to stick to this silly big knob, then yes, a Pro mode is highly overdue.

On a positive note: I really love the fact that in the Spitfire player, keyswitches can be assigned easily and freely. So e.g. all leg on C-2, stac / shorts on G-2. A very big plus compared to the Sine player where you are stuck to a prebaked sequential range for all articulations. So, the Spitfire approach is much preferred when using a DAW like Studio One that still doesn't offer expression maps.

Really love the tone of ARO and look forward to the legato's and further expansion packs. 

Happy new year, greetings from Sweden!


----------



## styledelk

The ironic part about the big knob is that so many of the bigger libraries are all about room room room. And the default parameter for that knob is reverb. Why would I add that reverb to my perfectly recorded room mics? (Or at least, wouldn’t I be using a bus elsewhere for that?)


----------



## antanasb

styledelk said:


> The ironic part about the big knob is that so many of the bigger libraries are all about room room room. And the default parameter for that knob is reverb. Why would I add that reverb to my perfectly recorded room mics? (Or at least, wouldn’t I be using a bus elsewhere for that?)



It is default for every Spitfire library, I think.. Starting from labs through bbc, up to abbey. I find reverb way more useful as default than e.g. release..


----------



## jonnybutter

Russell Anderson said:


> I agree and would like to see the redundant clicks for reverb/tightness/vibrato/release to instead be knobs on the main screen that occupy the large empty space to the right of the big knob thing. Or to just take the place of the big knob, even though it’s “the spitfire app look”... I understand the appeal of the big knob. It does look nice and simple, but maybe it could be a toggle, to have instead the full menu of knobs to turn a la spitfire kontakt interfaces.


Agree. Their player works well for me, but one-big-knob could be re-thought. Like many modern commercial interfaces, it’s done more for the company’s benefit (in this case for the look) than for mine. But the plug itself works well.


----------



## Jean Wilder

Just stopping by to say that Abbey Road One works great on a 2015 Macbook pro. Not sure what all the hoopla was earlier in this thread about CPU running at 100% with one plugin instance. I'm running 5-6 instances at once with two mic positions each and barely hitting 20% of my cpu. That's with a bunch of other audio tracks and plugins running at the same time. I watched that Daniel James video and that almost made me skip AR1. Glad I didn't do that!


----------



## spacepluk

I don't think the big knob is such a big deal. Most of the time I'm tweaking from a controller anyway. And if it really bothers you, you can always disable the GUI and use the pro mode in your DAW


----------



## Casiquire

Every day reality approaches closer and closer to satire


----------



## dzilizzi

Casiquire said:


> Every day reality approaches closer and closer to satire



That looks like an April Fool's joke.


----------



## Fry777

I love the sound of the lib, but I've just seen on facebook talks of a glitch, and I tried it myself, when playing the "Low Brass Swells Long" patch, notes G0 and G#0, you can hear someone saying "thirty five" in the tail of the swell (present in all the mics). I just reported it to Spitfire, in case people didn't before (and the more the merrier, I suppose).
Did you find other glitches of that nature in the lib ?


----------



## Peter Satera

Fry777 said:


> I love the sound of the lib, but I've just seen on facebook talks of a glitch, and I tried it myself, when playing the "Low Brass Swells Long" patch, notes G0 and G#0, you can hear someone saying "thirty five" in the tail of the swell (present in all the mics). I just reported it to Spitfire, in case people didn't before (and the more the merrier, I suppose).
> Did you find other glitches of that nature in the lib ?


This is what I reported, it's already fixed, to come in the update.


----------



## Fry777

Peter Satera said:


> This is what I reported, it's already fixed, to come in the update.


Great news


----------



## MartinH.

Casiquire said:


> Every day reality approaches closer and closer to satire




Watching 10 year old onion news videos is surreal, so much real stuff has happened that is just as insane as their old jokes. It's getting really hard to tell satire apart from reality. Like that 999$ monitor stand...


----------



## Jdiggity1

The worst thing about the big knob, is that it's not even a knob!
It gets you all excited to give it the ol' click+drag, only to discover it's just a bloody button.


----------



## antanasb

Jdiggity1 said:


> The worst thing about the big knob, is that it's not even a knob!
> It gets you all excited to give it the ol' click+drag, only to discover it's just a bloody button.



Indeed. For me the reverb could still be the big round knob, as that is the main thing that I look for, but the other options would be gladly welcome as e.g. ever-presented sliders all the time...


----------



## easyrider

Does anyone see the update?


----------



## José Herring

Fry777 said:


> I love the sound of the lib, but I've just seen on facebook talks of a glitch, and I tried it myself, when playing the "Low Brass Swells Long" patch, notes G0 and G#0, you can hear someone saying "thirty five" in the tail of the swell (present in all the mics). I just reported it to Spitfire, in case people didn't before (and the more the merrier, I suppose).
> Did you find other glitches of that nature in the lib ?


Adds to the realism.


----------



## Justin L. Franks

easyrider said:


> Does anyone see the update?


No, I do not. Apparently it was pulled shortly after it was released due to some issues. But other peoples' comments seem to suggest that they were able to get it after it was pulled, so I don't know.

My copy is on 1.0.2 for both the plugin and content, with no updates available.


----------



## Peter Satera

Justin L. Franks said:


> No, I do not. Apparently it was pulled shortly after it was released due to some issues. But other peoples' comments seem to suggest that they were able to get it after it was pulled, so I don't know.
> 
> My copy is on 1.0.2 for both the plugin and content, with no updates available.


With the update now being visible again. I thought it was fixed. 1.0.5. Just opened it. The issues are still apparent.


----------



## easyrider

Peter Satera said:


> With the update now being visible again. I thought it was fixed. 1.0.5. Just opened it. The issues are still apparent.


Let me check mine.....what patch is that?


----------



## Peter Satera

easyrider said:


> Let me check mine.....what patch is that?


Horns shorts.


----------



## M_Helder

Peter Satera said:


> With the update now being visible again. I thought it was fixed. 1.0.5. Just opened it. The issues are still apparent.



Yep. Same here. Marcato everywhere.


----------



## M_Helder

Also, is it just me or does Spitfire Audio purposely avoids recording anything above MF? For such an iconic library to never be able to go above MF is heartbreaking. Why make customers leave and search for another product from another developer to fill the holes in the one they have already bought?

Why, dammit. Can anyone explain? I genuinely don’t get it.


----------



## yiph2

M_Helder said:


> Also, is it just me or does Spitfire Audio purposely avoids recording anything above MF? For such an iconic library to never be able to go above MF is heartbreaking. Why make customers leave and search for another product from another developer to fill the holes in the one they have already bought?
> 
> Why, dammit. Can anyone explain? I genuinely don’t get it.


Um... Have you listened to the walkthrough? The trumpets and horn go a solid forte to me. Also, they recorded 5 dynamic layers, so if they stopped at mf, the lowest dynamic layer goes ppp (???), doesn’t make sense.


----------



## Saxer

M_Helder said:


> Also, is it just me or does Spitfire Audio purposely avoids recording anything above MF? For such an iconic library to never be able to go above MF is heartbreaking. Why make customers leave and search for another product from another developer to fill the holes in the one they have already bought?
> 
> Why, dammit. Can anyone explain? I genuinely don’t get it.


Just made a first track with this library a few days ago and it doesn't sound to me like "not more than mf" at all. I'm quite impressed by the dynamic this library offers.





Monsters of the 50s


Abbey Road Vista Spitfire Harp *edit* Half a year later I found use for this track in a video we made... https://vi-control.net/community/threads/monsters-of-the-50s.104251/page-2#post-4935735




vi-control.net


----------



## M_Helder

yiph2 said:


> Um... Have you listened to the walkthrough? The trumpets and horn go a solid forte to me. Also, they recorded 5 dynamic layers, so if they stopped at mf, the lowest dynamic layer goes ppp (???), doesn’t make sense.



I did. Also played it myself in the DAW, since I own the product. Take the Horns patch Long and try putting the modwheel all the way up. Then take any other brass library (CSB, EWHB, CB, etc) and do the same. Spitfire’s tops at grand and mellow, not huge and bitey (it’s how I call dyn.layers, don’t judge), as if it can go bigger and louder, only it doesn’t. 

Trumpets are fine.

P.S. I’ll try to illustrate later in the evening with some audio examples

But don’t take my word for it. Here is Daniel James’s review covering the same thing, basically at 1:25:00


----------



## ridgero

yiph2 said:


> Um... Have you listened to the walkthrough? The trumpets and horn go a solid forte to me. Also, they recorded 5 dynamic layers, so if they stopped at mf, the lowest dynamic layer goes ppp (???), doesn’t make sense.



Have you compared it to CSB / Cinebrass / Berlin Brass / Junkie XL?

Those libraries seem to go up higher than Abbey Road One.


----------



## yiph2

ridgero said:


> Habe you compared it to CSB / Cinebrass / Berlin Strings / Junkie XL?
> 
> Those libraries seem to go up higher than Abbey Road One.


Yes, they are obviously more louder, however, (in my opinion), the AR1 horns still go to an f. Those libraries are insanely loud, maybe up to triple f (also in my opinion  )

Also, have you tried EQing the brass to get the brassy sound? Paul has a video of that


----------



## Jonathan Moray

For those of you who think that the brass doesn't go loud enough, I wouldn't hold my breath that SF will change their philosophy. It's not only that they stopped at mf-f, they just don't know how to sample it any louder. Paul even stated that the loud brass sound we hear in a lot of scores is fake and that it's "not a real acoustic sound" so my guess is that they don't know how to sample it any louder than what they already did.

Here's the full quote:


paulthomson said:


> All great advice - also experiment with some Eq - you don’t have to go mad - but it’s incredibly easy to get that sizzle that we hear all over “hybrid” scores - that’s not a real acoustic sound, it’s a treated “hyper-real” sound. If there’s interest in this I could do a quick video on some ways to get that intense hyped sound?
> 
> Certainly the a6 patches were crazy crazy loud in the room - I mean window shattering loud. It’s not a volume thing!



Of course, I don't agree. The sound of a player playing loud is not the same as EQing a softer sample to give it more high-end and "sizzle". It's not going to give the same effect, not even close when it comes to brass. I doubt the highest layers of something like CSB are extremely processed to give it that aggressive sound, it's probably just recorded that way.


----------



## ridgero

yiph2 said:


> Yes, they are obviously more louder, however, (in my opinion), the AR1 horns still go to an f. Those libraries are insanely loud, maybe up to triple f (also in my opinion  )
> 
> Also, have you tried EQing the brass to get the brassy sound? Paul has a video of that


I prefer the sound of Abbey Road One anyway, I like the room tone so much.


----------



## SupremeFist

Maybe they are holding back a cuivré patch (like the one in BBCSO) for one of the add-on packs.


----------



## M_Helder

ridgero said:


> I prefer the sound of Abbey Road One anyway, I like the room tone so much.



I prefer it too! That is why it pains me to search for something else and then match it to ARO sound if I want to go truly big and bold.

The problem is, that awesome 3D-ness is super hard to match right. At least for me.


----------



## paulthomson

Jonathan Moray said:


> For those of you who think that the brass doesn't go loud enough, I wouldn't hold my breath that SF will change their philosophy. It's not only that they stopped at mf-f, they just don't know how to sample it any louder. Paul even stated that the loud brass sound we hear in a lot of scores is fake and that it's "not a real acoustic sound" so my guess is that they don't know how to sample it any louder than what they already did.
> 
> Here's the full quote:
> 
> 
> Of course, I don't agree. The sound of a player playing loud is not the same as EQing a softer sample to give it more high-end and "sizzle". It's not going to give the same effect, not even close when it comes to brass. I doubt the highest layers of something like CSB are extremely processed to give it that aggressive sound, it's probably just recorded that way.


Well - I don’t even know where to begin with this.

Suffice to say I think that part of the problem is comparing recordings made in different sizes of room, comparing to produced sound, not being familiar enough with what the instrument really sounds like live when you are sitting next to it.

Until I had done enough sessions of my own I also had learned the sound of instruments from limited live experience - performing - but also being in concerts on many many occasions sat next to the orchestra as a singer, then recordings and sample libraries. I was lucky to have done a lot of sessions on an almost daily basis for quite a few years before I started recording my own sample libraries, so I entered that world with some clear ideas.

I think a lot of information is propagated as “truth” by people who really don’t know - so it can be incredibly confusing for people who are learning all this stuff for the first time.

Suffice to say that the top layer of AR in the brass is way way above mf.

We’ve recorded a variety of “intense” sounds over the years including deliberate exaggerated Cuivre, Bells Up, and so on.

But if you’re after the sizzley sound you hear in many games and hybrid scores - be aware that it’s a produced sound.


----------



## ridgero

paulthomson said:


> Well - I don’t even know where to begin with this.
> 
> Suffice to say I think that part of the problem is comparing recordings made in different sizes of room, comparing to produced sound, not being familiar enough with what the instrument really sounds like live when you are sitting next to it.
> 
> Until I had done enough sessions of my own I also had learned the sound of instruments from limited live experience - performing - but also being in concerts on many many occasions sat next to the orchestra as a singer, then recordings and sample libraries. I was lucky to have done a lot of sessions on an almost daily basis for quite a few years before I started recording my own sample libraries, so I entered that world with some clear ideas.
> 
> I think a lot of information is propagated as “truth” by people who really don’t know - so it can be incredibly confusing for people who are learning all this stuff for the first time.
> 
> Suffice to say that the top layer of AR in the brass is way way above mf.
> 
> We’ve recorded a variety of “intense” sounds over the years including deliberate exaggerated Cuivre, Bells Up, and so on.
> 
> But if you’re after the sizzley sound you hear in many games and hybrid scores - be aware that it’s a produced sound.


Hey Paul, thanks for your clarification. It is always welcome to read the opinion of an experienced musician.


----------



## paulthomson

ridgero said:


> Hey Paul, thanks for your clarification. It is always welcome to read the opinion of an experienced musician.


You’re very welcome. 

I think it’s always useful to get info from people who have done the thing, a lot, but working out who that is can be tricky in the anonymous age of the internet!!

Don’t get me wrong, there are loads of incredibly gifted orchestrators who I would happily pay to teach me stuff!! A couple of them are on here. I’m not saying I’m the oracle. Just whatever info I’ve been able to accumulate over the years I’m happy to share.

And life is a long musical journey - there’s way too much to learn, and not enough time.


----------



## lucor

paulthomson said:


> We’ve recorded a variety of “intense” sounds over the years including deliberate exaggerated Cuivre, Bells Up, and so on.


Paul, is there a reason why you and Spitfire always insist on making these top brass layers a separate patch (i.e. the 'cuivre' patches)? I think you'd already make a lot of people happy if you'd start implementing that top dynamic layer into the 'main' patches themselves so you can crossfade into them.

Right now you have to use 2 patches and a lot of volume crossfading trickery when you want to have a simple crescendo from pp < fff with this approach, while in other libraries it's as simple as riding the modwheel from 1 to 127.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

paulthomson said:


> Well - I don’t even know where to begin with this.
> 
> Suffice to say I think that part of the problem is comparing recordings made in different sizes of room, comparing to produced sound, not being familiar enough with what the instrument really sounds like live when you are sitting next to it.
> 
> Until I had done enough sessions of my own I also had learned the sound of instruments from limited live experience - performing - but also being in concerts on many many occasions sat next to the orchestra as a singer, then recordings and sample libraries. I was lucky to have done a lot of sessions on an almost daily basis for quite a few years before I started recording my own sample libraries, so I entered that world with some clear ideas.
> 
> I think a lot of information is propagated as “truth” by people who really don’t know - so it can be incredibly confusing for people who are learning all this stuff for the first time.
> 
> Suffice to say that the top layer of AR in the brass is way way above mf.
> 
> We’ve recorded a variety of “intense” sounds over the years including deliberate exaggerated Cuivre, Bells Up, and so on.
> 
> But if you’re after the sizzley sound you hear in many games and hybrid scores - be aware that it’s a produced sound.


This might turn into an argument of semantics; I'm not sure I understand what you mean by a "produced" sound then. Didn't you guys at SF record to real tape when recording at AIR to get a certain warmth and character to the sound? Does that count as produced? Or are you talking about something completely different?

Yes, you can definitely play above f and still have a clean and bold sound. Getting that raspy sound that most associate with anything above f is not always a given, it's an effect/technique. Although, not having the option in the top layers for a more aggressive overblown sound is pretty limiting. Since you have those cuivre patches (not sure how aggressive those are) in a few libraries I'm surprised you're saying that it's not a real sound. Too bad they are usually recorded without legato and put in a sperate patch.

The way I understood it, and this might be a misunderstanding on my part, was as that you were implying that the samples of other libraries with more aggressive brass had been modified and "produced" after the recording to get that edgy and brassy sound with something like an EQ or exciter.

If you guys have a different philosophy for what you want the brass to sound like that's fine. The brass in AR1 sounds beautiful.

Saying that it's not a "real acoustic sound" seems a bit, I don't, disingenuous. It's definitely a technique that can be reproduced in the real world but there's a lot of things to consider to get a specific sound, but it's doable. We are not talking about a hyper-processed-hi-fi synthy sound.

Not trying to be mean or stir trouble because I don't care either way, but people were wondering and I knew you had already explained the situation and from your post, it seems like there's nothing to change because you are happy with the product.


----------



## Trash Panda

I believe a lot of people associate the cuivre, that rattling aggressive “brassy” sound, to the ff-fff dynamic.

I think Paul is saying that sound is more a combination of technique and production (EQ, saturation, etc.).


----------



## Jonathan Moray

Trash Panda said:


> I believe a lot of people associate the cuivre, that rattling aggressive “brassy” sound, to the ff-fff dynamic.
> 
> I think Paul is saying that sound is more a combination of technique and production (EQ, saturation, etc.).



Probably.

That's why it might just be a case of misunderstanding. Especially since I've heard the a6 Hrn patch in Symphonic Brass and that gets pretty loud and aggressive, but other than the a6 patches in Symphonic Brass, they often seem to be missing that top cuivre layer in their libraries, both for shorts and longs. I'm talking especially about the horns here.


----------



## jbuhler

Jonathan Moray said:


> Probably.
> 
> That's why it might just be a case of misunderstanding. Especially since I've heard the a6 Hrn patch in Symphonic Brass and that gets pretty loud and aggressive, but other than the a6 patches in Symphonic Brass, they often seem to be missing that top cuivre layer in their libraries, both for shorts and longs. I'm talking especially about the horns here.


Most of the SF brass instruments have separate (long) cuivre patches. I prefer this because it gives more room in CC1 for dynamic shaping on the other patches. I also like the OT approach where they make it easy to remove the top (or bottom) layer in order to allow more control.

As for shorts, I find the transitions between dynamic layers to be more of a problem—when you jump from one dynamic layer to another there’s a notable break because of the change in timbre—than getting a good raucous FF.


----------



## Jonathan Moray

jbuhler said:


> I also like the OT approach where they make it easy to remove the top (or bottom) layer in order to allow more control.



I agree, that's one of the better ways of handling it - at least the choice in the composer's hands. If that's not an option and you think the dynamics are too sensitive, there's the option to limit the CC movement in Kontakt so that you have the whole modwheel at your disposal but the value in Kontakt doesn't reach above 100. Not sure if that's possible in SF new player.



jbuhler said:


> As for shorts, I find the transitions between dynamic layers to be more of a problem—when you jump from one dynamic layer to another there’s a notable break because of the change in timbre—than getting a good raucous FF.



Yes, that's a huge problem with a lot of libraries when they opt for dynamic switching instead of dynamic crossfades. Not saying dynamic crossfading is better, it poses its own set of problems.


----------



## paulthomson

Just to note - cuivre is often a factor of both the style of horn being played (bell “throat” / mouthpiece etc) and an artistic decision on the basis of the player and or composer.

Cuivre does not imply fff - it’s simply a style of sound production using the embouchure and sometimes the hand in the bell. You can certainly play medium power Cuivre. I’d love to know how quiet it can go, I’ve never asked a horn player that.

On the question of whether or not to put a Cuivre layer at the top - well the above is one reason not to!! Although we have done in the past - and people are split between those who want to ride up into brassy tone at will and those who want full open tone to continue to the top layer. Inevitably you will lose part of the “open” top layer by cross fading into the Cuivre layer.

Cuivre also often sounds a bit strangled compared to the full open sound at full tilt. So it can paradoxically be quieter. This is another factor to consider when balancing your tracks - I promise you 4 horns playing full tilt with an open non brassy sound is insanely loud when you’re in the room - and to communicate that you have to balance properly so the relative volume to the rest of the orchestra is correct. If you turn that down, and you don’t have the “cue” or mental reminder of the brassy tone to make you think “the horns are loud” then it will feel and sound underwhelming.

Also - remember too much fff whether open or Cuivre will quickly sound fake - real players tire. It’s much better to establish your top layer so you still have room for brief incursions into ff and so on, to make it sound more realistic.


----------



## jbuhler

Jonathan Moray said:


> I agree, that's one of the better ways of handling it - at least the choice in the composer's hands. If that's not an option and you think the dynamics are too sensitive, there's the option to limit the CC movement in Kontakt so that you have the whole modwheel at your disposal but the value in Kontakt doesn't reach above 100. Not sure if that's possible in SF new player.


Of course you can create your own crossfade from the sustain patch to cuivre in a variety of ways if you need that. The number of times I’ve needed to do that is very small. And generally I’d rather have to do that occasionally than have to fight a basic sustain patch that has cuivre built into its dynamic profile.

ETA: also what @paulthomson said ☝️.


----------



## NoamL

*Just my opinion*

Before you say that two libraries don't have the same dynamics, it is best to adjust them to the same, what I'll call, *"reference volume."* Reference volume doesn't mean that two samples peak the same on the VU meter, it means that they sound like they were part of the same recording session. Putting libraries to the same reference volume is a process that takes me ages... and I don't blame @Daniel James for not doing it in the middle of a walkthrough.

BTW some of what I'm about to say is probably well known to people who make really good mockups, the usual VI-C suspects 


There are 5 factors that can trip you up when getting libraries to the same reference volume.

1. You must pick two samples of the same timbre (dynamic). A dynamic that was actually sampled in one library may only be available as a crossfade of 2 neighboring dynamics in another library. It is best to find two "pure samples" to compare if at all possible. Find them with your ears.

2. The two libraries may start with reference volumes that are far apart. This can confuse you into believing two samples are equivalent dynamics when they're not (the louder library's sample is a lower dynamic).

3. The balance of microphones changes how loud an instrument sounds at different dynamics (mostly the proximity effect, I think?). Reverb also changes this.

4. Libraries may produce different true dynamics on different notes despite the same MIDI instruction. On brass and woodwind libraries it's unfortunately common because the musician has to push much harder or hold off much more to produce the same _true_ dynamic (remember, not loudness, just intensity of timbre) in a tough part of their range. Sampling is not the same as playing music and it seems on some libraries the musicians didn't really understand "yes we want you to play a maximum ff low D on the flute, the composer might need it, doesn't matter if it's bad orchestration and there's nothing like it in the canon, the samples have to be consistent for programming." If you are comparing a chromatic scale played by two libraries (the better to have more reference material, rather than just comparing one note or one chord played by the two libraries), Library B may need different MIDI instructions over time to match the dynamics of the scale played by A.

5. Libraries may have differing reference volumes on two articulations of the same instrument. Maddening, but very common among nearly all sample developers unfortunately. Just to pick one example: in my opinion the tremolos in Spitfire Symphonic Strings have a louder reference volume than the legatos - and thus to balance them you need to put a higher-value CC7 tag on the legatos than the tremolos.

The whole process is kind of like straightening a picture frame.

You start by bringing two libraries A & B to the same rough volume, only to notice that your "better" reference (A) has much more close mic. So you turn up B's close mic, but now it needs slightly more reverb and slightly less volume to match A. As you get closer you realize that B's _forte_ that perfectly matches A's _forte_ is slightly higher CC1 than you thought, so you adjust that and then the whole process starts over. After an hour of this you maddeningly lose objectivity about whether the picture frame is straight, or not straight, or whether you can even see straight lines anymore.

The biggest problem when setting up libraries, that I haven't even mentioned yet, is that the first library you pick as a reference, against which all others are referenced, may not itself be _a good reference against real life_. That's why it's best for your first, "reference kilogram" reference to be a recording of a great film score or other piece of music you admire. Then find some libraries that can really deliver the same dynamic range and musicality as your reference. Then reference from there.

All of this raises the question of why balance libraries at all.

As an example, the 4 Horns in Abbey Road Orchestral Foundations have a nice _forte_ layer that's actually only available as a crossfade in Cinematic Studio Brass.

When you reference CC1 = 127 in the Abbey Road horns against CC1 = 85 (or so - again, it depends on the pitch range...) for CSB, you'll see that the Abbey horns have a clarity to them because they _don't _have a hint of that ff buzz coming through.

But those two dynamic layers won't even sound close to the same until you fix the volumes - here you need about CC7 = 95 for the CSB horn sustains, and 67 for the Abbey Road ones. Then you'll notice that the CSB horns have less reverb but also less close mic than the Abbey Road mix... see where this is going? 

Cinematic Studio Brass's horns on the other hand go to a _fff_ sustain that isn't available in Abbey Road (on the sustains of the two libraries). It's a sound that's possible in real life but only for a few seconds at a time.

The 4horn shorts in Abbey Road feel more musical than the ones in CSB - but watch out, because they need _higher_ CC7 than the Abbey Road Longs.

The Abbey Road swells easily beat "MIDI crescendos" in both libraries.

And finally, of course, CSB has peerless legato which Abbey lacks.

So I end up using the two libraries for different stuff, but this is only a recipe for mayhem if they aren't both brought to the same standard first!


----------



## Peter Satera

M_Helder said:


> Also, is it just me or does Spitfire Audio purposely avoids recording anything above MF? For such an iconic library to never be able to go above MF is heartbreaking. Why make customers leave and search for another product from another developer to fill the holes in the one they have already bought?
> 
> Why, dammit. Can anyone explain? I genuinely don’t get it.


I personally think the library can do loud well. It's all in context.


----------



## Justin L. Franks

OK, so the v1.0.5 update is finally showing up for me. But if it fixed the reported issues with this update (the articulation naming in the horns shorts patch, and the percussion key mappings), wouldn't it be a new version number?

I think I'm going to hold off on this update for the time being until I know whether the newly-introduced bugs have been fixed.


----------



## Peter Satera

Justin L. Franks said:


> OK, so the v1.0.5 update is finally showing up for me. But if it fixed the reported issues with this update (the articulation naming in the horns shorts patch, and the percussion key mappings), wouldn't it be a new version number?
> 
> I think I'm going to hold off on this update for the time being until I know whether the newly-introduced bugs have been fixed.


Yeah, most likely it would be v1.0.6, as those with v1.0.5 are updating too. That's the same assumption I made; that it was showing up it should be fixed, turns out - it wasn't. You're right to hold off if everything is stable for you, now.


----------



## zvenx

Just updated to 1.05 (thanks SFA), but yes indeed four patches (Trumpets, Horns, Low Brass and High Winds) where I believe Tenuto was is now Marcato too. (just the GUI though)

What is even stranger to me though, is has anyone reported it to SFA? When I chatted with them less than an hour ago, the agent said it was not in their log.
Strange.
rsp


----------



## Peter Satera

zvenx said:


> Just updated to 1.05 (thanks SFA), but yes indeed four patches (Trumpets, Horns, Low Brass and High Winds) where I believe Tenuto was is now Marcato too. (just the GUI though)
> 
> What is even stranger to me though, is has anyone reported it to SFA? When I chatted with them less than an hour ago, the agent said it was not in their log.
> Strange.
> rsp


I didn't, because I assumed it had already been reported as it was mentioned much earlier.


----------



## mgnoatto

I found in my folders that I don’t have any instruments on v1.05 but I do on 1.02 and 1.04. I asked to the support a way to see what changes in the new update cause the .html is on the documentation folder don’t t have any information


----------



## JGRaynaud

Jonathan Moray said:


> Paul even stated that the loud brass sound we hear in a lot of scores is fake and that it's "not a real acoustic sound"


Really ? On many "acoustic only" scores we can hear the horns blowing a lot. I have many cues of John Williams in mind where you can hear the horns being very powerful and not that much with a sizzling sound. 

Here is the first example that is popping in my mind : 


or this :


----------



## Jonathan Moray

JGRaynaud said:


> Really ? On many "acoustic only" scores we can hear the horns blowing a lot. I have many cues of John Williams in mind where you can hear the horns being very powerful and not that much with a sizzling sound.
> 
> Here is the first example that is popping in my mind :
> 
> 
> or this :




Let it go.

I don't agree with the statement either and I believe that I and a few others must have misinterpreted him. He's recorded enough to actually know that aggressive brassy brass (cuivre) is a real acoustic sound. I'm still not sure what he meant though.

Actually, a lot of JW scores came to mind when I read that statement, you know, JW with the unrealistic sounding orchestral template and the master of trailer music, bombastic drums, and synths.


----------



## paulthomson

Obviously I’m not talking about John Williams.

I’m talking about hybrid (did I not mention that word several times?) film and games scores - super over the top sound. As per the tutorial on my Yt vid.

I mean - where do I say Cuivre is not an acoustic sound?? I’ve recorded it on several sample libraries?

I do sometimes wonder why I bother!!


----------



## wilifordmusic

paulthomson said:


> Obviously I’m not talking about John Williams.
> 
> I’m talking about hybrid (did I not mention that word several times?) film and games scores - super over the top sound. As per the tutorial on my Yt vid.
> 
> I mean - where do I say Cuivre is not an acoustic sound?? I’ve recorded it on several sample libraries?
> 
> I do sometimes wonder why I bother!!


Don't let them get you down.


----------



## antanasb

paulthomson said:


> Obviously I’m not talking about John Williams.
> 
> I’m talking about hybrid (did I not mention that word several times?) film and games scores - super over the top sound. As per the tutorial on my Yt vid.
> 
> I mean - where do I say Cuivre is not an acoustic sound?? I’ve recorded it on several sample libraries?
> 
> I do sometimes wonder why I bother!!


As Paul just said Cuivre =/= FFF. It is a different technique, hence the sound is "produced".

Having the libraries fade to Cuivre at max CC1 does not teach good things, I think...

I found this video helpful on demystifying the french horn techniques and nuances further...


Somewhere in here, Tim Davies says, that sometimes they need to play very loud and clean, and they can do that using appropriate horn. And, as far as I understand, they then can add the Cuivre on top, if needed. (If the instrument is smaller, the sound is brassier naturally, so again -- it depends..)


----------



## M_Helder

antanasb said:


> As Paul just said Cuivre =/= FFF. It is a different technique, hence the sound is "produced".
> 
> Having the libraries fade to Cuivre at max CC1 does not teach good things, I think...
> 
> I found this video helpful on demystifying the french horn techniques and nuances further...
> 
> 
> Somewhere in here, Tim Davies says, that sometimes they need to play very loud and clean, and they can do that using appropriate horn. And, as far as I understand, they then can add the Cuivre on top, if needed. (If the instrument is smaller, the sound is brassier naturally, so again -- it depends..)



Very interesting, thank you.


----------



## Daniel James

paulthomson said:


> Just to note - cuivre is often a factor of both the style of horn being played (bell “throat” / mouthpiece etc) and an artistic decision on the basis of the player and or composer.
> 
> Cuivre does not imply fff - it’s simply a style of sound production using the embouchure and sometimes the hand in the bell. You can certainly play medium power Cuivre. I’d love to know how quiet it can go, I’ve never asked a horn player that.
> 
> On the question of whether or not to put a Cuivre layer at the top - well the above is one reason not to!! Although we have done in the past - and people are split between those who want to ride up into brassy tone at will and those who want full open tone to continue to the top layer. Inevitably you will lose part of the “open” top layer by cross fading into the Cuivre layer.
> 
> Cuivre also often sounds a bit strangled compared to the full open sound at full tilt. So it can paradoxically be quieter. This is another factor to consider when balancing your tracks - I promise you 4 horns playing full tilt with an open non brassy sound is insanely loud when you’re in the room - and to communicate that you have to balance properly so the relative volume to the rest of the orchestra is correct. If you turn that down, and you don’t have the “cue” or mental reminder of the brassy tone to make you think “the horns are loud” then it will feel and sound underwhelming.
> 
> Also - remember too much fff whether open or Cuivre will quickly sound fake - real players tire. It’s much better to establish your top layer so you still have room for brief incursions into ff and so on, to make it sound more realistic.


I mean I understand the justification, but at the same time you can't fault people for pointing out that other libraries *can* cut through in an epic mix with that top layer when yours just simply do not (as I am sure you have begrudgingly seen me point out before).

And epic music I imagine does make up a portion of your user base (given your attempt to market to that field multiple times)...a genre not known for its pursuit of realism. All this says to me is that epic composers, or those looking for the hyper real should avoid your brass libraries as you _prefer_ the more muffled, yet realistic, sound as a creative choice.

If thats a creative decision on your part I fully respect it. It wont make me want to buy your brass libraries, but I respect your right to make whatever the fuck you want 😂

To me 'real' is never the aim, samples are not real, technology still isn't quite there to pretend they are. Instead I aim for 'good' or at least what good means to me. Which may not always sound real, but that FFF feeling can add a sense of drama and power that hits emotionally that one simply cant do with the more 'realistic' yet muffled tone from Spitfire brass.

As you pointed out in a different thread, it would be a seemingly simple thing for you to add with EQ, and would satiate your 'epic' users (again a group you actively market to) it just seems a bit of an oxymoron to have a desire to sell to them but not cater to what they would actually want. You are not an idiot, I know that you know people will reach for the 12 horns of cinebrass or the 9horns of Ark1 for that epic sound....you yourself said it was an easy thing to add. So why not just add it? rather than essentially tell people the way they compose is wrong and unrealistic.

-DJ


----------



## MartinH.

Daniel James said:


> You are not an idiot, I know that you know people will reach for the 12 horns of cinebrass or the 9horns of Ark1 for that epic sound....you yourself said it was an easy thing to add. So why not just add it? rather than essentially tell people the way they compose is wrong and unrealistic.



Maybe it's planned as one of the future expansions that hasn't been announced yet?


----------



## Daniel James

MartinH. said:


> Maybe it's planned as one of the future expansions that hasn't been announced yet?


This part makes it feel like its not.



> On the question of whether or not to put a Cuivre layer at the top - well the above is one reason not to!! Although we have done in the past - and people are split between those who want to ride up into brassy tone at will and those who want full open tone to continue to the top layer. Inevitably you will lose part of the “open” top layer by cross fading into the Cuivre layer.


----------



## Gerbil

Daniel James said:


> This part makes it feel like its not.


It might be as an additional patch. There's 'Bells Up' and 'Cuivre' patches in their Studio Brass.


----------



## Daniel James

Gerbil said:


> It might be as an additional patch. There's 'Bells Up' and 'Cuivre' patches in their Studio Brass.


If they add it I am 100% behind it BTW. In fact my post was actually a strong insinuation that they _should_ be adding this layer to all their brass.

-DJ


----------



## antanasb

Daniel James said:


> I mean I understand the justification, but at the same time you can't fault people for pointing out that other libraries *can* cut through in an epic mix with that top layer when yours just simply do not (as I am sure you have begrudgingly seen me point out before).
> 
> And epic music I imagine does make up a portion of your user base (given your attempt to market to that field multiple times)...a genre not known for its pursuit of realism. All this says to me is that epic composers, or those looking for the hyper real should avoid your brass libraries as you _prefer_ the more muffled, yet realistic, sound as a creative choice.
> 
> If thats a creative decision on your part I fully respect it. It wont make me want to buy your brass libraries, but I respect your right to make whatever the fuck you want 😂
> 
> To me 'real' is never the aim, samples are not real, technology still isn't quite there to pretend they are. Instead I aim for 'good' or at least what good means to me. Which may not always sound real, but that FFF feeling can add a sense of drama and power that hits emotionally that one simply cant do with the more 'realistic' yet muffled tone from Spitfire brass.
> 
> As you pointed out in a different thread, it would be a seemingly simple thing for you to add with EQ, and would satiate your 'epic' users (again a group you actively market to) it just seems a bit of an oxymoron to have a desire to sell to them but not cater to what they would actually want. You are not an idiot, I know that you know people will reach for the 12 horns of cinebrass or the 9horns of Ark1 for that epic sound....you yourself said it was an easy thing to add. So why not just add it? rather than essentially tell people the way they compose is wrong and unrealistic.
> 
> -DJ


There is a very good Cinesamples video on horns, which I discovered recently. I was quite hesitant on posting it here, on Spitfire commercial thread, but due to the discussion and available information there, which I think is really relevant, I will still post it here.



The good bit starts at 19:00.

There, they talk exactly about this issue. That samples are way more aggresive than real instruments and players, and that people got used to the sampled sound of twenty something horns playing at the same time...

Then, they also mention, that this influences people coming to record stuff with real musicians, and that then real musicians falls flat on their faces trying to emulate that CC1 127 FFF Cuivre turned to 11 all the time in perfect timing and intonation...

I feel this is a legitimate concern, and more or less support the "real sound" approach. Especially, as there are not many of developers who are doing this..

If I could choose one -- I would go for more natural sound. But I agree -- it does not hurt to have both options, right?

At least in my opinion?

I hope the video is not hugely inapropriate...


----------



## Gerbil

Daniel James said:


> If they add it I am 100% behind it BTW. In fact my post was actually a strong insinuation that they _should_ be adding this layer to all their brass.
> 
> -DJ


I'd like it for sure. They're in Abbey Road. Real, hyper-real, positively mental...chuck the lot in and I'll buy it.


----------



## Daniel James

antanasb said:


> There, they talk exactly about this issue. That samples are way more aggresive than real instruments and players, and that people got used to the sampled sound of twenty something horns playing at the same time...


Thats the point, we are working in the sampled realm, we are not restricted by the limitations of the real world. As I mentioned, in Epic or Trailer music, the hyper real is a sought after sound. This is a market they are clearly interested in selling too...so why not add the option, as mentioned by Paul, its an easy fix.

Real doesnt always have to be the end game, there are times when going beyond real can say what you want to say better. As one can in libraries like Cinebrass Pro, Metropolis Ark, Angry Brass, Trailer Brass etc.

-DJ


----------



## JohnG

I like having cuivre separate from normal playing. I don't agree that it should be in one patch. It's easy enough to layer and then you have more control anyway.

I've written a lot of trailers and I agree with Paul's point:



paulthomson said:


> I promise you 4 horns playing full tilt with an open non brassy sound is insanely loud when you’re in the room


You don't actually need 8 or 12 horns to get a big sound. Mind you, it's cool, but it also demands an exceptionally good recording engineer, or the big section can sound not so big after all. Twelve horns in Abbey Road does sound luscious, and the HTTYD score, one of the loveliest in recent years, has mucho horns, so I'm not bagging it at all, just agreeing with Paul that four often does the trick just fine, especially if the writing supports the line.

I recorded a brass section live for a trailer for a movie I did not too long ago and had to smile at how loud the four horns were -- sometimes using samples it's easy to forget.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

I for one am glad Spitfire is taking a more realistic approach. Why ingrain wrong expectations or bad habits in your users which will come to light when they go from mockup to standing in front of a live orchestra only to realize their samples led them astray. If you want a fake sound, learn to produce and create it. That's what sound design is for. AROOF was never marketed as an epic library (same with BBCSO which had similar criticism).


----------



## Daniel James

ALittleNightMusic said:


> I for one am glad Spitfire is taking a more realistic approach. Why ingrain wrong expectations or bad habits in your users which will come to light when they go from mockup to standing in front of a live orchestra only to realize their samples led them astray. If you want a fake sound, learn to produce and create it. That's what sound design is for. AROOF was never marketed as an epic library (same with BBCSO which had similar criticism).


Pointing out a library doesn't have that hyper real 'epic' layer isn't the same as saying its objectively bad. It just means it lacks something you can get easily from their competition. Again a market they do covet for example: "ALBION ONE: EPIC COMPOSER TOOLS" a library which lacks the 'epic' layer. To point that out is a valid point I believe.

And again, while not marketed specifically to epic composers with BBC, I believe that many who value my opinion do care about the epic layer, so pointing out Spitfire libraries that lack the ability other companies libraries actually have is also valid.

You don't have to agree with me or value my opinion of course, thats perfectly fine to feel like its irrelevant. But don't assume that because something doesn't matter to you, it doesn't matter to others.

-DJ


----------



## pawelmorytko

I honestly wish every sampled horn section had the dynamics of CSB - it's such a great wide range of dynamics, and the top layer is just insane. But even then, it's used very sparingly for me, most melodies will sit around the 70-110 CC area, but it's so great to be able to push it that little further sometimes at the start of a note or an ending crescendo. I've never felt like I wanted or needed the CSB horns to go any louder than they already do, it's just perfect.


----------



## ism

Daniel James said:


> Pointing out a library doesn't have that hyper real 'epic' layer isn't the same as saying its objectively bad. It just means it lacks something you can get easily from their competition. Again a market they do covet for example: "ALBION ONE: EPIC COMPOSER TOOLS" a library which lacks the 'epic' layer. To point that out is a valid point I believe.
> 
> And again, while not marketed specifically to epic composers with BBC, I believe that many who value my opinion do care about the epic layer, so pointing out Spitfire libraries that lack the ability other companies libraries actually have is also valid.
> 
> You don't have to agree with me or value my opinion of course, thats perfectly fine to feel like its irrelevant. But don't assume that because something doesn't matter to you, it doesn't matter to others.
> 
> -DJ



I think you mean ‘hyper-epic’. (Which I completely respect as a perfectly valid lifestyle choice, let me be clear. )

But if this isn’t ‘epic’, and Albion One isn’t epic, then neither is John Williams. 

So fair to point out that need to do your own hyper epic sound design here, depending on your personal choices in the hyper epic lifecycle.

But surely if this sound is epic enough for Indiana Jones, then it’s epic enough to still be called ‘epic’?


----------



## Daniel James

ism said:


> I think you mean ‘hyper-epic’. (Which I completely respect as a perfectly valid lifestyle choice, let me be clear. )
> 
> But if this isn’t ‘epic’, and Albion One isn’t epic, then neither is John Williams.
> 
> So fair to point out that need to do your own hyper epic sound design here, depending on your personal choices in the hyper epic lifecycle.
> 
> But surely if this sound is epic enough for Indiana Jones, then it’s epic enough to still be called ‘epic’?


I'd call John Williams something other than epic these days, words change meaning as things evolve, Perhaps majestic would be more suitable?. But the 'hyper-epic' sound is, by design, bigger than life. Balanced with the orchestra correctly in a purely orchestral sence his brass is huge. But in order to cut through the walls of hybrid sound design, and the power that comes from those, the brass needs to goto a new level of size. 12horns from cs can do it. 9horns from Ark1 can do it. Audio Imperias libraries do it. This isn't something new and you know exactly what I am referring too.

You can show me a John Williams piece as an example of epic and I think it would still struggle to compete against some of the apocalyptic end of the world sized epic productions I have heard. But thats subjective and my opinion on it.

It would be a moot point if Spitfire have no desire to cater to the epic style but they very clearly do. So me mentioning its absence in a library is valid I think. And as mentioned above they seemingly know how to do it but as a creative decision, choose not to include it. Which is their prerogative, but me saying this might not be great for the kind of music I, and some of the people who value my opinion, write often, isnt somehow an attack on them. Its just a matter of fact, spoken from my lived experience in this industry. Again no one here has to agree with that. Just saying how I see it, and would love to see things develop. But if they have no desire to cater to the people like me who value things like this thats fine, we have plenty of options.

-DJ


----------



## Saxer

I don't think that every library has to have everything. There are tons of fff-layers out there. And edge of silence and everything in between. Nobody is missing the ppp-layer in ARK1. Or if so, choose or add another library. Probably all of us have tons on our drives.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Daniel James said:


> Pointing out a library doesn't have that hyper real 'epic' layer isn't the same as saying its objectively bad. It just means it lacks something you can get easily from their competition. Again a market they do covet for example: "ALBION ONE: EPIC COMPOSER TOOLS" a library which lacks the 'epic' layer. To point that out is a valid point I believe.
> 
> And again, while not marketed specifically to epic composers with BBC, I believe that many who value my opinion do care about the epic layer, so pointing out Spitfire libraries that lack the ability other companies libraries actually have is also valid.
> 
> You don't have to agree with me or value my opinion of course, thats perfectly fine to feel like its irrelevant. But don't assume that because something doesn't matter to you, it doesn't matter to others.
> 
> -DJ


Where did I assume that? The marketing comment was referencing your point (stated multiple times) that Spitfire were marketing to the epic composer crowd...which might be the case for certain libraries, but certainly isn't with Abbey Road or BBCSO. You can point out what you'd like, but I think Paul made it clear they have gone for realistic horn representation in this library (and in BBCSO) vs. adopting a more sound design approach. If that sound matters to you, these are not the right libraries for you (as your video reviews seem to indicate) - or learn how to do the sound design on top of these libraries. I'm stating I like they stuck to a more realistic approach. That matters to people that don't judge a library based on how loud the braams are.


----------



## NoamL

Daniel have you played the 8 piece low brass section in Abbey Road? It goes pretty hard. So do the 4 tpts...


----------



## mgnoatto

I just want back my "right hand" on the percussion that went missing in v1.05


----------



## Justin L. Franks

mgnoatto said:


> I just want back my "right hand" on the percussion that went missing in v1.05


In the meantime, you could always make a second track, transposed down an octave, and record both tracks simultaneously.


----------



## antanasb

Saxer said:


> I don't think that every library has to have everything. There are tons of fff-layers out there. And edge of silence and everything in between. Nobody is missing the ppp-layer in ARK1. Or if so, choose or add another library. Probably all of us have tons on our drives.



Exactly my thoughts. There are many other libraries and especially — cheap a la carte options from OT, which can do that FFF sizzly brass. Spitfire did not add that, and that is fine. Other products can do that, but they may lack in other areas. There is choice, and choice is good..


----------



## ism

Daniel James said:


> I'd call John Williams something other than epic these days, words change meaning as things evolve, Perhaps majestic would be more suitable?. But the 'hyper-epic' sound is, by design, bigger than life. Balanced with the orchestra correctly in a purely orchestral sence his brass is huge. But in order to cut through the walls of hybrid sound design, and the power that comes from those, the brass needs to goto a new level of size. 12horns from cs can do it. 9horns from Ark1 can do it. Audio Imperias libraries do it. This isn't something new and you know exactly what I am referring too.
> 
> You can show me a John Williams piece as an example of epic and I think it would still struggle to compete against some of the apocalyptic end of the world sized epic productions I have heard. But thats subjective and my opinion on it.
> 
> It would be a moot point if Spitfire have no desire to cater to the epic style but they very clearly do. So me mentioning its absence in a library is valid I think. And as mentioned above they seemingly know how to do it but as a creative decision, choose not to include it. Which is their prerogative, but me saying this might not be great for the kind of music I, and some of the people who value my opinion, write often, isnt somehow an attack on them. Its just a matter of fact, spoken from my lived experience in this industry. Again no one here has to agree with that. Just saying how I see it, and would love to see things develop. But if they have no desire to cater to the people like me who value things like this thats fine, we have plenty of options.
> 
> -DJ


Ok, well, if Williams isn’t epic, then you’re totally right. 

But then nothing before, say, 1997 is epic anymore.

And this has broader implications. Wagner, for instance - used to be epic, but no longer epic. Homer - no longer epic. Virgil - definitely not epic if Homer isn’t epic anymore. 

Words do change. And with your social media following, you do have a disproportionate amount of power in influencing which words get to mean what, at least within a certain marketing discourse. 

But let me make a last gasp pitch to save the traditional meaning of ‘epic’: There are hundreds - thousands - of years of human culture invested in the epic mode of human expression. And it seems a pity to simply jettison all of this and now insist that ‘Epic’ is something else. Especially when words like ‘bombastic’ , ‘hyper-epic’, or even just ‘really *%&$ing loud’ would carry the concept of this ‘new epic’ just as handily.


For it just seems a shame to abandon all the rich meanings and traditions of the word ‘epic’ and replace them with something that’s just a single, extremely modern, style.


----------



## Go To 11

Daniel James said:


> This part makes it feel like its not.


Abbey Road Epic Brass expansion mentioned here. Sounds like you might get your FFF after all?:


----------



## Daniel James

ism said:


> Ok, well, if Williams isn’t epic, then you’re totally right.
> 
> But then nothing before, say, 1997 is epic anymore.
> 
> And this has broader implications. Wagner, for instance - used to be epic, but no longer epic. Homer - no longer epic. Virgil - definitely not epic if Homer isn’t epic anymore.
> 
> Words do change. And with your social media following, you do have a disproportionate amount of power in influencing which words get to mean what, at least within a certain marketing discourse.
> 
> But let me make a last gasp pitch to save the traditional meaning of ‘epic’: There are hundreds - thousands - of years of human culture invested in the epic mode of human expression. And it seems a pity to simply jettison all of this and now insist that ‘Epic’ is something else. Especially when words like ‘bombastic’ , ‘hyper-epic’, or even just ‘really *%&$ing loud’ would carry the concept of this ‘new epic’ just as handily.
> 
> 
> For it just seems a shame to abandon all the rich meanings and traditions of the word ‘epic’ and replace them with something that’s just a single, extremely modern, style.


Epic to me seems to be that feel of hugeness, of scale, of power. When you have technology that allows genres to supersede the previous champion of 'epic', when it can overpower what epic used to mean, then the previous work is no longer up to the power standard of 'epic'. It _was_ epic but compared to what we can do today, some might argue it no longer holds that title. (you dont have to agree here before we go round in circles)

But being the most epic doesn't equate to 'better' music,_ that_ subjective, but being the biggest or most powerful sounding is something we can more easily come close to consensus on.

No one is suggesting that once you are no longer the epitome of epic you are somehow worse than you used to be. But you move from being 'epic' into a new category. 'Classical' music all got lumped together overtime. The same will happen to film/game/epic music in the future and a new epic will be born. John Williams might be called 'classical Hollywood' these days, but I personally refer to his work as majestic.

-DJ


----------



## pawelmorytko

antanasb said:


> Exactly my thoughts. There are many other libraries and especially — cheap a la carte options from OT, which can do that FFF sizzly brass. Spitfire did not add that, and that is fine. Other products can do that, but they may lack in other areas. There is choice, and choice is good..


I think the main argument was to have one patch with a whole range of dynamics though, and not relying on one library to do p-mf and another to do f-fff, cause at that point you're probably having to hop between libraries, section sizes, halls and players, just to reach a different dynamic that your library doesn't let you do and it can get a bit messy


----------



## mgnoatto

Justin L. Franks said:


> In the meantime, you could always make a second track, transposed down an octave, and record both tracks simultaneously.


I would prefer a rollback to 1.04 lol


----------



## Sarah Mancuso

When the unrealistic sound-design brass hits:


----------



## Justin L. Franks

mgnoatto said:


> I would prefer a rollback to 1.04 lol


There was a 1.0.4? I have been on 1.0.2 since I bought it at the tail end of the last sale, but the first available update I had was 1.0.5 (which I did not update because I saw the reports of issues first. I only saw the 1.0.5 update just a few days ago too. And I checked for updates daily.


----------



## JGRaynaud

paulthomson said:


> Obviously I’m not talking about John Williams.
> 
> I’m talking about hybrid (did I not mention that word several times?) film and games scores - super over the top sound.


Sorry I didn't read that because of the amount of comments in this thread (58 pages is a lot.. I didn't go through all of them).

Then I agree with you in this regard.


----------



## M_Helder

pawelmorytko said:


> I think the main argument was to have one patch with a whole range of dynamics though, and not relying on one library to do p-mf and another to do f-fff, cause at that point you're probably having to hop between libraries, section sizes, halls and players, just to reach a different dynamic that your library doesn't let you do and it can get a bit messy


Thank you. It was a question of convenience, not a debate on what's epic or not.
I am perfectly aware of what this library is and don't expect it to trailer braaam me all the way.

But let me get this straight, EWHB, CB and CSB have an artificially produced sound which is not possible (or highly unlikely) with real brass section? You learn something new every day.


----------



## mgnoatto

Justin L. Franks said:


> There was a 1.0.4? I have been on 1.0.2 since I bought it at the tail end of the last sale, but the first available update I had was 1.0.5 (which I did not update because I saw the reports of issues first. I only saw the 1.0.5 update just a few days ago too. And I checked for updates daily.


I have v.1.02 and v1.04 folder instruments. But I just realized that v.1.04 was created the day I´ve updated v.1.05 so they must be wrong labelled. Maybe I can load the older instruments... I will check if that is possible


----------



## molemac

Sorry if I missed it , but did the problem of the update to 1.05 with missing drums get solved , loading older projects now have missing timps and other drums


----------



## jamie8

molemac said:


> Sorry if I missed it , but did the problem of the update to 1.05 with missing drums get solved , loading older projects now have missing timps and other drums


No fix yet for 1.05 or for the confirmed transpose problem with bbcso 1.2


----------



## molemac

jamie8 said:


> No fix yet for 1.05 or for the confirmed transpose problem with bbcso 1.2


thanks , Thats a real pain all my mixes are messed up. whats the transpose problem in BBcso 1.2


----------



## molemac

molemac said:


> thanks , Thats a real pain all my mixes are messed up. whats the transpose problem in BBcso 1.2


dont suppose there is a way to revert back to the original ?


----------



## jamie8

molemac said:


> thanks , Thats a real pain all my mixes are messed up. whats the transpose problem in BBcso 1.2


If you transpose up or down in the plugin you get an extra octave of the same pitch either down or up , i think this happens in the abby road plugin as well in 1.05 , say if the last note-is a c “ you get that same pitch either an octave up or down one octave below or up. Depending on wether you transpose -12 or up+12 😊


----------



## jamie8

molemac said:


> dont suppose there is a way to revert back to the original ?


Not that im aware of unless you had a copy of not only the older plugin but also the sample s and presets associated with it!.


----------



## DrMickGotSick

molemac said:


> dont suppose there is a way to revert back to the original ?


Support should be able to help you.


----------



## mgnoatto

They sent me the v1.0.2 today, I didn't have the chance to try it though. I suppose I have to delete the folder with the v1.0.5 (called v1.0.4)


----------



## molemac

DrMickGotSick said:


> Support should be able to help you.


Ok will send them a request , would be good to have both available. Lesson, dont upgrade during projects that aren’t finished. Doh. or stick with original and dont always assume the upgrade is going to be better.


----------



## mgnoatto

molemac said:


> Ok will send them a request , would be good to have both available. Lesson, dont upgrade during projects that aren’t finished. Doh. or stick with original and dont always assume the upgrade is going to be better.


To do the rollback they told me to delete the instruments folder called 1.0.4 to do the rollback (you should have another folder called 1.0.2) I didn’t try this yet


----------



## mgnoatto

Well I´ve tried deleting both 1.0.4 folders and doesn´t work. Also tried copying 1.0.2 into 1.0.4 folders and doesn´t work either.
I don´t understand why the change in the percussion patches... Changelog doesn´t work...


----------



## borisb2

mgnoatto said:


> Well I´ve tried deleting both 1.0.4 folders and doesn´t work. Also tried copying 1.0.2 into 1.0.4 folders and doesn´t work either.
> I don´t understand why the change in the percussion patches... Changelog doesn´t work...


doesnt work here either .. stuck at the moment with the most buggy plugin in the history of VI .. not even sure how that version passed the trash bin.


----------



## Justin L. Franks

mgnoatto said:


> Well I´ve tried deleting both 1.0.4 folders and doesn´t work. Also tried copying 1.0.2 into 1.0.4 folders and doesn´t work either.
> I don´t understand why the change in the percussion patches... Changelog doesn´t work...


You're probably going to need to replace the actual 1.0.5 plugin with the 1.0.2 version too, not just the presets/patches/samples. Can Spitfire send you that version of the plugin?


----------



## dcoscina

As a brass player myself I find Spitfire to be on point with how brass sound in real life. As Paul said, if you are looking for epic loud offerings, there are many other options out there.

oh and Berlin Brass has also been criticized for being too soft as well.


----------



## mgnoatto

Justin L. Franks said:


> You're probably going to need to replace the actual 1.0.5 plugin with the 1.0.2 version too, not just the presets/patches/samples. Can Spitfire send you that version of the plugin?


They told me that if I deleted those folders, the plugin would work with the 1.0.2 presets... AFAIK there is no way to install a different version than the last.
I´m not happy with this, it´s been like 10 days (?) that this update with the bug is still there, they should´ve fixed it by now. Maybe it isn't affecting all the computers? or they don´t use the percussion?


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

@SpitfireSupport @Karma Should we contact support directly to resolve this or is there an updated fixed version imminent? I think the starting keyswitch got changed too since all of my expression maps broke with the 1.0.5 release.


----------



## Justin L. Franks

mgnoatto said:


> They told me that if I deleted those folders, the plugin would work with the 1.0.2 presets... AFAIK there is no way to install a different version than the last.
> I´m not happy with this, it´s been like 10 days (?) that this update with the bug is still there, they should´ve fixed it by now. Maybe it isn't affecting all the computers? or they don´t use the percussion?


Yes, if the issue was in the presets, deleting the v1.0.5 presets should have worked. But if the issue is in the plugin itself (or how the plugin is reading the presets), it would still have the same issues, even with the older presets.

Something was broken with the update, and we'll just have to wait for it to be fixed with another update.

Luckily, I saw the reports of the issues before the 1.0.5 update even showed up for me (it took over a week from when people first reported the update was available). So I'm still on 1.0.2.

I would offer to send you the 1.0.2 version of the plugin so you could try, but unfortunately that would certainly be a violation of the license terms. In the meantime, I'd ask Spitfire support if they could send that over to you, since deleting the new presets did not work.


----------



## mgnoatto

Justin L. Franks said:


> Yes, if the issue was in the presets, deleting the v1.0.5 presets should have worked. But if the issue is in the plugin itself (or how the plugin is reading the presets), it would still have the same issues, even with the older presets.
> 
> Something was broken with the update, and we'll just have to wait for it to be fixed with another update.
> 
> Luckily, I saw the reports of the issues before the 1.0.5 update even showed up for me (it took over a week from when people first reported the update was available). So I'm still on 1.0.2.
> 
> I would offer to send you the 1.0.2 version of the plugin so you could try, but unfortunately that would certainly be a violation of the license terms. In the meantime, I'd ask Spitfire support if they could send that over to you, since deleting the new presets did not work.


Yeah, I told support on Friday, and then the weekend happened 😢


----------



## mgnoatto

I had the plugin 1.0.2 in my support email. I thought they were the 1.0.2 presets and only had to delete the presets, so I didn´t download the attachment. My bad!


----------



## Soundbed

The world did not need another Star Wars mockup, but I wanted to try it (my first time!).... Used ARO only, except for a harp. No mixing outside what the Spitfire Abbey Road One plugin can do internally -- meaning basic panning and mic position levels, reverb and expression modulation.


----------



## Trash Panda

Soundbed said:


> The world did not need another Star Wars mockup


Poppycock! There’s always room for another Star Wars mock-up. Nice job!


----------



## Evans

I'd say those pros and cons are right on the mark.


----------



## Soundbed

Trash Panda said:


> Poppycock! There’s always room for another Star Wars mock-up. Nice job!


Thank you!!


Evans said:


> I'd say those pros and cons are right on the mark.


Cheers, thanks!


----------



## shropshirelad

The ultimate Abbey Road One accessory for your home or studio!


----------



## Jdiggity1

shropshirelad said:


> The ultimate Abbey Road One accessory for your home or studio!


Abbey Road DAW?


----------



## companyofquail

Jdiggity1 said:


> Abbey Road DAW?


i laughed harder at this than one should


----------



## jaketanner

Eyeing this library...heard there was an update...can anyone comment if it addressed all issues people had prior? And is there any info on the next single release?


----------



## Justin L. Franks

jaketanner said:


> Eyeing this library...heard there was an update...can anyone comment if it addressed all issues people had prior? And is there any info on the next single release?


Unfortunately, the latest update (v1.0.5) actually broke several things. We are waiting on those to be fixed.

I was lucky enough to see the reports of these new issues before I actually updated, so I'm on v1.0.2 which is running well.


----------



## jaketanner

Justin L. Franks said:


> Unfortunately, the latest update (v1.0.5) actually broke several things. We are waiting on those to be fixed.
> 
> I was lucky enough to see the reports of these new issues before I actually updated, so I'm on v1.0.2 which is running well.


Ok, thanks for the update and sorry you have to wait.


----------



## Devoluti0n

This library is actually the first one I'm listening to, which makes me wanna buy it and start learning (I'm a beginner hobbyist) because I think it does sounds amazing and inspiring. I just saw that DJ video on youtube with all the weird behavior and bugs :(. That kinda stopped me from buying it for now. I hope everything is going to be corrected in a near future. I don't know if I can find a change log or something to know when I can go for it, but I feel like it's the most tasteful library for now. I'm just sad there isn't legato !!


----------



## molemac

jaketanner said:


> Ok, thanks for the update and sorry you have to wait.


Anyone manage to solve this percussion update issue and revert to previous update? I wrote to support at spitfire 2 weeks ago , radio silence.


----------



## jamie8

molemac said:


> Anyone manage to solve this percussion update issue and revert to previous update? I wrote to support at spitfire 2 weeks ago , radio silence.


same here but its been 6 weeks , seems they are more interested in releasing new librarys, they broke what used to work and now we wait.


----------



## Kevperry777

jamie8 said:


> same here but its been 6 weeks , seems they are more interested in releasing new librarys, they broke what used to work and now we wait.



Yeah...this is a shame. New flagship library broken. I love my one handed percussion patches.


----------



## jamie8

ok 1.07 is out ,..... they fixed the percussion issues with the missing divisi but still no tuning fix for transposing and also in the timpani mix 2 is still not working .
may have to download the lib again and see if that fixes it but hey , everything else works this time and no dual marcato in the brass... yeah!!!! perhaps someone else can chime in as to wether or not the mix two with version 1.07 timpani works for them?


----------



## Peter Satera

jamie8 said:


> ok 1.07 is out ,..... they fixed the percussion issues with the missing divisi but still no tuning fix for transposing and also in the timpani mix 2 is still not working .
> may have to download the lib again and see if that fixes it but hey , everything else works this time and no dual marcato in the brass... yeah!!!! perhaps someone else can chime in as to wether or not the mix two with version 1.07 timpani works for them?


Funnily enough my Mix 2 is fine, but my Mix 1 is now no longer working... :(


----------



## EricValette

jamie8 said:


> ok 1.07 is out ,..... they fixed the percussion issues with the missing divisi but still no tuning fix for transposing and also in the timpani mix 2 is still not working .
> may have to download the lib again and see if that fixes it but hey , everything else works this time and no dual marcato in the brass... yeah!!!! perhaps someone else can chime in as to wether or not the mix two with version 1.07 timpani works for them?


Same thing here with 1.07 ... timpani "divisi" mix 1 works well but mix 2 is broken (no sound at all)...


----------



## ridgero

Via Mail


----------



## yiph2

ridgero said:


> Via Mail


Probably just the stuff Paul announced (the sparkling woodwinds and low strings)


----------



## AudioLoco

ridgero said:


> Via Mail


Finally! Can't wait...


----------



## ridgero

yiph2 said:


> Probably just the stuff Paul announced (the sparkling woodwinds and low strings)


Yes, those are the next ones.


----------



## dzilizzi

Finally get my free Sparkling Woodwinds!


----------



## muziksculp

Do you think it is essential to have AR1-Foundations library, before adding some of the AR Expansions they will be releasing soon (low Strings, legatos, ..etc.) ?


----------



## BasariStudios

dzilizzi said:


> Finally get my free Sparkling Woodwinds!


How's that?


----------



## TintoL

muziksculp said:


> Do you think it is essential to have AR1-Foundations library, before adding some of the AR Expansions they will be releasing soon (low Strings, legatos, ..etc.) ?


Well, I find that is a tough question to answer. It kind of depends on your objectives. 

Personally, I find that ALL the SHORTS are a must have. Unless you are only playing long linear lines and exposed. 

I can imagine The essential package getting a bit redundant once we have legatos for everything. However, the shorts are already there, and those are a needed no matter what. 

I hope that helps.


----------



## muziksculp

TintoL said:


> Well, I find that is a tough question to answer. It kind of depends on your objectives.
> 
> Personally, I find that ALL the SHORTS are a must have. Unless you are only playing long linear lines and exposed.
> 
> I can imagine The essential package getting a bit redundant once we have legatos for everything. However, the shorts are already there, and those are a needed no matter what.
> 
> I hope that helps.


Thanks.

I have Albion ONE, so I felt I don't need AR-1 Foundations. Since they are not too different. 

What's so specia/very different about AR-1 Foundations Shorts, compared to Albion ONE Shorts ?


----------



## TintoL

muziksculp said:


> Thanks.
> 
> I have Albion ONE, so I felt I don't need AR-1 Foundations. Since they are not too different.
> 
> What's so specia/very different about AR-1 Foundations Shorts, compared to Albion ONE Shorts ?


IMHO, They are massively different.

Albion ONE was recorded in Air studios. And instruments are super mega wet. It's a beutifull sound. But, you will hear that the AR-1 on the other hand has this wet sound and YET DETAILED AND NOT MUDDY SOUND.

But, the important thing is that the famous orchestral recordings of williams and other legendary recordings are literally baked and the mixing is READY FOR YOU, ALMOST OUT OF THE BOX.

Another thing I find is that albion has this ensamble patches that at moments sound a bit too out of tune and weird.

Albion is maybe a modern wet zimeresk trailer package. AR-1 is just trying to achieve a realistic orchestral recording from a specific era, I guess.


----------



## muziksculp

TintoL said:


> IMHO, They are massively different.
> 
> Albion ONE at recorded in Air studios. And are super mega wet. It's a beutifull sound. But, you will hear that the AR-1 on the other hand has this wet sound and YET DETAILED AND NOT MUDDY SOUND.
> 
> But, the important thing is that the famous orchestral recordings of williams and other legendary recordings are literally baked and the mixing is READY FOR YOU, ALMOST OUT OF THE BOX.
> 
> Another thing I find is that albion has this ensamble patches that at moments sound a bit too out of tune and weird.
> 
> Albion is maybe a modern wet zimeresk trailer package. AR-1 is just trying to achieve a realistic orchestral recording from a specific era, I guess.


Thanks.

It's not an easy decision for me. 

I will re-evaluate AR-1 Foundations, it might be on sale soon as well. Which could help.


----------



## dcoscina

yiph2 said:


> Probably just the stuff Paul announced (the sparkling woodwinds and low strings)


It is.


----------



## José Herring

muziksculp said:


> Thanks.
> 
> It's not an easy decision for me.
> 
> I will re-evaluate AR-1 Foundations, it might be on sale soon as well. Which could help.


Well worth getting even in its incomplete state as it sounds fantastic.


----------



## muziksculp

José Herring said:


> Well worth getting even in its incomplete state as it sounds fantastic.


Thanks for the feedback. I will consider if it goes on Sale tomorrow. 

If you have Albion ONE, how different is AR-1, i.e. much nicer sounding, or ... ?


----------



## dzilizzi

BasariStudios said:


> How's that?


Bought during the Presale. Part of the deal was a free expansion from the first 2.


----------



## SupremeFist

muziksculp said:


> If you have Albion ONE, how different is AR-1, i.e. much nicer sounding, or ... ?


It's next level, just sounds massively better all round.


----------



## dzilizzi

muziksculp said:


> Do you think it is essential to have AR1-Foundations library, before adding some of the AR Expansions they will be releasing soon (low Strings, legatos, ..etc.) ?


No. You can use these like you might use any of the texture libraries. Room size-wise, it would work better with BBCSO than with Albion. Or maybe Teledex libraries?


----------



## muziksculp

SupremeFist said:


> It's next level, just sounds massively better all round.


That statement is tempting me to buy it. Hopefully it will be on sale tomorrow during their Thurderbolt sale event.


----------



## muziksculp

I wish they had both Low, and High Strings Legato expansions.


----------



## José Herring

muziksculp said:


> Thanks for the feedback. I will consider if it goes on Sale tomorrow.
> 
> If you have Albion ONE, how different is AR-1, i.e. much nicer sounding, or ... ?


Don't have Albion I'm afraid. I don't get on with mixed ensemble patches too much. Tends to sound muddy and indistinct to me. I'm actually terrified that Abbey Road will head in that direction.

My hope is that they use Abbey Road like they used Air and give his an equally impressive amount of material sampled in Abbey Road One.


----------



## mussnig

muziksculp said:


> That statement is tempting me to buy it. Hopefully it will be on sale tomorrow during their Thurderbolt sale event.


I don't think so. Tomorrow's sale will feature 6 libraries with a discount of 40 % and newer libraries only go back to the intro price (usually -25 %) if they are part of a sale during the first few months after their release (roughly a year).


----------



## muziksculp

mussnig said:


> I don't think so. Tomorrow's sale will feature 6 libraries with a discount of 40 % and newer libraries only go back to the intro price (usually -25 %) if they are part of a sale during the first few months after their release (roughly a year).


Well, if it's not on sale, I will most likely have to pass on it until it is back on Sale.


----------



## ed buller

muziksculp said:


> Thanks.
> 
> I have Albion ONE, so I felt I don't need AR-1 Foundations. Since they are not too different.
> 
> What's so specia/very different about AR-1 Foundations Shorts, compared to Albion ONE Shorts ?


about 8 years. Better room...wonderful recording..exceptional sound. don't Use Albion anymore


best

ed


----------



## muziksculp

ed buller said:


> about 8 years. Better room...wonderful recording..exceptional sound. don't Use Albion anymore
> 
> 
> best
> 
> ed


Thanks. 

So, I should view AR-1 as the next generation Albion.


----------



## ed buller

muziksculp said:


> Thanks.
> 
> So, I should view AR-1 as the next generation Albion.


No it's more than That. It really is the sound off the Abbey Road Orchestra found in so many soundtracks. Plus it's made by those people. Engineers, players, and gear !

it's so Much more than Abion 


best
ed


----------



## TintoL

dzilizzi said:


> No. You can use these like you might use any of the texture libraries. Room size-wise, it would work better with BBCSO than with Albion. Or maybe Teledex librar


In this sense Dzilizzi is right. Depending on your skills, and objective, having these patches as additional tools for adding color will be a good addition. You don't need AR-1 in that scenario.

But, If you are after that sound written in those famose scoring rooms, you do need it.

I honestly think that AR-1 is in another level compared to albion in terms of the overall sound.

However, I do have my reservations and even fear a lot about these *ensamble patches ideas*. I hope we don't go the fully orchestrated and curated patches like the Bernard Herman product. I want the flexibility of my music having that "mixing" sound, but without ending up sounding like "Bernard" or "Williams". I will never be those guys even in my wildest dreams, so, why fake it ???..... I rather get that mixing, room sound but at least with my own bad composition... heheh.


----------



## muziksculp

TintoL said:


> I hope we don't go the fully orchestrated and curated patches like the Bernard Herman product. I want the flexibility of my music having that "mixing" sound, but without that sound like "Bernard" or "Williams".


I agree, I'm not a fan of pre-orchestrated patches, don't like using them, BHCTK is a good example. I have it, but don't like many of the pre-orchestrated patches. I would rather have the vanilla versions, and orchestrate them to my taste. That's one detail that might turn me off from getting AR-1


----------



## TintoL

muziksculp said:


> I agree, I'm not a fan of pre-orchestrated patches, don't like using them, BHCTK is a good example. I have it, but don't like many of the pre-orchestrated patches. I would rather have the vanilla versions, and orchestrate them to my taste. That's one detail that might turn me off from getting AR-1


Well, the fact that you own BHCTK and feel like that confirms my fears. I haven't bought BHCTK precisely because of those combination/orchestrated patches.

!! I honestly hope that SF is listening !!


----------



## dzilizzi

After they are done with these ensemble patches with extensions, the next plan is to record a full orchestra there a la SSO with articulations. So these should also work with those patches when they are finally released, similar to things like the orchestral swarm with SSO.


----------



## jamie8

EricValette said:


> Same thing here with 1.07 ... timpani "divisi" mix 1 works well but mix 2 is broken (no sound at all)...


ok still to many bugs , i wish they would fix this , i know they probably are trying to get the glaring mistakes fixed and useable and out to the masses but ... common .. , i am a proud owner of a lot of spitfire products and i truly believe in their team but please..... fix the bugs!


----------



## pistacchio

I bought AR-1 as soon as it was on sale. It's my first orchestral library ever. Love the sound. If you have any experience about these kind of updates, how much will the two expansions cost, or will they be free updates? Also, will single instruments ever come out, or I'd better wait for the next BBC Pro sale, bite the bullet and buy it?
Thanks


----------



## dzilizzi

pistacchio said:


> I bought AR-1 as soon as it was on sale. It's my first orchestral library ever. Love the sound. If you have any experience about these kind of updates, how much will the two expansions cost, or will they be free updates? Also, will single instruments ever come out, or I'd better wait for the next BBC Pro sale, bite the bullet and buy it?
> Thanks


Updates are free for the various products. 

The extensions are supposed to be priced at $49 each. They are not updates, but additional material that you can buy piecemeal as you find them to be usable. I'm guessing at the end, there will be a bundle price and you will likely get credit for what you own against the bundle price. That is usually how they do it.


----------



## muziksculp

How meaningful/useful are these upcoming extensions if one doesn't have AR-1 Foundations ? 

Are they primarily tailored for AR-1 users ? or ... ? 

i.e Low Strings with Legatos ? I have a lot of options already. Why would I get it ? just the sound of the room ?


----------



## TintoL

dzilizzi said:


> After they are done with these ensemble patches with extensions, the next plan is to record a full orchestra there a la SSO with articulations. So these should also work with those patches when they are finally released, similar to things like the orchestral swarm with SSO.


I do remember reading that back when I was analyzing if it was worth taking the risk of buying in pre-release. I hope they are true to their word. 

Honestly, if we get those "comprehensive" patches for the sections, it could very well push aside as secondary many other libraries I use. 

This makes me think twice about even thinking of purchasing anything else before they release the legatos. I would even hesitate on buying modern scoring strings.


----------



## Trash Panda

muziksculp said:


> How meaningful/useful are these upcoming extensions if one doesn't have AR-1 Foundations ?
> 
> Are they primarily tailored for AR-1 users ? or ... ?
> 
> i.e Low Strings with Legatos ? I have a lot of options already. Why would I get it ? just the sound of the room ?


There doesn’t seem to be much information about the details of the expansions yet. I’m sure it will show up eventually. I think they’re designed to supplement AROOF but can also be used in a standalone capacity.

The only real reason to get it is if you like the sound of the room + recording chain. It really sounds amazing to my ears when the player isn’t being finicky. Like John Williams in a box, minus his talent and experience.

First time I watched Guy’s YouTube review, I felt transported back to all of my favorite movie scores of the 80s and 90s.


----------



## muziksculp

Trash Panda said:


> I felt transported back to all of my favorite movie scores of the 80s and 90s.


But, don't we need newer scoring tools for our current times, it's 2021, not the 80's or 90's


----------



## Trash Panda

muziksculp said:


> But, don't we need newer scoring tools for our current times, it's 2021, not the 80's or 90's


You could also view it as the timeless sound of cinematic greats. It would sound just as spot on for Kylo Ren’s theme as it does for the Imperial March.


----------



## muziksculp

Trash Panda said:


> You could also view it as the timeless sound of cinematic greats. It would sound just as spot on for Kylo Ren’s theme as it does for the Imperial March.


I agree. Great sounding recording halls are not time/period specific, they are good for any day of any year, be it 80's , 90's, 2K's , 2021, and beyond. What matters is the resulting sound of the orchestra.


----------



## jaketanner

muziksculp said:


> I agree. Great sounding recording halls are not time/period specific, they are good for any day of any year, be it 80's , 90's, 2K's , 2021, and beyond. What matters is the resulting sound of the orchestra.


True...for the most part, it's all the same equipment from the 80's...same usual suspect mics, preamps and consoles...few exceptions, but mostly it's all the same gear. What changes are the musicians, instruments, seating and mic placement that can shape the sound to be more modern or standard.


----------



## muziksculp

Given that AR-1 Foundations is lacking String Legatos at this time, what are AR-1 users using for Legato Strings that sound very good, and natural with AR-1 ?


----------



## muziksculp

Here is Blakus doing a walkthrough, and thoughts on AR-1 which I found very interesting, and helpful. Also noticed he is using Studio One Pro instead of Cubase 

I just wish they recorded proper String legatos for AR-1 at release. Now they will add Low-Strings legato, but we are still missing high-Strings Legato. Why not release both Low and High String legatos first, then add the woodwinds ? Very odd decisions.


----------



## holywilly

Maybe spitfire is saving the best for the last. AR-1 replaces Albion One in my template and I think it’s a big leap of sounds.


----------



## muziksculp

When can I expect to see the next sale offer for AR-1 ?

For those using AR-1 , Which Legato Strings are you using with AR-1 that seem to blend nicely ? 

Non of the current strings on their Thunderbolt sale is something I need to buy, but AR-1 would be a lot more useful.


----------



## NoamL

Looking forward to the next additions to this series. I think they are solid buys. I only got AROOF because of the pressure sale and thinking that I could use it as a general reference but ended up using it a lot in recent cues. I use it A LOT more than Albion 1 Legacy (still love the Easter Island hits and the cymb/tam stuff!) AROOF's double basses in the low strings, the bass drum, the horns, and both woodwind ensembles, are getting a workout especially.

Legatos will be super welcome. Right now I use AROOF side by side with Spitfire's AIR symphonic orchestra, and also Cinematic Studio. As long as you get the volume balances right (and this involves putting the CS orchestra in a slightly larger space) I think you can get good results quickly. It requires some caution ... like SSO I think there is different inherent volume in certain articulations.

But the sound is great. I actually EQ'd my CSB horns to sound like the Abbey Road ones, and set up my CSB trumpet mics & space in imitation of the Abbey trumpets.

You could get really really nerdy and rebuild your whole template around these Abbey instruments, but so far I am finding that just using my pre-existing custom mic mix for Spitfire Symphonic Strings is working fine with Abbey Road. Same with Hollywood Strings. In the end all these libraries are a tree, an outrigger pair, and some kind of height/feature/spot mic setup.


----------



## Trash Panda

NoamL said:


> But the sound is great. I actually EQ'd my CSB horns to sound like the Abbey Road ones, and set up my CSB trumpet mics & space in imitation of the Abbey trumpets.



If you’re willing to share how you go about this or know of good resources to do this, I’m quite interested.


----------



## BasariStudios

Does anybody know what is updated in the 1.07 Update?


----------



## AudioLoco

NoamL said:


> Looking forward to the next additions to this series. I think they are solid buys. I only got AROOF because of the pressure sale and thinking that I could use it as a general reference but ended up using it a lot in recent cues. I use it A LOT more than Albion 1 Legacy (still love the Easter Island hits and the cymb/tam stuff!) AROOF's double basses in the low strings, the bass drum, the horns, and both woodwind ensembles, are getting a workout especially.
> 
> Legatos will be super welcome. Right now I use AROOF side by side with Spitfire's AIR symphonic orchestra, and also Cinematic Studio. As long as you get the volume balances right (and this involves putting the CS orchestra in a slightly larger space) I think you can get good results quickly. It requires some caution ... like SSO I think there is different inherent volume in certain articulations.
> 
> But the sound is great. I actually EQ'd my CSB horns to sound like the Abbey Road ones, and set up my CSB trumpet mics & space in imitation of the Abbey trumpets.
> 
> You could get really really nerdy and rebuild your whole template around these Abbey instruments, but so far I am finding that just using my pre-existing custom mic mix for Spitfire Symphonic Strings is working fine with Abbey Road. Same with Hollywood Strings. In the end all these libraries are a tree, an outrigger pair, and some kind of height/feature/spot mic setup.


I think I used the "Verdi Drums" patch on every single thing since I got AROOF...


----------



## AudioLoco

jaketanner said:


> True...for the most part, it's all the same equipment from the 80's...same usual suspect mics, preamps and consoles...few exceptions, but mostly it's all the same gear. What changes are the musicians, instruments, seating and mic placement that can shape the sound to be more modern or standard.


Yes, minus the analog tape.

(I don't mind, just for accuracy of statement...)


----------



## jaketanner

AudioLoco said:


> Yes, minus the analog tape.
> 
> (I don't mind, just for accuracy of statement...)


I thought SF uses analog tape for all their recordings...but could just be the older stuff. I forgot about the tape.  Love tape...however I totally understand not wanting to use it for orchestral recordings especially sample libraries due to the noise.


----------



## AudioLoco

jaketanner said:


> I thought SF uses analog tape for all their recordings...but could just be the older stuff. I forgot about the tape.  Love tape...however I totally understand not wanting to use it for orchestral recordings especially sample libraries due to the noise.


The extra noise and technical worries during the recording are probably not worth it.

PS I haven't read the "making of" AROOF so I can't guarantee no tape was hurt during the recordings, I am just guessing...


----------



## muziksculp

What was the special Intro price of AR-1 Foundations ?


----------



## Evans

muziksculp said:


> What was the special Intro price of AR-1 Foundations ?


$349


----------



## muziksculp

Evans said:


> $349


Thanks.

I'm considering buying AR-1 Foundations at the current price, I will wait until they release the new expansions on Feb. 18th. I don't think they will have another discount for AR-1 in quite a while.


----------



## ridgero

Sneak Peek of the Legendary Strings & Sparkling Woodwinds



Paul posted this here some weeks ago


----------



## Peter Satera

I'm sadly becoming a little frustrated with AR1. Initial install was great for me, no issues other than a voice on the tail of a low brass instrument. Updating has produced significant issues. 1.0.5 the names of many instrument articulations were incorrect and in 1.0.7 locating the library gave me continued errors and after resolving, percussion instruments are missing samples, and some mics are completely empty.

It's been reported, but this is really disappointing that something which was robust for me, has went from bad to worse with updating.

(This in no way reflects my very positive opinion on the product quality when in a robust state).


----------



## BasariStudios

Peter Satera said:


> I'm sadly becoming a little frustrated with AR1. Initial install was great for me, no issues other than a voice on the tail of a low brass instrument. Updating has produced significant issues. 1.0.5 the names of many instrument articulations were incorrect and in 1.0.7 locating the library gave me continued errors and after resolving, percussion instruments are missing samples, and some mics are completely empty.
> 
> It's been reported, but this is really disappointing that something which was robust for me, has went from bad to worse with updating.
> 
> (This in no way reflects my very positive opinion on the product quality when in a robust state).


Same here, it is one of the worst systems to update or move and so on.


----------



## danwool

Peter Satera said:


> I'm sadly becoming a little frustrated with AR1. Initial install was great for me, no issues other than a voice on the tail of a low brass instrument. Updating has produced significant issues. 1.0.5 the names of many instrument articulations were incorrect and in 1.0.7 locating the library gave me continued errors and after resolving, percussion instruments are missing samples, and some mics are completely empty.
> 
> It's been reported, but this is really disappointing that something which was robust for me, has went from bad to worse with updating.
> 
> (This in no way reflects my very positive opinion on the product quality when in a robust state).





BasariStudios said:


> Same here, it is one of the worst systems to update or move and so on.


No issues here with 1.0.2. With these experiences in mind I'd just stick, except I imagine the new add-ons will require the latest version.


----------



## molemac

So frustrating , I cant complete a project because I cant recreate a mix from 1.02 . Is it possible to upgrade form 1.05 to 1.07 and keep 1.05 to test ?


----------



## Zedcars

molemac said:


> So frustrating , I cant complete a project because I cant recreate a mix from 1.02 . Is it possible to upgrade form 1.05 to 1.07 and keep 1.05 to test ?


You could try copying the old plugin version from your plugin folder to a safe place before upgrading, upgrade, then see if you can switch back and forth. However, the changes in the sample folder may not make this seamless. I’ve not tried it myself.


----------



## Willowtree

TintoL said:


> But, the important thing is that the famous orchestral recordings of williams and other legendary recordings are literally baked and the mixing is READY FOR YOU, ALMOST OUT OF THE BOX.


That's rude, how'd they fit poor Williams into a sample library? They didn't hurt him, did they? Poor Williams ....


----------



## Devoluti0n

Anyone knows what kind of promotions sales policy Spitfire does ? So I can have an idea about when will the best moment to buy this be ? Thanks !


----------



## danwool

Devoluti0n said:


> Anyone knows what kind of promotions sales policy Spitfire does ? So I can have an idea about when will the best moment to buy this be ? Thanks !


Unfortunately you just missed a big Spitfire promotion by a few hours :( Their pre-sale promotions for new products are the most economical I think. There's always a Black Friday promotion, but other than that I've never been able predict when they'll do a sale. And whenever they do they only include certain libraries, never the whole store. ....predictably, almost never the one I'm looking to purchase!


----------



## Devoluti0n

danwool said:


> Unfortunately you just missed a big Spitfire promotion by a few hours :( Their pre-sale promotions for new products are the most economical I think. There's always a Black Friday promotion, but other than that I've never been able predict when they'll do a sale. And whenever they do they only include certain libraries, never the whole store. ....predictably, almost never the one I'm looking to purchase!


Ohhh... Was there a promotion for AAROOF ? :s
Thank you for this information, I appreciate . I guess it's now impossible to get one for cheaper than it is...


----------



## mgnoatto

Peter Satera said:


> I'm sadly becoming a little frustrated with AR1. Initial install was great for me, no issues other than a voice on the tail of a low brass instrument. Updating has produced significant issues. 1.0.5 the names of many instrument articulations were incorrect and in 1.0.7 locating the library gave me continued errors and after resolving, percussion instruments are missing samples, and some mics are completely empty.
> 
> It's been reported, but this is really disappointing that something which was robust for me, has went from bad to worse with updating.
> 
> (This in no way reflects my very positive opinion on the product quality when in a robust state).


Yeah, I'm feeling that way too. Don't understand how something that is working ok gets screwed in the updates. In 1.0.7 the keyswiches for High and Low strings starts on different notes (C-2 and C#-2) it wasn't like that in the previous versions


----------



## danwool

Devoluti0n said:


> Ohhh... Was there a promotion for AAROOF ? :s
> Thank you for this information, I appreciate . I guess it's now impossible to get one for cheaper than it is...


I don't think the recently expired promo included AR1, so it may show up on sale sometime. I recommend putting the libraries you plan to buy on your Wishlist on the Spitfire site.


----------



## muziksculp

danwool said:


> I recommend putting the libraries you plan to buy on your Wishlist on the Spitfire site.


Good idea. Thanks, I just did that.


----------



## jbuhler

Devoluti0n said:


> Anyone knows what kind of promotions sales policy Spitfire does ? So I can have an idea about when will the best moment to buy this be ? Thanks !


I think SF’s sales are very predictable. They usually have a monthly special on a random library. They have the December and May sales with 40% off libraries older than a year and 30% off bundles. They have the Apex sale in March with 50% off one library. They have the Thunderbolt sale which was just completed. They have the Black Friday sale with lower discounts than the winter sale but with a special offer on the Ton and the last two years an Aoverture special. And they have a Back to School sale in September for those with EDU credentials. Did I miss any?


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> They have the Apex sale in March with 50% off one library


AR-1 Foundations would be a nice pick.


----------



## Devoluti0n

I guess I will have to be patient ^^. Who knows, if by any luck everything gets stable again and legatos show their faces, it will be a great and finally complete solution for their new customers... And the long awaited one for you guys who already have it.


----------



## TintoL

mgnoatto said:


> Yeah, I'm feeling that way too. Don't understand how something that is working ok gets screwed in the updates. In 1.0.7 the keyswiches for High and Low strings starts on different notes (C-2 and C#-2) it wasn't like that in the previous versions


Because some of my day to day work is software development management, I can imagine where is this happening.

If they are using Github or Gitlab, or whatever software manager they are using, they are probably not checking their commits. Likely they have regressions in their merged versions of the updates. Or, they are assigning fixes to different programmers, and they are changing names and this info is not tracked well or falling through the cracks on their management side.

These type of issues are relatively typical problems in software dev. However, in this case, this doesn't leave them in a good spot at all.... At least to me. This is software dev 101: "do no modify names", especially if they are hard coded into their processes and there is chain dependency. If those type of changes are unavoidable, then, another process should be written to fix or compensate changed names. You basically need a "Hashing" process that checks all names from a main database that is "up to date" with what the UI is calling. 

Sounds like in this case, the solution should be to remove the whole library and download the whole thing again. Which is, mmm, well, pretty bad.............


----------



## MaxOctane

TintoL said:


> But, the important thing is that the famous orchestral recordings of williams and other legendary recordings are literally baked and the mixing is READY FOR YOU, ALMOST OUT OF THE BOX.


I feel like we heard exactly this about BBCSO (which I own) and I don't think it was true for BBC. I still haven't bought AROOF (but will). 

Sorry but the pattern on VI-C seems to be: "That last library... you can forget about it, it had issues. But now *this* new library totally nails it!"


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 Foundations would be a nice pick.


That won't happen this year. It would more likely happen with BBCSO or SSO.


----------



## BasariStudios

TintoL said:


> But, the important thing is that the famous orchestral recordings of williams and other legendary recordings are literally baked and the mixing is READY FOR YOU, ALMOST OUT OF THE BOX.


I just hope and pray to God that you are not serious about this.


----------



## TintoL

MaxOctane said:


> I feel like we heard exactly this about BBCSO (which I own) and I don't think it was true for BBC. I still haven't bought AROOF (but will).
> 
> Sorry but the pattern on VI-C seems to be: "That last library... you can forget about it, it had issues. But now *this* new library totally nails it!"


yeah, I know exactly what you mean. I didn't buy BBC because I didn't trust the player. And still don't. I remember hearing the same thing "they nailed it".... then came the complains.

I bought AROOF, because I love the Brass and percussion mics in that room. But, I know it will not be perfect.


----------



## TintoL

BasariStudios said:


> I just hope and pray to God that you are not serious about this.


Unfortunately I am relatively serious.

The mics and room are an instant film recording from the 80s and 90s. IMHO. That I like a lot.

I think my comment wrongly used Williams to express a recording type of sound.

However, I really hope SF don't take the preorchestrated patches too far and we all end up having a boxed version of these composers for a price.

It will not surprise me to eventually see an AROOF Hollywoodwinds patch version. And the same Bernard Herman preorchestrated patches that sound as per Williams or Goldsmith. I have my diferences with that patch approach.


----------



## muziksculp

I'm not a fan of pre-orchestrated patches. 

I hope Spitfire Audio don't get carried away with the pre-orchestrated patches (amateurish orchestration), I should add that I dislike using their BHCTK mainly because of that. Please let us orchestrate as we wish using separate instruments, and articulations.


----------



## yiph2

muziksculp said:


> I'm not a fan of pre-orchestrated patches.
> 
> I hope Spitfire Audio don't get carried away with the pre-orchestrated patches (amateurish orchestration), I should add that I dislike using their BHCTK mainly because of that. Please let us orchestrate as we wish using separate instruments, and articulations.


That's going to be covered in the modular orchestra


----------



## muziksculp

yiph2 said:


> That's going to be covered in the modular orchestra


Hopefully. It's going to take them a long time to build the modular orchestra, given the current pace.


----------



## danwool

I can't find the cost of of the AR1 add-ons anywhere? I think pre-sale AR1 customers, like me, are eligible for just one of them gratis. Both look worthwhile to me. Anyone know the cost(s)?


----------



## rnb_2

danwool said:


> I can't find the cost of of the AR1 add-ons anywhere? I think pre-sale AR1 customers, like me, are eligible for just one of them gratis. Both look worthwhile to me. Anyone know the cost(s)?


I believe they're going to be $49, or thereabouts.


----------



## dzilizzi

TintoL said:


> Unfortunately I am relatively serious.
> 
> The mics and room are an instant film recording from the 80s and 90s. IMHO. That I like a lot.
> 
> I think my comment wrongly used Williams to express a recording type of sound.
> 
> However, I really hope SF don't take the preorchestrated patches too far and we all end up having a boxed version of these composers for a price.
> 
> It will not surprise me to eventually see an AROOF Hollywoodwinds patch version. And the same Bernard Herman preorchestrated patches that sound as per Williams or Goldsmith. I have my diferences with that patch approach.


From what I understand, the extensions for AROOF will be a mix of combined instruments and texture libraries. Not so much pre-orchestrated, but easy to use combinations like Symphobia maybe? It is primarily made for media composers. 

And, if this isn't your thing, there will eventually be a regular normal orchestra VI similar to SSO that I believe is already partially recorded. COVID delayed things. But you should be able to write yuh our Williamsesque pieces, should you so choose or something totally different. AROOF will work as full ensembles with the sections from this library. It isn't clear if these will be sold in sections like SSO, or if they will be available by individual instruments.


----------



## TintoL

dzilizzi said:


> From what I understand, the extensions for AROOF will be a mix of combined instruments and texture libraries. Not so much pre-orchestrated, but easy to use combinations like Symphobia maybe? It is primarily made for media composers.
> 
> And, if this isn't your thing, there will eventually be a regular normal orchestra VI similar to SSO that I believe is already partially recorded. COVID delayed things. But you should be able to write yuh our Williamsesque pieces, should you so choose or something totally different. AROOF will work as full ensembles with the sections from this library. It isn't clear if these will be sold in sections like SSO, or if they will be available by individual instruments.


Thanks for sharing the information. At these early stage I find all is just expectations. We will see where we end up. For now, I am fine with the ensemble sections. But, if the product starts combining instruments in a patch then it will be something I will pass even if it is in Abbey Road.

I didn't know there was where sections partially recorded. Good to know that. 

Thanks again for the info.


----------



## JohnG

Hi all,

I'm still on the original version of AR1 and a little confused about whether 1.07 is ready to roll or still has a few things that need fixing -- anyone know?

It's not a big rush but certainly curious about the new content that appears to be there.

Thanks,

John


----------



## danwool

rnb_2 said:


> I believe they're going to be $49, or thereabouts.


Thanks. A reasonable, if not dangerous price point  I can almost always afford that much, even for something I might not need!


----------



## danwool

JohnG said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I'm still on the original version of AR1 and a little confused about whether 1.07 is ready to roll or still has a few things that need fixing -- anyone know?
> 
> It's not a big rush but certainly curious about the new content that appears to be there.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> John


I'm not clear on this either. My original 1.02 seems fine, but some say that version is the buggy one. My guess is that the new content add-ons (available 2/18 btw) will require the latest version, bugs or no.


----------



## Peter Satera

danwool said:


> I'm not clear on this either. My original 1.02 seems fine, but some say that version is the buggy one. My guess is that the new content add-ons (available 2/18 btw) will require the latest version, bugs or no.


Honestly, I'd say hold off for now ( I wish I did). If you need to up date then by all means go for it at that point. On Social media and here there are a few of us have issues now with 1.0.7 that are being worked on. (Mic issues mostly it seems).


----------



## muziksculp

I just noticed that *AR-1 Foundations* is on sale at *$349*. , would you recommend buying it at this price ?


----------



## styledelk

muziksculp said:


> I just noticed that *AR-1 Foundations* is on sale at *$349*. , would you recommend buying it at this price ?


Despite that probably being what I paid for it-- it feels like a lot. But maybe I just haven't gotten enough usage out of it yet. I've put it on a few cues so far, and it indeed sounds beautiful. I just wish there was more content in there like Albions have.


But it's probably the best price you'll have for a long while.


----------



## muziksculp

Some users commented that AR-1 has replaced their Albion ONE. I'm guessing because AR-1 sounds a lot better ?


----------



## styledelk

muziksculp said:


> Some users commented that AR-1 has replaced their Albion ONE. I'm guessing because AR-1 sounds a lot better ?


It very definitely sounds _better_. And the microphone selection is fantastic.


----------



## jdrcomposer

muziksculp said:


> Some users commented that AR-1 has replaced their Albion ONE. I'm guessing because AR-1 sounds a lot better ?


AR1 has replaced any other ensemble libraries I have. The brass being separated is actually a gigantic plus for me. If I have a project with a Williams temp, nothing else can get me to that sound in as short time as this does. 

Plus those sordino strings are just ridiculous.


----------



## ism

I can't hear this and not instantly think "Indiana Jones".

It's amazingly distinctive. And in terms of whatever they're doing in the recording/mics (or something), it's huge step up over Albion One or the Arks, or anything I can think of.


----------



## muziksculp

I'm actually more interested in their AR-Modular Orchestra, but that's going to require a long wait to be completed. So, I thought AR-1 is not a bad choice for now. Although I'm not a big fan of using Pre-Orchestrated patches.


----------



## muziksculp

jdrcomposer said:


> AR1 has replaced any other ensemble libraries I have. The brass being separated is actually a gigantic plus for me. If I have a project with a Williams temp, nothing else can get me to that sound in as short time as this does.
> 
> Plus those sordino strings are just ridiculous.


AR-1 Foundations has Sordino Strings ? I wasn't aware of that.


----------



## jdrcomposer

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 Foundations has Sordino Strings ? I wasn't aware of that.


Yup! Here's an example of a multi I set up so I could do left hand chords/right hand melody with the sordinos (I just played this in so it's not edited, I usually would smooth out the right hand melody after to get a better sense of legato)


----------



## BasariStudios

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 Foundations has Sordino Strings ? I wasn't aware of that.


I am wondering about this too.


----------



## BasariStudios

jdrcomposer said:


> Yup! Here's an example of a multi I set up so I could do left hand chords/right hand melody with the sordinos (I just played this in so it's not edited, I usually would smooth out the right hand melody after to get a better sense of legato)


Where did you find those? Never heard AR head Con Sordino
nor i have it in mine. What am i missing?
In your example they sound NOTHING like the Strings in AR1.


----------



## jdrcomposer

BasariStudios said:


> Where did you find those? Never heard AR head Con Sordino
> nor i have it in mine. What am i missing?
> In your example they sound NOTHING like the Strings in AR1.


Long CS patches are there for high and low strings


----------



## BasariStudios

jdrcomposer said:


> Long CS patches are there for high and low strings


WTF happened to me, lol.


----------



## jdrcomposer

BasariStudios said:


> I think you confused your self or you confused us.
> We are talking about Abbey Road One.


So am I.


----------



## JohnG

It's right there in your screen shot: Long CS


----------



## muziksculp

jdrcomposer said:


> Yup! Here's an example of a multi I set up so I could do left hand chords/right hand melody with the sordinos (I just played this in so it's not edited, I usually would smooth out the right hand melody after to get a better sense of legato)


Thanks. Sounds great.


----------



## BasariStudios

The problem is you guys know nothing about me.
I've literary bought 3 times some VSTs, not knowing i have them.
I literary have over 7 Double Eurorack Modules because i did not
know i had the first one to begin with, stuck in a closet.
I almost bought ARO ... again.


----------



## muziksculp

So, I guess getting the new AR-Low Strings is a no brainer if you own AR-1 ?


----------



## Nadav

BasariStudios said:


> The problem is you guys know nothing about me.
> I've literary bought 3 times some VSTs, not knowing i have them.
> I literary have over 7 Double Eurorack Modules because i did not
> know i had the first one to begin with, stuck in a closet.
> I almost bought ARO ... again.


Haha, the perfect consumer is one with amnesia


----------



## jdrcomposer

muziksculp said:


> So, I guess getting the new AR-Low Strings is a no brainer if you own AR-1 ?


absolute no brainer


----------



## Fry777

jdrcomposer said:


> absolute no brainer


I get the feeling a lot of members will not find legato overrated anymore


----------



## Ozinga

I forgot that one expansion was free with pre-release purchase of AR1
So it was a nice surprise to see $0.00 when I added the Low Strings to the basket


----------



## BasariStudios

jdrcomposer said:


> absolute no brainer


Is this from the new Expansion?


----------



## BasariStudios

Ozinga said:


> I forgot that one expansion was free with pre-release purchase of AR1
> So it was a nice surprise to see $0.00 when I added the Low Strings to the basket


How did you get that? In mine is still at 49$, yes i am signed in.


----------



## Peter Satera

BasariStudios said:


> Is this from the new Expansion?


Yes. Hence the file name 'Legendary Low' 

I'm playing with them too, and I must say, this is likely to be my go to low string legato now, it's very different sound too to OF, which is great!


----------



## styledelk

It says $49 until you try to check out in the cart.


----------



## Ozinga

BasariStudios said:


> How did you get that? In mine is still at 49$, yes i am signed in.


Add to basket and go to check out


----------



## Larbguy

For anyone that's already picked it up, I'm curious how agile you find the low string expansion spiccatos, especially as it gets to the lower end of the register


----------



## BasariStudios

And the biggest BLOOPER od the year goes to SpitFire, ahahahaha.
Check the Audio Demos out. The Woodwinds are under Low Strings
and Low Strings Demos are under Woodwinds. ROFL!


----------



## Evans

BasariStudios said:


> And the biggest BLOOPER od the year goes to SpitFire,


I can think of worse.


----------



## BasariStudios

Evans said:


> I can think of worse.


LOL


----------



## dzilizzi

muziksculp said:


> I just noticed that *AR-1 Foundations* is on sale at *$349*. , would you recommend buying it at this price ?


It won't be at 40% until next BF at the earliest. Probably Christmas though.


----------



## SupremeFist

BasariStudios said:


> And the biggest BLOOPER od the year goes to SpitFire, ahahahaha.
> Check the Audio Demos out. The Woodwinds are under Low Strings
> and Low Strings Demos are under Woodwinds. ROFL!


This is almost as bad as when Eastwest didn't release that product they had pre-announced nearly a year ago, _again_.


----------



## mussnig

dzilizzi said:


> It won't be at 40% until next BF at the earliest. Probably Christmas though.


If we are lucky it's going to be December's product of the month with - 40 % (like they did with BBCSO)


----------



## PaulieDC

BasariStudios said:


> The problem is you guys know nothing about me.
> I've literary bought 3 times some VSTs, not knowing i have them.
> I literary have over 7 Double Eurorack Modules because i did not
> know i had the first one to begin with, stuck in a closet.
> I almost bought ARO ... again.


Might be cheaper to get a business manager.


----------



## dzilizzi

BasariStudios said:


> The problem is you guys know nothing about me.
> I've literary bought 3 times some VSTs, not knowing i have them.
> I literary have over 7 Double Eurorack Modules because i did not
> know i had the first one to begin with, stuck in a closet.
> I almost bought ARO ... again.


I understand this. I now check to make sure before buying things.


----------



## muziksculp

AR-1 Foundations users, what are you using for your Mid-High Legato Strings, i.e. Violins, and Violas that sound good with AR-1 ?


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Fantastic launch video - you can feel Paul's excitement and it's great they go into depth on application of these. The sound is holy sh*t level. Exciting to anticipate what the future releases will sound like given how good these are.


----------



## PaulieDC

styledelk said:


> It says $49 until you try to check out in the cart.


Actually, mine says $49 right through to the Payment page, and I did buy the pre-release. Hmmmm....


----------



## PaulieDC

OK, had a chat with Spitfire CS... You have to have purchased Abbey Road One BEFORE NOV 5th in order to get the free Low Strings. I bought mine on the 27th. Weird, I thought I bought Pre-Release, now I remember that I bought it in time to get the Aperture Orchestra for free. All comes out in the wash.


----------



## Saxer

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 Foundations users, what are you using for your Mid-High Legato Strings, i.e. Violins, and Violas that sound good with AR-1 ?


I used Vista in this example. Not really a perfect match, it was just an opportunity to try out both libraries. But somehow it works.






Monsters of the 50s


Abbey Road Vista Spitfire Harp *edit* Half a year later I found use for this track in a video we made... https://vi-control.net/community/threads/monsters-of-the-50s.104251/page-2#post-4935735




vi-control.net


----------



## muziksculp

Saxer said:


> I used Vista in this example. Not really a perfect match, it was just an opportunity to try out both libraries. But somehow it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Monsters of the 50s
> 
> 
> Abbey Road Vista Spitfire Harp *edit* Half a year later I found use for this track in a video we made... https://vi-control.net/community/threads/monsters-of-the-50s.104251/page-2#post-4935735
> 
> 
> 
> 
> vi-control.net


Thanks. Yes, I remember this track, and liking it as well after you posted it. I don't have Visa Strings, and don't plan on buying it. I' guessing I will just have to experiment using various string libraries with AR-1 to see what clicks for me.

I'm still trying to decide if I should buy AR-1 Foundations at the discounted price.


----------



## jdrcomposer

Did a quick pass of the Home Alone theme to hear the slower more expressive side of the winds - all except harp are from AR1 line (melody from sparkling woodwinds, bass/celli are legendary low strings). The legato woods help the non-legato strings have more of a flow.

Mix is vintage mics with a touch of close and ambient.


----------



## muziksculp

jdrcomposer said:


> Did a quick pass of the Home Alone theme to hear the slower more expressive side of the winds - all except harp are from AR1 line. The legato woods help the non-legato strings have more of a flow.
> 
> Mix is vintage mics with a touch of close and ambient.


Sounds good. 

Are these the new AR-Sparkling Woodwinds ? or ... ?


----------



## jdrcomposer

muziksculp said:


> Sounds good.
> 
> Are these the new AR-Sparkling Woodwinds ? or ... ?


Editing my original post to mention, yes. Sparkling woodwinds up top, legendary low strings for the bass line.


----------



## muziksculp

jdrcomposer said:


> Editing my original post to mention, yes. Sparkling woodwinds up top, legendary low strings for the bass line.


The Legato Sparkling Woodwinds do help cover the gaps of the non-legato strings in AR-1. Good technique. Hopefully they will also release AR-mid-high Legato Strings to complement AR-1. 

Thanks.


----------



## BasariStudios

SupremeFist said:


> This is almost as bad as when Eastwest didn't release that product they had pre-announced nearly a year ago, _again_.


I think this deserves its own topic.


----------



## TintoL

PaulieDC said:


> OK, had a chat with Spitfire CS... You have to have purchased Abbey Road One BEFORE NOV 5th in order to get the free Low Strings. I bought mine on the 27th. Weird, I thought I bought Pre-Release, now I remember that I bought it in time to get the Aperture Orchestra for free. All comes out in the wash.


Crap, now I am sad........ That's why it wasn't free for me.... Got aperture, but not this one. Still worth every penny.


----------



## danwool

muziksculp said:


> The Legato Sparkling Woodwinds do help cover the gaps of the non-legato strings in AR-1. Good technique. Hopefully they will also release AR-mid-high Legato Strings to complement AR-1.
> 
> Thanks.


"Romantic Legato Strings" are in the AR1 pipeline as I recall.


----------



## muziksculp

danwool said:


> "Romantic Legato Strings" are in the AR1 pipeline as I recall.


That would be awesome, I didn't see any mention of them, so.. when are they expected to be available ?


----------



## Saxer

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 Foundations users, what are you using for your Mid-High Legato Strings, i.e. Violins, and Violas that sound good with AR-1 ?


Me again...

Thinking of a good match library to fill the gaps of missing AR's legato I'd go VSL Synchron. Probably some tweaking (match EQ & reverb) necessary but I think section sizes and sound will connect rather good. BigBang would fit best for the workflow (kind of an enhanced ensemble concept with legatos and separate sections for strings and woodwinds).
I'm in a project right now but probably next week (hope so) I'll try that combi.


----------



## muziksculp

Saxer said:


> Me again...
> 
> Thinking of a good match library to fill the gaps of missing AR's legato I'd go VSL Synchron. Probably some tweaking (match EQ & reverb) necessary but I think section sizes and sound will connect rather good. BigBang would fit best for the workflow (kind of an enhanced ensemble concept with legatos and separate sections for strings and woodwinds).
> I'm in a project right now but probably next week (hope so) I'll try that combi.


Thanks for the helpful feedback. 

I have VSL Synchron Strings Pro, and Zodiac Strings, no other BigBang VSL libraries. in addition to many other Strings libraries, so no shortage of option here. It's just a matter of matching things.


----------



## ridgero

Wow, those expansions are perfect.

Can‘t imagine how good the whole Modular Orchestra will sound like.


----------



## icecoolpool

jdrcomposer said:


> Did a quick pass of the Home Alone theme to hear the slower more expressive side of the winds - all except harp are from AR1 line (melody from sparkling woodwinds, bass/celli are legendary low strings). The legato woods help the non-legato strings have more of a flow.
> 
> Mix is vintage mics with a touch of close and ambient.


Sounds great. Very tempted to go for those Sparkling Woodwinds here.


----------



## NeonMediaKJT

Low strings sound nice.

What low brass do you reckon would go nice with those? VSL Hercules?


----------



## Kevperry777

muziksculp said:


> Thanks for the helpful feedback.
> 
> I have VSL Synchron Strings Pro, and Zodiac Strings, no other BigBang VSL libraries. in addition to many other Strings libraries, so no shortage of option here. It's just a matter of matching things.


I think Afflatus sounds pretty nice (Lush patches) as it is a nice warm timbre and not overly wet similar to Abbey Road.


----------



## muziksculp

Kevperry777 said:


> I think Afflatus sounds pretty nice (Lush patches) as it is a nice warm timbre and not overly wet similar to Abbey Road.


Thanks.  

I agree. Afflatus might be just the right match for AR-1. 

Do you have Afflatus and AR-1, and tried to use both in a track ?


----------



## jazzman7

jdrcomposer said:


> Did a quick pass of the Home Alone theme to hear the slower more expressive side of the winds - all except harp are from AR1 line (melody from sparkling woodwinds, bass/celli are legendary low strings). The legato woods help the non-legato strings have more of a flow.
> 
> Mix is vintage mics with a touch of close and ambient.


Excellent!


----------



## soulofsound

I think the high woodwinds in AR-1 sound more convincing than these new ones. Low strings sound great.


----------



## MA-Simon

Imho I think these two libraries are a new low point for spitfire...
Bare minimum of sampling. Just enough for a library. But not nearly enough to be usefull.

None of the demos sounded convincing to me. If that is what the future of spitfire is looking like, I won't be seeing myself buying into it.


----------



## mopsiflopsi

MA-Simon said:


> Imho I think these two libraries are a new low point for spitfire...
> Bare minimum of sampling. Just enough for a library. But not nearly enough to be usefull.
> 
> None of the demos sounded convincing to me. If that is what the future of spitfire is looking like, I won't be seeing myself buying into it.



What would you rather have for $49?


----------



## Bereckis

Hi,
can someone explain to me what the 8ve means for the supplements? Thank you.


----------



## mussnig

Bereckis said:


> Hi,
> can someone explain to me what the 8ve means for the supplements? Thank you.


8ve means that the instruments are playing in octaves. E.g., for the Legendary Low Strings the Basses play an octave below the Celli.


----------



## Peter Satera

Larbguy said:


> For anyone that's already picked it up, I'm curious how agile you find the low string expansion spiccatos, especially as it gets to the lower end of the register


Did a quick example for you.


----------



## DovesGoWest

Personally for me it seems spitfire now has two key products those been bbcso and ar, where one has all the sections and solos and the other is ensemble based. What I wish they had done is rolled these both together to create one truly massive expandable product.

There was a point in the launch where Paul said sure you can layer cello and bass samples together but when they are recorded together they bring another dimension.

If they had taken this modular approach with bbcso it would have been great. The reason I bought areia lite was to add ensembles like cello/bass , violin/viola etc


----------



## gst98

Peter Satera said:


> Did a quick example for you.



How are you finding the consistency of the editing? (timing wise) To me it sounds like an improvement on over SSS which is a bit sloppy on the spiccs. makes me hopeful for the modular sections.


----------



## Peter Satera

gst98 said:


> How are you finding the consistency of the editing? (timing wise) To me it sounds like an improvement on over SSS which is a bit sloppy on the spiccs. makes me hopeful for the modular sections.


(I unfortunately don't have SSS to compare to).

The shorts and the longs have some volume jumps at comparable velocities to CC Values. I find the longs are louder when at a low dynamic range compared to the shorts at the same lower dynamic. But when it gets louder the differences aren't as evident.

The longs are likely to needs expression work to bring them as quiet as the shorts.

View attachment Dynamic Comparison Long v Short.mp4


----------



## Bereckis

mussnig said:


> 8ve means that the instruments are playing in octaves. E.g., for the Legendary Low Strings the Basses play an octave below the Celli.


Thanks, in the meantime I came up with it after watching the videos.


----------



## gst98

Peter Satera said:


> (I unfortunately don't have SSS to compare to).
> 
> The shorts and the longs have some volume jumps at comparable velocities to CC Values. I find the longs are louder when at a low dynamic range compared to the shorts at the same lower dynamic. But when it gets louder the differences aren't as evident.
> 
> View attachment Dynamic Comparison Long v Short.mp4


That's a bit annoying, but I can live with it. What drives me insane is when some of the spiccato RRs in SSS play out of time - to the point where I just give up and use something else.


----------



## Bereckis

gst98 said:


> How are you finding the consistency of the editing? (timing wise) To me it sounds like an improvement on over SSS which is a bit sloppy on the spiccs. makes me hopeful for the modular sections.


Great! I'm also currently experimenting with the two supplements.

Maybe the volume differences are also due to the playing technique?


----------



## Rory

Bereckis said:


> Hi,
> can someone explain to me what the 8ve means for the supplements? Thank you.


Just to add to an earlier response, Paul Thompson talks about this in the videos.


----------



## Bereckis

icecoolpool said:


> Sounds great. Very tempted to go for those Sparkling Woodwinds here.


At first I was disappointed with the crowd, but in the end I prefer quality to quantity.


----------



## Peter Satera

gst98 said:


> That's a bit annoying, but I can live with it. What drives me insane is when some of the spiccato RRs in SSS play out of time - to the point where I just give up and use something else.


Yeah. there are some instruments I have which have the odd laggy RR short (metro ark has a 1 or 2). It's good when you can disable the individual RR samples if you don't like them. I find a good way to test is to drive it in continuous 16ths and just run through velocity checks and let it sweep through the RRs. The tightness sounds pretty good though, I dont think I hear any of them lagging.

If you compare these Legendary Low Spic compared to the Low Shorts AROOF the legendary pack a heck of a punch.


----------



## Bereckis

Rory said:


> Just to add to an earlier response, Paul Thompson talks about this in the videos.


Since my English is rather moderate, I have to guess a lot of things in the video. The automatic translation into German is sometimes so misleading that I better only use the English subtitles.

Google also has to translate my texts here for me.

Thanks for the hint.


----------



## dzilizzi

DovesGoWest said:


> Personally for me it seems spitfire now has two key products those been bbcso and ar, where one has all the sections and solos and the other is ensemble based. What I wish they had done is rolled these both together to create one truly massive expandable product.
> 
> There was a point in the launch where Paul said sure you can layer cello and bass samples together but when they are recorded together they bring another dimension.
> 
> If they had taken this modular approach with bbcso it would have been great. The reason I bought areia lite was to add ensembles like cello/bass , violin/viola etc


It is coming. They were in the process of recording the modular library when COVID shutdowns started. So they have been limited in what they can do to record the rest. This will have the full SSO type library. Well BBCSO but in an SSO format - deep sampled full orchestra, not ensemble.


----------



## Trevor Meier

dzilizzi said:


> It is coming. They were in the process of recording the modular library when COVID shutdowns started. So they have been limited in what they can do to record the rest. This will have the full SSO type library. Well BBCSO but in an SSO format - deep sampled full orchestra, not ensemble.


I’m really, really excited for the full modular orchestra. Given how much Spitfire has upped their game recently and being totally in love with the sound, having a full detailed orchestra to work with is going to be heaven. I doubt I’ll be able to afford it by then, but I sure as hell will want it!

On another note, I took the plunge on the expansions today and tried the Legendary Low Strings on a quick demo with SCS. I spent a couple hours this afternoon trying to replicate the ostinatos from MSS with SCS. I added the AR low strings for some beef, and was quite surprised how lyrical the octave strings can be.

Keep in mind I spent about 20 minutes adding the AR parts so none of this is polished... but it gives an idea how quickly the new expansion gets some beautiful-sounding results.


----------



## DovesGoWest

dzilizzi said:


> It is coming. They were in the process of recording the modular library when COVID shutdowns started. So they have been limited in what they can do to record the rest. This will have the full SSO type library. Well BBCSO but in an SSO format - deep sampled full orchestra, not ensemble.


So we’re going to see modular expansions for bbcso? Sorry for my ignorance what’s sso format


----------



## Alex Fraser

DovesGoWest said:


> So we’re going to see modular expansions for bbcso? Sorry for my ignorance what’s sso format


SSO = Spitfire Symphony Orchestra.
Nothing more has been confirmed for BBCSO, but Spitfire confirmed they were recording a complete "modular" orchestra at AR, i.e a traditionally sampled orchestra with all the separated parts that the forum so likes.

Also, when Spitfire says "modular" they might even be referring to the early SF libraries which came in Violins Vol 1, 2, 3 etc. So this could be a long term (and very expensive) project.


----------



## muziksculp

Watching the AR-1 Foundations Walkthrough again, is giving me a lot of GAS. 

The Sound... The Sound ... The Sound.. Yes, The Sound of this library is fantastic.  

With AR-1 at $349. I'm super tempted to buy it, in addition to the new Legendary Low-Strings expansion $49. Not sure about the Sparkling Woodwinds.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Watching the AR-1 Foundations Walkthrough again, is giving me a lot of GAS.
> 
> The Sound... The Sound ... The Sound.. Yes, The Sound of this library is fantastic.
> 
> With AR-1 at $349. I'm super tempted to buy it, in addition to the new Legendary Low-Strings expansion $49. Not sure about the Sparkling Woodwinds.


The sound is fantastic. I think the sound of BBCSO is pretty good too, but I was able to withstand that temptation. ARO, though—Every time I hear something from it, the GAS comes on strong. The only thing that has kept me safe so far is that I'm not currently working on anything for large orchestra, and there have been a lot of complaints about the current version.


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> and there have been a lot of complaints about the current version.


Oh.. don't want to deal with that. Hope they can fix it via an update soon. I'm going to wait, and see what happens in the next few weeks. 

What are the complaints mostly about ? 

Thanks.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Oh.. don't want to deal with that. Hope they can fix it via an update soon. I'm going to wait, and see what happens in the next few weeks.
> 
> What are the complaints mostly about ?
> 
> Thanks.


For a very few it's not working at all. For others there have been a variety of issues. None of the latter seem so bad that I couldn't work around them if I was doing work right now where ARO would be in use. But since I don't have an immediate project for it, it seems better to wait.


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> For a very few it's not working at all. For others there have been a variety of issues. None of the latter seem so bad that I couldn't work around them if I was doing work right now where ARO would be in use. But since I don't have an immediate project for it, it seems better to wait.


That's very odd, OK. I won't rush into buying it. Thanks for the early warning.

I wonder if Spitfire Audio knows about these issues, and is working to fix them via an update. I will keep a watch on the forum to see what's the status of these issues.

Thanks.


----------



## dzilizzi

DovesGoWest said:


> So we’re going to see modular expansions for bbcso? Sorry for my ignorance what’s sso format


Spitfire Symphony Orchestra started out as a "modular" orchestra. You could buy the parts without buying the whole thing - strings, winds and brass - unlike BBCSO which comes as a whole orchestra all in one. The only problem with SSO is it doesn't technically have a piano and percussion section. You can buy the orchestral grand and Joby Buress percussion which were both recorded later in Air Lyndhurst. So I was meaning like BBCSO as in the whole orchestra will be recorded at the same time relatively, but like SSO in that you can buy the bits and pieces you want or the whole thing. And it will all be recorded at Abbey Road Studio 1. Likely will be a bundle discount. 

So - AR full orchestra available in sections should be available eventually depending on COVID restrictions. 

And AR ensemble with bits and pieces (AROOF/Low Strings/SparklingWinds/etc) geared towards media composers with continue to come out this year as it is mostly fully recorded. Unless they think of something else they want to do. 

As far as I know, only the normal updates to BBCSO & SSO are planned at this time. Christian mentioned recording a piano in Maida Vale for BBCSO, but that was before COVID and there may not be time before it becomes something other than a recording studio.


----------



## MaxOctane

Peter Satera said:


> Did a quick example for you.



I can only imagine if this patch (and your demo!) had shipped with Hans Zimmer Strings...


----------



## soulofsound

muziksculp said:


> Not sure about the Sparkling Woodwinds.


This is a weird one, i think. Why are the AR-1 so good and this is not convincing at all? I heard the Home Alone demo, where clearly the programming is pro and the woodwinds don't convince. Very strange.


----------



## muziksculp

soulofsound said:


> This is a weird one, i think. Why are the AR-1 so good and this is not convincing at all? I heard the Home Alone demo, where clearly the programming is pro and the woodwinds don't convince. Very strange.


Yes, Not very fond of these woodwinds. I will most likely wait for their AR-Modular libraries. Meanwhile, I have a good selection of woodwinds. 

Q. Do you have AR-1 Foundations ? are you using the latest version, and having any issues with it ?

I don't have it yet, but would rather wait for the next update if the current version is buggy. 

Thanks.


----------



## jamessy

I can understand the modular orchestra rolling out in small pieces over time but won't they invalidate these selections? What will be the point of legendary low strings once you have access to the basses and celli with full articulations? Seems like if there ends up being 9-10 of these, that's going to add up to a full priced library's worth of redundancy.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

jamessy said:


> I can understand the modular orchestra rolling out in small pieces over time but won't they invalidate these selections? What will be the point of legendary low strings once you have access to the basses and celli with full articulations? Seems like if there ends up being 9-10 of these, that's going to add up to a full priced library's worth of redundancy.


Perhaps not every Spitfire customer is interested in orchestrating everything one instrument at a time, all the time. As Paul stated, there's a difference also when different sections are recorded together in a room.


----------



## jamessy

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Perhaps not every Spitfire customer is interested in orchestrating everything one instrument at a time, all the time. As Paul stated, there's a difference also when different sections are recorded together in a room.


Fair enough


----------



## soulofsound

muziksculp said:


> Yes, Not very fond of these woodwinds. I will most likely wait for their AR-Modular libraries. Meanwhile, I have a good selection of woodwinds.
> 
> Q. Do you have AR-1 Foundations ? are you using the latest version, and having any issues with it ?
> 
> I don't have it yet, but would rather wait for the next update if the current version is buggy.
> 
> Thanks.


Haven't noticed any bugginess. But then i have so little time work-wise, i might have missed any. Overall i think their custom player is pretty good. Load times are way better than when first released (with BBCSO). I just wish to know how to use program change to switch between keyswitches. Can't figure it out.


----------



## muziksculp

jamessy said:


> I can understand the modular orchestra rolling out in small pieces over time but won't they invalidate these selections? What will be the point of legendary low strings once you have access to the basses and celli with full articulations? Seems like if there ends up being 9-10 of these, that's going to add up to a full priced library's worth of redundancy.


SPEED


----------



## muziksculp

soulofsound said:


> Haven't noticed any bugginess. But then i have so little time work-wise, i might have missed any. Overall i think their custom player is pretty good. Load times are way better than when first released (with BBCSO). I just wish to know how to use program change to switch between keyswitches. Can't figure it out.


OK. Thanks for the feedback. 

I will do a bit more research on the status of the current version of AR-1, just to be safe before buying into a buggy version. It might be something related to some of the mics, but I'm not sure.


----------



## yiph2

Both the WWs and Strings have 3 dynamic layers, and has a -125ms delay for slow transitions and -75ms delay for fast ones.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

yiph2 said:


> Both the WWs and Strings have 3 dynamic layers, and has a -125ms delay for slow transitions and -75ms delay for fast ones.


Yeh, I'm not really sure why they didn't just make it all timed to 125ms really. Also it would have been useful to know what the legato/long attack times were and what they timed the shorts too as well.


----------



## yiph2

Tom Ferguson said:


> Yeh, I'm not really sure why they didn't just make it all timed to 125ms really. Also it would have been useful to know what the legato/long attack times were and what they timed the shorts too as well.


Well it's pretty common to have multiple legato speeds, eg CSS, which has 3 (333, 250, 100)


----------



## muziksculp

yiph2 said:


> Well it's pretty common to have multiple legato speeds, eg CSS, which has 3 (333, 250, 100)


But not very popular, or practical to use.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

yiph2 said:


> Well it's pretty common to have multiple legato speeds, eg CSS, which has 3 (333, 250, 100)


Yes I realise this thanks, but the thing is that with CSS etc. libraries there is the argument that delaying everything to 333 or whatever would have a big impact on playability (still something I'd personally prefer, though preferably with an audio imperia style ms delay control), but with this library unifying the delays with the extra 50ms for those transitions would (IMO) greatly increase ease of use for very little change in general playability. If anything it should hopefully feel more responsive considering you always know exactly what lag will be triggered.


----------



## CT

muziksculp said:


> But not very popular, or practical to use.


I'm pretty sure it's popular with many people. Doesn't require anything more impractical than offsetting MIDI notes appropriately.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

Mike T said:


> I'm pretty sure it's popular with many people. Doesn't require anything more impractical than offsetting MIDI notes appropriately.


Generally, with cinematic scoring libraries I don't really think the lag differences are the thing that is popular, but the quality of legato that it comes with it, with the benefit of the legatos far outweighing the downside of the extra lag and disparities in timing. But I still think that most people would at least prefer an option to have the timings unified and preferably controllable.


----------



## dzilizzi

jamessy said:


> I can understand the modular orchestra rolling out in small pieces over time but won't they invalidate these selections? What will be the point of legendary low strings once you have access to the basses and celli with full articulations? Seems like if there ends up being 9-10 of these, that's going to add up to a full priced library's worth of redundancy.


They have different audiences. Media composers who aren't writing for orchestra need to do it fast. It is one of the reasons Symphobia is so popular. I'm also guessing when they are all out, there will be a bundle price. Those who are buying the modular may want AROOF for parts where you want an ensemble to play. Otherwise, there is no reason to buy AROOF and the expansions if you are going for the modular.


----------



## CT

Tom Ferguson said:


> Generally, with cinematic scoring libraries I don't really think the lag differences are the thing that is popular, but the quality of legato that it comes with it, with the benefit of the legatos far outweighing the downside of the extra lag and disparities in timing.


Yeah. I know. Obviously wasn't saying lag is popular, but the result.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

Mike T said:


> Yeah. I know. Obviously wasn't saying lag is popular, but the result.


Well OK, but it wasn't obvious because you responded to a comment specifically about multiple legato speeds being an unpopular feature by simply saying 'I'm pretty sure it's popular with many people'. But it's good we are on the same page now.


----------



## CT

Tom Ferguson said:


> Well OK, but it wasn't obvious because you responded to a comment specifically about multiple legato speeds being an unpopular feature by simply saying 'I'm pretty sure it's popular with many people'. But it's good we are on the same page now.


Multiple legato speeds aren't just there for the hell of it. I didn't think there needed to be a distinction made between the means and the end.


----------



## muziksculp

One of the reasons I like Physically Modelled instruments, is I don't have to deal with any Legato delay compensations for legatos, shorts, or any other style of playing.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

Mike T said:


> Multiple legato speeds aren't just there for the hell of it. I didn't think there needed to be a distinction made between the means and the end.


There is when the different legato transition speeds aren't the only means to that end though. muziksculp wasn't talking about the legato quality but the legato speed difference. You obviously conflate the two, but I don't think they should be personally as there is a perfectly viable alternative.

Though this is just getting pedantic at this point.


----------



## CT

Ok.


----------



## Frederick

Me, amateur mockup builder of soundtracks between 1975 and say 2010 - not a fan of more recent work, except for when its author is John Williams of course:

Normally I would go for the modular version, but given the price of this, I think the modular version will be too expensive considering that I'm very happy with other modular orchestras that I already have. A little odd, but in this case the high price of the ensemble product actually made me go for it.

I have bought AR1 Foundations early on since I figured it's about 33% off with the free Selection and it could take awhile for the 40% off deal during sales. I have shelved AR One though - till it's complete enough for me to use it on its own even if it's just ensembles. I'm buying this for the AR1 room sound and I'm not a fan of mixing different parts of different orchestras. Only some solo instruments here and there - otherwise I prefer to use one of my other tools more suited for the task.

I'm a little disappointed that there's no introduction price for the Selections. I'm better off waiting for the bundle when they are all out - considering I have shelved this for now.

I did get both Selections now though. It didn't feel right to just get the free one.


----------



## Gerbil

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Perhaps not every Spitfire customer is interested in orchestrating everything one instrument at a time, all the time. As Paul stated, there's a difference also when different sections are recorded together in a room.


Con Moto cellos and basses legato sound just as good together with a bit more beef to them imo. Plus they can also go their own way. Minus is that there are no accompanying shorts.


----------



## DovesGoWest

dzilizzi said:


> Spitfire Symphony Orchestra started out as a "modular" orchestra. You could buy the parts without buying the whole thing - strings, winds and brass - unlike BBCSO which comes as a whole orchestra all in one. The only problem with SSO is it doesn't technically have a piano and percussion section. You can buy the orchestral grand and Joby Buress percussion which were both recorded later in Air Lyndhurst. So I was meaning like BBCSO as in the whole orchestra will be recorded at the same time relatively, but like SSO in that you can buy the bits and pieces you want or the whole thing. And it will all be recorded at Abbey Road Studio 1. Likely will be a bundle discount.
> 
> So - AR full orchestra available in sections should be available eventually depending on COVID restrictions.
> 
> And AR ensemble with bits and pieces (AROOF/Low Strings/SparklingWinds/etc) geared towards media composers with continue to come out this year as it is mostly fully recorded. Unless they think of something else they want to do.
> 
> As far as I know, only the normal updates to BBCSO & SSO are planned at this time. Christian mentioned recording a piano in Maida Vale for BBCSO, but that was before COVID and there may not be time before it becomes something other than a recording studio.


This wasn't my interpretation from everything i have heard Paul & Christian talk about, the whole modular concept refers to the expansion packs that have just been released for AR. Although i can see where your coming from and infer it from the way some of the web pages are written. If the plan is ultimately to release all the sections\leaders from AR1 in the same way BBCSO is provided then i can see it making the BBCSO defunct.

Way back when the BBCSO was all the hype and they were saying about it been a new direction\step\future etc the AR1 expansions are i thought they would add to BBCSO. Having things like Celli\Bass 8va, Violins\Violas 8va, Violins 1\Violins2 8va and Violins 1\Violins2 unison etc would have really added to the product. 

In fact if BBCO had the expansions it would put both products on the same path in opposite directions where AR1 starts with ensembles and adds to it until ultimately you have all sections\leaders and BBCSO starts with sections\leaders and adds to it until ultimately you have ensembles.


----------



## yiph2

DovesGoWest said:


> This wasn't my interpretation from everything i have heard Paul & Christian talk about, the whole modular concept refers to the expansion packs that have just been released for AR. Although i can see where your coming from and infer it from the way some of the web pages are written. If the plan is ultimately to release all the sections\leaders from AR1 in the same way BBCSO is provided then i can see it making the BBCSO defunct.
> 
> Way back when the BBCSO was all the hype and they were saying about it been a new direction\step\future etc the AR1 expansions are i thought they would add to BBCSO. Having things like Celli\Bass 8va, Violins\Violas 8va, Violins 1\Violins2 8va and Violins 1\Violins2 unison etc would have really added to the product.
> 
> In fact if BBCO had the expansions it would put both products on the same path in opposite directions where AR1 starts with ensembles and adds to it until ultimately you have all sections\leaders and BBCSO starts with sections\leaders and adds to it until ultimately you have ensembles.


Holy crap, how many times has this been explained... AR foundations and expansions ARE NOT THE MODULAR ORCHESTRA. They are a separate product, similar to SSO


----------



## Al Maurice

I would say, both BBCSO and AR1, are two different ways of cracking the same nut.

Both are meant to complement one another if you go by Spitfire's videos, so I'm not sure if the intention is there to be too much overlap.

BBCSO allows an orchestrator to make up their sonic space in which ever way they see fit.

Whereas AR1 with the modules, will allow a composer who wants ready made orchestrated blends and timbres, much like what Iconica Ensemble achieves. And achieve their result quickly without too much effort.


----------



## gst98

It did make me laugh, after hearing a thousand times from Spitfire about how BBCSO was finally a *cohesive *_sound, all recorded in the same studio - it's never been done before_. 
And now they're emphasing _"nah, doesn't matter, all your favourite films are recorded in multiple places anyway, just plop these in your template"._ They all sound good regardless.


----------



## Karma

Tom Ferguson said:


> Yeh, I'm not really sure why they didn't just make it all timed to 125ms really. Also it would have been useful to know what the legato/long attack times were and what they timed the shorts too as well.


In that case you can just play everything at a softer velocity (below 40) and you will always be locked into 125ms delay, even when playing very fast. That was an intentional addition for anyone that prefers to have that delay consistent.


----------



## Nadav

gst98 said:


> It did make me laugh, after hearing a thousand times from Spitfire about how BBCSO was finally a *cohesive *_sound, all recorded in the same studio - it's never been done before_.
> And now they're emphasing _"nah, doesn't matter, all your favourite films are recorded in multiple places anyway, just plop these in your template"._ They all sound good regardless.


Whatever sells.


----------



## DovesGoWest

yiph2 said:


> Holy crap, how many times has this been explained... AR foundations and expansions ARE NOT THE MODULAR ORCHESTRA. They are a separate product, similar to SSO


Excuse me for not reading hundreds of threads on it, AR Foundation, AR Legendry Low String and AR Sparkling Woodwinds all are packaged under the Abbey Road ONE product line banner. Therefore this could be thought of and considered to be MODULAR.

Now if you took BBCSO and sold the String, Woodwinds, Brass, Percussion etc as separate products under the BBCSO banner again this could be thought of and considered a MODULAR orchestra.


----------



## DovesGoWest

Karma said:


> In that case you can just play everything at a softer velocity (below 40) and you will always be locked into 125ms delay, even when playing very fast. That was an intentional addition for anyone that prefers to have that delay consistent.


Can we see the figures for various sections\instruments\articulation for the BBCSO as well


----------



## yiph2

DovesGoWest said:


> Excuse me for not reading hundreds of threads on it, AR Foundation, AR Legendry Low String and AR Sparkling Woodwinds all are packaged under the Abbey Road ONE product line banner. Therefore this could be thought of and considered to be MODULAR.
> 
> Now if you took BBCSO and sold the String, Woodwinds, Brass, Percussion etc as separate products under the BBCSO banner again this could be thought of and considered a MODULAR orchestra.


Yes, but they aren't doing it... Paul and Christian already mentioned it just yesterday in the video, where Christian askes about the selections, then the modular orchestra


----------



## DovesGoWest

Al Maurice said:


> I would say, both BBCSO and AR1, are two different ways of cracking the same nut.
> 
> Both are meant to complement one another if you go by Spitfire's videos, so I'm not sure if the intention is there to be too much overlap.
> 
> BBCSO allows an orchestrator to make up their sonic space in which ever way they see fit.
> 
> Whereas AR1 with the modules, will allow a composer who wants ready made orchestrated blends and timbres, much like what Iconica Ensemble achieves. And achieve their result quickly without too much effort.


Like what @gst98 says last year when BBCSO Discover and Core launched the big thing was about a cohesive sound across the whole orchestra etc. rather than having to mix and blend different libraries together. Now we are on the AR band wagon its all about taking any libraries and blending them together as its not that hard anyways using reverbs.

I do wonder prior to COVID at least how many pieces were recorded in different locations are blended together, certainly from watching videos with Alan Meyerson, Hans Zimmer and Harry Gregson Williams they all seem to record in a singular place for a given piece\cue. I accept that given COVID it has meant you cant get an entire orchestra in one place for days\weeks to record, but to use that as a USP about blending libraries together is a bit.......


----------



## DovesGoWest

yiph2 said:


> Yes, but they aren't doing it... Paul and Christian already mentioned it just yesterday in the video, where Christian askes about the selections, then the modular orchestra


Yes i just re-listened and Paul does say they have embarked on a separate modular orchestra recorded at AR that is separate from AR1. So we will end up with BBCSO that is cohesive in terms of players and location record and then AR which is cohesive purely on location as presumably they will not be able to guarantee the same players


----------



## Peter Satera

MaxOctane said:


> I can only imagine if this patch (and your demo!) had shipped with Hans Zimmer Strings...


Funnily enough, that is what I also tried out last night, and it works very well with HZ Full String shorts patch and Celli L and Celli R Spiccatissimo articulations.


----------



## yiph2

DovesGoWest said:


> Yes i just re-listened and Paul does say they have embarked on a separate modular orchestra recorded at AR that is separate from AR1. So we will end up with BBCSO that is cohesive in terms of players and location record and then AR which is cohesive purely on location as presumably they will not be able to guarantee the same players


Not sure how it's related to BBCSO? But yea it would be very cohesive and similar to SSO in release


----------



## prodigalson

DovesGoWest said:


> Excuse me for not reading hundreds of threads on it, AR Foundation, AR Legendry Low String and AR Sparkling Woodwinds all are packaged under the Abbey Road ONE product line banner. Therefore this could be thought of and considered to be MODULAR.
> 
> Now if you took BBCSO and sold the String, Woodwinds, Brass, Percussion etc as separate products under the BBCSO banner again this could be thought of and considered a MODULAR orchestra.



For the love of God, can we please pin this information to the top of every thread that discusses Abbey Road ONE?? Every single thread that discusses it features this confusion reiterated several times and several subsequent pages of attempts to clarify by members facing obtuse, indignant parsing of the word “modular”.


----------



## DovesGoWest

prodigalson said:


> For the love of God, can we please pin this information to the top of every thread that discusses Abbey Road ONE?? Every single thread that discusses it features this confusion reiterated several times and several subsequent pages of attempts to clarify by members facing obtuse, indignant parsing of the word “modular”.


You make a good point but also if we as experienced people still get confused was this a not so great marketing\branding strategy by spitfire


----------



## icecoolpool

gst98 said:


> It did make me laugh, after hearing a thousand times from Spitfire about how BBCSO was finally a *cohesive *_sound, all recorded in the same studio - it's never been done before_.
> And now they're emphasing _"nah, doesn't matter, all your favourite films are recorded in multiple places anyway, just plop these in your template"._ They all sound good regardless.


Good point!

That said, they´re not wrong: the BBCSO DOES have a cohesive sound because recordings are of a symphony orchestra who have played together for years. I think that is an important issue for some people looking to mockup classical symphonic pieces or pieces where you simply want that "one band in a room" sound.

However, Spitfire acknowledge that the modern day reality for film composers, even those guys right at the top, is that they will have to juggle different recordings from musicians in different studios from all over the world. With a bit of mixing, they make it work. In this vain, there is no reason different libraries should work together (and most of us do mix and match). This aspect of cohesive "purity" just isn´t as an important a factor for modern media composers as it would be for those from more traditional classical backgrounds.

That said, sometimes there is a big disjunct between different libraries, either due to the room or the way the instruments were played or recorded (how many people mix SF Symphonic Brass with SF Studio Strings?). That said BBCSO PRO and AR1, for example, are both flexible enough that the user should be able to comfortably find a middle ground somewhere between the two (or, imho, to try and get BBCSO PRO with its traditional orchestra sound as close as possinle to AR1 which has THAT sound).


----------



## Tom Ferguson

Karma said:


> In that case you can just play everything at a softer velocity (below 40) and you will always be locked into 125ms delay, even when playing very fast. That was an intentional addition for anyone that prefers to have that delay consistent.


Cheers for the replay. Ah OK, so are you saying that the 'hard' 75ms delay one is basically just the same transition as the slow, but with the sample more cut into? If so this would definitely be something useful to explain in the manual as it's easy to assume it would be a separate recorded transition with the lack of explanation!
Also personally it would be nice to have this as a feature that could be turned off so there is no chance of triggering it by accident.


----------



## Evans

Aaand I'm already tired of hearing glockenspiel paired with woodwinds.


----------



## Saxer

Evans said:


> Aaand I'm already tired of hearing glockenspiel paired with woodwinds.


At least you can switch the glockenspiel off as it's a separate layer.


----------



## Evans

Saxer said:


> At least you can switch the glockenspiel off as it's a separate layer.


Thanks for the clarification for anyone I've confused, but I'm aware. It's more that we're already hearing (and will likely continue to hear) this in a lot of user examples. Kind of like some of the "best" Omnisphere patches getting beaten to death!


----------



## dzilizzi

Christian stated in the Tombola video that Spitfire would eventually like to record in every top British recording studio. 

SSO is Air Lyndhurst. First orchestra library 
Studio Orchestra also at Air in the smaller dryer room 

BBCSO - orchestra that has played together for years recorded in situ so no adjustments are required to make it play well together. Out of the box should play well. Great for beginners who don't understand how an orchestra sits. Plus lots of microphones. 

AROOF plus expansion packs. For media composers. get the quick sound of Abbey Road in an easy to throw together product. Similar to Albion. 

Abbey Road modular orchestra. Simular to SSO. Different from BBCSO in that you can buy sections and using studio players that may not regularly play together. 

There is also something being recorded in the smaller AR studio 2(?) right now. The one the Beatles recorded in. Paul said it is something that can be recorded with COVID restrictions, so something small or solo players. I got the impression it isn't the normal stuff they do. Wondering if it will be like OT's LA Sessions. 

I'm looking forward to the modular orchestra and seeing what other British recording studios they are going to record at.


----------



## muziksculp

Is the latest version of AR-1 Foundations working fine, or has issues ?

I'm trying to decide if I should go forward and purchase it at the current reduced price. 

Thanks.


----------



## Trevor Meier

muziksculp said:


> Is the latest version of AR-1 Foundations working fine, or has issues ?
> 
> I'm trying to decide if I should go forward and purchase it at the current reduced price.
> 
> Thanks.


Working fine for me


----------



## muziksculp

Trevor Meier said:


> Working fine for me


Thanks. Are you on Mac or PC ?


----------



## Kevperry777

muziksculp said:


> Thanks.
> 
> I agree. Afflatus might be just the right match for AR-1.
> 
> Do you have Afflatus and AR-1, and tried to use both in a track ?


I do have both, but haven't tried it much.MIght mess with it more now that the lows are out.... here is a very quick and dirty test. Legendary lows, AR main strings with Lush Afflatus in the violins/,melody.


----------



## Jordan1566

If only they separated the cello and basses, I would consider this


----------



## CT

Yeah I wish they'd make a modular orchestra or something.


----------



## Peter Satera

Mike T said:


> Yeah I wish they'd make a modular orchestra or something.


VI be like...

...


----------



## DennyB

Mike T said:


> I'm pretty sure it's popular with many people. Doesn't require anything more impractical than offsetting MIDI notes appropriately.


Maybe this is what you meant, but in cubase at least, you can offset the whole track rather than make micro adjustments to every midi note. I get it that this isn’t as precise, but it makes the midi data much easier to deal with.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

Sorry if this is another piece of information that should be common knowledge by now, but is abbey road one: Orchestral foundations _not _getting a legato update (no, I don't mean these separate selections)? 

I had understood that at a later date the legato was being added, but not people seem to be talking as if that isn't the case and that these separate products are supposed to be filling in these functions. I've been looking to by AROOF for a while, but that was always presuming the legatos were going to be added sometime in the near future. Without them I'm really not interested because I just won't end up using most of the patches and can't justify that kind of price. 

I'm really hoping I'm mistaken and there definitely are legatos coming though!


----------



## Marsen

Tom Ferguson said:


> Sorry if this is another piece of information that should be common knowledge by now, but is abbey road one: Orchestral foundations _not _getting a legato update (no, I don't mean these separate selections)?
> 
> I had understood that at a later date the legato was being added, but not people seem to be talking as if that isn't the case and that these separate products are supposed to be filling in these functions. I've been looking to by AROOF for a while, but that was always presuming the legatos were going to be added sometime in the near future. Without them I'm really not interested because I just won't end up using most of the patches and can't justify that kind of price.
> 
> I'm really hoping I'm mistaken and there definitely are legatos coming though!


Short: No.


----------



## muziksculp

Tom Ferguson said:


> Sorry if this is another piece of information that should be common knowledge by now, but is abbey road one: Orchestral foundations _not _getting a legato update (no, I don't mean these separate selections)?
> 
> I had understood that at a later date the legato was being added, but not people seem to be talking as if that isn't the case and that these separate products are supposed to be filling in these functions. I've been looking to by AROOF for a while, but that was always presuming the legatos were going to be added sometime in the near future. Without them I'm really not interested because I just won't end up using most of the patches and can't justify that kind of price.
> 
> I'm really hoping I'm mistaken and there definitely are legatos coming though!


Since they just released the Low-Strings Legato for AR-1 , I don't think they will be adding legatos to the main library, that would have been done using these new Low-Strings, but it wasn't, they decided to add them as a separate expansion. Just my guess.


----------



## Marsen

Jordan1566 said:


> If only they separated the cello and basses, I would consider this


Fun fact: just added CSS Cello & Bass Legato (8ve) in a Multi, added some Cinematic Rooms, and played along with Guy's new Video about Legendary Low Strings.
Sounds the same.


----------



## muziksculp

Has this issue been fixed ? 

When release envelope is set to a high value, D.James shows the issue in the video, where the note plays again, instead of playing a longer tail of the envelope.


----------



## Peter Satera

Marsen said:


> Fun fact: just added CSS Cello & Bass Legato (8ve) in a Multi, added some Cinematic Rooms, and played along with Guy's new Video about Legendary Low Strings.
> Sounds the same.


I don't think that is accurate, there's more to it than reverb. They sound similar in certain scenarios, but definitely not the same, especially when it comes to the shorts, both have their merits imo. Legendary sounds deeper with clarity on the longs, the spic' on CSS is tighter and the attack is more prominent, where as Legendary it's more rounded I find. But you can see for yourself. 

View attachment CSS 8ve v Legendary.mp4


----------



## dcoscina

Mike T said:


> Yeah I wish they'd make a modular orchestra or something.


Not sure if this is dry humour but it is something Spitfire has publicly said they are working on.


----------



## dzilizzi

dcoscina said:


> Not sure if this is dry humour but it is something Spitfire has publicly said they are working on.


He's kidding. About every 15 pages someone complains about lack of individual instruments and legato and basically wants a full orchestra.


----------



## VSriHarsha

dzilizzi said:


> Christian stated in the Tombola video that Spitfire would eventually like to record in every top British recording studio.
> 
> SSO is Air Lyndhurst. First orchestra library
> Studio Orchestra also at Air in the smaller dryer room
> 
> BBCSO - orchestra that has played together for years recorded in situ so no adjustments are required to make it play well together. Out of the box should play well. Great for beginners who don't understand how an orchestra sits. Plus lots of microphones.
> 
> AROOF plus expansion packs. For media composers. get the quick sound of Abbey Road in an easy to throw together product. Similar to Albion.
> 
> Abbey Road modular orchestra. Simular to SSO. Different from BBCSO in that you can buy sections and using studio players that may not regularly play together.
> 
> There is also something being recorded in the smaller AR studio 2(?) right now. The one the Beatles recorded in. Paul said it is something that can be recorded with COVID restrictions, so something small or solo players. I got the impression it isn't the normal stuff they do. Wondering if it will be like OT's LA Sessions.
> 
> I'm looking forward to the modular orchestra and seeing what other British recording studios they are going to record at.


Ok! The place where the Beatles recorded. Well, that sounds promising.


----------



## dcoscina

dzilizzi said:


> He's kidding. About every 15 pages someone complains about lack of individual instruments and legato and basically wants a full orchestra.


Thought so. I’m sure it will be amazing when it comes out but the peanut gallery here will find something wrong with it anyhow


----------



## Tom Ferguson

muziksculp said:


> Since they just released the Low-Strings Legato for AR-1 , I don't think they will be adding legatos to the main library, that would have been done using these new Low-Strings, but it wasn't, they decided to add them as a separate expansion. Just my guess.


Yeh, fair enough! Personally I think that's a pretty crap move considering the price of that library, and I'm almost certain at the time it seemed like it was supposed to be getting a legato update (which I'm pretty certain multiple people including pros like Blakus were talking about coming iirc). I would have thought if these selections were really the legatos that were being talked about, these should be free updates to AROOF surely? Other than the amazing room (which I don't think is worth not getting legatos considering it really makes a lot of those longs patches weak for everything but loose sketching IMO) what makes it worth the same price as albion one? Is there something I'm missing here? 

I really love the idea of the library, but without a proper legato update I'm just not interested anymore unfortunately.


----------



## muziksculp

Tom Ferguson said:


> Yeh, fair enough! Personally I think that's a pretty crap move considering the price of that library, and I'm almost certain at the time it seemed like it was supposed to be getting a legato update (which I'm pretty certain multiple people including pros like Blakus were talking about coming iirc). I would have thought if these selections were really the legatos that were being talked about, these should be free updates to AROOF surely? Other than the amazing room (which I don't think is worth not getting legatos considering it really makes a lot of those longs patches weak for everything but loose sketching IMO) what makes it worth the same price as albion one? Is there something I'm missing here?
> 
> I really love the idea of the library, but without a proper legato update I'm just not interested anymore unfortunately.


So, you don't own AR-1 Foundations ? 

I'm still undecided if I should buy it, or just wait for some of the AR-Modular libraries to be released. 

The Low-Strings Legatos they just released is not a bad deal $49., but I agree, the lack of Legatos in AR-1 was what made me not buy it in the first place when it was released, and I'm still debating if I should just wait for the AR modular releases.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

muziksculp said:


> So, you don't own AR-1 Foundations ?
> 
> I'm still undecided if I should buy it, or just wait for some of the AR-Modular libraries to be released.
> 
> The Low-Strings Legatos they just released is not a bad deal $49., but I agree, the lack of Legatos in AR-1 was what made me not buy it in the first place when it was released, and I'm still debating if I should just wait for the AR modular releases.


No I don't, I only have the leg. low strings so far which are super nice and not a bad price really (though a bit rough how much more expensive it is in the UK). I was very much intending to get AROOF on the seemingly misinterpreted promise of legatos being added. I'm very glad I've realised that this isn't going to happen as that would have been a serious disappointment if I had got it. 

Regardless of AROOF, I'm super excited about the new modular series as it's pretty much exactly what I've wanted from spitfire for ages (right down to the new much better IMO room). If it's it's anything like the quality of the leg. low strings (but obviously way way more deep sampled please! (Don't skimp!!!)) then I'm likely to be spending a serious amount of money on them : S


----------



## Trash Panda

Honestly haven’t missed legato in AR1.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

Trash Panda said:


> Honestly haven’t missed legato in AR1.


Yep, fair enough! I know I would, but I realise it's not such a big deal for everyone ofc.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Anybody know if you can include the patch articulations as extra articulations in the Low Strings or High Woods patches? Or do you need to load a new AR1 instance for these because they are totally standalone patches?


----------



## muziksculp

Trash Panda said:


> Honestly haven’t missed legato in AR1.


Interesting. Can you elaborate on this. 

Thanks


----------



## John R Wilson

Think I'm going to hold of on getting any of these selections. Still seems a little on the pricier side for what you actually get. Think I need to see what other selections get released first.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

John R Wilson said:


> Think I'm going to hold of on getting any of these selections. Still seems a little on the pricier side for what you actually get. Think I need to see what other selections get released first.


I have to agree. I think £39 would be more in line with what you'd get with a full sized library, or at the least have an intro offer.


----------



## John R Wilson

Tom Ferguson said:


> I have to agree. I think £39 would be more in line with what you'd get with a full sized library, or at the least have an intro offer.





Tom Ferguson said:


> I have to agree. I think £39 would be more in line with what you'd get with a full sized library, or at the least have an intro offer.


I would have certainly been much more inclined to have just gone for them at around that price or if they had an intro offer on them. £49 is pushing it for what you get in my view.


----------



## PaulieDC

John R Wilson said:


> I would have certainly been much more inclined to have just gone for them at around that price or if they had an intro offer on them. £49 is pushing it for what you get in my view.


They've knocked AROOF down to $349 again. For those of us who bought it first time around, offering the bundle of Low Strings and Sparkling Cider for $49 as a special would have been nice. They do give Low Strings free to those who bought AROOF before Nov 5th, but all of us early adopters would have appreciated the pair for $49 as an intro to this new direction they are going. I'm glad I bought AROOF on Nov 27th, had I bought it Nov 6th, that would've have been aggravating.

Well, relatively speaking. There's a whole lot more folderol going on across this planet at the moment outweighing the prices of digital samples, lol.


----------



## markleake

John R Wilson said:


> I would have certainly been much more inclined to have just gone for them at around that price or if they had an intro offer on them. £49 is pushing it for what you get in my view.


Same thoughts here.

I've been holding off, waiting to see what comes out for this series. These seem to confirm what people were a bit worried about - the price is high for the number of articulations, and how specific the purpose is. Recording these as octaves is very sensible, yes, given this use is so common. But for the price, couldn't they have recorded some more articulations? Trills, for example, in the woods?

They do sound great though.

I see these targeted at people who want the AR sound, are willing to pay the "leading edge" $$ for it, and are fine with the risk of limited releases like these ones.


----------



## jononotbono

I just watched Daniel James’ video. It is a few months old. So, I’m just wondering, is that cpu spiking still happening? I mean, he showed High and Low strings with a few mic positions and it brought his 12 core Trash Can to its knees. I don’t know what his settings were both in Cubase and the Spitfire player but can anyone who is currently using this library confirm whether the spiking still happens? Cheers


----------



## emasters

jononotbono said:


> I just watched Daniel James’ video. It is a few months old. So, I’m just wondering, is that cpu spiking still happening? I mean, he showed High and Low strings with a few mic positions and it brought his 12 core Trash Can to its knees. I don’t know what his settings were both in Cubase and the Spitfire player but can anyone who is currently using this library confirm whether the spiking still happens? Cheers


Not an issue here - running an 8 Core, 16 Thread Intel MacBook Pro with i9 and 64 GB RAM. If I have the DAW buffer set to 32, it does stutter excessively like Daniel's video. If I increase the DAW buffer to 256 (which is a reasonable size), no issues with multiple mics enabled. I know Daniel expected it to work out of the box (seems like a reasonable expectation), but I do wonder if there was a setting like this, that impacted his use? Or perhaps there was an issue in the product, that got corrected in one of the updates? Or maybe it was related to his system/environment? Long answer to a short question - no issues here like Daniel experienced.


----------



## muziksculp

Does the Release parameter of the big knob in AR-1 work as it should ?


----------



## BasariStudios

jononotbono said:


> I just watched Daniel James’ video. It is a few months old. So, I’m just wondering, is that cpu spiking still happening? I mean, he showed High and Low strings with a few mic positions and it brought his 12 core Trash Can to its knees. I don’t know what his settings were both in Cubase and the Spitfire player but can anyone who is currently using this library confirm whether the spiking still happens? Cheers


It is one if the CPU heaviest SAMPLES Library, i know of Algorhytmic can do it but this is Samples. It bring my 10900k to its knees too.


----------



## Russell Anderson

emasters said:


> Not an issue here - running an 8 Core, 16 Thread Intel MacBook Pro with i9 and 64 GB RAM. If I have the DAW buffer set to 32, it does stutter excessively like Daniel's video. If I increase the DAW buffer to 256 (which is a reasonable size), no issues with multiple mics enabled. I know Daniel expected it to work out of the box (seems like a reasonable expectation), but I do wonder if there was a setting like this, that impacted his use? Or perhaps there was an issue in the product, that got corrected in one of the updates? Or maybe it was related to his system/environment? Long answer to a short question - no issues here like Daniel experienced.


He runs on 2k buffer by default (crazy). Many have not shared his issue, most in fact. Was a strange happenstance. I run on a dualcore 8gb rock I found outside, and for the smell of the library my computer is capable of running, no issues.


----------



## Kevperry777

muziksculp said:


> Does the Release parameter of the big knob in AR-1 work as it should ?



Yes.


----------



## muziksculp

Kevperry777 said:


> Yes.


OK. Great. So they must have fixed it via an update. 

I don't have AR-1 yet, but I'm trying to evaluate if I should buy it at the current discount price. 

Do you recommend it, even if I have Albion ONE ? 

Thanks.


----------



## jonathanwright

jononotbono said:


> I just watched Daniel James’ video. It is a few months old. So, I’m just wondering, is that cpu spiking still happening? I mean, he showed High and Low strings with a few mic positions and it brought his 12 core Trash Can to its knees. I don’t know what his settings were both in Cubase and the Spitfire player but can anyone who is currently using this library confirm whether the spiking still happens? Cheers


I’ve been running AR1 (and now the new expansions) on my rusty old 2013 iMac with no CPU spikes or issues whatsoever.


----------



## Peter Satera

Trash Panda said:


> Honestly haven’t missed legato in AR1.


I actually do and still would appreciate them if distributed independently. I'd pay for them, as legato is a time consuming development.

These modules are produced with certain aims. With legendary the tonal differences to me are distinguishable. There's more boldness in the playing in legendary sustained notes in comparison to the Low Strings in AR1. 

More significantly, you need to sacrifice one attribute or another. Currently legendary has the legato, but limited to 3 dynamic layers compared AR1s 5 dynamic layers. Also Legendary it's _only_ in octaves, you might not want that all the time.


----------



## Russell Anderson

Peter Satera said:


> I actually do and still would appreciate them if distributed independently. I'd pay for them, as legato is a time consuming development.
> 
> These modules are produced with certain aims. With legendary the tonal differences to me are distinguishable. There's more boldness in the playing in legendary sustained notes in comparison to the Low Strings in AR1.
> 
> More significantly, you need to sacrifice one attribute or another. Currently legendary has the legato, but limited to 3 dynamic layers compared AR1s 5 dynamic layers. Also Legendary it's _only_ in octaves, you might not want that all the time.


Whoa, thank you for the information on the character + dynamic layers, I didn't know. Any inclination I had to pick these up is now vanished. I am in the same boat of wanting legato in AR1, but I've just accepted the fate that I own a non-legato product until 2022 when the $2.5k+ full orchestral library is released. If they did happen to release a 5+ layer legato played in the same character as Foundations then I would be more inclined to buy that. But I am not presently inclined to invest any more money into the ensemble patches in the Selections; the modular orchestra will be expensive enough already without them (and the complete library would for me mostly render them obsolete)

and then there's Voyage to be thinking about, also; both of these libraries would be a bit over my reach presently but whether I even expand on AR1 for the time being is yet to be seen. AR1 itself is definitely not a bad product, so I could live with it and some other legatos for awhile. The brass + percussion are quite excellent IMO


----------



## Gerbil

Tom Ferguson said:


> I have to agree. I think £39 would be more in line with what you'd get with a full sized library, or at the least have an intro offer.


They'll have a big sale on these further down the line so I'll wait until then.


----------



## Russell Anderson

Gerbil said:


> They'll have a big sale on these further down the line so I'll wait until then.


The savings will be slightly less than you'd think, because you know it's going to be a package deal including Sparkling Woodwinds.


----------



## Peter Satera

Russell Anderson said:


> Whoa, thank you for the information on the character + dynamic layers, I didn't know. Any inclination I had to pick these up is now vanished. I am in the same boat of wanting legato in AR1, but I've just accepted the fate that I own a non-legato product until 2022 when the $2.5k+ full orchestral library is released. If they did happen to release a 5+ layer legato played in the same character as Foundations then I would be more inclined to buy that. But I am not presently inclined to invest any more money into the ensemble patches in the Selections; the modular orchestra will be expensive enough already without them (and the complete library would for me mostly render them obsolete)
> 
> and then there's Voyage to be thinking about, also; both of these libraries would be a bit over my reach presently but whether I even expand on AR1 for the time being is yet to be seen. AR1 itself is definitely not a bad product, so I could live with it and some other legatos for awhile. The brass + percussion are quite excellent IMO


Yeah, I appreciate the perspective. To me, I find the modules we are gaining to be beneficial, they give me a different approach entirely, and hearing cello and dbbass recorded together does give a fuller sound. I do see Voyage as a possible purchase too, we'll have to see the price point as currently it's $339 only for legato in vista. So wouldn't be surprised at a 800 - 1000 release for the lot. The good thing about modular approach is, if you see something and it's not for you, you just pass, there's no need for an all in mentality. Similar to what we're seeing over at OT. So I get the overall price is expensive, but it allows us to be selective.

Pro's and cons, you'know...


----------



## yiph2

Peter Satera said:


> Yeah, I appreciate the perspective. To me, I find the modules we are gaining to be beneficial, they give me a different approach entirely, and hearing cello and dbbass recorded together does give a fuller sound. I do see Voyage as a possible purchase too, we'll have to see the price point as currently it's $339 only for legato in vista. So wouldn't be surprised at a 800 - 1000 release for the lot. The good thing about modular approach is, if you see something and it's not for you, you just pass, there's no need for an all in mentality. Similar to what we're seeing over at OT. So I get the overall price is expensive, but it allows us to be selective.
> 
> Pro's and cons, you'know...


Jasper said it would be 1-2k for strings alone


----------



## AudioLoco

dzilizzi said:


> There is also something being recorded in the smaller AR studio 2(?) right now. The one the Beatles recorded in. Paul said it is something that can be recorded with COVID restrictions, so something small or solo players. I got the impression it isn't the normal stuff they do. Wondering if it will be like OT's LA Sessions.


"An instrument we know sounds good in studio 2" + sigh and smile ...

It is a Ringo inspired drum kit.... Maybe even drums, bass, guitar, piano, mellotron?! A la East West Fab Four?!

But me? I am really hoping for an Eleanor Rigby inspired strings octet with super close micing.... 
Pliiiiiiz!!!!
It was recorded in studio 2....


----------



## Peter Satera

yiph2 said:


> Jasper said it would be 1-2k for strings alone


Wwwhhhat!?


----------



## scoringdreams

yiph2 said:


> Jasper said it would be 1-2k for strings alone


I personally don't think it would eventually become overly expensive ($4-5K for the full series) unless we're looking at the future versions of Spitfire Symphony Series being priced equally or more expensive.


----------



## yiph2

scoringdreams said:


> I personally don't think (or hope) it would eventually become overly expensive ($4-5K for the full series) unless we're looking at the future versions of Spitfire Symphony Series being priced equally or more expensive.


Well considering strings alone is at least 1k, the full thing would be 4k minimum...


----------



## Frederick

I'm a fan of both Spitfire Audio and VSL, but in this case I keep thinking about the release of VSL's Big Bang Orchestra (BBO) last year (compared to AR1 and Selections). Also very high quality material. Both are little brothers of a full modular orchestra including solo instruments. Both were released in steps. Both have all the mic positions of their big brother. So that makes me compare these two. In total BBO could be had for as low as 1250 Euro when it was still being released. AR1 with 9 Selections seems to be heading towards about 750 Euro in total - taking advantage of all discounts sofar.

For 500 extra you get a choir, legato on almost everything, more articulations including timed ones, and besides the high and low ensembles and full ensembles there's also sections for strings, brass and woodwinds, detailed solo percussion including rolls, percussion ensembles, bonus mega sized orchestra, bonus muted full orchestra, FX strings, FX woodwinds, low brass clusters, phrases... etc. Compared to that, AR1 has very - VERY - little content for the price. Okay, what about AR1 has more dynamic layers? Not on the legato patch or so it seems.


----------



## Jotto

The AR thing is going to be very very expencive. I stay away from that rabbit hole.


----------



## BasariStudios

yiph2 said:


> Jasper said it would be 1-2k for strings alone


You forgot to tell him that Jasper also said that John Williams comes in the package too.


----------



## Nadav

Is Performance Samples that good? Looking at their site I see high prices, no support is guaranteed, nothing with kontakt player license, no refunds/returns or transfers and a lot of threats about protecting their rights and interests.


----------



## jononotbono

Nadav said:


> Is Performance Samples that good? Looking at their site I see high prices, no support is guaranteed, nothing with kontakt player license, no refunds/returns or transfers and a lot of threats about protecting their rights and interests.


Jasper's stuff is amazing. Each product generally does one thing exceptionally well. Listen to all the demos and examples of his products and make up your own mind though


----------



## Kevperry777

muziksculp said:


> OK. Great. So they must have fixed it via an update.
> 
> I don't have AR-1 yet, but I'm trying to evaluate if I should buy it at the current discount price.
> 
> Do you recommend it, even if I have Albion ONE ?
> 
> Thanks.



That’s an interesting question. I don’t own Albion one...but In the video where Henson compares BBC, Albion One and AR1 strings I literally said out loud, “ wow, Albion One still sounds good.”

From what I’ve heard in demos/walkthroughs...I give the woodwind edge to Albion. For pure usability and articulations, I’d give the edge to Albion for strings. Brass is so much better in AR1. Percussion, in an orchestral sense, is better in AR 1. But Albion cinematic perc is an evergreen. But then Albion obviously has a ton of other sounds. 

I think I’d be content waiting for the modular section AR libraries if I had Albion one. A library of extremely limited articulations is just- limiting. (I’m not Paul Thompson....the Mars demo is amazing....but how often could one go to that well living off staccatos?) The section libraries are going to be absolute killer going by the sound of AR1. That’s just my meager opinion.


----------



## Nadav

jononotbono said:


> Jasper's stuff is amazing. Each product generally does one thing exceptionally well. Listen to all the demos and examples of his products and make up your own mind though


I find it suspect how most of these sample libraries companies are made by individuals with no formal education in music nor in software development and employ little to no staff yet command Apple like high prices.


----------



## muziksculp

Kevperry777 said:


> That’s an interesting question. I don’t own Albion one...but In the video where Henson compares BBC, Albion One and AR1 strings I literally said out loud, “ wow, Albion One still sounds good.”
> 
> From what I’ve heard in demos/walkthroughs...I give the woodwind edge to Albion. For pure usability and articulations, I’d give the edge to Albion for strings. Brass is so much better in AR1. Percussion, in an orchestral sense, is better in AR 1. But Albion cinematic perc is an evergreen. But then Albion obviously has a ton of other sounds.
> 
> I think I’d be content waiting for the modular section AR libraries if I had Albion one. A library of extremely limited articulations is just- limiting. (I’m not Paul Thompson....the Mars demo is amazing....but how often could one go to that well living off staccatos?) The section libraries are going to be absolute killer going by the sound of AR1. That’s just my meager opinion.


Hi @Kevperry777 ,

Thanks for you very helpful feedback. I appreciate your time. 

I agree. I think I'm just going to wait for the AR-Modular libraries to be released over time. I know it's going to require a long wait, but I don't mind. I think AR-1 Foundations is a great tool, but the fact that I have other similar type libraries like Albion-ONE, and also OT-Metropolis Arcs, it makes more sense to wait for the AR-1 Modular libraries. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## jononotbono

Nadav said:


> I find it suspect how most of these sample libraries companies are made by individuals with no formal education in music nor in software development and employ little to no staff yet command Apple like high prices.


😂 What's that got to do with any conversation going on in this thread? Hey man, if you don't like a sample library then don't buy them.


----------



## Nadav

jononotbono said:


> 😂 What's that got to do with any conversation going on in this thread? Hey man, if you don't like a sample library then don't buy them.


Sorry I didn't know I was talking with the thread topic police, this is what I felt like talking about if you don't find it to your liking feel free to ignore


----------



## yiph2

Nadav said:


> I find it suspect how most of these sample libraries companies are made by individuals with no formal education in music nor in software development and employ little to no staff yet command Apple like high prices.


What/who are you talking about???


----------



## jononotbono

Nadav said:


> Sorry I didn't know I was talking with the thread topic police, this is what I felt like talking about if you don't find it to your liking feel free to ignore


I will from now. Thanks.


----------



## Nadav

yiph2 said:


> What/who are you talking about???


I can see your'e being triggred by my comment, that was not my intention. I was asking because I wanted to know what is the general opinion here regarding sample libraries companies practices and pricings in relation to the proffesional level of their products and the effort it takes to make them. If that strikes you as inappropriate then really feel free to ignore the comment.


----------



## Jotto

Nadav said:


> I find it suspect how most of these sample libraries companies are made by individuals with no formal education in music nor in software development and employ little to no staff yet command Apple like high prices.


They are salesmen


----------



## SupremeFist

Kevperry777 said:


> That’s an interesting question. I don’t own Albion one...but In the video where Henson compares BBC, Albion One and AR1 strings I literally said out loud, “ wow, Albion One still sounds good.”
> 
> From what I’ve heard in demos/walkthroughs...I give the woodwind edge to Albion. For pure usability and articulations, I’d give the edge to Albion for strings. Brass is so much better in AR1. Percussion, in an orchestral sense, is better in AR 1. But Albion cinematic perc is an evergreen. But then Albion obviously has a ton of other sounds.
> 
> I think I’d be content waiting for the modular section AR libraries if I had Albion one. A library of extremely limited articulations is just- limiting. (I’m not Paul Thompson....the Mars demo is amazing....but how often could one go to that well living off staccatos?) The section libraries are going to be absolute killer going by the sound of AR1. That’s just my meager opinion.


Personally I find that the combo of BBC (Core) + AR1 makes the strings/brass/wood sections of Albion One totally redundant. The sound is just so much better.


----------



## Nadav

Jotto said:


> They are salesmen


I guess you charge as much as you think you can get for a product regardless of the amount of time, effort or skill it takes to make it, that much is true for any salesman, I guess I'm asking if you feel it's justified for what you're getting. software after all is a business with minimal operational loss and you can see high end software by high end companies with huge amount of professionally qualified employees revolving around a single or very few products which they are committed to support and update for years to come being offered for sometimes considerably less then even one library, on the other hand the number of libraries a company can release is limitless and requires much less support or updating or any advancement in technology, but then again I am relatively new to sample libraries perhaps these prices are justified or maybe target such a small pool of costumers as to make it impossible to price any lower, is that the case or is it so simply because we allow it to be?


----------



## dzilizzi

Nadav said:


> I can see your'e being triggred by my comment, that was not my intention. I was asking because I wanted to know what is the general opinion here regarding sample libraries companies practices and pricings in relation to the proffesional level of their products and the effort it takes to make them. If that strikes you as inappropriate then really feel free to ignore the comment.


I have different feelings about it depending upon what the library includes. When they hire musicians and a large studio, they may have to put out hundreds of thousands of dollars to just record it. If they take loans out to do this, the costs of interest may be really high and they don't get paid back until it sells. If they have to hire programmers and customer service people, costs go up. Plus, if the audience for the product is small, the cost per sale to break even is high. 

I buy few of Jasper's products because I'm a hobbyist and I can live with the legato I get from my less expensive per articulation libraries. But I think for professionals? If that is the type of music they write? Totally worth it. Time is money. It is similar with these AR1 expansions. if you are a media composer like Christian and Paul are, anything that speeds up the time to write a composition means you earn more per hour, as those jobs are usually paid set prices. Also it means you have time to do more jobs, which means more money. 

From things Troels over at 8Dio has said. the majority of his libraries come from things he needs for jobs he is working on. He then turns them into sample libraries. I think a lot of library producers are the same. "Hey, I need this sound for a project. If I do a bit more sampling work, I can make it into a library once I'm done with this job and extra money. plus I can share these cool sounds"

So I believe most either work in the industry or make music somehow before they get into library production. You don't need a degree in music to be a good composer. It helps. But music was around long before colleges. Also, anyone can make an instrument in Kontakt (or a few other players) It also doesn't require a degree. There are lots of YouTube videos that will tell you how. And check out Pianobook. 

So, if we laugh at your comment, this is why.


----------



## ed buller

SupremeFist said:


> Personally I find that the combo of BBC (Core) + AR1 makes the strings/brass/wood sections of Albion One totally redundant. The sound is just so much better.


yeah. Albion barely gets a look in now

e


----------



## BasariStudios

Nadav said:


> I find it suspect how most of these sample libraries companies are made by individuals with no formal education in music nor in software development and employ little to no staff yet command Apple like high prices.


Exactly. Yep. Let us know how things worked out for Hans Zimmer.
He has no music education and all the good stuff.


----------



## Nadav

dzilizzi said:


> I have different feelings about it depending upon what the library includes. When they hire musicians and a large studio, they may have to put out hundreds of thousands of dollars to just record it. If they take loans out to do this, the costs of interest may be really high and they don't get paid back until it sells. If they have to hire programmers and customer service people, costs go up. Plus, if the audience for the product is small, the cost per sale to break even is high.
> 
> I buy few of Jasper's products because I'm a hobbyist and I can live with the legato I get from my less expensive per articulation libraries. But I think for professionals? If that is the type of music they write? Totally worth it. Time is money. It is similar with these AR1 expansions. if you are a media composer like Christian and Paul are, anything that speeds up the time to write a composition means you earn more per hour, as those jobs are usually paid set prices. Also it means you have time to do more jobs, which means more money.
> 
> From things Troels over at 8Dio has said. the majority of his libraries come from things he needs for jobs he is working on. He then turns them into sample libraries. I think a lot of library producers are the same. "Hey, I need this sound for a project. If I do a bit more sampling work, I can make it into a library once I'm done with this job and extra money. plus I can share these cool sounds"
> 
> So I believe most either work in the industry or make music somehow before they get into library production. You don't need a degree in music to be a good composer. It helps. But music was around long before colleges. Also, anyone can make an instrument in Kontakt (or a few other players) It also doesn't require a degree. There are lots of YouTube videos that will tell you how. And check out Pianobook.
> 
> So, if we laugh at your comment, this is why.


I appreciate your thoughts on this. I actually know pretty well what goes into making these products on the software side as I have a degree in computer science and I work as a software developer myself. The point I was making is just that, it doesn't require a high amount of sophistication to make these libraries nor much of any kind of technological advancements or R&D is required so how are the prices justified? I realize any product requires some expenditure to make and a founding of any company includes risk, but perhaps these products have such "boutique like" pricing more because we accepted it as a fact rather then it representing the value of the products.


----------



## Iosonopie

Nadav said:


> I appreciate your thoughts on this. I actually know pretty well what goes into making these products on the software side as I have a degree in computer science and I work as a software developer myself. The point I was making is just that, it doesn't require a high amount of sophistication to make these libraries nor much of any kind of technological advancements or R&D is required so how are the prices justified? I realize any product requires some expenditure to make and a founding of any company includes risk, but perhaps these products have such "boutique like" pricing more because we accepted it as a fact rather then it representing the value of the products.


Venue (microphone, preamps, analog mixers...), musicians (many musicians...), assistants, collaborators, time to develop the library, graphics (from UI to web page), advertising... That's a lot of money, I think. A lot of people need to be paid.


----------



## gst98

Nadav said:


> I appreciate your thoughts on this. I actually know pretty well what goes in to making these products on the software side as I have a degree in computer science and I work as a software developer myself. The point I was making is just that, it doesn't require a high amount of sophistication to make these libraries nor much of any kind of technological advancements or R&D is required so how are the prices justified? I realize any product requires some expenditure to make and a founding of any company includes risk, but perhaps these products have such "boutique like" pricing more because we accepted it as a fact rather then it representing the value of the products.


Go into the Voyage thread and find the videos where he shows his editing process. Never seen any other dev so transparent. His products are so simple the only coding is stuff like note on, note off - its all about the recording/sampling techniques and crossfades. People often refer to legato as scripting, but there is no magic formula going on, no complex engine or pretty interfaces.

No one puts more time into crafting the samples (other than maybe CSS) and he has totally unique ways of sampling (hence the name). He even explains a lot of it on the website.

It is expensive because it is boutique, and because he is a single man operation, so if he wants to do the ridiculous record times that are being done on voyage, he needs to recoup the money on a short time frame, unlike a larger company. Hans said his string library cost over $2m, so only a big company like Spitfire with investors can actually finance that. It doesn't take much more than some napkin maths to get an estimate on how much sampling costs, and people forget that EW and SF samples used to cost this much if not more. Just do a little research into how you would put a sample library together, and I think you'll appreciate where the money goes. And unless you're making your own sampler, I think you're vastly overestimating the role of coding in a library. It certainly doesn't make them more musical.


----------



## dzilizzi

Nadav said:


> I appreciate your thoughts on this. I actually know pretty well what goes into making these products on the software side as I have a degree in computer science and I work as a software developer myself. The point I was making is just that, it doesn't require a high amount of sophistication to make these libraries nor much of any kind of technological advancements or R&D is required so how are the prices justified? I realize any product requires some expenditure to make and a founding of any company includes risk, but perhaps these products have such "boutique like" pricing more because we accepted it as a fact rather then it representing the value of the products.


You are assuming they sell Apple numbers of products. I'm going to guess Jasper probably doesn't, since he seems to be a one man company. He probably breaks even. Maybe. 

Now synths are a different matter. they are more like software development. They don't require expensive recording equipment to produce a product other than a computer. Just time. Which still is valuable but maybe not as expensive in total. 

But as soon as you start talking about recording things properly with expensive mics, paid for musicians, and studio time, plus all the other costs associated with running a business, prices go up. I'd be curious as to how long it takes Spitfire to make back their money on each orchestral product they make.


----------



## Nadav

Yes so this is way I was asking because I don't know much of the costs on the music side of things. I guess venue, hardware and musicians is a big one. Again not overestimating how much coding goes into it, trust me on that one I know there's not much to it on that side.
I guess I'm questioning how much could it cost if one man can pay it out of pocket, and is it still justified to continue asking for such high prices on all of the following products after you become exceedingly efficient at doing it over time and require less resources to accomplish it (such as time, the same hardware, same UI, same code etc..).
I get what all of you are saying, this is not meant as a dis on Mr. Jasper, It just seems like the musical software kinda inherited the musical hardware pricing model and just got stuck there because they found that they can, instead of adapting to the general software industry pricing.
Could be that the expenditure to make these really is astronomical and merits the price, or perhaps it is so because we are to busy defending it rather then criticizing it.


----------



## jbuhler

ed buller said:


> yeah. Albion barely gets a look in now
> 
> e


Added the Albion One, Albion 1, Iceni, and Ark 1 low string legatos to my testing template for the low strings in octaves, and they all hold up surprisingly well in this very narrow test. Ark 1 is a bit one dimensional due to its lack of dynamics. But none of those layer as well as BSS, SSS, HZS, BS, AR-LL, and Afflatus Lush. Not disputing the general claim about A1, just referring to this specific item of brooding low legato.


----------



## Jotto

dzilizzi said:


> You are assuming they sell Apple numbers of products. I'm going to guess Jasper probably doesn't, since he seems to be a one man company. He probably breaks even. Maybe.
> 
> Now synths are a different matter. they are more like software development. They don't require expensive recording equipment to produce a product other than a computer. Just time. Which still is valuable but maybe not as expensive in total.
> 
> But as soon as you start talking about recording things properly with expensive mics, paid for musicians, and studio time, plus all the other costs associated with running a business, prices go up. I'd be curious as to how long it takes Spitfire to make back their money on each orchestral product they make.


My guess is that they get their money back really fast. Just look at the production from all the companies these days. Its not slowing down.


----------



## babylonwaves

Nadav said:


> I find it suspect how most of these sample libraries companies are made by individuals with no formal education in music nor in software development and employ little to no staff yet command Apple like high prices.


it's a niche market and it behaves like that. you're wrong about the education of those who do libs though.


----------



## Nadav

babylonwaves said:


> it's called a niche market and it behaves like that. you're wrong about the education of those who do libs though.


Is it though? can you really say that music production is a niche endeavor? some even buy to just play, that can't be niche.
bear in mind there is no manufacturing costs to these products, you upload them and they are instantly available to billions of people around the world.


----------



## jbuhler

Nadav said:


> Yes so this is way I was asking because I don't know much of the costs on the music side of things. I guess venue, hardware and musicians is a big one. Again not overestimating how much coding goes into it, trust me on that one I know there's not much to it on that side.
> I guess I'm questioning how much could it cost if one man can pay it out of pocket, and is it still justified to continue asking for such high prices on all of the following products after you become exceedingly efficient at doing it over time and require less resources to accomplish it (such as time, the same hardware, same UI).
> I get what all of you are saying, this is not meant as a dis on Mr. Jasper, It just seems like the musical software kinda inherited the musical hardware pricing model and just got stuck there because they found that they can, instead of adapting to the general software industry pricing.
> Could be that the expenditure to make these really is astronomical and merits the price, or perhaps it is so because we are to busy defending it rather then criticizing it.


The sample business is not immune to basic economic theory. There has been a general tendency for prices in the long term to fall close to marginal cost, which is basically server cost plus any royalties due. Look at 8dio pricing, or the SF originals series, most of which started out in libraries costing 20x or more their current cost, the APD sales. etc. Almost all companies have regular sales at 40-50% off, some end up with almost permanent 60% or more sales, and I take the sale price to be the price the companies expect most people to pay for the product. 

Overall, it is a curious market. Selling to hobbyists and aspirational composers is where the real money is at, and almost everyone learns at some point that there's more money to be made with increased volume. But the prestige market yields larger margins and seems to attract the kind of high profile users (successful composers) that can help draw aspirational composers to the company's products in general. So it can help a company's brand to have at least some products that are rarely discounted or remain expensive even when on discount, even if it means leaving a lot of profit that could be reaped from those products on the table. 

But the market for sample libraries is still very small. SF is a very large company in the market, but at 70 or so employees is in the large scheme of business, still a pretty small firm. Most firms in the business are much smaller; many are a single person. The larger companies like Native Instruments are almost all diversified so that sample libraries are only a part of their business, sometimes functioning more like loss leaders or basic content to help sell their hardware. And that causes its own strangeness when a company like Apple buys Logic and adds Alchemy and puts it together in a package, which is already on the low end of costs for a full DAW suite, especially when one considers that Apple hasn't charged for an update since 2013.


----------



## styledelk

Nadav said:


> Is it though? can you really say that music production is a niche endeavor? some even buy to just play, that can't be niche.
> bear in mind there is no manufacturing costs to these products, you upload them and they are instantly available to billions of people around the world.


No manufacturing costs to physical media, sure. Hosting and data transfer costs with AWS or whatever service provider they use? Yes. Licensing cost with Native Instruments for Kontakt libraries? Yes. 

The "COGS" (cost of goods sold) also includes the studio, recording engineers, players, the time editing samples, building the interface. R&D costs might include innovations in the interfaces (like Spitfire's EVOs, for example). Then there's support and marketing, potentially royalties. Yes, there's efficiencies with companies that do this a lot.

But building software (particularly software like samples, which are a whole lot more than just Software) is not without serious high costs.


----------



## gst98

Nadav said:


> Yes so this is way I was asking because I don't know much of the costs on the music side of things. I guess venue, hardware and musicians is a big one. Again not overestimating how much coding goes into it, trust me on that one I know there's not much to it on that side.
> I guess I'm questioning how much could it cost if one man can pay it out of pocket, and is it still justified to continue asking for such high prices on all of the following products after you become exceedingly efficient at doing it over time and require less resources to accomplish it (such as time, the same hardware, same UI, same code etc..).
> I get what all of you are saying, this is not meant as a dis on Mr. Jasper, It just seems like the musical software kinda inherited the musical hardware pricing model and just got stuck there because they found that they can, instead of adapting to the general software industry pricing.
> Could be that the expenditure to make these really is astronomical and merits the price, or perhaps it is so because we are to busy defending it rather then criticizing it.


No, prices have been going down every year. 10/15 years ago you'd be shelling out 4-6k for EW and SF. now you can get the wholse CSS range for under a grand, which is insane. Jasper, however is bringing back more bespoke sampling. Some like Spitfire can reduce their prices over time as the market grows, and they have. Jasper is bespoke and so he can't just lower the price and expect customers to come flocking, he would sell a similar amount but get less revenue.

And there isn't a production line going on here, every time they sample, the devs are testing new ways to approach things to improve the quality. I don't see how peope are getting more efficient, I think they reached that years ago. There biggest time consumption is recording samples (which is getting longer the deep things are sampled) and editing the samples.



Nadav said:


> Is it though? can you really say that music production is a niche endeavor? some even buy to just play, that can't be niche.
> bear in mind there is no manufacturing costs to these products, you upload them and they are instantly available to billions of people around the world.


Yes, producing orchestral samples is incredibly niche. a very small part of all music production.
AWS hosting could be 10/20/30 usd per download for any significantly large library. And the potential market size is not billions, but in the thousands, maybe tens of thousands. It depends on if the product caters to niche orchestral/composer markets, or appeals to a larger music production market.


----------



## Nadav

gst98 said:


> No, prices have been going down every year. 10/15 years ago you'd be shelling out 4-6k for EW and SF. now you can get the wholse CSS range for under a grand, which is insane. Jasper, however is bringing back more bespoke sampling. Some like Spitfire can reduce their prices over time as the market grows, and they have. Jasper is bespoke and so he can't just lower the price and expect customers to come flocking, he would sell a similar amount but get less revenue.
> 
> And there isn't a production line going on here, every time they sample, the devs are testing new ways to approach things to improve the quality. I don't see how peope are getting more efficient, I think they reached that years ago. There biggest time consumption is recording samples (which is getting longer the deep things are sampled) and editing the samples.
> 
> 
> Yes, producing orchestral samples is incredibly niche. a very small part of all music production.
> AWS hosting could be 10/20/30 usd per download for any significantly large library. And the potential market size is not billions, but in the thousands, maybe tens of thousands. It depends on if the product caters to niche orchestral/composer markets, or appeals to a larger music production market.


I think you're exaggerating with the AWS cost just a smidge there, but if the audience is only in the thousands of people then it could make sense, I don't have the data on that.


----------



## Nadav

Well I guess if most of you feel it's justified then there's no reason to be questioning it.
Thanks everyone for all the valid reasons you pointed out and mostly for indulging my curiosity on the matter.


----------



## rnb_2

This is a truly remarkable day in internet history, and I'd like to congratulate everybody involved, from everyone who gave reasoned explanations of the costs and market forces, to @Nadav, who took everything in, asked more questions, thought it over, and thanked everyone for their explanations.

Well done, one and all! And I say that with all sincerity


----------



## babylonwaves

Nadav said:


> Is it though? can you really say that music production is a niche endeavor? some even buy to just play, that can't be niche.
> bear in mind there is no manufacturing costs to these products, you upload them and they are instantly available to billions of people around the world.


it is a niche market and making samples with real players is expensive. just to give you an idea, the costs to hire an orchestra per day can be $50k (some with more experience here please correct me if I'm wrong). for sure you don't hire all the guys on one day but it adds up.
if you take the time to read though all the info available you might learn that there are kickbacks to the player (union related), studio expenses and a lot of costs related to editing samples etc.

I've just realised that I've more or less repeated what @styledelk said


----------



## gst98

Nadav said:


> I think you're exaggerating with the AWS cost just a smidge there, but if the audience is only in the thousands of people then it could make sense, I don't have the data on that.








There are ways with CDNs to get it lower because these AWS prices are not feasible. I think most of the big companies will be paying closer to $0.03-0.05


----------



## styledelk

gst98 said:


> There are ways with CDNs to get it lower because these AWS prices are not feasible. I think most of the big companies will be paying closer to $0.03-0.05


The CDNs wouldn't work quite as easily, since everyone's downloads are watermarked and personally made for them [which is why it often takes a bit to get your download ready.] At least in the case of a Spitfire and their own player. The Kontakt versions may be too, for all I know, but I imagine it's some other things. CDNs are good for files that are relatively static and the same for every destination downloader. [That said, there's also the different regional AWS clusters to account for].

Anyway. It's all more complicated than it seems at the higher levels, and even at the lower levels it's a lot of effort for a one-person operation to get right. 

[And so it doesn't seem like I'm entirely talking out of my ass, I'm a COO with many hats for a startup that deals in lots and lots of data distribution, with likely a very similar niche set of B2B businesses we sell for. At least we sell subscriptions and you can get predictable revenue out of that  ]


----------



## gst98

styledelk said:


> The CDNs wouldn't work quite as easily, since everyone's downloads are watermarked and personally made for them [which is why it often takes a bit to get your download ready.] At least in the case of a Spitfire and their own player. The Kontakt versions may be too, for all I know, but I imagine it's some other things. CDNs are good for files that are relatively static and the same for every destination downloader. [That said, there's also the different regional AWS clusters to account for].
> 
> Anyway. It's all more complicated than it seems at the higher levels, and even at the lower levels it's a lot of effort for a one-person operation to get right.
> 
> [And so it doesn't seem like I'm entirely talking out of my ass, I'm a COO with many hats for a startup that deals in lots and lots of data distribution, with likely a very similar niche set of B2B businesses we sell for. At least we sell subscriptions and you can get predictable revenue out of that  ]



Sure, I wasn’t trying to claim these as exact numbers or exactly how they were doing it, it was more (as example figures) just to say that they are not negligible costs for the seller. I’m sure you’d have a much better idea of the pricing.

Btw, I don’t often see devs claiming their products are watermarked anymore. Even if they are, would watermarking each sample be feasible? Can’t they just do on a few? That way 99% of the download is not unique


----------



## styledelk

gst98 said:


> Sure, I wasn’t trying to claim these as exact numbers or exactly how they were doing it, it was more (as example figures) just to say that they are not negligible costs for the seller. I’m sure you’d have a much better idea of the pricing.
> 
> Btw, I don’t often see devs claiming their products are watermarked anymore. Even if they are, would watermarking each sample be feasible? Can’t they just do on a few? That way 99% of the download is not unique


We're probably veering too far off topic now, but yeah, it could be not unique. But then you're splitting the global copy samples ("for everyone") that are cachable and the unique samples ("for you") that aren't, and dealing with more complicated routing for the CDN (download from this CDN box that's for everyone for this part, and this other one just for them for this other part). Not exactly optimal


----------



## dzilizzi

Nadav said:


> Yes so this is way I was asking because I don't know much of the costs on the music side of things. I guess venue, hardware and musicians is a big one. Again not overestimating how much coding goes into it, trust me on that one I know there's not much to it on that side.
> I guess I'm questioning how much could it cost if one man can pay it out of pocket, and is it still justified to continue asking for such high prices on all of the following products after you become exceedingly efficient at doing it over time and require less resources to accomplish it (such as time, the same hardware, same UI, same code etc..).
> I get what all of you are saying, this is not meant as a dis on Mr. Jasper, It just seems like the musical software kinda inherited the musical hardware pricing model and just got stuck there because they found that they can, instead of adapting to the general software industry pricing.
> Could be that the expenditure to make these really is astronomical and merits the price, or perhaps it is so because we are to busy defending it rather then criticizing it.


Actual coding is probably a small part of making a library. The big costs are not normally reusable in the next library. Each new instrument generally requires new recordings. And thousands of samples that have to be checked, cleaned up and separated before any processing. Once in a while, they can reuse samples. Generally, these libraries are cheaper.


----------



## dzilizzi

Jotto said:


> My guess is that they get their money back really fast. Just look at the production from all the companies these days. Its not slowing down.


That actually makes it harder if you know anything about economics. The more competition, the less you sell unless you have something really unique to make you better. Plus competition causes prices to drop to a point companies will start dropping out. 

But for orchestral libraries, the cost of entry can be high, which also does slow down competition so prices stay higher. Sorry my business degree is peaking out.


----------



## dzilizzi

gst98 said:


> Sure, I wasn’t trying to claim these as exact numbers or exactly how they were doing it, it was more (as example figures) just to say that they are not negligible costs for the seller. I’m sure you’d have a much better idea of the pricing.
> 
> Btw, I don’t often see devs claiming their products are watermarked anymore. Even if they are, would watermarking each sample be feasible? Can’t they just do on a few? That way 99% of the download is not unique


8Dio is the only one I regularly buy from that still watermarks. I've had other, small companies. Most that use NI serial numbers don't appear to watermark, but it could be included in the SN process.


----------



## Jotto

dzilizzi said:


> That actually makes it harder if you know anything about economics. The more competition, the less you sell unless you have something really unique to make you better. Plus competition causes prices to drop to a point companies will start dropping out.
> 
> But for orchestral libraries, the cost of entry can be high, which also does slow down competition so prices stay higher. Sorry my business degree is peaking out.


Yes.... but i think that for the last years now more and more people have started to buy these libraries.


----------



## dzilizzi

Jotto said:


> Yes.... but i think that for the last years now more and more people have started to buy these libraries.


True. No spending on nights out drinking where you pay $8 for 50 cents worth of alcohol. (I'm exaggerating...a bit) Stuck at home watching bad TV reruns. Yeah, I can see it. Buy a Unison chord pack and a couple sample libraries and you are A Producer! Record the process to YouTube or Twitch, and you are The Next Star! You will be a millionaire in next to no time!

I'm kind of kidding - but kind of not.


----------



## yiph2

Nadav said:


> I can see your'e being triggred by my comment, that was not my intention. I was asking because I wanted to know what is the general opinion here regarding sample libraries companies practices and pricings in relation to the proffesional level of their products and the effort it takes to make them. If that strikes you as inappropriate then really feel free to ignore the comment.


I'm honestly not triggered, it was just a bit weird suddenly bringing out this topic with no context


----------



## Nadav

yiph2 said:


> I'm honestly not triggered, it was just a bit weird suddenly bringing out this topic with no context


Yeah you just never know when I'm gonna FLIP OUT like that


----------



## jonathanwright

Here's a quick demo using AR1, plus the new Legendary Low Strings and Sparkling Woodwinds. Inspired rather heavily by watching Gremlins 2 beforehand. 



Other libraries include the BBC harp and Ark choirs.


----------



## Russell Anderson

yiph2 said:


> Well considering strings alone is at least 1k, the full thing would be 4k minimum...





yiph2 said:


> Well considering strings alone is at least 1k, the full thing would be 4k minimum...


On PS’ website it states not each section would carry the same cost. Well, website or heresay from facebook. But I’m betting we’ll see around $3k or less. I wonder if he’s recording woodwinds yet? He’s in northern California, maybe I should go for a drive...


----------



## Peter Satera

I get it, 1k to 2k is a lot, but Jasper is really going to town, and even though it is unlikely I'll be able to go in for that price Jasper is aware of customers that are on a tight budget. This is why a year or two down the line he does flash sales. It gives those that purchased early the benefit of hands on first, but allow those with a tight budget to also gain a taster of what PS has to offer.

I can also say from talking to him about his libs and his process, the guy is really kind and open about his work. This is the type of indie developer which does deserve support as they push us forward.


----------



## Devoluti0n

jonathanwright said:


> Here's a quick demo using AR1, plus the new Legendary Low Strings and Sparkling Woodwinds. Inspired rather heavily by watching Gremlins 2 beforehand.
> 
> 
> 
> Other libraries include the BBC harp and Ark choirs.



Sounds amazing, love it !


----------



## DovesGoWest

I really liked the sound of AR1 Foundations and the Legendary Low strings and been an owner of BBCSO Core they brought me the ensembles and pairings i was missing. However the i didn't jump in with foundations because of the cost and having already bought BBCSO Core last year when it came out.

Then Audio Imperia went and released Areia Lite and bingo this gave me the string sections and pairings that i was missing and originally was going to get via AR. The cost of Areia was $79 for which i got all the ensembles in terms of strings from AR1F and AR1LL plus more as it gives me individual sections as well. If you divide the cost of AR1F by 4 to approximate just the string then it would mean AR strings as it stands now costs $136.25 (AR1F/4 + AR1LL). I can see that the AR product line (Modular + ONE) is going to be an expensive rabbit hole to go down and from cost of SSO you can see how much a modular orchestra currently costs. 

Now i know there is all the talk of the AR sound from those great film scores etc and that essentially is what you are paying of top on normal costs is for an impulse response of AR1. Also given Paul's latest comment about it doesn't matter about cohesive rooms for libraries as they can be blended together easily with reverb I start to question is the AR1 Impulse response worth the cost.

Another thing how many "great" film score are actually recorded at AR now as i had a look on the AR site and it mentions a few from the past such as "Raiders of the lost ark", "Return of the Jedi" (Not the original as that was recorded in Denham), "Highlander" etc but nothing since the 90's in mentioned. A lot of modern epic scores are recorded either at Air, or Sony , Teldex etc.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

DovesGoWest said:


> Another thing how many "great" film score are actually recorded at AR now as i had a look on the AR site and it mentions a few from the past such as "Raiders of the lost ark", "Return of the Jedi" (Not the original as that was recorded in Denham), "Highlander" etc but nothing since the 90's in mentioned. A lot of modern epic scores are recorded either at Air, or Sony , Teldex etc.


That's just factually wrong. Do some more research. Also, Areia is a joke compared to the sound of AR1 and expansions.


----------



## DovesGoWest

ALittleNightMusic said:


> That's just factually wrong. Do some more research. Also, Areia is a joke compared to the sound of AR1 and expansions.


it may be factually wrong but this is from Abbey Roads own website https://www.abbeyroad.com/news/the-...old-by-abbey-roads-mirek-stiles-part-two-2744 research shows a lot of the big modern day composers do not use AR

Sorry but to say Areia is a joke compared to the sound of AR1 is an insult to AI and the musicians, did you not ready what i wrote? the "SOUND" is the impulse response its the sound of the room. On your basis then i can come out and state that AR1 is joke compared to the sound of BBCSO


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

DovesGoWest said:


> it may be factually wrong but this is from Abbey Roads own website https://www.abbeyroad.com/news/the-...old-by-abbey-roads-mirek-stiles-part-two-2744 research shows a lot of the big modern day composers do not use AR
> 
> Sorry but to say Areia is a joke compared to the sound of AR1 is an insult to AI and the musicians, did you not ready what i wrote? the "SOUND" is the impulse response its the sound of the room. On your basis then i can come out and state that AR1 is joke compared to the sound of BBCSO


Maybe take a look at recent projects https://www.abbeyroad.com/studio-one or here https://www.abbeyroad.com/news/golden-globe-nominations-2021-2903

The sound of a library is also due to the players, the recording engineering, the recording philosophy, the mixing, etc. in addition to the room. AR1's end product is the sum of those things. Same with BBCSO. Both being far superior to Areia IMO.


----------



## Peter Satera

DovesGoWest said:


> Then Audio Imperia went and released Areia Lite and bingo this gave me the string sections and pairings that i was missing and originally was going to get via AR. The cost of Areia was $79 for which i got all the ensembles in terms of strings from AR1F and AR1LL plus more as it gives me individual sections as well. If you divide the cost of AR1F by 4 to approximate just the string then it would mean AR strings as it stands now costs $136.25 (AR1F/4 + AR1LL). I can see that the AR product line (Modular + ONE) is going to be an expensive rabbit hole to go down and from cost of SSO you can see how much a modular orchestra currently costs.


This is all over the place.

You paid $79 for Areia, that was the *discount intro *price, and you've said a single section in AR1 is averaged at $136.25 (which is the amount _some how_ you arrived at by a division of 4) which actually totals to be $545 USD, but Abbey Road One: OF sells for $449 USD. Your maths is off. If we take your arbitrary comparison, preorder was $345, which comes out at $87, not $136.25.

However, the aim to cherry pick Abbey Road One's content to dissect in aim to portray a representation of worth only in the strings is misguided. Nothing against Audio Imperia, I love 'em, but a comparison like this is not only inaccurate in calculation but clearly overlooks the difference in articulations, dynamic range, mic choices, mixing and consistency which is balanced over an entire orchestra.


----------



## babylonwaves

DovesGoWest said:


> but nothing since the 90's in mentioned.


JP's How To Train Your Dragon was recorded there. StarWars Solo was recorded there. Skyfall. and so many other recent things.



https://twitter.com/AbbeyRoad


----------



## Frederick

DovesGoWest may have made some inaccurate statements, but I do believe he's right in questioning that you really HAVE to have Abbey Road samples to get the sound of big budget blockbuster film scores, which sort of is suggested by Spitfire or at least that it's 'easy'.

I also think he's right to notice that it's going to be one expensive rabbit hole.

And lastly I agree with how their story about the importance of the room is inconsistant. That they now start saying that mixing different recordings in different (not dry) rooms is perfectly valid and easy. What was the story with the BBCSO? That it sounds better, because all the players are used to playing together? Why does Abbey Road matter so much then? Simon Rhodes also recorded the studio orchestra in Air One and I'm sure the equipment was top notch there as well.

I'm not saying that AR1 is not of an awesome quality level though. That part I agree with Spitfire.


----------



## muziksculp

Would I gain a lot by getting AR-1 Foundations if I already have Albion-ONE ?


----------



## Peter Satera

We've just justified a price of 1k - 2k for PS, now we're saying a full orchestra recorded at abbey road won't be worth it? Nobody is forcing anyone to buy it all, that's the benefit of it.

I'm fine with the statements made by Spitfire, personally, The room you record in is highly influential to the sound achieved, but other libraries can be mixed into it.


----------



## Nadav

Ariea is amazing, sounds much better then BBCSO or anything by spitfire in my opinion. AI does an impeccable job, their samples are just pristine, unlike what I have from spitfire which is filled with noises. I really appriceiate this kind of thorough and meticulous work, money well spent.


----------



## babylonwaves

Nadav said:


> Ariea is amazing, sounds much better then BBCSO or anything by spitfire in my opinion. AI does an impeccable job, their samples are just pristine, unlike what I have from spitfire which is filled with noises.


out of curiosity, which SF libraries do you own?


----------



## DovesGoWest

Frederick said:


> DovesGoWest may have made some inaccurate statements, but I do believe he's right in questioning that you really HAVE to have Abbey Road samples to get the sound of big budget blockbuster film scores, which sort of is suggested by Spitfire or at least that it's 'easy'.
> 
> I also think he's right to notice that it's going to be one expensive rabbit hole.
> 
> And lastly I agree with how their story about the importance of the room is inconsistant. That they now start saying that mixing different recordings in different (not dry) rooms is perfectly valid and easy. What was the story with the BBCSO? That it sounds better, because all the players are used to playing together? Why does Abbey Road matter so much then? Simon Rhodes also recorded the studio orchestra in Air One and I'm sure the equipment was top notch there as well.
> 
> I'm not saying that AR1 is not of an awesome quality level though. That part I agree with Spitfire.


You got it bud, I’m not saying AR doesn’t sound good but I don’t fall for the marketing crap anymore. For me AR lives by its history and connections of the past and whilst that’s great times move forward as well. With Spitfires latest contradiction about cohesive rooms and just mix them together with reverb I have lost some trust in them now as well.

My other issue with AR is there is no mention of the orchestra/musicians so your not buying something like the LSO or BBC or RPO etc just a collection that spitfire got together and it’s never going to be consustabd across all the expansions and then the modular


----------



## Nadav

babylonwaves said:


> out of curiosity, which SF libraries do you own?


I have BBCSO, their solo strings and some of the originals, Not saying they're bad, I like them too but they're nowhere close to AI's level (in my opinion).


----------



## DovesGoWest

Nadav said:


> Ariea is amazing, sounds much better then BBCSO or anything by spitfire in my opinion. AI does an impeccable job, their samples are just pristine, unlike what I have from spitfire which is filled with noises. I really appriceiate this kind of thorough and meticulous work, money well spent.


I wouldn’t go as far as saying it’s better than bbcso, but does bring a more epic edge. Also I find the shorts more aggressive than bbc, what I wont say though is it’s a joke, that’s just down right insulting to the musicians and as a musician myself people saying things like that I have no interest in their narrow minded views


----------



## Nadav

DovesGoWest said:


> I wouldn’t go as far as saying it’s better than bbcso, but does bring a more epic edge. Also I find the shorts more aggressive than bbc, what I wont say though is it’s a joke, that’s just down right insulting to the musicians and as a musician myself people saying things like that I have no interest in their narrow minded views


Nuh, no need to exaggerate, people have their own opinions and taste and they can voice their opinions, we don't want to silence anyone for having different views. And I think BBCSO is bigger in scope but not better in execution or implementation.
You're right about the shorts, I use Ariea's shorts And for longs I use BBC (BBC's shorts are just filled with the most jarring noises I just can't use them).


----------



## jonathanwright

Devoluti0n said:


> Sounds amazing, love it !


Thanks @Devoluti0n


----------



## DovesGoWest

Nadav said:


> Nuh, no need to exaggerate, people have their own opinions and taste and they can voice their opinions, we don't want to silence anyone for having different views. And I think BBCSO is bigger in scope but not better in execution or implementation.
> You're right about the shorts, I use Ariea's shorts And for longs I use BBC (BBC's shorts are just filled with the most jarring noises I just can't use them).


Opinions are fine and each to their own but insults I don’t accept to say areia is a joke is like walking up to the cello players after they spent 8hrs recording and say ‘your a joke’ that’s uncalled for


----------



## Nadav

jonathanwright said:


> Thanks @Devoluti0n


Good work there, sounds very good.


----------



## Nadav

DovesGoWest said:


> Opinions are fine and each to their own but insults I don’t accept to say areia is a joke is like walking up to the cello players after they spent 8hrs recording and say ‘your a joke’ that’s uncalled for


Maybe but I think people are sometimes way to sensitive, people come here to vent and that's fine, besides players aren't these magical creatures incapable of fault they're people like you and me, their shit stinks just like ours and they are certainly capable of producing bad performances and making bad products and it's okay to call them out on it, especially if you paid your hard earn money. I'm sure he didn't mean to target the players, he's just saying he doesn't think it's a good product which is fine, I think the exact opposite.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

DovesGoWest said:


> Opinions are fine and each to their own but insults I don’t accept to say areia is a joke is like walking up to the cello players after they spent 8hrs recording and say ‘your a joke’ that’s uncalled for


Did I ever say the cello players who were recorded were a joke? Though some of them may be quite humorous. Don't be so sensitive. The product is still a joke though. Reusing samples from Jaeger. Horrible legato (only recorded bow change). Horrible tone. Sounds like an Omnisphere patch. Of course doesn't matter as much if you write epic ostinatos which seems to be their target audience.

Anyway, this thread is about AR1, not about jokes.


----------



## SupremeFist

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Horrible tone. Sounds like an Omnisphere patch.


Now I'm confused: I thought Omnisphere was the best VI ever...


----------



## Nadav

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Did I ever say the cello players who were recorded were a joke? Though some of them may be quite humorous. Don't be so sensitive. The product is still a joke though. Reusing samples from Jaeger. Horrible legato (only recorded bow change). Horrible tone. Sounds like an Omnisphere patch. Of course doesn't matter as much if you write epic ostinatos which seems to be their target audience.
> 
> Anyway, this thread is about AR1, not about jokes.


Haha, I appreciate the aggressiveness even though I think differently I don't like tiptoeing and overly polite opinions, give it to me raw, speak your mind we're all adults here


----------



## ism

Nadav said:


> AI does an impeccable job, their samples are just pristine, unlike what I have from spitfire



AI is a great company, and absolutely nails it in getting the (modern, aggressive, pristine) AI sound. Nothing does that AI sound as well as AI.

But that SF libraries sound more or less nothing like AI is kind of what I love about them.


----------



## Nadav

ism said:


> AI is a great company, and absolutely nails in getting the (modern, aggressive, pristine) AI sound. Nothing does that AI sound as well as AI.
> 
> But that SF libraries sound more or less nothing like AI is kind of what I love about them.


They are good in some aspects. But I just can't help but expect more from Spitfire, they're one of the big names and it's just boggles the mind how they miss all these issues, glaring issues I found just by playing with it for a few minutes, It's almost as if they just slap those samples in the player as fast as they can and move on to churning out the next products.
BBCSO still needs a lot of work done on it and I fear it will never happen, they're all about Abbey Road now and putting out as much 50 dollar packs as they possibly can, their gonna milk that cow dry and eat it too, which would've been fine if they didn't aim for just passable quality.


----------



## gst98

DovesGoWest said:


> You got it bud, I’m not saying AR doesn’t sound good but I don’t fall for the marketing crap anymore. For me AR lives by its history and connections of the past and whilst that’s great times move forward as well. With Spitfires latest contradiction about cohesive rooms and just mix them together with reverb I have lost some trust in them now as well.




So what, you don’t suppose AR got its reputation for sounding incredible? Maybe there is a reason people pay 2-3 times as much to record in AIR or AR instead of Budapest or Prague.



DovesGoWest said:


> just a collection that spitfire got together and it’s never going to be consustabd across all the expansions and then the modular



That’s a pretty derogatory way to refer to the best session musicians in the world. You do realise these guys play together all the time? SF didn’t put out a flyer at the local pub and wait to see who turned up. 

I think you’re taking SFs BBCSO marketing too seriously.


----------



## CT

This place never ceases to entertain.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Nadav said:


> they're all about Abbey Road now and putting out as much 50 dollar packs as they possibly can, their gonna milk that cow dry and eat it too, which would've been fine if they didn't aim for just passable quality.


By all accounts so far, the packs have high quality and AROOF is their first time sampling 5 dynamic layers for the broader sections, so they're getting better in terms of depth.

Personally, I think the idea of AR1 selections is pretty smart. No matter what, trying to combine instruments together from different recordings won't sound the same as recording all of them in a room together, playing techniques specific to the desired style. If you don't want that style, you don't have to buy the selection. But let's say you really want romantic sweeping legato type of sound and instead of trying to get that sound from individual violins, cellos, and let's say oboe legato patches and mixing them together (which of course has served us well up until now), Spitfire can record all of those players in situ in Abbey Road with this specific brief and provide that as a selection. These are just brushes within your palette and like most special case brushes, won't be the right fit all of the time, but when you do want that particular brush, it'll be there for you.


----------



## Nadav

ALittleNightMusic said:


> By all accounts so far, the packs have high quality and AROOF is their first time sampling 5 dynamic layers for the broader sections, so they're getting better in terms of depth.
> 
> Personally, I think the idea of AR1 selections is pretty smart. No matter what, trying to combine instruments together from different recordings won't sound the same as recording all of them in a room together, playing techniques specific to the desired style. If you don't want that style, you don't have to buy the selection. But let's say you really want romantic sweeping legato type of sound and instead of trying to get that sound from individual violins, cellos, and let's say oboe legato patches and mixing them together (which of course has served us well up until now), Spitfire can record all of those players in situ in Abbey Road with this specific brief and provide that as a selection. These are just brushes within your palette and like most special case brushes, won't be the right fit all of the time, but when you do want that particular brush, it'll be there for you.


Could be smart choices yes, I just hope they put a little more work on the final steps and take the time to put it all together in the best way when they finally get it in the player and not be afraid to scrap noisy samples and maybe adjusting transiants instead of cutting the samples when using some of the fx, that didn’t happen in BBC.


----------



## babylonwaves

Nadav said:


> I use Ariea's shorts And for longs I use BBC (BBC's shorts are just filled with the most jarring noises I just can't use them).


so, you cannot work with the BBCSO short arts because they're apparently filled with noises and at the same time it doesn't bother you to use two totally different sounding libraries at the same time like one instrument? I mean those two mixes sound totally different, the room perception / stereo field is totally different as well.


----------



## Nadav

babylonwaves said:


> so, you cannot work with the BBCSO short arts because they're apparently filled with noises and at the same time it doesn't bother you to use two totally different sounding libraries at the same time like one instrument? I mean those two mixes sound totally different, the room perception / stereo field is totally different as well.


I find the classic mix in Ariea to fit well with BBC. Of course I use my own special sauce of effects chain too. I like the results so far. And that’s just one use case, I use Ariea’s longs too. I usually don’t fret about mixing different libraries.


----------



## BasariStudios

Besides the Sound that is good the Legato in Jaeger 
totally SUCKS...which i guess is same with Areia Strings.


----------



## Aldo_arf

DovesGoWest said:


> Opinions are fine and each to their own but insults I don’t accept to say areia is a joke is like walking up to the cello players after they spent 8hrs recording and say ‘your a joke’ that’s uncalled for


Aren’t you the guy that wanted $29 because your BBCSO update wasn’t ready? Right after calling SA “a bunch of amateurs”.


----------



## ism

This is getting silly.


----------



## Bear Market

Mike T said:


> This place never ceases to entertain.


Indeed. Especially if your idea of entertainment is near aneurysm-inducing asceticism.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Would I gain a lot by getting AR-1 Foundations if I already have Albion-ONE ?


A lot? Well it depends on how much you use ensemble libraries, I imagine. Albion One has some issues in my experience, in being used as the foundation. I still use some of it for a sketching library, but I’ve long ago replaced the strings, first with SCS ensemble, now supplemented with Afflatus because of it’s excellent polylegato. The brass in Albion One have always been hard to use and can sound a bit one dimensional. The woodwinds have remained in my sketching palette, but I often use the originals version when doing section work because the patch works a bit better just playing stuff in. At this point it’s rare for any of the Albion One material to remain when I go from sketch to final version.

I’ve picked up the Legendary Low Strings and sparkling woodwinds expansion packs. The low strings offer a different sound to the low legato patch of Albion One.Is it better? I find Legendary Lows more versatile and in general I prefer the performance, but I was actually impressed with how well this particular patch from Albion One holds up. I find it much better than the Ark 1 low legato patch.

The Sparking Woodwinds sounds to me to be a different orchestration, and if not that it’s a different balance, than the high woodwinds legato in Albion One. The range on the Albion One patch is about an octave more. In very cursory tests, Sparkling woodwinds seem a bit more agile. I find the glock a bit annoying, for me it doesn’t register well even at its highest setting, even though it often seems to dominate in the walkthrough. And then it also seems to only cover part of the range of the patch. So the portion you can orchestrate with the glock is very narrow, or there’s something wrong with the distribution copy. Fortunately you can just turn it off and add your own glock to taste... Overall, sparkling woodwinds seems less distinguished and easier to reproduce by mixing other libraries (like SSW). Yes, it’s easy enough to get the low strings in octaves with other libraries, but this patch has a very distinctive character and offers something that my other strings do not.

I don’t have Foundations yet, but based on my experience with these two expansions, it seems like it should play very well with other libraries (not necessarily the case with Albion One). The brass is also better laid out for most typical uses (though the low brass has a too restricted range), and many have said the percussion is well done. We’ll see about the rest of it. Based on my experience with the two expansions, I‘m now planning on getting Foundations sooner rather than later.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi @jbuhler ,

Thank You for the helpful feedback above. 

I'm still undecided about AR-1 Foundations. I'm feel it might be useful, but how much is another topic. 

I watched this video comparing AR-1 and Albion-ONE. It highlights some of the advantages AR-1 has over Albion-ONE, and vice-versa. 

I think the fact that Spitfire Audio's AR-1 Modular Orchestral line of libraries might take a long time to show up, maybe a couple of years until they have a complete orchestra modular library. So, maybe adding AR-1 Foundations with the Low-Strings might be my best option if I don't want to wait that long. But, I'm still evaluating my options.


----------



## muziksculp

Also curious when SA will release a high-strings Expansion with Legato, and more Shorts for AR-1 ?


----------



## DovesGoWest

gst98 said:


> So what, you don’t suppose AR got its reputation for sounding incredible? Maybe there is a reason people pay 2-3 times as much to record in AIR or AR instead of Budapest or Prague.


No i'm saying yes AR does sound good and in its hayday it was the place to go, however now there are other places like AIR that have just a good if not better sound. Thats just competition and times moving forward.



gst98 said:


> That’s a pretty derogatory way to refer to the best session musicians in the world. You do realise these guys play together all the time? SF didn’t put out a flyer at the local pub and wait to see who turned up.


Thats a bit of stretch, you cant say they are the best in the world. You also dont know whether they do or do not play together all the time, that was the point to all intents and purposes it is a random selection of players. Given that ever instrument has its own unique sound there is no guarentee that the cellists and bassist that were sampled for AR1LL are the same as the ones that were sampled for AR1F, unless of course the samplings were all done together. That's all i am saying is what was once the important "cohesive" sound is potentially lost in AR.



gst98 said:


> I think you’re taking SFs BBCSO marketing too seriously.


No i think i bought into it just like all those that have bought into the AR product line


----------



## DovesGoWest

ALittleNightMusic said:


> By all accounts so far, the packs have high quality and AROOF is their first time sampling 5 dynamic layers for the broader sections, so they're getting better in terms of depth.
> 
> Personally, I think the idea of AR1 selections is pretty smart. No matter what, trying to combine instruments together from different recordings won't sound the same as recording all of them in a room together, playing techniques specific to the desired style. If you don't want that style, you don't have to buy the selection. But let's say you really want romantic sweeping legato type of sound and instead of trying to get that sound from individual violins, cellos, and let's say oboe legato patches and mixing them together (which of course has served us well up until now), Spitfire can record all of those players in situ in Abbey Road with this specific brief and provide that as a selection. These are just brushes within your palette and like most special case brushes, won't be the right fit all of the time, but when you do want that particular brush, it'll be there for you.


I'm also in favor of this as Paul mentioned there is a resonance\timbre created when multiple sections play together like the Cellos\Basses 8ve. The thing is this could lead to a very expensive library take AR1LL that $50 for 1 patch\4 Articulations, now other common pairings in string V1 & V2 in unison, V1 & V2 in octaves, V1 & Va in octaves, V2 & Va in octaves, V1&V2&Va etc etc. theres another $250 and thats just strings in basic articulations.

Other companies are already doing these combinations in libraries with more articulations and the cost is far less.


----------



## DovesGoWest

babylonwaves said:


> so, you cannot work with the BBCSO short arts because they're apparently filled with noises and at the same time it doesn't bother you to use two totally different sounding libraries at the same time like one instrument? I mean those two mixes sound totally different, the room perception / stereo field is totally different as well.


Sorry but that latest from Paul at Spitfire is that mixing different libraries recorded in different locations is done all of the time and is easy to mix together into a cohesive sound using reverbs as thats what all mix engineers do anyways.

Personally i have Areia Lite and BBCSO core mixed together without any issues, the key was first to get the Areia strings to sound like they are in a similar room as the BBCSO Core (mix1) using the inbuilt verb. Once i had this then both libraries go through my room and hall verbs which fully blends them together.


----------



## gst98

DovesGoWest said:


> No i'm saying yes AR does sound good and in its hayday it was the place to go, however now there are other places like AIR that have just a good if not better sound. Thats just competition and times moving forward.
> 
> 
> Thats a bit of stretch, you cant say they are the best in the world. You also dont know whether they do or do not play together all the time, that was the point to all intents and purposes it is a random selection of players. Given that ever instrument has its own unique sound there is no guarentee that the cellists and bassist that were sampled for AR1LL are the same as the ones that were sampled for AR1F, unless of course the samplings were all done together. That's all i am saying is what was once the important "cohesive" sound is potentially lost in AR.
> 
> 
> No i think i bought into it just like all those that have bought into the AR product line


I'm not going even to bother lol


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

DovesGoWest said:


> Other companies are already doing these combinations in libraries with more articulations and the cost is far less.


Please, do enlighten all of us on who is doing this at this level on a top tier stage with top tier players and a top tier engineer for less than $49 per combination? And since you have so much experience recording Abbey Road session players in Abbey Road Studio One to say it is a stretch to say they are among the best in the world, please also provide info on how these other companies are recording and where and with whom. I'm sure all of us would love to know of these magical libraries you seem to have uncovered.

VSL BBO are doing this (and doing it well) but their individual collections are twice the price (and they should be, given they have more articulations). The tone is totally different than AR1.


----------



## Peter Satera

Lets cut to the chase. I think we should just stop judging on how it sounds and more on if the players have had lunch together.


----------



## jazzman7

Peter Satera said:


> I don't think that is accurate, there's more to it than reverb. They sound similar in certain scenarios, but definitely not the same, especially when it comes to the shorts, both have their merits imo. Legendary sounds deeper with clarity on the longs, the spic' on CSS is tighter and the attack is more prominent, where as Legendary it's more rounded I find. But you can see for yourself.
> 
> View attachment CSS 8ve v Legendary.mp4


Thanks for putting this up. I actually went full screen on the file. At the end, I wanted to re-listen to the Spicc's and I automatically tried to rewind by clicking the time ruler! Then I suddenly remembered this was a vid of a DAW and not the actual DAW. Muscle memory... senility... or a combination haha


----------



## Peter Satera

jazzman7 said:


> Thanks for putting this up. I actually went full screen on the file. At the end, I wanted to re-listen to the Spicc's and I automatically tried to rewind by clicking the time ruler! Then I suddenly remembered this was a vid of a DAW and not the actual DAW. Muscle memory... senility... or a combination haha


I'd be lying if I said I had never done that before! 😁


----------



## jazzman7

Peter Satera said:


> I'd be lying if I said I had never done that before! 😁


Thanks... I feel better!


----------



## muziksculp

I have been listening to quite a few videos of AR-1 Foundations.

The Brass in AR-1 comes across as outstanding ! 

The new Legendary Low-Strings expansion sounds very good, and hopefully they will also release a Legendary High-Strings expansion soon. I'm guessing the brass here is very complementing to the BBCSO Brass, and BBCSO strings are also fill the missing strings legatos in AR-1.


----------



## szczaw

I'd like to jump on the bandwagon, but I fear AROOF going through the roof of my CPU.


----------



## muziksculp

szczaw said:


> I'd like to jump on the bandwagon, but I fear AROOF going through the roof of my CPU.


Did you read that it is very CPU hungry ?


----------



## szczaw

muziksculp said:


> Did you read that it is very CPU hungry ?


I have BBC core and compared to other libs, it's a resource hog.


----------



## muziksculp

szczaw said:


> I have BBC core and compared to other libs, it's a resource hog.


Oh.. I see. You have AR-1. I thought you don't have it. 

I wonder why it's a CPU hog, I would have expected it to consume more RAM if you used lots of the Mic options, but why would it need so much CPU power ?


----------



## szczaw

muziksculp said:


> Oh.. I see. You have AR-1. I thought you don't have it.
> 
> I wonder why it's a CPU hog, I would have expected it to consume more RAM if you used lots of the Mic options, but why would it need so much CPU power ?


I don't have AR-1. I have BBC that uses the same player. I like to load many instruments and the player isn't even multitimbral.


----------



## muziksculp

szczaw said:


> I don't have AR-1. I have BBC that uses the same player. I like to load many instruments and the player isn't even multitimbral.


I see. So, how do you know that AR-1 is a CPU Hog ? Are you basing it on BBCSO CPU usage ?


----------



## szczaw

muziksculp said:


> I see. So, how do you know that AR-1 is a CPU Hog ? Are you basing it on BBCSO CPU usage ?


Yes, ram and cpu.


----------



## CT

Performance is always a crapshoot. I am using a nearly ten year old computer and BBCSO/EWC both behave fine on it.


----------



## muziksculp

szczaw said:


> Yes, ram and cpu.


You might just need a more powerful computer system to run it. I don't know what your Computer specs are. So that might be something you need to factor in, or maybe your DAW/Audio Interface settings.


----------



## jazzman7

The back and forth on all of this has been entertaining but more importantly, I wind up learning so much about various approaches, Libs, and opinions. None of these items are cheap and the more info, the better. VI control has been a valuable resource. 

For example, I have AR Foundations and Leg Lows, but I do not have CSS or Vista. Love the demos posted and the insights of those that do own all of these. Do I wish AR1 was something other than ensemble? Yes. Do I love the sound of it? Yes! My main occupation for now will be upgrading my Computer and systems, but I am looking forward to upcoming releases... and the various opinions that go with them!


----------



## BasariStudios

ARO is one of the CPU Heaviest Sample Library.
One would it expect RAM but this kills the CPU too.
I am fighting with it everytday...BBC SO is similar.


----------



## szczaw

That's a pass then. I have an older system with 96 gbs ram and 24 Xeon cores, but they are not that fast.


----------



## BasariStudios

muziksculp said:


> You might just need a more powerful computer system to run it. I don't know what your Computer specs are. So that might be something you need to factor in, or maybe your DAW/Audio Interface settings.


Actually that is not the problem with a lot of users.
I am running it on the latest 10900k and still same problem.
It is the heaviest CPU Samples Library.


----------



## Soundbed

Peter Satera said:


> I don't think that is accurate, there's more to it than reverb. They sound similar in certain scenarios, but definitely not the same, especially when it comes to the shorts, both have their merits imo. Legendary sounds deeper with clarity on the longs, the spic' on CSS is tighter and the attack is more prominent, where as Legendary it's more rounded I find. But you can see for yourself.
> 
> View attachment CSS 8ve v Legendary.mp4


Thanks @Peter Satera this really helped. They are so similar but the Legendary Lows sound the way I’ve always wanted CSS to, in those examples. Listening on headphones. Will revisit in the studio.


----------



## jazzman7

BasariStudios said:


> Actually that is not the problem with a lot of users.
> I am running it on the latest 10900k and still same problem.
> It is the heaviest CPU Samples Library.


I have a 9 yr old i7 system. I can run AROOF, but I have to be careful and freeze on a bigger project. Mostly RAM is my issue. Only 16 Gig. Kontakt is easier on the memory that's for sure


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Also curious when SA will release a high-strings Expansion with Legato, and more Shorts for AR-1 ?


High strings legato has to be one of the 10 expansions. I'm guessing it will also be in octaves. I imagine that each of the non-percussion sections will get a legato with shorts expansion. Not sure what else they might have in store. 

Meanwhile, I did pick up Foundations and am currently testing my libraries for what pairs well with it. In a brief test, BSS fared very well, and ARO high strings give back vibrato to help out BSS violin 1 legato and they also help fill in the dull spot in the second dynamic layer from the top in BSS violin 1 legato. I'm not sure yet if it's the best match I have, but so far I like it. I must say though that I don't mind sketching at all with the ARO strings.

I haven't yet had any issues with ARO, its expansions, or any other SF library with the SF Plugin except SF Motions, and even that is not bad. But I have a 2020 i9 iMac.


----------



## dzilizzi

szczaw said:


> That's a pass then. I have an older system with 96 gbs ram and 24 Xeon cores, but they are not that fast.


You should be fine with it. I never found CPU to be that much of a problem and I have an i7.


----------



## CT

szczaw said:


> That's a pass then. I have an older system with 96 gbs ram and 24 Xeon cores, but they are not that fast.


Dude I'm on an iMac from 2012 with a quad core 2.5 they-weren't-even-naming-the-processors-yet, and just 32 gigs of RAM. Like I said it's always a gamble but I think you might be in good shape....


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> High strings legato has to be one of the 10 expansions. I'm guessing it will also be in octaves. I imagine that each of the non-percussion sections will get a legato with shorts expansion. Not sure what else they might have in store.
> 
> Meanwhile, I did pick up Foundations and am currently testing my libraries for what pairs well with it. In a brief test, BSS fared very well, and ARO high strings give back vibrato to help out BSS violin 1 legato and they also help fill in the dull spot in the second dynamic layer from the top in BSS violin 1 legato. I'm not sure yet if it's the best match I have, but so far I like it. I must say though that I don't mind sketching at all with the ARO strings.
> 
> I haven't yet had any issues with ARO, its expansions, or any other SF library with the SF Plugin except SF Motions, and even that is not bad. But I have a 2020 i9 iMac.


You are tempting me to buy AR-1 Foundations, with the two new expansions.


----------



## Frederick

ALittleNightMusic said:


> VSL BBO are doing this (and doing it well) but their individual collections are twice the price (and they should be, given they have more articulations). The tone is totally different than AR1.


BBO Musca (low strings) :

Short notes, bold and agile
Sustained with light and strong vibrato, and espressivo
Legato with light and strong vibrato, and espressivo
Sforzato, sforzatissimo, swells short and long, soft and very soft swells, soft diminuendo
Tremolo with normal and fast attack, half and whole tone trills
Fast repetitions, staccato at 120/140/160 BPM
Glissandos minor and major 2nd, up and down
Pizzicato
Introduction price 65 Euro.

I feel Spitfire is looking ridiculously expensive with Legendary Low Strings that only has 4 articulations for 49 Euro and no introduction price.

Also your comparison would have been better if you'd added 10% of the price of Foundations to the price of the Selection considering you'd want the low strings articulations in there as well.

Combined they still are not on the same level as BBO Musca. According to the manual of AR1 time stretching isn't even included yet. And last but not least: The Spitfire player is no match (yet?) for the Synchron player.


----------



## CT

Frederick said:


> I feel Spitfire is looking ridiculously expensive with Legendary Low Strings that only has 4 articulations for 49 Euro and no introduction price.


The prices actually seem quite equivalent to me considering what my ears tell me of the Abbey Road material and the VSL stuff.


----------



## Frederick

Mike T said:


> The prices actually seem quite equivalent to me considering what my ears tell me of the Abbey Road material and the VSL stuff.


Wow, myself I only have a slight preference for the sound of Legendary Low Strings compared to BBO Musca, which I attribute mostly to larger section sizes of the first. I have both, but if I had to choose one or the other I would always go for the most complete set of articulations. I would hate to have to use two different products to play separate parts of one section in a piece.


----------



## DovesGoWest

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Please, do enlighten all of us on who is doing this at this level on a top tier stage with top tier players and a top tier engineer for less than $49 per combination? And since you have so much experience recording Abbey Road session players in Abbey Road Studio One to say it is a stretch to say they are among the best in the world, please also provide info on how these other companies are recording and where and with whom. I'm sure all of us would love to know of these magical libraries you seem to have uncovered.
> 
> VSL BBO are doing this (and doing it well) but their individual collections are twice the price (and they should be, given they have more articulations). The tone is totally different than AR1.


Well a little research produces the following as a cross section of different companies:


CompanyProductLocationEngineerCostCost per Patch\Instrument\ArticulationCineSamplesTina GuaSony\MGMTim Starnes$99$14.14SpitfireARO LLAbbey RoadSimon Rhodes$49$12.25SpitfireARO OFAbbey RoadSimon Rhodes$449$9.35Orchestral ToolsBerlin Syphonic StringsTeldex?$664$8.85Orchestral ToolsMetropolis ARK 1Teldex/?$664$5.88CineSamplesCineStrings CORESony\MGMDennis Sands$499$5.54SpitfireHans Zimmer StringsAIR StudiosJake Jackson$799$5.06SpitfireSymphonic StringsAIR StudiosJake Jackson$799$3.608DIONew Century String 2?Colin O’Malley$598$2.61SpitfireBBCSO CoreMaida ValeJake Jackson$449$1.65

Baring Tina Gua which is a world class soloist library the AR libraries work out the most expensive with the expansion topping the tree. One thing to note is that apart from Tina Gua and ARO LL all of the other libraries are either complete string libraries or orchestral libraries.


----------



## scoringdreams

AR1 has essentially been Albion on steroids for me!

Does anyone have tips on blending Cinematic Studio Strings / Woods / Brass with AR1?

So far, I have faced success blending AR1 against the main Spitfire libraries, but when trying to pair with CSS for instance, I find the strings in CSS to be a little dark compared to the airy and silky strings of AR1. I don't think it's a reverb issue, but more of a tonal (bright/dark) issue?

Any tips?


----------



## Alex Fraser

A couple of thoughts on the pricing:

I think the Abbey Road stuff might be Spitfire's flagship range going forward. I'd be surprised if the first modular products don't make the forum's eyes water a little bit - we've been weaned on BBCSO levels of value which I'm not sure will translate to the Abbey Road products.

Also, I think AR will be cheaper in the long term. It's not hard to see Spitfire at some point offering an "Abbey Road Collection" where this stuff is discounted and bundled. I think the prices are fair if you consider it a long term investment _which you actually use_, rather than something to keep your interest until the next sale.


----------



## Alex Fraser

Mike T said:


> Performance is always a crapshoot. I am using a nearly ten year old computer and BBCSO/EWC both behave fine on it.


Your iMac 2011? I've just got a quote to repair mine. £175 gets a new SSD installed, clean and everything else. I'm actually tempted..

As for the Spitfire plugin: I find it loads data slower than Kontakt but once up and running, it's not a resource hog, or no worse than Kontakt.


----------



## holywilly

muziksculp said:


> You are tempting me to buy AR-1 Foundations, with the two new expansions.


Get it, it’s a nice addition to your collections. AR sounds very very good, and blend nicely with VSL and OT.


----------



## styledelk

Do we divide price by articulation now? Surely there’s other combined value metrics here. This is ridiculous.


----------



## Ndee

styledelk said:


> Do we divide price by articulation now? Surely there’s other combined value metrics here. This is ridiculous.


We could all submit the amount of $ made with each library bought and see which one offers the most bang for buck, no, I mean buck for buck. That has to be _the _metric!


----------



## Nadav

styledelk said:


> Do we divide price by articulation now? Surely there’s other combined value metrics here. This is ridiculous.


Not ridiculous, but it is a bit simplistic. We need a more inclusive formula. It can really help us measure value for money. This really points out how much of a value BBCSO is (in relative terms).


----------



## Alex Fraser

Nadav said:


> Not ridiculous, but it is a bit simplistic. We need a more inclusive formula. It can really help us measure value for money. This really points out how much of a value BBCSO is (in relative terms).


_value = (a x m) * x + x + x * p - bf_

where
m = amount of mics
p = time used in production
a = amount of articulations.
bf = time in seconds until next Black Friday sale.
x = time spent moaning about shortcomings on VIC.

Nailed it. Should we write some music now? 😉


----------



## styledelk

Does a wizard ask how much value their magic staff gives them?  This reduces this all to commodities and not these unique, expensive-to-make expressive magic devices.


----------



## Nadav

styledelk said:


> Does a wizard ask how much value their magic staff gives them?  This reduces this all to commodities and not these unique, expensive-to-make expressive magic devices.


Of course you still got to make up your own mind about the intangibles, but its a good starting point.


----------



## ism

Mics and dynamic layers do matter. So can be helpful metrics.

Except when they don’t. i have a couple of libraries recorded in a dry space with 7 mics. None of which do anything to make the sound wetter, or the space sound better, so it feels like it’s just padding the number of Gb they can advertise. 

Conversely, L&S string are dry, yet each of the 7 mics really add something, including the bleed mics, which really add something, and anticipate how I think they’ve proven important in whatever it is that goes into getting BBCSO and AR1 to sound so great. 

Wheras the Berlin wind soloist are tiny, tiny libraries. And entirely wonderful in very few Gb. 


The general point just being the perennial danger that ‘when you can’t measure what’s important, you make important what you can measure’. (To quote a former CIA analyst on just how well this kind of ‘data driven’ policy worked out for the people of Vietnam).


----------



## Nadav

You don't see gaming companies saying "wait our game is much better then the other game from that other company and we spent more money making it therefore it should cost more", nope, still 60 bucks.
This way we can have an average expectation of how much something should cost and if it's overpriced then we should expect it to make up for it in quality.


----------



## styledelk

Nadav said:


> You don't see gaming companies saying "wait our game is much better then the other game from that other company and we spent more money making it therefore it should cost more", nope, still 60 bucks.
> This way we can have an average expectation of how much something should cost and if it's overpriced then we should expect it to make up for it in quality.


Games are artificially set at $60 and are sold to millions, if not billions, of potentional customers.


----------



## ism

Nadav said:


> You don't see gaming companies saying "wait our game is much better then the other game from that other company and we spent more money making it therefore it should cost more", nope, still 60 bucks.



I agree. All sample libraries should only ever cost $60. I love the way you think.

@Spitfire Team - please change you pricing structure asap. Thanks!


----------



## styledelk

Game studios routinely go out of business because they can't charge a price commiserate with their investment, and essentially gamble away all of their effort for big numbers.


----------



## Nadav

styledelk said:


> Games are artificially set at $60 and are sold to millions, if not billions, of potentional customers.


Dudes relax, you read what you want to read ha.. You're missing the point, I didn't say libraries should be priced at $60. We should have a reference point.


----------



## AudioLoco

Reminder:
THIS IS MUSIC related shit. IT'S MUSIC. IT'S ART. MUSIC.

Bang for buck is just how much I am inspired by that product to make MUSIC, not hedge funds or sell an n. number of potatoes.

If there is a library with one patch, one microphone that inspires me it could be £1000s, and I would buy it if I can afford it.
There are libraries with numerous patches, tens of microphone positions, many gigabytes, lying in my hard disc unused. 

Buy what inspires you, don't make math calculations, this is ridiculous indeed....


----------



## ism

Nadav said:


> Dudes relax, you read what you want to read ha.. You're missing the point, I didn't say libraries should be priced at $60. We should have a reference point.


Seriously, that’s a nice thought. 

But for those of us who really value the innovation at the level of recording and depth and that results that show up just at the level of the sheer, groundbreaking sonority certain recent libraries are achieving, we’re willing also to pay for it.

The $70 AI library, is splendid value, and excellent sampling also, of course. But simply doesn’t exist in the same aesthetic space of the sonorities of the likes of Tundra, Neo, BBCSO, AR (and there’s a couple of OT libraries I’d add to this list also). 

So it’s apples to oranges is all.


----------



## ism

AudioLoco said:


> Reminder:
> THIS IS MUSIC related shit. IT'S MUSIC. IT'S ART. MUSIC.
> 
> Bang for buck is just how much I am inspired by that product to make MUSIC, not hedge funds or sell an n. number of potatoes.
> 
> If there is a library with one patch, one microphone that inspires me it could be £1000s, and I would buy it if I can afford it.
> There are libraries with numerous patches, tens of microphone positions, many gigabytes, lying in my hard disc unused.
> 
> Buy what inspires you, don't make math calculations, this is ridiculous indeed....



Don’t anyone tell Spitfire this, but by this metric, I shudder to think how much I would have actually been willing to pay for Tundra.


----------



## Nadav

Why are


AudioLoco said:


> Reminder:
> THIS IS MUSIC related shit. IT'S MUSIC. IT'S ART. MUSIC.
> 
> Bang for buck is just how much I am inspired by that product to make MUSIC, not hedge funds or sell an n. number of potatoes.
> 
> If there is a library with one patch, one microphone that inspires me it could be £1000s, and I would buy it if I can afford it.
> There are libraries with numerous patches, tens of microphone positions, many gigabytes, lying in my hard disc unused.
> 
> Buy what inspires you, don't make math calculations, this is ridiculous indeed....


You can say that on almost every product, movies and games are art too and can inspire you in many ways and yet they have controlled pricing.
Why are people so defensive about sampling compnies? as if you want it to be priced high. If there is money to be had people will keep making them don't worry.


----------



## AudioLoco

Nadav said:


> You don't see gaming companies saying "wait our game is much better then the other game from that other company and we spent more money making it therefore it should cost more", nope, still 60 bucks.
> This way we can have an average expectation of how much something should cost and if it's overpriced then we should expect it to make up for it in quality.


How many people on the planet play videogames and how many use sample libraries to create orchestral style music?
This comparison is not working. At all.

Every company can make their own prices. Unless it is a monopoly, customers can decide to purchase or not.


----------



## Nadav

AudioLoco said:


> How many people on the planet play videogames and how many use sample libraries to create orchestral style music?
> This comparison is not working. At all.
> 
> Every company can make their own prices. Unless it is a monopoly, customers can decide to purchase or not.


Didn't say they couldn't


----------



## DovesGoWest

The point of the costings wasn’t to start judging libraries based on costs/articulation etc, I was called out to show who else is doing stuff as ‘cheap’ as ARO LL with top notch studio/players/engineers. So as can be seen there are lots of others doing it including spitfire themselves. 

I agree with others if a library inspires you then you can’t put a cost on it


----------



## Nadav

DovesGoWest said:


> The point of the costings wasn’t to start judging libraries based on costs/articulation etc, I was called out to show who else is doing stuff as ‘cheap’ as ARO LL with top notch studio/players/engineers. So as can be seen there are lots of others doing it including spitfire themselves.
> 
> I agree with others if a library inspires you then you can’t put a cost on it


Lol. I have an inspiring timeshare I want to sell you.


----------



## ism

Again, seriously, I think it’s just that all thing being equal, some people prefer apples to oranges.

Which is cool. And AI (for instance) makes absolutely succulent apples.

But then you go into an orange lover festival and start telling everyone their oranges are over priced compared to your apples. 

I mean, it’s not that it wouldn’t be nice to get an orange for $70. Just that, all things being equal, I like oranges more than apples, and recognize the cost and the effort of the innovation that goes into creating such virtuosically succulent oranges. 

None of which devalues the succulence or cost structures of apples and apple vendors, if that’s your thing. 

Seriously, there a whole thread here somewhere arguing that AR1 and recent SF libraries are just retreading new ground, it’s all marketing hype, and there’s no real justification for the cost of these new libraries. 

Which, for apple lovers, is I’m sure absolutely true. It you’re good with the p layer in Aria, you have no need to spend hundreds more on Tundra. If you’re happy that older and/or cheaper libraries sound just as good as AR, then happy days. No need for another expensive SF library. 


But I listen to these recent demos (Neo, AR, Sunset Strings, BBCSO and a handful of others) and think, “my God, the sound, the sound”. Just when you think oranges couldn’t get any juicer, Spitfire, OT, Realitone, somehow manage to do it.


----------



## yiph2

You clearly do not know much about the sample library by the comments you posted (also the one about "developers not knowing anything about software/music"... You can't compare two separate things and say "oh this should be applied to this"


----------



## Nadav

yiph2 said:


> You clearly do not know much about the sample library by the comments you posted (also the one about "developers not knowing anything about software/music"... You can't compare two separate things and say "oh this should be applied to this"


Well you clearly can't read because that's not what I said.
And when did I said developers not knowing anything about software/music?


----------



## yiph2




----------



## Nadav

yiph2 said:


>


How is that saying developers not knowing anything about software/music?, I said they don't have to invest in formal education and don't employ many people in relevance to how high their products are priced.
I can understand why a doctor will price his services high as he had a difficult path to walk and obtained special skills (not saying sampling can't be difficult but you get what i meant here, I was talking about prices not about anyone being unworthy to sample).


----------



## ism

It’s the oranges, folks, lets try to stay focused on the oranges.


----------



## jbuhler

Nadav said:


> You don't see gaming companies saying "wait our game is much better then the other game from that other company and we spent more money making it therefore it should cost more", nope, still 60 bucks.
> This way we can have an average expectation of how much something should cost and if it's overpriced then we should expect it to make up for it in quality.


Games and libraries are completely different kinds of commodities if libraries are even commodities. Games would be like movies or records. Libraries are like production tools and other assets for games. I don’t make games or study them so I can’t say what the pricing scheme for production tools in those areas is but I do know a bit about video production and the tool pricing there is quite similar. Some things are comparably cheaper, others more expensive but it seems similar overall in having a wide variation of pricing, some aimed at professionals, others at hobbyists or incidental video production, and some at prosumers, with much overlap in the categories, similar approaches to sales with high discounts and so forth.


----------



## Nadav

jbuhler said:


> Games and libraries are completely different kinds of commodities if libraries are even commodities. Games would be like movies or records. Libraries are like production tools and other assets for games. I don’t make games or study them so I can’t say what the pricing scheme for production tools in those areas is but I do know a bit about video production and the tool pricing there is quite similar. Some things are comparably cheaper, others more expensive but it seems similar overall in having a wide variation of pricing, some aimed at professionals, others at hobbyists or incidental video production, and some at prosumers, with much overlap in the categories, similar approaches to sales with high discounts and so forth.


Understood, I still think that setting value references (**in regards to content and price not including inspiring intangibles) can help people make wiser purchasing choices.


----------



## ism

Nadav said:


> Understood, I still think that setting value references (**in regards to content and price not including inspiring intangibles) can help people make wiser purchasing choices.



I do think you’re speaking to important ideas of value. But it’s an extremely difficult conversation to have without going within into either excessive and fetishizing commodification (value per Gb), or excessive subjectivity (‘how could I ever put a price on how much I love that col leg trato patch?”)

Relevant to the value of AR1 though, ther’s subjective value in whether or not you value the resulting sonority to pay this much for it.


For instance, I think one thing that makes BBCSO and AR1 sound so good (beyond lots of more straightforward things like the quality of the musicians, the mics, the space etc) is that in the accumulated experience in recording engineering has helped SF (and AR/BBC engineers) figure out how to really capture a certain type of spatial information of the space.

Conjecturally, perhaps this involves things like the spill mics. Whatever it is, modern evolutionary neuroscience offers theories around why spatial information in sound is so pleasurable within the specific phenomenon of human perception of spatial information reconstructed from sensitivities to wobbly air in your left and right ears. And I think also why ‘fake reverb’ might be perceived with an uncanny, and to some, unpleasant, quality.

So iit’s a matter of subjective perception whether that extra sound quality for all the mics and sound engeering matters to you - and in a big, loud, modern hybrid piece, perhaps this aspect of sonority is just washed out in the mix anyway and won’t matter at all.



But for a certain types of music, it’s not a purely subjective fact that it does matter. There’s also a quality of spatial information perceptible in the resuting mix that - at least in principle - could be objectively measurable. 


Just not in gigabytes - although it might conceivably correlate to Gbs in that the spatial information that makes its way perceptibly in the final mix probably requires contributions from quite a few signals.

At least this is one theory for why this particular orange is just so deliciously juicy.


----------



## dzilizzi

Frederick said:


> BBO Musca (low strings) :
> 
> Short notes, bold and agile
> Sustained with light and strong vibrato, and espressivo
> Legato with light and strong vibrato, and espressivo
> Sforzato, sforzatissimo, swells short and long, soft and very soft swells, soft diminuendo
> Tremolo with normal and fast attack, half and whole tone trills
> Fast repetitions, staccato at 120/140/160 BPM
> Glissandos minor and major 2nd, up and down
> Pizzicato
> Introduction price 65 Euro.
> 
> I feel Spitfire is looking ridiculously expensive with Legendary Low Strings that only has 4 articulations for 49 Euro and no introduction price.
> 
> Also your comparison would have been better if you'd added 10% of the price of Foundations to the price of the Selection considering you'd want the low strings articulations in there as well.
> 
> Combined they still are not on the same level as BBO Musca. According to the manual of AR1 time stretching isn't even included yet. And last but not least: The Spitfire player is no match (yet?) for the Synchron player.


But I don't have to pay around $35 per year to safeguard my purchase with Spitfire. For me, you either go all in for VSL and pay for the insurance, or don't buy it at all.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Frederick said:


> BBO Musca (low strings) :
> 
> Short notes, bold and agile
> Sustained with light and strong vibrato, and espressivo
> Legato with light and strong vibrato, and espressivo
> Sforzato, sforzatissimo, swells short and long, soft and very soft swells, soft diminuendo
> Tremolo with normal and fast attack, half and whole tone trills
> Fast repetitions, staccato at 120/140/160 BPM
> Glissandos minor and major 2nd, up and down
> Pizzicato
> Introduction price 65 Euro.
> 
> I feel Spitfire is looking ridiculously expensive with Legendary Low Strings that only has 4 articulations for 49 Euro and no introduction price.
> 
> Also your comparison would have been better if you'd added 10% of the price of Foundations to the price of the Selection considering you'd want the low strings articulations in there as well.
> 
> Combined they still are not on the same level as BBO Musca. According to the manual of AR1 time stretching isn't even included yet. And last but not least: The Spitfire player is no match (yet?) for the Synchron player.


I don’t understand why all sample developers need to be charging the exact same amount, as if this was some sort of commodity market.

“$49 is ridiculously expensive” is a ridiculous statement.


----------



## dzilizzi

Alex Fraser said:


> A couple of thoughts on the pricing:
> 
> I think the Abbey Road stuff might be Spitfire's flagship range going forward. I'd be surprised if the first modular products don't make the forum's eyes water a little bit - we've been weaned on BBCSO levels of value which I'm not sure will translate to the Abbey Road products.
> 
> Also, I think AR will be cheaper in the long term. It's not hard to see Spitfire at some point offering an "Abbey Road Collection" where this stuff is discounted and bundled. I think the prices are fair if you consider it a long term investment _which you actually use_, rather than something to keep your interest until the next sale.


I agree they will likely do this. And based on past practice, you will get credit for the parts you already own, unlike some of the other developers when they bundle.


----------



## muziksculp

I listened to both Musca, and Legendery Low Strings, and to my ears Legendary Low Strings sounds better.

Although Musca has more articulations. I don't have them, but I think I will be buying AR-1, with both new Low-Strings, and Sparkling Woodwinds expansions.


----------



## jbuhler

Nadav said:


> Understood, I still think that setting value references (**in regards to content and price not including inspiring intangibles) can help people make wiser purchasing choices.


I'm not sure. First of all, none of these companies are really in the business of helping its customers make wise purchasing choices. Rather the opposite I think, and more so the lower the basic pricing scheme, because there profit can only be made with volume, and volume means priming the pump of desire. Even the best intentioned company in the world can't help but do this to some extent when they turn to advertising. That's the determining logic of advertising.

As @ism notes, these libraries are also not fully substitutable. One string library is not another string library, and for many in the business of production it matters a lot whether a library delivers what we need it to, and even folks who are just doing this as a hobby will also pay for this sound so as not to make do with that sound. 

Those differences are at root of price differentials that might not make sense when you look at libraries as simple interchangeable commodities. And while there is a certain measuring of value and return on investment by those making these purchases, they do not follow a straightforward calculus. Some will pay a very high premium for one articulation (legato especially) if it is done well, others will pay for beautifully rendered versions of flautando or sul tasto. But the varied pricing on the whole is not in my experience irrational. 

The pricing is not exactly that you get what you pay for, but that companies, at least those that are large enough to have a staff to think about these things, have a decent sense of what the market will bear for the sounds they are putting out. They also understand that professionals have somewhat different needs from hobbyists and are willing to pay more (within reason) to have those needs met but that the professional market is also very small (and in the great scheme of the music industry, the sample instrument portion of it is also very small). So most sample companies can't make a business, at least a business above a certain size, work only serving the professional market.


----------



## Nadav

jbuhler said:


> I'm not sure. First of all, none of these companies are really in the business of helping its customers make wise purchasing choices. Rather the opposite I think, and more so the lower the basic pricing scheme, because there profit can only be made with volume, and volume means priming the pump of desire. Even the best intentioned company in the world can't help but do this to some extent when they turn to advertising. That's the determining logic of advertising.
> 
> As @ism notes, these libraries are also not fully substitutable. One string library is not another string library, and for many in the business of production it matters a lot whether a library delivers what we need it to, and even folks who are just doing this as a hobby will also pay for this sound so as not to make do with that sound.
> 
> Those differences are at root of price differentials that might not make sense when you look at libraries as simple interchangeable commodities. And while there is a certain measuring of value and return on investment by those making these purchases, they do not follow a straightforward calculus. Some will pay a very high premium for one articulation (legato especially) if it is done well, others will pay for beautifully rendered versions of flautando or sul tasto. But the varied pricing on the whole is not in my experience irrational.
> 
> The pricing is not exactly that you get what you pay for, but that companies, at least those that are large enough to have a staff to think about these things, have a decent sense of what the market will bear for the sounds they are putting out. They also understand that professionals have somewhat different needs from hobbyists and are willing to pay more (within reason) to have those needs met but that the professional market is also very small (and in the great scheme of the music industry, the sample instrument portion of it is also very small). So most sample companies can't make a business, at least a business above a certain size, work only serving the professional market.


Nicely put but also well known, the metric in question is simply a metric, not designed to choose for you but simply another input you might want to consider. If a product has exactly the sound you were looking for then by all means ignore the metric, for me I would've found it very helpful.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

DovesGoWest said:


> Well a little research produces the following as a cross section of different companies:
> 
> 
> CompanyProductLocationEngineerCostCost per Patch\Instrument\ArticulationCineSamplesTina GuaSony\MGMTim Starnes$99$14.14SpitfireARO LLAbbey RoadSimon Rhodes$49$12.25SpitfireARO OFAbbey RoadSimon Rhodes$449$9.35Orchestral ToolsBerlin Syphonic StringsTeldex?$664$8.85Orchestral ToolsMetropolis ARK 1Teldex/?$664$5.88CineSamplesCineStrings CORESony\MGMDennis Sands$499$5.54SpitfireHans Zimmer StringsAIR StudiosJake Jackson$799$5.06SpitfireSymphonic StringsAIR StudiosJake Jackson$799$3.608DIONew Century String 2?Colin O’Malley$598$2.61SpitfireBBCSO CoreMaida ValeJake Jackson$449$1.65
> 
> Baring Tina Gua which is a world class soloist library the AR libraries work out the most expensive with the expansion topping the tree. One thing to note is that apart from Tina Gua and ARO LL all of the other libraries are either complete string libraries or orchestral libraries.


Not what I was asking - none of these are doing the same thing as AR1 Selections in terms of recording multiple sections together for specific purposes.

Either way, your analysis is flawed in that none of your examples sell individual patches. They require selling the whole lot to make back their investment. If 8Dio or CineSamples let users pick and choose what patches they wanted for $5 each, they would both go out of business. The one company that is allowing users to buy individual patches is Orchestral Tools and if you notice, they charge much more per instrument than simply dividing the retail price by the number of instruments. Also, remains to be seen if this is a viable business model for them to recoup their production costs.

And lastly, Spitfire is one of the only companies that pays royalties to the musicians who recorded the samples. If that costs an extra few bucks per patch, I'm happy to do it.


----------



## ism

DovesGoWest said:


> Well a little research produces the following as a cross section of different companies:
> 
> 
> CompanyProductLocationEngineerCostCost per Patch\Instrument\ArticulationCineSamplesTina GuaSony\MGMTim Starnes$99$14.14SpitfireARO LLAbbey RoadSimon Rhodes$49$12.25SpitfireARO OFAbbey RoadSimon Rhodes$449$9.35Orchestral ToolsBerlin Syphonic StringsTeldex?$664$8.85Orchestral ToolsMetropolis ARK 1Teldex/?$664$5.88CineSamplesCineStrings CORESony\MGMDennis Sands$499$5.54SpitfireHans Zimmer StringsAIR StudiosJake Jackson$799$5.06SpitfireSymphonic StringsAIR StudiosJake Jackson$799$3.608DIONew Century String 2?Colin O’Malley$598$2.61SpitfireBBCSO CoreMaida ValeJake Jackson$449$1.65
> 
> Baring Tina Gua which is a world class soloist library the AR libraries work out the most expensive with the expansion topping the tree. One thing to note is that apart from Tina Gua and ARO LL all of the other libraries are either complete string libraries or orchestral libraries.



Another fun bit of context that you need to bring to critical evaluating this kind of data, is that yes, Tina Guo is a world class soloist. But Spitfire also samples people like Caroline Dale. Who, if you glance at her IMDB page is - with no disrespect to the fabulous Tina - a whole other level of accomplished as a world class cellist than Tina is (yet). - though with less tube celebrity. 

Just that this is the sort of thing that gets lots in spreadsheets, is all.


----------



## DovesGoWest

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Not what I was asking - none of these are doing the same thing as AR1 Selections in terms of recording multiple sections together for specific purposes.


That's because they already have the selections in their libraries along with so much more than AR. Right now ARO is an ensemble based library and the expansions are just adding extra ensemble combinations. The other libraries are full sections with pre-orchestrated ensembles.



ALittleNightMusic said:


> Either way, your analysis is flawed in that none of your examples sell individual patches. They require selling the whole lot to make back their investment. If 8Dio or CineSamples let users pick and choose what patches they wanted for $5 each, they would both go out of business. The one company that is allowing users to buy individual patches is Orchestral Tools and if you notice, they charge much more per instrument than simply dividing the retail price by the number of instruments. Also, remains to be seen if this is a viable business model for them to recoup their production costs.


Get real hardly anybody is only go to buy an expansion and nothing else, no other libraries at all that expansion is only useful when paired either with ARO OF or another full strings\orchestra library. I think your argument is flawed there as i cannot buy individual patches for ARO either.


ALittleNightMusic said:


> And lastly, Spitfire is one of the only companies that pays royalties to the musicians who recorded the samples. If that costs an extra few bucks per patch, I'm happy to do it.


That is true and if you had listened to Paul\Christen you will have heard them saying that other companies have started to do this as well.


----------



## BasariStudios

People talking about Blending and Mixing and adding some Vibrato
from another Library and other stuff...how does that work?
You take only a Strings Sections and you add ARO Strings to it?
So basically you add another 2 Strings Sections and a Viola Section 
on top of that existing Strings Section...how would that sounds when
one want just 1 Strings Section?
I am struggling to understand.


----------



## DovesGoWest

ism said:


> Another fun bit of context that you need to bring to critical evaluating this kind of data, is that yes, Tina Guo is a world class soloist. But Spitfire also samples people like Caroline Dale. Who, if you glance at her IMDB page is - with no disrespect to the fabulous Tina - a whole other level of accomplished as a world class cellist than Tina is (yet). - though with less tube celebrity.
> 
> Just that this is the sort of thing that gets lots in spreadsheets, is all.


I just added Tina as an example of a soloist library and it was the first one that came to mind.


----------



## Frederick

dzilizzi said:


> But I don't have to pay around $35 per year to safeguard my purchase with Spitfire. For me, you either go all in for VSL and pay for the insurance, or don't buy it at all.


I went all in with VSL, but I still haven't bought insurance. Can't remember that I ever lost a dongle, broke one or had it stolen. With their vouchers (25% off) I suppose it would be 52,50 for two years. I still didn't bother to get one. I think it's also possible to use more e-licensers and spread your risk.


----------



## DovesGoWest

BasariStudios said:


> People talking about Blending and Mixing and adding some Vibrato
> from another Library and other stuff...how does that work?
> You take only a Strings Sections and you add ARO Strings to it?
> So basically you add another 2 Strings Sections and a Viola Section
> on top of that existing Strings Section...how would that sounds when
> one want just 1 Strings Section?
> I am struggling to understand.


Not sure i fully understand what your asking, i have for instance BBCSO Core and Areia. There are times when i want the short string to have a little bit more aggression and bite which is what Areia provides, when i want the flowing lush strings i use the BBCSO. I have the two products balanced in my template so that they sound like they are in the same room and then the extra verbs i use glue them together.

Where i thing it will get more difficult is when your trying to blend in ensembles with sections and obviously there becomes overlaps.


----------



## BasariStudios

DovesGoWest said:


> Where i thing it will get more difficult is when your trying to blend in ensembles with sections and obviously there becomes overlaps.


That's exactly what i was asking because i hear and see
people doing it and you can tell right away.


----------



## Frederick

ALittleNightMusic said:


> I don’t understand why all sample developers need to be charging the exact same amount, as if this was some sort of commodity market.
> 
> “$49 is ridiculously expensive” is a ridiculous statement.


I certainly didn't mean to imply that all sample developers need to be charging the same. Now that would be ridiculous indeed.

I was arguing there's a lot more content in Musca and that I feel the quality edge in favor of LLS is way too small to be able to be thinking of it as priced competitively including compared to their own products. To me this price is an extreme outlier and for me it's not worth it, eventhough I bought it anyway. *)


*) My idea is I'll stick with AR1 Foundations and the Selections to get in on these recordings and the AR1 room sound and I'll skip the modular orchestra for the forseeable future, as it seems that will probably be as expensive as BBCSO Pro, SStO Pro and SSO together were for me when I got those. I can't imagine it being worth to me that much. I still love those other three products. To me AR1 is not a giant leap forward, just a little bit better. Added to that my favorite room sound is actuallly still the hall in Air Studios, so that's not helping either. Another factor is the incompleteness which I loathe. I'm old fashioned when it comes to wanting everything recorded in the same room. I basically have separate templates per recording room. With AR1 I'm screwed till it's more complete. Having to compromise and fill the holes with other orchestras when this product is relatively more expensive... Nope, for me the price is ridiculous.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Frederick said:


> I certainly didn't mean to imply that all sample developers need to be charging the same. Now that would be ridiculous indeed.
> 
> I was arguing there's a lot more content in Musca and that I feel the quality edge in favor of LLS is way too small to be able to be thinking of it as priced competitively including compared to their own products. To me this price is an extreme outlier and for me it's not worth it, eventhough I bought it anyway. *)
> 
> 
> *) My idea is I'll stick with AR1 Foundations and the Selections to get in on these recordings and the AR1 room sound and I'll skip the modular orchestra for the forseeable future, as it seems that will probably be as expensive as BBCSO Pro, SStO Pro and SSO together were for me when I got those. I can't imagine it being worth to me that much. I still love those other three products. To me AR1 is not a giant leap forward, just a little bit better. Added to that my favorite room sound is actuallly still the hall in Air Studios, so that's not helping either. Another factor is the incompleteness which I loathe. I'm old fashioned when it comes to wanting everything recorded in the same room. I basically have separate templates per recording room. With AR1 I'm screwed till it's more complete. Having to compromise and fill the holes with other orchestras when this product is relatively more expensive... Nope, for me the price is ridiculous.


So, AIR is your favorite room, AR1 Selections are overpriced, and yet...you will keep buying them?

Musca is great for what it is. And I completely love Synchron Player. However, Musca is not recorded in Abbey Road so if you want the sound of samples recorded at Abbey Road, this is the option. VSL owns Synchron Stage I believe, while Spitfire has to pay some sort of licensing fee to Abbey Road. That could be also one factor in the "higher" cost. But more importantly, Spitfire never intended AR selections to be some fully featured set of articulations for certain instrument groups (like VSL has done). AROOF already has most of the standard articulations per instrument section (outside of legato without which most of Vi-C could never write any music of any quality). That's where the BBO and AR1 concepts differ. Spitfire is specifically going after different thematic textures and recording specifically with those in mind, including the appropriate articulations. BBO is more a piecemeal ensemble library, but wants to cover all articulation bases. If that's your jam, good news is VSL actually sells their products so you can buy them!


----------



## jaketanner

Would anyone say that AR1 would be good at "happy" type music...such as romantic comedy? Or is it a bit too heavy and not enough light-hearted elements? May be looking for a quick sketching library for this type of genre. Thanks.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

jaketanner said:


> Would anyone say that AR1 would be good at "happy" type music...such as romantic comedy? Or is it a bit too heavy and not enough light-hearted elements? May be looking for a quick sketching library for this type of genre. Thanks.


I think what you're looking for is this https://www.sonokinetic.net/products/heritage/thecarnival/

AR1 has con sord sustains. Throw some major chord progressions under that, some high winds, and voila!


----------



## jdrcomposer

jaketanner said:


> Would anyone say that AR1 would be good at "happy" type music...such as romantic comedy? Or is it a bit too heavy and not enough light-hearted elements? May be looking for a quick sketching library for this type of genre. Thanks.


The pop mics are pretty good for this. I'm working on a children's show right now and the basis of all the orchestral stuff is the close pop mics in AR1.


----------



## jaketanner

ALittleNightMusic said:


> I think what you're looking for is this https://www.sonokinetic.net/products/heritage/thecarnival/
> 
> AR1 has con sord sustains. Throw some major chord progressions under that, some high winds, and voila!


Thanks will check this out.


----------



## Frederick

ALittleNightMusic said:


> So, AIR is your favorite room, AR1 Selections are overpriced, and yet...you will keep buying them?


Yup. I'm a sucker for different rooms that are suited for orchestration. I do want AR. Just was hoping it wouldn't cost as much as it seems to now.



ALittleNightMusic said:


> Spitfire is specifically going after different thematic textures and recording specifically with those in mind, including the appropriate articulations.


I sure hope that they'll add legato to everything where it's still missing - I think most people that bought AROOF feel that way. Same for the rolls with percussion. I don't mind they record stuff with a special theme in mind so it'll be more suited for that, as long as in the end this product can stand on its own as an ensemble product. My biggest worry here is that they would add a glockenspiel to everything and not being able to turn it off. Maybe I should have waited till it became a bundle and then on sale. For not doing that I can only blame myself.



ALittleNightMusic said:


> BBO is more a piecemeal ensemble library, but wants to cover all articulation bases. If that's your jam, good news is VSL actually sells their products so you can buy them!


Of course I own BBO already as well as a lot of other Synchron stuff. I stated earlier that if given the choice between BBO and AR1 that I would choose BBO on account of it being more complete.


----------



## muziksculp

Frederick said:


> I do want AR. Just was hoping it wouldn't cost as much as it seems to now.


AR-1 is discounted now at $349. (until March 11th), price goes back to $449. on March 12th. 

I don't think you will see it at this price for a while. That's one of the reasons I'm not passing on this opportunity.


----------



## AndyP

For me, it's less a question of price. If I like something so much that I want to have it, then I am also willing to pay more for it.

What irritates me about Spitfire in particular is that one game changer after another comes onto the market in a short time. First BBCSO, then ARO, and at the same time you have other (orchestral)libraries in the portfolio.

In the end, I can create halfway convincing mockups with all libraires, since the libraries mostly only differ in details. So for me the question is, do I need this or do I want this. The price is not really relevant in either case, although it hurts me more when the answer is, I need that.

Fortunately, since last year I'm at the point to be able to say, I do not need anything, if then I want to have it. This leads me to spend less and less money on (orchestral)libraries. 

At the moment there is only one library that really turns me on, and that will probably come at the end of the year. Even the initial enthusiasm for OPUS has diminished, because I am also able to work without OPUS.

What I don't like is to buy a library in bits and pieces, spread over a period of a year or more. This was already a bit critical with BBO, but in the end it was just about acceptable for me (and I didn't regret it). It makes planning the budget unnecessarily difficult and what should I do with a half-finished library? Even if the parts that are already out sound great, I then have to use them with another library that wasn't recorded in the same room and am mixing again.

In the end, it's always an individual decision and free market means: The price is sometimes so and sometimes so, and the customer buys sometimes and sometimes not.


----------



## jaketanner

AndyP said:


> What I don't like is to buy a library in bits and pieces, spread over a period of a year or more


This drives me nuts about any library. I've fallen down this path, and the wait is just silly, because either the library that is out is incomplete, or it leaves you wanting more...i think libraries need to be released in full, or don't bother. Having said that, AR1, is technically a complete library for what it's market is...but i may wait for the modular Abbey Road...might take years at this pace.


----------



## muziksculp

Spitfire Audio's AR-Modular Orchestral Libraries are not going to be out for a year or two, so that's the main reason I have decided to get AR-1, and some of the expansions. 

Mainly to get some of that Abbey Road sound vibe. Maybe it's a lot of Hype, and some good reverb, IR will do the trick, but I'm willing to take a chance, and explore this option. I'm sure I will like the AR-Modular Orchestra once they start releasing sections of it.


----------



## ed buller

jaketanner said:


> This drives me nuts about any library. I've fallen down this path, and the wait is just silly, because either the library that is out is incomplete, or it leaves you wanting more...i think libraries need to be released in full, or don't bother. Having said that, AR1, is technically a complete library for what it's market is...but i may wait for the modular Abbey Road...might take years at this pace.


oh we say that about everything!....from star wars films to sample Libraries . But then if Spitfire just gave us everything we needed next wednesday at 1pm GMT....what on earth would they do next ?

You are just going to have to accept that you being impatient, and wanting the perfect Library right now , is a key component of their business plan. 

best

ed


----------



## muziksculp

jaketanner said:


> Having said that, AR1, is technically a complete library for what it's market is...but i may wait for the modular Abbey Road...might take years at this pace.


Yes, factoring in the COVID-19 situation, and the complexity to record a full orchestra in detail in AR-1, I would easily say they need two years to complete it if all goes smoothly.

That's why AR-1 and some of the expansions would be the easy solution for now. You can add the Modular Orchestral libraries once they are ready. That's what I decided to do.


----------



## jaketanner

ed buller said:


> You are just going to have to accept that you being impatient, and wanting the perfect Library right now , is a key component of their business plan


Also a good way to piss people off and then we go elsewhere...LOL But I really do like AR1's sound...and I can get it for a very low price since i can get an EDY discount on top...may just go for it...need a fast sketching library that can double as the final if need be.


----------



## ed buller

jaketanner said:


> Also a good way to piss people off and then we go elsewhere...LOL But I really do like AR1's sound...and I can get it for a very low price since i can get an EDY discount on top...may just go for it...need a fast sketching library that can double as the final if need be.


but where would you go /...they all do this...everyone. It's commerce 

best

e


And yes you should get it !


----------



## jaketanner

ed buller said:


> but where would you go /...they all do this...everyone. It's commerce
> 
> best
> 
> e
> 
> 
> And yes you should get it !


oh I know...as much as I like performance samples libraries, the fact they release things in drips and drabs is crazy making..LOL They have yet to complete their solo library and it's been years and they only released 1 instrument...LOL


----------



## Frederick

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 is discounted now at $349. (until March 11th), price goes back to $449. on March 12th.
> 
> I don't think you will see it at this price for a while. That's one of the reasons I'm not passing on this opportunity.


A little misunderstanding here - I already own it. Bought it when you would still get a free Selection on top of the introduction price.


----------



## jbuhler

BasariStudios said:


> People talking about Blending and Mixing and adding some Vibrato
> from another Library and other stuff...how does that work?
> You take only a Strings Sections and you add ARO Strings to it?
> So basically you add another 2 Strings Sections and a Viola Section
> on top of that existing Strings Section...how would that sounds when
> one want just 1 Strings Section?
> I am struggling to understand.


It depends very much on what you are trying to do. With an ensemble library like ARO, you can add individual libraries to it (say first violins to bring out the tune or add legato or whatnot) for detail. That's how SF long advocated folks use Albion One—use the ensemble library to get the basics down, then the individual libraries for detail. Does it work? More or less. The one thing it does offer is speed: you can get credible results very fast as long as you are willing to work with the patches and not against them.

Vice versa, you can mix ensemble libraries behind section libraries and sometimes it will add some glue, a bit like a reverb. Or you can layer different section libraries. They all produce different kinds of effects which may or may not be what you want. But one thing to understand is that samples don't add the way that adding players in a room do. So a sample of 8 violins added to another sample of 8 violins doesn't sound like a sample of 16 violins. But layering libraries does produce a different sound from those libraries each used separately, and that can be a good thing if the libraries complement each other or a bad thing if they fight...


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 is discounted now at $349. (until March 11th), price goes back to $449. on March 12th.
> 
> I don't think you will see it at this price for a while. That's one of the reasons I'm not passing on this opportunity.


Likely it will be back at this price for each release of a new expansion pack and for the May sale, assuming they continue that sale. BBCSO basically went back to its intro pricing for each sale.


----------



## AEF

Anyone else having issues with the Spitfire Audio App? Seems to go through a download process, and then never installs. Usually the app is very smooth for me.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Lot of complaining from people that have never developed a sample library of this size. "I want everything magically now!" So...Spitfire should have spent the better part of 3 years just recording and editing everything before delivering anything from Abbey Road? They can pay their employees with magic beans in the meantime. That also assumes all the players they want, the engineers, and the hall are at their beck and call whenever they want them to be. And they should drop everything else they are working on (like that massive update to BBCSO).

And it isn't like they just come up with the idea one day, go record the next, edit it and put it out on day three. Christian mentioned the most expensive session they did where they ended up not using anything because it was a failed experiment with new sampling approaches was $60k down the drain (though I'm sure they learned from their failures).


----------



## styledelk

The solution to so much of this is a subscription model


----------



## jbuhler

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Lot of complaining from people that have never developed a sample library of this size. "I want everything magically now!" So...Spitfire should have spent the better part of 3 years just recording and editing everything before delivering anything from Abbey Road? They can pay their employees with magic beans in the meantime. That also assumes all the players they want, the engineers, and the hall are at their beck and call whenever they want them to be. And they should drop everything else they are working on (like that massive update to BBCSO).
> 
> And it isn't like they just come up with the idea one day, go record the next, edit it and put it out on day three. Christian mentioned the most expensive session they did where they ended up not using anything because it was a failed experiment with new sampling approaches was $60k down the drain (though I'm sure they learned from their failures).


I mean, yes, they could have waited another year when all the legatos were ready, and sold the whole thing at $750 or so, everyone would have complained about the price, and folks who have been using it successfully for a year to 18 months it took to get everything ready would not have been able to use it. I mean how long were folks waiting for CSW? That's an opportunity cost that most simply ignore. For developers there's no winning these things, because people basically want the best library immediately for free, and that's just never going to happen. I can hardly wait for the reaction when the modular library finally drops and we learn the price...


----------



## packhorse

DovesGoWest said:


> Sorry but that latest from Paul at Spitfire is that mixing different libraries recorded in different locations is done all of the time and is easy to mix together into a cohesive sound using reverbs as thats what all mix engineers do anyways.
> 
> Personally i have Areia Lite and BBCSO core mixed together without any issues, the key was first to get the Areia strings to sound like they are in a similar room as the BBCSO Core (mix1) using the inbuilt verb. Once i had this then both libraries go through my room and hall verbs which fully blends them together.





DovesGoWest said:


> Not sure i fully understand what your asking, i have for instance BBCSO Core and Areia. There are times when i want the short string to have a little bit more aggression and bite which is what Areia provides, when i want the flowing lush strings i use the BBCSO. I have the two products balanced in my template so that they sound like they are in the same room and then the extra verbs i use glue them together.
> 
> Where i thing it will get more difficult is when your trying to blend in ensembles with sections and obviously there becomes overlaps.


I went with your advice and bought Areia Lite to go with BBC SO Core and haven’t looked back. A great combination for me. Do you think Classic or Modern mode fits best with Core? Thank you for your advice.


----------



## CT

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Lot of complaining from people that have never developed a sample library of this size. "I want everything magically now!"


I understand impatience, but I can't help feeling like people who came into all this relatively recently were spoiled by the fact that all the major lines were already complete, and we even got a complete "all at once" package in BBCSO (when is the last time that happened? EWQLSO?).

I remember when SSO didn't exist yet, and instead you had "Flute Consort" and "Trombone Phalanx." And that lovely old style of artwork they used. Abbey Road is going to be the same process as any of these other projects from Spitfire, Orchestral Tools, Cinesamples, VSL, Alex W, etc., and will come together over a period of years. Not ideal, but it's how things usually go. And none of those developers save Alex are silent on other fronts during the process.


----------



## DovesGoWest

packhorse said:


> I went with your advice and bought Areia Lite to go with BBC SO Core and haven’t looked back. A great combination for me. Do you think Classic or Modern mode fits best with Core? Thank you for your advice.


Glad you like it and for the price it’s a bargain. I found the classic mode is closer to the smooth bbc however I wanted areia for the bite/aggression so have used modern


----------



## packhorse

DovesGoWest said:


> Glad you like it and for the price it’s a bargain. I found the classic mode is closer to the smooth bbc however I wanted areia for the bite/aggression so have used modern


Thanks. I knew you said to me last time modern was best.


----------



## DovesGoWest

What I find strange is when I started getting into this style of music production the general consensus was ensemble libraries are for sketching and mocking things up. To properly orchestrate you need to have proper section. Now whilst the AR Modular may be a great thing right now it’s a pipe dream. 

So all we have is AR1 an ensemble library, at the point you add anything else to it or add your own verbs then you have lost/polluted the AR sound which is surely why you bought into the AR brand


----------



## muziksculp

DovesGoWest said:


> What I find strange is when I started getting into this style of music production the general consensus was ensemble libraries are for sketching and mocking things up. To properly orchestrate you need to have proper section. Now whilst the AR Modular may be a great thing right now it’s a pipe dream.
> 
> So all we have is AR1 an ensemble library, at the point you add anything else to it or add your own verbs then you have lost/polluted the AR sound which is surely why you bought into the AR brand


I have to agree. That's one of the reasons I'm eager to buy AR-1 , with expansions, but find the fact that I still have to mix in my own legato mid-high strings, to fit the AR-1 acoustics, and possibly solo woodwinds, brass, ..etc. from other libraries, i.e. BBCSO, or any other brand, is counter to the principal idea that one is using an AR-1 based library, with it's unique and rich sonic signature.

Maybe this is not a big deal, but isn't this what SA is selling here 'The Abbey-Road One sound' ?


----------



## DovesGoWest

muziksculp said:


> Maybe this is not a big deal, but isn't this what SA is selling here 'The Abbey-Road One sound' ?



Correct both BBCSO and AR are all about the complete sound, like you say the point you start adding sections an solos then the AR sound is gone.

It did just strike me how many using ARO are still adding their own verbs which surely defeats the AR sound


----------



## molemac

Saxer said:


> Me again...
> 
> Thinking of a good match library to fill the gaps of missing AR's legato I'd go VSL Synchron. Probably some tweaking (match EQ & reverb) necessary but I think section sizes and sound will connect rather good. BigBang would fit best for the workflow (kind of an enhanced ensemble concept with legatos and separate sections for strings and woodwinds).
> I'm in a project right now but probably next week (hope so) I'll try that combi.


Look forward to hearing that. I thought Vista legs sounded vgood . Ps have you also tied Afflatus ?


----------



## muziksculp

DovesGoWest said:


> Correct both BBCSO and AR are all about the complete sound, like you say the point you start adding sections an solos then the AR sound is gone.
> 
> It did just strike me how many using ARO are still adding their own verbs which surely defeats the AR sound


Same applies to using BBCSO and adding your own reverb/s . 

I think marketing these SA Libraries for the sound of the venue they were recorded in is something that is rarely followed by the users. I see composers mixing them with anything they feel works in their mix. The Venue sound doesn't seem to be the #1 priority when it comes down to using these libraries.


----------



## dzilizzi

ed buller said:


> oh we say that about everything!....from star wars films to sample Libraries . But then if Spitfire just gave us everything we needed next wednesday at 1pm GMT....what on earth would they do next ?
> 
> You are just going to have to accept that you being impatient, and wanting the perfect Library right now , is a key component of their business plan.
> 
> best
> 
> ed


Not sure if it is a key component. No one planned on COVID. 

But I have definitely been waiting on the Strings before looking at AV's Infinite series. Not as concerned about Spitfire though. I haven't been overly disappointed in anything I've bought from them, sound-wise. I did pick up the ensemble in the pre-purchase period just to get the sparkling winds. And because it doesn't hurt to have ensembles when eventually buying the modular library.


----------



## muziksculp

I should also add that if I had AR-1, I wouldn't mind mixing its brass sounds with BBCSO's Brass, because I find AR-1 Brass sounds very inspiring form what I have heard in demos, ..etc. or any other library I have. I wouldn't be restricting myself. 

At the end of the day, we are mixing sounds of instruments, regardless to where they were sampled/recorded. We have so many DSP tools to sculpt things to our taste, imho. that's the bottom line. Making a track that sounds great, to your taste.


----------



## DovesGoWest

muziksculp said:


> Same applies to using BBCSO and adding your own reverb/s .
> 
> I think marketing these SA Libraries for the sound of the venue they were recorded in is something that is rarely followed by the users. I see composers mixing them with anything they feel works in their mix. The Venue sound doesn't seem to be the #1 priority when it comes down to using these libraries.


Exactly my feelings as well, the BBCSO wasn’t about the sound of Maida Vale it was about a cohesive full orchestra. Now on that basis then AR is trying to do the exact opposite and make it about the location, but to do that then at least for me you need to provide everything so there is no reason to add to it.

Like you say I will any samples/libraries I want to the BBCSO if they provide the sound/style I am looking for


----------



## muziksculp

DovesGoWest said:


> Exactly my feelings as well, the BBCSO wasn’t about the sound of Maida Vale it was about a cohesive full orchestra. Now on that basis then AR is trying to do the exact opposite and make it about the location, but to do that then at least for me you need to provide everything so there is no reason to add to it.
> 
> Like you say I will any samples/libraries I want to the BBCSO if they provide the sound/style I am looking for


We could also try to produce a track using only AR-1 and it's expansions, not use any reverbs, to produce a more realistic Abbey-Road One Studio sounding Orchestra. We have the choice to do whatever we wish with our libraries, and DSP tools. 

What really matters is does the track sound great, and is it enjoyable to listen to. Simple as that.


----------



## muziksculp

I wonder when Spitfire Audio will be releasing the high-legato strings for AR-1 ? 

I feel this is badly needed at this time.


----------



## VSriHarsha

dzilizzi said:


> From things Troels over at 8Dio has said. the majority of his libraries come from things he needs for jobs he is working on. He then turns them into sample libraries.


Thanks @dzilizzi!
I really didn’t know this.


----------



## ridgero

muziksculp said:


> I wonder when Spitfire Audio will be releasing the high-legato strings for AR-1 ?
> 
> I feel this is badly needed at this time.


Maybe in summer? So they can use a suitable name like:

Scorching Strings


----------



## Peter Satera

We're still in lockdown here, so I think people need to remember a pandemic is still ongoing and that expecting libraries hastily is not that straight forward.


----------



## holywilly

I think the contents for modular orchestra are already recorded, they just need to program and polish for the final products.


----------



## DovesGoWest

holywilly said:


> I think the contents for modular orchestra are already recorded, they just need to program and polish for the final products.


from what Paul mentioned and hinted at it was plan that would take several years


----------



## Fry777

DovesGoWest said:


> from what Paul mentioned and hinted at it was plan that would take several years


But they also start working on libraries well before they go public about them, so who knows. While they were releasing BBCSO, it's reasonable to think that work was well under way for part of ARO at least


----------



## dzilizzi

Peter Satera said:


> We're still in lockdown here, so I think people need to remember a pandemic is still ongoing and that expecting libraries hastily is not that straight forward.


All the parts of AR1OF are recorded. As long as they are happy with the sound, they should be coming out without a problem. If they aren't happy and need to rerecord, there will be delays. 

The modular orchestra was started, but is not finished. This gets confusing - maybe AR1OF and expansions could be the AR Media Library and the symphonic orchestral one the modular library? They really are both modular in a way.


----------



## muziksculp

holywilly said:


> I think the contents for modular orchestra are already recorded, they just need to program and polish for the final products.


That would be good news if true, which could mean we can see it begin releasing sooner than I was expecting. But have they confirmed this ?


----------



## yiph2

muziksculp said:


> That would be good news if true, which could mean we can see it begin releasing sooner than I was expecting. But have they confirmed this ?


I think they said that they have recorded 1 section


----------



## Frederick

dzilizzi said:


> All the parts of AR1OF are recorded. As long as they are happy with the sound, they should be coming out without a problem. If they aren't happy and need to rerecord, there will be delays.
> 
> The modular orchestra was started, but is not finished. This gets confusing - maybe AR1OF and expansions could be the AR Media Library and the symphonic orchestral one the modular library? They really are both modular in a way.


But they were also talking about binned recordings, so I figure they had setbacks with this already and that some things can't be (re-)recorded due to covid.

Also they said that we can expect more selections "later this year", what sounded to me like they have nothing almost finished in the pipeline. Could be wrong about the last part though - they might have something almost ready despite the way they phrased it.


----------



## ism

Kind of reminds me of the story of how Paul et al spend so long in Abby Road that their critics were banging on about "ok, they've must have lost it ... they got nothing " ... and then they released Sgt. Pepper. 

I believe Paul (Spitfire Paul) mention that the had one part of the modular library done before covid. And there's a very strong hint that they recorded solo strings in AR2 over the summer, which are actively being worked on. 

So hopefully covid hasn't slowed them down too much. Given their hit records in recent years, I just wouldn't bet against SF having lots for great suff on the way in 2021. Particularly since Christian said somewhere that they've managed to avoid laying anyone off. So a glass half full hope might be .. soloists?

We have this hint of soloist recording in AR2 over the summer. But why not solo strings vol 2? Or woodwind soloists? I'm dying for a deeply sampled soloist clarinet in AIR, personal. Or the Olafur Arnalds / Viktor Orri Árnason solo chamber evolutions. I can't imagine that no no-one at Spitfire has been thinking of that. It's just too obvious a follow up. And what better time record soloists?


----------



## muziksculp

Solo Strings in AR will be nice, but I don't think it is priority #1, imho. what is badly needed is Mid-High Ensemble Strings for AR-1 Foundations, and that doesn't seem to be coming out soon.


----------



## Frederick

ism said:


> I believe Paul (Spitfire Paul) mention that the had one part of the modular library done before covid. And there's a very strong hint that they recorded solo strings in AR2 over the summer, which are actively being worked on.
> 
> We have this hint of soloist recording in AR2 over the summer. But why not solo strings vol 2?


When Paul said we can almost guess what they've been recording in AR2 I figured he meant a piano.

What was your clue for solo strings? I missed that completely...


----------



## Flyo

Hello there a new on this Vi Control. In posting here for share my experience using the Abbey Road audio library. From the start this sound really really good, my issues with Foundations and now Selections comes from the missed articulations, first in the Strings Department There it’s no Traditional Standard Legato (without 8ve) there it’s no Marccato, and no Swells, the last mentioned are in the others sections, Marccato, Swells an even Tenuto on Brass. So in order to composing a piece or arrangement this have a hole. I really wish that the Spitefire team comes with an update to Foundations with all the missed articulations, here and there, there are no special need for very special articulations before addressing the Standard, all this it’s a must have on a Ensamble like this! Sounds so wonderful. I keep hoping this


----------



## ism

Frederick said:


> When Paul said we can almost guess what they've been recording in AR2 I figured he meant a piano.
> 
> What was your clue for solo strings? I missed that completely...


When I asked, @NoamL suggested (forget which thread) that that one of the videos had a scene of solo stings being recorded in AR2. 

So this is a hint, and very, very far from a confirmation.


----------



## Flyo

muziksculp said:


> Solo Strings in AR will be nice, but I don't think it is priority #1, imho. what is badly needed is Mid-High Ensemble Strings for AR-1 Foundations, and that doesn't seem to be coming out soon.


Exactly my experience so far with. There it’s no Legato (traditional without 8ve), Staccato, Marccato and even Swells on Strings! How can I arrange without all this on Strings Department. Also missed Legatos Traditional and Staccato on Woods and Brass of course! But at last Woods and Brass have Marccato and Swells....


----------



## DovesGoWest

ism said:


> Kind of reminds me of the story of how Paul et al spend so long in Abby Road that their critics were banging on about "ok, they've must have lost it ... they got nothing " ... and then they released Sgt. Pepper.
> 
> I believe Paul (Spitfire Paul) mention that the had one part of the modular library done before covid. And there's a very strong hint that they recorded solo strings in AR2 over the summer, which are actively being worked on.
> 
> So hopefully covid hasn't slowed them down too much. Given their hit records in recent years, I just wouldn't bet against SF having lots for great suff on the way in 2021. Particularly since Christian said somewhere that they've managed to avoid laying anyone off. So a glass half full hope might be .. soloists?
> 
> We have this hint of soloist recording in AR2 over the summer. But why not solo strings vol 2? Or woodwind soloists? I'm dying for a deeply sampled soloist clarinet in AIR, personal. Or the Olafur Arnalds / Viktor Orri Árnason solo chamber evolutions. I can't imagine that no no-one at Spitfire has been thinking of that. It's just too obvious a follow up. And what better time record soloists?


There would be no point recording soloists in AR2 for either the modular orchestra or expansions as that would defeat the AR1 sound. Anything done in AR2 would have to be a complete stand alone library


----------



## ism

DovesGoWest said:


> There would be no point recording soloists in AR2 for either the modular orchestra or expansions as that would defeat the AR1 sound. Anything done in AR2 would have to be a complete stand alone library



Soloists are bit different from sections.


----------



## Fry777

DovesGoWest said:


> There would be no point recording soloists in AR2 for either the modular orchestra or expansions as that would defeat the AR1 sound. Anything done in AR2 would have to be a *complete stand alone* library


It will be as it is presented as a different product line


----------



## jaketanner

packhorse said:


> went with your advice and bought Areia Lite to go with BBC SO Core and haven’t looked back. A great combination for me. Do you think Classic or Modern mode fits best with Core? Thank you for your advice.


Isn't that just adding more of the same? I can see adding the missing instruments to BBC Core, but adding another scaled down string library with no additional mic mixes to add seems like an add choice, since BBC is already symphonic. Curious what it adds though...I have BBC pro, so hard to imagine this combination.


----------



## DovesGoWest

ism said:


> Soloists are bit different from sections.


There’s no difference the whole point of the AR line is about the sound of AR1. To put the soloists in a different room means you no longer have the AR1 sound. And unless a musician who has recorded there and comes on here to say yes all the soloists sit in AR2 I won’t buy Paul saying you can just mix them together lol


----------



## DovesGoWest

jaketanner said:


> Isn't that just adding more of the same? I can see adding the missing instruments to BBC Core, but adding another scaled down string library with no additional mic mixes to add seems like an add choice, since BBC is already symphonic. Curious what it adds though...I have BBC pro, so hard to imagine this combination.


Hi jake

I found the shorts in Areia more consistant across the board and also they have a little more bite an aggression to them where as the bbc shorts I find inconsistent and also aplayed a little smoother/gentler


----------



## jaketanner

DovesGoWest said:


> Hi jake
> 
> I found the shorts in Areia more consistant across the board and also they have a little more bite an aggression to them where as the bbc shorts I find inconsistent and also aplayed a little smoother/gentler


I think this is the case with Core...because in Pro , adding in the close mics and pulling down the tree will give a different sound. The Core is also too wet in general. But I understand about the consistency issue.


----------



## ism

DovesGoWest said:


> There’s no difference the whole point of the AR line is about the sound of AR1. To put the soloists in a different room means you no longer have the AR1 sound. And unless a musician who has recorded there and comes on here to say yes all the soloists sit in AR2 I won’t buy Paul saying you can just mix them together lol


Yeah, but lets have both. Spitfire solo strings are recored in the main hall in AIR and sound great, particularly as orchestral sections or spot soloists. 

Meanwhile, Berlin woodwind soloists are recorded in the booth at teledex and sound great. The have more up front properties that work well with telex (or AIR). They're definatly not replacing SSW for the hall sound, but they have a place in augmenting it. 

Whether this is 'pointless' is up to you.


----------



## DovesGoWest

jaketanner said:


> I think this is the case with Core...because in Pro , adding in the close mics and pulling down the tree will give a different sound. The Core is also too wet in general. But I understand about the consistency issue.


$79 was a damm site less than upgrading to pro as well lol plus it also has full ensemble, violins/violas 8ve and cello/bass 8ve.


----------



## DovesGoWest

ism said:


> Yeah, but lets have both. Spitfire solo strings are recored in the main hall in AIR and sound great, particularly as orchestral sections or spot soloists.
> 
> Meanwhile, Berlin woodwind soloists are recorded in the booth at teledex and sound great. The have more up front properties that work well with telex (or AIR). They're definatly not replacing SSW for the hall sound, but they have a place in augmenting it.
> 
> Whether this is 'pointless' is up to you.


Your missing the point all the sales, marketing and branding about Abbey Road has been about the famous sound of studio 1. So to go and record the soloists in studio 2 blows there own sales/marketing/brand up. They cannot go say here’s the AR1 orchestra apart from the soloists as they won’t record the twice

No issues if they record other stuff in AR2 that’s standalone, but if they record stuff in there to go into the AR1 product somebody needs to be fired


----------



## styledelk

DovesGoWest said:


> There’s no difference the whole point of the AR line is about the sound of AR1. To put the soloists in a different room means you no longer have the AR1 sound. And unless a musician who has recorded there and comes on here to say yes all the soloists sit in AR2 I won’t buy Paul saying you can just mix them together lol


It's not "the whole point," but it is a big part of the marketing, yes. I bought it because it sounds good. It even sounds good in close mics. It has an execllent dynamic range, and it works well with other stuff.


----------



## muziksculp

The fact that there is no AR-1 Mid-High Legato Strings expansion yet, is holding me back from buying any of the AR-1 Libraries at this time. Hopefully SA is planning on releasing the mid-high strings legatos, and possibly more short, and long articulations expansion in the near future. 

I won't be buying any AR-1 libraries until they have this crucial, yet missing part available.


----------



## DovesGoWest

styledelk said:


> It's not "the whole point," but it is a big part of the marketing, yes. I bought it because it sounds good. It even sounds good in close mics. It has an execllent dynamic range, and it works well with other stuff.


You are joking right.....arent you......

you bought it cause it "sounds good" oh yes thats ABBEY ROAD STUDIO 1 cause thats what Spitfire sold the clue is in the name Spitfire Abbey Road One, this means you cannot go add an expansion for it that's recorded in Abbey Road Two.

To quote the website "_Now with three libraries to choose from, there’s never been a better time to walk through those hallowed doors of Abbey Road Studios and enter a room most composers can only dream – Studio One. Get unparalleled and exclusive access to the world’s most celebrated recording location for movie music – from Star Wars and Lord of the Rings, to Harry Potter and Avengers: Endgame. It doesn’t get more iconic._" they are not selling it on dynamic range or close mics or working with other stuff its been sold pure and simply on the Studio One sound.


----------



## SupremeFist

I bought it because it sounds good.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

muziksculp said:


> The fact that there is no AR-1 Mid-High Legato Strings expansion yet, is holding me back from buying any of the AR-1 Libraries at this time. Hopefully SA is planning on releasing the mid-high strings legatos, and possibly more short, and long articulations expansion in the near future.
> 
> I won't be buying any AR-1 libraries until they have this crucial, yet missing part available.


What I don't understand is, considering they already have very good ensemble sections recorded but missing a few key articulations, why they would record a load of other products which basically re-record a load of that content to fill in the gaps missing in the original library. Wouldn't just recording those missing legato transitions be a much better, logical and more economical way to do it? If it's really a money thing then just make a AROOF: pro expansion. The way the 'selections' libraries make sense to me is in recording specific orchestrations which aren't covered by most libraries (at least as well or as specifically), and especially not their other recent library (AROOF). I get the wanting those legato patches, but asking for them from the selections seems kind of weird when there is a perfectly good library that has them already, albeit without the necessary legato transitions. Seems mad making all these extra smaller libraries to fill in the gaps of another, especially when it would surely be much less work/more economical to do that.

Again, I'm really not trying to be overly negative (especially since I'm super onboard the whole AR train in general), I'm just very confused about this whole AROOF+selections strategy.


----------



## SupremeFist

Tom Ferguson said:


> What I don't understand is, considering they already have very good ensemble sections recorded but missing a few key articulations, why they would record a load of other products which basically re-record a load of that content to fill in the gaps missing in the original library. Wouldn't just recording those missing legato transitions be a much better, logical and more economical way to do it? If it's really a money thing then just make a AROOF: pro expansion. The way the 'selections' libraries make sense to me is in recording specific orchestrations which aren't covered by most libraries (at least as well or as specifically), and especially not their other recent library (AROOF). I get the wanting those legato patches, but asking for them from the selections seems kind of weird when there is a perfectly good library that has them already, albeit without the necessary legato transitions. Seems mad making all these extra smaller libraries to fill in the gaps of another, especially when it would surely be much less work/more economical to do that.
> 
> Again, I'm really not trying to be overly negative (especially since I'm super onboard the whole AR train in general), I'm just very confused about this whole AROOF+selections strategy.


I suspect that if AROOF had legatos it would eat too much into BBCSO sales. Which is fair enough from SA's point of view.


----------



## styledelk

DovesGoWest said:


> You are joking right.....arent you......
> 
> you bought it cause it "sounds good" oh yes thats ABBEY ROAD STUDIO 1 cause thats what Spitfire sold the clue is in the name Spitfire Abbey Road One, this means you cannot go add an expansion for it that's recorded in Abbey Road Two.
> 
> To quote the website "_Now with three libraries to choose from, there’s never been a better time to walk through those hallowed doors of Abbey Road Studios and enter a room most composers can only dream – Studio One. Get unparalleled and exclusive access to the world’s most celebrated recording location for movie music – from Star Wars and Lord of the Rings, to Harry Potter and Avengers: Endgame. It doesn’t get more iconic._" they are not selling it on dynamic range or close mics or working with other stuff its been sold pure and simply on the Studio One sound.


Marketing Copy is not product. The room is a room. It helps it sound good, of course. So does the mixing engineers, players, recording technique, sections. Even blending it with other stuff, the "good sound I like" is coming along just fine, and still plenty configurable. I'm not sure yet if I prefer it to Albion Neo or not, but I don't have to prefer it. Just another tool in the box for certain uses.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

SupremeFist said:


> I suspect that if AROOF had legatos it would eat too much into BBCSO sales. Which is fair enough from SA's point of view.


Why would one library not being sold while another library from the same company being sold instead any difference. Anyway, AROOF has more in common with Albion1 than BBCSO, considering the latter isn't an ensemble library. 

Either way, that would be a really shitty business>customers decision that shouldn't be an excuse for anything IMO. So even if that kind of thing might be a reason, I think we as customers shouldn't accept or acknowledge it. Developers nerfing their own libraries so they can make more money is a terrible practise and the kind of thing that alienates customers and breeds animosity towards the company (I genuinely doubt this is the reason anyway, considering that for spitfire abbey road stuff is their new flagship series which they want to eclipse all before it, if only so that the owners of their previous libraries feel the need to get their new stuff. That seems like a much less self-defeating business practise anyway. Though I'm certainly no business guru so who knows...)


----------



## Flyo

Tom Ferguson said:


> What I don't understand is, considering they already have very good ensemble sections recorded but missing a few key articulations, why they would record a load of other products which basically re-record a load of that content to fill in the gaps missing in the original library. Wouldn't just recording those missing legato transitions be a much better, logical and more economical way to do it? If it's really a money thing then just make a AROOF: pro expansion. The way the 'selections' libraries make sense to me is in recording specific orchestrations which aren't covered by most libraries (at least as well or as specifically), and especially not their other recent library (AROOF). I get the wanting those legato patches, but asking for them from the selections seems kind of weird when there is a perfectly good library that has them already, albeit without the necessary legato transitions. Seems mad making all these extra smaller libraries to fill in the gaps of another, especially when it would surely be much less work/more economical to do that.
> 
> Again, I'm really not trying to be overly negative (especially since I'm super onboard the whole AR train in general), I'm just very confused about this whole AROOF+selections strategy.


He has a point here. I’m really hooping for an logical update to Foundation Main Library, how can’t i use Strings as a regular most common orchestra library? Again there it’s no traditional Legato without 8ves on any section, there it’s no Staccato on any section apart from the Orchestra Full Ensamble... there it’s no Marcarto Long/Short on Strings and no Swells either, its really confusing having articulations on one section and not on other section. This must be adressed. It’s illogical having missing articulations here or there. The Covid situation meaby it’s the issue here. Good sounding sample audio Library. Hope the free update to all cosntumer of the Foundations 🙏🏽


----------



## Tom Ferguson

DovesGoWest said:


> You are joking right.....arent you......
> 
> you bought it cause it "sounds good" oh yes thats ABBEY ROAD STUDIO 1 cause thats what Spitfire sold the clue is in the name Spitfire Abbey Road One, this means you cannot go add an expansion for it that's recorded in Abbey Road Two.
> 
> To quote the website "_Now with three libraries to choose from, there’s never been a better time to walk through those hallowed doors of Abbey Road Studios and enter a room most composers can only dream – Studio One. Get unparalleled and exclusive access to the world’s most celebrated recording location for movie music – from Star Wars and Lord of the Rings, to Harry Potter and Avengers: Endgame. It doesn’t get more iconic._" they are not selling it on dynamic range or close mics or working with other stuff its been sold pure and simply on the Studio One sound.


I mean we are talking about rumours here, so getting too pissed off about what potential libraries may or may not be made is a little unhinged. Who knows what reasons might be for them _*potentially *_recording something in AR2. Maybe it is a scheduling thing, a covid/lockdown thing, availability of musicians etc., or maybe it's just an instrument that sounds best in there or needs that character (IE maybe some Elenore Rigby strings or a character piano or something) Who knows and who cares really.

And remember there is nothing that says them recording one library precludes them from making another anyway. If they want to record some solo strings in AR2, they are still likely to record solo strings in AR1 of course. Until they say they aren't, lets not start getting angry. It's not even past year one since the AR series has been announced and it's during one of the worst pandemics in centuries. Lets try and remain patient and understanding haha.


----------



## DovesGoWest

SupremeFist said:


> I suspect that if AROOF had legatos it would eat too much into BBCSO sales. Which is fair enough from SA's point of view.


I doubt that , an ensemble library with basic articulations vs a full orchestral library with sections, soloists and a vast selection of articulations.


----------



## SupremeFist

DovesGoWest said:


> I doubt that , an ensemble library with basic articulations vs a full orchestral library with sections, soloists and a vast selection of articulations.


Aroof has a very good range of articulations _except_ for legato. Also remember they want to keep selling Albion One — Aroof plus legatos would kill that stone dead (unless you love the synthy stuff).


----------



## muziksculp

SupremeFist said:


> Aroof has a very good range of articulations _except_ for legato. Also remember they want to keep selling Albion One — Aroof plus legatos would kill that stone dead (unless you love the synthy stuff).


Not having Mid-High Strings Legatos for AR-1 is actually the main reason I didn't buy it when it was first released, and will still not buy any of their AR-1 libraries. imho. it was a bad, and odd decision, and still no Legato Mid-High Strings. but they release sparkling woodwinds.


----------



## DovesGoWest

SupremeFist said:


> Aroof has a very good range of articulations _except_ for legato. Also remember they want to keep selling Albion One — Aroof plus legatos would kill that stone dead (unless you love the synthy stuff).



It has 5 or 6 per group, the very basic articulations. You can’t call swells an articulation as you do it using the mod and expression sliders


----------



## muziksculp

DovesGoWest said:


> It has 5 or 6 per group, the very basic articulations. You can’t call swells an articulation as you do it using the mod and expression sliders


Plus they put in three swell lengths. As if it is the mostly used articulation, or everyone was bugging them about swells. more swells please... Beats me.


----------



## Flyo

muziksculp said:


> Plus they put in three swell lengths. As if it is the mostly used articulation, or everyone was bugging them about swells. more swells please... Beats me.


Having Sweels on Brass and Woods that was especially recorded on 3 dif lengths sounds good, but when it comes to Strings there it’s nothing. So every need to recreate this. It’s illogical not having them apart from the Sweels are not so important, but when you sum missing standard legatos, marccato, short, long, and then ok Sweels it’s odd


----------



## Flyo

Flyo said:


> Having Sweels on Brass and Woods that was especially recorded on 3 dif lengths sounds good, but when it comes to Strings there it’s nothing. So every need to recreate this. It’s illogical not having them apart from the Sweels are not so important, but when you sum missing standard legatos, marccato, short, long, and then ok Sweels it’s odd


I forgot to mention that there it’s no Staccatos either (the selections introduce some of the missing arts, but again ala are in 8ves, so it’s not the same, apart from sound good and are very welcome of course. But we need the standards really


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Programmed swells don’t sound the same as recorded swells.

A legato patch that has violas, violins 2, and violins 1 all playing in unison is less useful than the legendary low strings selection IMO.

Spitfire has said that AR1 is meant to provide recorded brushes for specific use cases / applications, not a be all end all library with every articulation.


----------



## muziksculp

Flyo said:


> I forgot to mention that there it’s no Staccatos either (the selections introduce some of the missing arts, but again ala are in 8ves, so it’s not the same, apart from sound good and are very welcome of course. But we need the standards really


Spitfire Audio are famous for leaving out Staccato Articulation, especially for Strings, which is one of the most basic building block articulations for strings. Go figure. I wonder who is the genius behind these decisions ?


----------



## jbuhler

SupremeFist said:


> I suspect that if AROOF had legatos it would eat too much into BBCSO sales. Which is fair enough from SA's point of view.


It's more about preserving space for the modular library, I think. I'll be surprised if when the expansion packs are done there is not legato for each section of AROOF. But they will mostly be in octaves or in some fashion limited so as to encourage sales of the modular library.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

muziksculp said:


> Spitfire Audio are famous for leaving out Staccato Articulation, especially for Strings, which is one of the most basic building block articulations for strings. Go figure. I wonder who is the genius behind these decisions ?


Professional composers.


----------



## jbuhler

SupremeFist said:


> Aroof has a very good range of articulations _except_ for legato. Also remember they want to keep selling Albion One — Aroof plus legatos would kill that stone dead (unless you love the synthy stuff).


AROOF with expansion packs looks like it will cost somewhere around $750 assuming bundle pricing at some point, so on price alone there is a place for Albion One.


----------



## Flyo

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Programmed swells don’t sound the same as recorded swells.
> 
> A legato patch that has violas, violins 2, and violins 1 all playing in unison is less useful than the legendary low strings selection IMO.
> 
> Spitfire has said that AR1 is meant to provide recorded brushes for specific use cases / applications, not a be all end all library with every articulation.


Of course the Selections bring us more colorful pallets, but why in the world we can just ask for the main arts, and bring the same arts across the entire sections it’s a logical way to do it, on every common use of an ensamble orchestra works that way. So we have Staccato en full ensamble but not in any section. We have Marccato and Swells on Brass and Woods but any on Strings. That why...?


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Flyo said:


> Of course the Selections bring us more colorful pallets, but why in the world we can just ask for the main arts, and bring the same arts across the entire sections it’s a logical way to do it, on every common use of an ensamble orchestra works that way. So we have Staccato en full ensamble but not in any section. We have Marccato and Swells on Brass and Woods but any on Strings. That why...?


You can ask for whatever you'd like, but clearly Spitfire has a different strategy in mind - and I do think it is something unique and new that they are doing vs. the same old sampling that has been done before.


----------



## Flyo

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Programmed swells don’t sound the same as recorded swells.
> 
> A legato patch that has violas, violins 2, and violins 1 all playing in unison is less useful than the legendary low strings selection IMO.
> 
> Spitfire has said that AR1 is meant to provide recorded brushes for specific use cases / applications, not a be all end all library with every articulation.


You said it, recorded Swells sounds very different, and with that in mind they recorded the Selections playing in octaves at same time to get that great sound that we heard. As a costumer I would ask repeatedly the missed arts on Foundation, it’s the most common action knowing that are a lot of missing sounds already


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> It's more about preserving space for the modular library, I think. I'll be surprised if when the expansion packs are done there is not legato for each section of AROOF. But they will mostly be in octaves or in some fashion limited so as to encourage sales of the modular library.


This doesn't make sense IMO, because again, AROOF is an ensemble library. It's never going to do the same job as the modular libraries for the same reason Alb1 is never regarded as doing the same job as SSS for example.

_"I'll be surprised if when the expansion packs are done there is not legato for each section of AROOF"_

Are you saying that the legatos recorded in the selections will be added to AROOF main somehow? Or are you talking about AROOF as if including the selections? (yeh this naming scheme sure can get confusing...)


----------



## Tom Ferguson

ALittleNightMusic said:


> You can ask for whatever you'd like, but clearly Spitfire has a different strategy in mind - and I do think it is something unique and new that they are doing vs. the same old sampling that has been done before.


And what is that thing they are doing may I ask?


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Tom Ferguson said:


> And what is that thing they are doing may I ask?





ALittleNightMusic said:


> Spitfire has said that AR1 is meant to provide recorded brushes for specific use cases / applications, not a be all end all library with every articulation.


----------



## Flyo

There are a few important missing articulations

Strings: 
- Legato (Standard Without 8ves)
- Marccato (With or Without Short and Long)
- Staccato
- Swells (Short, Medium, Long)

Woods:
- Legato (Standard without 8ves)
- Staccato
- Tenuto (only on Hi Woods?)

Brass:
- Legato (Standard without 8ves)
- Staccato


----------



## Tom Ferguson

I thought that was for the selections, not the main library. Where have they mentioned this?


----------



## jbuhler

Tom Ferguson said:


> This doesn't make sense IMO, because again, AROOF is an ensemble library. It's never going to do the same job as the modular libraries for the same reason Alb1 is never regarded as doing the same job as SSS for example.
> 
> _"I'll be surprised if when the expansion packs are done there is not legato for each section of AROOF"_
> 
> Are you saying that the legatos recorded in the selections will be added to AROOF main somehow? Or are you talking about AROOF as if including the selections? (yeh this naming scheme sure can get confusing...)


The expansion packs. I think they will mostly be adding legatos to the existing sections, like the first two did.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> The expansion packs. I think they will mostly be adding legatos to the existing sections, like the first two did.


Yes fair enough. I understand that it appears to be what might be happening, and what people seem to be accepting (and willing to accept). I am still just bemused by them doing this rather than adding to their existing sections for reasons I've already mentioned, but will try and shut up about soon haha. 
Either the selections are doing new things that aren't covered already in the main library, in which case these new libraries are auxiliary to what's recorded in the main libraries, or they are just re-doing what they did in the main library but with legato etc, in which case I don't understand why they would do this for all the reasons I've already mentioned (and if there is a good reason, I hope this will be communicated to us effectively if it hasn't already).


----------



## Flyo

jbuhler said:


> The expansion packs. I think they will mostly be adding legatos to the existing sections, like the first two did.


They are adding Legatos, Staccatos but specially recorded in 8ves, so it’s a different kind of Legato, and sounds wonderful but different. We don’t need every time composing in 8ves. And we still not having Marccato, or Sweels or what i mention right before on Strings and other section for example...


----------



## ism

DovesGoWest said:


> Your missing the point all the sales, marketing and branding about Abbey Road has been about the famous sound of studio 1. So to go and record the soloists in studio 2 blows there own sales/marketing/brand up. They cannot go say here’s the AR1 orchestra apart from the soloists as they won’t record the twice
> 
> No issues if they record other stuff in AR2 that’s standalone, but if they record stuff in there to go into the AR1 product somebody needs to be fired


Except that my point was "soloists are a bit different"


----------



## DovesGoWest

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Programmed swells don’t sound the same as recorded swells.
> 
> A legato patch that has violas, violins 2, and violins 1 all playing in unison is less useful than the legendary low strings selection IMO.
> 
> Spitfire has said that AR1 is meant to provide recorded brushes for specific use cases / applications, not a be all end all library with every articulation.


To me it seems more and like a sketching library and aimed more at beginners hence basic articulations. Even the lows expansion doesn’t replicate the same articulations as the foundation library so you can’t even use it that much


----------



## DovesGoWest

ism said:


> Except that my point was "soloists are a bit different"


Might as well record them at Sony mgm then what does it matter if they are in an abbey road product


----------



## ism

DovesGoWest said:


> Might as well record them at Sony mgm then what does it matter if they are in an abbey road product



But there's a different in ensemble sections. For instance Spitfire Solo Strings recorded in AIR. They carry the sense of space, and of *being* in the orchestra magnificently. And then you have soloists - the the Joshua Bell, of the OT wind soloists, which are recorded in the Teldex booth. And do up front virtuosic-soloist magnificent.

Sometimes you want one. Sometimes you want the other.

I don't know what the merits of recording in AR2 will be. But I'm will to be there will be some.

In any event, you're taking the marketing happy talk far too literally. It's entirely possible for the AR1 room sound to genuinely be all important and the marketing happy talk absolutely true ... except when it isn't. Because life, outside marketing happy talk, is notoriously just kind of like that. Crazy contextual, and with very few absolute truths.

Just like sometimes the AIR hall sound is absolutely all important in what I want in my alto flutes (for instance) .. until I want a soloist recorded in the Teldex booth for a more hyper-lyrical, up front effect. You will take my SSW and all their gorgeous early reflections, from my cold, dead hands. And similarly my Teldex booth soloists. They're both fabulous and I never want to go back to the life in which I didn't have them both.


And I'd be willing to bet that not *every* soloist recorded for a *every* score in AR is *always* in AR1.


Genuinely curious though - anyone here know how recording soloists at AR works?


----------



## DovesGoWest

ism said:


> But there's a different in ensemble sections. For instance Spitfire Solo Strings recorded in AIR. They carry the sense of space, and of *being* in the orchestra magnificently. And then you have soloists - the the Joshua Bell, of the OT wind soloists, which are recorded in the Teldex booth. And do up front virtuosic-soloist magnificent.
> 
> Sometimes you want one. Sometimes you want the other.
> 
> I don't know what the merits of recording in AR2 will be. But I'm will to be there will be some.
> 
> In any event, you're taking the marketing happy talk far too literally. It's entirely possible for the AR1 room sound to genuinely be all important and the marketing happy talk absolutely true ... except when it isn't. Because life, outside marketing happy talk, is notoriously just kind of like that. Crazy contextual, and with very few absolute truths.
> 
> Just like sometimes the AIR hall sound is absolutely all important in what I want in my alto flutes (for instance) .. until I want a soloist recorded in the Teldex booth for a more hyper-lyrical, up front effect. You will take my SSW and all their gorgeous early reflections, from my cold, dead hands. And similarly my Teldex booth soloists. They're both fabulous and I never want to go back to the life in which I didn't have them both.
> 
> 
> And I'd be willing to bet that not *every* soloist recorded for a *every* score in AR is *always* in AR1.
> 
> 
> Genuinely curious though - anyone here know how recording soloists at AR works?


I do agree with you as consumers we have the choice to mix and match as we want. However spitfire as a business cannot just spit out marketing crap, there is a legality to and if they contradict their branding/marketing then it’s miss selling


----------



## prodigalson

Tom Ferguson said:


> I understand that it appears to be what might be happening, and what people seem to be accepting (and willing to accept).


"willing to accept"? Its not as if they need ask users permission before releasing a library lol. If you see value in a product, buy it. If you dont, don't. Its as simple as that. They're entitled to develop whatever products they desire and everyone else is entitled not to buy them if there's no value to them. However, just because someone decides there IS value in a product doesn't mean they're "accepting" anything, just because you don't see the same value. To them, they're getting what they want.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

prodigalson said:


> "willing to accept"? Its not as if they need ask users permission before releasing a library lol. If you see value in a product, buy it. If you dont, don't. Its as simple as that. They're entitled to develop whatever products they desire and everyone else is entitled not to buy them if there's no value to them. However, just because someone decides there IS value in a product doesn't mean they're "accepting" anything, just because you don't see the same value. To them, they're getting what they want.


Of course, they can always make whatever libraries they want to, and we can buy or not buy whatever we want to. But at the same time we are free to share our opinions as customers the same way they are free to ignore them or not. Really the 'accepting/willing to accept' thing was more aimed at people talking as if these selections are supposed to be doing the same job that the missing legatos in the main library would, more than at spitfire themselves. 

I don't think that's the way they see these selections personally. I just think they've decided that the legatos in the main library weren't necessary or important, which is something which, in my opinion, isn't true, and hope that by speaking up as a potential customer might have a chance of changing their mind, if they are inclined to agree or see our point of view (or see that they might be loosing out of purchases due to this).


----------



## jbuhler

Tom Ferguson said:


> Yes fair enough. I understand that it appears to be what might be happening, and what people seem to be accepting (and willing to accept). I am still just bemused by them doing this rather than adding to their existing sections for reasons I've already mentioned, but will try and shut up about soon haha.
> Either the selections are doing new things that aren't covered already in the main library, in which case these new libraries are auxiliary to what's recorded in the main libraries, or they are just re-doing what they did in the main library but with legato etc, in which case I don't understand why they would do this for all the reasons I've already mentioned (and if there is a good reason, I hope this will be communicated to us effectively if it hasn't already).


The low legato expansion is really nice, and it stands up well against my dedicated string libraries. Since low strings in octaves is a common enough doubling, it is also very versatile, both for use with AROOF and for use in other contexts, with my other string libraries. The Sparkling Woodwinds I'm less convinced by. It's good on runs, so long as the run you need is in range. But everything else, the main hi woodwind patch is for me preferable, and then you don't have to deal with the glock either. If you need the legato for the woodwinds, it's also relatively easy to match this patch with other woodwind patches like SSW. So there doesn't seem to be a good reason for it aside from the fact that it only takes one patch to program and manage rather than 3 or 4. 

I find these ensemble libraries are good for certain kinds of things, but they are especially good if you need to get something out quickly because they require far fewer tracks to execute. On that count, AROOF is a material improvement over Albion One, not so much in sound (though I think there too), but especially in dynamic range. At the moment AROOF also doesn't seem to require as much supplementation by other libraries as Albion One, which required supplementation pretty much any time you wanted a dynamic level below mf. With AROOF I'll load legato patches from section first violins and cellos from a dedicated string library, any solo woodwinds I might need, harp, timpani (because I use rolls more than hits), solo horn, maybe solo trumpet, and trombones. The one thing I am missing with this layout is muted brass. I had to do quite a lot more supplementation with Albion One, and that also has no muted brass.


----------



## ism

DovesGoWest said:


> ... a business cannot just spit out marketing crap, there is a legality to and if they contradict their branding/marketing then it’s miss selling



This strikes me as a fundamental mis-theorization of marketing happy talk at its foundations .


----------



## jbuhler

Tom Ferguson said:


> Of course, they can always make whatever libraries they want to, and we can buy or not buy whatever we want to. But at the same time we are free to share our opinions as customers the same way they are free to ignore them or not. Really the 'accepting/willing to accept' thing was more aimed at people talking as if these selections are supposed to be doing the same job that the missing legatos in the main library would, more than at spitfire themselves.
> 
> I don't think that's the way they see these selections personally. I just think they've decided that the legatos in the main library weren't necessary or important, which is something which, in my opinion, isn't true, and hope that by speaking up as a potential customer might have a chance of changing their mind, if they are inclined to agree or see our point of view (or see that they might be loosing out of purchases due to this).


I think they didn't want to wait for the programming on the legatos to be done to release the library and they didn't want to release the library with a $750 or so price point. This release strategy gets around both of those issues.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> The low legato expansion is really nice, and it stands up well against my dedicated string libraries. Since low strings in octaves is a common enough doubling, it is also very versatile, both for use with AROOF and for use in other contexts, with my other string libraries. The Sparkling Woodwinds I'm less convinced by. It's good on runs, so long as the run you need is in range. But everything else, the main hi woodwind patch is for me preferable, and then you don't have to deal with the glock either. If you need the legato for the woodwinds, it's also relatively easy to match this patch with other woodwind patches like SSW. So there doesn't seem to be a good reason for it aside from the fact that it only takes one patch to program and manage rather than 3 or 4.


Yep, I agree about the Low Strings (which I have). They are very good, though I'm not particularly interested in the woodwinds atm, especially due to the range issue.



jbuhler said:


> I find these ensemble libraries are good for certain kinds of things, but they are especially good if you need to get something out quickly because they require far fewer tracks to execute. On that count, AROOF is a material improvement over Albion One, not so much in sound (though I think there too), but especially in dynamic range. At the moment AROOF also doesn't seem to require as much supplementation by other libraries as Albion One, which required supplementation pretty much any time you wanted a dynamic level below mf. With AROOF I'll load legato patches from section first violins and cellos from a dedicated string library, any solo woodwinds I might need, harp, timpani (because I use rolls more than hits), solo horn, maybe solo trumpet, and trombones. The one thing I am missing with this layout is muted brass. I had to do quite a lot more supplementation with Albion One, and that also has no muted brass.


I agree about all these good reasons for using AROOF, it's just without legato that's such a massive bummer because a lot of the time these ensemble sections are actually great to have layered in a track for the same reasons the orchestration selections are, that instruments recorded at the same time often sound, or have a vibe, better than when combining separately recorded instruments. But not having legato for me is a big thing which limits this potential substantially.

At the end of the day I may well just be shouting into the night about something that most people aren't concerned about, and since I respect that not every product can meet my hopes, and it appears there are more than enough people where this isn't the case, I'm happy to let it rest and wait for the rest of the selections (which I am certainly looking forward to) and the modular library. I think I've said my piece and hope that if Spitfire read my comments they understand where I'm coming from and can empathise with my position on this.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> I think they didn't want to wait for the programming on the legatos to be done to release the library and they didn't want to release the library with a $750 or so price point. This release strategy gets around both of those issues.


If this is the case, then all they had to do was say that legatos are coming in a separate update (paid or un-paid) so we understand what the intentions are. The thing I don't accept is that these separate £49 expansions are filling in the same job as the legatos with the main library considering they are different recordings and don't integrate into the main library fully. If we are really going to get a series of these for every section (from the main library) it just doesn't seem economical (from both the time needed to record them, and to money needed the purchase them) considering there will be so much overlap between the main library and the expansions. If I was an AROOF owner I would be quite perplexed by that idea!


----------



## dzilizzi

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Spitfire has said that AR1 is meant to provide recorded brushes for specific use cases / applications, not a be all end all library with every articulation.


This is what I was going to say again. I think most of us are really waiting for the modular library, which will unfortunately be delayed until they either figure out a way to get around the very acceptable COVID provisions, or everyone gets vaccinated (as much as people are able) 

AROF is for media composers. They don't pretend it is for anyone else. They are media composers. Christian has already used it in one of his current productions. It is not meant to be a full out library. Just give some color in a very quick way to productions for TV shows, commercials, trailers, etc.... Very much like an updated Symphobia in a new room.


----------



## jbuhler

Tom Ferguson said:


> If this is the case, then all they had to do was say that legatos are coming in a separate update (paid or un-paid) so we understand what the intentions are. The thing I don't accept is that these separate £49 expansions are filling in the same job as the legatos with the main library considering they are different recordings and don't integrate into the main library fully. If we are really going to get a series of these for every section (from the main library) it just doesn't seem economical (from both the time needed to record them, and to money needed the purchase them) considering there will be so much overlap between the main library and the expansions. If I was an AROOF owner I would be quite perplexed by that idea!


I mean who knows. They integrate well enough, or maybe you mean they don’t go into the same section in the Spitfire Player. Well they are somewhat different orchestrations, so it’s fine with me that they are in separate Sections of the player since they are destined for different tracks. I think you can look at the orchestra part of Albion One and get a good idea what AROOF and its expansions will look like when it’s done.

AROOF itself seems like it’s designed both to be the center of a standalone production library with the expansions and to serve as an ensemble version of the new modular library. So you can add the flutes say, when the solo flute and ensemble flutes module of the modular library is ready. Which is sort of how BML worked with Albion 1 back in the day when SSO was first being released. Also price: AROOF and its expansions will likely be bundled at around $750. The modular library I’m guessing will be at least $2500, probably more. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s quite a bit more.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

dzilizzi said:


> This is what I was going to say again. I think most of us are really waiting for the modular library, which will unfortunately be delayed until they either figure out a way to get around the very acceptable COVID provisions, or everyone gets vaccinated (as much as people are able)
> 
> AROF is for media composers. They don't pretend it is for anyone else. They are media composers. Christian has already used it in one of his current productions. It is not meant to be a full out library. Just give some color in a very quick way to productions for TV shows, commercials, trailers, etc.... Very much like an updated Symphobia in a new room.


Exactly. Or for pop producers that want to add some orchestral colors. Or, in terms of the selections, great additions when you want to achieve a very specific sound quickly (and tonally better given it is recorded together for that purpose). There was a post earlier comparing legendary low strings vs. layering basses and cellos from CSS - and there is a massive difference.

Paul and Christian know who their audience is (much broader than Vi-C), know what they are doing (they've been sampling for well over 15 years, while most people here haven't sampled an egg shaker let alone an orchestra), and know more about their upcoming roadmap than anybody here does. They also happen to be working composers, so it always amuses me when somebody implies they can't possibly write music with how the library exists today. The demos say otherwise.

Recently, it feels like we have some visitors that got lost on their way to KvR...


----------



## dzilizzi

ALittleNightMusic said:


> while most people here haven't sampled an egg shaker let alone an orchestra


Hey! At least I bought the egg shaker.


----------



## DovesGoWest

dzilizzi said:


> This is what I was going to say again. I think most of us are really waiting for the modular library, which will unfortunately be delayed until they either figure out a way to get around the very acceptable COVID provisions, or everyone gets vaccinated (as much as people are able)
> 
> AROF is for media composers. They don't pretend it is for anyone else. They are media composers. Christian has already used it in one of his current productions. It is not meant to be a full out library. Just give some color in a very quick way to productions for TV shows, commercials, trailers, etc.... Very much like an updated Symphobia in a new room.


I get that and agree completely so why bang on about the abbey road one sound and also have the expense/premium/license that will cost as the AR sound will be lost in media work


----------



## ism

DovesGoWest said:


> I get that and agree completely so why bang on about the abbey road one sound and also have the expense/premium/license that will cost as the AR sound will be lost in media work


Only if you mix badly.


----------



## DovesGoWest

ism said:


> Only if you mix badly.


Lol I know what you mean but on the flip I could take something recorded at Sony MGM and mix it using the right impulse response verb and that will sound like AR


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> I mean who knows. They integrate well enough, or maybe you mean they don’t go into the same section in the Spitfire Player. Well they are somewhat different orchestrations, so it’s fine with me that they are in separate Sections of the player since they are destined for different tracks. I think you can look at the orchestra part of Albion One and get a good idea what AROOF and its expansions will look like when it’s done.
> 
> AROOF itself seems like it’s designed both to be the center of a standalone production library with the expansions and to serve as an ensemble version of the new modular library. So you can add the flutes say, when the solo flute and ensemble flutes module of the modular library is ready. Which is sort of how BML worked with Albion 1 back in the day when SSO was first being released. Also price: AROOF and its expansions will likely be bundled at around $750. The modular library I’m guessing will be at least $2500, probably more. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s quite a bit more.


Yes, I meant that they are different orchestrations and aren't the same as the sections in the main library, so it doesn't make sense for them to be thought of as legato versions of anything in the main library (like people seem to be thinking of them as).

I guess I'm starting to get my head around the way this library (AROOF main) is being poised on the market, though I just see adding these selections instead of adding to the main library as a missed opportunity to make the main library more than just some 'colours' or 'tools' that has to have lots of work done by the composer to fill in the holes it's missing (either with these expansions or other libraries). I can see the potential logic, though I don't agree with it.

(BTW, again, I'm not saying these selections shouldn't be happening, they are awesome in their own right and I'm certain to keep on buying more as they come out. I'm only talking about them in the context of being _instead _of rounding off the main library)

But I've said my thing, people seem to be happy with it in it's current form and don't find issue with this model so what I can say that I haven't already. I'm just going to end up skipping out on this library even though it seems like it would be so easy to improve it with no more effort or cost (much less, in my mind) than via these expansions.


----------



## ism

DovesGoWest said:


> Lol I know what you mean but on the flip I could take something recorded at Sony MGM and mix it using the right impulse response verb and that will sound like AR


That is truly superhuman mixing skills you're describing there.


----------



## dzilizzi

DovesGoWest said:


> Lol I know what you mean but on the flip I could take something recorded at Sony MGM and mix it using the right impulse response verb and that will sound like AR


So, go hang around the Cinesamples thread. I'm sure there is one. 

Move along, these are not the droids, um I mean this is not the library you are looking for......

Sorry, I have been reading so many repetitive complaints here, on the EW thread, and on the MSS thread. The repetition of complaints gets tiring. Repeating it will not change what it is. Arguing that it isn't what you want won't make it what you want. And if CSS is the perfect library, stop looking at others and be happy with it. 

Sorry. I think I hit my limit. I think I will go hang out in the bassoon thread for a while.


----------



## ism

dzilizzi said:


> So, go hang around the Cinesamples thread. I'm sure there is one.
> 
> Move along, these are not the droids, um I mean this is not the library you are looking for......
> 
> Sorry, I have been reading so many repetitive complaints here, on the EW thread, and on the MSS thread. The repetition of complaints gets tiring. Repeating it will not change what it is. Arguing that it isn't what you want won't make it what you want. And if CSS is the perfect library, stop looking at others and be happy with it.
> 
> Sorry. I think I hit my limit. I think I will go hang out in the bassoon thread for a while.


The Bassoon thread really is quite good, isn't it.


----------



## VSriHarsha

dzilizzi said:


> So, go hang around the Cinesamples thread. I'm sure there is one.
> 
> Move along, these are not the droids, um I mean this is not the library you are looking for......
> 
> Sorry, I have been reading so many repetitive complaints here, on the EW thread, and on the MSS thread. The repetition of complaints gets tiring. Repeating it will not change what it is. Arguing that it isn't what you want won't make it what you want. And if CSS is the perfect library, stop looking at others and be happy with it.
> 
> Sorry. I think I hit my limit. I think I will go hang out in the bassoon thread for a while.


You're right! @dzilizzi . You gotta move on. If the library is not working as the way you want, yes, you can't complain about it. Well, not multiple times. It is what it is & it can't be changed in big way. And that's the beauty of it. It's like Time. You like Cinesamples, go with it. Nobody's objecting @DovesGoWest . No damn freakin' library IS perfect. You just have to deal with, in every possible way you can & I am sure you can. 

Yea, I see the Bassoon thread is quite soothe & smart @dzilizzi . Go ahead!

I know & understand there are things(well, complaints)which are getting old & old. Here's _a _ @dzilizzi .


----------



## Flyo

Ok. I have to say... i paid 350usd full. I read the articulation list before i click buy, nobody put me in the situation to force muy purchase. In my case i don’t have another orchestra Library like this, so i think i will find my way to orchestrate with it right out of the box without having others tools like this. My “complaint” or asking or petition emerges from not having the same articulations across the sections. That it’s the most weird thing about this amazing Library and of course as a costumer user i will prevail to ask if there will be Updates to Foundation, first for complete my compositions with same orchestra, players and acoustic space... in this case the Abbey Road Studios. And the other thing that push me to my normal petitions as that this Library have the potential to be the most prolific Ensamble Orchestra ever sampled for an audio sample library.... so whithout a doubt, having users requesting all the missing articulations are a really good thing to all. Or almost all... 🤙🏽


----------



## Alex Fraser

jbuhler said:


> AROOF itself seems like it’s designed both to be the center of a standalone production library with the expansions and to serve as an ensemble version of the new modular library. So you can add the flutes say, when the solo flute and ensemble flutes module of the modular library is ready. Which is sort of how BML worked with Albion 1 back in the day when SSO was first being released. Also price: AROOF and its expansions will likely be bundled at around $750. The modular library I’m guessing will be at least $2500, probably more. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s quite a bit more.


I reckon you're on the right lines there.
I know some wise forum folk who are already saving for the modular stuff on the basis the price tag will get the forum popcorn flowing and much throwing of toys from prams.

Of equal interest to me is what will happen to SSO. That's gotta be a product line being squeezed from multiple sides by BBCSO and now Abbey Road.


----------



## Flyo

This amazing Library it’s crying asking them why they leave Legato Standard, Marcato, Staccato Standard , Swells (where are on Strings?) Tenuto (where are on LowWoods?)... it’s a rare case here where from section to section are not entire equal across the sections. Bring that missing audios to the FOUNDATION of Spitfire and Abbey Road... 🧡 Bring us the Love that so many are missing. 🙏🏽


----------



## CT

I wish Spitfire would release the badly needed missing content for AROOF. I will not buy it before then. Any information about this?


----------



## styledelk

People seem to want this to fit in a standard box of expectations.


----------



## muziksculp

styledelk said:


> People seem to want this to fit in a standard box of expectations.


People are tired of bad decisions by sample library developers.


----------



## muziksculp

Mike T said:


> I wish Spitfire would release the badly needed missing content for AROOF. I will not buy it before then. Any information about this?


Same decision here, I'm not buying AR-1 or any of its expansions, until some of the more important missing parts are available.


----------



## Flyo

If you look everywhere else you will find that almost if not all ensambles libraries have the same (less or more) articulations on every section. So it’s a Standard request of course. This library deserves the most common arts sounds of every orchestra, but this in particular even more! Sound lovely and cohesive. I will just keep hoping they realize that this library deserves all the missing Love in Foundations.


----------



## CT

I hope it's plain that my prior post was a satirical jab at the repeated complaints over the last several pages of this thread (and others)....


----------



## Flyo

Someone know all the range of the Selection Sparkling Woodwinds? I see 2 octaves... so if this was recorded on 8ves will keep the Piccolo on it?


----------



## dzilizzi

Flyo said:


> Ok. I have to say... i paid 350usd full. I read the articulation list before i click buy, nobody put me in the situation to force muy purchase. In my case i don’t have another orchestra Library like this, so i think i will find my way to orchestrate with it right out of the box without having others tools like this. My “complaint” or asking or petition emerges from not having the same articulations across the sections. That it’s the most weird thing about this amazing Library and of course as a costumer user i will prevail to ask if there will be Updates to Foundation, first for complete my compositions with same orchestra, players and acoustic space... in this case the Abbey Road Studios. And the other thing that push me to my normal petitions as that this Library have the potential to be the most prolific Ensamble Orchestra ever sampled for an audio sample library.... so whithout a doubt, having users requesting all the missing articulations are a really good thing to all. Or almost all... 🤙🏽


So you are complaining without reading the thread or even the last few pages? This will never be what you want. It isn't meant to be. The modular orchestra will likely be and this will go well with it.  

I recommend getting BBCSO Discover for free (you just have to wait 14 days or less.) It is a similar room and should blend well. There should be enough articulations to get you started.


----------



## Flyo

dzilizzi said:


> So you are complaining without reading the thread or even the last few pages? This will never be what you want. It isn't meant to be. The modular orchestra will likely be and this will go well with it.
> 
> I recommend getting BBCSO Discover for free (you just have to wait 14 days or less.) It is a similar room and should blend well. There should be enough articulations to get you started.


I read it before I buy it as I say before, and even see all the videos and all. The modular will be awesome in his own way, but this it’s a long term goal and even more expensive assume, even more in this situation. I’m need one very good ensamble orchestra, and they nailed it! with all this dynamic layers, and cohesive sound. This is it! The main petition it’s that so many of the users composers need the most normal articulations referred here. If they bring us the complete ensamble orchestra it will be great for all, them and us... don’t you think? 🙏🏽


----------



## Flyo

I realize that i purchase this amazing library with the announcement and searching of a really cohesive sound of a good Ensamble Orchestra Library, then knowing that there was partial presented or recorded, and not equal distributed across all the sections. I’m afraid that it’s my fault, this it’s what a few people want to read from a new vi control user. I admire Spitfire Audio team and what achieve with this incomplete sample audio library. Here I’m just a composer hoping to have the same arts on every section at least. Love🧡


----------



## VSriHarsha

dzilizzi said:


> I recommend getting BBCSO Discover for free (you just have to wait 14 days or less.) It is a similar room and should blend well. There should be enough articulations to get you started.


Yea, BBCSO Discover is really worth, even with the given basic articulations, yes. And I found out that you can actually fake the legato of celli, with the given sustain articulation, using just the knobs to tweak a little.
Oh I also like the sound of the French Horns.
I really like that library, for the price point ($49/Free).


----------



## mussnig

VSriHarsha said:


> Yea, BBCSO Discover is really worth, even with the given basic articulations, yes. And I found out that you can actually fake the legato of celli, with the given sustain articulation, using just the knobs to tweak a little.
> Oh I also like the sound of the French Horns.
> I really like that library, for the price point ($49/Free).


You can also load a template for BBCSO Core (or even Pro) and then BBCSO Discover will use some sort of approximation of Legato (obviously it won't suddenly have Legato transitions but the Plugin will try to emulate the missing articulations which are available in the higher versions but not in Discover). I didn't try this personally, but in case you want to use a fake Legato with BBSCO Discover it's for sure worth a shot (and then you should obviously compare it to your own fake Legato).


----------



## Flyo

BBC Discover it’s relatively good for the price or free. The Abbey Road, have another approach and cost 350usd on intro price. it’s a Ensamble Orchestra, and that’s a lot of us want and need. I go for the AROF just one month before BBC Pro go on sale. But again it’s a complete different kind of Library. What a lot of us need with AROF it’s consistent of same articulations across all the sections at least. That’s all. The added pallets with Selections are a very very welcome of special recordings.


----------



## dzilizzi

Flyo said:


> BBC Discover it’s relatively good for the price or free. The Abbey Road, have another approach and cost 350usd on intro price. it’s a Ensamble Orchestra, and that’s a lot of us want and need. I go for the AROF just one month before BBC Pro go on sale. But again it’s a complete different kind of Library. What a lot of us need with AROF it’s consistent of same articulations across all the sections at least. That’s all. The added pallets with Selections are a very very welcome of special recordings.


I don't think you are listening. *AROF will not ever be what you are wanting*. It may come close. When I bought AROF, I knew exactly what I was getting and that, on its own, it really wasn't what I wanted. I too want articulations and legato. But I also trusted Paul & Christian when they said they are planning on making a full orchestra, which is what I do want. It just won't be here for a couple more years with the COVID delays. 

AROF does blend well with other libraries in rooms of similar size (Maida Vale, Teldex, Sony) Which is why I recommended getting Discover to give you the articulations you might feel are missing at the moment. Before you buy anything else, you may want to ask about sales. Spitfire does have regular sales, as well as surprise ones. But you can pretty much guarantee that after a library has been out a year, it will be 40% off at the next Christmas sale.


----------



## Flyo

dzilizzi said:


> I don't think you are listening. *AROF will not ever be what you are wanting*. It may come close. When I bought AROF, I knew exactly what I was getting and that, on its own, it really wasn't what I wanted. I too want articulations and legato. But I also trusted Paul & Christian when they said they are planning on making a full orchestra, which is what I do want. It just won't be here for a couple more years with the COVID delays.
> 
> AROF does blend well with other libraries in rooms of similar size (Maida Vale, Teldex, Sony) Which is why I recommended getting Discover to give you the articulations you might feel are missing at the moment. Before you buy anything else, you may want to ask about sales. Spitfire does have regular sales, as well as surprise ones. But you can pretty much guarantee that after a library has been out a year, it will be 40% off at the next Christmas sale.


Why i do need another orchestra. Based on your opinion there it’s no need to add selections for the start so. Also I contacted spitfire and they told me that for example they recorded Swell on Strings section but they don’t like the sound of it at the time, so they don’t release it for now. As a user this offer a “complete” orchestra. But again I was always referring as a ENSAMBLE. That it’s what it is... a wonderfully recorded orchestra, in this case as an Ensamble format, so why cannot have the same articulations presented in brass or wood in Strings? Or having Legato without 8ves like many others Ensamble Librarys. Maybe they will come up with an update as other users want.


----------



## dzilizzi

Flyo said:


> Why i do need another orchestra. Based on your opinion there it’s no need to add selections for the start so. Also I contacted spitfire and they told me that for example they recorded Swell on Strings section but they don’t like the sound of it at the time, so they don’t release it for now. As a user this offer a “complete” orchestra. But again I was always referring as a ENSAMBLE. That it’s what it is... a wonderfully recorded orchestra, in this case as an Ensamble format, so why cannot have the same articulations presented in brass or wood in Strings? Or having Legato without 8ves like many others Ensamble Librarys. Maybe they will come up with an update as other users want.


You keep calling it "complete" and appear to expect it to have everything. BBCSO is a "complete" orchestra. AROF is not a "complete" orchestra and may never be, even with all the expansions. It was never supposed to be "complete".

I also never said there is no need to add sections. I don't know where you got this.


----------



## Flyo

dzilizzi said:


> You keep calling it "complete" and appear to expect it to have everything. BBCSO is a "complete" orchestra. AROF is not a "complete" orchestra and may never be, even with all the expansions. It was never supposed to be "complete".
> 
> I also never said there is no need to add sections. I don't know where you got this.


Same again. This it’s an Ensamble Orchestra. It is a bad thing asking them if they will bring same arts in what it’s already presented? Again if you have Marcato and Swells on Brass and Woods why can’t we all have on Strings? Tenuto only on Hi Woods? It’s clearly that there it’s an omission sounds here and there, that always mean to be there... I guess I’m wrong it’s a Incomplete Ensamble Orchestra then.


----------



## ridgero

Love the Legendary Strings


----------



## dcoscina

I was testing some Macro Music creation features today in Studio One v5.1 and happened to be using AROOF. Dang the sound is just killer.. I cannot get over it.


----------



## muziksculp

dcoscina said:


> I was testing some Macro Music creation features today in Studio One v5.1 and happened to be using AROOF. Dang the sound is just killer.. I cannot get over it.


Hi @dcoscina ,

Sounds amazing ! Thanks for sharing. 

I Love the AR-1 Brass sounds. I think they are the stars of this library. 

I'm glad you are enjoying Studio One Pro 5.1 . Which Macro/s of S1 5.1 are you using here ? 

I'm looking forward to purchase AR-1 once they have the Mid-High Strings Legato expansion released. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## icecoolpool

dcoscina said:


> I was testing some Macro Music creation features today in Studio One v5.1 and happened to be using AROOF. Dang the sound is just killer.. I cannot get over it.


Sounds great, just ridiculous. Based solely on demos, I´ve yet to hear a library that´s comparable. What mic settings were you using?


----------



## dcoscina

muziksculp said:


> Hi @dcoscina ,
> 
> Sounds amazing ! Thanks for sharing.
> 
> I Love the AR-1 Brass sounds. I think they are the stars of this library.
> 
> I'm glad you are enjoying Studio One Pro 5.1 . Which Macro/s of S1 5.1 are you using here ?
> 
> I'm looking forward to purchase AR-1 once they have the Mid-High Strings Legato expansion released.
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


I used a lot of the Music Creation macros. Like inverting the chords (I began with the horns in step time then messed around with note lengths, took the top note off and transferred to the trumpets, took the low notes off and moved to Low Strings (not legendary, their spicc seemed too laggy).. But man does this library blend well. I almost think that once their modular big library is out, I will be able to chuck every other orchestral library and just work with that. Dare to dream...


----------



## dcoscina

icecoolpool said:


> Sounds great, just ridiculous. Based solely on demos, I´ve yet to hear a library that´s comparable. What mic settings were you using?


Just Mix 1. Sometimes I will used Mix 2 for the strings because it seems a little more detailed for the shorts.


----------



## muziksculp

dcoscina said:


> I used a lot of the Music Creation macros. Like inverting the chords (I began with the horns in step time then messed around with note lengths, took the top note off and transferred to the trumpets, took the low notes off and moved to Low Strings (not legendary, their spicc seemed too laggy).. But man does this library blend well. I almost think that once their modular big library is out, I will be able to chuck every other orchestral library and just work with that. Dare to dream...


Thanks so much.

Yes, the Music Creation Macros in S1 are great to experiment with. You can also try the humanization features for fun.

I agree regarding their AR-Modular Orch. Library, I wish the AR-1 Modular Orch. Library was all available today, but it's not, so we just have to wait. I'm sure it will be their best sounding orchestral library once it's all done. I'm also guessing it will come at a cost that's relative to its quality.


----------



## jbuhler

dcoscina said:


> I was testing some Macro Music creation features today in Studio One v5.1 and happened to be using AROOF. Dang the sound is just killer.. I cannot get over it.


It’s true. I haven’t had so much fun just messing around with a sample library in a long time, and it makes me a bit sorry I didn’t pick this up on release. It’s also got me back on my minimal template kick where I work towards a basic template that is as small as possible (while still giving me the coverage of the orchestra I want).


----------



## dcoscina

jbuhler said:


> It’s true. I haven’t had so much fun just messing around with a sample library in a long time, and it makes me a bit sorry I didn’t pick this up on release. It’s also got me back on my minimal template kick where I work towards a basic template that is as small as possible (while still giving me the coverage of the orchestra I want).


I have found mixing BBCSO isn't too bad with AROOF for the time being.


----------



## prodigalson

Tom Ferguson said:


> I just think they've decided that the legatos in the main library weren't necessary or important, which is something which, in my opinion, isn't true, and hope that by speaking up as a potential customer might have a chance of changing their mind, if they are inclined to agree or see our point of view (or see that they might be loosing out of purchases due to this).



Of course, voice your opinion. But I disagree that that they think legato isn't necessary or important. In fact, I'm pretty sure the plan was always to have legato, they've just decided to add it in very specific ways at additional cost. That may be unpalatable to many but voicing your opinion isn't going to change what was likely always a conscious business decision. If you disagree then wait until 2023 for the modular orchestra, but, in my opinion voicing your opinion to change their mind is a waste of (digital) breath.


ism said:


> This strikes me as a fundamental mis-theorization of marketing happy talk at its foundations .


stating that something has a fundamental characteristic at its foundations strikes me as being redundant and overly rhetorical.


----------



## ism

prodigalson said:


> stating that something has a fundamental characteristic at its foundations strikes me as being redundant and overly rhetorical.


Fetishizing even, one might say. Determined to find an absolute truth where there simply isn't one.


----------



## jbuhler

dcoscina said:


> I have found mixing BBCSO isn't too bad with AROOF for the time being.


I’ve liked it with SSO too. And BSS. And the SF harp. It didn’t take well to my JXL trombone though. Not at all. That surprised me.


----------



## VSriHarsha

mussnig said:


> You can also load a template for BBCSO Core (or even Pro) and then BBCSO Discover will use some sort of approximation of Legato (obviously it won't suddenly have Legato transitions but the Plugin will try to emulate the missing articulations which are available in the higher versions but not in Discover). I didn't try this personally, but in case you want to use a fake Legato with BBSCO Discover it's for sure worth a shot (and then you should obviously compare it to your own fake Legato).


Thanks @dzilizzi @mussnig.

I am sorry I never used a Spitfire Template is it available for free or you gotta pay for it?
If I download the BBCSO Core’s template, will it work, even if I don’t own the Core?

I am totally new to their templates but if I create a project with the Core template, is it possible to delete the tracks I don’t need in the template, for the project & still save that original downloaded Core template for another new project may be? Am I making sense or maybe confused?


----------



## mussnig

VSriHarsha said:


> Thanks @dzilizzi @mussnig.
> 
> I am sorry I never used a Spitfire Template is it available for free or you gotta pay for it?
> If I download the BBCSO Core’s template, will it work, even if I don’t own the Core?
> 
> I am totally new to their templates but if I create a project with the Core template, is it possible to delete the tracks I don’t need in the template, for the project & still save that original downloaded Core template for another new project may be? Am I making sense or maybe confused?


You can find them (for free) here:





Templates — THE PAGE







www.spitfireaudiothepage.com





And yes, you can use a Core or Pro template, even if you just have Discover. This is called Mode Switching - the Plugin will try to emulate the extra sounds and articulations from the higher versions. Obviously, it usually doesn't make a lot of sense to use a Core template if you are going to use it with Discover only, but you can use the templates to get access to a Legato emulation in Discover (but I don't know how well it's going to work - I was just suggesting it for you to try). Also, it's not a problem to further modify these templates to your needs.


----------



## AudioLoco

I consider AROOF to be the best shorts library on the planet.

Once, as a user, I realized that, I started to enjoy this library after using basically only the percussion for months in frustration.
With proper legato and a few missing articulations this could have been "the definitive library of the universe" to send on probes to distant alien civilizations as proof of our specie's greatness. 

But at the moment it's just an amazing short library. 
I will personally take it for what it is, and hope they gradually release great "legatoed" instruments such as Legendary Low Strings to make it fully featured. 
I shall use it in conjunction with other libraries, so, nothing new here...

I still don't understand the decision not to go the Symphonic Series route and provide all what is needed to write music.


----------



## Alex Fraser

AudioLoco said:


> I still don't understand the decision not to go the Symphonic Series route and provide all what is needed to write music.


There's actually an answer to this, as I understand it.
The "modular orchestra" is a long term (years!) work in progress, not helped by covid restrictions on recording. AROOF is kind of like the first step and a way to get the sounds of AR to customers sooner rather than later.

P&C explain this better and in more detail in the launch video for the 2 expansions. It's worth a watch if you want to know more about the long term Abbey Road project.


----------



## Simon Ravn

A bit OT:

Anyone knows what keyboard + fader-controller Paul Thomson uses in his demos?


----------



## Stevie

Could be a Viscount Physis.
https://www.viscountinstruments.com/instrument/physis-piano-k4-ex-2/


----------



## dcoscina

Simon Ravn said:


> A bit OT:
> 
> Anyone knows what keyboard + fader-controller Paul Thomson uses in his demos?


https://www.viscountinstruments.com/instrument/physis-piano-k4/


----------



## dcoscina

Stevie said:


> Could be a Viscount Physis.
> https://www.viscountinstruments.com/instrument/physis-piano-k4-ex-2/


It is.  
ive tried one before since the store I work at has them. The weighted action is weird actually. Something about the throw is “off” but hey, it’s got tons of sliders which is nice. But it ain’t cheap.


----------



## Stevie

dcoscina said:


> It is.
> ive tried one before since the store I work at has them. The weighted action is weird actually. Something about the throw is “off” but hey, it’s got tons of sliders which is nice. But it ain’t cheap.


The perfect keyboard has yet to be built 😂
I gave up and will just keep my crappy NI S88.


----------



## ridgero

AudioLoco said:


> I still don't understand the decision not to go the Symphonic Series route and provide all what is needed to write music.


That is the business plan.

If the Modular / Symphonic Abbey Road Orchestra appeared first, many of those buyers would not buy an Abbey Road ONE.

The paradox is that buyers of Abbey Road ONE + Expansions already know they are buying the Modular Orchestra anyway.


----------



## jbuhler

ridgero said:


> That is the business plan.
> 
> If the Modular / Symphonic Abbey Road Orchestra appeared first, many of those buyers would not buy an Abbey Road ONE.
> 
> The paradox is that buyers of Abbey Road ONE + Expansions already know they are buying the Modular Orchestra anyway.


The modular orchestra takes much more time to produce. The ensemble also has a utility apart from the modular orchestra, and if implemented correctly the modular orchestra will plug into AROOF and so make all those early modules a bit more useful. So there's not really a paradox here at all.


----------



## dcoscina

Stevie said:


> The perfect keyboard has yet to be built 😂
> I gave up and will just keep my crappy NI S88.


I really like my Kurzweil PC3x. It’s over 10 years old and I got it used back in 2010.


----------



## ridgero

jbuhler said:


> The modular orchestra takes much more time to produce. The ensemble also has a utility apart from the modular orchestra, and if implemented correctly the modular orchestra will plug into AROOF and so make all those early modules a bit more useful. So there's not really a paradox here at all.


Sure, its a win win situation. I don't blame them. I'm one of those who buy AROOF & Modular


----------



## Alex Fraser

Yeah, best of all worlds. Ensemble or modular. Pick the tool for the job.

Mouth watering, really. Exciting times ahead folks. This is a golden age of sampling. Abbey fu**ing Road!


----------



## Stevie

dcoscina said:


> I really like my Kurzweil PC3x. It’s over 10 years old and I got it used back in 2010.


I guess the issue is getting one in a very good condition, right now. 
I'm such a Monk when it comes to mint condition gear.


Sorry, totally derailing this thread, but if anyone cares: i got AROOF, too


----------



## dcoscina

The sound of AROOF reminds me of the classic Horner scores from the 80s like Aliens and Willow. The sound is phenomenal. The shorts right now are just unbeatable. The legendary low string legatos are gorgeous. I do like Sparkling Winds but I wish their range was a touch broader... but I'm just loving this direction SFA is heading in.


----------



## Stevie

I'm wondering if one needs the Legendary Low Strings, if one got Albion 3. 
The sound is very similar to me (of course, the room is different).


----------



## dcoscina

Stevie said:


> I'm wondering if one needs the Legendary Low Strings, if one got Albion 3.
> The sound is very similar to me (of course, the room is different).


I think LLS sound better than Iceni


----------



## VSriHarsha

Thanks @dzilizzi!


----------



## VSriHarsha

Thanks @mussnig. I’ll check it & see, work with it.


----------



## scoringdreams

dcoscina said:


> I think LLS sound better than Iceni


Totally agree, Legendary Low Strings sounds much more refined.



Stevie said:


> I'm wondering if one needs the Legendary Low Strings, if one got Albion 3.
> The sound is very similar to me (of course, the room is different).


I think it's another type of low strings sound, which has more depth in my opinion. There's also Albion ONE's low strings which do a pretty good job as well!


----------



## Flyo

Question... someone knows if the Sparkling Woodwinds Selection was recorded specially in octaves as the Legendary Low Strings? or a sum, overlay of 2 octaves of the Woodwinds that we already have in Foundations?


----------



## ridgero

Recorded specially in octaves


----------



## Paul Cardon

scoringdreams said:


> AR1 has essentially been Albion on steroids for me!
> 
> Does anyone have tips on blending Cinematic Studio Strings / Woods / Brass with AR1?
> 
> So far, I have faced success blending AR1 against the main Spitfire libraries, but when trying to pair with CSS for instance, I find the strings in CSS to be a little dark compared to the airy and silky strings of AR1. I don't think it's a reverb issue, but more of a tonal (bright/dark) issue?
> 
> Any tips?


*SORRY TO DERAIL IN ADVANCE, BUT:*

I sloppily matched CSS to SCS and SSS ages ago and haven't tweaked it much since. My current method is an absolutely *stupid* EQ curve that looks like this:





Plus a bit of stereo widening with a basic M/S balance control, and a few layers of reverb to push the result into a bigger space.

I avoid the mix mic and instead use a balance of the close and tree, avoiding the room mics entirely. The darkness and muddiness and shallowness of CSS is almost all because of Trackdown Studios, and the huge EQ scoop is doing a lot to counteract that, instead filling the body back in with smart reverb choices, specifically SP2016 tuned very tight for some diffusion, any of the EW Spaces "Stages" IRs as the main room, and some lexicon Hall for a bit of razzle dazzle tail.

You can do similar things for the other libraries in the Cinematic Studio lineup, but with different EQ curves. Generally, I don't need to cut too much of CSW as woodwinds can be alright with a bit of mid-heaviness, but my reverb setup remains the same.

CSS Dry:

View attachment compprog - CSS dry.mp3


CSS Mix (ignore the little bit of blackhole verb on the very end):

View attachment compprog - CSS mix.mp3


----------



## Flyo

Spitfire just gave me today another reason to keep on asking and wishing Standard Legato across all the Foundation in a great teaching recent video... and of course all the missed Arts.


----------



## muziksculp

AR-1 Foundations users, do you like, and use the sustained strings of the library ? or are you using other libraries for the strings ? 

Thanks.


----------



## styledelk

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 Foundations users, do you like, and use the sustained strings of the library ? or are you using other libraries for the strings ?
> 
> Thanks.


I’m using them. Despite not having legato, they sound beautiful and you can make them work fine.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 Foundations users, do you like, and use the sustained strings of the library ? or are you using other libraries for the strings ?
> 
> Thanks.


I'm using them and rather like them for writing. Hardly miss the legato. If anything, they are more lacking in shorts than the legatos. When I decide I need the legato I'm currently using BSS, and to layer not to replace.


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> I'm using them and rather like them for writing. Hardly miss the legato. If anything, they are more lacking in shorts than the legatos. When I decide I need the legato I'm currently using BSS, and to layer not to replace.


Hi @jbuhler ,

Thanks for your helpful feedback. 

I have decided to go ahead, with adding AR-1 Foundations, and Legendary Low-Strings. 

I'm not impressed with the Sparkling Woodwinds expansion. Hopefully they will add the Legato, and more shorts for the Mid-High Strings. Those would be a big improvement I think. 

Do you use the BBCSO ? I'm guessing it will also be a good library to mix with AR-1. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## DovesGoWest

muziksculp said:


> Hi @jbuhler ,
> 
> Thanks for your helpful feedback.
> 
> I have decided to go ahead, with adding AR-1 Foundations, and Legendary Low-Strings.
> 
> I'm not impressed with the Sparkling Woodwinds expansion. Hopefully they will add the Legato, and more shorts for the Mid-High Strings. Those would be a big improvement I think.
> 
> Do you use the BBCSO ? I'm guessing it will also be a good library to mix with AR-1.
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


You can guarantee that anything new added is going to cost you £€$50 whether it’s articulations or combinations etc

I still don’t get all those saying how great ARO sounds buts it’s missing xyz so they add all these other libraries to make up for it. At which point your not listening to ARO, either use it as is and add nothing then you can say how great it sounds or add other libraries to it and accept it’s just an expensive basic ensemble right now


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Hi @jbuhler ,
> 
> Thanks for your helpful feedback.
> 
> I have decided to go ahead, with adding AR-1 Foundations, and Legendary Low-Strings.
> 
> I'm not impressed with the Sparkling Woodwinds expansion. Hopefully they will add the Legato, and more shorts for the Mid-High Strings. Those would be a big improvement I think.
> 
> Do you use the BBCSO ? I'm guessing it will also be a good library to mix with AR-1.
> 
> Cheers,
> Muziksculp


I don't have BBCSO. I do have SCS, SSS and HZS. I haven't tried SCS with ARO yet. The other two work well. BSS is not better than SSS or HZS in my limited testing, it just offers different possibilities, and ones I'm wanting to explore. 

Passing on Sparkling Woodwinds makes sense to me. SW is a bit better on runs but not that much better. And on everything else, including melodic work, I prefer the regular ARO woodwinds to SW. The missing upper octave on SW is a major omission for sparkly stuff.


----------



## AudioLoco

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 Foundations users, do you like, and use the sustained strings of the library ? or are you using other libraries for the strings ?
> 
> Thanks.


No, just the shorts and swells. Unfortunately.


----------



## muziksculp

DovesGoWest said:


> You can guarantee that anything new added is going to cost you £€$50 whether it’s articulations or combinations etc
> 
> I still don’t get all those saying how great ARO sounds buts it’s missing xyz so they add all these other libraries to make up for it. At which point your not listening to ARO, either use it as is and add nothing then you can say how great it sounds or add other libraries to it and accept it’s just an expensive basic ensemble right now


Yes, that does make sense, especially If one is after the AR-1 sound, then mixing in other libraries defeats the initial objective. I think it all depends on what one wants to achieve with AR-1.

I know SA will be adding more expansions to AR-1 Foundations, which is a good thing. especially if they provide a lot of quality content, for $50. an expansion. I really wish they had a mid-high Legato strings, that also offered more short string articulations. Also more perc. via expansions would be very nice.


----------



## muziksculp

styledelk said:


> I’m using them. Despite not having legato, they sound beautiful and you can make them work fine.


Thanks.


----------



## muziksculp

When do you think they will release the next expansion/s for AR-1 ? maybe this month ? or ... ?


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

muziksculp said:


> When do you think they will release the next expansion/s for AR-1 ? maybe this month ? or ... ?


Why don’t you email Spitfire to ask them (since only they know) and then let us know.


----------



## Paul Cardon

DovesGoWest said:


> You can guarantee that anything new added is going to cost you £€$50 whether it’s articulations or combinations etc
> 
> I still don’t get all those saying how great ARO sounds buts it’s missing xyz so they add all these other libraries to make up for it. At which point your not listening to ARO, either use it as is and add nothing then you can say how great it sounds or add other libraries to it and accept it’s just an expensive basic ensemble right now


I do think the price is pushing it just a bit, but it's not all the way out there. I have to disagree that mixing it with other libraries renders it moot. Not at all.

First off, having access to the library and all the mic positions gives incredible reference points to match to, both in tone and room. Way easier to find and arrive at an Abbey Road sound when mixing other libraries towards it, soloing mic positions and sections, A/Bing, etc.

Second, most of the people who do great mockups on professional projects are already doing a lot of mixing and matching. It has some great instrument performances in a great space, even if the articulation list is limited, so people will find use for it.

Third, every time this comes up, people love to distill libraries down to a few bullet points, like "oh it's just more strings but in a different room, more brass but in a different room", when in fact, it's actually:

- A new library with new musicians in a new session putting in unique performances
- A new (and expensive) room with a very sought after character
- A new mic setup configured and mixed down by a world-class engineer with tons of options but also great easy mixes
- A deeper set of dynamics layers and RRs than most of Spitfire's other work
- A new concerted effort at new programming and balancing

Which of those bullet points are worth it and which aren't? Depends on who you ask, but I think it's worth saying that most of those took a forward step from Spitfire's usual fare.

I've had it for a couple of months now and played with it a lot, and have been playing around with the two expansions recently, and now when I need a certain thing done that I know it can do, I reach for it, just like any other library, and I've been reaching for it often to fill in gaps or provide a good core layer or to put down some easy ensemble stuff that will sound good in the way that Abbey Road does straight out of the box. It just works, especially with the latest updates cleaning up some issues.

Of course, every library has its weaknesses. Of course, the prices of libraries are super unstable. So make your decisions and spend wisely, but "I don't get it" maybe means you need to think about why people might dig it, come in with a different perspective, that's all.

Is it a library everyone needs or one that everyone will love? Nah not at all. Does it bring something good to the table? Of course.


----------



## Nicolas Felix

Hey, Anyone know the delay on the Abbey Road Foundation library for short, marc, long, etc.. ? It's been a nightmare so far!


----------



## muziksculp

Nicolas Felix said:


> Hey, Anyone know the delay on the Abbey Road Foundation library for short, marc, long, etc.. ? It's been a nightmare so far!


Hmmm... Reading a post like this makes me think twice about buying AR-1 Foundations.

Is there a lot of delay when you play these articulations to be on the grid ?


----------



## Paul Cardon

Nicolas Felix said:


> Hey, Anyone know the delay on the Abbey Road Foundation library for short, marc, long, etc.. ? It's been a nightmare so far!


There's a "Tightness" control for shorts that defaults to a halfway position. It's worth playing with that to find a playability that works for you and setting your own track delays from there.


----------



## Nicolas Felix

muziksculp said:


> Hmmm... Reading a post like this makes me think twice about buying AR-1 Foundations.
> 
> Is there a lot of delay when you play these articulations to be on the grid ?


It's 60-80 ms but I can't find the perfect number. It doesn't matter really that it's a lot of delay while playing. I just input the delay in my DAW.


----------



## Nicolas Felix

Paul Cardon said:


> There's a "Tightness" control for shorts that defaults to a halfway position. It's worth playing with that to find a playability that works for you and setting your own track delays from there.


I know about that but it sounds fake when you use it. I'm using the library at 0% to have the most natural sound. That's why i need the real delay.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Hmmm... Reading a post like this makes me think twice about buying AR-1 Foundations.
> 
> Is there a lot of delay when you play these articulations to be on the grid ?


If you don’t have issues with other SF strings you won’t have issues with these. This aspect of SF has never been an issue for me, perhaps because of the kind of music I write. And I find ARO behaves as I expect it to behave. If SF’s other string libraries give you fits, ARO likely will as well. But I somehow think that if other SF libraries were giving you issues that severe you wouldn’t be looking at ARO.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Nicolas Felix said:


> I know about that but it sounds fake when you use it. I'm using the library at 0% to have the most natural sound. That's why i need the real delay.


Ah for sure, I normally leave it at the default 50% and my delay floats around 30-40 ms and I'll tweak it around occasionally depending on the cue I'm working on. 60-80 ms sounds about right for the 0% setting. I think leaving yourself open to tweaking it when needed is probably totally healthy as, like I've found myself, suitable track delays may change slightly depending on the context of a piece, and Spitfire has never had machine-gun accurate performances or editing, not to say it's bad. Only a few library devs can make that claim, and those libraries serve a different purpose, sound a different way. Real ensembles just don't play that tight, and Spitfire's made it clear that their focus is realistic performance over timing precision and perfection.

Also, different instruments may need different delays as the gap before the start of sound and the intent of a note varies, especially with an ensemble. You can generally cut percussion pretty damn close, and the percussion in ARO is indeed cut quite close. Strings have the most delay since bow strokes require larger movements while brass is a little tighter since pecks of air can be delivered a little more "on-demand". So play around with it.

ALSO also, I'd recommend just getting it close and then getting on to writing music. You'll be able to figure out the best delays in context better than you will sitting with your eyes against the grid and your ear against a metronome.


----------



## scoringdreams

Paul Cardon said:


> *SORRY TO DERAIL IN ADVANCE, BUT:*
> 
> I sloppily matched CSS to SCS and SSS ages ago and haven't tweaked it much since. My current method is an absolutely *stupid* EQ curve that looks like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus a bit of stereo widening with a basic M/S balance control, and a few layers of reverb to push the result into a bigger space.
> 
> I avoid the mix mic and instead use a balance of the close and tree, avoiding the room mics entirely. The darkness and muddiness and shallowness of CSS is almost all because of Trackdown Studios, and the huge EQ scoop is doing a lot to counteract that, instead filling the body back in with smart reverb choices, specifically SP2016 tuned very tight for some diffusion, any of the EW Spaces "Stages" IRs as the main room, and some lexicon Hall for a bit of razzle dazzle tail.
> 
> You can do similar things for the other libraries in the Cinematic Studio lineup, but with different EQ curves. Generally, I don't need to cut too much of CSW as woodwinds can be alright with a bit of mid-heaviness, but my reverb setup remains the same.
> 
> CSS Dry:
> 
> View attachment compprog - CSS dry.mp3
> 
> 
> CSS Mix (ignore the little bit of blackhole verb on the very end):
> 
> View attachment compprog - CSS mix.mp3


Thanks for replying to my post, I had since given up on trying to blend them. But I think I will give it a try over the weekends, using scoop surely helps them sit in the mix, but I feel that there needs to be some work done to give them more depth; the downsides of mixing libraries that naturally do not sound cohesive.


----------



## scoringdreams

muziksculp said:


> AR-1 Foundations users, do you like, and use the sustained strings of the library ? or are you using other libraries for the strings ?
> 
> Thanks.


Absolutely love them, I use them as a scoring pad before working on the individual sections using Spitfire Symphonic Strings. It's just a better alternative compared to Masse...


----------



## DovesGoWest

Paul Cardon said:


> I do think the price is pushing it just a bit, but it's not all the way out there. I have to disagree that mixing it with other libraries renders it moot. Not at all.
> 
> First off, having access to the library and all the mic positions gives incredible reference points to match to, both in tone and room. Way easier to find and arrive at an Abbey Road sound when mixing other libraries towards it, soloing mic positions and sections, A/Bing, etc.
> 
> Second, most of the people who do great mockups on professional projects are already doing a lot of mixing and matching. It has some great instrument performances in a great space, even if the articulation list is limited, so people will find use for it.
> 
> Third, every time this comes up, people love to distill libraries down to a few bullet points, like "oh it's just more strings but in a different room, more brass but in a different room", when in fact, it's actually:
> 
> - A new library with new musicians in a new session putting in unique performances
> - A new (and expensive) room with a very sought after character
> - A new mic setup configured and mixed down by a world-class engineer with tons of options but also great easy mixes
> - A deeper set of dynamics layers and RRs than most of Spitfire's other work
> - A new concerted effort at new programming and balancing
> 
> Which of those bullet points are worth it and which aren't? Depends on who you ask, but I think it's worth saying that most of those took a forward step from Spitfire's usual fare.
> 
> I've had it for a couple of months now and played with it a lot, and have been playing around with the two expansions recently, and now when I need a certain thing done that I know it can do, I reach for it, just like any other library, and I've been reaching for it often to fill in gaps or provide a good core layer or to put down some easy ensemble stuff that will sound good in the way that Abbey Road does straight out of the box. It just works, especially with the latest updates cleaning up some issues.
> 
> Of course, every library has its weaknesses. Of course, the prices of libraries are super unstable. So make your decisions and spend wisely, but "I don't get it" maybe means you need to think about why people might dig it, come in with a different perspective, that's all.
> 
> Is it a library everyone needs or one that everyone will love? Nah not at all. Does it bring something good to the table? Of course.


Can I just say Paul that is one of the best non confrontationally worded replies I have seen and out of respect to you I am not going to argue as I did agree with a lot of what you wrote

One of the things that makes the AR sound is not only the room but also the mixing process and equipment. Things like the j37, TG12345, plates, chamber etc. many of these I have the waves official plugins.

I wonder whether the samples and mix have gone through this process or have they been left raw. Certainly a lot of mix engineers talk about the AR sound is a lot down to the hardware used in the mix process, and how a lot was invented there back in the day


----------



## DovesGoWest

scoringdreams said:


> Absolutely love them, I use them as a scoring pad before working on the individual sections using Spitfire Symphonic Strings. It's just a better alternative compared to Masse...


So are you just using ARF as a sketching tool and doing real composition using other libraries


----------



## Paul Cardon

DovesGoWest said:


> Can I just say Paul that is one of the best non confrontationally worded replies I have seen and out of respect to you I am not going to argue as I did agree with a lot of what you wrote
> 
> One of the things that makes the AR sound is not only the room but also the mixing process and equipment. Things like the j37, TG12345, plates, chamber etc. many of these I have the waves official plugins.
> 
> I wonder whether the samples and mix have gone through this process or have they been left raw. Certainly a lot of mix engineers talk about the AR sound is a lot down to the hardware used in the mix process, and how a lot was invented there back in the day


This is an interesting thought! I generally try to avoid putting too much baring on equipment. Equipment becomes most "important" when it's used incorrectly, but most professional equipment, when used right, can give good results. The best equipment out there is more about the icing on top.

A space is different though. The wash of sound, the way early reflections combine with source, the resonant frequencies, the harshness of hard surfaces vs. soft, the mud of too much tail in the wrong frequency ranges. AIR is great and all but its tail is kind of outrageous, not just the tail but the low-mid resonances that muddy up some of the most important frequencies in the orchestra. AIR isn't bad, of course; great stuff gets recorded there and most of it sounds great, but Abbey Road's Studio One is this annoyingly accidental perfect balance of so many things. It sounds like movies without the resonant issues a lot of other scoring stages have. There's barely anything to fight in the mix.

Spitfire mentions that they did record through the TG12345, and it's likely that there is some EQing done to balance things just right, all that's cool, but the mic selection and placements were set up and mixed down by Simon Rhodes, a guy who engineers on tons of great-sounding scores, not Spitfire's usual Jake Jackson (not to say he's a bad engineer), and all that aside, no amount of processing and mic selection will make a dodgy room perfect (*cough cough* Trackdown *cough cough*).

Room and recording engineer, plus musicians and performances, are things you just can't really fake. You can do a lot of really cool trickery to get other dodgier-sounding libraries to shine, and people do, but it's a whole lot easier and attainable when things are good from the get-go. Our mockup experiences are so often about fixing problems every step of the way, so when nerds like me hear that libraries are being recorded in one of if not the dopest sounding scoring stages in the world with one of today's best recording engineers, it's hard not to gush a bit. And having the stuff they've put out so far, I'm even more excited.

A bit of a ramble, but that's where I'm at haha


----------



## muziksculp

scoringdreams said:


> Absolutely love them, I use them as a scoring pad before working on the individual sections using Spitfire Symphonic Strings. It's just a better alternative compared to Masse...


Thanks for the feedback.

I guess we are still far away from seeing a detailed AR Strings Expansion, or addition, or possibly we have to wait for the AR-Modular Strings, so, until that happens, we would have to use of another pro-strings library such as Spitfire's Symphonic Strings, which unfortunately does not have the AR characteristic sound.


----------



## Nicolas Felix

Paul Cardon said:


> Ah for sure, I normally leave it at the default 50% and my delay floats around 30-40 ms and I'll tweak it around occasionally depending on the cue I'm working on. 60-80 ms sounds about right for the 0% setting. I think leaving yourself open to tweaking it when needed is probably totally healthy as, like I've found myself, suitable track delays may change slightly depending on the context of a piece, and Spitfire has never had machine-gun accurate performances or editing, not to say it's bad. Only a few library devs can make that claim, and those libraries serve a different purpose, sound a different way. Real ensembles just don't play that tight, and Spitfire's made it clear that their focus is realistic performance over timing precision and perfection.
> 
> Also, different instruments may need different delays as the gap before the start of sound and the intent of a note varies, especially with an ensemble. You can generally cut percussion pretty damn close, and the percussion in ARO is indeed cut quite close. Strings have the most delay since bow strokes require larger movements while brass is a little tighter since pecks of air can be delivered a little more "on-demand". So play around with it.
> 
> ALSO also, I'd recommend just getting it close and then getting on to writing music. You'll be able to figure out the best delays in context better than you will sitting with your eyes against the grid and your ear against a metronome.


Thank you, that's helping! I wish Spitfire would release some infos for this. I'm writing some Disney Jass Music right now and it need to be real tight. The sound is amazing but programming it, is awful.


----------



## Nicolas Felix

Paul Cardon said:


> This is an interesting thought! I generally try to avoid putting too much baring on equipment. Equipment becomes most "important" when it's used incorrectly, but most professional equipment, when used right, can give good results. The best equipment out there is more about the icing on top.
> 
> A space is different though. The wash of sound, the way early reflections combine with source, the resonant frequencies, the harshness of hard surfaces vs. soft, the mud of too much tail in the wrong frequency ranges. AIR is great and all but its tail is kind of outrageous, not just the tail but the low-mid resonances that muddy up some of the most important frequencies in the orchestra. AIR isn't bad, of course; great stuff gets recorded there and most of it sounds great, but Abbey Road's Studio One is this annoyingly accidental perfect balance of so many things. It sounds like movies without the resonant issues a lot of other scoring stages have. There's barely anything to fight in the mix.
> 
> Spitfire mentions that they did record through the TG12345, and it's likely that there is some EQing done to balance things just right, all that's cool, but the mic selection and placements were set up and mixed down by Simon Rhodes, a guy who engineers on tons of great-sounding scores, not Spitfire's usual Jake Jackson (not to say he's a bad engineer), and all that aside, no amount of processing and mic selection will make a dodgy room perfect (*cough cough* Trackdown *cough cough*).
> 
> Room and recording engineer, plus musicians and performances, are things you just can't really fake. You can do a lot of really cool trickery to get other dodgier-sounding libraries to shine, and people do, but it's a whole lot easier and attainable when things are good from the get-go. Our mockup experiences are so often about fixing problems every step of the way, so when nerds like me hear that libraries are being recorded in one of if not the dopest sounding scoring stages in the world with one of today's best recording engineers, it's hard not to gush a bit. And having the stuff they've put out so far, I'm even more excited.
> 
> A bit of a ramble, but that's where I'm at haha


I agree that this library has a sound. And it comes a lot from the room. But it just brings so much life to my music. It's incredible. 

I had the same realization with Keyscape vs other piano libraries. Where the sound is so musical. It's hard to fake. There's an essence to it that brings musicality where other libraries just sound great.


----------



## iMovieShout

paulmatthew said:


> Doubtful. This was on the Foundations page : Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations is the first in a series of Film Scoring Selections recorded in Studio One. The next titles in this symphonic series will arrive early 2021. These will be smaller, more focused libraries inspired by classic films – offering pre-orchestrated instrument pairings and themes. Each of these Selections is designed to help you accomplish a simple task phenomenally well, such as creating achingly beautiful melodic low string lines with just one simple legato patch. They will work seamlessly alongside Orchestral Foundations as well as on their own.
> 
> Pre-orchestrated instrument pairings would most likely indicate no individual sections are coming but the addition of legato to certain "pairings".


Good to know and thanks for the insight. 
Pondering your point on the Abbey Road releases coming up, reminds me of VSL's Big Bang Orchestra where they have done just this, but better than Spitfire. BBO is a great library.
I just wish Spitfire would publish their product roadmap when they start out down a new path. It would then be actually possible to decide whether to take an interest and wait to invest and add to my template, or, to waste money during their introductory sales, or just ignore their releases for a couple of years until they move on to the next trendy product set - at least then I can decide if a product set is worthwhile - but I have to be very very patient.


----------



## DovesGoWest

Paul Cardon said:


> This is an interesting thought! I generally try to avoid putting too much baring on equipment. Equipment becomes most "important" when it's used incorrectly, but most professional equipment, when used right, can give good results. The best equipment out there is more about the icing on top.
> 
> A space is different though. The wash of sound, the way early reflections combine with source, the resonant frequencies, the harshness of hard surfaces vs. soft, the mud of too much tail in the wrong frequency ranges. AIR is great and all but its tail is kind of outrageous, not just the tail but the low-mid resonances that muddy up some of the most important frequencies in the orchestra. AIR isn't bad, of course; great stuff gets recorded there and most of it sounds great, but Abbey Road's Studio One is this annoyingly accidental perfect balance of so many things. It sounds like movies without the resonant issues a lot of other scoring stages have. There's barely anything to fight in the mix.
> 
> Spitfire mentions that they did record through the TG12345, and it's likely that there is some EQing done to balance things just right, all that's cool, but the mic selection and placements were set up and mixed down by Simon Rhodes, a guy who engineers on tons of great-sounding scores, not Spitfire's usual Jake Jackson (not to say he's a bad engineer), and all that aside, no amount of processing and mic selection will make a dodgy room perfect (*cough cough* Trackdown *cough cough*).
> 
> Room and recording engineer, plus musicians and performances, are things you just can't really fake. You can do a lot of really cool trickery to get other dodgier-sounding libraries to shine, and people do, but it's a whole lot easier and attainable when things are good from the get-go. Our mockup experiences are so often about fixing problems every step of the way, so when nerds like me hear that libraries are being recorded in one of if not the dopest sounding scoring stages in the world with one of today's best recording engineers, it's hard not to gush a bit. And having the stuff they've put out so far, I'm even more excited.
> 
> A bit of a ramble, but that's where I'm at haha


I do use a lot of the waves Abbey Road plugins during mixing and production and have watched\read so much on them and how they contribute to the famous Abbey Road sound. What would have been interesting is if they had a "Simon Rhodes" mix which uses all the processing of the AR Studio 3 and a mix which is just a mix of the mic positions much like mix1\mix2 in BBCSO


----------



## iMovieShout

robgb said:


> So, it's clearly a sketching library that could potentially be used for a final product if you aren't too finicky about detail. I am annoyed, however, about the teasing of what the other libraries will be. I know this is Spitfire's never ending marketing at work, but for godsakes just tell us what you have planned so we can determine whether or not we want to dive into this particular ecosystem.


Well said. I unsubscribed from Spitfire's e-mails and YouTube channel a while ago because of their annoying marketing and leading me up the garden path tactics. I will check in on their website each month, but have lost interest. I tend to prefer the passionate vendors, such as Orchestral Tools, Vienna Symphonic Library, ProjectSAM, CineSamples, Heavyocity etc etc, and the startups - who often bring new energy and fresh ideas to the mix.

Spitfire were great in the early days, but for me have become too much of a big player with big corporate style tactics. I already regard them in the same way I think of Native Instruments's libraries. Which is, 'great instruments to get you started for entry level composers and beginners, with a handful of specialised useful instruments (often created by 3rd parties such as Heavyocity and OT), but largely targeting the masses'. 

Dare I say that Spitfire's marketing has really hit a nerve to the point that I even find Christian's videos annoying these days (personal and Spitfire videos). 

...but I put that down to my being old and grumpy and need of more coffee!!


----------



## CT

DovesGoWest said:


> I do use a lot of the waves Abbey Road plugins during mixing and production and have watched\read so much on them and how they contribute to the famous Abbey Road sound. What would have been interesting is if they had a "Simon Rhodes" mix which uses all the processing of the AR Studio 3 and a mix which is just a mix of the mic positions much like mix1\mix2 in BBCSO


I think this is what they did, though. Mix 1 and 2 are standard "modern" mixes while the two Vintage options use the sexy Abbey Road special sauce mics, the TG desk etc.


----------



## DovesGoWest

Mike T said:


> I think this is what they did, though. Mix 1 and 2 are standard "modern" mixes while the two Vintage options use the sexy Abbey Road special sauce mics, the TG desk etc.


Yeah the manual doesnt make it easy but it seems Mix1\2 are Rhodes Mix, Vintage 1\2 are RM1B & Classic Ribbons through the TG12345. I would expect that the Simon Rhodes mixes do use outboard gear much like the JJ mix in BBCSO does.

What i find interesting though and i am not sure if this is the case in the BBCSO is that the mic's have been put into groups and you cannot use mic's from different groups together.


----------



## InLight-Tone

scoringdreams said:


> Absolutely love them, I use them as a scoring pad before working on the individual sections using Spitfire Symphonic Strings. It's just a better alternative compared to Masse...


Why not use the SSS ensemble patches?


----------



## muziksculp

Not having an AR-1 Mid-High Legato Strings Expansion at this time, is quite a crippling detail to this library. I'm planning to purchase AR-F, and the Low-Strings Expansion, before March 11th, but I am not happy that Spitfire Audio is missing the mid-high Strings legato for AR-1. I would also like to see more Short String articulations, and more Percussion instruments.


----------



## SupremeFist

CH's video on arranging woods is a really nice presentation of some basics but ironically the result when stacking three instances of the pre-orchestrated Sparkling Woodwinds ensemble is horrendous, at least to my ears. Happy with AROOF and adding bits of BBCSO for true sections/legato for the time being.


----------



## muziksculp

SupremeFist said:


> CH's video on arranging woods is a really nice presentation of some basics but ironically the result when stacking three instances of the pre-orchestrated patch of Sparkling Woodwinds is horrendous


Yes, same impression here. Using three instances of layered woodwind patches sounded super unrealistic.


----------



## muziksculp

I just reached out to Spitfire Audio with a question about when we can expect the Mid-High Legato strings expansion, and more short strings as well. 

I'm waiting to hear what their reply to this will be.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Not having an AR-1 Mid-High Legato Strings Expansion at this time, is quite a crippling detail to this library. I'm planning to purchase AR-F, and the Low-Strings Expansion, before March 11th, but I am not happy that Spitfire Audio is missing the mid-high Strings legato for AR-1. I would also like to see more Short String articulations, and more Percussion instruments.


No, it’s really not that much of a problem. I mean it’s an ensemble library so it comes with limitations, but lack of legato is not really one of them, at least in my usage. If we use Albion One as a guide, we’ll get expansion packs with violins in octaves as one high legato, useful to be sure but not on everything, and we’ll get something like a double violin section and maybe violas in unison in the lower range. But that mid legato has a fairly narrow range in Albion One, and in general the legatos are tailored for very narrow uses, however common they may be. For more ordinary usage of Albion One, I typically ended up using legatos from other spitfire libraries, either SCS or SSS as the task required. And I moved away from using Albion One for anything but sketching once I acquired the full SSS.

That same approach I took with Albion One is the same one I’ve been taking with ARO to good effect so far. No, the supplemental string legatos are not recorded in AR. But that doesn’t bother me, and I don’t really care that much that it sounds or doesn’t sound like AR. I only care that the sound as a whole is a sound that I like and can work with, and so far I find ARO layers well with most everything I’ve tried it with (Ark 1 strings being the only combination I’ve disliked).

Basically what I like about ARO is that it’s a great writing library and it’s already completely replaced my previous template I’d been using for that. And it has the bonus that so far in the two weeks or so that I’ve had it, many elements of ARO end up not getting replaced but only supplemented. So moving from writing to the final track goes much faster, and I can work with smaller track counts overall, and that keeps everything more manageable.

But, yes, at the end of the day ARO is still an ensemble library and will be when all its expansion packs are released, and that won‘t be remedied until the modular library appears. I also continue to think ARO is more restricted on its shorts, especially with the strings. I’m not fond of the basic spiccato, the sound itself not timing issues.


----------



## BasariStudios

jbuhler said:


> No, the supplemental string legatos are not recorded in AR.


Wait, these new Legato Expansions are not recorded at AR?


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

BasariStudios said:


> Wait, these new Legato Expansions are not recorded at AR?


They are recorded in AR Studio One as Spitfire's site says.


----------



## BasariStudios

ALittleNightMusic said:


> They are recorded in AR Studio One as Spitfire's site says.


Now even more confused, LOL.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Since the plot has been lost several times now in this thread, Abbey Road One is an ensemble line all recorded in AR Studio One: "Orchestral Foundations", "Legendary Low Strings", "Sparkling Woodwinds". All this ensemble content was recorded a little while back, and there are probably more up for release that haven't been announced yet.

But into the future, Spitfire will be recording a separate deeply sampled "modular" series in AR that will be similar to the likes of their Symphonic Orchestra line (originally named BML, British Modular Library).

There's also mention of some work they plan to do in AR's Studio Two.

I'm sure their timeline has been thrown up in the air due to covid, and they may also not be sure how long it will take them to put together these additional projects, only making it clear that they will be doing it, so don't expect it soon.






The "Abbey Road One" series we have now, the future BML-style series, and whatever they plan to do in AR's Studio Two are all different projects part of their AR partnership.


----------



## rnb_2

BasariStudios said:


> Now even more confused, LOL.





jbuhler said:


> For more ordinary usage of Albion One, I typically ended up using legatos from other spitfire libraries, either SCS or SSS as the task required. And I moved away from using Albion One for anything but sketching once I acquired the full SSS.
> 
> That same approach I took with Albion One is the same one I’ve been taking with ARO to good effect so far. No, the supplemental string legatos are not recorded in AR.


I think this is what @jbuhler was referring to: his use of SCS or SSS legatos with ARO, as he had been doing with Albion One. He wasn't referring to the ARO supplemental packs.


----------



## jbuhler

BasariStudios said:


> Wait, these new Legato Expansions are not recorded at AR?


No, I was referring to libraries I use to supplement ARO that are not recorded in AR, so SSS or BSS, or whatever.

ETA: so I use AROOF and supplement it with the Violin 1 and/or cello legato from SSS or BSS or whatever. Legendary Lows are recorded in AR, as will any other AR expansion. (But those are expansions not supplements as I think of them.)


----------



## muziksculp

In a way, I know If I buy AR-F I would be buying it mainly for the AR sound, if Spitfire Audio had their AR Modular Orchestra available today, I wouldn't even bother looking at AR-F. Since I'm not a fan of using ensemble/pre-orchestrated, layered orchestral libraries.

So, Option 1 : I could wait for the AR Modular Orchestra (which could take a few years), or

Option 2 : Buy ARF, and Some Expansions for the AR sound they offers now, and in the near future, then add the Modular-Orchestra libraries as they become available.

It looks like I'm going to go with options 2. even tough it is a bit of a compromise for me.


----------



## Flyo

Seeing last Pauls Video referred on layering Legato Sparkling Woods do not sound very gentle, in purely terms of sound in these Selection... and I genuinely think its because all these Selections are only recorded in 8ves. And this and not having the same Arts on every section on Foundation is my main concern and obstacle.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> In a way, I know If I buy AR-F I would be buying it mainly for the AR sound, if Spitfire Audio had their AR Modular Orchestra available today, I wouldn't even bother looking at AR-F. Since I'm not a fan of using ensemble/pre-orchestrated, layered orchestral libraries.
> 
> So, Option 1 : I could wait for the AR Modular Orchestra (which could take a few years), or
> 
> Option 2 : Buy ARF, and Some Expansions for the AR sound they offers now, and in the near future, then add the Modular-Orchestra libraries as they become available.
> 
> It looks like I'm going to go with options 2. even tough it is a bit of a compromise for me.


Option 2 is more or less how BML was rolled out, with Albion 1 (legacy) serving as the foundation for those modular add-ons until BML was complete enough that Albion 1 was no longer needed as the foundation. In many ways I prefer that workflow because it reduces complexity (even though it doesn't translate as well to conversion to real orchestra), it's just that in the case of Albion 1 and SSO, the sound of SSO was better without Albion 1 most of the time, at least in part because the dynamic range of Albion 1 is limited, so Albion 1 ended up getting replaced rather than supplemented. The dynamic range of ARO is much better, so I have hopes that I'll be able to stick closer to the original workflow without replacing.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Flyo said:


> Seeing last Pauls Video referred on layering Legato Sparkling Woods do not sound very gentle, in purely terms of sound in these Selection... and I genuinely think its because all these Selections are only recorded in 8ves. And this and not having the same Arts on every section on Foundation is my main concern and obstacle.


Definitely. the ARO series really just feels like Spitfire getting their feet wet with some basics first while they spend the rest of their time in R&D.


muziksculp said:


> In a way, I know If I buy AR-F I would be buying it mainly for the AR sound, if Spitfire Audio had their AR Modular Orchestra available today, I wouldn't even bother looking at AR-F. Since I'm not a fan of using ensemble/pre-orchestrated, layered orchestral libraries.
> 
> So, Option 1 : I could wait for the AR Modular Orchestra (which could take a few years), or
> 
> Option 2 : Buy ARF, and Some Expansions for the AR sound they offers now, and in the near future, then add the Modular-Orchestra libraries as they become available.
> 
> It looks like I'm going to go with options 2. even tough it is a bit of a compromise for me.


They're definitely taking some new strategies to this stuff, room and engineer aside, i.e. the deeper dynamic layers and the much-improved smoothness of the legato programming in the two expansions, and though a bit pricy, they're obviously not useless, but yup, I think the coolest stuff will be later on when they dive deep into the Modular-Orchestra libraries, even if it's a ways off from now.


----------



## Flyo

Excuse me the great video was
Unlock the Secrets of Orchestral Programming — Legato​With Christian Henson*


----------



## scoringdreams

InLight-Tone said:


> Why not use the SSS ensemble patches?


That's a good point, when I was using Masse, it somehow slipped my mind to use the SSS ensemble patches. But with AR1, I use my Garritan CFX in all my compositions and you can say that the arrangement is somewhat heavily influenced by the piano parts. It is also a lot easier to blend the libraries with minimal effort since I prefer the room of Abbey Road Studio One.


----------



## muziksculp

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Why don’t you email Spitfire to ask them (since only they know) and then let us know.


I did. waiting for a reply.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I was checking some user demos of ARO, and found these two demos of the Lord of the Rings Theme. 

One of them done using BBCSO, the other using ARO. I was surprised at how good the ARO version sounded, I was expecting a much bigger difference between the two. I think the BBCSO version has a bit more detail, but not a lot that I can hear compared to the ARO version. 

What do you think ? 

imho. The Strings in ARO sound really good, and given they are just sustain strings, (not Legato), they transition smoothly from one chord to the next. Actually the difference is not huge between the two versions. Hopefully Spitfire will release the Mid-High Legato Strings for ARO, and offer more variety for the short string articulations. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

Also loving the ARO Staccato Strings, and Brass here :


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

muziksculp said:


> Hopefully Spitfire will release the Mid-High Legato Strings for ARO





muziksculp said:


> I am not happy that Spitfire Audio is missing the mid-high Strings legato for AR-1.





muziksculp said:


> Hopefully they will add the Legato, and more shorts for the Mid-High Strings.





muziksculp said:


> I'm looking forward to purchase AR-1 once they have the Mid-High Strings Legato expansion released.





muziksculp said:


> Not having Mid-High Strings Legatos for AR-1 is actually the main reason I didn't buy it when it was first released





muziksculp said:


> what is badly needed is Mid-High Ensemble Strings for AR-1 Foundations





muziksculp said:


> The fact that there is no AR-1 Mid-High Legato Strings expansion yet, is holding me back from buying any of the AR-1 Libraries at this time





muziksculp said:


> Also curious when SA will release a high-strings Expansion with Legato



Which expansion are you looking forward to? Not sure you've mentioned it.


----------



## muziksculp

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Which expansion are you looking forward to? Not sure you've mentioned it.


LOL... The one I mentioned above.


----------



## Paul Cardon

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> Also loving the ARO Staccato Strings, and Brass here :



oh hey that's me!

just to add-on, as lazy as it is, I still love those full orchestra patches, especially the stacs. great for beefing up the sound of a section when it needs a little extra oomph. goofy but fun


----------



## muziksculp

Paul Cardon said:


> oh hey that's me!
> 
> just to add-on, as lazy as it is, I still love those full orchestra patches, especially the stacs. great for beefing up the sound of a section when it needs a little extra oomph. goofy but fun


That's a wonderful sounding demo of the ARO Stacc. 

Has ARO been very useful for you ? 

Thanks.


----------



## muziksculp

OK.

Too much GAS for me to handle, plus I was getting a bad headache, so .. I finally Purchased Abbey Road ONE Foundations, and Legendary Low-Strings Expansion.

I feel much better now.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> OK.
> 
> Too much GAS for me to handle, plus I was getting a bad headache, so .. I finally Purchased Abbey Road ONE Foundations, and Legendary Low-Strings Expansion.
> 
> I feel much better now.


It was inevitable.


----------



## rnb_2

muziksculp said:


> OK.
> 
> Too much GAS for me to handle, plus I was getting a bad headache, so .. I finally Purchased Abbey Road ONE Foundations, and Legendary Low-Strings Expansion.
> 
> I feel much better now.


I figured that fence had to be getting very uncomfortable - you kept wanting to fall off one way, but somehow kept catching your balance and staying up there. I'm glad you finally fell off the other way and are happy about it!


----------



## muziksculp

rnb_2 said:


> I figured that fence had to be getting very uncomfortable - you kept wanting to fall off one way, but somehow kept catching your balance and staying up there. I'm glad you finally fell of the other way and are happy about it!


Yes, it was getting very uncomfortable on that fence. It felt more like a barbed wire fence.


----------



## BasariStudios

muziksculp said:


> OK.
> 
> Too much GAS for me to handle, plus I was getting a bad headache, so .. I finally Purchased Abbey Road ONE Foundations, and Legendary Low-Strings Expansion.
> 
> I feel much better now.


And you still typing here?


----------



## Soundbed

Paul Cardon said:


> There's a "Tightness" control for shorts that defaults to a halfway position. It's worth playing with that to find a playability that works for you and setting your own track delays from there.


Great tip! I hadn't realized that I'd adjusted this for some instruments but not for other instruments, which was making my high woodwinds runs sound "late".

Here's a revisit to my quick John Williams Star Wars attempt, using only AROOF (no expansions).

*And no mixing in the DAW -- all levels and panning and mic automation was done completely inside the Spitfire plugin* (for better or worse lol). Only the harp wasn't ARO.

Whether you think it sounds like the OST or not (of course it doesn't) I'm surprised how close it gets with just a couple handfuls of MIDI tracks (and they could be condensed even more; I have a couple added tracks, simply so I can "see" which parts I added specifically, for range or what-not).

(N.B. as it pertains to what ARO might be "good for" ... personally I bought ARO to provide a basis for a template, so any library I brought in needed to meld with this sound. For example I prefer Majestic Horn – now sold by OT – for the opening horn line, and it blends well enough for my tastes, but the audio file in this posts uses the AROOF horns.)


----------



## Soundbed

muziksculp said:


> OK.
> 
> so .. I finally Purchased Abbey Road ONE Foundations


Congratulations! 🎉


----------



## muziksculp




----------



## muziksculp




----------



## Soundbed

muziksculp said:


>


I'm waiting for a sale on these, if I get them.


----------



## icecoolpool

Soundbed said:


> I'm waiting for a sale on these, if I get them.


They sound good but I´m really looking forward to seeing what their $49 high string and brass offerings will be like.


----------



## banjo01

I just got the legendary low strings. They sound absolutely beautiful with Abbey Road singing. Mic Positions are certainly fun to play with and useful - close, tree, and vintage especially.

I do wish, however, that they included one or two more articulations such as trills and pizzicatos.

On another note, I look forward to their Modular orchestra. I hope AROOF, Scoring Selects, and the Modular Orchestra are all housed in that one plugin. But the way they are talking about it, I am not so sure about it.

But either way, I am optimistic about this Abbey Road partnership.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Adding on here that I've been using the low strings addon all over a recent project. Absolutely love it. Feels meaty and real and is a bit more flexible than I was expecting. Great when you need a cue to be menacing. 

Dead simple in concept, but way way better than Spitfire's usual legatos. None of the usual transitional bumpiness that most of their legatos suffer from. A little more like CSS but with less delay and more "force" in the performances of the transitions.


----------



## companyofquail

Paul Cardon said:


> Adding on here that I've been using the low strings addon all over a recent project. Absolutely love it. Feels meaty and real and is a bit more flexible than I was expecting. Great when you need a cue to be menacing.
> 
> Dead simple in concept, but way way better than Spitfire's usual legatos. None of the usual transitional bumpiness that most of their legatos suffer from. A little more like CSS but with less delay and more "force" in the performances of the transitions.


i noticed this with the legatos as well but i am just an amateur so i didnt want to give anyone false hope that is more pro and owns more libraries from various companies than i do. these are def some of the best(if not THE BEST) legatos from any spitfire library i own.


----------



## ism

Flyo said:


> Still missing Marcato, Tenuto, Swells on Strings and Tenuto on Low Woods and Staccato on everything except all ensambles also Standard Legato without 8ves 😒


If only Spitfire would make some more sample libraries sometime


----------



## Flyo

I hope they reach out and recall the missing articulations on Foundation, before Studio One dedicated proyect.


----------



## Flyo

I also think that all this was already recorded but they leave it behind because they need to launch Abbey project on some schedule on planned time frame. It’s really weird, illogical, nomsense having Marccato, Swells, Tenuto and Staccato here and not there... 🥵


----------



## daan1412

I really like Legendary Low Strings - great sound, very useful. Not so sure about Sparkling Woodwinds. It has a very specific, thick sound and the range seems narrow. Doesn't strike me as particularly useful, but we'll see. And that glock overlay is a pretty odd thing to add IMHO, especially as the default setting.

I expected Selections to feature some non-standard articulations on top of unison legato. Now I'm really curious about horns and high strings - hopefully at least horns and trumpets won't be octave only, but well... if we didn't get unison legato for woodwinds, something tells me we might not get it at all.


----------



## Flyo

daan1412 said:


> I really like Legendary Low Strings - great sound, very useful. Not so sure about Sparkling Woodwinds. It has a very specific, thick sound and the range seems narrow. Doesn't strike me as particularly useful, but we'll see. And that glock overlay is a pretty odd thing to add IMHO, especially as the default setting.
> 
> I expected Selections to feature some non-standard articulations on top of unison legato. Now I'm really curious about horns and high strings - hopefully at least horns and trumpets won't be octave only, but well... if we didn't get unison legato for woodwinds, something tells me we might not get it at all.


----------



## jbuhler

daan1412 said:


> I really like Legendary Low Strings - great sound, very useful. Not so sure about Sparkling Woodwinds. It has a very specific, thick sound and the range seems narrow. Doesn't strike me as particularly useful, but we'll see. And that glock overlay is a pretty odd thing to add IMHO, especially as the default setting.
> 
> I expected Selections to feature some non-standard articulations on top of unison legato. Now I'm really curious about horns and high strings - hopefully at least horns and trumpets won't be octave only, but well... if we didn't get unison legato for woodwinds, something tells me we might not get it at all.


I think it depends very much on what they have planned for the modular library. If they are planning an a4 trumpet or a4 horn patch in the modular library, I's say the likelihood of it appearing as one of the add-ons is about zero. Given that the a4 trumpet and a4 horn patches are already in Foundations, however, I think it is more likely they simply won't do the a4s in the modular library. In which case we could very well get non-octave legatos. I imagine the low brass legato will be in octaves.

High strings will almost certainly be in octaves. We might get a double violin section legato in unison. Albion One has this articulation (or something like it) but it is restricted in range. I'm curious whether there will be a con sord legato for the high strings.


----------



## Flyo

Truly, I really expect the same articulations on Strings (*Marcato, Tenuto, Swells*) as the already included on Brass and Woods, the missing *Staccato* from the "All Orchestra Ensamble" patch... but on every section Strings, Brass and Woods. Also the rare omission of the *Tenuto* on Low Brass. All this on Foundation . If they never give us Unison Legato I think its the common place because they never already included on any section on Foundation... so I could live with that (never I would say I couldn't needed it! ) And the Selections bring us another tools, and flavors to the palette.


----------



## yiph2

How many times have you said this


----------



## Flyo

yiph2 said:


> How many times have you said this


----------



## banjo01

A little short demo that I whipped up. Tree 1 mics 100% nothing else, Reverb 50%. Tree mics really give more emphasis on the cello.


----------



## Nordstorm

I am interested in what you need for mics? If I need for exemple 4 mics, I get performance problems even with an Intel 9900K. What are your preferred settings?

Cheers


----------



## banjo01

Nordstorm said:


> I am interested in what you need for mics? If I need for exemple 4 mics, I get performance problems even with an Intel 9900K. What are your preferred settings?
> 
> Cheers


Each mic position takes about 350 MB (give or take) of memory. I am running this on an i5 73XX without hics on 4 mic positions.


----------



## Nordstorm

banjo01 said:


> Each mic position takes about 350 MB (give or take) of memory. I am running this on an i5 73XX without hics on 4 mic positions.


i have no problems with RAM - but with a lot of CPU spikes. and i try every possible configuration. i have no idea what the issue is


----------



## jaketanner

banjo01 said:


> A little short demo that I whipped up. Tree 1 mics 100% nothing else, Reverb 50%. Tree mics really give more emphasis on the cello.


what patch was that? Sounded pretty big..


----------



## banjo01

jaketanner said:


> what patch was that? Sounded pretty big..


Just Legendary Low Strings.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> I think it depends very much on what they have planned for the modular library. If they are planning an a4 trumpet or a4 horn patch in the modular library, I's say the likelihood of it appearing as one of the add-ons is about zero. Given that the a4 trumpet and a4 horn patches are already in Foundations, however, I think it is more likely they simply won't do the a4s in the modular library. In which case we could very well get non-octave legatos. I imagine the low brass legato will be in octaves.
> 
> High strings will almost certainly be in octaves. We might get a double violin section legato in unison. Albion One has this articulation (or something like it) but it is restricted in range. I'm curious whether there will be a con sord legato for the high strings.


Why would they not do a4 trumpet and horns considering the AROOF ones don't have legato and shouldn't be anything remotely in the same league as the modular library. I really don't think anything in the ARone stuff should have any impact on the modular library as they are, or should be, completely different types of libraries!


----------



## companyofquail

can someone please start an AROOF speculation and complaints thread?


----------



## SupremeFist

Tom Ferguson said:


> Why would they not do a4 trumpet and horns considering the AROOF ones don't have legato and shouldn't be anything remotely in the same league as the modular library. I really don't think anything in the ARone stuff should have any impact on the modular library as they are, or should be, completely different types of libraries!


My own plan is to keep and love AROOF for what it is, and not buy any of the expansions because octave/prearranged patches suck. I'll just mix it with HOD or BBC until the modular library arrives.


----------



## muziksculp

SupremeFist said:


> My own plan is to keep and love AROOF for what it is, and not buy any of the expansions because octave/prearranged patches suck. I'll just mix it with HOD or BBC until the modular library arrives.


That's a wise plan. 

I only added the Legendary Low-Strings to AROOF, and would most likely add the Mid-High Legato strings exp. whenever they release it (hopefully soon) , and then wait for the modular library.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

SupremeFist said:


> My own plan is to keep and love AROOF for what it is, and not buy any of the expansions because octave/prearranged patches suck. I'll just mix it with HOD or BBC until the modular library arrives.


Fair enough! I personally like the idea of the standard pre-arranged orchestration stuff because I find they have a certain quality that is hard to beat with combining samples recorded separately. I would genuinely likely buy all of the standard combinations of strings unisons (V1+V2 uni. + oct, V1+V2+Va unison+low oct, oct + oct etc etc.) if they were decent quality and acceptably priced, just because the more stuff recorded at the same time playing together, the closer you are getting to a real performance/recording in my mind.

Of course it's an expensive way to do things for a minor improvement, so understand most people would find that pretty OTT. I certainly wouldn't want them instead of super detailed sampling and high QA though! I just want Spitfire to really go deep with their libraries primarily.


----------



## jaketanner

banjo01 said:


> Just Legendary Low Strings.


Ah ok.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

That being said, £49 for pretty decent legato (kinda similar to the original Albion 1 low strings legato if you compare, mostly with slightly different qualities. They are both great.) with 3dyn + 2 transitions and stac + spic (5dyn layers?) only, is kind of really pushing it imo. Yep, it definitely sounds pretty good, but for that kind of price I'd really hope for a lot more detail.

(If they had intro pricing like all of their other libraries, that would soften the blow, but still doesn't make much difference for everyone else who misses that window anyway)

It definitely makes me a little worried that spitfire are likely to either skimp on these modular libraries, or highly overprice them.


----------



## SupremeFist

Tom Ferguson said:


> Fair enough! I personally like the idea of the standard pre-arranged orchestration stuff because I find they have a certain quality that is hard to beat with combining samples recorded separately.


Sure, I guess I just don't personally find the legendary low strings appreciably better than constructing the same thing with two patches of BBCSO. Plus I find that prearranged combos always sound synthy more quickly, because the note-to-note timing is unrealistically perfect.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

SupremeFist said:


> Sure, I guess I just don't personally find the legendary low strings appreciably better than constructing the same thing with two patches of BBCSO. Plus I find that prearranged combos always sound synthy more quickly, because the note-to-note timing is unrealistically perfect.


Yeh that makes sense! Though regarding the synth-y aspect, I think that kinda depends how they are done. The legendary low strings at least are not something that has that quality because it would be natural for them to be playing in sync for this orchestration, and regarding the perfect timing thing, one of the first thing I liked about them was how they were actually kind of nicely sloppy/out of sync to my ears, and that's preserved in the transitions. Fair enough if you disagree with that assessment though!


----------



## muziksculp

I wonder how good the mid-high Legato Strings AROOF expansion will sound ? 

How will they implement the orchestration, transitions, short notes, playability, ..etc. I really hope this will be their next release.


----------



## styledelk

muziksculp said:


> I wonder how good the mid-high Legato Strings AROOF expansion will sound ?
> 
> How will they implement the orchestration, transitions, short notes, playability, ..etc. I really hope this will be their next release.


And will there even be one? Or is everyone just trying to will into existence what they want.


----------



## muziksculp

styledelk said:


> And will there even be one?


Why Not ? It's a very important missing part of ARROF, and It's only logical that they will offer it.


----------



## José Herring

SupremeFist said:


> My own plan is to keep and love AROOF for what it is, and not buy any of the expansions because octave/prearranged patches suck. I'll just mix it with HOD or BBC until the modular library arrives.


Agree. But for the cello bass patches since that is such a common orchestral pairing it works well. But for woodwinds all it does is invite excessive parallel octaves and a lack of harmony. Also hardly anything sounds worse than having woodwinds mixed at unison. I know some orchestrators in Hollywood that love that shit but to me it just takes the wonderful sound of solo winds and turns them into a reed organ patch. For that reason it was a hard pass on Sparkling Woodwinds.


----------



## muziksculp

José Herring said:


> For that reason it was a hard pass on Sparkling Woodwinds.


Same here. It was very easy to decide not to get it.


----------



## jbuhler

Tom Ferguson said:


> Why would they not do a4 trumpet and horns considering the AROOF ones don't have legato and shouldn't be anything remotely in the same league as the modular library. I really don't think anything in the ARone stuff should have any impact on the modular library as they are, or should be, completely different types of libraries!


If they release legatos like they did for the low strings it would have those legatos. Not sure why you think trumpets a4 recorded for a modular library would be in a different league. The whole point is that AROOF can serve as the foundation for the modular library as it comes out. I mean, I hope that the modular will have many more articulations and mutes and so forth, but I wouldn't expect it to sound much different in the core articulations available in AROOF, and I think SF is trying to avoid duplicating patches between what would be in AROOF and what would be in the modular. (Duplication will only be an issue for trumpets, horns, and some of the percussion.) The modular will almost certainly have solo trumpet, and trumpets a2 or a3. Hopefully, a second solo trumpet as well, and likely trumpets a6.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

José Herring said:


> Agree. But for the cello bass patches since that is such a common orchestral pairing it works well. But for woodwinds all it does is invite excessive parallel octaves and a lack of harmony. Also hardly anything sounds worse than having woodwinds mixed at unison. I know some orchestrators in Hollywood that love that shit but to me it just takes the wonderful sound of solo winds and turns them into a reed organ patch. For that reason it was a hard pass on Sparkling Woodwinds.


I do feel like some good woodwind orchestrated patches could be good, but they would really need to have solo and a2/3 patches from the modular counterparts that mesh very well (would need exactly the same players/positions and compatible tone/performance etc) so that you could mix and match to make them actually work as a section. I feel that would help stop you getting stuck using a certain patch or having due to having to contend with incompatible sounding performances making it difficult to work the orchestrated patches into a greater line. 

That being said I do think they are generally going to be harder to work with as part of a realistic mockup due to the woodwind section being far less players and much less homogenous, so any inconsistencies are going to be much more apparent than if you were to do the same with strings.

Personally I just found the sparkling woodwinds just weren't an orchestration/balance that sounded that great to me (and it seems a majority tend to agree), though I'm sure there are some who dig it so I'm hard pressed to say it was a mistake or "bad", really.


----------



## jbuhler

styledelk said:


> And will there even be one? Or is everyone just trying to will into existence what they want.


Didn't Paul or Christian say there are 10 expansions planned?


----------



## John R Wilson

SupremeFist said:


> My own plan is to keep and love AROOF for what it is, and not buy any of the expansions because octave/prearranged patches suck. I'll just mix it with HOD or BBC until the modular library arrives.


I'm pretty much planning on doing the same and am mixing it with HOD and BBCSO. I did end up getting the low strings today as felt it could be useful, not interested in the woodwind one. I might get one or two more of the expansions depending on whether one really sticks out as being very useful, otherwise, ill probably just await for the modular libraries.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> If they release legatos like they did for the low strings it would have those legatos. Not sure why you think trumpets a4 recorded for a modular library would be in a different league. The whole point is that AROOF can serve as the foundation for the modular library as it comes out. I mean, I hope that the modular will have many more articulations and mutes and so forth, but I wouldn't expect it to sound much different in the core articulations available in AROOF, and I think SF is trying to avoid duplicating patches between what would be in AROOF and what would be in the modular. (Duplication will only be an issue for trumpets, horns, and some of the percussion.) The modular will almost certainly have solo trumpet, and trumpets a2 or a3. Hopefully, a second solo trumpet as well, and likely trumpets a6.


I didn't say anything about the sound/recording/quality control being better, I was referring to the detail of the sampling! Stuff like extra dynamic layers (especially in the legatos), loads of transitions (RR leg maybe? That would help make spitfire truly pioneers and leaders in sampling again), loads of shorts, lots of different sizes of sections and broad selection of articulations and extended articulations etc.

The baseline should be the kind of detail that sable and mural etc were doing back in 2013/14, but I'd really hope that spitfire are able to bring some new ideas/techniques and extra deep sampling (as well as the even better room ofc) considering it's 8 years later and SSS/SCS/SSW/SSB already exist etc.

So yes, I don't think an instrument from AR1OF should be thought of as an instrument from the modular library unless they bring it right up to the level of detail as the modular stuff, and if the modular library isn't significantly more detailed than AR1OF, then just make a normal full section library like everyone else and don't charge up the arse for it haha : P


----------



## Nordstorm

jononotbono said:


> I just watched Daniel James’ video. It is a few months old. So, I’m just wondering, is that cpu spiking still happening? I mean, he showed High and Low strings with a few mic positions and it brought his 12 core Trash Can to its knees. I don’t know what his settings were both in Cubase and the Spitfire player but can anyone who is currently using this library confirm whether the spiking still happens? Cheers


i have the exact same problems - no fixes for me after 3 month talking with spitfire support


----------



## Paul Cardon

jononotbono said:


> I just watched Daniel James’ video. It is a few months old. So, I’m just wondering, is that cpu spiking still happening? I mean, he showed High and Low strings with a few mic positions and it brought his 12 core Trash Can to its knees. I don’t know what his settings were both in Cubase and the Spitfire player but can anyone who is currently using this library confirm whether the spiking still happens? Cheers





Nordstorm said:


> i have the exact same problems - no fixes for me after 3 month talking with spitfire support


Okay so first off, watch this if you haven't yet: 

Paul Thompson explains that there are specific mic sets that are meant to be paired together, and how it's always going to be better to write with only 1-2 mics active at once. Get your core sound and get on with it.

Y'all should try to resist turning on 4-5 mics at once in ARO or really in any sample library, but in addition, ARO's patches are a little heavier than most. The longs patches generally have a few more active crossfade layers than other libs have:

A single strings long note in ARO has 5 dynamics layers x 2 vibrato layers, meaning for every note you press, 10 voices trigger. In addition, anytime you release a note, every one of those 10 layers has its own unique release, so as the samples crossfade from the held note loop to the release, you have 20 voices. Now say you let off a note and quickly press another. If you do it within the window that the held note loop is still releasing and the release sample is playing, then suddenly you have 30 voices. Now say you have 4 mics enabled. That's 30 x 4, you've got 120 sample voices playing at that exact moment. Now say you start playing big block chords all over the keyboard, even just two simple triads in each hand. Now say you're using the sustain pedal to hold notes for tight overlaps between chords. You will be getting up towards 120 x 6, 720 voices at once, and that's not even counting release samples that ring out for a little while, so if you're jumping around a bunch of different chords in quick succession, you're gonna be shooting over the player's voice limit in no time.

This is what Daniel James was doing, activated several disparate mics and played tons of block chords with sustain pedal action with the heaviest 10-layer-per-note longs + release samples patches. Literally the worst-case scenario, but if you're avoiding that, you'll more than likely be fine. That would bog down anyone's computer.

HOWEVER, if you're doing the same thing, lots of mics, big block chords, with any other non-longs patches, you'll be fine. Shorts tend to only ever trigger one voice per-mic. Easy peasy. Context matters. Any of us can sit down and create a worst-case scenario and point and complain, but our entire process as composers is finding solutions to problems and understand the reasons and causes and solutions behind issues. Trade-offs and compromises.

I will say that single instances of Spitfire's Player do seem to croak a little sooner than Kontakt, at slightly lower voice counts, but if voice counts are spread across plugin instances, things play a lot nicer. It's primarily those rare instances you're feeding a ton of notes into a heavy patch with one too many mics active and a voice count shooting past 500 that you'll start struggling. Even if Kontakt can go a little farther, it's still reckless towards anyone's CPU to be performing into patches like that with tons of active mics on a larger project.

Stick to one or two mics, and pick your two based on the context of the piece. Maybe go for 3 or 4 for final mixdown if you really actually need them, do some printing, but I've been using ARO for about 3 months on a handful of different projects and I rarely use more than the starting mixes, sometimes the pop pair, sometimes close + a tree. More issues can be solved with smart mixing, EQ, and reverb choices than turning on a few more mics, I promise.


----------



## jbuhler

Paul Cardon said:


> Okay so first off, watch this if you haven't yet:
> 
> Paul Thompson explains that there are specific mic sets that are meant to be paired together, and how it's always going to be better to write with only 1-2 mics active at once. Get your core sound and get on with it.
> 
> Y'all should try to resist turning on 4-5 mics at once in ARO or really in any sample library, but in addition, ARO's patches are a little heavier than most. The longs patches generally have a few more active crossfade layers than other libs have:
> 
> A single strings long note in ARO has 5 dynamics layers x 2 vibrato layers, meaning for every note you press, 10 voices trigger. In addition, anytime you release a note, every one of those 10 layers has its own unique release, so as the samples crossfade from the held note loop to the release, you have 20 voices. Now say you let off a note and quickly press another. If you do it within the window that the held note loop is still releasing and the release sample is playing, then suddenly you have 30 voices. Now say you have 4 mics enabled. That's 30 x 4, you've got 120 sample voices playing at that exact moment. Now say you start playing big block chords all over the keyboard, even just two simple triads in each hand. Now say you're using the sustain pedal to hold notes for tight overlaps between chords. You will be getting up towards 120 x 6, 720 voices at once, and that's not even counting release samples that ring out for a little while, so if you're jumping around a bunch of different chords in quick succession, you're gonna be shooting over the player's voice limit in no time.
> 
> This is exactly what Daniel James was doing, activated several disparate mics and played tons of block chords with sustain pedal action with the heaviest 10-layer-per-note longs + release samples patches. Literally the worst-case scenario. I don't know if he was just naive or trying to cause problems, but if you're not doing that, you'll more than likely be fine. That would bog down anyone's computer.
> 
> HOWEVER, if you're doing the same thing, lots of mics, big block chords, with any other non-longs patches, you'll be fine. Shorts tend to only ever trigger one voice per-mic. Easy peasy. Context matters. Any of us can sit down and create a worst-case scenario and point and complain, but our entire process as composers is finding solutions to problems and understand the reasons and causes and solutions behind issues. Trade-offs and compromises.
> 
> I will say that single instances of Spitfire's Player do seem to croak a little sooner than Kontakt, at slightly lower voice counts, but if voice counts are spread across plugin instances, things play a lot nicer. It's primarily those rare instances you're feeding a ton of notes into a heavy patch with one too many mics active and a voice count shooting past 500 that you'll start struggling. Even if Kontakt can go a little farther, it's still reckless towards anyone's CPU to be performing into patches like that with tons of active mics on a larger project.
> 
> Stick to one or two mics, and pick your two based on the context of the piece. Maybe go for 3 or 4 for final mixdown if you really actually need them, do some printing, but I've been using ARO for about 3 months on a handful of different projects and I rarely use more than the starting mixes, sometimes the pop pair, sometimes close + a tree. More issues can be solved with smart mixing, EQ, and reverb choices than turning on a few more mics, I promise.



Also raise the voice count. I think the default is set at 512. The second I changed the voice count the few issues I was having went away. Earlier today I added a bunch of mics to a trial project of ARO, and I don't get any real CPU spikes with ARO. 2020 iMac i9.


----------



## Paul Cardon

jbuhler said:


> Also raise the voice count. I think the default is set at 512. The second I changed the voice count the few issues I was having went away. Earlier today I added a bunch of mics to a trial project of ARO, and I don't get any real CPU spikes with ARO. 2020 iMac i9.


If your PC can handle it, definitely. Mine struggles a bit when my voice counts start going up past that point in a single Spitfire Player instance so I still try to avoid it lol. I can shoot a bit higher in Kontakt though, about 700-800 voices, so Spitfire's Player is doing something a lil more taxing with its voices. Whether it's the resampling algorithm or sample decompression or thread scheduling I don't know, but it's not quite as efficient as Kontakt is at spitting out massive voice counts on a single instance, but like I said, never an issue for me if I'm not being overtly goofy and reckless with mics and heavy patches. Glad to hear your iMac is chewing through it!


----------



## jbuhler

Tom Ferguson said:


> I didn't say anything about the sound/recording/quality control being better, I was referring to the detail of the sampling! Stuff like extra dynamic layers (especially in the legatos), loads of transitions (RR leg maybe? That would help make spitfire truly pioneers and leaders in sampling again), loads of shorts, lots of different sizes of sections and broad selection of articulations and extended articulations etc.
> 
> The baseline should be the kind of detail that sable and mural etc were doing back in 2013/14, but I'd really hope that spitfire are able to bring some new ideas/techniques and extra deep sampling (as well as the even better room ofc) considering it's 8 years later and SSS/SCS/SSW/SSB already exist etc.
> 
> So yes, I don't think an instrument from AR1OF should be thought of as an instrument from the modular library unless they bring it right up to the level of detail as the modular stuff, and if the modular library isn't significantly more detailed than AR1OF, then just make a normal full section library like everyone else and don't charge up the arse for it haha : P


I think you are confusing what I'm saying. Yes, surely, the modular library will have lots and lots of instruments, sections, and articulations, many, many more than Foundations, and they will all be deeply sampled. I simply question whether it will have patches for Trumpets a4 and Horns a4. That still leaves a host of possibilities: Trumpet 1, Trumpet 2, Trumpets a2 or a3, trumpets a6. Maybe Trumpets 1, 2, 3, and 4 all individual. Similar situation for horn. My expectations are set by looking at how BML was created around Albion 1 (legacy). I think the new AR modular orchestra will bear a similar relation to AROOF as SSO does to Albion 1. It's why I don't expect any of the legatos for AROOF to duplicate something that will be available in another form in the modular library. So if there is an ARO expansion of trumpets a4 legato, then I doubt the AR modular will also have a set of trumpets a4 articulations. (But again AR modular will have a whole module's worth of trumpet patches.)


----------



## jononotbono

Paul Cardon said:


> Okay so first off, watch this if you haven't yet:
> 
> Paul Thompson explains that there are specific mic sets that are meant to be paired together, and how it's always going to be better to write with only 1-2 mics active at once. Get your core sound and get on with it.
> 
> Y'all should try to resist turning on 4-5 mics at once in ARO or really in any sample library, but in addition, ARO's patches are a little heavier than most. The longs patches generally have a few more active crossfade layers than other libs have:
> 
> A single strings long note in ARO has 5 dynamics layers x 2 vibrato layers, meaning for every note you press, 10 voices trigger. In addition, anytime you release a note, every one of those 10 layers has its own unique release, so as the samples crossfade from the held note loop to the release, you have 20 voices. Now say you let off a note and quickly press another. If you do it within the window that the held note loop is still releasing and the release sample is playing, then suddenly you have 30 voices. Now say you have 4 mics enabled. That's 30 x 4, you've got 120 sample voices playing at that exact moment. Now say you start playing big block chords all over the keyboard, even just two simple triads in each hand. Now say you're using the sustain pedal to hold notes for tight overlaps between chords. You will be getting up towards 120 x 6, 720 voices at once, and that's not even counting release samples that ring out for a little while, so if you're jumping around a bunch of different chords in quick succession, you're gonna be shooting over the player's voice limit in no time.
> 
> This is exactly what Daniel James was doing, activated several disparate mics and played tons of block chords with sustain pedal action with the heaviest 10-layer-per-note longs + release samples patches. Literally the worst-case scenario. I don't know if he was just naive or trying to cause problems, but if you're not doing that, you'll more than likely be fine. That would bog down anyone's computer.
> 
> HOWEVER, if you're doing the same thing, lots of mics, big block chords, with any other non-longs patches, you'll be fine. Shorts tend to only ever trigger one voice per-mic. Easy peasy. Context matters. Any of us can sit down and create a worst-case scenario and point and complain, but our entire process as composers is finding solutions to problems and understand the reasons and causes and solutions behind issues. Trade-offs and compromises.
> 
> I will say that single instances of Spitfire's Player do seem to croak a little sooner than Kontakt, at slightly lower voice counts, but if voice counts are spread across plugin instances, things play a lot nicer. It's primarily those rare instances you're feeding a ton of notes into a heavy patch with one too many mics active and a voice count shooting past 500 that you'll start struggling. Even if Kontakt can go a little farther, it's still reckless towards anyone's CPU to be performing into patches like that with tons of active mics on a larger project.
> 
> Stick to one or two mics, and pick your two based on the context of the piece. Maybe go for 3 or 4 for final mixdown if you really actually need them, do some printing, but I've been using ARO for about 3 months on a handful of different projects and I rarely use more than the starting mixes, sometimes the pop pair, sometimes close + a tree. More issues can be solved with smart mixing, EQ, and reverb choices than turning on a few more mics, I promise.



Yeah man, thanks. I know how to use sample libraries and mic positions (I understand you’re just being helpful) which is why in my original post I said I don’t know what Daniel’s settings were set to (as I also am very aware how important it is to set things up correctly). I’m kind of laughing at the thought of using 5 mic positions on one patch (try Berlin Strings and see where that gets you) when writing. I personally use a decca and maybe an outrigger and/or a close completely depending on what I am writing. I also would never play block chords with multiple mics as I don’t really write like that. Even though I have DFD streaming setup with my SSDs so voice count isn’t generally a problem for me especially as I have multiple computers handling different instruments and mostly from different SSDs etc. Anyway, thanks.


----------



## Nick Weathers

Are Abbey Road Foundations ensembles recorded in octaves or unison?


----------



## Nordstorm

Paul Cardon said:


> f you're jumping around a bunch of different chords in quick succession, you're gonna be shooting over the player's voice limit in no time.
> 
> This is exactly what Daniel James was doing, activated several disparate mics and played tons of block chords with sustain pedal action with the heaviest 10-layer-per-note longs + release samples patches. Literally the worst-case scenario. I don't know if he was just naive or trying to cause problems, but if you're not doing that, you'll more than likely be fine. That would bog down anyone's computer.
> 
> HOWEVER, if you're doing the same thing, lots of mics, big block chords, with any other non-longs patches, you'll be fine. Shorts tend to only ever trigger one voice per-mic. Easy peasy. Context matters. Any of us can sit down and create a worst-case scenario and point and complain, but our entire process as composers is finding solutions to problems and understand the reasons and causes and solutions behind issues. Trade-offs and compromises.
> 
> I will say that single instances of Spitfire's Player do seem to croak a little sooner than Kontakt, at slightly lower voice counts, but if voice counts are spread across plugin instances, things play a lot nicer. It's primarily those rare instances you're feeding a ton of notes into a heavy patch with one too many mics active and a voice count shooting past 500 that you'll start struggling. Even if Kontakt can go a little farther, it's still reckless towards anyone's CPU to be performing into patches like that with tons of active mics on a larger project.
> 
> Stick to one or two mics, and pick your two based on the context of the piece. Maybe go for 3 or 4 for final mixdown if you really actually need them, do some printing, but I've been using ARO for about 3 months on a handful of different projects and I rarely use more than the starting mixes, sometimes the pop pair, sometimes close + a tree. More issues can be solved with smart mixing, EQ, and reverb choices than turning on a few more mics, I promise.


hi paul and thanks for your answer

I agree with many of what you wrote. and there is no need to blame @Daniel James (but i don't want go in this discussion.

I think we know it doesn't make sense turn on 6 mics. but there is the thing that i am not agree with you. mixing starts for me personally in the orchestration. for ex. when i need to move the brass a bit back in the room i want use exactly this mic's. I think that's why they recorded like this . when i use BBS SO for the Brass i take a Decca Tree, Outriggers, Sides, and some Spill. when there are the possibilities to do this - i will do it. i do not want fix this in the mix (Reverb, Precendence, etc. are for me to finish stuff) , when i have all mics already when i can do this. 
I think SA had an idea why they record so many mics in BBS SO. The microphones are designed for this very purpose and not as decoration. 
When i use Kontakt Libs i never must think about CPU Spikes or any other Issues. I love the sound from AR1 - because of that it is a bit a shame, when there are some "obvious" Problems with the SA Player. Again - i love the sound - but not how the player works (completely apart from that, that he is not multitimbral, etc.) in they way ou using ressources.

cheers


----------



## Paul Cardon

jononotbono said:


> Yeah man, thanks. I know how to use sample libraries and mic positions (I understand you’re just being helpful) which is why in my original post I said I don’t know what Daniel’s settings were set to (as I also am very aware how important it is to set things up correctly). I’m kind of laughing at the thought of using 5 mic positions on one patch (try Berlin Strings and see where that gets you) when writing. I personally use a decca and maybe an outrigger and/or a close completely depending on what I am writing. I also would never play block chords with multiple mics as I don’t really write like that. Even though I have DFD streaming setup with my SSDs so voice count isn’t generally a problem for me especially as I have multiple computers handling different instruments and mostly from different SSDs etc. Anyway, thanks.





Nordstorm said:


> hi paul and thanks for your answer
> 
> I agree with many of what you wrote. and there is no need to blame @Daniel James (but i don't want go in this discussion.
> 
> I think we know it doesn't make sense turn on 6 mics. but there is the thing that i am not agree with you. mixing starts for me personally in the orchestration. for ex. when i need to move the brass a bit back in the room i want use exactly this mic's. I think that's why they recorded like this . when i use BBS SO for the Brass i take a Decca Tree, Outriggers, Sides, and some Spill. when there are the possibilities to do this - i will do it. i do not want fix this in the mix (Reverb, Precendence, etc. are for me to finish stuff) , when i have all mics already when i can do this.
> I think SA had an idea why they record so many mics in BBS SO. The microphones are designed for this very purpose and not as decoration.
> When i use Kontakt Libs i never must think about CPU Spikes or any other Issues. I love the sound from AR1 - because of that it is a bit a shame, when there are some "obvious" Problems with the SA Player. Again - i love the sound - but not how the player works (completely apart from that, that he is not multitimbral, etc.) in they way ou using ressources.
> 
> cheers


Haha for sure, and sorry to make such a long-winded post but I thought it'd be good to spit it all out for anyone else who stumbles on the thread and isn't aware of what may be causing these problems.

But my overall intent was to say that this specific "problem" of Spitfire's player isn't really a "problem". If the problem was constant glitches and hitches and bugs during normal operation, then sure, but the "problem" is that it can't quite crank out as many voices as Kontakt can at its default settings, and it's hard to say what the cause is when there could be many aspects of sample playback that could cause it, but for me (your mileage may vary) it's really only a 20-30% cut in voice counts *out of a single Spitfire Player instance*, and maybe something they'll improve with time as their tools and codebase develop. The fact it can already spit out so much and that it scales higher on better systems is all good.

Both Play and Kontakt are pretty old samplers at this point, and it might be safe to assume that Spitfire may have gone a little above standard for a few key aspects of their plugin, such as their resampling algorithms or something like that, for a lift in quality in one area at the expense of performance requirements. Is that tradeoff worth it? Is it an understandable result of progress in technology and modern CPU horsepower that the tech and algorithms behind it improve? Would love to hear more from @SpitfireSupport @Spitfire Team about what they suspect would cause this effect as, compared to Play and Kontakt, there are a lot of engine features that are stripped back (extensive library management vs. isolated exclusive library plugins, for example). So the first assumption is that it'll run better than anything else, but it doesn't, so maybe those engine cuts compared to the competitors do save a lot of performance that they're then using up in other places. All speculation though, and admittedly overly positive speculation, but worth thinking about.


----------



## Bereckis

I have to admit that I find the new Spitfire GUI much better than the Contact GUI because it is easy on my eyes.

If I want to use several layers at the same time without Logic, then I use the great UNIFY.


----------



## mcalis

Bereckis said:


> I have to admit that I find the new Spitfire GUI much better than the Contact GUI because it is easy on my eyes.
> 
> If I want to use several layers at the same time without Logic, then I use the great UNIFY.


Ha, goes to show how different people have different preferences. Glad it works well for you, honestly. Personally I strongly dislike the new Spitfire aesthetic. I find it obnoxiously large and to my eyes it very much sacrifices practical functionality over looking pretty.

I would be able to get over it pretty quick if the player actually performed well, but like many others I have (seemingly) random CPU spikes. All samples disks are already excluded from anti-virus, I've already gone through all the hoops of different buffer sizes and such, but no luck just yet. At the moment it's practically unusable.

For years now Spitfire gives me this ambivalent feeling. On the one hand I would not have learned about all kinds of extended string playing techniques without them, and I would not have samples recorded at Abbey Road sitting on my computer without them either.

On the other hand, I can't shake the feeling they've gotten complacent. When they started they had a serious financial incentive to make their business work, and I can't help but feel like most of that incentive has now vanished. The performance of Sine, Play, and Kontakt all show that it is entirely within the realm of possibility to get significantly better performance. I'll grant them some leeway because it took Play a long time to get good (it's absolutely rock solid now though), and Sine had a lot of teething issues as well.

I do take some issue with the attitude that we just have to live with the current performance. No. It's demonstrably worst-in-class at the moment for a significant amount of users. That said, I trust that SA are aware by now and that they will improve given proper time. Again, I'll cut them some slack here because I've seen this before with both OT and EW.


----------



## Bereckis

mcalis said:


> Ha, goes to show how different people have different preferences. Glad it works well for you, honestly. Personally I strongly dislike the new Spitfire aesthetic. I find it obnoxiously large and to my eyes it very much sacrifices practical functionality over looking pretty.


My problem at age 60 is that I just see worse. If NI finally brought out a scalable GUI for Kontakt, I would be satisfied.


----------



## Saxer

Are the performance problems on Windows only? The Spitfire player runs fine here (Mac/Logic). I don't see any performance differences to Kontakt in real life use.


----------



## Bereckis

Saxer said:


> Are the performance problems on Windows only? The Spitfire player runs fine here (Mac/Logic). I don't see any performance differences to Kontakt in real life use.


I join I haven't noticed any performance differences with IMac and Logic either.


----------



## Daniel James

Paul Cardon said:


> This is exactly what Daniel James was doing, activated several disparate mics and played tons of block chords with sustain pedal action with the heaviest 10-layer-per-note longs + release samples patches. Literally the worst-case scenario. I don't know if he was just naive or trying to cause problems, but if you're not doing that, you'll more than likely be fine. That would bog down anyone's computer.


Why must you continue to word shit like I am trying to make the problems.

Here in this video I am playing 2 patches with 4 mics each Vintage1, Tree, Ambient, Outrigger. Not a particularly unusual combination. A combination I use often in their Kontakt libraries. In the video I play 3 notes, and the CPU jumps to 30% with only those two patches playing. The second I play anymore notes the spikes happen.

This is two patches...in isolation. Not even part of a larger session. And EVERY OTHER companies libraries that I play, even Spitfires own Kontakt based libraries, in this manner (hold a 3 note chord, sustain pedal to move to the next chord then release sustain....you know, like a piano) manages to perform perfectly fine.

I have sessions where I have tens of instruments playing in this exact same manner without issue. Only ever this Spitfire player. So please stop pretending like I make this stuff up. I showed the library on a live stream, there was no editing away, so however it responded to my playing is how it works for me in my work life....which is the main reason I never use it.

Having tons of mic positions is great but if you can't use them, whats the point. Orchestral Tools actually innovated and came up with a solution with mic merging. If other companies can find an issue and actually come up with a solution other than blaming the customer and pretending they are infallible, then so can Spitfire. I get it Paul, you like Spitfire, but seriously can you fuck off trying to insinuate I am trying to make the problems up. Trust me I would much rather these things I purchase from Spitfire actually work. You even hear me multiple times talk about how I like the sounds of certain things. And had this been a Kontakt library I can almost guarantee I would have got on with it better.

Again this CPU spike stuttering doesn't happen with any other orchestral library I have when played in the exact same manner. If the excuse is that this library is very data intensive, then thats a problem with the library, not with me. Every other company manages to figure it out and still manage to sound just as good or better, have more features, and be more playable. They are a big company of over 80 employees now, they should focus more on solutions not excuses... Particularly when 1 or 2 man teams manage to figure it out.

Just because issues don't happen to you, don't assume it isn't happening to others.




-DJ


----------



## jbuhler

mcalis said:


> Ha, goes to show how different people have different preferences. Glad it works well for you, honestly. Personally I strongly dislike the new Spitfire aesthetic. I find it obnoxiously large and to my eyes it very much sacrifices practical functionality over looking pretty.
> 
> I would be able to get over it pretty quick if the player actually performed well, but like many others I have (seemingly) random CPU spikes. All samples disks are already excluded from anti-virus, I've already gone through all the hoops of different buffer sizes and such, but no luck just yet. At the moment it's practically unusable.
> 
> For years now Spitfire gives me this ambivalent feeling. On the one hand I would not have learned about all kinds of extended string playing techniques without them, and I would not have samples recorded at Abbey Road sitting on my computer without them either.
> 
> On the other hand, I can't shake the feeling they've gotten complacent. When they started they had a serious financial incentive to make their business work, and I can't help but feel like most of that incentive has now vanished. The performance of Sine, Play, and Kontakt all show that it is entirely within the realm of possibility to get significantly better performance. I'll grant them some leeway because it took Play a long time to get good (it's absolutely rock solid now though), and Sine had a lot of teething issues as well.
> 
> I do take some issue with the attitude that we just have to live with the current performance. No. It's demonstrably worst-in-class at the moment for a significant amount of users. That said, I trust that SA are aware by now and that they will improve given proper time. Again, I'll cut them some slack here because I've seen this before with both OT and EW.


Sine is having its share of difficulties as well. Though I’ve not had major difficulties with either the SF player or Sine, I‘ve had far more issues with Sine. And I’ve had more issues with Kontakt libraries since I’ve had the SF player than I’ve had with the SF player.

Aesthetically I’m offended by the wasted space of the big knob, especially since the libraries so far have not used it for the space it takes up. And I dislike the page structure of the plugin, that makes it difficult to easily balance mics, or see all the articulations at a glance. But I do like the readability of the SF Player.


----------



## Daniel James

jbuhler said:


> Aesthetically I’m offended by the wasted space of the big knob, especially since the libraries so far have not used it for the space it takes up.


I was watching Guy Michelmore the other day and he almost missed a key controller function which solved an issue he was having, all because it was hidden behind that big fucking knob 😂 there is ZERO reason to not just have the reverb, release and patch specific functions the right of it. It reminds me of that little animated 'intro' on 8dio libraries that serve zero purpose. There is nothing that indicates thats where extra hidden parameters are and is a HUGE design flaw. But for some reason they seem adamant to keep because it was created by 'a graphic designer' even though is serves literally no purpose..... it doesn't even make it look cleaner, as they have the logo to the left of the knob it weighs the whole thing left, when you have the controllers open to the right it balances it out. Aesthetically and functionally poor design, IMO of course.

-DJ


----------



## Denkii

Daniel James said:


> I was watching Guy Michelmore the other day and he almost missed a key controller function which solved an issue he was having, all because it was hidden behind that big fucking knob 😂 there is ZERO reason to not just have the reverb, release and patch specific functions the right of it. It reminds me of that little animated 'intro' on 8dio libraries that serve zero purpose. There is nothing that indicates thats where extra hidden parameters are and is a HUGE design flaw. But for some reason they seem adamant to keep because it was created by 'a graphic designer' even though is serves literally no purpose..... it doesn't even make it look cleaner, as they have the logo to the left of the knob it weighs the whole thing left, when you have the controllers open to the right it balances it out. Aesthetically and functionally poor design, IMO of course.
> 
> -DJ


Sounds like primo corporate decision making. Someone spent a lot of money for having someone else coming up with this stupid thing.
And because they are supposedly experts and also because how could the contractor and/or client ever do a 180 and say that all of the sudden it should be changed again after clearing it in the first place?

It's people working to justify their jobs, not working for the best result.

My vote also goes to: get rid of the knob, have all the FX be shown there from the start and be done with it. You know...three/four little knobs instead of one giant one?
Stop trying to be progressive and extra. Stop making me think which turns into me being annoyed.


----------



## NoamL

jbuhler said:


> Also raise the voice count. I think the default is set at 512. The second I changed the voice count the few issues I was having went away. Earlier today I added a bunch of mics to a trial project of ARO, and I don't get any real CPU spikes with ARO. 2020 iMac i9.


yep same here. Raising the voice count solved a lot of problems.


----------



## gst98

jbuhler said:


> Sine is having its share of difficulties as well. Though I’ve not had major difficulties with either the SF player or Sine, I‘ve had far more issues with Sine. And I’ve had more issues with Kontakt libraries since I’ve had the SF player than I’ve had with the SF player.
> 
> Aesthetically I’m offended by the wasted space of the big knob, especially since the libraries so far have not used it for the space it takes up. And I dislike the page structure of the plugin, that makes it difficult to easily balance mics, or see all the articulations at a glance. But I do like the readability of the SF Player.


Yes but the difference is that OT are sinking large amounts of money into developing the new sinearc compression to improve serious issues in sampling world. As our computing power gets better, developers are making more demanding products with no concern to the performance of them. It really doesn't help when SF then move to a player that has worse performance than Kontakt.

Not that Sine doesn't have its issues - I still struggle to tell mic channels apart from each other in the mixer, and I had a fair few crashes until 1.05. And it really helps that OT and VSL are really communacative online about when updates will happen and what they're going to fix.

And I do agree that Kontakt causes lots of problems too. Kontakt takes ages to load, especially the first time in a project where I get a beachball everytime. SF player and Sine open really quickly, and I put it down to the fact that Kontakt is old and has to handle so many libraries it gets really slow. It also is the thing that crashes for me 9/10 times


----------



## jbuhler

gst98 said:


> It really doesn't help when SF then move to a player that has worse performance than Kontakt.
> 
> Not that Sine doesn't have its issues - I still struggle to tell mic channels apart from each other in the mixer, and I had a fair few crashes until 1.05. And it really helps that OT and VSL are really communacative online about when updates will happen and what they're going to fix.


I don't find that the SF player has worse performance than Kontakt. There are things it doesn't do that Kontakt does, but that's true of Sine as well. And the mic merge on Sine is currently broken for a number of libraries with an update that was promised in January and we're still waiting for. SF sensibly (in my view) separated out their downloading app from the plug-in, where it's combined in Sine and has caused some issues. I don't feel like OT has been especially communicative about updates, and SF still updates their libraries far more frequently than does OT.


----------



## ism

Daniel James said:


> I was watching Guy Michelmore the other day and he almost missed a key controller function which solved an issue he was having, all because it was hidden behind that big fucking knob 😂 there is ZERO reason to not just have the reverb, release and patch specific functions the right of it. It reminds me of that little animated 'intro' on 8dio libraries that serve zero purpose. There is nothing that indicates thats where extra hidden parameters are and is a HUGE design flaw. But for some reason they seem adamant to keep because it was created by 'a graphic designer' even though is serves literally no purpose..... it doesn't even make it look cleaner, as they have the logo to the left of the knob it weighs the whole thing left, when you have the controllers open to the right it balances it out. Aesthetically and functionally poor design, IMO of course.
> 
> -DJ



For power users - or at least anyone technical enough to engage with something like vi-c conversations, you’re of course exactly right. It’s pure form over function. It drives me a bit crazy too. And it’s lucky I don’t mix with lots of mics because that would *really* drive me crazy.

In any event, Paul has said somewhere that some kind of power use mode (i forget his exact words) is coming, so that will be nice.

But it’s also true that there are a lot more people composing, and a lot more types of people than there used to be. And I don’t just mean amateurs. As technologies mature, even very high end composers no longer need to have the same kinds of technical subjectivity as ourselves. A base line of technical engagements is no longer absolutely necessary to cope with the messiness of technology in the way it once was. And this will become true over time.

So from a UX perspective, it’s not necessarily poor design. It’s just not optimized for ourselves.


----------



## gst98

jbuhler said:


> I don't find that the SF player has worse performance than Kontakt. There are things it doesn't do that Kontakt does, but that's true of Sine as well. And the mic merge on Sine is currently broken for a number of libraries with an update that was promised in January and we're still waiting for. SF sensibly (in my view) separated out their downloading app from the plug-in, where it's combined in Sine and has caused some issues. I don't feel like OT has been especially communicative about updates, and SF still updates their libraries far more frequently than does OT.


I just went and tested and legendary low strings, and a single legato sends 4 of my 10 cores to 30-35%. JXL brass legato barely registers, and I even played block chords and it again barely moved from idle. I've found synchron player fairly good other than timestretching on measured trems is unusable with with noise it makes even on monophonic lines.

If I then play legatos on SSO in kontakt it again barely even registers, even adding mics doesn't impact it.

I've done merges of all the AMXL mics on SINE, and been able to play thorugh having every mic on to balance it before merging with no CPU issues at all. With SF its apparently user error to have more than 2 mics enabled.

SF and their support barely ever reply on here. The SF player has been out in several forms for 3/4 years? not sure exaclty but its fairly old now. Didn't we get to 1.05 of SINE in under 6 months, and they gave regular feedback on VI control about what was adding and asking people to send in bug reports etc...

I had legendary low strings for 3 days beofore i had to reinstall it because the patches just dissapeared. I still have'nt used any LABS instruments becuase it is in a loop of asking me to rebuild and support didn't know how to fix it.

I think its clear that people can have very different experinces though, I seem to have had a decent ride with OT and not a great one with SF, for many it seems the other way around.


----------



## mussnig

gst98 said:


> And I do agree that Kontakt causes lots of problems too. Kontakt takes ages to load, especially the first time in a project where I get a beachball everytime. SF player and Sine open really quickly, and I put it down to the fact that Kontakt is old and has to handle so many libraries it gets really slow. It also is the thing that crashes for me 9/10 times



Funny. Kontakt loads way faster than the SF player on my system ...


----------



## gst98

mussnig said:


> Funny. Kontakt loads way faster than the SF player on my system ...


how many libraries do you have installed in kontakt? I'm certain its becuase Kontakt does a search of all your SSDs/HDs on first boot. I cleared my quickload that made a big difference. also hiding lots of libs from my browser tab made a huge difference. The more stuff installed the slower it is.

Just did a quick check. If I just keep using the open plugin edit command, SF player takes about a second to open, SINE is near instant, and Kontakt _can_ be near instant (sometimes), but most other times it beachballs for 5 seconds.


----------



## Denkii

Kontakt is definitely faster than the SF player. That includes first loadup as well as (and especially) loading any library or changing instruments. SF player needs way longer to load all the samples into RAM. All on SSD, more than 80 libraries installed for Kontakt + all the player libraries that don't appear in the left tab. With Kontakt you can start playing even while it's still loading an instrument into RAM, with SF you can't (or at least you can only do it way later). I mean the SF player works but on my machine it is a fact that it has always been significantly slower than Kontakt in any way that I use them.
Edit: To be clear and calm down the SF keyboard warriors before they hunt me down: I am not trying to bash anyone. All I am saying is, it is objectively slower than Kontakt. And I am not even looking at what features might be missing on one vs. the other.


----------



## Trash Panda

muziksculp said:


> Interesting. Can you elaborate on this.
> 
> Thanks


For the purposes of what I've used it for (largely cinematic score mock ups) it seems to get along just fine with the sustain patches flowing smoothly from one chord to another. We'll see how it handles the second movement of the Star Wars OST main theme, but it did just fine to my amateur ears on this.


----------



## LynxUK

Denkii said:


> Kontakt is definitely faster than the SF player. That includes first loadup as well as (and especially) loading any library or changing instruments. SF player needs way longer to load all the samples into RAM. All on SSD, more than 80 libraries installed for Kontakt + all the player libraries that don't appear in the left tab. With Kontakt you can start playing even while it's still loading an instrument into RAM, with SF you can't (or at least you can only do it way later). I mean the SF player works but on my machine it is a fact that it has always been significantly slower than Kontakt in any way that I use them.
> Edit: To be clear and calm down the SF keyboard warriors before they hunt me down: I am not trying to bash anyone. All I am saying is, it is objectively slower than Kontakt. And I am not even looking at what features might be missing on one vs. the other.


Well, I'm a heavy Spitfire user, and I would have to agree with you - slow to load, even after file optimization. I'm not really keen on their player. It wont deter me from buying anything, I just like it less than Kontakt....now, Sine I just loath.


----------



## gst98

Denkii said:


> Kontakt is definitely faster than the SF player. That includes first loadup as well as (and especially) loading any library or changing instruments. SF player needs way longer to load all the samples into RAM. All on SSD, more than 80 libraries installed for Kontakt + all the player libraries that don't appear in the left tab. With Kontakt you can start playing even while it's still loading an instrument into RAM, with SF you can't (or at least you can only do it way later). I mean the SF player works but on my machine it is a fact that it has always been significantly slower than Kontakt in any way that I use them.
> Edit: To be clear and calm down the SF keyboard warriors before they hunt me down: I am not trying to bash anyone. All I am saying is, it is objectively slower than Kontakt. And I am not even looking at what features might be missing on one vs. the other.


Yes loading into RAM is much faster on Kontakt than SF or SINE for me, its made even worse that no one else seems to have been able to figure out how to purge properly like Kontakt. But when you say objectively, you mean objectively in _your_ experience. There are dozens of threads on NI forums about people who get beachballs/generally sluggish opening times.


----------



## jbuhler

gst98 said:


> I just went and tested and legendary low strings, and a single legato sends 4 of my 10 cores to 30-35%. JXL brass legato barely registers, and I even played block chords and it again barely moved from idle. I've found synchron player fairly good other than timestretching on measured trems is unusable with with noise it makes even on monophonic lines.
> 
> If I then play legatos on SSO in kontakt it again barely even registers, even adding mics doesn't impact it.
> 
> I've done merges of all the AMXL mics on SINE, and been able to play thorugh having every mic on to balance it before merging with no CPU issues at all. With SF its apparently user error to have more than 2 mics enabled.
> 
> SF and their support barely ever reply on here. The SF player has been out in several forms for 3/4 years? not sure exaclty but its fairly old now. Didn't we get to 1.05 of SINE in under 6 months, and they gave regular feedback on VI control about what was adding and asking people to send in bug reports etc...
> 
> I had legendary low strings for 3 days beofore i had to reinstall it because the patches just dissapeared. I still have'nt used any LABS instruments becuase it is in a loop of asking me to rebuild and support didn't know how to fix it.
> 
> I think its clear that people can have very different experinces though, I seem to have had a decent ride with OT and not a great one with SF, for many it seems the other way around.


I don't have these issues on my 2020 iMac i9. I've never had an issue with a SF player library. I've had lots of issues with Sine, and just ordinary things like Amber refusing to work for awhile. I really haven't found the OT people any more responsive than the SF people, and in both cases I've had excellent experiences with their support. (All of my issues with SF libraries have been with the Kontakt libraries.)

I just tested AROOF with 4 mics open on all seven non percussion sections. Four note chords are fine, five note chords cause problems if played too quickly, six note chords are a problem. I mean, I don't ever use it like this, so it was a stress test. In regular use with one or two mics, I've haven't encountered a problem with AROOF since I raised the voice count to 750.


----------



## mussnig

gst98 said:


> how many libraries do you have installed in kontakt? I'm certain its becuase Kontakt does a search of all your SSDs/HDs on first boot. I cleared my quickload that made a big difference. also hiding lots of libs from my browser tab made a huge difference. The more stuff installed the slower it is.
> 
> Just did a quick check. If I just keep using the open plugin edit command, SF player takes about a second to open, SINE is near instant, and Kontakt _can_ be near instant (sometimes), but most other times it beachballs for 5 seconds.



I have approx. 1 TB Kontakt libs. The thing is, when I open a SF Player library (and my default is that no patch/preset is loaded - so just the player, no samples) it takes way more than the one second you are describing. Kontakt (the plugin itself without any library) is loading much faster than Spitfire (also faster than the 5 seconds you are experiencing).

Samples themselves are loading faster in Kontakt but I have the impression that the SF player improved and is much better than it used to be (at least with BBCSO).

Would be interesting to know why our systems are behaving so differently. Obviously, I would prefer the SF player to be as quick as you are experiencing it (and probably you would be happy if Kontakt was faster on your system).

On a side note: I also had the complete opposite experience regarding crashes. I can't remember the last time a Kontakt library crashed my DAW but I had my fair share of crashes from LABS ...


----------



## SupremeFist

ism said:


> But it’s also true that there are a lot more people composing, and a lot more types of people than there used to be. And I don’t just mean amateurs. As technologies mature, even very high end composers no longer need to have the same kinds of technical subjectivity as ourselves. A base line of technical engagements is no longer absolutely necessary to cope with the messiness of technology in the way it once was. And this will become true over time.
> 
> So from a UX perspective, it’s not necessarily poor design. It’s just not optimized for ourselves.


I think that not only is it a dumb design but it's significantly _worse_ for newbies than it is for us techy types who grew up with E-mu samplers and zip drives. You load up the player for the first time, and what the hell does the big knob do? It literally doesn't say. Nor does it say that it does different things if you click the blob in the middle. It makes no sense at all!


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

CSW takes forever to load for me while BBCSO is almost instantaneous. Is that due to the player or perhaps due to the library? Hard to say either Kontakt or Spitfire player is faster or slower without taking the library into account.


----------



## mussnig

ALittleNightMusic said:


> CSW takes forever to load for me while BBCSO is almost instantaneous. Is that due to the player or perhaps due to the library? Hard to say either Kontakt or Spitfire player is faster or slower without taking the library into account.



I don't have CSW (so maybe something different is happening there) but in general if a library has it's samples saved in larger files (compared to many smaller files), then the loading times are usually better.

The loading times also depend on the number of Mics that are loaded by default.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Okay who tattled on me...


Daniel James said:


> Why must you continue to word shit like I am trying to make the problems.


I'm sorry. I ran back to the post and edited out the accusatory language. It's not just you, I'm just good at getting swept up in my own emotions on the regular haha

But yeah, my post wasn't trying to hide the fact that Spitfire's Player DOES crack at a lower voice count than Kontakt's.


Daniel James said:


> Just because issues don't happen to you, don't assume it isn't happening to others.


It does happen to me! I can open up the same patches in the same config and actually, mine starts struggling slightly sooner than yours if I do exactly what you were doing, but it's the only time during regular use I've had those issues.

My post wasn't trying to compare ARO's 5dyn x 2vib patches with 4 mics to a CSS ensemble patch with 2-4dyn (yeah the ranges in CSS only go up to 4 max, basses are only 2dyn layers in the ensemble patch) x 2vib and 1 mix mic. I get your point about "well then why offer it if no one can run it?" but if you make two decisions:

be smart about mic usage
avoid tons of fast black chords with this heavy passages if you do decide to use several mics, or use another library for your block chord sketches
Then you'll get a lot more mileage. That's why I made the post, to let people know why that specific situation was the worst-case scenario and how to easily avoid it. Not to defend Spitfire's player performance as, again, I do admit that it's not meeting the raw voice output that Kontakt can. That's totally true. *But to be clear*, yes I can recreate the same problem you ran into, yes my computer starts to struggle even sooner than yours did (paying attention to voice count on this), *but outside of this, *I've literally truly never experienced this issue during my actual project usage of ARO over the past few months. So there has to be this massive chasm between regular use and the specific thing you were doing. That's why I'm at least a little impassioned to make the case I did.

I want people to understand their tools because then we can all solve problems quicker and get on with it. Again, easy advice to avoid a worst-case scenario (i.e. that moment in your video) that others seemed to be pointing towards as a straight-up flaw when it's more of a result of too much of the "more" people ask for, and that more inside a player that's not quite as performative as Kontakt is yet

(too many crossfade layers, too many mics, too many release samples, block chords and sustain pedal against a lower-layer single-mic CSS ensemble patch)

I was in the stream then and was just as frustrated watching it go down hahaha, and I just think we're all a little bit saner if we really understand what's going on in our tools, when we use them with context, but regardless I'm calming myself down now. No hard feelings, for realzies


----------



## Paul Cardon

ALittleNightMusic said:


> CSW takes forever to load for me while BBCSO is almost instantaneous. Is that due to the player or perhaps due to the library? Hard to say either Kontakt or Spitfire player is faster or slower without taking the library into account.


Do a batch resave if you haven't yet!


----------



## Lisa Mueller

Sine and Kontakt have worked way better for me than SF Player as well. I guess on different systems people have different experiences. Also, what host is used, which features may you be missing from Kontakt matter to the user expirience. I honestly would have bought buy AR1 volumes, if they were still on Kontakt - and have not because of my previous experiences with the player. In the future I will have to see how those new platforms develop and decide. Today, it is to much hassle IMO.


----------



## ism

SupremeFist said:


> I think that not only is it a dumb design but it's significantly _worse_ for newbies than it is for us techy types who grew up with E-mu samplers and zip drives. You load up the player for the first time, and what the hell does the big knob do? It literally doesn't say. Nor does it say that it does different things if you click the blob in the middle. It makes no sense at all!


Yeah, so I hate it too. But I think - or at least I’m guessing - that the point is that you load it up for the first time and don’t feel like you’re at the control panel of the Enterprise. 

You can start playing, and until you’re ready to go deeper, you’re protected from the information overload of a power user interface. I’ve been working on projects lately with non technical people, and avoiding information overload is a serious issue. They would prefer this.


There’s real UX science behind this. 


But with a “power user” tab, there’s no reason we can’t all be happy.


----------



## Nordstorm

Daniel James said:


> Why must you continue to word shit like I am trying to make the problems.
> 
> Here in this video I am playing 2 patches with 4 mics each Vintage1, Tree, Ambient, Outrigger. Not a particularly unusual combination. A combination I use often in their Kontakt libraries. In the video I play 3 notes, and the CPU jumps to 30% with only those two patches playing. The second I play anymore notes the spikes happen.
> 
> This is two patches...in isolation. Not even part of a larger session. And EVERY OTHER companies libraries that I play, even Spitfires own Kontakt based libraries, in this manner (hold a 3 note chord, sustain pedal to move to the next chord then release sustain....you know, like a piano) manages to perform perfectly fine.
> 
> I have sessions where I have tens of instruments playing in this exact same manner without issue. Only ever this Spitfire player. So please stop pretending like I make this stuff up. I showed the library on a live stream, there was no editing away, so however it responded to my playing is how it works for me in my work life....which is the main reason I never use it.
> 
> Having tons of mic positions is great but if you can't use them, whats the point. Orchestral Tools actually innovated and came up with a solution with mic merging. If other companies can find an issue and actually come up with a solution other than blaming the customer and pretending they are infallible, then so can Spitfire. I get it Paul, you like Spitfire, but seriously can you fuck off trying to insinuate I am trying to make the problems up. Trust me I would much rather these things I purchase from Spitfire actually work. You even hear me multiple times talk about how I like the sounds of certain things. And had this been a Kontakt library I can almost guarantee I would have got on with it better.
> 
> Again this CPU spike stuttering doesn't happen with any other orchestral library I have when played in the exact same manner. If the excuse is that this library is very data intensive, then thats a problem with the library, not with me. Every other company manages to figure it out and still manage to sound just as good or better, have more features, and be more playable. They are a big company of over 80 employees now, they should focus more on solutions not excuses... Particularly when 1 or 2 man teams manage to figure it out.
> 
> Just because issues don't happen to you, don't assume it isn't happening to others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -DJ



I'm already telling paul - go not in this ground with DJ 
And yes...i have exactly the same problems. also i can not understand why i can use not 3-4 mics. I can well imagine why SF made this video to explain why you should need a maximum of 2 mics.


----------



## Daniel James

Paul Cardon said:


> I'm sorry. I ran back to the post and edited out the accusatory language. It's not just you, I'm just good at getting swept up in my own emotions on the regular haha


Gentleman and scholar, cheers for that. I also take it back


----------



## SupremeFist

ism said:


> Yeah, so I hate it too. But I think - or at least I’m guessing - that the point is that you load it up for the first time and don’t feel like you’re at the control panel of the Enterprise.
> 
> You can start playing, and until you’re ready to go deeper, you’re protected from the information overload of a power user interface. I’ve been working on projects lately with non technical people, and avoiding information overload is a serious issue. They would prefer this.
> 
> 
> There’s real UX science behind this.
> 
> 
> But with a “power user” tab, there’s no reason we can’t all be happy.


That makes sense to me to a degree, but I still can't see any reason not to even label the knob.


----------



## Denkii

gst98 said:


> Yes loading into RAM is much faster on Kontakt than SF or SINE for me, its made even worse that no one else seems to have been able to figure out how to purge properly like Kontakt. But when you say objectively, you mean objectively in _your_ experience. There are dozens of threads on NI forums about people who get beachballs/generally sluggish opening times.


"Beachballs" huh? So we're talking Mac?
You know...the ecosystem where you have to pay triple of Windows universe prices in order to get the same amount of performance?
Yeah I wonder how the amount of reports correlate with that.

But of course you're right that I'm speaking from my own experience. On the three desktops and two laptops I used with Kontakt so far it's speed has been generally consistent.

I'd bet a good chunk of those user reports refer to big libraries while those people have not batch resaved them.
And a batch resaved kontakt library will load faster than an optimized SF player library of the same size on all of the machines I have tried it so far.

I am not trying to say Kontakt is the end it all sampler. It's not. But now instead of being able to use Kontakt, some devs force us into using their (in my experience) inferior proprietary software.
SINE is it's own nightmare but at least OT seems better with listening to user's voices and concerns so far compared to SF.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Nordstorm said:


> I'm already telling paul - go not in this ground with DJ
> And yes...i have exactly the same problems. also i can not understand why i can use not 3-4 mics. I can well imagine why SF made this video to explain why you should need a maximum of 2 mics.


Yeah if I load up two of the heaviest patches in ARO, longs patches heavier than most other libraries, CSS included, and load up 3-4 mics (CSS ensemble patches use only one mic), I too have the same problem.

Again, not deflecting that, rather I'm RECOMMENDING to you that you can find a great sound from 1-2 mics that you can use to write and even deliver, and then maybe use one or two more during final mixdown. It's just advice. I've used ARO on 3 different score gigs now and I'd like to think I'm kind of alright at the whole mixing thing, and I rarely use more than 1-2 mics up to final delivery. Loading up more mics *while writing* has very minimal gains, I assure you.


Nordstorm said:


> i do not want fix this in the mix (Reverb, Precendence, etc. are for me to finish stuff) , when i have all mics already when i can do this.


I want to be a little more clear about this. I'd avoid using Precedence on ARO since the image of that space is already so good through the mic configuration they've set up, but when it comes to other basic abilities like EQ, M/S balance, and added reverb, those are bare basics. I can assure you that every score recorded in Abbey Road has had an engineer tweaking all this stuff to fit the context of the score that's been recorded there. Hell, almost everyone adds some lexicon hall or some bricasti verb to an orchestra to enhance sense of scale. It's natural to do stuff like that and EQ and width management in the mix, even more so when you're mixing libraries together.

Mic options are the core of the mix, but only a piece of it. I worry that people are spending more time fussing with the mic setup in their libraries than they need to, and for Simon to recommend to Paul and the team that he never expected people to run up disparate mics across the sets reinforces that we should maybe feel justified in doing the same.

Not an excuse, not a defense, just advice.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Denkii said:


> I am not trying to say Kontakt is the end it all sampler. It's not. But now instead of being able to use Kontakt, some devs force us into using their (in my experience) inferior proprietary software.
> SINE is it's own nightmare but at least OT seems better with listening to user's voices and concerns so far compared to SF.


I've talked about this elsewhere but feel like it's good to bring up again. Sample library devs everywhere know that Kontakt has MASSIVE piracy issues that are still unsolved to this day. Not just being able to pirate a library and use it, but the ability to completely tear out every piece of a library, from exporting individual samples to diving into the "locked" code behind the interface. It's pretty bad, and with most devs still releasing in Kontakt 5 to support users who haven't upgraded (including Spitfire when they do Kontakt releases), that will continue to happen. NI, whether they're sitting on their butt or don't have the means to fix these problems, is running slow on solving it.

So moving away is a pretty appealing option not just for functionality. Would Abbey Road have allowed anyone to sample in their space if they were releasing through Kontakt while being aware of its deep piracy issues? I'm just spitballing, but with how tight AR keeps their operations, I think it'd be unlikely. You can't even get publically available IR responses of any of their spaces anywhere. They take a lot of pride in keeping their stuff under lock and I'm sure part of Spitfire's pitch was assuring them that they'd be releasing content in a platform that hadn't been cracked wide open for the past 10 years.

I'm certain that every Spitfire Kontakt release flies up on piracy websites immediately after release while, as far as I'm aware, there are no true cracks of any Spitfire Player libraries.


----------



## Nordstorm

Paul Cardon said:


> Yeah if I load up two of the heaviest patches in ARO, longs patches heavier than most other libraries, CSS included, and load up 3-4 mics (CSS ensemble patches use only one mic), I too have the same problem.
> 
> Again, not deflecting that, rather I'm RECOMMENDING to you that you can find a great sound from 1-2 mics that you can use to write and even deliver, and then maybe use one or two more during final mixdown. It's just advice. I've used ARO on 3 different score gigs now and I'd like to think I'm kind of alright at the whole mixing thing, and I rarely use more than 1-2 mics up to final delivery. Loading up more mics *while writing* has very minimal gains, I assure you.
> 
> I want to be a little more clear about this. I'd avoid using Precedence on ARO since the image of that space is already so good through the mic configuration they've set up, but when it comes to other basic abilities like EQ, M/S balance, and added reverb, those are bare basics. I can assure you that every score recorded in Abbey Road has had an engineer tweaking all this stuff to fit the context of the score that's been recorded there. Hell, almost everyone adds some lexicon hall or some bricasti verb to an orchestra to enhance sense of scale. It's natural to do stuff like that and EQ and width management in the mix, even more so when you're mixing libraries together.
> 
> Mic options are the core of the mix, but only a piece of it. I worry that people are spending more time fussing with the mic setup in their libraries than they need to, and for Simon to recommend to Paul and the team that he never expected people to run up disparate mics across the sets reinforces that we should maybe feel justified in doing the same.
> 
> Not an excuse, not a defense, just advice.


thanks for your replay. Yes, we can do a lot of the stuff in the mix with some easy EQ Tweaks and all the nice plugins that we all have - also with reverb like Cinerooms or 7HE - sure. but my workflow is a bit a other one , and i do not spend many hours to find the mic position that i need. As I said. The mics have a sense why they were built in. The best example is BBC SO with all that stuff. And i like the spill mices and all this stuff. and maybe i a to stupid, but i can not add a spill mic sound in the mix- as it has already been wonderfully recorded in BBC SO...

Those who have no problems can be happy


----------



## jbuhler

SupremeFist said:


> I think that not only is it a dumb design but it's significantly _worse_ for newbies than it is for us techy types who grew up with E-mu samplers and zip drives. You load up the player for the first time, and what the hell does the big knob do? It literally doesn't say. Nor does it say that it does different things if you click the blob in the middle. It makes no sense at all!


Yes, and how do you move it efficiently with your mouse? Mostly, though, it's the big design element and so it suggests it should do something really important, and I haven't found a library yet where that's the case. (Maybe turning on and off the glock in Sparkling Woodwinds counts, but I don't think so.)


----------



## Paul Cardon

Nordstorm said:


> thanks for your replay. Yes, we can do a lot of the stuff in the mix with some easy EQ Tweaks and all the nice plugins that we all have - also with reverb like Cinerooms or 7HE - sure. but my workflow is a bit a other one , and i do not spend many hours to find the mic position that i need. As I said. The mics have a sense why they were built in. The best example is BBC SO with all that stuff. And i like the spill mices and all this stuff. and maybe i a to stupid, but i can not add a spill mic sound in the mix- as it has already been wonderfully recorded in BBC SO...
> 
> Those who have no problems can be happy


Virtual orchestration at every step is about the right balance of compromises, whether it's sound or realism or articulation mixing or playback performance, and I think it's always worth it to try and find a way around our issues. I spent years at the beginning making all my first gigs on the crudiest little Gateway PC with a cruddy little AMD Athlon X4 CPU and a cruddy little 6 GB of RAM and most of my libs running off a spinning disk. The things I did to keep working on projects was insane and I ended up making some pretty awesome stuff back then. Even now with a 9900k and 64GB of RAM, I still keep some of those lessons in mind and always find ways to do less with more, or find new smart ways to do something without brute-forcing the easy path.


----------



## Flyo

On Strings for example the Big Knob handles the Vibrato amount, its a non sense having the Reverb as the Main/First movement on everything, its almost useless the reverb as the main/fisrt function there. There are a much more important fewer task to move and see before apply a reverb/fx... specially on a library as the Abbey Road having that studio huge room. It would be cool if the user can re-arrange quickly the primary first function of the knob whatever they want


----------



## Denkii

Paul Cardon said:


> I've talked about this elsewhere but feel like it's good to bring up again. Sample library devs everywhere know that Kontakt has MASSIVE piracy issues that are still unsolved to this day. Not just being able to pirate a library and use it, but the ability to completely tear out every piece of a library, from exporting individual samples to diving into the "locked" code behind the interface. It's pretty bad, and with most devs still releasing in Kontakt 5 to support users who haven't upgraded (including Spitfire when they do Kontakt releases), that will continue to happen. NI, whether they're sitting on their butt or don't have the means to fix these problems, is running slow on solving it.
> 
> So moving away is a pretty appealing option not just for functionality. Would Abbey Road have allowed anyone to sample in their space if they were releasing through Kontakt while being aware of its deep piracy issues? I'm just spitballing, but with how tight AR keeps their operations, I think it'd be unlikely. You can't even get publically available IR responses of any of their spaces anywhere. They take a lot of pride in keeping their stuff under lock and I'm sure part of Spitfire's pitch was assuring them that they'd be releasing content in a platform that hadn't been cracked wide open for the past 10 years.
> 
> I'm certain that every Spitfire Kontakt release flies up on piracy websites immediately after release while, as far as I'm aware, there are no true cracks of any Spitfire Player libraries.


I understand the appeal for the developer. I understand that there even are theoretical benefits for the customer but so far all kontakt equivalents are...well...not really equivalents and I can find that underwhelming without having to justify myself.
SINE at least offers some practical benefits already that neither SF nor Kontakt offers.

Oh by the way: There are even more theoretical benefits for the customers like say...being able to have first party power over licensing which would enable them to look into refunding and/or reselling (my all time favorite topic). But we all know how much changed in those regards.
Piracy is not solemnly a pricing and/or security problem and working on security alone will not prevent it (nothing ever will long term if the product is interesting to enough people).

I think it's time for this one again:





If you think moving to a proprietary player is what got them a deal to record in AR1...lol :D
And if the player on the other hand could actually comply to whatever was part of that contract, the people who developed that thing are way better off working in IT security for the military or the other side.
ARO wasn't the first sample library recorded in studio one.

When it comes to SF, their followers will never grow tired of showing a Pipi Longstocking world building attitude.


----------



## Paul Cardon

Denkii said:


> Oh by the way: There are even more theoretical benefits for the customers like say...being able to have first party power over licensing which would enable them to look into refunding and/or reselling (my all time favorite topic). But we all know how much changed in those regards.


It turns the licensing of content into a bit of a mess and adds a ton of support overhead, but I also think it's a super interesting topic.


Denkii said:


> If you think moving to a proprietary player is what got them a deal to record in AR1...lol :D


Just a part! I'm sure it factored is all.


Denkii said:


> When it comes to SF, their followers will never grow tired of showing a Pipi Longstocking world building attitude.


This own is too epic because I had to spend 5 minutes researching this Swedish character from an American perspective to understand what you meant and it still hurt my feelings.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> I think you are confusing what I'm saying. Yes, surely, the modular library will have lots and lots of instruments, sections, and articulations, many, many more than Foundations, and they will all be deeply sampled. I simply question whether it will have patches for Trumpets a4 and Horns a4. That still leaves a host of possibilities: Trumpet 1, Trumpet 2, Trumpets a2 or a3, trumpets a6. Maybe Trumpets 1, 2, 3, and 4 all individual. Similar situation for horn. My expectations are set by looking at how BML was created around Albion 1 (legacy). I think the new AR modular orchestra will bear a similar relation to AROOF as SSO does to Albion 1. It's why I don't expect any of the legatos for AROOF to duplicate something that will be available in another form in the modular library. So if there is an ARO expansion of trumpets a4 legato, then I doubt the AR modular will also have a set of trumpets a4 articulations. (But again AR modular will have a whole module's worth of trumpet patches.)


Well fair enough, I probably was getting the wrong end of the stick because I don't really understand why you think this. Personally I don't think anything about the AROOF stuff should affect the modular for the reasons I've already stated. I mean if they think that actually solo x2 + a2 + a3 + a6 (for example) without a4 would be the most useful for some reason, then that's great, but I don't think they should do anything to lower the standard of the modular library due to another library which does not share it's comprehensive approach. If the intention would be that you are meant to supplement the modular libraries with bits of the AROOF libraries, then it would garner the same criticism from me that any library with serious inconsistencies of articulations of patches would, except worse than usual knowing the intention behind the modular library.

At least that is how I see it. Sorry for beating a dead horse about this, I just (obviously) feel quite strongly about this. I understand not everyone has been waiting for this library (maybe for the idea of a library, more than what will end up being the reality I guess) as long as I have and aren't as invested in the detail/quality/comprehensiveness aspect as I might be.

That being said, specifically regarding the AROOF: Selections a4 trumpet or horns whatever, I don't think that is going to happen anyway. I'm pretty certain these selections are all going to be combinations of instruments for classic orchestrations, not just the kind of single instrument section playing normally you would get in something like the modular library. What makes it appropriate for a selections library when they could just do the same thing but much more comprehensively and with the same musicians in the same (or near) session for the modular library? I just don't see the logic to that, *especially* if that means the are going to skip it when it comes to the modular library they are just about to do anyway... seriously, why they would do that? haha Maybe I'm misunderstanding something again?


----------



## Tom Ferguson

ism said:


> Yeah, so I hate it too. But I think - or at least I’m guessing - that the point is that you load it up for the first time and don’t feel like you’re at the control panel of the Enterprise.
> 
> You can start playing, and until you’re ready to go deeper, you’re protected from the information overload of a power user interface. I’ve been working on projects lately with non technical people, and avoiding information overload is a serious issue. They would prefer this.
> 
> 
> There’s real UX science behind this.
> 
> 
> But with a “power user” tab, there’s no reason we can’t all be happy.


Then do what they did with their kontact libraries and have a beginner page on first load, and then an 'expert' page you can click to with all the info you could possibly need right there. Preferably with a *super-future-tech-galaxy-brain-2021-thinking* option to have the expert mode as default. I really feel that a 12yo could come up with these ideas, but for some reason they just don't/can't.


----------



## ism

Tom Ferguson said:


> Then do what they did with their kontact libraries and have a beginner page on first load, and then an 'expert' page you can click to with all the info you could possibly need right there.



Precisely what I was saying, and that Paul has indicated is on the way.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

ism said:


> Precisely what I was saying, and that Paul has indicated is on the way.


Sorry my post made it sound like I was disagreeing with you rather than agreeing. And that's really good news that I didn't know! Go Spitfire!!! Woooh : D


----------



## ism

Caveat is that I don’t remember where Paul mentioned this. But it was somewhere.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

ism said:


> Caveat is that I don’t remember where Paul mentioned this. But it was somewhere.


Well we can hold him to it even if it was just a hallucinated fever dream : S ; P


----------



## jbuhler

Tom Ferguson said:


> Well fair enough, I probably was getting the wrong end of the stick because I don't really understand why you think this. Personally I don't think anything about the AROOF stuff should affect the modular for the reasons I've already stated. I mean if they think that actually solo x2 + a2 + a3 + a6 (for example) without a4 would be the most useful for some reason, then that's great, but I don't think they should do anything to lower the standard of the modular due to another library which does not share it's comprehensive approach. If the intention would be that you are meant to supplement the modular libraries with bits of the AROOF libraries, then it would garner the same criticism from me that any library with serious inconsistencies of articulations of patches would, except worse than usual knowing the intention behind the modular library.
> 
> At least that is how I see it. Sorry for beating a dead horse about this, I just (obviously) feel quite strongly about this. I understand not everyone has been waiting for this library (maybe for the idea of a library, more than what will end up being the reality I guess) as long as I have and aren't as invested in the detail/quality/comprehensiveness as I might be.
> 
> That being said, specifically regarding the AROOF: Selections a4 brass whatever, I don't think that is going to happen anyway. I'm pretty certain these instruments are all going to be combinations of instruments for classic orchestrations, not just the kind of single instrument section playing normally you would get in something like the modular library. What makes it appropriate for a selections library when they could just do the same thing but much more comprehensively and with the same musicians in the same (or near) session? I just don't see the logic to that, *especially* if that means the are going to skip it when it comes to the modular library they are just about to do anyway... seriously, I don't see why they would do that haha. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something again?


It's hard to say what they are thinking, tbh. I would like to think the modular libraries will have at least two solo players per section, though that hasn't generally been the SF way. I find section patches useful and I doubt they would do both a2 and a3 but rather one or the other. But even with two solo players per section I look at SSO and see one way that might go. But I look at BBCSO and I see another way that might go, and the BBCSO route leads to a4 horns for the modular section. Because of AROOF, I think it more likely they will follow a template more like SSO than BBCSO (and I'm talking layout of the various sections not number of articulations or dynamic layers), but who knows. This is just speculation.


----------



## jbuhler

ism said:


> Caveat is that I don’t remember where Paul mentioned this. But it was somewhere.


I remember this too, but it was rather a long time ago, I think, so while I don't doubt it's on the to-do list, I think it might be some time still before we see it.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> It's hard to say what they are thinking, tbh. I would like to think the modular libraries will have at least two solo players per section, though that hasn't generally been the SF way. I find section patches useful and I doubt they would do both a2 and a3 but rather one or the other. But even with two solo players per section I look at SSO and see one way that might go. But I look at BBCSO and I see another way that might go, and the BBCSO route leads to a4 horns for the modular section. Because of AROOF, I think it more likely they will follow a template more like SSO than BBCSO (and I'm talking layout of the various sections not number of articulations or dynamic layers), but who knows. This is just speculation.


Yep, I can see that happening for sure! Honestly I'm not so bothered about having two solo players, but I certainly wouldn't be against it and I know loads of people live for that shit haha. I think either solo + a2 + a4 + a6 or solo 1 + solo 2 + a4 (/a3 maybe in this combo?) + a6 would be my preference.

Though conceptually I'd love both a4 + a3 because I feel that a4's would be perfect for 2 part a6 chords, and a3's would be perfect for 3 part a6 chords, because they have both enough of the sound of the room being activated by the multiple players, but with a little less thickness that you would get if using the full a6 patches for the chords. That's kind of me theorising there though, because most libraries don't have those kind of options of course.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

jbuhler said:


> I remember this too, but it was rather a long time ago, I think, so while I don't doubt it's on the to-do list, I think it might be some time still before we see it.


We should probably just have a campaign of muziksculp-ing it into existence by simply talking about it as if it's been confirmed and should be coming very soon ; )


----------



## muziksculp

Tom Ferguson said:


> @muziksculp-ing


LOL... That's a new term that can be handy.


----------



## Flyo

How do i spell the most nedded update to Foundation? Symmetry... All articulations perfectly mirrored across all Sections. @Spitefire


----------



## Trash Panda

Flyo said:


> How do i spell the most nedded update to Foundation? Symmetry... All articulations perfectly mirrored across all Sections. @Spitefire


Maybe if you post the same. exact. point. ten more times, the library will stop being what Spitfire wanted to make and will become what you want it to be.


----------



## Flyo

Trash Panda said:


> Maybe if you post the same. exact. point. ten more times, the library will stop being what Spitfire wanted to make and will become what you want it to be.


Yess i do one more last time, because i found the exact word to describe it simple and to the point, hope the team work with Foundation a little more. You got it right. Was my last time


----------



## JohnG

Flyo said:


> Was my last time


I'll believe it when I see it.

This thread has deteriorated into a complaints department, at times a very petty one, instead of musicians helping musicians.

*Buy It?*

If you're trying to work out whether to get the library, I weigh the amazing, dazzling sonic quality at about 95 out of 100, and issues with the player -- whether it's Sine, Spitfire, Kontakt, Play -- whatever -- at maybe a 3. Not sure about the other 2...

Abbey Road One offers sounds that are among the most amazing I've ever heard from samples. I would be ready to buy a new computer -- wait! I did! -- to be able to get sounds like that and forget about RAM or any other kinds of limitations.

Rarely, but sometimes, we hear libraries that just sound so incredible it's worth doing whatever it takes to incorporate them. Lately, Spitfire has been crushing it, along with a few other standouts like Strezov's choirs and the updated Afflatus strings, just to name a few.

*Players, Schmayers*

Who cares how fast they load? I mean, unless you are @chimuelo playing live shows, does it really slow the composition process if Sine or Spitfire's player is even 3x slower? 

*Why Not Kontakt?*

I don't really see how NI can carry on without addressing piracy. New Kontakt libraries are pirated sometimes within 24 hours -- that fast. So clearly that's not a sustainable model for those developing libraries. Besides, the custom players do offer capabilities with many mic positions that Kontakt doesn't easily emulate.

It's the sound-sound-sound. First last and always.


[note: I have received free products from Strezov Sampling]


----------



## Flyo

I get it for what it's sounds, my main priority. I really try to understand why it's developed or presented as that. Maybe someone appears to bring an answer or have a clue, or do feel as i am with the last mentioned from me so many times and push the boundaries to bring us a little more love 2 Foundations before they fully embark to the (I guess) pricey Abbey Road modulars. Not everybody have multiples sample libraries, and maybe wants to work with selected One on an entire level (as an Ensamble Orchestra) and that's what i found lacks with ARO Foundation, and now Selections (for now).


----------



## Paul Cardon

Flyo said:


> I get it for what it's sounds, my main priority. I really try to understand why it's developed or presented as that. Maybe someone appears to bring an answer or have a clue, or do feel as i am with the last mentioned from me so many times and push the boundaries to bring us a little more love 2 Foundations before they fully embark to the (I guess) pricey Abbey Road modulars. Not everybody have multiples sample libraries, and maybe wants to work with selected One on an entire level (as an Ensamble Orchestra) and that's what i found lacks with ARO Foundation, and now Selections (for now).


My hunch is that ARO was only meant to be the first step, a place to start experimenting with some new methods and some new material in a new space alongside a new partnership, show off what the future may bring. I don't think anyone from Spitfire has said anywhere that ARO would ever be a one-stop-shop, and it's unfortunate that the articulation sets are tight, but I think it's fair to say that most people doing virtual orchestration for a living, who do lots of media music, mix and match libraries all the time. Everyone who I've known personally who's in the media music world at a professional level does, but for sure that's just my perspective. Spitfire has made it clear that their target is media composers and ARO is useful to those ends, not the edge case composers and hobbyists who are obsessed with special criteria and methodology, stuff that's sometimes outside of the scope of and sometimes in direct opposition with delivering good media music.

Also making it clear that I'm just talking about your idea of a package that can do everything in a broad and equal way. There are easily other arguments in other aspects of ARO that could go against what I'm talkin' about.


----------



## Flyo

Paul Cardon said:


> My hunch is that ARO was only meant to be the first step, a place to start experimenting with some new methods and some new material in a new space alongside a new partnership, show off what the future may bring. I don't think anyone from Spitfire has said anywhere that ARO would ever be a one-stop-shop, and it's unfortunate that the articulation sets are tight, but I think it's fair to say that most people doing virtual orchestration for a living, who do lots of media music, mix and match libraries all the time. Everyone who I've known personally who's in the media music world at a professional level does, but for sure that's just my perspective, and Spitfire's also made it clear that their target is media composers and ARO is useful to those ends, not the edge case composers and hobbyists who are obsessed with special criteria and methodology, stuff that's sometimes outside of the scope of and sometimes in direct opposition with delivering good media music.
> 
> Also making it clear that I'm just talking about your idea of a package that can do everything in a broad and equal way. There are easily other arguments in other aspects of ARO that could go against what I'm talkin' about.


Understand what you said. Im only wishing, exposing my use with, and questioning if it would be an upgrade path for what its much missing, and even more doing justice with the term *Foundation* and also *Abbey Road Studios* and of course *Spitefire* itself, because I really think they check almost all needs in terms of an very best Ensamble Orchestra> QualitySound/Playability/Mic Positions/SoundHall etc. I do keep my faith on still


----------



## Trash Panda

You lied. You said you would stop beating this dead horse.


----------



## Flyo

Trash Panda said:


> You lied. You said you would stop beating this dead horse.


Oh my... I did it? f&ck. I think this its very alive and they will continue to bring us more. Hope so


----------



## mussnig

Flyo said:


> Oh my... I did it? f&ck. I think this its very alive and they will continue to bring us more. Hope so



Why don't you message Spitfire support directly? I have the feeling you are again and again telling us what type of product you want to have but we are not the ones producing or selling these libraries ...


----------



## Flyo

I don’t find eco on this thread about this. I guess I’m the only one. Almost everyone stop at was offered initially on AROF and anything else.


----------



## Nick Weathers

Anyone know if AR1 will have solo instruments? I’m thinking of picking up BBCSO Core for the solos and more control, but if there will be solos for AR1, I’ll wait. I love the sound, the spitfire player, everything about it.


----------



## jbuhler

Nick Weathers said:


> Anyone know if AR1 will have solo instruments? I’m thinking of picking up BBCSO Core for the solos and more control, but if there will be solos for AR1, I’ll wait. I love the sound, the spitfire player, everything about it.


The modular AR library will have soloists. But the modular library is likely to be most expensive. It also is unlikely that it will start appearing before 2022.


----------



## muziksculp




----------



## muziksculp

Any guesses what they have sampled at Abbey Road Studio Two ? According the the video they are done with the recording, and are in the editing phase. So, these might be out soon.

Maybe soloists ? i.e. Solo Strings, woodwinds, brass, Percussionists ? or .... ? Since they don't have to be sampled as a group, which makes it less of a restriction given the current COVID situation in the U.K.

I don't know much about what sonic characteristics AR-Studio Two offers, so if anyone has some background about this, maybe some feedback on AR-Studio Two would be helpful, just to get an idea what it is very suitable for. I think the Beatles recorded in that studio, but don't know much beyond that.

They will also be releasing more specialized expansions for AROOF, Most likely in AR-Studio One, I wonder when the next expansion/s will be ready for release ?


----------



## Flyo

So, I will have to wait maybe years to have common symmetrical sections with that special AR technical acoustic sound. And have a lot much more money to invest. From libraries and even more storage to ram. Insert all the arts sounds not founded in AROF from distinctive individuals instruments. When all i really go for now was that cohesive sound of the big Studio One with the orchestra playing all together. It will be a lost chance to don’t go for an equally, shared, mirrored most common arts from section to section. Almost all I read in here it’s based on prediction of the future release of Studio Two individuals instruments or smaller sections modular project. This will be great of course! But this thread it’s about most directly to Abbey Road Studio One Foundation Ensamble Orchestra Department. Sorry for bringing this again but I have to say it man.


----------



## Trash Panda




----------



## Flyo

Trash Panda said:


>



Jajajjaja but daaanm do you really think that this it’s all the Big Studio ONE from Abbey Road, and the Big Ensamble Orchestra presented from Spitefire Audio have to offer?🤔


----------



## Flyo

There it’s a thread about Studio Two project living, breathing ready on? Because we are still here on Studio One and there a few recording task to do before we leave. Cambio y fuera.


----------



## Flyo

Apart from jokes. As a family musician I really hope that this pandemic situation don’t be any reason. I’m really, really glad that my investment effort go to the musicians to, so without a doubt an Ensamble Orchestra reunites much more people on one location, this could’ve as impediment in this situation, at the same time it’s important to their lives having activities to living on to. Most important to all is that everyone have healt, work and stay safe, around the world.


----------



## jbuhler

Flyo said:


> There it’s a thread about Studio Two project living, breathing ready on? Because we are still here on Studio One and there a few recording task to do before we leave. Cambio y fuera.


We may or may not get more basic articulations. SF has added articulations occasionally in the past, and there are some that would be most useful, especially a better variety of shorts for the strings. But I never buy a library expecting more than what it currently has. I believe SF announced 10 paid expansion packs, and we've seen two of those, so we should be getting 8 more. But those are paid expansions of course.


----------



## PaulieDC

To no one in particular, srsly: If you don't like it, don't buy it and stop talking about it.

Next slide.


----------



## Flyo

Initially i was thinking wrong and waiting this packs to collect them to bring me standard symmetry sounds from section to section, and light on the holes on Foundation to. But now that I know what the Selections offers change my thoughts radically. So Foundation and the Orchestra itself I think deserve an update to the Standard.


----------



## Nick Weathers

PaulieDC said:


> To no one in particular, srsly: If you don't like it, don't buy it and stop talking about it.
> 
> Next slide.


Exactly. I love AR1. It’s my first library and I can see the need for individual instruments. I’ll be picking up BBCSO to compliment. AR1 is so immediate and sounds awesome. Looking forward to the other expansions.


----------



## Flyo

I see almost everyone has a huge wallet here? That’s what’s up? So it’s my fault to paid $350usd based on paying 10 future unknown releases of packs for $49usd each one called Selections ? Yess. Do u have a voice to opinion as a user like everyone here? Why not? Yess. Bring us symmetry as a standard. It will ROCK IT! 🎸 even more... Keep roll on going


----------



## NoamL

The #1 thing that gives me confidence in ARO is that they are *recording* great sounds off the bat.

I was a cellist and am pretty finicky about capturing the right tone with cello.. load up the Close mic for AROOF's low strings and play above Eb so that you just hear the cellos... then compare it to the Close mic in SSS, CSS, HWS, or CS2.... and you will learn something...

AROOF's close mics feel beautiful & dimensional when solo'd, and together with the tree & outriggers capturing a very pristine sound IMO, this library is among the "best recorded" ever. It is a product of expertise from someone who really knows how to record THOSE musicians in THAT space. The mixes are very, very good. I think few here can make a better mix than the brilliant sounding mix2 (mix1 is admittedly epic but feels a bit too ambient and Star-Wars-Prequel-ish for the music I like to write).

Who knows what the modular libraries have in store, but I would actually *put less urgency on getting all the mics* than on getting a 2-signal setup, "Close & Room," where "Room" is the Tree, Outrigger, and any ambient/spill mics Simon Rhodes includes in his mix, and "Close" is the collection of close+feature mics that he'd turn up to bring out the detail in a section. That 2-signal setup is all I would ever load up and all I'd ever deliver to a mixer!!


----------



## Flyo

NoamL said:


> The #1 thing that gives me confidence in ARO is that they are *recording* great sounds off the bat.
> 
> I was a cellist and am pretty finicky about capturing the right tone with cello.. load up the Close mic for AROOF's low strings and play above Eb so that you just hear the cellos... then compare it to the Close mic in SSS, CSS, HWS, or CS2.... and you will learn something...
> 
> AROOF's close mics feel beautiful & dimensional when solo'd, and together with the tree & outriggers capturing a very pristine sound IMO, this library is among the "best recorded" ever. It is a product of expertise from someone who really knows how to record THOSE musicians in THAT space. The mixes are very, very good. I think few here can make a better mix than the brilliant sounding mix2 (mix1 is admittedly epic but feels a bit too ambient and Star-Wars-Prequel-ish for the music I like to write).
> 
> Who knows what the modular libraries have in store, but I would actually *put less urgency on getting all the mics* than on getting a 2-signal setup, "Close & Room," where "Room" is the Tree, Outrigger, and any ambient/spill mics Simon Rhodes includes in his mix, and "Close" is the collection of close+feature mics that he'd turn up to bring out the detail in a section. That 2-signal setup is all I would ever load up and all I'd ever deliver to a mixer!!


I think the same exact as you in terms of sound wise this audio sample library have and the way it was recorded. Sensational. Im still here on One... what’s the hurry? The full Orchestra was Reunited let’s do it all!


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Flyo said:


> Sorry for bringing this again but I have to say it man.


No you didn't.

"At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."*

In other news, the ignore button is a gift from the heavens.

* From Billy Madison in case anybody doesn't get the reference


----------



## yiph2

Flyo said:


> So it’s my fault to paid $350usd based on paying 10 future unknown releases of packs for $49usd each one called Selections ?


Yes it is completely your fault. You saw the articulations list on the website yet you still chose to buy it


----------



## Flyo

ALittleNightMusic said:


> No you didn't.
> 
> "At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."*
> 
> In other news, the ignore button is a gift from the heavens.
> 
> * From Billy Madison in case anybody doesn't get the reference


Incoherent? Clearly you don’t read everything.


yiph2 said:


> Yes it is completely your fault. You saw the articulations list on the website yet you still chose to buy it


So you missed the “?” Sign at the end of my text... and then you selected only this and boast about it. I said right after an affirmative “Yess” i don’t blame any way for what i proudly purchase, right? No? Read it again.


----------



## PaulieDC

Flyo said:


> I see almost everyone has a huge wallet here? That’s what’s up? So it’s my fault to paid $350usd based on paying 10 future unknown releases of packs for $49usd each one called Selections ? Yess. Do u have a voice to opinion as a user like everyone here? Why not? Yess. Bring us symmetry as a standard. It will ROCK IT! 🎸 even more... Keep roll on going


Nobody is saying anything is your fault. Give SpitFire a chance to get the project going. Symmetry will come because that's their plan. Millions of samples take time to record and produce. BTW, $350 is NOT an amount that qualifies as "huge wallet" when you're talking sample libraries, lol. That doesn't even begin to scratch the itch. Which is why AR1 and BBCSO Core for their prices offer a LOT, and it's just the start. Keep your stick on the ice... we'll get there.


----------



## PaulieDC

Nick Weathers said:


> Exactly. I love AR1. It’s my first library and I can see the need for individual instruments. I’ll be picking up BBCSO to compliment. AR1 is so immediate and sounds awesome. Looking forward to the other expansions.


Ba da bing. That's the combo I'm moving forward with too. And dragging SCS, BS and BB 6 inches behind!


----------



## Flyo

ALittleNightMusic said:


> No you didn't.
> 
> "At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."*
> 
> In other news, the ignore button is a gift from the heavens.
> 
> * From Billy Madison in case anybody doesn't get the reference


Do I need to feel sorry for posting what I think


PaulieDC said:


> Nobody is saying anything is your fault. Give SpitFire a chance to get the project going. Symmetry will come because that's their plan. Millions of samples take time to record and produce. BTW, $350 is NOT an amount that qualifies as "huge wallet" when you're talking sample libraries, lol. That doesn't even begin to scratch the itch. Which is why AR1 and BBCSO Core for their prices offer a LOT, and it's just the start. Keep your stick on the ice... we'll get there.


Of course both AR1 and BBCcore have magnificent quality for price. You get $350 AR1 (intro price) + pick up all the AR1 selecciones $49 each x 10 Total $840 apeoximatly. Oh if we count BBCore as a luxury plus $1.340 Huge wallet as I call it. But the main reason to all this it’s keep pushing to get the most out of the Big One as it’s sounds wonderful presented just like that Full Orchestra Ensamble. I think I say it a lot


----------



## Flyo

ALittleNightMusic said:


> No you didn't.
> 
> "At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."*
> 
> In other news, the ignore button is a gift from the heavens.
> 
> * From Billy Madison in case anybody doesn't get the reference


So everybody witness my concern about was i mentioned repeatedly. I’m doing wrong to says something that everybody knows and nobody says or ask? Ok that’s me. For me what it’s seems significant maybe its not to you.


----------



## Nick Weathers

PaulieDC said:


> Ba da bing. That's the combo I'm moving forward with too. And dragging SCS, BS and BB 6 inches behind!


I’m thinking that it won’t sound realistic combined, but who cares. For example, if I double a melody; e.g. AR1 ensemble high strings with BBC V1 an octave above. No solo strings in the Core, but I bet AR1 will have a solo string expansion. BBC has solo woodwind and brass so octaves or doubling ensemble patches will be fun.


----------



## Flyo

Nick Weathers said:


> I’m thinking that it won’t sound realistic combined, but who cares. For example, if I double a melody; e.g. AR1 ensemble high strings with BBC V1 an octave above. No solo strings in the Core, but I bet AR1 will have a solo string expansion. BBC has solo woodwind and brass so octaves or doubling ensemble patches will be fun.


Excuse me.
I thing soloist will come from another recording in Abbey Road Studio Two, they already mentioned that this type of approach will come from Studio Two, different kind of this Orchestra Ensambles in Studio One.


----------



## jbuhler

Flyo said:


> Excuse me.
> I thing soloist will come from another recording in Abbey Road Studio Two, they already mentioned that this type of approach will come from Studio Two, different kind of this Orchestra Ensambles in Studio One.


I don’t think so. There’s another project still coming out of AR2. The orchestral soloists will be done in the big room as part of the modular orchestra. Whatever is happening in AR2 might be soloists like the Berlin woodwind expansions, but they won’t be the main orchestral soloists. You won’t get the in situ right otherwise.


----------



## yiph2

Flyo said:


> Incoherent? Clearly you don’t read everything.
> 
> So you missed the “?” Sign at the end of my text... and then you selected only this and boast about it. I said right after an affirmative “Yess” i don’t blame any way for what i proudly purchase, right? No? Read it again.


Then why are you complaining? You knew what you were buying


----------



## mussnig

Flyo said:


> So everybody witness my concern about was i mentioned repeatedly. I’m doing wrong to says something that everybody knows and nobody says or ask? Ok that’s me. For me what it’s seems significant maybe its not to you.


I think most of us around here don't have a problem with you raising your concerns or wishes about the library and what it is missing in your opinion - that all is of course very valid and a forum is obviously a place to exchange about things like that. But if you keep repeating and repeating the same things again, it's not bringing anything new to the discussion and honestly becomes a bit tiresome to read ... just my 2 cents.


----------



## Trash Panda

mussnig said:


> I think most of us around here don't have a problem with you raising your concerns or wishes about the library and what it is missing in your opinion - that all is of course very valid and a forum is obviously a place to exchange about things like that. But if you keep repeating and repeating the same things again, it's not bringing anything new to the discussion and honestly becomes a bit tiresome to read ... just my 2 cents.


Pretty much. You made your point very clear. Continuing to post that same opinion five times on every page is not going to make Spitfire change anything. It WILL annoy most people reading this thread.


----------



## Justin L. Franks

Flyo said:


> So everybody witness my concern about was i mentioned repeatedly. I’m doing wrong to says something that everybody knows and nobody says or ask? Ok that’s me. For me what it’s seems significant maybe its not to you.


You posted the same complaint *over 40 times*. Over _2/3rds of your entire post history_ is you repeating this complaint.

Does this sound reasonable to you?


----------



## Flyo

You right. I multiply cloned myself to hundreds to bring all this content to the table, and speak about it. But i found that nobody seems to care so much as me, or have multiples orchestra ensambles sample libraries sounding good as this.
I truly can’t believe if they stop recordings of the full orchestra there and leaven us without symmetrical sections at least. I will see it as a big miss one in a million opportunity wasted. Now I’m will try to put focus on others things as handle what’s its missing and go for another library? Anyone would recommend something? I don’t go for Orchestra Tools as the other one that sound as good yet because I keep waiting a fully promised compatibility with AAX format. So I think I will wait for more news from Spitefire or EW.


----------



## banjo01

NoamL said:


> The #1 thing that gives me confidence in ARO is that they are *recording* great sounds off the bat.
> 
> I was a cellist and am pretty finicky about capturing the right tone with cello.. load up the Close mic for AROOF's low strings and play above Eb so that you just hear the cellos... then compare it to the Close mic in SSS, CSS, HWS, or CS2.... and you will learn something...
> 
> AROOF's close mics feel beautiful & dimensional when solo'd, and together with the tree & outriggers capturing a very pristine sound IMO, this library is among the "best recorded" ever. It is a product of expertise from someone who really knows how to record THOSE musicians in THAT space. The mixes are very, very good. I think few here can make a better mix than the brilliant sounding mix2 (mix1 is admittedly epic but feels a bit too ambient and Star-Wars-Prequel-ish for the music I like to write).
> 
> Who knows what the modular libraries have in store, but I would actually *put less urgency on getting all the mics* than on getting a 2-signal setup, "Close & Room," where "Room" is the Tree, Outrigger, and any ambient/spill mics Simon Rhodes includes in his mix, and "Close" is the collection of close+feature mics that he'd turn up to bring out the detail in a section. That 2-signal setup is all I would ever load up and all I'd ever deliver to a mixer!!


I also was a cellist and it was one of the reasons why I purchased legendary low strings.


----------



## Aldo_arf

Flyo said:


> You right. I multiply cloned myself to hundreds to bring all this content to the table, and speak about it. But i found that nobody seems to care so much as me, or have multiples orchestra ensambles sample libraries sounding good as this.
> I truly can’t believe if they stop recordings of the full orchestra there and leaven us without symmetrical sections at least. I will see it as a big miss one in a million opportunity wasted. Now I’m will try to put focus on others things as handle what’s its missing and go for another library? Anyone would recommend something? I don’t go for Orchestra Tools as the other one that sound as good yet because I keep waiting a fully promised compatibility with AAX format. So I think I will wait for more news from Spitefire or EW.


If you don’t mind me asking, how old are you?


----------



## Flyo

Aldo_arf said:


> If you don’t mind me asking, how old are you?


I’m on exact 40’s now. This have relevance? I write about it like a child or a very older grown man with short memory? I put my English knowledge on test here, still learning how to write in other language grammatically correct.


----------



## Aldo_arf

T


Flyo said:


> I’m on exact 40’s now. This have relevance? I write about it like a child or a very older grown man with short memory? I put my English knowledge on test here, still learning how to write in other language grammatically correct.


Thanks, just curious.


----------



## Andrew0568

Has Spitfire dropped any hints as to what the future expansions are?


----------



## Paul Cardon

Flyo said:


> I’m on exact 40’s now. This have relevance? I write about it like a child or a very older grown man with short memory? I put my English knowledge on test here, still learning how to write in other language grammatically correct.


It's alright to be working on your English, but 27 posts over the past 4-5 days saying the same basic thing. You're responding to people that weren't even addressing you. This isn't your personal thread and it's also not a chat room. Your comments will stay up forever and people have read them already, I promise.


----------



## Bear Market

Paul Cardon said:


> But you're kind of trampling over this thread. 27 posts over the past 4-5 days saying the same basic thing.


I have no clue what you are talking about, but then again I make ample use of the ignore button.


----------



## Flyo

💎 Forever, forever, forever...? 🎵 Ok i learn from my behavior. I was perplex knowing that anybody talk about it, as this doesn’t even exist when so many others companies have it all this initially as the most common start point.

My fault.


----------



## jbuhler

Andrew0568 said:


> Has Spitfire dropped any hints as to what the future expansions are?


I don’t think so, but going on parallel with Albion One.

we have:

1. Low String legato in octaves
2. High winds legato in octaves

I’m pretty sure we’ll get:

3. High strings legato in octaves
4. low winds legato in octaves

less certain (we’re likely to get versions of brass legato but I’m not at all sure of the configurations. The configurations of brass legato in Albion One don’t work especially well, imho):

5. Low brass legato in octaves (I would prefer they passed on this one, tbh)
6. trumpets and horns (or maybe trumpets and trombones) legato in octaves
7. high strings con sord legato in octaves
8. low strings con sord legato in octaves
9. mid strings legato (two octaves)
10. runs and effects

Things I’d like to see:
Horns a8 legato
harp ensemble
muted brass
alternate orchestrations for high winds
repetitions (like Symphonic Motions, but they obviously won’t sell that for $49)


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

I believe (and hope) they won't actually copy Albion 1's patches and instead will deliver pre-orchestrated "brushes" based on specific applications from scores recorded at AR. The first two selections are basically that. That's much more interesting than delivering bog-standard ensemble expansions IMO.


----------



## SupremeFist

jbuhler said:


> Things I’d like to see:
> Horns a8 legato


This is one I would buy! And the fact that they separated horns from trumpets in the original library (unlike Albion, and which was one of the things that made me buy it) makes it plausible that they might have a "Heroic Horns" selection planned. I'm not interested in any octave patches whatsoever.


----------



## Flyo

SupremeFist said:


> This is one I would buy! And the fact that they separated horns from trumpets in the original library (unlike Albion, and which was one of the things that made me buy it) makes it plausible that they might have a "Heroic Horns" selection planned. I'm not interested in any octave patches whatsoever.


Hello, the good thing about this packs of Selections are that all the content are specially recorded as presented, and not merely sounds patches. 😊 i hope something more without octaves to.


----------



## jbuhler

SupremeFist said:


> This is one I would buy! And the fact that they separated horns from trumpets in the original library (unlike Albion, and which was one of the things that made me buy it) makes it plausible that they might have a "Heroic Horns" selection planned. I'm not interested in any octave patches whatsoever.


I could go for the trumpets in octaves with either horns or trombones and the violins in octaves. Both are common doublings and the doublings played together are not precisely the same when played with two sets of samples (Though you quickly hit diminishing returns). The octave doublings on brass and winds generally don’t work so well on anything but bass or melody and end up sounding very much like organ stops.



ALittleNightMusic said:


> I believe (and hope) they won't actually copy Albion 1's patches and instead will deliver pre-orchestrated "brushes" based on specific applications from scores recorded at AR. The first two selections are basically that. That's much more interesting than delivering bog-standard ensemble expansions IMO.


Albion One has the low octave legato (and shorts and long) of Legendary Lows, and the high woodwind legato patch and shorts and longs of sparkling woodwinds. It does not have the glock, but it has an extra octave that is far more useful. From these first two packs I see nothing that promises something distinct from providing legatos to ARO as the main goal of these packs.


----------



## Flyo

Specially recorded octaves are a very welcome additions to ARO really, sounds great so far.


----------



## BasariStudios

Paul Cardon said:


> Haha for sure, and sorry to make such a long-winded post but I thought it'd be good to spit it all out for anyone else who stumbles on the thread and isn't aware of what may be causing these problems.
> 
> But my overall intent was to say that this specific "problem" of Spitfire's player isn't really a "problem". If the problem was constant glitches and hitches and bugs during normal operation, then sure, but the "problem" is that it can't quite crank out as many voices as Kontakt can at its default settings, and it's hard to say what the cause is when there could be many aspects of sample playback that could cause it, but for me (your mileage may vary) it's really only a 20-30% cut in voice counts *out of a single Spitfire Player instance*, and maybe something they'll improve with time as their tools and codebase develop. The fact it can already spit out so much and that it scales higher on better systems is all good.
> 
> Both Play and Kontakt are pretty old samplers at this point, and it might be safe to assume that Spitfire may have gone a little above standard for a few key aspects of their plugin, such as their resampling algorithms or something like that, for a lift in quality in one area at the expense of performance requirements. Is that tradeoff worth it? Is it an understandable result of progress in technology and modern CPU horsepower that the tech and algorithms behind it improve? Would love to hear more from @SpitfireSupport @Spitfire Team about what they suspect would cause this effect as, compared to Play and Kontakt, there are a lot of engine features that are stripped back (extensive library management vs. isolated exclusive library plugins, for example). So the first assumption is that it'll run better than anything else, but it doesn't, so maybe those engine cuts compared to the competitors do save a lot of performance that they're then using up in other places. All speculation though, and admittedly overly positive speculation, but worth thinking about.


Reading your comments i guarantee you you know NOTHING
of what we are talking about here.


----------



## Paul Cardon

BasariStudios said:


> Reading your comments i guarantee you you know NOTHING
> of what we are talking about here.


I'm super down to be educated. Definitely possible I'm misinterpreting, but I was also specifically responding to the "block chords in ARO strings longs patch with multiple mics active" thing.


----------



## NoamL

Andrew0568 said:


> Has Spitfire dropped any hints as to what the future expansions are?


Just speculation but I think they are unlikely to release "un-blended orchestration" VIs in their scoring selects.

Horn Solo = unlikely
Horns a4 = unlikely
Horns + Cellos = likely


----------



## Nick Weathers

NoamL said:


> Just speculation but I think they are unlikely to release "un-blended orchestration" VIs in their scoring selects.
> 
> Horn Solo = unlikely
> Horns a4 = unlikely
> Horns + Cellos = likely


I was hoping for unblended, but that would devalue BBCSO. The combos will be fun. I bet they toss in a solo violin or at least one solo instrument


----------



## jbuhler

Nick Weathers said:


> I was hoping for unblended, but that would devalue BBCSO. The combos will be fun. I bet they toss in a solo violin or at least one solo instrument


I really doubt we'll get a solo violin at $49. Almost certainly there will be AR Solo Strings at some point.


----------



## jaketanner

Nick Weathers said:


> I was hoping for unblended, but that would devalue BBCSO


Not at all...I have BBC and would happily purchase the modular AR...two totally different sounds and players. I think it's great to have multiple orchestras at our fingertips.


----------



## muziksculp

Any guesses what they have already recorded in AR-Studio Two ? Maybe some Soloists ? and if so, which ones, Strings, Woodwinds, or Brass players ?

They mentioned they were done with the recording, and are editing them in one of the videos. I'm also not sure if this will be part of AROOF's Expansions, since it is not recorded in AR-Studio ONE. so would this be another line they plan on releasing, that's not part of the AR-ONE Modular Orch. ?


----------



## jbuhler

jaketanner said:


> Not at all...I have BBC and would happily purchase the modular AR...two totally different sounds and players. I think it's great to have multiple orchestras at our fingertips.


Yes, I believe they are trying to minimize duplication between AROOF and its expansions on the one hand and the modular AR libraries on the other. The modular orchestra will absolutely have solo players and have many of the same articulations as in BBCSO, SSO, etc., just as AROOF duplicates articulations in Albion One. Certain elements like the timpani hits will almost certainly have some duplication in AROOF and the modular AR timpani, though I imagine they will be recording the hits anew for the modular library.



muziksculp said:


> Any guesses what they have already recorded in AR-Studio Two ?


Pop stuff.


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> Pop stuff.


OK. that makes sense. 

Thanks.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> OK. that makes sense.
> 
> Thanks.


I should say, I know nothing. It's just a guess based on history and something about the way the studio 2 stuff was announced.


----------



## jaketanner

jbuhler said:


> though I imagine they will be recording the hits anew for the modular library.


I am hoping it's either all recorded already, OR everything will be re-recorded new.


----------



## jbuhler

jaketanner said:


> I am hoping it's either all recorded already, OR everything will be re-recorded new.


I just mean they won't reuse any samples from AROOF in the modular AR library. I think SF said they had just started the recordings for the modular library when lockdown started. I suppose it depends on what they got in those sessions as to whether they will be able to use it or they have to record it again. But I'm not expecting any of the modular library to appear until 2022.


----------



## CT

Wow, very disappointing to hear that the modular orchestra coming out next month will just be reused samples from AROOF. I think this is a major problem that I'd like Spitfire to address.


----------



## yiph2

Mike T said:


> Wow, very disappointing to hear that the modular orchestra coming out next month will just be reused samples from AROOF. I think this is a major problem that I'd like Spitfire to address.


I don't think anyone said that


----------



## jaketanner

jbuhler said:


> I just mean they won't reuse any samples from AROOF in the modular AR library. I think SF said they had just started the recordings for the modular library when lockdown started. I suppose it depends on what they got in those sessions as to whether they will be able to use it or they have to record it again. But I'm not expecting any of the modular library to appear until 2022.


Or later.


----------



## Nick Weathers

Solos could have been recorded during lockdown. Probably not much more than that. How about a masked choir library?? where the vocalists sound muffled and muted? Muted brass - muted people.


----------



## CT

yiph2 said:


> I don't think anyone said that


I'm thinking I should give up sarcasm on VI-Control.


----------



## Nick Weathers

Mike T said:


> I'm thinking I should give up sarcasm on VI-ControlJ


Just give up. Burn your computer and leave your family.


----------



## yiph2

Mike T said:


> I'm thinking I should give up sarcasm on VI-Control.


Whoops! That might be the worst attempt of sarcasm Ive ever seen tho


----------



## Flyo

There is no new thread on VI Control for the next upcoming modular series yet?


----------



## Flyo

What we could imagine here it’s that not only the treated acoustic space will to differ from bottom to top, but also the technology gear implemented on Studio One to Studio Two

Studio 1 mixing board​




KATHLEEN CRAIGThis is the mixing console for Abbey Road Studio's Studio 1. According to sound engineer Simon Rhodes, the studio works with the manufacturers of equipment like this to ensure that it gets the exact machines it needs. A console like this Neve 88RS costs about $800,000. Although digital is all the rage in music, these consoles are strictly analog due to the fact that for professionals like those at Abbey Road, digital is not yet up to the quality standards demanded by clients who pay a lot for the privilege of working there.

*Studio 2 mixing room console*



KATHLEEN CRAIGThis is a brand-new Neve 88 RS that is used to mix sound in Studio 2.


----------



## Flyo

Just kidding. Look at this Neves! 👀


----------



## ed buller

Mike T said:


> I'm thinking I should give up sarcasm on VI-Control.


there IS a sarcasm font. You can't blame other if you just insist on NOT using it !

best

ed


----------



## Flyo

What would possible change it’s the array list of microphones for Studio Two recordings i guess...


----------



## companyofquail

Flyo said:


> What would possible change it’s the array list of microphones for Studio Two recordings i guess...


hey man, i know you are excited, as we all are. but here is the bottom line: no one on this forum has any actual facts about what spitfire is going to release in the future that they are allowed to divulge.

you post on an average of 25 times per week to this thread and have offered very little information that is valuable. please just contact spitfire, let them know exactly what you want them to do or ask them questions and if you find out anything feel free to share it with the class. 

obviously, if you have a question about how the library works or what people think that is totally reasonable to post. but if you just want to rant and complain and speculate then just open another thread and everyone else that wants to do that can go there. 

i would just prefer to see this thread have valuable information about the library and how people are using it in its current form, which can change with each update. and sure, if an update happens and someone doesnt like the octaves or mix of instruments or whatever feature then its totally fine to post a gripe and move on. 

what you are doing is extraneous and makes this thread a worse place to visit.


----------



## Evans

companyofquail said:


> here is the bottom line: no one on this forum has any actual facts about what spitfire is going to release in the future that they are allowed to divulge.


Problems at VI-Control:

Armchair quarterbacks / backseat drivers; and
People stating speculation or opinions as fact.
Sticking to Abbey Road One, I've seen people saying that the "modular" releases will be in the range of $2500-4000 for the full suite. Speculation is fine, but I recall one person stating it as fact and really sticking to their guns.


----------



## Flyo

companyofquail said:


> hey man, i know you are excited, as we all are. but here is the bottom line: no one on this forum has any actual facts about what spitfire is going to release in the future that they are allowed to divulge.
> 
> you post on an average of 25 times per week to this thread and have offered very little information that is valuable. please just contact spitfire, let them know exactly what you want them to do or ask them questions and if you find out anything feel free to share it with the class.
> 
> obviously, if you have a question about how the library works or what people think that is totally reasonable to post. but if you just want to rant and complain and speculate then just open another thread and everyone else that wants to do that can go there.
> 
> i would just prefer to see this thread have valuable information about the library and how people are using it in its current form, which can change with each update. and sure, if an update happens and someone doesnt like the octaves or mix of instruments or whatever feature then its totally fine to post a gripe and move on.
> 
> what you are doing is extraneous and makes this thread a worse place to visit.


Now I complaint for something? I open a thought about the array of microphones could use in studio two for new content. It was most a engineering method wonder, not complaints. So relax


----------



## icecoolpool

jbuhler said:


> I just mean they won't reuse any samples from AROOF in the modular AR library. I think SF said they had just started the recordings for the modular library when lockdown started. I suppose it depends on what they got in those sessions as to whether they will be able to use it or they have to record it again. But I'm not expecting any of the modular library to appear until 2022.


I absolutely wouldn´t have a problem with the modular library having some duplicates with AROOF as long as there was a sufficient crossgrade discount and it didn´t take up extra HD space.


----------



## Evans

icecoolpool said:


> and it didn´t take up extra HD space.


Yes. I don't want to buy any more SSDs. I don't want another powered USB hub for such additional SSDs. I don't want another machine for another VEPro server.

Audio Imperia has this file redundancy issue. It drives me bonkers and is part of why I haven't picked up Areia (I have Nucleus and Jaeger). Sure, it's at fairly small scale, but it's a literal waste of storage space.


----------



## Flyo

AROF complete with all the Selections (possibly x10, each at $49) will costs around $939 total, as we know so far.


----------



## BasariStudios

Nick Weathers said:


> Solos could have been recorded during lockdown. Probably not much more than that. How about a masked choir library?? where the vocalists sound muffled and muted? Muted brass - muted people.


I'd call that Con Sordino Choirs.


----------



## Mike Greene

companyofquail said:


> hey man, i know you are excited, as we all are. but here is the bottom line: no one on this forum has any actual facts about what spitfire is going to release in the future that they are allowed to divulge.
> 
> you post on an average of 25 times per week to this thread and have offered very little information that is valuable. please just contact spitfire, let them know exactly what you want them to do or ask them questions and if you find out anything feel free to share it with the class.
> 
> obviously, if you have a question about how the library works or what people think that is totally reasonable to post. but if you just want to rant and complain and speculate then just open another thread and everyone else that wants to do that can go there.
> 
> i would just prefer to see this thread have valuable information about the library and how people are using it in its current form, which can change with each update. and sure, if an update happens and someone doesnt like the octaves or mix of instruments or whatever feature then its totally fine to post a gripe and move on.
> 
> what you are doing is extraneous and makes this thread a worse place to visit.





Flyo said:


> Now I complaint for something? I open a thought about the array of microphones could use in studio two for new content. It was most a engineering method wonder, not complaints. So relax


@Flyo, CompanyOfQuail is right. You're posting way, way, waaayyyy too much. Especially with long threads like this, it's annoying when people see there are new posts, but when they click, those new posts are mostly useless.

It's best to spend the first few weeks or months reading the forum, rather than writing. That way you get a better feeling for how people post.

Thanks!


----------



## Flyo

Mike Greene said:


> @Flyo, CompanyOfQuail is right. You're posting way, way, waaayyyy too much. Especially with long threads like this, it's annoying when people see there are new posts, but when they click, those new posts are mostly useless.
> 
> It's best to spend the first few weeks or months reading the forum, rather than writing. That way you get a better feeling for how people post.
> 
> Thanks!


In no way i want to offend nobody with my words here. And took it personal. This was all about trying to explain (in other language without any traductor help) this concern, idea in front of a time/money stretched schedule. At the same time i think i will hope endlessly to have this ensamble orchestra fully complete. Nothing more, nothing else at first.

(Fun Note apart!)
Sunset Strings is tremendously ingenious from scripting to GUI design, is really amazing and thanks to bring that to all.


----------



## EricValette

I did some quick tests in order to integrate AROOF into an almost entirely OT template. BSS mixed with AROOF sounds particularly good... may be my favorite combination at the moment for large string sections. AROOF appears to be a great layering tool while waiting for the release of the modular series, even if it already sounds really great on its own (with very little processing!!!),

The end result appears seems to be perfect intermediate mix between the rendering of the original LOTR OST ("Prologue" of the "Complete recordings" edition) and the more reverberant one of the "Symphony" recorded in a large concert hall in Switzerland. More and more happy with the result...

For those who are interested, some details below (mics settings edited the 2021-03-20) :

AROOF
Mix 1 only (processing: nothing on the Strings and Brass mix bus => Master bus: Cinematic Room Pro, Maximizer (Ozone), Vintage Limiter... and nothing else!).

BSS
All sections : Spot1 +3 db, Tree 0db

Performance Samples Vista
Violins + Celli only : Tree (DC) -7,8 db

Processing BSS and Vista: Strings mix bus with EQ, Clariphonic to open up and dynamise the sound, a little bit of Exciter and Imager (both are Ozone) => Master bus: Cinematic Room Pro, Maximizer (Ozone), Vintage Limiter (Ozone)


----------



## Leon Willett

EricValette said:


> I did some quick tests in order to integrate AROOF into an almost entirely OT template. BSS mixed with AROOF sounds particularly good... may be my favorite combination at the moment for large string sections. AROOF appears to be a great layering tool while waiting for the release of the modular series, even if it already sounds really great on its own (with very little processing!!!),
> 
> The end result appears seems to be perfect intermediate mix between the rendering of the original LOTR OST ("Prologue" of the "Complete recordings" edition) and the more reverberant one of the "Symphony" recorded in a large concert hall in Switzerland. More and more happy with the result...
> 
> For those who are interested, some details below:
> 
> AROOF
> Mix 1 only (processing: nothing on the Strings and Brass mix bus => Master bus: Cinematic Room Pro, Maximizer (Ozone), Vintage Limiter... and nothing else!).
> 
> BSS
> - Violins 1: Spot1 +1db, Leader -5db, Tree 0db, Outrigger -3db
> - Violins 2: Spot1 +3db, Tree 0db, Outrigger -3db, AB -5db
> - Violas 1: Spot1 +3db, Leader -5db, Tree 0db, Outrigger -3db
> - Celli : Spot1 +3db, Spot2 -12db, Leader -5db, Tree 0db, Outrigger -3db, AB -5db
> - Basses : Spot1 +3db, Leader -5db, Tree 0db, Outrigger -3db
> Processing: Strings mix bus with EQ, Clariphonic to open up and dynamise the sound, a little bit of Exciter and Imager (both are Ozone) => Master bus: Cinematic Room Pro, Maximizer (Ozone), Vintage Limiter (Ozone)



Great, sound, well done! What is the choir? Cheers.


----------



## EricValette

Leon Willett said:


> Great, sound, well done! What is the choir? Cheers.


Hi Leon,

Thanks a lot!

It's OT Ark1 choir layered with Eric Whitacre choir from Spitfire Audio.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

Paul Cardon said:


> *SORRY TO DERAIL IN ADVANCE, BUT:*
> 
> I sloppily matched CSS to SCS and SSS ages ago and haven't tweaked it much since. My current method is an absolutely *stupid* EQ curve that looks like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus a bit of stereo widening with a basic M/S balance control, and a few layers of reverb to push the result into a bigger space.
> 
> I avoid the mix mic and instead use a balance of the close and tree, avoiding the room mics entirely. The darkness and muddiness and shallowness of CSS is almost all because of Trackdown Studios, and the huge EQ scoop is doing a lot to counteract that, instead filling the body back in with smart reverb choices, specifically SP2016 tuned very tight for some diffusion, any of the EW Spaces "Stages" IRs as the main room, and some lexicon Hall for a bit of razzle dazzle tail.
> 
> You can do similar things for the other libraries in the Cinematic Studio lineup, but with different EQ curves. Generally, I don't need to cut too much of CSW as woodwinds can be alright with a bit of mid-heaviness, but my reverb setup remains the same.
> 
> CSS Dry:
> 
> View attachment compprog - CSS dry.mp3
> 
> 
> CSS Mix (ignore the little bit of blackhole verb on the very end):
> 
> View attachment compprog - CSS mix.mp3


Heya Paul,

Your processing sounds great and definitely brings out a much more pleasing tone (to my ears) with lots of nice air and a sense of space than standard. I realise this might be quite throw-away for you, but if you were up for it I'd love to (and I'm certain others would too) see a more detailed breakdown of what you did for this! (Obviously probably not in this thread as it's rather off-topic ofc) : )


----------



## Paul Cardon

Tom Ferguson said:


> Heya Paul,
> 
> Your processing sounds great and definitely brings out a much more pleasing tone (to my ears) with lots of nice air and a sense of space than standard. I realise this might be quite throw-away for you, but if you were up for it I'd love to (and I'm certain others would too) see a more detailed breakdown of what you did for this! (Obviously probably not in this thread as it's rather off-topic ofc) : )


While I would half love to, I would also half like to keep the specifics close to my chest haha

But honestly, it's a context thing. I outlined most of the tools I used but the specific sound you aim for will totally depend on the context of the piece you're writing, what other libraries you're using, what sound you're going for. The best I can do is to reiterate that it's super fine to make seemingly-goofy and excessive moves when mixing, but to do it all in context. I'm always tweaking things from piece to piece, project to project. It's not a "throw these plugins on your CSS tracks and set every option this way to make CSS suddenly awesome on every track!" sort of thing, rather a methodology and theory thing.

These are the 3 main things I think about when I'm mixing libraries together (or mixing in general):
- Tone (EQ, room character baked into the samples)
- Imaging (width, directionality, stage presence)
- Depth (also stage presence, but also reverbs in general)

And the worst part is all of these things overlap in strange and confusing ways, from the baked-in characteristics of the libraries you're using and the mic options available to the things you can do to them.

There are a million tools out there to manipulate those characteristics, and several ways to get in the same ballpark as someone else. The hard parts are knowing what your tools do, how to use them, how to keep your ear open to context, and how to train your ears to pick out the characteristics, then being willing to execute on all that knowledge and skill in constructive ways. Time and effort, practice and more practice, and doing everything you can to not get lost in the tiny details.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

Paul Cardon said:


> While I would half love to, I would also half like to keep the specifics close to my chest haha
> 
> But honestly, it's a context thing. I outlined most of the tools I used but the specific sound you aim for will totally depend on the context of the piece you're writing, what other libraries you're using, what sound you're going for. The best I can do is to reiterate that it's super fine to make seemingly-goofy and excessive moves when mixing, but to do it all in context. I'm always tweaking things from piece to piece, project to project. It's not a "throw these plugins on your CSS tracks and set every option this way to make CSS suddenly awesome on every track!" sort of thing, rather a methodology and theory thing.
> 
> These are the 3 main things I think about when I'm mixing libraries together (or mixing in general):
> - Tone (EQ, room character baked into the samples)
> - Imaging (width, directionality, stage presence)
> - Depth (also stage presence, but also reverbs in general)
> 
> And the worst part is all of these things overlap in strange and confusing ways.
> 
> There are a million tools out there to manipulate those characteristics, and several ways to get to the same place. The hard parts are knowing what your tools do, how to use them, how to keep your ear open to context, and how to train your ears to pick out the characteristics.


That's understandable! Thanks for the extra insight to the thought processes anyway, it's all very good food for thought.


----------



## muziksculp

Any guesses what the next AROOF expansion/s will be ? 

If you guess correctly, you get a big round of applause from Muziksculp


----------



## Alex Fraser

muziksculp said:


> Any guesses what the next AROOF expansion/s will be ?
> 
> If you guess correctly, you get a big round of applause from Muziksculp


"Soaring High Strings"
High strings scored and recorded an octave apart, featuring *Spitfire Power Legato™ *


----------



## NoamL

I found a mix of Spitfire's AIR strings that is reasonably close to the Hi Strings / Low Strings mix in AROOF. I'm using AROOF's mix 2.

Spitfire Symphonic Strings mix:
CC22 = 69 (Close)
CC23 = 69 (Tree)
CC25 = 73 (Outrigger)
CC27 = 87 ("Stereo", an alternate Tree)

This mix will only work if you have the older version of SSS, you know "Spitfire Mural." That one has all the mics. Those using the new SSS will need to wait for the alt mic pack to come out.

Some refinement on top of this is possible, but these figures will quickly get you in the ballpark of an AR-compatible mix.

If you want to match AROOF Mix1 instead, turn off CC27/Stereo and turn up CC23/Tree.

I've also been experimenting with lining up CSS's mix with Abbey Road as well. I think you can get a decent AR-compatible mix with the high strings but the cellos and basses (of CSS) are more difficult to work with.


----------



## companyofquail

NoamL said:


> I found a mix of Spitfire's AIR strings that is reasonably close to the Hi Strings / Low Strings mix in AROOF. I'm using AROOF's mix 2.
> 
> Spitfire Symphonic Strings mix:
> CC22 = 69 (Close)
> CC23 = 69 (Tree)
> CC25 = 73 (Outrigger)
> CC27 = 87 ("Stereo", an alternate Tree)
> 
> This mix will only work if you have the older version of SSS, you know "Spitfire Mural." That one has all the mics. Those using the new SSS will need to wait for the alt mic pack to come out.
> 
> Some refinement on top of this is possible, but these figures will quickly get you in the ballpark of an AR-compatible mix.
> 
> If you want to match AROOF Mix1 instead, turn off CC27/Stereo and turn up CC23/Tree.
> 
> I've also been experimenting with lining up CSS's mix with Abbey Road as well. I think you can get a decent AR-compatible mix with the high strings but the cellos and basses (of CSS) are more difficult to work with.


really awesome, thank you for sharing. unfortunately still waiting on that mic pack from spitfire. i hope it shows up soon but i am no longer holding my breath.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

NoamL said:


> I found a mix of Spitfire's AIR strings that is reasonably close to the Hi Strings / Low Strings mix in AROOF. I'm using AROOF's mix 2.
> 
> Spitfire Symphonic Strings mix:
> CC22 = 69 (Close)
> CC23 = 69 (Tree)
> CC25 = 73 (Outrigger)
> CC27 = 87 ("Stereo", an alternate Tree)
> 
> This mix will only work if you have the older version of SSS, you know "Spitfire Mural." That one has all the mics. Those using the new SSS will need to wait for the alt mic pack to come out.
> 
> Some refinement on top of this is possible, but these figures will quickly get you in the ballpark of an AR-compatible mix.
> 
> If you want to match AROOF Mix1 instead, turn off CC27/Stereo and turn up CC23/Tree.
> 
> I've also been experimenting with lining up CSS's mix with Abbey Road as well. I think you can get a decent AR-compatible mix with the high strings but the cellos and basses (of CSS) are more difficult to work with.


Thanks for this! Love me some specifics haha 

It's friggin' mad that Spitfire are still sitting on SSS pro considering that for the last few years I've seen Paul using them regularly, so they obviously know they are the superior product but just CBA (or at least have put minimal effort) to release them haha BTW Noam, if you've been able to compare them, what do you think of the difference in quality of the legato between Mural and SSS? From some of what I've heard it seems that Mural with the 'speed' down seems to have a much longer more natural transition which seems to have been lost in the new legatos somewhat. I kind of wish Spitfire would give back the user these kind of controls (preferably with an audio imperia style legato delay knob).


----------



## Paul Cardon

Tom Ferguson said:


> Thanks for this! Love me some specifics haha
> 
> It's friggin' mad that Spitfire are still sitting on SSS pro considering that for the last few years I've seen Paul using them regularly, so they obviously know they are the superior product but just CBA (or at least have put minimal effort) to release them haha BTW Noam, if you've been able to compare them, what do you think of the difference in quality of the legato between Mural and SSS? From some of what I've heard it seems that Mural with the 'speed' down seems to have a much longer more natural transition which seems to have been lost in the new legatos somewhat. I kind of wish Spitfire would give back the user these kind of controls (preferably with an audio imperia style legato delay knob).


As far as I'm aware from a couple of small chats I've had, Spitfire's doing a little more than just throwing those new mics in and MAY release a SSS update with fixes and patch tweaks and etc. alongside the extra mics. Would explain why it's taking a bit longer while the devs themselves have immediate access to the extended mic options. Nothing officially confirmed so I'm not super sure, all to say I don't think they've abandoned work on the Symphonic series yet.


----------



## Tom Ferguson

Paul Cardon said:


> As far as I'm aware from a couple of small chats I've had, Spitfire's doing more than just throwing those new mics in and will likely release a bigger SSS update with fixes and patch tweaks and etc. alongside that.


OK, I mean that's awesome and good to know, but in the mean time people have just wanted access to these mics for years now. I feel they could have just released the mics in the mean time and kept working on the big update too. It's surely going to have to apply to SSS standard too, so it's not like the update is a specific feature to only pro which will be missing and diminish value for that product. Though I guess they are kind of wanting to release it together as a big bang to maximise interest.

Well hopefully it will be soon anyway, as Mural/SSS is still one of the best sounding string libraries around!


----------



## Paul Cardon

Tom Ferguson said:


> OK, I mean that's awesome and good to know, but in the mean time people have just wanted access to these mics for years now. I feel they could have just released the mics in the mean time and kept working on the big update too. It's surely going to have to apply to SSS standard too, so it's not like the update is a specific feature to only pro which will be missing and diminish value for that product. Though I guess they are kind of wanting to release it together as a big bang to maximise interest.
> 
> Well hopefully it will be soon anyway, as Mural/SSS is still one of the best sounding string libraries around!


Yeah, I think their history has shown that they like to bundle updates together so they can make events out of them. Unfortunate for current owners, but I think I get why they do it. They might risk muddying the focus between updates and new releases if they make their announcements cycles any denser than they already are.


----------



## NoamL

Yeah like Paul I expect they will "Refresh" the SSO line eventually. Maybe it'll go in SF Player, as well.

To your question @Tom Ferguson , I only use Mural, but that's because I love the sound of the outriggers. The reprogramming of SSS is quite nice. CTA does get you a well rounded sound.


----------



## muziksculp

It has been super quiet here, and at Spitfire Audio with regards to the AR-1 Orchestral Libraries. 

I wonder what Spitfire Audio is up to lately with regards to AROOF expansions ? and the AR1, Modular Orchestral Library ? 

I'm guessing they will be super excited to surprise us with something super cool, and new soon.


----------



## Russell Anderson

I think they’re probably going to complete the OF portion (Selections) before the modular orchestra gets released


----------



## muziksculp

Russell Anderson said:


> I think they’re probably going to complete the OF portion (Selections) before the modular orchestra gets released


Possible, that would be a good thing for us AROOF users. At least they complete one project, then move to the next.


----------



## Trash Panda

muziksculp said:


> It has been super quiet here, and at Spitfire Audio with regards to the AR-1 Orchestral Libraries.
> 
> I wonder what Spitfire Audio is up to lately with regards to AROOF expansions ? and the AR1, Modular Orchestral Library ?
> 
> I'm guessing they will be super excited to surprise us with something super cool, and new soon.


They’ve already moved on to their latest exciting partnership with Skywalker Sounds. Soon you will be able to hear the magical ensembles you love from past Spitfire products like Albion One and Abbey Road One, but even better since it’s being recorded by the magical techno wizards from the highly exclusive Skywalker Sounds scoring stage.


----------



## banjo01

muziksculp said:


> It has been super quiet here, and at Spitfire Audio with regards to the AR-1 Orchestral Libraries.
> 
> I wonder what Spitfire Audio is up to lately with regards to AROOF expansions ? and the AR1, Modular Orchestral Library ?
> 
> I'm guessing they will be super excited to surprise us with something super cool, and new soon.


I'm hoping for some percussion scoring selections like taikos and low booms and whatnot


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

I was using AROOF for the first time today, for couple hours , I also have the Low-Strings Expansion. All I can say, is the sound of this library is amazing ! So full, rich, and real. Also Love the dynamics, and playability. 

What I really missed were Legatos Strings for the high-and mid strings, and Individual Woodwind ens. sections, and soloists. 

I tested some of the mic options, and they sound great, but using more than 2 mics per instrument will spike my CPU, so I have to be careful with this detail, Mix 1, and Mix 2, along with the Close mic, or any of the other mics is what I found to be a good solution. I also added a dash of M7 Bricasti Reverb (The Hardware unit), which is very transparent, it helped get the long strings to play smoother legato style. Also worked beautifully with the Long Strings Sordinos. 

The Trumpets and Horns are amazing, I would have like to have a Stacc. articulation as well, but that's not included. The woodwinds both low and high are nice, but I wasn't impressed the way the other sections impressed me. I haven't had a chance to test the Perc yet. 

So, my very early conclusion, is the more Expansions Spitfire Audio releases for AROOF, the better it will become, but the bigger conclusion for me, is that whenever Spitfire Audio has the AR1 Modular Library ready, it will be one of the best sounding large orchestral libraries ever developed. If not the best. 

I wish it would be completed by the end of this year, but given the COVID situation, things might be moving forward at a much slower pace than normal. So, I will just have to wait. 

I also love the Legendary Low-Strings, I layer them with the High Strings form the AROOF, and they blend very nicely to give a full string ens. range that is playable across the keyboard. 

I didn't buy the Sparkling Woodwinds expansion, I'm curious if these high-woodwinds (without the Glockenspiel), sound much better than the high-woodwinds in AROOF, plus the high-woodwinds have legatos, played in octaves is a bit of a constraint on how flexible they can be. 

Bottom line so far, I love AROOF, and the Leg. Low-Strings, and look forward to adding more expansions, I will be super excited to see AR1 Modular Orchestra in my Studio one of these days, I think it will be a dream Orchestral Library to have. 

Exciting times ahead.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> I was using AROOF for the first time today, for couple hours , I also have the Low-Strings Expansion. All I can say, is the sound of this library is amazing ! So full, rich, and real. Also Love the dynamics, and playability.
> 
> What I really missed were Legatos Strings for the high-and mid strings, and Individual Woodwind ens. sections, and soloists.
> 
> I tested some of the mic options, and they sound great, but using more than 2 mics per instrument will spike my CPU, so I have to be careful with this detail, Mix 1, and Mix 2, along with the Close mic, or any of the other mics is what I found to be a good solution. I also added a dash of M7 Bricasti Reverb (The Hardware unit), which is very transparent, it helped get the long strings to play smoother legato style. Also worked beautifully with the Long Strings Sordinos.
> 
> The Trumpets and Horns are amazing, I would have like to have a Stacc. articulation as well, but that's not included. The woodwinds both low and high are nice, but I wasn't impressed the way the other sections impressed me. I haven't had a chance to test the Perc yet.
> 
> So, my very early conclusion, is the more Expansions Spitfire Audio releases for AROOF, the better it will become, but the bigger conclusion for me, is that whenever Spitfire Audio has the AR1 Modular Library ready, it will be one of the best sounding large orchestral libraries ever developed. If not the best.
> 
> I wish it would be completed by the end of this year, but given the COVID situation, things might be moving forward at a much slower pace than normal. So, I will just have to wait.
> 
> I also love the Legendary Low-Strings, I layer them with the High Strings form the AROOF, and they blend very nicely to give a full string ens. range that is playable across the keyboard.
> 
> I didn't buy the Sparkling Woodwinds expansion, I'm curious if these high-woodwinds (without the Glockenspiel), sound much better than the high-woodwinds in AROOF, plus the high-woodwinds have legatos, played in octaves is a bit of a constraint on how flexible they can be.
> 
> Bottom line so far, I love AROOF, and the Leg. Low-Strings, and look forward to adding more expansions, I will be super excited to see AR1 Modular Orchestra in my Studio one of these days, I think it will be a dream Orchestral Library to have.
> 
> Exciting times ahead.


I’m not a fan of the high woodwind expansion, which I have. I prefer the high woodwind legato of Albion One if I’m honest. The main woodwinds themselves are ok, but don’t yield especially realistically scored woodwind chords. 

My main complaint with the brass is the restricted range of the low brass. It really should go at least to the F above middle C. Even so and without legato the whole brass section is light years ahead of Albion One. 

I’ve been happy blending AROOF strings with either BSS or SSS to cover the legato. The Legendary Lows are fantastic and I now find myself wanting to write lots of brooding low string lines... I would like more variety of shorts in the strings.


----------



## muziksculp

I'm wondering if Spitfire Audio will release the AR1 Modular Orchestra when they have all the sections recorded, or one section at a time as they are completed ? i.e. Strings, then Brass, then ... or wait until all sections are completed, and release SA AR1 Modular Orchestra ? 

Any guesses ?


----------



## yiph2

muziksculp said:


> I'm wondering if Spitfire Audio will release the AR1 Modular Orchestra when they have all the sections recorded, or one section at a time as they are completed ? i.e. Strings, then Brass, then ... or wait until all sections are completed, and release SA AR1 Modular Orchestra ?
> 
> Any guesses ?


Sections


----------



## muziksculp

yiph2 said:


> Sections


Interesting, so any chance we get one of these sections this year ?


----------



## muziksculp

After having a taste of AR1's sound by using AROOF, I'm totally obsessed by the sound, and can't wait to use the full AR1 Modular Orchestra released. 

Hehe.. Being the kind of person who hates waiting, this is going to be tough period for me.


----------



## yiph2

muziksculp said:


> Interesting, so any chance we get one of these sections this year ?


Possibly, they said they have recorded one section already


----------



## muziksculp

yiph2 said:


> Possibly, they said they have recorded one section already


Awesome, hopefully it's the Strings.


----------



## Mike Fox

Now that hype season is over for this library, how are people getting a long with it? Any unwelcome surprises? 

I’m seriously digging the sound of these low strings from the new expansion.


----------



## SupremeFist

Mike Fox said:


> Now that hype season is over for this library, how are people getting a long with it? Any unwelcome surprises?
> 
> I’m seriously digging the sound of these low strings from the new expansion.


For me the brass and percussion (those toms!) just have _that_ sound and so make the whole thing worth it. The string shorts are great; the woods imo are meh-to-actually-bad. (Actually good for ostinato shorts tbf but pretty much nothing else.) I'm no mixing wizard but I've been satisfied blending it with HOD or BBCSO for legatopodes & disaggregated woodwinds.


----------



## Trash Panda

Mike Fox said:


> Now that hype season is over for this library, how are people getting a long with it? Any unwelcome surprises?
> 
> I’m seriously digging the sound of these low strings from the new expansion.


The low brass longs could benefit from an additional mf/f layer as it goes from warm and round to pissed off can of bees very suddenly. Aside from that and the usual Spitfire player performance issues (which seems to be a Windows PC issue) it’s damn near flawless.


----------



## muziksculp

I wish the AROOF player had a Niente option for the CC1 (Dynamics). Maybe I can request it via their new Forum.


----------



## John R Wilson

Mike Fox said:


> Now that hype season is over for this library, how are people getting a long with it? Any unwelcome surprises?
> 
> I’m seriously digging the sound of these low strings from the new expansion.


I'm really liking the percussion and brass on abbey road one. The low strings expansion is really nice as well.


----------



## SupremeFist

muziksculp said:


> I wish the AROOF player had a Niente option for the CC11 (Dynamics). Maybe I can request it via their new Forum.


Do you mean cc1? Yeah, I wish all Spitfire libraries had that option. I'm not a "ride cc1 & c11 simultaneously" kind of guy.


----------



## muziksculp

SupremeFist said:


> Do you mean cc1? Yeah, I wish all Spitfire libraries had that option. I'm not a "ride cc1 & c11 simultaneously" kind of guy.


Oh, yes.. I meant CC1 (Dynamics). Sorry about that. was typing without thinking, fixed it.


----------



## Russell Anderson

Trash Panda said:


> The low brass longs could benefit from an additional mf/f layer as it goes from warm and round to pissed off can of bees very suddenly. Aside from that and the usual Spitfire player performance issues (which seems to be a Windows PC issue) it’s damn near flawless.


I think part of the issue is the trombones and tuba are not on the same page dynamically. The trombones seem to top out a lot quicker on a lot of notes. I’d like to hear one more dynamic level on the FFF side from the tuba and for the trombones to then match that dynamics curve with like you say a more reasonable growth from mf to ff. I agree that the rest sounds awesome! Barring the usual timing things (and a few trumpet slips at the very high range; it’s mostly that it happens every time the notes (same slipped sample for multiple pitches) that betrays the library-sound, not so much that it happens at all).


----------



## muziksculp

I came across this video playing the LOTR theme. Using mostly AROOF

Listen to how good the Sustained Strings of AROOF sound in this demo, you can tell they are not legato, but they are still pretty good, and convincing in this track. The Brass is fantastic as well. 

I can just imagine how much better the legato versions of the mid-high strings would sound, as an expansion for AROOF, and eventually in the AR1 Modular Strings library.

Note : This video features a real acoustic Violin, and Recorder performances.


----------



## Evans

I find AR1OF extremely fast to work with, because it requires very little effort at what I'm worst at: mixing and mastering.

I mean, I'll never find compositional success beyond my small, local market, but I'm legit _awful _at mixing and have not put in the effort to move beyond the rudimentary skills needed to not actively upset any mix engineer I work with.

But the limited lift on my part to make a mix "sound good" with AR1OF has me pretty excited for a more complete series.

With that said, this Lord of the Rings mockup (and others like it) clearly show an extreme deficiency in the offering's current state. It's a neat technical test, but AR1OF simply isn't capable of satisfying my ears when anything other than basic sustains and shorts are needed (which are incredible). 

It really takes me out of the piece when there's any sort of connection required between notes.


----------



## muziksculp

Evans said:


> It really takes me out of the piece when there's any sort of connection required between notes.


Yes, that's very true. That's why not having Legato Mid-High Strings at this time for AROOF is a crippling detail. I'm hoping they don't surprise us with odd octaves legatos for the strings. 

Honestly, AROOF to me is the appetizer, the real deal is the AR1 Modular Orch.


----------



## David Kudell

The percussion sounds amazing and I hope that’s the first section Spitfire records for the individual sections! Kinda hoping that’s what they’ll do since you wouldn’t really need to worry about COVID protocols for single percussion players.


----------



## muziksculp

David Kudell said:


> The percussion sounds amazing and I hope that’s the first section Spitfire records for the individual sections! Kinda hoping that’s what they’ll do since you wouldn’t really need to worry about COVID protocols for single percussion players.


It depends which Section they already recorded. It could be the Perc., but no way to know for sure.


----------



## John R Wilson

David Kudell said:


> The percussion sounds amazing and I hope that’s the first section Spitfire records for the individual sections! Kinda hoping that’s what they’ll do since you wouldn’t really need to worry about COVID protocols for single percussion players.


I agree. The percussion is brilliant. I'm hoping that one of the Abbey Road One expansions may be a percussion one.


----------



## InLight-Tone

I'm waiting for the 12 Horn patch. I don't want to have to buy JunkieXL Brass being an admitted Spitfire fanatic...


----------



## muziksculp

Spitfire Audio has been quiet lately about AROOF Expansions, although, I'm really more interested in their AR1-Modular Orchestra release, maybe parts of it will be out this year.

I'm guessing they are busy working on both of these projects, hopefully we will also see some expansions for AROOF released soon, especially legato mid-high strings, better woodwinds, and more percussion.


----------



## InLight-Tone

Yes I'm anxiously awaiting the Modular sections as well. I guess I'm going to have to buckle and get Junkie Brass as well as I write lots of aggressive stuff and the SSB just doesn't cut it unfortunately...


----------



## Russell Anderson

InLight-Tone said:


> Yes I'm anxiously awaiting the Modular sections as well. I guess I'm going to have to buckle and get Junkie Brass as well as I write lots of aggressive stuff and the SSB just doesn't cut it unfortunately...


I hear a lot of people like CSB for that, look at that also

@ wanting modular. agreed. everyone is waiting for that one


----------



## InLight-Tone

Russell Anderson said:


> I hear a lot of people like CSB for that, look at that also
> 
> @ wanting modular. agreed. everyone is waiting for that one


Ive already been buying the JunkieXL patches I feel I need to fill in the holes like 12 Horns, 12 Trombones etc.. I do like sticking to mostly one company as regards the Orchestral stuff which for me would be Spitfire for consistency and ease of layering and blending...


----------



## Composer 2021

I'm excited for the possibility of Abbey Road becoming another full orchestra like BBCSO. Spitfire said that they were lucky to record in AR before lockdown. Not sure which lockdown they were referring to. I hope it doesn't come too soon because I am saving up for BBCSO Pro.


----------



## banjo01

Composer 2021 said:


> I'm excited for the possibility of Abbey Road becoming another full orchestra like BBCSO. Spitfire said that they were lucky to record in AR before lockdown. Not sure which lockdown they were referring to. I hope it doesn't come too soon because I am saving up for BBCSO Pro.


They say it's gonna be a modular orchestra, so I imagine it's gonna be more like what they did with the Symphonic Series.


----------



## Pontus Rufelt

Used a bit of Abbey Road stuff (including sparkling woodwinds and legendary low strings if I remember correctly) on this trailer recently. These libraries really help add some good tone and color!


----------



## RogiervG

InLight-Tone said:


> I'm waiting for the 12 Horn patch. I don't want to have to buy JunkieXL Brass being an admitted Spitfire fanatic...


97 euro's excl vat for the horn a12 patch from Junkie XL.. that is quite hefty in price for one patch though. considering the whole thing is 749 euro's excl. vat


----------



## InLight-Tone

banjo01 said:


> They say it's gonna be a modular orchestra, so I imagine it's gonna be more like what they did with the Symphonic Series.


Did they actually say somewhere they were going to do individual sections like Strings: Violins 1, Violins 2, Violas etc., or would everything be pre-orchestrated ensembles like the current offerings?


----------



## mussnig

InLight-Tone said:


> Did they actually say somewhere they were going to do individual sections like Strings: Violins 1, Violins 2, Violas etc., or would everything be pre-orchestrated ensembles like the current offerings?



They mentioned in a couple of videos that apart from all the pre-orchestrated releases they are really doing complete individual sections (this is what people refer to as modular orchestra in this case). Think Spitfire Symphony Orchestra but in Abbey Road: Studio One and with (hopefully) more dynamic layers.


----------



## InLight-Tone

Oh good, that's what I wanted hear!


----------



## mussnig

InLight-Tone said:


> Oh good, that's what I wanted hear!



Prepare to spend a lot of money though 😁
At this point most people expect the price to be considerably higher than SSO (more mics, more dynamic layers and of course it's going to be new and shiny).


----------



## Drumdude2112

Yes spitfire HAS been awful quiet about more aroof expansions as they've only relased two so far🤔 (what did they say they had about a dozen in the pipeline?) I LOVE the low strings expansion.Keep em' coming .


----------



## Jotto

I bought sparkling w and low strings. The sound is very good
soloed but so far i havent been successful at blending them with anything else. At least not with BBC core.


----------



## mussnig

Jotto said:


> I bought sparkling w and low strings. The sound is very good
> soloed but so far i havent been successful at blending them with anything else. At least not with BBC core.



I don't have any of the Spitfire Abbey Road libraries yet but I have been recently trying to emulate the sound of Studio One with other libraries. In your case, I would try the following (Warning: I am a complete noob, though, and I just found that this process works for me. Obviously YMMV):

1. Use the Mics from Abbey Road to get as close as possible to BBCSO.
2. Optional: Use a bit of EQ on Abbey Road to get even closer. Try to play the same articulations with the same instruments with both libraries and use some spectral analyzer as help. 
3. Apply some nice reverb (I would suggest some plate reverb here) to both libraries. Not necessarily the same amount for both, though.
4. Optional: Use a tiny bit of glue compression.

You may also want to reverse the order of 2 and 3.

Also, if somebody thinks that the process described above is completely unreasonable, I would be glad to learn how to improve it (or why one shouldn't do certain things that I suggested).


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

They're teasing something new from AR on their Instagram account now.


----------



## banjo01

ALittleNightMusic said:


> They're teasing something new from AR on their Instagram account now.


I hope it's percussion. But the image features a stringed instrument so it could be high strings.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

"The next title in our Abbey Road One Selections series arrives this Thursday!"


----------



## muziksculp

ALittleNightMusic said:


> They're teasing something new from AR on their Instagram account now



Here is a quote they posted on Instagram. 

*Quote* 

"The next title in our Abbey Road One Selections series arrives this Thursday! Recorded in Studio One at the iconic @abbeyroadstudios and housed in our award-winning dedicated plug-in, this series brings the magic of movie music to your fingertips. ⁠⁠
Any guesses what the new release might be? "

So, most likely one or two new expansions for AROOF. I wish it's the mid-high Legato Strings. I think it is badly needed. We will know what it is on Thursday.


----------



## Kevperry777

muziksculp said:


> Here is a quote they posted on Instagram.
> 
> *Quote*
> 
> "The next title in our Abbey Road One Selections series arrives this Thursday! Recorded in Studio One at the iconic @abbeyroadstudios and housed in our award-winning dedicated plug-in, this series brings the magic of movie music to your fingertips. ⁠⁠
> Any guesses what the new release might be? "
> 
> So, most likely one or two new expansions for AROOF. I wish it's the mid-high Legato Strings. I think it is badly needed. We will know what it is on Thursday.


I also remember an 'Epic Horns' being accidentally leaked in a vid.


----------



## Drumdude2112

Kevperry777 said:


> I also remember an 'Epic Horns' being accidentally leaked in a vid.


Epic Horns AND High Strings Legato would be GREAT 👍🏻


----------



## FireGS

Kevperry777 said:


> I also remember an 'Epic Horns' being accidentally leaked in a vid.


Just what we need, another 6-8 horns patch playing stupidly loud in unison.


----------



## Evans

Imagine, 6 FH Legato for only $49.


----------



## FireGS

Evans said:


> Imagine, 6 FH Legato for only $49.


Plz no...


----------



## jbuhler

Evans said:


> Imagine, 6 FH Legato for only $49.


I hope they go for a9 or a12 rather than a6 if they are going to do a big horn section. Given the imagery they are using, I'm betting on at least one string legato in this release, likely either high strings in octaves or mid-strings in unison.


----------



## Evans

jbuhler said:


> Given the imagery they are using, I'm betting on at least one string legato in this release, likely either high strings in octaves or mid-strings in unison.


Oh, yeah, I didn't even look a the Instagram post. Definitely more flutes.


----------



## ProfoundSilence

Personally I would like more percussion


----------



## Brobdingnagian

Peter Satera said:


> I'm sadly becoming a little frustrated with AR1. Initial install was great for me, no issues other than a voice on the tail of a low brass instrument. Updating has produced significant issues. 1.0.5 the names of many instrument articulations were incorrect and in 1.0.7 locating the library gave me continued errors and after resolving, percussion instruments are missing samples, and some mics are completely empty.
> 
> It's been reported, but this is really disappointing that something which was robust for me, has went from bad to worse with updating.
> 
> (This in no way reflects my very positive opinion on the product quality when in a robust state).


@Peter Satera Did you ever solve this issue, without having to re-download? Same issue here on Timpani hits, no sound on Mix 1 only Mix 2 and the rest of Page 1 mixes, no sound on Page 2 of mixes here...

Any info appreciated.


----------



## Peter Satera

Brobdingnagian said:


> @Peter Satera Did you ever solve this issue, without having to re-download? Same issue here on Timpani hits, no sound on Mix 1 only Mix 2 and the rest of Page 1 mixes, no sound on Page 2 of mixes here...
> 
> Any info appreciated.


Unfortunately not. The issue remains to date. I also don't want to download the whole library again as worried it could cause projects or other issues to occur.


----------



## Peter Satera

Brobdingnagian said:


> @Peter Satera Did you ever solve this issue, without having to re-download? Same issue here on Timpani hits, no sound on Mix 1 only Mix 2 and the rest of Page 1 mixes, no sound on Page 2 of mixes here...
> 
> Any info appreciated.


I felt it was just to reply and update the status of this as it dates to February. Upon updating to v1.0.10 no changes occurred and the Mic remained an issue. We also tried replacing Abbey Road One Vst2, Vst3 files, without success. After this we concluded the best resolve was to delete it completely and redownload (I did not delete the additional modules). There's always a concern with this as it can mess up projects. But upon redownloading everything and reinstalling the lot I can say v1.0.10 is successful and so far everything is absolutely fine. My projects and ARO Presets created also are seamless as the pathway remained identical.

Therefore, if anyone has any issues regarding this (as we read Mix2 for some others), it is worth mentioning to Support. They'll reset the library for you, you delete what is in your drives and do a fresh install. This reestablishes the link between the plugin and samples.

As always in my experience, Spitfire Support is excellent.


----------



## Brobdingnagian

Thank you for the update, @Peter Satera. Very kind of you to have taken the time to do so.


----------



## Futchibon

Soundbed said:


> The world did not need another Star Wars mockup, but I wanted to try it (my first time!).... Used ARO only, except for a harp. No mixing outside what the Spitfire Abbey Road One plugin can do internally -- meaning basic panning and mic position levels, reverb and expression modulation.



Thanks for this, a great demonstration of the lovely sound and limitations of the library. I'm thinking Soaring Strings would be a good fit for legato strings,? Or do you think something else?


----------



## Soundbed

Futchibon said:


> Thanks for this, a great demonstration of the lovely sound and limitations of the library. I'm thinking Soaring Strings would be a good fit for legato strings,? Or do you think something else?


Thank you!

It should be said that I could definitely get the timing of those runs tighter, if I went back and revisited this.

I made a mistake when programming that I only realized AFTER the video was out there. I was automating a parameter to "shorten the attack" (can't remember what it's called but it's part of the Spitfire Player) in the middle of the playback for some instruments.

*That adjustment mid-playback threw off the timing (sadly).*

(esp 1:45-1:55 or so)

At the time, I simply thought the instruments were sluggish ... but now I know one could definitely do better than this, if one did a better job of managing the offsets and the note starts so the timing doesn't "fall apart" like in that video.

I spent a lot of time playing with the mic options with the trumpets (there are lots of mics) and trying to match the OST when I should have simply tried harder to keep everything in time and together like an ensemble. I had what I thought was a pretty good mix going for a while and then I started monkeying with a bunch of in-plugin automation and might have done some damage. Anyway, I ran out of time to tweak things and I've not taken the opportunity to go back and revisit it.

As for Soaring Strings, the best answer I can give right now is that I haven't tried it! Perhaps someone else can help with that advice. I have read that either Vista or Soaring Strings should work well, from others. I have a video comparing the sound between Vista and Soaring Strings on my channel. Basically SS sounds "brighter" and crisper than Vista. I didn't do a back to back with Abbey Road tone-wise though.

The Abbey Road trems are really close to movie soundtracks btw.


----------



## jbuhler

Futchibon said:


> Thanks for this, a great demonstration of the lovely sound and limitations of the library. I'm thinking Soaring Strings would be a good fit for legato strings,? Or do you think something else?


I like Berlin Symphonic Strings with AROOF strings. SF Symphonic Strings work reasonably well too. I haven't tried Soaring Strings yet, because they are recently acquired, and I haven't had a reason to pull out AROOF.


----------



## SupremeFist

jbuhler said:


> I like Berlin Symphonic Strings with AROOF strings. SF Symphonic Strings work reasonably well too. I haven't tried Soaring Strings yet, because they are recently acquired, and I haven't had a reason to pull out AROOF.


Hollywood Strings can work too!


----------



## Futchibon

Thanks guys, I couldn't resist AROOF for only $218, especially as I already had the low strings and sparkling woodwinds. Will give SS and Vista a go first as I have them already, and recently acquired IB and IW which I think might go well. Cheers


----------



## axb312

Futchibon said:


> Thanks guys, I couldn't resist AROOF for only $218, especially as I already had the low strings and sparkling woodwinds. Will give SS and Vista a go first as I have them already, and recently acquired IB and IW which I think might go well. Cheers


I had the same thought initially regarding AROOF but decided to hold out until the detailed sections come out. 218 would just be a waste of money imo.


----------



## Bman70

jbuhler said:


> I like Berlin Symphonic Strings with AROOF strings. SF Symphonic Strings work reasonably well too. I haven't tried Soaring Strings yet, because they are recently acquired, and I haven't had a reason to pull out AROOF.


Glad to hear BSS is a good match, that was the other one I've had my eye on. BSS and AR1 both have a cinematic "sound" and character which I find inspiring to just play around on. Got one of them now at least.


----------



## icecoolpool

Futchibon said:


> Thanks guys, I couldn't resist AROOF for only $218, especially as I already had the low strings and sparkling woodwinds. Will give SS and Vista a go first as I have them already, and recently acquired IB and IW which I think might go well. Cheers


$218? Is that with a student discount? It´s showing as €336 for me.


----------



## Germain B

icecoolpool said:


> $218? Is that with a student discount? It´s showing as €336 for me.








Spitfire Audio Monthly Deal (January): Save 30% off BBC SO


Weird. For me, completing the OA bundle with the same two missing products is $10 cheaper. $348 for the bundle, $179 + $179 = $358 for OACT and OAE. There was an initial glitch with their bundle pricing that they have now corrected.




vi-control.net


----------



## szczaw

axb312 said:


> I had the same thought initially regarding AROOF but decided to hold out until the detailed sections come out. 218 would just be a waste of money imo.


Yea, I got it because I thought it was a good deal. I don't know what to do with it now. The only thing that comes to mind is merging with something more complete.


----------



## Futchibon

jbuhler said:


> I like Berlin Symphonic Strings with AROOF strings. SF Symphonic Strings work reasonably well too. I haven't tried Soaring Strings yet, because they are recently acquired, and I haven't had a reason to pull out AROOF.


Oh I misread your post as BS rather than BSS, I have BSS and just tried it, yes they go great together, thanks!


axb312 said:


> I had the same thought initially regarding AROOF but decided to hold out until the detailed sections come out. 218 would just be a waste of money imo.


I thought about holding out too but glad I didn't, sounding greqt. Still a few hours in the sale left!


icecoolpool said:


> $218? Is that with a student discount? It´s showing as €336 for me.


Thanis @Germain B for the link - beat me to it!


----------



## Futchibon

szczaw said:


> Yea, I got it because I thought it was a good deal. I don't know what to do with it now. The only thing that comes to mind is merging with something more complete.


8dios Agitato Grandiose strings and Century brass are very cheap atm and Soaring Strings has been as low as $99 this year. Might go well with an IR like below



https://vi-control.net/community/threads/abbey-road-poor-mans-impulse-response.105040/


----------



## Bman70

szczaw said:


> Yea, I got it because I thought it was a good deal. I don't know what to do with it now. The only thing that comes to mind is merging with something more complete.


Come on, when the legato module comes out you'll be glad you got the foundation at such a deal.  I enjoy noodling with it because the tone inspires me.


----------



## muziksculp

Bman70 said:


> Come on, when the legato module comes out you'll be glad you got the foundation at such a deal.  I enjoy noodling with it because the tone inspires me.


I'm not so confident they will release Legato Strings Expansion Modules for AROOF. Actually, it feels that the whole AROOF expansion development has come to a stand still, not much activity for quite a while. 

But I'm surely looking forward to see them release one of the AR-1 Modular Orchestra Libraries this year. I think that might be their current focus.


----------



## SupremeFist

muziksculp said:


> I'm not so confident they will release Legato Strings Expansion Modules for AROOF. Actually, it feels that the whole AROOF expansion development has come to a stand still, not much activity for quite a while.
> 
> But I'm surely looking forward to see them release one of the AR-1 Modular Orchestra Libraries this year. I think that might be their current focus.


I think they may have mispriced/misconceived the expansions in terms of selling them to a mass audience. (Of course pros will buy whatever they feel will be useful, at any price within reason.)


----------



## muziksculp

SupremeFist said:


> I think they may have mispriced/misconceived the expansions in terms of selling them to a mass audience. (Of course pros will buy whatever they feel will be useful, at any price within reason.)


Yeah, I feel like they were just experimenting a bit with the whole concept of AROOF. Not sure what's going on, they could reduce the expansion prices if they wanted to fix that part, it's not rocket science. 

But as I said above, I think they are silently developing the AR-1 Modular Orchestra, all the hype about AROOF seems to have died out. We are in August, I don't recall when AROOF was released, but most likely a while ago already. They could have released much more expansions for it if it was a priority, but I think it was more of an experiment. I might be wrong, but these are the facts so far.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Actually, the facts are:

AROOF - November 2020
Sparkling Woodwinds - February 2021
Legendary Low Strings - February 2021
Wondrous Flutes - May 2021

So, they've been consistently releasing new AR material every ~3 months since they launched the partnership.


----------



## Bman70

muziksculp said:


> I'm not so confident they will release Legato Strings Expansion Modules for AROOF. Actually, it feels that the whole AROOF expansion development has come to a stand still, not much activity for quite a while.
> 
> But I'm surely looking forward to see them release one of the AR-1 Modular Orchestra Libraries this year. I think that might be their current focus.



So you reckon that Legendary Low Strings, Sparkling WW and the Flute expansion are the extent of add-ons? Seems odd not to finish out the brass at least, then string registers besides low.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Bman70 said:


> So you reckon that Legendary Low Strings, Sparkling WW and the Flute expansion are the extent of add-ons? Seems odd not to finish out the brass at least, then string registers besides low.


They're not - they've stated they will have 9 expansions.


----------



## muziksculp

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Actually, the facts are:
> 
> AROOF - November 2020
> Sparkling Woodwinds - February 2021
> Legendary Low Strings - February 2021
> Wondrous Flutes - May 2021
> 
> So, they've been consistently releasing new AR material every ~3 months since they launched the partnership.


Based on this, we could see a new expansion this month. But, I have a feeling we won't .


----------



## Bman70

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Actually, the facts are:
> 
> AROOF - November 2020
> Sparkling Woodwinds - February 2021
> Legendary Low Strings - February 2021
> Wondrous Flutes - May 2021
> 
> So, they've been consistently releasing new AR material every ~3 months since they launched the partnership.


Ah, interesting, a release about every 3 months on it so far. So we could expect Hot Diggity Brass in... this month!


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

muziksculp said:


> Based on this, we could see a new expansion this month. But, I have a feeling we won't .


You're not basing anything you're saying on any factual knowledge or information from Spitfire. I wonder why...


----------



## muziksculp

If they release any expansion this month (although I doubt it very much), it won't be the Legato string sections.


----------



## SupremeFist

muziksculp said:


> If they release any expansion this month (although I doubt it very much), it won't be the Legato string sections.


It will be Heroic Horns and I will hate myself for buying it but then really like having it. 💁‍♀️


----------



## Bman70

Of the 3 expansions released so far, two are woodwind related. So 2 wind, 2 brass, 1 percussion, would leave 4 string expansions (total 9)... Low, Mid, High, and solo? Anyway whatever just daydreaming.


----------



## muziksculp

ALittleNightMusic said:


> You're not basing anything you're saying on any factual knowledge or information from Spitfire. I wonder why...


Just by observing the pattern of their current releases. I have no insider info. about what's going on, that's why I keep saying I think. ... ... 

If you are basing your predictions on their previous release patterns of ARROF expansions, it's still a bit of guessing. Bottom line, we don't know for sure, but we can guess, or speculate. Personally, I really don't care much for AROOF anymore. It's crippled in many ways, and I don't think more expansions will make it my go to orchestral library. Maybe it's target market is not for me.


----------



## Futchibon

muziksculp said:


> Based on this, we could see a new expansion this month. But, I have a feeling we won't .


Sparkling triangles?


----------



## Futchibon

ALittleNightMusic said:


> They're not - they've stated they will have 9 expansions.


That's good to hear!


----------



## muziksculp

Action Cowbells


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

muziksculp said:


> It's crippled in many ways, and I don't think more expansions will make it my go to orchestral library. Maybe it's target market is not for me.


If that's what your expectation was with an ensemble-based library, then...yes, I don't think you understand the design or usage philosophy for AROOF and the selections.


----------



## muziksculp

ALittleNightMusic said:


> If that's what your expectation was with an ensemble-based library, then...yes, I don't think you understand the design or usage philosophy for AROOF and the selections.


Yes, Maybe I made a bad decision, I really don't care for AROOF, or it's future expansions.


----------



## SupremeFist

ALittleNightMusic said:


> If that's what your expectation was with an ensemble-based library, then...yes, I don't think you understand the design or usage philosophy for AROOF and the selections.


I think to be fair and polite we all understand the "design and usage philosophy" of AROOF (which I have and like very much): it's marketed as an all-in-one library ("Everything you need to bring the iconic sound of cinema to your scores", lol), but it obviously doesn't work as such and needs another library (with legatos) to take up the slack. So even though the sound is gob-smackingly tremendous, it's not even as good as doing what it promises to do as Albion One.


----------



## muziksculp

SupremeFist said:


> So even though the sound is gob-smackingly tremendous, it's not even as good as doing what it promises to do as Albion One.


Yup. Very true.

Actually, I love the sound of AROOF i.e. The Short Strings, and Brass especially, but that's Thanks to AR-1's hall, and it's sonic characteristics. Something that will be part of the Modular Orchestra when it is released.


----------



## Saxer

Wondrous Flutes... I wonder why the didn't sample the last missing half octave from F#3 to C4 (MIDI F#5 to C6). Same with the AROOF "low brass": no tenor range of trombones C#1 to A or C2 (MIDI C#2 to C3).


----------



## muziksculp

Saxer said:


> Wondrous Flutes... I wonder why the didn't sample the last missing half octave from F#3 to C4 (MIDI F#5 to C6). Same with the AROOF "low brass": no tenor range of trombones C#1 to A or C2 (MIDI C#2 to C3).


 To Keep it Crippled


----------



## muziksculp

Plus, they didn't even bother making an Ensemble Strings Short patch, I had to make it myself by layering them, and this is supposed to be a good sketching library


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

SupremeFist said:


> I think to be fair and polite we all understand the "design and usage philosophy" of AROOF (which I have and like very much): it's marketed as an all-in-one library ("Everything you need to bring the iconic sound of cinema to your scores", lol), but it obviously doesn't work as such and needs another library (with legatos) to take up the slack. So even though the sound is gob-smackingly tremendous, it's not even as good as doing what it promises to do as Albion One.


One thing I've noticed based on reading this thread is actually many people _don't_ understand the design and usage philosophy of AROOF - despite Spitfire stating it multiple times. And like many Spitfire products, people tend to latch onto a single piece of marketing copy and keep harping on that constantly (like BBCSO's universal starting point thing). Or keep commenting how it isn't something _you_ think it should be, even though it was never meant to be that (if you're really paying attention to what Paul and Christian have been saying). Which I suppose is an approach to take if you have decided that you will do everything to convince others of your viewpoint or want to sway public opinion in a certain way, as seems to be happening here frequently. If selective marketing copy is going to tell you how to use your tools, well then you're only in for constant disappointment going forward.

I should point out that your quote is nowhere to be found on the AROOF product page btw https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/abbey-road-one-orchestral-foundations/


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

muziksculp said:


> Plus, they didn't even bother making an Ensemble Strings Short patch, I had to make it myself by layering them, and this is supposed to be a good sketching library


Crazy how people can sketch without that right? It's almost as if your sketching workflow is not the universal standard.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Yeah, I feel like they were just experimenting a bit with the whole concept of AROOF. Not sure what's going on, they could reduce the expansion prices if they wanted to fix that part, it's not rocket science.
> 
> But as I said above, I think they are silently developing the AR-1 Modular Orchestra, all the hype about AROOF seems to have died out. We are in August, I don't recall when AROOF was released, but most likely a while ago already. They could have released much more expansions for it if it was a priority, but I think it was more of an experiment. I might be wrong, but these are the facts so far.


I think SF discovered an issue with the string legatos—likely minor but who knows—that they planned to release in May and so delayed it, and they already had their release plans in place for other libraries for the next few months and didn't want to disrupt those by squeezing in another AROOF expansion. 

And they haven't been especially silent about developing the modular orchestra. It was announced when they released AROOF. So it's been ongoing, with work slowed due to Covid. I expect the first modules to start appearing in 2022, and I'd be most surprised if they all dropped at once. I suspect it will be about a module every two or three months.

But of course my take is speculation too.


----------



## muziksculp

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Crazy how people can sketch without that right? It's almost as if your sketching workflow is not the universal standard.


You missed my point.


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> I expect the first modules to start appearing in 2022


Why not 2021 ?


----------



## soulofsound

muziksculp said:


> You missed my point.


Yes and i think you made some good ones. In my view SF are leaving a lot of money on the table here. This library could be so much more. Of course there must be a reason we don't know about, but that doesn't make your points any less valuable.


----------



## jbuhler

ALittleNightMusic said:


> If that's what your expectation was with an ensemble-based library, then...yes, I don't think you understand the design or usage philosophy for AROOF and the selections.


AROOF is also designed to work like Albion One did while they were rolling out BML in the day. You sketch the basic shapes with the broad brush (AROOF) and then add the details with the modular library. So if you are going to bring your modules out over a year or two, it makes sense to have something like AROOF to hang them on. And like Albion One, AROOF also has another use case for quick media composition, where the broad brush approach is generally fine, but you might want bits of detail for some common special case scenario (hence the expansion packs). At least that's how I understand the logic of the libraries.


----------



## Futchibon

So if there are 6 more expansions coming, what could they be?

High Strings
Mid Strings
Trumpets
Trombones
Horns
Bassoons?

9 expansions @$49 each plus the base library @$449 is $890. As opposed to BBCSO Core for $449 or Pro for $999.

I'm sure SA wil be interested how the sales between BBCSO and AROOF go. With one you can get a playable library for $449 but with only one mic option, or get great mic options but crippled playability.

Given how happy I am with BBCSO Core I'm much more likely to spend more on AROOF all up I think, but only time will tell. And I think non-pros won't be too interested in BBCSO Pro.

And never underestimate the number of Star Wars fanboys (and girls) who want that AR sound!


----------



## SupremeFist

ALittleNightMusic said:


> One thing I've noticed based on reading this thread is actually many people _don't_ understand the design and usage philosophy of AROOF - despite Spitfire stating it multiple times. And like many Spitfire products, people tend to latch onto a single piece of marketing copy and keep harping on that constantly (like BBCSO's universal starting point thing). Or keep commenting how it isn't something _you_ think it should be, even though it was never meant to be that (if you're really paying attention to what Paul and Christian have been saying). Which I suppose is an approach to take if you have decided that you will do everything to convince others of your viewpoint or want to sway public opinion in a certain way, as seems to be happening here frequently. If selective marketing copy is going to tell you how to use your tools, well then you're only in for constant disappointment going forward.
> 
> I should point out that your quote is nowhere to be found on the AROOF product page btw https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/abbey-road-one-orchestral-foundations/


Ok!


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Why not 2021 ?


Because they won't be ready yet. They barely started recording and then COVID hit. If you followed Christian's videos on Solstice you can get some idea how long the development process takes, and that wasn't their flagship library that they need to get absolutely right, especially if my hunch about the cost is correct. (The price is going to give folks around here heart attacks.)


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> Because they won't be ready yet. They barely started recording and then COVID hit. If you followed Christian's videos on Solstice you can get some idea how long the development process takes, and that wasn't their flagship library that they need to get absolutely right, especially if my hunch about the cost is correct. (The price is going to give folks around here heart attacks.)


That maybe the case. But why did they even bother with developing a library like Solstice, when they could have used that time, and money to begin with AR-1 Modular Orch. , was everyone asking for a library like Solstice ? I don't think so. I'm very confused about their priorities, and time management, and overall focus of their product release scheduling.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

jbuhler said:


> AROOF is also designed to work like Albion One did while they were rolling out BML in the day. You sketch the basic shapes with the broad brush (AROOF) and then add the details with the modular library. So if you are going to bring your modules out over a year or two, it makes sense to have something like AROOF to hang them on. And like Albion One, AROOF also has another use case for quick media composition, where the broad brush approach is generally fine, but you might want bits of detail for some common special case scenario (hence the expansion packs). At least that's how I understand the logic of the libraries.


Indeed - in fact, these are directly taken from the product page:

"Organised into ensembles (combinations of instruments), Abbey Road One springs out of the box, pre-orchestrated – helping you sketch your musical ideas quickly and easily."

"Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations is the first in a series of film scoring selections recorded in Studio One. These follow up titles will be smaller, more focused libraries inspired by classic films – offering pre-orchestrated instrument themes. Each Selections library is focussed on accomplishing certain performance elements of orchestral movie music brilliantly...Beautifully orchestrated and incredibly detailed sounds designed for a specific performance purpose..."

In that, AROOF is meant to be a sketching library, first and foremost - never was meant to be an extensively detailed, instrument-by-instrument one. And the selections have always been meant to serve a specific orchestration / thematic purpose - like a particular brush. One that you may not use all the time, but when you have a need for that specific purpose, it is tailor-made for that. Once again, people here seem to think the selections are somehow meant to "complete" AROOF as a full, all-in-one sample library - and that's never been the goal.


----------



## muziksculp

New name for AROOF is AROCOF Guess what the C stands for ?


----------



## jbuhler

Futchibon said:


> So if there are 6 more expansions coming, what could they be?
> 
> High Strings
> Mid Strings
> Trumpets
> Trombones
> Horns
> Bassoons?
> 
> 9 expansions @$49 each plus the base library @$449 is $890. As opposed to BBCSO Core for $449 or Pro for $999.
> 
> I'm sure SA wil be interested how the sales between BBCSO and AROOF go. With one you can get a playable library for $449 but with only one mic option, or get great mic options but crippled playability.
> 
> Given how happy I am with BBCSO Core I'm much more likely to spend more on AROOF all up I think, but only time will tell. And I think non-pros won't be too interested in BBCSO Pro.
> 
> And never underestimate the number of Star Wars fanboys (and girls) who want that AR sound!


You can look at Albion One to get some ideas:
High string legato in octaves.
Mid string legato, unison two violin sections and maybe viola
Heroic brass legato in octaves
Low winds legato in octaves (bassoon, contrabassoon, bass clarinet?)
Low brass legato in octaves

Other possibilities
Horns, cellos, and bassoon legato
Runs and effects
Sordino Strings (unlikely)

All of the expansions will be combinations that won't be redundant with the modular orchestra.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> That maybe the case. But why did they even bother with developing a library like Solstice, when they could have used that time, and money to begin with AR-1 Modular Orch. , was everyone asking for a library like Solstice ? I don't think so. I'm very confused about their priorities, and time management, and overall focus of their product release scheduling.


Because they aren't aiming their production only at your wants. They have a company that requires good cash flow on a regular basis, needs a diverse line of products to ensure that cash flow, and seems to be aiming for about a release per month. 

Also Solstice is great and slots quite neatly in with other things like the textural libraries and such. If it's not what you are looking for, it's what a lot of other people are.


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> Because they aren't aiming their production only at your wants.


LOL...I thought that was their main focus


----------



## holywilly

last year VSL had focused on releasing BBO every single month to complete the series, then Synchron instruments this year. I wish Spitfire takes the same route to focus on Abbey Road instead of something else before releasing something else. Oh yeah, and to improve its own plugin in every aspect.


----------



## muziksculp

holywilly said:


> last year VSL had focused on releasing BBO every single month to complete the series, then Synchron instruments this year. I wish Spitfire takes the same route to focus on Abbey Road instead of something else before releasing something else. Oh yeah, and to improve its own plugin in every aspect.


+1000 

Yes, they can learn a lot from VSL.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

jbuhler said:


> You can look at Albion One to get some ideas:
> High string legato in octaves.
> Mid string legato, unison two violin sections and maybe viola
> Heroic brass legato in octaves
> Low winds legato in octaves (bassoon, contrabassoon, bass clarinet?)
> Low brass legato in octaves
> 
> Other possibilities
> Horns, cellos, and bassoon legato
> Runs and effects
> Sordino Strings (unlikely)
> 
> All of the expansions will be combinations that won't be redundant with the modular orchestra.


My feeling - and my hope - is that we'll see more unique combinations in selections than something like high strings in octaves. There's so much unchartered territory in terms of common orchestration colors that no other developer has recorded, playing together at the same time, in an amazing room.


----------



## dzilizzi

muziksculp said:


> I'm not so confident they will release Legato Strings Expansion Modules for AROOF. Actually, it feels that the whole AROOF expansion development has come to a stand still, not much activity for quite a while.
> 
> But I'm surely looking forward to see them release one of the AR-1 Modular Orchestra Libraries this year. I think that might be their current focus.


Well, CoVID shutdowns did mess up their recording plans. I think they may not have anything else recorded yet. And if Abbey Road is booked in advance, it could be they are having trouble getting back in.


----------



## muziksculp

dzilizzi said:


> Well, CoVID shutdowns did mess up their recording plans. I think they may not have anything else recorded yet. And if Abbey Road is booked in advance, it could be they are having trouble getting back in.


Yes, could be damn COVID complicating everything these days.


----------



## jbuhler

ALittleNightMusic said:


> My feeling - and my hope - is that we'll see more unique combinations in selections than something like high strings in octaves. There's so much unchartered territory in terms of common orchestration colors that no other developer has recorded, playing together at the same time, in an amazing room.


I'm not sure on this. The first two expansions were arguably versions of Albion One's low string legato and the high woodwinds legato. The Wondrous Flutes, or whatever its called, did give us something a bit different, more like one of the brass sections in AROOF, but with legato. I think they have to do high strings legato, and octave is the most likely version of that, and we might get a mid-legato too. And then I expect some kind of heroic brass patch, though that could be anything from trumpets and trombones or horns in octaves to a horns a8 or a12. After that, I think things are pretty open.

Which patches would you like to see?


----------



## Soundbed

SupremeFist said:


> I think to be fair and polite we all understand the "design and usage philosophy" of AROOF





ALittleNightMusic said:


> many people _don't_ understand the design and usage philosophy of AROOF


I didn’t fully understand the ramifications of the AROOF expansions plan at first.

I went through early phases when I believed the expansions WERE the modular library. I was confused and then disappointed. I also thought the ensemble expansions were going to be more useful / versatile than they seem to actually be (i.e., better value for me).



Saxer said:


> Wondrous Flutes... I wonder why the didn't sample the last missing half octave from F#3 to C4 (MIDI F#5 to C6). Same with the AROOF "low brass": no tenor range of trombones C#1 to A or C2 (MIDI C#2 to C3).


I made a short video about the wondrous flutes range when it came out. The low brass range is frustrating. There’s a spot in the dynamic range where you can get an almost perfect crossover to the high brass (around mf iirc) but it doesn’t work at other dynamics like p or f.


----------



## jbuhler

Soundbed said:


> I didn’t fully understand the ramifications of the AROOF expansions plan at first.
> 
> I went through early phases when I believed the expansions WERE the modular library. I was confused and then disappointed. I also thought the ensemble expansions were going to be more useful / versatile than they seem to actually be (i.e., better value for me).
> 
> 
> I made a whole (short)
> video about the flutes range. The low brass range is pretty frustrating. There’s a spot in the dynamic range where you can get an almost perfect crossover to the high brass (around mf iirc) but it doesn’t work at other dynamics like p or f.


Yes, these crossovers were a problem in Albion as well and some of the changes with AROOF addressed some of the issues with the brass, but they also inexplicably introduced new ones, and the trombone range is one of the worst. The horns can sort of cover it but it's far less than ideal, and it makes you really wonder what SF was thinking in terms of design. I was also very irritated with the limited sparkling woodwinds range, where they more or less eliminated the sparkling range of the woodwinds (and the legato is an octave less than is the case in Albion One). Again I just don't understand the thinking. I like the sound of the flute expansion better than the woodwinds, though I haven't bought it yet.


----------



## Evans

dzilizzi said:


> Well, CoVID shutdowns did mess up their recording plans. I think they may not have anything else recorded yet. And if Abbey Road is booked in advance, it could be they are having trouble getting back in.


Per Christian, on October 22, 2020:


> we've recorded the foundation library along with 9 additional selections already. Abbey 2 is fully recorded and we have just finished our first chapter of the modular library.


Direct link to post: https://vi-control.net/community/th...one-orchestral-foundations.99671/post-4664567


----------



## dcoscina

I guess it depends on how much recording inside Abbey Road SFA managed before and during Covid. My guess is that the prolonged schedule is due to covid. I’m sure we will see high strings and both low and high brass at some point.


----------



## dzilizzi

Evans said:


> Per Christian, on October 22, 2020:
> 
> Direct link to post: https://vi-control.net/community/th...one-orchestral-foundations.99671/post-4664567


Ah, I missed this. The last I had seen was when Covid shutdowns first started and they were talking about delays and how they could play with the 6 feet between players and still get the sounds right. 

I personally am waiting for the modular library. I'm not a media composer, though I did get AROOF, I figured it would be useful for full sections when needed.


----------



## axb312

I think it could be an effort by Spitfire to gauge how much interest there is in the Abbey Road line, while also reeling those who like the sound in for more. Foundations and the various expansions will be a very pricy package at the end of the day.

Wish they'd just skipped to the detailed modular orchestra instead.


----------



## jbuhler

axb312 said:


> I think it could be an effort by Spitfire to gauge how much interest there is in the Abbey Road line, while also reeling those who like the sound in for more. Foundations and the various expansions will be a very pricy package at the end of the day.
> 
> Wish they'd just skipped to the detailed modular orchestra instead.


As I see it, Abbey Road Modular is primarily about prestige and brand building, not sales. The interest they want is folks saying this is the best orchestral library ever, even if it is unaffordable to mere mortals. So it's likely to be very pricey and its rollout relatively slow to ensure it has that requisite quality. That's also one reason for the Foundations library, so you have something to hang the modules on while they are rolling out. 

I mean, I might be wrong about what ends up happening. And maybe SF will lose focus midway like they did with BML or have a financial crisis and rush out the whole thing in incomplete and not so expensive form to address that crisis. That's all hard to say, but there is no sign at present that SF is anything except a very healthy company from a financial standpoint. And right now available evidence suggests the modular library aims to be this prestige and quite exclusive library.


----------



## muziksculp

axb312 said:


> Wish they'd just skipped to the detailed modular orchestra instead.


+1000


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> +1000


Until you see the price...


----------



## axb312

jbuhler said:


> Until you see the price...


If it's going to be unapproachably expensive, I don't see the point getting in the line (with foundations) at all...will just be hungry for something one can never afford....

All this doesn't change the fact that foundations seems like a waste of time (in my opinion)...


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> Until you see the price...


Do you know the price already ? What is the price ? Please let me know


----------



## styledelk

The price is time. It's always time.


----------



## Drundfunk

jbuhler said:


> Until you see the price...


Considering how old the BML libraries are (although rebranded) and how expensive they still are, I think you're right .


----------



## muziksculp

@jbuhler ,

Looks like you were also wrong about the expected release of AR-1 Modular, they plan to release one of them this year according to the post above.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> @jbuhler ,
> 
> Looks like you were also wrong about the expected release of AR-1 Modular, they plan to release one of them this year according to the post above.


Which post above?


----------



## szczaw

Detailed libraries take time. In the meantime, small ensembles can generate some revenue. VSL's been doing the same quite steadily and efficiently with BBO and Synchron libraries.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Do you know the price already ? What is the price ? Please let me know


No one knows what the price is, but I'll be shocked if the retail price is under $3000 for the whole modular library bundled, and I'm expecting and saving for a price quite a lot higher than that.


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> Which post above?


https://vi-control.net/community/th...ne-orchestral-foundations.100028/post-4886609


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> No one knows what the price is, but I'll be shocked if the retail price is under $3000 for the whole modular library bundled, and I'm expecting and saving for a price quite a lot higher than that.


That's pure speculation. You don't know.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> https://vi-control.net/community/th...ne-orchestral-foundations.100028/post-4886609


That post doesn't say anything about release dates.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> That's pure speculation. You don't know.


Where did I say I know? "No one knows what the price is." I mean, read, dude. I haven't made any claims of fact. I've said everything is speculation. 

I would be willing to bet however that none of the modular library will come out this year, and that the price of the retail price of the bundled modular orchestra will be more than $3000 when all is said and done.


----------



## muziksculp

https://vi-control.net/community/th...ne-orchestral-foundations.100028/post-4886241


----------



## SupremeFist

axb312 said:


> All this doesn't change the fact that foundations seems like a waste of time (in my opinion)...


Though I'm critical of the marketing of it I absolutely don't think it's a waste of time as is. The brass is stunning, as is the percussion, and the plethora of mic options mean you can use these instruments in a lot of different contexts besides vanilla orchestral. (Eg I've been using the absolutely amazing toms as the "snare" in some sort of orchestral-hybrid-trance lately....)


----------



## muziksculp

I have no intention of spending an extra penny on anything to do with AROOF's crippled expansions. 

But I'm surely looking forward to adding AR-1 Modular Orchestra. My expectations about it are super high. Can't wait to see the first modular part released this year.


----------



## Gerbil

jbuhler said:


> Where did I say I know? "No one knows what the price is." I mean, read, dude. I haven't made any claims of fact. I've said everything is speculation.
> 
> I would be willing to bet however that none of the modular library will come out this year, and that the price of the retail price of the bundled modular orchestra will be more than $3000 when all is said and done.


The beautiful thing about modular libraries is that we can pick what bits we do and don't want. If it's too pricey then just settle for a slow build. Better that than releasing some 3k+ single purchase monster.


----------



## muziksculp

Gerbil said:


> The beautiful thing about modular libraries is that we can pick what bits we do and don't want. If it's too pricey then just settle for a slow build. Better that than releasing some 3k+ single purchase monster.


It depends on what the word 'Modular' means here. 

Does it refer to the sections of the orchestra ? (Strings, Brass, Woodwind, Perc.) or does it go further into subdividing them in a modular fashion ?


----------



## SupremeFist

Gerbil said:


> The beautiful thing about modular libraries is that we can pick what bits we do and don't want. If it's too pricey then just settle for a slow build. Better that than releasing some 3k+ single purchase monster.


Agreed. If I liked the VSL sound I would potentially have gone all in on BBO: the Synchron player is best in class technically imo (from my experience demoing the woodwind sections a while ago).


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> It depends on what the word 'Modular' means here.
> 
> Does it refer to the sections of the orchestra ? (Strings, Brass, Woodwind, Perc.) or does it go further into subdividing them in a modular fashion ?


We know how SF talks about these things. They have made a thing they called a "modular orchestra" before, and they do not refer to SSO as a modular orchestra, though its samples are derived from that modular orchestra. So it seems likely that modular orchestra means broken down generally on a per instrument basis, certainly at a level of detail below the section level. That said, BML grouped the strings into two modules (but then multiple divisions of those two modules—Mural consisted of four volumes in all as I recall), and oboes and clarinets were grouped together, and so forth.


----------



## John R Wilson

muziksculp said:


> It depends on what the word 'Modular' means here.
> 
> Does it refer to the sections of the orchestra ? (Strings, Brass, Woodwind, Perc.) or does it go further into subdividing them in a modular fashion ?


Im hoping it is release per sections and not further subdivided up in a modular fashion like the original bml series.


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> We know how SF talks about these things. They have made a thing they called a "modular orchestra" before, and they do not refer to SSO as a modular orchestra, though its samples are derived from that modular orchestra. So it seems likely that modular orchestra means broken down generally on a per instrument basis, certainly at a level of detail below the section level. That said, BML grouped the strings into two modules (but then multiple divisions of those two modules—Mural consisted of four volumes in all as I recall), and oboes and clarinets were grouped together, and so forth.


Interesting. Let's see what they do in terms of modularity with the AR-1 Orchestra.


----------



## John R Wilson

I don't want it all split up with only a selection of articulations per release, I would much prefer a full string section release. I'm hoping it will have consistency between sections and have things like a nicer range of shorts such as spic, stacc and a longer marc.


----------



## muziksculp

John R Wilson said:


> a nicer range of shorts such as spic, stacc and a longer marc.


Yes. That's very important. SA has skipped Stacc. shorts, in some of their strings, not sure why they don't think it is needed, which is a big mistake. Hope they don't repeat it with the AR-1 Modular Strings.

Take a look at SA Symphonic Strings Pro. (No Staccato) WTF is that, how can it be a Professional Strings library with no Stacc. ? Priced at $1099.


----------



## John R Wilson

muziksculp said:


> Yes. That's very important. SA has skipped Stacc. shorts, not sure why they don't think it is needed, which is a big mistake. Hope they don't repeat it with the AR-1 Modular Strings.


Certainly is, similar to how sss has longer shorts, but chamber strings has no longer shorts but has spic and stacc. They seem to have improved upon this with some more consistency between section with BBCSO so hopefully this is something they will make sure to do for Abbey Road One. 

I still would quite like to see some more developments in some other areas to set this apart and raise it to a level above what is already available.


----------



## muziksculp

John R Wilson said:


> They seem to have improved upon this with some more consistency between section with BBCSO so hopefully this is something they will make sure to do for Abbey Road One.


Yup. That's why the BBCSO Pro is my go to Orchestral Library in my Template. I then complement it as needed per project. Love the BBCSO Pro library.


----------



## jbuhler

John R Wilson said:


> I don't want it all split up with only a selection of articulations per release, I would much prefer a full string section release. I'm hoping it will have consistency between sections and have things like a nicer range of shorts such as spic, stacc and a longer marc.


I could see all the strings, say, being released at the same time but still in separate libraries for purchase either as individual sections (violin 1, violin 2, violas, cellos, basses) or in a fashion similar to Mural so one could buy them on the installment plan, as it were. Or maybe released in several volumes with core articulations and extended articulations (which, as I recall, was what Mural did). 

I think strings are much harder to divide up into modules compared to the other sections of the orchestra because a lot of the value of the section as a whole comes from the cohesiveness of the individual parts. But we will see...

And I certainly hope they have a lot more variety of shorts than just spic, stacc, and long marc. I hope the extensive list of shorts in SCS and SSS is the starting point and we will get all of those plus many additional.


----------



## John R Wilson

muziksculp said:


> Yup. That's why the BBCSO Pro is my go to Orchestral Library in my Template. I then complement it as needed per project. Love the BBCSO Pro library.


BBCSO Pro is also my go to orchestral library and starting foundation. And like you I add more libraries to it such as CSS, SCS, CB when needed. Also personally I think I prefer the more controlled and drier sound of maida vale.


----------



## muziksculp

John R Wilson said:


> BBCSO Pro is also my go to orchestral library and starting foundation. And like you I add more libraries to it such as CSS, SCS, CB when needed. Also personally I think I prefer the more controlled and drier sound of maida vale.


We have similar tastes in libraries.


----------



## John R Wilson

jbuhler said:


> I could see all the strings, say, being released at the same time but still in separate libraries for purchase either as individual sections (violin 1, violin 2, violas, cellos, basses) or in a fashion similar to Mural so one could buy them on the installment plan, as it were. Or maybe released in several volumes with core articulations and extended articulations (which, as I recall, was what Mural did).
> 
> I think strings are much harder to divide up into modules compared to the other sections of the orchestra because a lot of the value of the section as a whole comes from the cohesiveness of the individual parts. But we will see...
> 
> And I certainly hope they have a lot more variety of shorts than just spic, stacc, and long marc. I hope the extensive list of shorts in SCS and SSS is the starting point and we will get all of those plus many additional.


I don't think I'd like the mural approach as much and would probably prefer it if they released separate but complete violins, violas, cellos and basses sections with all the consistency between articulations with a nice range of shorts. 

Even if it is released in a more core and extended articulations approach and more like mural I'd still like to see that consistency between the sections and libraries before buying. If they are going to release a abbey road one chamber strings and symphonic strings type library I'd like and want to see the same articulation between both the libraries.


----------



## John R Wilson

muziksculp said:


> We have similar tastes in libraries.


We certainly do 👍🙂


----------



## SupremeFist

muziksculp said:


> Yup. That's why the BBCSO Pro is my go to Orchestral Library in my Template. I then complement it as needed per project. Love the BBCSO Pro library.


Me too! And AROOF can work great as a complement to it if you want a bit more weight in the brass or a bit more smack in the drums.


----------



## muziksculp

SupremeFist said:


> Me too! And AROOF can work great as a complement to it if you want a bit more weight in the brass or a bit more smack in the drums.


Awesome ! Good Choice. 

I don't tend to use AROOF to complement the BBCSO Pro, but use other libraries, from Spitfire, and other developers. But I will try the AROOF brass, Which sound great, and some of its perc. For Perc. I love using CinePerc. more than the BBCSO Pro perc.


----------



## jbuhler

John R Wilson said:


> I don't think I'd like the mural approach as much and would probably prefer it if they released separate but complete violins, violas, cellos and basses sections with all the consistency between articulations with a nice range of shorts.
> 
> Even if it is released in a more core and extended articulations approach and more like mural I'd still like to see that consistency between the sections and libraries before buying. If they are going to release a abbey road one chamber strings and symphonic strings type library I'd like and want to see the same articulation between both the libraries.


I think they will be consistent in terms of articulations, with the possible exception of the basses. I just hope they have lots of different shorts and that the shorts are consistent within category. I also want longer shorts, and longs with round robin attacks (not layered) that can be connected to legato longs. And pretty much all the longs that can be legato enabled (like you can do with OT libraries).


----------



## muziksculp

Also.. Their Performance Legatos are very good, and useful to have. Hopefully they will include these articulations in AR-1 Modular Strings. Love the ones they have in the BBCSO Pro.


----------



## muziksculp

I would love to have them release Sordino String sections for AR-1 Modular Strings. 

I also metioned on other threads, that Sordino Legato String sections would have been awesome to have in the BBCSO Pro. Sadly that's one of the missing features of the BBCSO Pro library.


----------



## muziksculp

Maybe we should start a Spitfire Audio Abbey Road-1 Modular Orchestra Speculation Thread. Since this thread is more about AROOF.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

jbuhler said:


> I'm not sure on this. The first two expansions were arguably versions of Albion One's low string legato and the high woodwinds legato. The Wondrous Flutes, or whatever its called, did give us something a bit different, more like one of the brass sections in AROOF, but with legato. I think they have to do high strings legato, and octave is the most likely version of that, and we might get a mid-legato too. And then I expect some kind of heroic brass patch, though that could be anything from trumpets and trombones or horns in octaves to a horns a8 or a12. After that, I think things are pretty open.
> 
> Which patches would you like to see?


Well, as an example, the mordents in Wondrous Flutes are very unique. I haven't seen that in another library that I own - and they sound perfect when you want that particular color. Legendary Low Strings have a sound that you don't get just by layering a cello patch with a bass patch (but it also isn't meant to be the all-in-one low strings package - AROOF does have it's own low strings patch for example).

I think they could continue to release some unique combinations or colors - both from a timbre perspective (French horns and cellos, English horn and Violas, etc) but also from an articulation focus perspective (legatos, sure, but what about, for example, piccolo and trumpet doing an extensive array of shorts with lots of round robins and dynamic layers). Just an example - I trust Paul and Christian know what they're doing. It's gotten them this far after all!


----------



## dcoscina

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Well, as an example, the mordents in Wondrous Flutes are very unique. I haven't seen that in another library that I own - and they sound perfect when you want that particular color. Legendary Low Strings have a sound that you don't get just by layering a cello patch with a bass patch (but it also isn't meant to be the all-in-one low strings package - AROOF does have it's own low strings patch for example).
> 
> I think they could continue to release some unique combinations or colors - both from a timbre perspective (French horns and cellos, English horn and Violas, etc) but also from an articulation focus perspective (legatos, sure, but what about, for example, piccolo and trumpet doing an extensive array of shorts with lots of round robins and dynamic layers). Just an example - I trust Paul and Christian know what they're doing. It's gotten them this far after all!


the sound is really spectacular.. I expect when they come out with the AR1 Modular, that I could potentially dump my other libraries and just use that for all cinematic material. I'd still use BBCSO for more concert work or classical styled material.

I miss the days of being limited to only a couple libraries and really knowing them well. I know that doesn't stop me from doing that now but when I have so much choice, it's hard to resist reaching for another sound from A or B or Z library.


----------



## muziksculp

OK.. Here we go. 

*Spitfire Audio AR-1 Modular Orch. Speculation Thread*


----------



## styledelk

I consider the AROOF expansions to be more like continuations of the Bernard Herrmann Composer Toolkit approach than to be like AlbionOne or really any of the their other libraries. Colors, pairings, unique new combinations and articulations for orchestral effects. 

I feel like that's where people are getting their disappointment from: their expectations are formulaic based on other libraries, or they're just hooked on to some necessity for every section to have a legato.


----------



## jbuhler

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Well, as an example, the mordents in Wondrous Flutes are very unique. I haven't seen that in another library that I own - and they sound perfect when you want that particular color. Legendary Low Strings have a sound that you don't get just by layering a cello patch with a bass patch (but it also isn't meant to be the all-in-one low strings package - AROOF does have it's own low strings patch for example).
> 
> I think they could continue to release some unique combinations or colors - both from a timbre perspective (French horns and cellos, English horn and Violas, etc) but also from an articulation focus perspective (legatos, sure, but what about, for example, piccolo and trumpet doing an extensive array of shorts with lots of round robins and dynamic layers). Just an example - I trust Paul and Christian know what they're doing. It's gotten them this far after all!


Legendary Lows is very similar to the low legatos in Albion One. I like it a bit better than the Albion One low strings legato, but I revisited Albion One when LL was released and was reminded that the Albion One patch is quite good in its own way. Yes the flutes patch is a new thing. But the Sparking Woodwinds is basically the Albion One high woodwinds but with less range and the ability to add a glock. (I would have preferred the old range.) If I'm honest, I'd say I'm also worried about what the legato on Sparkling Woodwinds says about SF's thinking about woodwind legato for AR modular orchestra. The legato on the flutes sounded much better in the walkthrough, but I don't yet have that expansion, so I can't comment definitively.


----------



## MaxOctane

jbuhler said:


> No one knows what the price is, but I'll be shocked if the retail price is under $3000 for the whole modular library bundled, and I'm expecting and saving for a price quite a lot higher than that.


I don't think $3000 would be the price. Spitfire has consistently priced full orchestras in sub-1000 range. BBCSO and Symphonic Orchestra and Studio Orchestra are all less than $1000 for brass+strings+WW. I think it would be out of character to 3x the price, or even 2x it.

The Spitfire MO is (as I see it) to constantly release new libs at reasonably-affordable price, to get people to always keep buying into the latest. Not a "once and done" approach.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

MaxOctane said:


> I don't think $3000 would be the price. Spitfire has consistently priced full orchestras in sub-1000 range. BBCSO and Symphonic Orchestra and Studio Orchestra are all less than $1000 for brass+strings+WW. I think it would be out of character to 3x the price, or even 2x it.
> 
> The Spitfire MO is (as I see it) to constantly release new libs at reasonably-affordable price, to get people to always keep buying into the latest. Not a "once and done" approach.


Just for accuracy, SSO was ~$2500 originally. Only recently have they dropped the price.


----------



## muziksculp

Please post your AR-1 Modular Orch. Comments on this dedicated thread. (THANKS)

*AR-1 Modular Orch. Speculation Thread*


----------



## MaxOctane

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Just for accuracy, SSO was ~$2500 originally. Only recently have they dropped the price.


Yeah. I just checked my order history, I paid $2447 in 2017. But still, it's not $2500 *now*, is my point. I feel that Spitfire has established <$1000 as the price of a full orchestra.

I don't know how they'd justify that an Abbey Road orchestra is worth 3x a Maida Vale orchestra.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts

MaxOctane said:


> I don't know how they'd justify that an Abbey Road orchestra is worth 3x a Maida Vale orchestra.


They'd price it higher because it's sampled in more depth, because Abbey Road is a more expensive location, and because this is a newer product.

Remember that AROOF has 5 dynamic layers, which is more than just about anything else on the market right now. And Spitfire has indicated that the Modular libraries will have even more than that. (Up to seven, I believe.) 

BBCSO has 3 dynamics for most instruments and 2 for string sections, if I remember correctly.


----------



## MaxOctane

Land of Missing Parts said:


> They'd price it higher because it's sampled in more depth, because Abbey Road is a more expensive location, and because this is a newer product.
> 
> Remember that AROOF has 5 dynamic layers, which is more than just about anything else on the market right now. And Spitfire has indicated that the Modular libraries will have even more than that. (Up to seven, I believe.)
> 
> BBCSO has 3 dynamics for most instruments and 2 for string sections, if I remember correctly.


Well, it'd be nice to someday know which of us guessed right -- because that would mean the lib is released! Even better if it actually delivers. TBH though, at this point I just accept that new libs aren't necessarily better, just sometimes different than what exists already. 

Mostly, right now I'm looking forward to Sonokinetic's lib


----------



## muziksculp

MaxOctane said:


> Mostly, right now I'm looking forward to Sonokinetic's lib


Good Luck waiting for that one.


----------



## MaxOctane

muziksculp said:


> Good Luck waiting for that one.


----------



## holywilly

Albion I split strings section to high and low where Albion ONE merged them together as one ensemble patch; I speculate the same with Abbey Road ONE in the future. It’s much easier to sketch with.


----------



## jbuhler

MaxOctane said:


> I don't think $3000 would be the price. Spitfire has consistently priced full orchestras in sub-1000 range. BBCSO and Symphonic Orchestra and Studio Orchestra are all less than $1000 for brass+strings+WW. I think it would be out of character to 3x the price, or even 2x it.
> 
> The Spitfire MO is (as I see it) to constantly release new libs at reasonably-affordable price, to get people to always keep buying into the latest. Not a "once and done" approach.


$3000 is my low end guess. $5000 would be my high end guess. Of course everyone is entitled to their own guess and opinion.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

As Paul has stated, they're learning a lot while making selections - testing new scripting approaches, learning what works well in the room for samples (could be different than what works well for a straight recording), etc. Updating their player to support whatever custom functionality they need (see Hammers). I imagine they will continue to learn as they make more selections. I'd rather them focus on that and use those learnings down the road to make the fully fledged modular orchestra. Plenty of similar sample libraries right now so there's no rush to bring out a modular AR library (and I'm sure Spitfire recognizes that - ain't like any other developer has access to Abbey Road for the next 5-10 years).

There is a market opportunity for recording something unique, like the selections or something in Studio 2. And as they put those together, they hopefully will bring something to the modular library that we haven't seen before from other developers. I would guess mid-2022 - possibly 2023 if they want to release everything together at once. Totally fine with that - looking forward to seeing the other selections they've dreamed up.


----------



## muziksculp

holywilly said:


> Albion I split strings section to high and low where Albion ONE merged them together as one ensemble patch; I speculate the same with Abbey Road ONE in the future. It’s much easier to sketch with.


Yes, I created a custom AROOF String Ensemble patch, i.e. for the shorts. 

Here is a short video showing what I did, I used the Multi-Instrument feature in S1Pro 5 to layer the High, and Low Strings i.e the Spicc. articulations.

View attachment Abbey Road One Stac Ensemble Strings.mp4


----------



## Scalms

Question about Legendary Low Strings...sorry if this has been asked but I don't feel like reading through 100 pages.

Did they record the basses and cellos together, or did they just stick separate recordings together?


----------



## Trash Panda

Scalms said:


> Question about Legendary Low Strings...sorry if this has been asked but I don't feel like reading through 100 pages.
> 
> Did they record the basses and cellos together, or did they just stick separate recordings together?


I think the preorchestrated patches were all recorded together. Paul mentioned it in one of the videos.


----------



## Flyo

Hopefully they will bring missed articulations for AROOF in a future update. Also bring traditional legato in unison not at 8ves. for all sections.
The sound of this ensamble it’s the best around. They need to record even more! 🙏🏽


----------



## holywilly

I have Orchestral Foundation and all 3 expansions update showing in Spitfire installer this morning. The plugin version is now v1.0.11 and there’s a 13GB of updates for OF and 120MB for expansions. I wonder what’s new for OF? I can’t find any info regarding the massive update.


----------



## muziksculp

holywilly said:


> I have Orchestral Foundation and all 3 expansions update showing in Spitfire installer this morning. The plugin version is now v1.0.11 and there’s a 13GB of updates for OF and 120MB for expansions. I wonder what’s new for OF? I can’t find any info regarding the massive update.


13 GB update for OF ? wow .. I have to check this out. I wonder what's new. 

Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## styledelk

holywilly said:


> I have Orchestral Foundation and all 3 expansions update showing in Spitfire installer this morning. The plugin version is now v1.0.11 and there’s a 13GB of updates for OF and 120MB for expansions. I wonder what’s new for OF? I can’t find any info regarding the massive update.


13GB is not even a massive update. It looks like it was primarily an updated Spitfire Player and replaced tympani samples.


----------



## tritonely

Really excited for the 'Soaring Strings and Brass' package that was leaked from the announcement of Wondrous flutes. I wonder if it's a legato strings patch AND a legato brass patch which is very much needed for the completeness of the Albion-like library. But for $49 in comparison to the former packs? Probably something like horns and viola/violins together recorded. What do you think or hope for?


----------



## Daniel Wilson Compos

Pardon my ignorance, but, what are people referring to exactly when they talk about the "modular orchestra"? Is this something that Spitfire has confirmed they are working on or is this just wishful thinking on our part?


----------



## mussnig

Daniel Wilson Compos said:


> Pardon my ignorance, but, what are people referring to exactly when they talk about the "modular orchestra"? Is this something that Spitfire has confirmed they are working on or is this just wishful thinking on our part?


Modular Orchestra means access to individual sections like SSO (or also BBCSO). So we expect a dedicated Abbey Roads Strings Library that allows you to have individual control over Vn I, Vn II, Va, Vc, Cb (maybe it will be split into 5 libraries or more - who knows). Same with WWs and Brass and probably Percussion. Obviously, this one is expected to have Legatos and all the standard articulations you want. Probably also the same mics as AROOF and hopefully 5 dynamic layers as well (at least for the most important articulations).

This was confirmed by Spitfire early on but they also said that they are releasing expansions for AROOF (called "film scoring selections") first.

Also note that recently (I think it was during the Spring Sale) the price for SSO was permanently reduced to 999 USD/EUR (it used to be more expensive before). We all expect that the complete Abbey Road Modular Orchestra will be priced clearly above that.


----------



## Paul Jelfs

The Sound of the Abbey Road Foundations, is probably my favourite of all sample libraries- But it makes me miss the Performance legato of Spitfire all the more :( 

So I take it the modular library SHOULD be Abbey Road Strings - With the sound of Abbey Road, on their own player, but with loads of articulations like the SSS ? 

However, if they still have plenty of expansions planned for the Abbey Road Foundation series (Like the Flutes and Low Strings) wont their be some overlap here? I imagine a lot of people will end up buying both any way. It really depends on the timing of each on which I would be keener to invest in - 

If the strings dropped before Black Friday, I would be more inclined to save up and go that route, while if they release really good Brass and High String Legato first, it would be easier and cheaper to go that route. Any one know of what to expect next ?


----------



## Daniel Wilson Compos

mussnig said:


> Modular Orchestra means access to individual sections like SSO (or also BBCSO). So we expect a dedicated Abbey Roads Strings Library that allows you to have individual control over Vn I, Vn II, Va, Vc, Cb (maybe it will be split into 5 libraries or more - who knows). Same with WWs and Brass and probably Percussion. Obviously, this one is expected to have Legatos and all the standard articulations you want. Probably also the same mics as AROOF and hopefully 5 dynamic layers as well (at least for the most important articulations).
> 
> This was confirmed by Spitfire early on but they also said that they are releasing expansions for AROOF (called "film scoring selections") first.
> 
> Also note that recently (I think it was during the Spring Sale) the price for SSO was permanently reduced to 999 USD/EUR (it used to be more expensive before). We all expect that the complete Abbey Road Modular Orchestra will be priced clearly above that.


Gotcha. Do you think there'd be a crossgrade offer for those who have the AR1 and want to access the modular?


----------



## Evans

Daniel Wilson Compos said:


> Do you think there'd be a crossgrade offer for those who have the AR1 and want to access the modular?


I think the only thing people here could offer are wild guesses. What mussnig posted above is almost entirely all we know about the "modular" releases. The only other big thing we know is that they did get a chance to start recording it before lockdowns.


----------



## mussnig

Daniel Wilson Compos said:


> Gotcha. Do you think there'd be a crossgrade offer for those who have the AR1 and want to access the modular?


Maybe - who knows. I mean also their recent Hammers release had a crossgrade for owners of their Originals Cinematic Percussion library (but not for owners of say Spitfire Percussion or HZ Percussion). Who would have guessed that?

Also, we don't have a clue if they recorded (or plan to record) different sizes of strings sections (i.e. symphonic vs. chamber). Same with the brass section sizes (will it have 4 horns or also 6 or even 12?).

Also, will there be additional instruments like a piano, cimbalom, etc.? Too many unanswered questions.

IIRC they said that they were able to record around 10 of the film scoring selections (or even more?) before the first lockdown, so I guess there will be still a couple of smaller Abbey Road One releases before we get more infos on the modular orchestra.


----------



## Evans

Yep, per Christian, in October 2020:



> we've recorded the foundation library along with 9 additional selections already. Abbey 2 is fully recorded and we have just finished our first chapter of the modular library.


----------



## Futchibon

tritonely said:


> Really excited for the 'Soaring Strings and Brass' package that was leaked from the announcement of Wondrous flutes. I wonder if it's a legato strings patch AND a legato brass patch which is very much needed for the completeness of the Albion-like library. But for $49 in comparison to the former packs? Probably something like horns and viola/violins together recorded. What do you think or hope for?


Could you explain a little more what you mean about the 'soaring strings and brass' package from the WF announcement? Haven't heard of that before.


----------



## mussnig

Futchibon said:


> Could you explain a little more what you mean about the 'soaring strings and brass' package from the WF announcement? Haven't heard of that before.


There was a teaser video where this name appeared in the AROOF GUI. They took down the video after a day or so and replaced it with a non-spoilery version.


----------



## Toecutter

I don't think it's realistic to expect a modular release before 2022? SF never mentioned dates right? Hard to keep track of all the announcements and releases and delays...


----------



## Karmand

I would love to be optimistic about "usable" pieces to complete Abby Road One.
Honestly, I was two months into purchasing my first libs - I started in January - so I did not think that is would take long for them to release things. When the wondrously failed flutes came out I got a clue that I invested in vapor-lib-promises.

SpitFire: You guys have a great sounding lib with AR1; come on, release something usable. I fell for your marketing and promises.

Vi-community: Thanks for being so cool, intelligent, sharing and delightfully entertaining.

I am not purchasing any more SpitFire things unless they come thru with this and complete this product.
I've not spent anything on 'the summer' fail, er I mean sale.


----------



## dzilizzi

Karmand said:


> I would love to be optimistic about "usable" pieces to complete Abby Road One.
> Honestly, I was two months into purchasing my first libs - I started in January - so I did not think that is would take long for them to release things. When the wondrously failed flutes came out I got a clue that I invested in vapor-lib-promises.
> 
> SpitFire: You guys have a great sounding lib with AR1; come on, release something usable. I fell for your marketing and promises.
> 
> Vi-community: Thanks for being so cool, intelligent, sharing and delightfully entertaining.
> 
> I am not purchasing any more SpitFire things unless they come thru with this and complete this product.
> I've not spent anything on 'the summer' fail, er I mean sale.


Wow. Spitfire has generally been very good about releasing libraries and being open about how long the process takes. I've heard them say it can take 2 years - and not 2 years where there are constant Covid shutdowns making it hard to record a group of people playing. Just 2 normal years to get a good quality library out. After recording hours and hours of audio, it has to be separated, cleaned-up, labeled, etc... of thousands of samples before putting it into the player. Then there's the GUI and various software building requirements, the checked and double checks that it works, etc... It is a lot of work. 

This is not vaporware. This is a company that has done this multiple times. They have just been thrown off by something out of their control. I would give them a bit of slack on the timing of these libraries. 

They also have been quite clear about the vision of Abbey Road libraries. AR1 Foundations and expansions are made specifically for media composers who need to come up with good sounding music fast. Hobbyist like myself can use them, but mostly, it isn't what I am waiting for. AR2 is a smaller room and there will be things similar to the Studio series from Air. And finally, AR modular orchestra for the rest of us with money, which will be coming out in maybe a year but probably the earliest will be late 2022/early 2023. They had planned to record in March and April of 2020, if I understood correctly. So some got recorded, the rest, I don't know. Keeping my fingers crossed they got back in during the last 6 months. 

So really, they aren't too far off from the original plan yet. But I haven't been paying attention to recent updates, so there may be some changes.


----------



## JohnG

Abbey Road One is one of the best libraries I've ever owned. I use it all the time and it sits unbelievably well in mixes.

So far, used it for three video game projects and a Netflix movie. It doesn't replace all the detailed libraries I have but it sounds awesome.


----------



## Kevperry777

There was an “epic brass” spoiled in an earlier Oliver video as well. 



mussnig said:


> There was a teaser video where this name appeared in the AROOF GUI. They took down the video after a day or so and replaced it with a non-spoilery version.


----------



## Flyo

There must be a reason for delaying more Selections for complete the idea of Foundations, it could be the Lockdown and… they still keep recording even on the same Studios in London as the Pianos of Abbey. They don’t share any more info about dates for new Selections. Something that keep bother me always with this is that Foundation don’t offer same arts across sections, and having only one Selection with one Legato on LowStrings in 8ves it’s annoying, but at the same time is great have this Block recorded in that way to, but again still not having Legato at Unison on Strings department keep this amazing sounding ensamble library away from use many times because all this. I really hope that SF come up with those traditional Legato for Hi and Low…. (Also Hi Strings in 8ves to!) If not it will be a so so much waste opportunity I think. The Foundation could be a much much greater tool, and even we could use this Ensamble as the main and only Orchestra with any other on it so many times, and you know what? You want to write with more detailed focus? Boom the Modular comes in! Let’s go SF! When lockdown calms down bring the big band at Studio One again and complete all the holes… it’s amazing sounding Library also a pricey one.


----------



## yiph2

Oh my god how many times have you posted the exact same thing before


----------



## Flyo

Many times. It’s a $350 ensamble library. And so many people comes and say the same as me. I could not believe that it’s not complete after a year? 3 Selection for now.


----------



## Flyo

After more than a half year I ended up buying BBCPro (Amazing rchestra even more with every update) another approach of course. But I do mainly because all I mentioned before. 

So…

AROF $350 + 3 Selections

And then BBCPro…. 

Yess much money involved in such a small time frame.

Could SF says something about progress or not about Abbey Road Foundation?

Because they release many more libraries from the beginning of AROF till newest Albion.


----------



## yiph2

Flyo said:


> Many times. It’s a $350 ensamble library. And so many people comes and say the same as me. I could not believe that it’s not complete after a year? 3 Selection for now.


Then maybe stop saying the same thing over and over???


----------



## Flyo

You buy it? And you are happy with it? Great!
Not me until the team comes and say something? (Of course I reach to support before)
I mean is one of the most newest main library’s and it’s not complete after a year, they could just come and says something about? 
To clarify, to help us to decide what library could complement their one?
I know BBCPro in my case a $550 library on top of a $350 plus 3 Selections of $50 each with AROF.

I think as many others want to know what comes next with this for our investment wise right?


----------



## yiph2

Everyone is sick of you repeating the same thing over and over again, there's no point posting that here. And what investment? Orchestral Foundations is a standalone library, expansions are extra. They already explained more things about AR than they have ever explained about another product


----------



## mussnig

Flyo said:


> You buy it? And you are happy with it? Great!
> Not me until the team comes and say something? (Of course I reach to support before)
> I mean is one of the most newest main library’s and it’s not complete after a year, they could just come and says something about?
> To clarify, to help us to decide what library could complement their one?
> I know BBCPro in my case a $550 library on top of a $350 plus 3 Selections of $50 each with AROF.
> 
> I think as many others want to know what comes next with this for our investment wise right?


I mean they already announced that they have already recorded 9 film scoring selections and that there will be a modular orchestra. So already have some idea what comes along the road.

Sure, they could tell us some estimated release dates but as you can see in other threads around here, there is even more complaining in case such dates are not met.

Also, 1 year is nothing. Take a look at how long e.g. the Cinematic Studio Series took to get to WWs. And Percussion is still not here. Same with the Infinite Series (only Brass and WWs so far).


----------



## Flyo

A $350 + $50 each “extras” library maybe it is not an investment for you.

In such case with dilated dates of others developers they inform us at least. But in this case the library is out to buy it or not but with the premise that it would be another content already recorded! But they keep coming with others main library’s as Albion.

I admire their work but I don’t like the marketing /sale ethic behind this ONE in particular.


----------



## mussnig

Flyo said:


> But they keep coming with others main library’s as Albion.


Spitfire is one of the largest devs for sample libraries so it's only natural for them to develop multiple "series" of libraries in parallel. Another example would be 8Dio: they still haven't released Century WWs but they are releasing other libs every couple of months.

You simply cannot compare Spitfire to smaller devs who spend years only focusing on 1 series.


----------



## Flyo

A word could help us right?

As Foundation would have more Legatos or not? 

Besides dates…. 

Simple as that man


----------



## yiph2

Flyo said:


> As Foundation would have more Legatos or not?


NO, they have confirmed that


----------



## Flyo

So the one and only Strings Section that would have Legato (only 8ve) will be LowStrings

Great news.
👍 

But you have to keep with it, because you have to wait next years to see all the picture.


----------



## yiph2

Flyo said:


> So the one and only Strings Section that would have Legato (only 8ve) will be LowStrings
> 
> Great news.
> 👍
> 
> But you have to keep with it, because you have to wait next years to see all the picture.


What no, that legato is not orchestral foundations... That's the film scoring selections.......


----------



## Flyo

mussnig said:


> Spitfire is one of the largest devs for sample libraries so it's only natural for them to develop multiple "series" of libraries in parallel. Another example would be 8Dio: they still haven't released Century WWs but they are releasing other libs every couple of months.
> 
> You simply cannot compare Spitfire to smaller devs who spend years only focusing on 1 series.


Correct me if I’m wrong but 8Dio last release was Woods Ostinatos and SoundPaint release ahead between this year. All the other stuff was from the Intimate Series Content (previously released)


yiph2 said:


> What no, that legato is not orchestral foundations... That's the film scoring selections.......


I know, I was referring as Foundation + Selections


----------



## Flyo

Okey I’m out of this thread until something comes out and have other things to say.


----------



## chrisav

As with any other entertainment medium, don't buy into an unfinished product line/franchise/series if you can't handle waiting for a bit. 

Also, AROOF itself is finished, it was a finished product the day it launched. Don't conflate AROOF with the expansions/film score selections


----------



## mussnig

Flyo said:


> Correct me if I’m wrong but 8Dio last release was Woods Ostinatos


Here you can see their product history: https://8dio.com/company/history-8dio/

I am not talking about the Ostinato libs but the "regular" ones (so where you have all your standard artics etc). The New Century Brass was released in January 2020 and the Strings followed in November. The New Century WWs (or whatever they will be called) are still missing.


----------



## Flyo

mussnig said:


> Here you can see their product history: https://8dio.com/company/history-8dio/
> 
> I am not talking about the Ostinato libs but the "regular" ones (so where you have all your standard artics etc). The New Century Brass was released in January 2020 and the Strings followed in November. The New Century WWs (or whatever they will be called) are still missing.


Exactly they release WW’s Ostinatos only and then a few devs for the Prophet Keyboard, and their Warm line instruments (also called Intimate Series) a few years behind release… but in this case as separate solo instruments for multiple purchase option. 
The last thing was an update 2.0 for Majestica 

But I understand your point of Major and more Indies Developments


----------



## dzilizzi

yiph2 said:


> Oh my god how many times have you posted the exact same thing before


Well, it has been 114 pages and new people never go back and read from the beginning. So about every 25 pages?  Edit: Oops, you weren't talking to me. 

I do get tired of the complaining as well.


----------



## ModalRealist

@Flyo I hate to break it to you but I don't believe Orchestral Foundations will receive any additional content _itself._ At _some point_ there will be further releases of products recorded in Abbey Road. We know that there will be more "Selections" and eventually a modular section library that will provide more detail for particular sections. And that's it.


----------



## styledelk

It is complete. This is it. You're not buying a subscription. They will add additional things you can buy, maybe. But the product is the product. 

Even if that was the case, what makes a library complete? It's not a legato. You can still write around that. As @JohnG has, I'm sure.


----------



## Flyo

Ok with it, except for Selections or Extras as you want to name it. The last Selection was in Woods department, what alse they record or what else could bring us with Selections?

All i really want to now is that.

Can I have a answer on this regard? 

Sometimes you ended buying something because you need it and knowing that it’s not complete until all the others content comes in, specially because it will we more content added later. And this is the case in particular for me.


----------



## Soundbed

styledelk said:


> I consider the AROOF expansions to be more like continuations of the Bernard Herrmann Composer Toolkit approach than to be like AlbionOne or really any of the their other libraries. Colors, pairings, unique new combinations and articulations for orchestral effects.
> 
> I feel like that's where people are getting their disappointment from: their expectations are formulaic based on other libraries, or they're just hooked on to some necessity for every section to have a legato.


Very astute.


----------



## Flyo

styledelk said:


> It is complete. This is it. You're not buying a subscription. They will add additional things you can buy, maybe. But the product is the product.
> 
> Even if that was the case, what makes a library complete? It's not a legato. You can still write around that. As @JohnG has, I'm sure.


Complete? Maybe no Legato because this was not n any section on the release. But what else with everything I write many times? Where they are same articulations fir the sections? 

They are leaving with many missing pieces?


----------



## becolossal

Flyo said:


> Complete? Maybe no Legato because this was not n any section on the release. But what else with everything I write many times? Where they are same articulations fir the sections?
> 
> They are leaving with many missing pieces?


It sounds to me like maybe you didn't do enough research into the product before you bought it? They sold a foundational library with commonly used ensembles to give working composers the ability to sketch ideas quickly and have them sound great. Foundations is finished. The Selections are additional tools in the toolkit. You're not missing any pieces, you just may have bought the wrong toolbox for your needs.


----------



## Trash Panda

Flyo said:


> Complete? Maybe no Legato because this was not n any section on the release. But what else with everything I write many times? Where they are same articulations fir the sections?
> 
> They are leaving with many missing pieces?


Not every library has the exact same articulations across every single section. This isn't all that uncommon. 

Even super consistent devs like Cinematic Studio Series leaves out articulations on certain instruments. For example, the contrabasses in CSS and CSSS don't have harmonics even though every other section has them.


----------



## Bman70

Flyo said:


> Ok with it, except for Selections or Extras as you want to name it. The last Selection was in Woods department, what alse they record or what else could bring us with Selections?
> 
> All i really want to now is that.
> 
> Can I have a answer on this regard?
> 
> Sometimes you ended buying something because you need it and knowing that it’s not complete until all the others content comes in, specially because it will we more content added later. And this is the case in particular for me.


Did you read where they said they already finished recording 9 expansions for Foundations? Or did I get that wrong. If it's 9 Foundations expansions, we've seen 3 so far.. Legendary Lows, Wonderflute, and Sparkling Wood. So 6 more to go, might as well wait to see what those have.


----------



## Flyo

Ok.

I will keep waiting till the last Selections releases.

BBC Pro resolve so many holes that prevail on Foundstions to me.

Thanks for your responses.


----------



## styledelk

Foundations was never supposed to plug those holes (I imagine even with the expansions it won't). BBCSO is an entirely different kind of library that can (and should?) supplement.


----------



## Flyo

For me having all this inconsistent articulations between each section is as I refer as a “holes”.


----------



## holywilly

I wonder anyone here using the expansion in the music for final production? And how are you guys using these expansions? Layering with prime orchestral template? I own all Abbey Road (so far) and still trying to find good spots to fit them in.


----------



## mybadmemory

Flyo said:


> For me having all this inconsistent articulations between each section is as I refer as a “holes”.


I’m not sure I see the articulations as any more inconsistent than most libraries. Each section seem to have the usual essentials most libraries have. Longs, Shorts, Con Sord, Pizz, and Trem for strings. Long, Short, Marcato, Tenuto, and Swellls for Winds and Brass. What are the inconsistencies here? And what do you think is missing, considering the library is actually called essentials?

There’s also a handy list of articulations and some great walkthrough videos to look through on the product page before buying!


----------



## Flyo

😒

Don’t push me to write again the same.


----------



## Soundbed

mybadmemory said:


> What are the inconsistencies here? And what do you think is missing, considering the library is actually called essentials?


One extra month of waiting for the next expansion, each time this gets asked. 😈


----------



## Craig Sharmat

Flyo said:


> 😒
> 
> Don’t push me to write again the same.


I am going to suggest nicely that you don’t, you have said your piece, we get it.


----------



## Soundbed

muziksculp said:


> Take a look at SA Symphonic Strings Pro. (No Staccato) WTF is that, how can it be a Professional Strings library with no Stacc. ? Priced at $1099.


There are three different staccatos plus time machine shorts in SSS.


----------



## gst98

Soundbed said:


> There are three different staccatos plus time machine shorts in SSS.


Yes, but they have a completely different attack style to the spicc. Even on TM full stretch (which then introduces artifacts), they are still very long. Probably 2-3 times the length of CSS or Berlin or any other stacc, they are much more like the Berlin portato, and much longer than the CSS Sfz. Even when using the timed-release feature it sounds weird to try and shorten them. 

Staccato dig is only on the Basses and limited in dyn range.

So I still consider there to be no true staccato in SSS (at least in the sense most people are talking). I think SF do too, which is why they recorded them for BBCSO and Legendary Low Strings.


----------



## Soundbed

gst98 said:


> Yes, but they have a completely different attack style to the spicc. Even on TM full stretch (which then introduces artifacts), they are still very long. Probably 2-3 times the length of CSS or Berlin or any other stacc, they are much more like the Berlin portato, and much longer than the CSS Sfz. Even when using the timed-release feature it sounds weird to try and shorten them.
> 
> Staccato dig is only on the Basses and limited in dyn range.
> 
> So I still consider there to be no true staccato in SSS (at least in the sense most people are talking). I think SF do too, which is why they recorded them for BBCSO and Legendary Low Strings.


Why would we want them (staccato shorts) to have the same attack style as the spiccato?

I wonder if most people who are missing staccato shorts from SSS have skipped step #3 below? It doesn’t seem to be called out in the manual and I’m not sure why it isn’t a default.

(The Time Machine shorts sound fine to me, and quite flexible.)

1. select Time Machine for an instrument group from the Other folder (although many/most of the same controls are available elsewhere, like in the main, Individual and the Core Techniques, this is a good place to start to explore SSS shorts)

2. click the wrench aka spanner

*3. IMPORTANT: change No short artic RTs to Timed short artic RTs (or alternately: Untimed short RTs)*






4. play midi notes as short as possible (tap them and release them almost instantly)

Hold the midi notes longer for longer notes.

Shorten the attacks with the Tightness slider.

Play with Stretch and Release … yes you can make it sound weird at extremes, but you can also make it sound musical.

After getting a handle on the variations, try the Slider Controlled RTs.

Marcato shorts are a nice bridge between the spiccato sound and the shortest 0’5 time machine shorts as described above, but you need to use the dynamics slider (mod wheel).

Let me know if I’m missing anything?


----------



## AEF

Maybe Im mistaken, but I thought it was abundantly clear that there were three phases of AR1.

foundations (sketching library)
selections (pre orchestrated ensembles)
modules (full section libraries)

I happen to think AR1 is Spitfires best offering to date.


----------



## Soundbed

AEF said:


> Maybe Im mistaken, but I thought it was abundantly clear that there were three phases of AR1.
> 
> foundations (sketching library)
> selections (pre orchestrated ensembles)
> modules (full section libraries)
> 
> I happen to think AR1 is Spitfires best offering to date.


It was _more clear_ [that AROOF was for sketching] after a few of us purchased AROOF and maybe some of the selections.  But you are correct that it was explicitly advertised with sketching in mind.

"Organised into ensembles (combinations of instruments), Abbey Road One springs out of the box, pre-orchestrated – helping you sketch your musical ideas quickly and easily. You do not need to understand the detailed inner workings of the orchestra to create stunning compositions."

- https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/abbey-road-one-orchestral-foundations/

"*Spitfire Audio* carefully captured a full, symphony-sized (90-plus-piece) orchestra inside Studio One, the world’s largest purpose-built recording studio, to create an easy-to-use expandable sample library like no other. Split into strings, woodwinds, brass, and percussion, the library is pre-orchestrated to create a perfect fit for established music-makers (wanting to quickly sketch an idea at high quality) and newcomers (learning how to write for an orchestra) alike."

- https://www.abbeyroad.com/spitfire-audio


----------



## jbuhler

Soundbed said:


> One extra month of waiting for the next expansion, each time this gets asked. 😈


We’ll never see another one if this is the rule!


----------



## Soundbed

jbuhler said:


> We’ll never see another one if this is the rule!


(good thing I really don't make any rules)


----------



## gst98

Soundbed said:


> Why would we want them (staccato shorts) to have the same attack style as the spiccato?
> 
> I wonder if most people who are missing staccato shorts from SSS have skipped step #3 below? It doesn’t seem to be called out in the manual and I’m not sure why it isn’t a default.
> 
> (The Time Machine shorts sound fine to me, and quite flexible.)
> 
> 1. select Time Machine for an instrument group from the Other folder (although many/most of the same controls are available elsewhere, like in the main, Individual and the Core Techniques, this is a good place to start to explore SSS shorts)
> 
> 2. click the wrench aka spanner
> 
> *3. IMPORTANT: change No short artic RTs to Timed short artic RTs (or alternately: Untimed short RTs)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. play midi notes as short as possible (tap them and release them almost instantly)
> 
> Hold the midi notes longer for longer notes.
> 
> Shorten the attacks with the Tightness slider.
> 
> Play with Stretch and Release … yes you can make it sound weird at extremes, but you can also make it sound musical.
> 
> After getting a handle on the variations, try the Slider Controlled RTs.
> 
> Marcato shorts are a nice bridge between the spiccato sound and the shortest 0’5 time machine shorts as described above, but you need to use the dynamics slider (mod wheel).
> 
> Let me know if I’m missing anything?


Why would you want similar attacks? So it sounds like a cohesive phrase? I think it's rare you want a staccato with a soft attack tbh.

Time Machine shorts really aren't flexible. 0.5 sec short is pretty damn long, and as I say when you stretch it to the limit (which doesn't even get it _that_ short) you then have artefacts. Yeah, it's still musical if you adjust by 10-30%, but that doesn't turn a 0.5 short into a general staccato. Works great work double tonguing on the brass, but this is making too much of it.

Well regarding point three I already mentioned that in my post. As I said, it introduces weird releases that do not sound like an actual staccato. Again this feature is intended to shorten the length of the note, not turn it into short staccato. At this point, you are essentially only playing release notes back, which sounds very odd. Lengthening the spicc is much more suitable to achieve a staccato, but it still doesn't get quite there before introducing artefacts.

Every library has staccato that all sound much like each other with similar styles and lengths, with matching attacks to their spiccatos or staccatissimos. but SF jumped from spicc to 0.5 sec shorts. What is wrong with people wanting one? 

Yes but marcato is only 1 dyn? I think?


----------



## dzilizzi

AEF said:


> Maybe Im mistaken, but I thought it was abundantly clear that there were three phases of AR1.
> 
> foundations (sketching library)
> selections (pre orchestrated ensembles)
> modules (full section libraries)
> 
> I happen to think AR1 is Spitfires best offering to date.


It's just taking soooo looooonnngg!!!! I want it all nooooowwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!

Obviously, Spitfire should not have released this in bits and pieces. No other developer releases in bits and pieces. It's not the way to do business.

Yes, this is sarcasm.


----------



## jbuhler

AEF said:


> Maybe Im mistaken, but I thought it was abundantly clear that there were three phases of AR1.
> 
> foundations (sketching library)
> selections (pre orchestrated ensembles)
> modules (full section libraries)
> 
> I happen to think AR1 is Spitfires best offering to date.


I would say AROOF is not really a sketching library. Or it’s a sketching library the same way the orchestra part of Albion One is a sketching library. It can be used that way effectively but that’s not it’s only function or even the reason for its design. 

AROOF is an ensemble library that provides a foundation for an orchestral production. The idea of the foundation is that it is the broad brush that will then be supplemented and filled out with the details of fine brushes. These fine brushes might come from the expansions; they might come from other libraries you have; they might come from the AR modules when they start to appear. The idea is not that AROOF is being replaced in the piece by other libraries, as would be the case if you think about it as a sketching library, but that it is being filled in with detail, so AROOF might be “painted over” in places by the fine brushes, but the “foundation” will remain like a base coat. 

This can in fact be an effective way to work, and the original Albion One served quite well as a foundation for the original BML modules when they were coming out. Once they were all out and consolidated into SSO, the foundation layer of Albion One was no longer needed, though it is often still much faster to lay down the foundation with Albion One and then add just the details from SSO that you need. I still do this occasionally when I want to work fast, though usually I use the SCS ensemble patch in place of the Albion One strings. There are also significant drawbacks to this approach so I don’t use it all the time.


----------



## Soundbed

gst98 said:


> Why would you want similar attacks? So it sounds like a cohesive phrase? I think it's rare you want a staccato with a soft attack tbh.
> 
> Time Machine shorts really aren't flexible. 0.5 sec short is pretty damn long, and as I say when you stretch it to the limit (which doesn't even get it _that_ short) you then have artefacts. Yeah, it's still musical if you adjust by 10-30%, but that doesn't turn a 0.5 short into a general staccato. Works great work double tonguing on the brass, but this is making too much of it.
> 
> Well regarding point three I already mentioned that in my post. As I said, it introduces weird releases that do not sound like an actual staccato. Again this feature is intended to shorten the length of the note, not turn it into short staccato. At this point, you are essentially only playing release notes back, which sounds very odd. Lengthening the spicc is much more suitable to achieve a staccato, but it still doesn't get quite there before introducing artefacts.
> 
> Every library has staccato that all sound much like each other with similar styles and lengths, with matching attacks to their spiccatos or staccatissimos. but SF jumped from spicc to 0.5 sec shorts. What is wrong with people wanting one?
> 
> Yes but marcato is only 1 dyn? I think?


I see what you're saying, "What is wrong with people wanting one?" although I sense Spitfire included enough to work with.

And I wonder if there is an explanation for why people some are not hearing what they want to out of the package "as is" while others don't mind what is provided. Maybe because some people are "working around" the lack of a sample named "staccato".

tl;dr the 0'5 shorts above velocity 90 sound different (and subjectively "better") than the ones recorded below velocity 90. And we'd need to use expression to make the relative volumes match.

~

I tend to use two keyboards and one of them plays above velocity 64 more easily and the other plays under 64 more easily.

When I play shorts, I tend to use the one that is biased toward the higher velocities.

The 0'5 "staccato" type recordings sound blurry and soft at lower velocities under 90.

But the 0'5 "staccato" type recordings sound more defined and have a touch of "rosin" at upper velocities (above 90).

The 0'5 art doesn't last half a second when you tap the midi note and release it almost immediately.

(But you'd feel like you're smashing your keyboard if you had to slam and release every key to get that effect, whereas I'm lightly tapping my controller that is biased toward the upper velocities.)

For a more accented attack we can choose Marcato Attack.

Yes Marcato is only recorded at one dynamic level but it's got that more accented attack, without the "bounce" of the spiccato.

In order to make Marcato "match" mid-velocity spiccatos, we need to lower the mod wheel to the very bottom. To match lower velocity spiccatos we'd need to start lowering expression as well.

For a high velocity (above 90) short 0'5 to match, we need to take down the expression sometimes as well.

Here's some audio.

As the video goes on, the duration of the midi notes get longer and longer. No Time Machine sliders are changed. The spiccatos are always the same length, but the Marcatos and 0'5 shorts will get longer and longer due to the MIDI notes getting longer.


----------



## gst98

Soundbed said:


> I see what you're saying, "What is wrong with people wanting one?" although I sense Spitfire included enough to work with.
> 
> And I wonder if there is an explanation for why people some are not hearing what they want to out of the package "as is" while others don't mind what is provided. Maybe because some people are "working around" the lack of a sample named "staccato".
> 
> tl;dr the 0'5 shorts above velocity 90 sound different (and subjectively "better") than the ones recorded below velocity 90. And we'd need to use expression to make the relative volumes match.
> 
> ~
> 
> I tend to use two keyboards and one of them plays above velocity 64 more easily and the other plays under 64 more easily.
> 
> When I play shorts, I tend to use the one that is biased toward the higher velocities.
> 
> The 0'5 "staccato" type recordings sound blurry and soft at lower velocities under 90.
> 
> But the 0'5 "staccato" type recordings sound more defined and have a touch of "rosin" at upper velocities (above 90).
> 
> The 0'5 art doesn't last half a second when you tap the midi note and release it almost immediately.
> 
> (But you'd feel like you're smashing your keyboard if you had to slam and release every key to get that effect, whereas I'm lightly tapping my controller that is biased toward the upper velocities.)
> 
> For a more accented attack we can choose Marcato Attack.
> 
> Yes Marcato is only recorded at one dynamic level but it's got that more accented attack, without the "bounce" of the spiccato.
> 
> In order to make Marcato "match" mid-velocity spiccatos, we need to lower the mod wheel to the very bottom. To match lower velocity spiccatos we'd need to start lowering expression as well.
> 
> For a high velocity (above 90) short 0'5 to match, we need to take down the expression sometimes as well.
> 
> Here's some audio.
> 
> As the video goes on, the duration of the midi notes get longer and longer. No Time Machine sliders are changed. The spiccatos are always the same length, but the Marcatos and 0'5 shorts will get longer and longer due to the MIDI notes getting longer.



Yes, anyone who comments on wishing a product included something must be sitting around doing nothing while you work around it. If we weren't supposed to discuss this sort of thing, I wonder why we're all on VI Control! But you are correct, "enough to work with" truly is the mantra of SF. Desiring anything more than adequate is frowned on I suppose.

I mean you're video just showed how the TM or timed-release 0.5 can't go short without compromise, nor match the correct attack (even when limited to only those upper dynamics!), and while the marcato sounds fine in this non-musical context, exclusively at the dynamic you used, I'm not sure how much you can make a single dynamic, 1-RR marcato work as a staccato in everyday writing. Do you not think it just sounds choked when you bring it to traditional staccato length?

I don't get the bending over backwards to explain why they didn't include a real recorded short staccato. Almost every other library has it, SF doesn't - it's pretty clear cut. Yeah, there are some neat tricks to try and work around it, but it doesn't change the fact that it is omitted from the library. As I said, they're putting it in newer libraries because they too think it's missing, and haven't bothered with the 0.5/1sec.

A library with a consistant and well-recorded variety of shorts, like CSS, allows for a very nuanced line of shorts. And to replicate it with SSS you have to work 10x just to fake that.


----------



## muziksculp

gst98 said:


> I don't get the bending over backwards to explain why they didn't include a real recorded short staccato. Almost every other library has it, SF doesn't - it's pretty clear cut. Yeah, there are some neat tricks to try and work around it, but it doesn't change the fact that it is omitted from the library. As I said, they're putting it in newer libraries because they too think it's missing, and haven't bothered with the 0.5/1sec.
> 
> A library with a consistant and well-recorded variety of shorts, like CSS, allows for a very nuanced line of shorts. And to replicate it with SSS you have to work 10x just to fake that.


Exactly this. Totally with you.


----------



## muziksculp

I'm beginning to suspect that @Soundbed works for Spitfire Audio, or is an undercover promoter for SSS. Trying to convince us that not having a Stacc. in a professional library like SSS is fine, and can be fixed with some workarounds. 

(@Soundbed , I'm Just Kidding).


----------



## Soundbed

gst98 said:


> I mean you're video just showed how the TM or timed-release 0.5 can't go short without compromise, nor match the correct attack (even when limited to only those upper dynamics!),


First, thanks for watching / listening. Now it feels like we at least have a basis for a conversation.

You mentioned the 0’5 shorts were too long at half a second. I thought the video showed they could be shorter without being “compromised”.

But now that you’ve heard them, you’re saying they sound “compromised” … so I guess even when we hear the same thing we think different things about it.

You also mentioned the attacks should be able to be used in the same
phrase. I thought the video showed a continuity of attack types that could easily fit in the same phrase … but you’re saying the attacks still aren’t “correct” so I guess we hear the same thing and have different takeaways.




gst98 said:


> and while the marcato sounds fine in this non-musical context, exclusively at the dynamic you used, I'm not sure how much you can make a single dynamic, 1-RR marcato work as a staccato in everyday writing. Do you not think it just sounds choked when you bring it to traditional staccato length?


Yes it’s one dynamic, but I didn’t notice it was only one rr. (Is it? I’m not in the studio anymore.) There are lots of things I’ve done to get around limited rr and limited dynamics but this goes to another of your points about working 10x harder.

No, I hadn’t really thought about the “choked” sound but I hear what you’re saying. I expect in a musical context I could make it work.



gst98 said:


> I don't get the bending over backwards to explain


Actually I enjoy going into libraries to explore what they can do well and how to eek out the most from them. I also enjoy discussing them.



gst98 said:


> why they didn't include a real recorded short staccato. Almost every other library has it, SF doesn't - it's pretty clear cut.


It’s really not clear cut, to me. They didn’t record a very abrupt stop-start short with some grit or rosin on the front, but that is easy enough to get, if desired. What they did record is flexible (in my opinion) but in your opinion it’s not flexible. Ok. I don’t know why you’re saying it’s not “real”. 


gst98 said:


> Yeah, there are some neat tricks to try and work around it, but it doesn't change the fact that it is omitted from the library.


I don’t think it’s a fact that ‘staccato’ is omitted from SSS. I think that is misinformation. I agree the shorts in SSS don’t sound like many other libraries that have recorded a particular type of staccato sound, though. But I think ‘staccato’ is a discussable topic. 



gst98 said:


> As I said, they're putting it in newer libraries because they too think it's missing, and haven't bothered with the 0.5/1sec.


@Spitfire Team wrote in 2016 on VI-C that it’s largely a terminology thing. It was discussed at length (pun intended) with the players while recording Mural/SSS.


gst98 said:


> A library with a consistant and well-recorded variety of shorts, like CSS, allows for a very nuanced line of shorts. And to replicate it with SSS you have to work 10x just to fake that.


Yes, it takes some work. That’s why I was playing with it today and trying to discuss it. Was genuinely not sure we were hearing the same things, wanted to get on the same page, trying to learn and explore. Thanks for your time.


----------



## Flyo

Look at all this words and words pictures videos critical advanced analysis and workarounds from professionals, advanced users, conposers, engineers, analyst.

Developers….
Let’s rental another day on studio, bring the orchestral music professionals comes in, enjoy life to it and push record button for what it’s need. 

More music less words.

Just a tough. 😅


----------



## Flyo

I’m more in the field of thinking that maybe it will be good if a major as SF is develop with more continuity a good super “rounded complete” one at the time product, than many greats but avoiding various standard audio sample sounds to use it love it and get it done.


----------



## dzilizzi

Flyo said:


> Look at all this words and words pictures videos critical advanced analysis and workarounds from professionals, advanced users, conposers, engineers, analyst.
> 
> Developers….
> Let’s rental another day on studio, bring the orchestral music professionals comes in, enjoy life to it and push record button for what it’s need.
> 
> More music less words.
> 
> Just a tough. 😅


Paul has mentioned in the past that they record a lot, but that not everything makes it into the product because, for some reason, it doesn't sound good or match or whatever, and they have to trash it. It could very well be that the staccatos were one of these things. 

That said, SSS is a very old library. if they go back an rerecord parts, the new stuff will not sound the same. Different players, different equipment, etc... It is better to get SCS and use the staccatos from there.


----------



## Trash Panda

Flyo said:


> I’m more in the field of thinking that maybe it will be good if a major as SF is develop with more continuity a good super “rounded complete” one at the time product, than many greats but avoiding various standard audio sample sounds to use it love it and get it done.


Honestly, it sounds like you just need to find a different developer who’s philosophy matches your own.


----------



## Flyo

Trash Panda said:


> Honestly, it sounds like you just need to find a different developer who’s philosophy matches your own.


Probably. But in terms of sound I matches many times.


----------



## Trash Panda

Flyo said:


> Probably. But in terms of sound I matches many times.


Then you have to accept the compromise that Spitfire isn’t going to make a library exactly to your specifications. That is unless you become a big time composer they want to collaborate with.


----------



## Saxer

I remember a discussion here (or somewhere else) where this spiccato/staccato question was asked. It seems that in bigger string sections the staccs and spiccs start to sound too similar to make it an extra patch. At least that’s what I remember.


----------



## axb312

Sad to see a different view being dealt with as just "deal with it" again :(.

I once believed this forum could perhaps be a great place to influence developers, just a little bit to do things the way some of their customers want them (and through which everyone would possibly benefit).


----------



## muziksculp

Saxer said:


> I remember a discussion here (or somewhere else) where this spiccato/staccato question was asked. It seems that in bigger string sections the staccs and spiccs start to sound too similar to make it an extra patch. At least that’s what I remember.


EDIT: Please visit this link to see how to see two options to get staccato in SSS. My statement below is not correct. I found out that SSS does have Stacc. 






How to get a Staccato Articulation in Spitfire Symph. Strings


Hi, How to get a Staccato articulation in Spitfire Audio Symphonic Strings. See my post below for the two methods to achieve this. Thanks, Muziksculp




vi-control.net






All of my large string libraries have a Spicc. and Stacc. articulations, (Except SSS), by the way Spicc. is not the same as Stacc. they are two different bowing techniques, and sound very different from each other. Spicc. is a short bounce of the bow on the string, stacc. does not have any bouncing happening, constant contact between the bow and strings. There is not much one can do to control the length of a Spicc. since it's just a momentary contact during due to the bouncing action, but Stacc. length is totally controllable depending on the speed, and distance of bowing. Completely different articulations.


----------



## Trash Panda

axb312 said:


> Sad to see a different view being dealt with as just "deal with it" again :(.
> 
> I once believed this forum could perhaps be a great place to influence developers, just a little bit to do things the way some of their customers want them (and through which everyone would possibly benefit).


This guy has spammed numerous threads making the same complaints over and over and over again. We’re all kind of sick of it.

Edit: even the mods told him to knock it off, which he did, for a time, before starting it up all over again.


----------



## Saxer

muziksculp said:


> All of my large string libraries have a Spicc. and Stacc. articulations, by the way Spicc. is not the same as Stacc. they are two different bowing techniques, and sound very different from each other. Spicc. is a short bounce of the bow on the string, stacc. does not have any bouncing happening, constant contact between the bow and strings.


I know and it wasn‘t my argumentation. But it might have been the reason for their choice not to have staccs. I think in HZ Strings there are also just „shorts“.


----------



## muziksculp

Saxer said:


> I know and it wasn‘t my argumentation. But it might have been the reason for their choice not to have staccs. I think in HZ Strings there are also just „shorts“.


HZ Strings has 'Short', and 'Spiccatisimo' . The shorts sound like Stacc. and Spiccatisimo just sound like Spicc. to me.


----------



## mussnig

Saxer said:


> I remember a discussion here (or somewhere else) where this spiccato/staccato question was asked. It seems that in bigger string sections the staccs and spiccs start to sound too similar to make it an extra patch. At least that’s what I remember.


Interesting, I didn't know that. I will definitely play around and make some comparisons for myself.

However, while that would explain the lack of Stacc. in SSS, it doesn't explain its lack in SStS.

But there is a Brushed Short and a Spicc. (also both as CS versions) and together with the TM versions I already find them flexible enough. Also BHCT has some more shorts for the high strings, so I definitely won't complain.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

axb312 said:


> Sad to see a different view being dealt with as just "deal with it" again :(.
> 
> I once believed this forum could perhaps be a great place to influence developers, just a little bit to do things the way some of their customers want them (and through which everyone would possibly benefit).


Vi-C is definitely not the center of a developer’s universe. There’s a lot of other places for them to get feedback / interact with customers. Christian and Paul will occasionally show up here but it’s not like Vi-C has been particularly cordial with them in the past. EW doesn’t even show up anymore in an official capacity.

Let’s face it - if somebody like Carlos Rafael Riviera can mock the entire Queen’s Gambit score with SSO (with plenty of short notes), they’re probably going to listen to his feedback over some random person on a forum that’s known for attracting hobbyist collectors (I’ve been guilty of that!).


----------



## John R Wilson

mussnig said:


> Interesting, I didn't know that. I will definitely play around and make some comparisons for myself.
> 
> However, while that would explain the lack of Stacc. in SSS, it doesn't explain its lack in SStS.
> 
> But there is a Brushed Short and a Spicc. (also both as CS versions) and together with the TM versions I already find them flexible enough. Also BHCT has some more shorts for the high strings, so I definitely won't complain.


I do like the brushed shorts. SSS and SstS has that, they are quite soft, silky sounding but are closer to a stacc note.

I also really like the 0'5 shorts while enabling the timed short RT on BHCT on the high strings half section and high strings. You can play quite short notes and longer notes quite well and it seems to work better than the SSS 0'5 shorts with Timed RT enabled.


----------



## Karma

I mean we're talking about a library that was recorded in 2012/13 here if my memory serves? A *lot* has changed since then, and it's pretty safe to say that anything upcoming in regards to the AR Modular will definitely be more comprehensive. Not only in the articulations department, but also in the depth of the sampling itself.

As a developer I can assure you that we're well aware of the things people are expecting & hoping for as well.


----------



## muziksculp

Karma said:


> I mean we're talking about a library that was recorded in 2012/13 here if my memory serves? A *lot* has changed since then, and it's pretty safe to say that anything upcoming in regards to the AR Modular will definitely be more comprehensive. Not only in the articulations department, but also in the depth of the sampling itself.
> 
> As a developer I can assure you that we're well aware of the things people are expecting & hoping for as well.


I'm super excited, and looking forward to the Spitfire Audio AR-1 Modular Orchestra. 

Hope there is good progress in developing it.


----------



## Scalms

muziksculp said:


> HZ Strings has 'Short', and 'Spiccatisimo' . The shorts sound like Stacc. and Spiccatisimo just sound like Spicc. to me.


agreed here. HZ shorts are the same length as CS2 staccato, and are staccato, to my ears, I concur


----------



## muziksculp

Scalms said:


> agreed here. HZ shorts are the same length as CS2 staccato, and are staccato, to my ears, I concur


Remember they updated HZ Strings with more shorts, it was lacking when it was first released.


----------



## Scalms

muziksculp said:


> Remember they updated HZ Strings with more shorts, it was lacking when it was first released.


yes, i remember. The original shorts are staccato length (at least the "staccato" length that I am used to)


----------



## Flyo

Big time composer then, or just record my entire arregments with the National Orchestra on my super Studer Tape and just get it done.

Sorry about having múltiples instances for let know what it’s missing to my own criteria? I mean there is a plenty full of avoided arts here and there and it’s very hard go to another route and make another huge investment again because of that. But I am the only one guilt for that first investment hooping that the additional content will bring that content back from my point of view it is what I consider as missing pieces.

Sorry and have mercy.
😅


----------



## Flyo

Trash Panda said:


> This guy has spammed numerous threads making the same complaints over and over and over again. We’re all kind of sick of it.
> 
> Edit: even the mods told him to knock it off, which he did, for a time, before starting it up all over again.


Q Boton Panda.

Numerous threads??

It was on 2 man!
EW for let behind their loyal costumer behind and for pronounce a missed launch date form more than a year delay and with this SF AROF with another kind of treat. it was more a submitting a requirement.

Sound like you a Soldier of every Developer.


----------



## becolossal

Flyo said:


> Big time composer then, or just record my entire arregments with the National Orchestra on my super Studer Tape and just get it done.
> 
> Sorry about having múltiples instances for let know what it’s missing to my own criteria? I mean there is a plenty full of avoided arts here and there and it’s very hard go to another route and make another huge investment again because of that. But I am the only one guilt for that first investment hooping that the additional content will bring that content back from my point of view it is what I consider as missing pieces.
> 
> Sorry and have mercy.
> 😅


Nothing is missing from what you bought. All of the articulations included in each library are clearly listed on the site you purchased them from. You bought the toolbox knowing what was (and wasn’t) in it.


----------



## muziksculp

Hi,

EDIT :
Please note that SSS has Staccato, but it's not obvious at first glance, and you need to do a small edit to get it to sound like a Staccato.

Follow this link to see two options to achieve a get a Staccato articulation in SSS.

https://vi-control.net/community/th...in-spitfire-symph-strings.113497/post-4896415

This is one of the options :


----------



## markleake

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> Going back to the lack of Staccato in SSS, here is what I think is an easy, and best fix so far, and it sounds fantastic.


I'm confused. Didn't Spitfire themselves say that pretty much all the same short articulations are in SSS as in SCS? I thought they confirmed staccato is there in SSS, they just used different labels?

Personally I've never struggled at all with the short articulations in these two libraries. They are fantastic for shorts, and more varied than most string libraries. That's my personal experience anyway.


----------



## muziksculp

markleake said:


> I'm confused. Didn't Spitfire themselves say that pretty much all the same short articulations are in SSS as in SCS? I thought they confirmed staccato is there in SSS, they just used different labels?


EDIT: Please visit this link to see how to see two options to get staccato in SSS. My statement below is not correct. I found out that SSS does have Stacc. 






How to get a Staccato Articulation in Spitfire Symph. Strings


Hi, How to get a Staccato articulation in Spitfire Audio Symphonic Strings. See my post below for the two methods to achieve this. Thanks, Muziksculp




vi-control.net





No, SCS has proper Stacc. SSS does not.

Just play the SCS Stacc. , and compare it with SSS Spic.. or other shorts. Not the same.

I wouldn't be wasting my time trying to find a fix for the SSS Stacc. if they had included it but gave it a different name. It simply doesn't exist in SSS.

By the way, maybe we need to create a new thread for this topic. This is thread is about Abbey Road Foundations, not SSS.


----------



## Geoff Grace

I have a question in case people are ready to return to the topic. For those who have AROOF, what are the patches you use most often? In what context do you use them—for sketching, doubling, or as a supplement to other libraries?

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Justin L. Franks

Geoff Grace said:


> I have a question in case people are ready to return to the topic. For those who have AROOF, what are the patches you use most often? In what context do you use them—for sketching, doubling, or as a supplement to other libraries?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Geoff


Brass and percussion mostly. Sketching and supplementing with the brass in SSO. Percussion stands by itself, it is really quite good.

I also use the full orchestra patches for noodling around.


----------



## Mike Greene

I'm giving Flyo a timeout for a few days. I've also deleted a number of posts related to his pension for battle.


----------



## Daniel Wilson Compos

*penchant.

I'm unnecessarily pedantic and it's a character flaw.


----------



## Evans

Justin L. Franks said:


> Brass and percussion mostly.


I swear, if there was a small handful of additional techniques, I would have easily paid full AR1OF price just for the percussion. It sounds _really_ good in that space.


----------



## gst98

Soundbed said:


> First, thanks for watching / listening. Now it feels like we at least have a basis for a conversation.
> 
> You mentioned the 0’5 shorts were too long at half a second. I thought the video showed they could be shorter without being “compromised”.
> 
> But now that you’ve heard them, you’re saying they sound “compromised” … so I guess even when we hear the same thing we think different things about it.
> 
> You also mentioned the attacks should be able to be used in the same
> phrase. I thought the video showed a continuity of attack types that could easily fit in the same phrase … but you’re saying the attacks still aren’t “correct” so I guess we hear the same thing and have different takeaways.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it’s one dynamic, but I didn’t notice it was only one rr. (Is it? I’m not in the studio anymore.) There are lots of things I’ve done to get around limited rr and limited dynamics but this goes to another of your points about working 10x harder.
> 
> No, I hadn’t really thought about the “choked” sound but I hear what you’re saying. I expect in a musical context I could make it work.
> 
> 
> Actually I enjoy going into libraries to explore what they can do well and how to eek out the most from them. I also enjoy discussing them.
> 
> 
> It’s really not clear cut, to me. They didn’t record a very abrupt stop-start short with some grit or rosin on the front, but that is easy enough to get, if desired. What they did record is flexible (in my opinion) but in your opinion it’s not flexible. Ok. I don’t know why you’re saying it’s not “real”.
> 
> I don’t think it’s a fact that ‘staccato’ is omitted from SSS. I think that is misinformation. I agree the shorts in SSS don’t sound like many other libraries that have recorded a particular type of staccato sound, though. But I think ‘staccato’ is a discussable topic.
> 
> 
> @Spitfire Team wrote in 2016 on VI-C that it’s largely a terminology thing. It was discussed at length (pun intended) with the players while recording Mural/SSS.
> 
> Yes, it takes some work. That’s why I was playing with it today and trying to discuss it. Was genuinely not sure we were hearing the same things, wanted to get on the same page, trying to learn and explore. Thanks for your time.


Honestly, can you imagine this conversation happening over Cinebrass if it lacked the 1/8 note articulation, and you were saying to time-stretch the 1/2 note to 1/8? I shorten the 1/8 notes in CB on a daily basis (because I love the sound of the hall) to try and achieve more double-tongue style playing, but you really can't do more than 25% before it compromises the quality of the sample. And that's with stretching with something superior to Kontakts TM algo.

I think it's range though, because people in this forum are so passionate over the tiniest details, always demanding better mics, more RR's and more dynamics, better players, better engineering and better editing. But in this instance, it's acceptable to time stretch a single-dynamic, single round-robin sample to make a staccato. Or to isolate the other sample in only one of its dynamics where the attack is more pronounced. I'm pretty sure there is no release-sample round-robin, so how can you do any repeated notes with Timed short RT? Not even to mentioned how long the hall rings out on them.

To me it is clear cut, you can hear when you play a 'staccato' length version of it that you instantly transition from the attack of one sample to the release of the next. And SSS has all kinds of weird things going on with the releases which is a whole other story. Just put it in a musical context and tell me you actually think it's sufficient, and then play it on CSS where they were recorded in full. You just can't replicate the length of a CSS Staccato (or Berlin or Cinestrings for that matter) with the methods you suggested.

FWIW, I do think the 0.5sec is a fairly flexible articulation, works great as an alternative to the detache in HWS or SSP or portato in Berlin,_ AND_ is something CSS lacks. But trying to turn it into a staccato is like shrinking an XL t-shirt in the wash to fit like a medium. The shape is all wrong, the graphic is ruined and you're better off wearing one that came in the right size in the first place.

I think misinformation is a bit extreme, seeing as you then say there is no traditional staccato in the next sentence. I don't think anyone is saying they aren't a _type_ of disjointed articulation, but they are not what most consider the traditional staccato. (although I have that other guy blocked so no idea what he's spamming in the thread). I think it isn't as simple as terminology because the new libraries with an artic called 'staccato' sound nothing like the 0.5sec, and I don't think those have made an appearance since.


----------



## Soundbed

gst98 said:


> You just can't replicate the length of a CSS Staccato (or Berlin or Cinestrings for that matter) with the methods you suggested.


They can get pretty close. Here's a video example, where I'm using the RR features in SSS to get some variety:

View attachment shorts.mp4




gst98 said:


> I think misinformation is a bit extreme, seeing as you then say there is no traditional staccato in the next sentence.


I didn't say there is no "traditional staccato". I said "I agree the shorts in SSS don’t sound like many other libraries that have recorded a particular type of staccato sound, though. But I think ‘staccato’ is a discussable topic."



gst98 said:


> I think it isn't as simple as terminology


Ok. But it is, sort of, in my view. And that's why I'm saying misinformation.

I think you are looking for a sound that is missing.

It's not there.

I agree it's not there.

I wanted to make sure we were hearing the same things and it appears we are, in most cases.

I'm not arguing that they recorded what you wanted.

I'm saying that you can get a lot of sounds out of SSS, but apparently not exactly what you wanted.

I am also saying that what you are asking for is not necessarily the only way to interpret a dot over a note, for a string player, a staccato marking.

What they recorded can be a staccato in certain contexts.

Mostly slower, mellower contexts.

So a staccato is not exactly missing.

But the shorts SA recorded have certain uses, and one of the things you'd like to do with the SSS isn't possible.

The idea that strings staccato MUST sound like other libraries' accented short staccato with predefined duration is what I'm questioning.

It's sort of like "bow change legato" in the sense that it's maybe turned into a sample dev thing that has gained traction and now sample library consumers expect "staccato" to sound like a particular kind of accented short with a particular length.


----------



## Soundbed

gst98 said:


> Just put it in a musical context and tell me you actually think it's sufficient



Here's some notes played entirely with the SSS 0'5 articulation, using Timed Artic RTs:

View attachment sss shorts.mp4


People might like it or might not like the sound of it....


----------



## gst98

Soundbed said:


> They can get pretty close. Here's a video example, where I'm using the RR features in SSS to get some variety:
> 
> View attachment shorts.mp4
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't say there is no "traditional staccato". I said "I agree the shorts in SSS don’t sound like many other libraries that have recorded a particular type of staccato sound, though. But I think ‘staccato’ is a discussable topic."
> 
> 
> Ok. But it is, sort of, in my view. And that's why I'm saying misinformation.
> 
> I think you are looking for a sound that is missing.
> 
> It's not there.
> 
> I agree it's not there.
> 
> I wanted to make sure we were hearing the same things and it appears we are, in most cases.
> 
> I'm not arguing that they recorded what you wanted.
> 
> I'm saying that you can get a lot of sounds out of SSS, but apparently not exactly what you wanted.
> 
> I am also saying that what you are asking for is not necessarily the only way to interpret a dot over a note, for a string player, a staccato marking.
> 
> What they recorded can be a staccato in certain contexts.
> 
> Mostly slower, mellower contexts.
> 
> So a staccato is not exactly missing.
> 
> But the shorts SA recorded have certain uses, and one of the things you'd like to do with the SSS isn't possible.
> 
> The idea that strings staccato MUST sound like other libraries' accented short staccato with predefined duration is what I'm questioning.
> 
> It's sort of like "bow change legato" in the sense that it's maybe turned into a sample dev thing that has gained traction and now sample library consumers expect "staccato" to sound like a particular kind of accented short with a particular length.


I don't know, you've limited it to one dynamic (which was much higher than in CSS), dialled in the close mic to minimise the hall release and even then it's a fair bit longer than CSS with a more gradual attack, that is reminiscent of SSS brushed articulations. There is no tightness to the staccato at all, and you can definitely still hear repetition in the release samples too. If you played it in a fast musical passage it would only become more obvious.

The terminology things a bit of a red herring really, the whole discussion here was over the lack of a traditional staccato. Although it sounds like you're on the same page about it here, so now I'm wondering what the objection was to people asking for a traditional staccato was the first place. 

Otherwise, you're getting me to argue over something I agree with you on - it's a useful articulation for slower and softer detached passages like your second example shows. But SF didn't call it staccato because they knew people would be surprised if they load up a staccato and it was that long. If you were to replicate the second example you would use detache in HWS and SSP, portato in Berlin, and sfz would the closest in CSS (but the attack is altogether different).

Sample libraries are not as versatile as real players of course, and so where there is room for interpretation of a player to adjust attack and length, that is not available in samples. However, there is a sound that most people expect when they think of staccato, and it happens to be the same across every library I can think of. Including SF, because the only time they refer to this as a staccato is in the manual, it's not labelled as such in the patch list. And in the libraries that do have a staccato, it sounds exactly as you would expect, right in line with every other library, and nothing like the 0.5 sec. 



Soundbed said:


> The idea that strings staccato MUST sound like other libraries' accented short staccato with predefined duration is what I'm questioning.
> 
> It's sort of like "bow change legato" in the sense that it's maybe turned into a sample dev thing that has gained traction and now sample library consumers expect "staccato" to sound like a particular kind of accented short with a particular length.


So no, I don't think so, but SF's interpretation of any articulation actually called staccato is right in line with the convention as every other library. If you searched 'how to play staccato' on youtube, or just "staccato', regardless of the instrument, there is an expectation of how it should sound. It's usually pretty quick with a snappy attack.


----------



## jbuhler

gst98 said:


> I don't know, you've limited it to one dynamic (which was much higher than in CSS), dialled in the close mic to minimise the hall release and even then it's a fair bit longer than CSS with a more gradual attack, that is reminiscent of SSS brushed articulations. There is no tightness to the staccato at all, and you can definitely still hear repetition in the release samples too. If you played it in a fast musical passage it would only become more obvious.
> 
> The terminology things a bit of a red herring really, the whole discussion here was over the lack of a traditional staccato. Although it sounds like you're on the same page about it here, so now I'm wondering what the objection was to people asking for a traditional staccato was the first place.
> 
> Otherwise, you're getting me to argue over something I agree with you on - it's a useful articulation for slower and softer detached passages like your second example shows. But SF didn't call it staccato because they knew people would be surprised if they load up a staccato and it was that long. If you were to replicate the second example you would use detache in HWS and SSP, portato in Berlin, and sfz would the closest in CSS (but the attack is altogether different).
> 
> Sample libraries are not as versatile as real players of course, and so where there is room for interpretation of a player to adjust attack and length, that is not available in samples. However, there is a sound that most people expect when they think of staccato, and it happens to be the same across every library I can think of. Including SF, because the only time they refer to this as a staccato is in the manual, it's not labelled as such in the patch list. And in the libraries that do have a staccato, it sounds exactly as you would expect, right in line with every other library, and nothing like the 0.5 sec.
> 
> 
> So no, I don't think so, but SF's interpretation of any articulation actually called staccato is right in line with the convention as every other library. If you searched 'how to play staccato' on youtube, or just "staccato', regardless of the instrument, there is an expectation of how it should sound. It's usually pretty quick with a snappy attack.


The “traditional” staccato of most libraries is frequently far too short to serve as staccato to render properly music that is written with a dot over it, especially at slower tempos. I agree that SF likely called these “shorts” rather than “staccatos” because they were aware of the conventions of sample naming. They are almost certainly aware that the length of a “staccato” is style and tempo dependent. But none of that means that the SSS shorts are not good at rendering staccato in many contexts. The whole point is that the term “staccato” refers to a broad category, and the customary sample staccato articulation does not come close to covering staccato needs for a lot of music. Indeed many libraries suffer from not having an articulation that can serve effectively as a staccato at slower tempos.

This whole argument seems to center around those who take their orientation from musical notation, where staccato dots are a flexible sign, as opposed to those who take it from naming conventions of libraries, where “staccato” is necessarily a more or less fixed thing.

I still find this conversation strange because the main thing I use SSS for is the shorts, since few other string libraries have the ground of the SSS shorts well covered, and my music calls for staccatos served by these shorts far more often than the “staccato” customarily included with sample libraries, which is just too short for my general staccato use. (Usually when I want shorter I want spiccato.)


----------



## Soundbed

gst98 said:


> I don't know, you've limited it to one dynamic (which was much higher than in CSS), dialled in the close mic to minimise the hall release and even then it's a fair bit longer than CSS with a more gradual attack, that is reminiscent of SSS brushed articulations. There is no tightness to the staccato at all, and you can definitely still hear repetition in the release samples too. If you played it in a fast musical passage it would only become more obvious.
> 
> The terminology things a bit of a red herring really, the whole discussion here was over the lack of a traditional staccato. Although it sounds like you're on the same page about it here, so now I'm wondering what the objection was to people asking for a traditional staccato was the first place.
> 
> Otherwise, you're getting me to argue over something I agree with you on - it's a useful articulation for slower and softer detached passages like your second example shows. But SF didn't call it staccato because they knew people would be surprised if they load up a staccato and it was that long. If you were to replicate the second example you would use detache in HWS and SSP, portato in Berlin, and sfz would the closest in CSS (but the attack is altogether different).
> 
> Sample libraries are not as versatile as real players of course, and so where there is room for interpretation of a player to adjust attack and length, that is not available in samples. However, there is a sound that most people expect when they think of staccato, and it happens to be the same across every library I can think of. Including SF, because the only time they refer to this as a staccato is in the manual, it's not labelled as such in the patch list. And in the libraries that do have a staccato, it sounds exactly as you would expect, right in line with every other library, and nothing like the 0.5 sec.
> 
> 
> So no, I don't think so, but SF's interpretation of any articulation actually called staccato is right in line with the convention as every other library. If you searched 'how to play staccato' on youtube, or just "staccato', regardless of the instrument, there is an expectation of how it should sound. It's usually pretty quick with a snappy attack.


Thank you for taking the time to articulate. I fully acknowledge your position. I understand what you’re saying. I tried to acknowledge your position — and where we might have different positions — in a previous post.

(I was not intending to get you to “argue,” per se.)

Originally I wanted to make certain we were hearing the same sounds, and we are, and I am content knowing you have fully explored the sound and you are still unsatisfied.

We still might disagree about “traditional staccato” which goes to @jbuhler ‘s points above but I don’t need to press that point any further.


----------



## dunamisstudio

Is Staccato the new Legato debate here on VI?


----------



## chrisav

Calling all VICPD Staccato Police units, we've got a situation here


----------



## holywilly

New film scoring selection is coming on 9/1!


----------



## mussnig

holywilly said:


> New film scoring selection is coming on 9/1!


The YouTube premiere is set to August 31st. Still, both dates seem strange to me as usually Spitfire releases their products on Thursdays.

But perhaps they want the release to kick off a potential back-to-school sale (which I guess will start on September 1st).


----------



## holywilly

Maybe it’s the matter of time zone. I’m in Asia and 9/1 is 8/31 in Europe and North America. I think it’s gonna be “Soaring High Strings”.


----------



## Nimrod7

There is a horn on that YouTube thumbnail.


----------



## muziksculp




----------



## muziksculp

See a horn, but no Legato Strings


----------



## styledelk

How dare they. Didn't they check the thread and your post history?!


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Actually, the facts are:
> 
> AROOF - November 2020
> Sparkling Woodwinds - February 2021
> Legendary Low Strings - February 2021
> Wondrous Flutes - May 2021
> 
> So, they've been consistently releasing new AR material every ~3 months since they launched the partnership.


I’m always right.


----------



## Niv Schrieber

ALittleNightMusic said:


> I’m always right.


If they keep releasing a new selection every 3 months at a steady pace the 9th and final one should be out around November next year, I think. So maybe the first chapter of the modular orchestra will be out by the end of 2022? 😁🤤


----------



## muziksculp

Niv Schrieber said:


> So maybe the first chapter of the modular orchestra will be out by the end of 2022? 😁🤤


----------



## Niv Schrieber

muziksculp said:


>


Not good enough? 😜


----------



## SupremeFist

muziksculp said:


>



If it's horn legatos but locked to tpts doubled 8va I'm going to be very slightly annoyed and not buy it. That will show them!


----------



## Trash Panda

SupremeFist said:


> If it's horn legatos but locked to tpts doubled 8va I'm going to be very slightly annoyed and not buy it. That will show them!


What if it's horn legatos locked to trombones doubled -8va or even just...horn legato and nothing else?


----------



## Niv Schrieber

SupremeFist said:


> If it's horn legatos but locked to tpts doubled 8va I'm going to be very slightly annoyed and not buy it. That will show them!


Yeah I really hope those are separated as well. Personally I also don't want just horn legatos, but also some strong marcatos.


----------



## SupremeFist

Trash Panda said:


> What if it's horn legatos locked to trombones doubled -8va or even just...horn legato and nothing else?


I dunno, horns + tbs 8ba would be surprising to me as the main event. Most useful I guess would be horn legatos and separate trumpet legatos, but I imagine that's the kind of thing they're saving for the modular orchestra.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

I guarantee whatever it is, somebody here will not be happy that Spitfire didn’t sample exactly what they wanted! How dare they!


----------



## styledelk

I want harps + horns, with a bass clarinet breath noise overlay.


----------



## styledelk

You're laughing but I'm serious! Why not get further out of bounds here. It's $49. We'll buy it.


----------



## Futchibon

holywilly said:


> Maybe it’s the matter of time zone. I’m in Asia and 9/1 is 8/31 in Europe and North America. I think it’s gonna be “Soaring High Strings”.


If Paul gets his way it will be ‘Very excited Violins & Violas’! 🎻🎻


----------



## John R Wilson

I'm guessing a horns legato patch or horns and string legato.


----------



## muziksculp

John R Wilson said:


> horns and string legato.


Hopefully Not. I don't want any Horns in my Strings.

I have a feeling they want to keep this library crippled. Whatever they release won't help fix things.

I'm better off saving for the AR-1 Modular Orchestra, than wasting it on AROOF expansions.


----------



## MaxOctane

All joking aside, I'm seriously curious about how the pricing will work out for the full package. 9 expansions @ $50 each, plus the base orchestra will come out to $900 -- Now this becomes a very pricey library! 

If I recall correctly, they haven't been discounting the expansions. But I gotta believe that at some point they'll offer the whole thing at a discount.


----------



## John R Wilson

muziksculp said:


> Hopefully Not. I don't want any Horns in my Strings.
> 
> I have a feeling they want to keep this library crippled. Whatever they release won't help fix things.
> 
> I'm better off saving for the AR-1 Modular Orchestra, than wasting it on AROOF expansions.


I hope not as well! It might just be Horns legato. 

I feel similar. I'd like some legatos for some of the sections and maybe a percussion selection but otherwise I'll probably just wait and see what happens with the AR-1 modular orchestra.


----------



## John R Wilson

MaxOctane said:


> All joking aside, I'm seriously curious about how the pricing will work out for the full package. 9 expansions @ $50 each, plus the base orchestra will come out to $900 -- Now this becomes a very pricey library!
> 
> If I recall correctly, they haven't been discounting the expansions. But I gotta believe that at some point they'll offer the whole thing at a discount.


Yeah It'll be expensive if you want all the expansions.


----------



## muziksculp

I am sure that the AR-1 Modular Orchestra will blow AROOF and its expansions out of the water, the modular version will be quite superior in every way when compared to these so/so limiting expansions.

I have already decided not to waste a penny on AROOF expansions, and will begin buying the AR-1 Modular Orch. as it gets released.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

My guess is it will definitely be a blended section. To those who think or hope it won't be, you haven't been paying attention and still don't understand the point of AROOF Selections.


----------



## John R Wilson

I'm sure it will be. I wont be buying anymore expansions unless they are quite useful like the legendary low strings or a percussion one. Otherwise I'll be waiting quite some time to see what happens with the AR-1 modular libraries.


----------



## John R Wilson

ALittleNightMusic said:


> My guess is it will definitely be a blended section. To those who think or hope it won't be, haven't been paying attention and still don't understand the point of AROOF Selections.


This is what I'm thinking as well. I suppose it may be slightly different with the horns and trumpets as the foundation library does include separate horns and trumpets so its possible that they might include a legato horns and trumpets as part of the selections.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

John R Wilson said:


> I'm sure it will be. I wont be buying anymore expansions unless they are quite useful like the legendary low strings a percussion one. Otherwise I'll be waiting quite some time to see what happens with the AR-1 modular libraries.


I think that's the smart approach - buy these if they are useful for your music. Just like you wouldn't go to a paint store and buy every brush you may not even need, you buy these for specific applications - because they have been sampled and created for specific applications. For example, if you want those flute mordents type of licks, there's no library that sounds as good doing those as Wondrous Flutes.


----------



## muziksculp

Strings With Horns is a NO NO..


----------



## John R Wilson

ALittleNightMusic said:


> I think that's the smart approach - buy these if they are useful for your music. Just like you wouldn't go to a paint store and buy every brush you may not even need, you buy these for specific applications - because they have been sampled and created for specific applications. For example, if you want those flute mordents type of licks, there's no library that sounds as good doing those as Wondrous Flutes.


Absolutely, that's how I'm seeing the selections. I did not get the woodwind ones as I did not think they would be that useful for me. I already have BHCT and VSL synchronized woodwinds that both come with mordents as well so I decided against getting them.


----------



## John R Wilson

muziksculp said:


> Strings With Horns is a NO NO..


Yeah that would be a no for me.


----------



## muziksculp

Whatever it is, I'm not getting my hopes too high, I doubt it very much that they will release what I want for AROOF.


----------



## John R Wilson

Same here. Only ones I'd be interested in is a percussion one and some extra legatos but otherwise its pretty much a waiting game to see what happens with the AR-1 modular library.

Also, at this point I'm going to want to see some pretty good developments with the AR-1 modular library that sets it way apart from the competition to buy into it.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Strings With Horns is a NO NO..


Horns and cellos. Outside chance it might be a large horn section that wouldn’t be included in modular AR. 

I think you’ll still get a strings legato, maybe not this release, but it will be violins in octaves.


----------



## John R Wilson

jbuhler said:


> Horns and cellos. Outside chance it might be a large horn section that wouldn’t be included in modular AR.
> 
> I think you’ll still get a strings legato, maybe not this release, but it will be violins in octaves.


Yeah I'm expecting a strings in 8ve selection at some point. Not sure ill get it though.


----------



## jbuhler

John R Wilson said:


> Yeah I'm expecting a strings in 8ve selection at some point. Not sure ill get it though.


If it sounds good and the range isn’t overly limited, I’ll likely get it. A horn/cello patch would also be convenient if it sounds good and it’s not overly limited in terms of range. But these expansions haven’t traditionally gone on sale so there’s been no real incentive to get any of them until I need them.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

It's definitely going to be horns + strings (it leaked during the Wondrous Flutes demo). Which strings though - TBD.


----------



## John R Wilson

jbuhler said:


> If it sounds good and the range isn’t overly limited, I’ll likely get it. A horn/cello patch would also be convenient if it sounds good and it’s not overly limited in terms of range. But these expansions haven’t traditionally gone on sale so there’s been no real incentive to get any of them until I need them.


I might get it as well if it sounds good and isn't overly limited in range, however, like you mentioned their would be no rush and I'd unlikely get it straight away.


----------



## John R Wilson

ALittleNightMusic said:


> It's definitely going to be horns + strings (it leaked during the Wondrous Flutes demo). Which strings though - TBD.


If so then I'm not that interested in that but I suppose that is to be expected as these selection are suppose to be pre orchestrated sections and mixtures.


----------



## Drumdude2112

ALittleNightMusic said:


> It's definitely going to be horns + strings (it leaked during the Wondrous Flutes demo). Which strings though - TBD.


i recall they accidentally had that in the screenshot when they released wonderless flutes 😂


----------



## Trash Panda

You have to examine the image on their YouTube channel really closely, but if you do, you can see this will be similar to Sparkling Woodwinds, but with French Horns and vibraslaps.

Seems like a bold choice, but I’m here for it.


----------



## becolossal

muziksculp said:


> I have already decided not to waste a penny on AROOF expansions, and will begin buying the AR-1 Modular Orch. as it gets released.


WE KNOW.


----------



## daan1412

I completed the collection (so far) the other day and I'm not entirely satisfied with the legato combos. The low strings and Grand Brass are pretty cool and quite useful, but the three woodwinds expansions have a very particular sound and I don't see it being _that_ useful on a daily basis.

I wish they would give us at least non-octave horns, trumpets and high strings, but I guess that's not happening. Realistically, I think we're getting high strings in octave, horns with trumpets in octave, high strings with something else and maybe some extra percussion.

Those Selections are more about keeping the Abbey Road buzz alive than about content itself. It was a smart marketing move for sure. As a user, though, I'd much rather pay like €699 or whatever up front for something that mirrors how they handled legatos in Albion One. In a single, complete package. Oh well, it is what it is thought. I still use ARO whenever it's able to do the job (mainly shorts, percussion and some layering).


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

daan1412 said:


> Those Selections are more about keeping the Abbey Road buzz alive than about content itself. It was a smart marketing move for sure.


Some people keep repeating this theory and my question to them would be “so there’s no value in recording players playing together at the same time?” Which of course is a rhetorical question because of course there is value. Recording two instruments actively trying to blend together sounds VERY different than layering two separately recorded instruments on top of each other.

You may not care for the combinations, but there’s no discounting the concept (or the value for those that want those colors).


----------



## Bman70

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Some people keep repeating this theory and my question to them would be “so there’s no value in recording players playing together at the same time?” Which of course is a rhetorical question because of course there is value. Recording two instruments actively trying to blend together sounds VERY different than layering two separately recorded instruments on top of each other.
> 
> You may not care for the combinations, but there’s no discounting the concept (or the value for those that want those colors).


This is true, but at the same time it seems strange to release niche combinations before even having the basics in place. It's like releasing a Bob Ross oil painting set, and it only has some specialty blended colors without having black, white, red, yellow and blue primaries. You'd love to use them but without the rest you can't make a whole picture.


----------



## daan1412

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Some people keep repeating this theory and my question to them would be “so there’s no value in recording players playing together at the same time?” Which of course is a rhetorical question because of course there is value. Recording two instruments actively trying to blend together sounds VERY different than layering two separately recorded instruments on top of each other.
> 
> You may not care for the combinations, but there’s no discounting the concept (or the value for those that want those colors).


Pre-recorded combinations are a great concept, I like them myself (ideally, if essential single section content is already there ). I was just saying it feels like this release strategy is more about maintaing the buzz (especially since it all had been already recorded when they released Orchestral Foundations) and building the hype for the modular orchestra.

I'm curious what came first - the recordings or the release strategy. Probably the latter and if that's the case, I'm wondering what would this library be like if they decided to do it as a single product, no expansions.




Bman70 said:


> This is true, but at the same time it seems strange to release niche combinations before even having the basics in place. It's like releasing a Bob Ross oil painting set, and it only has some specialty blended colors without having black, white, red, yellow and blue primaries. You'd love to use them but without the rest you can't make a whole picture.


Exactly. There is stuff that this library needs more at the moment than 3 different woodwind combos.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Bman70 said:


> This is true, but at the same time it seems strange to release niche combinations before even having the basics in place. It's like releasing a Bob Ross oil painting set, and it only has some specialty blended colors without having black, white, red, yellow and blue primaries. You'd love to use them but without the rest you can't make a whole picture.


Well they have released the "primary" colors in the Foundations set. If you only consider it primary when it has legato, well...

Are they really niche combinations? Cellos and Basses in octaves? Flutes and Piccolos in octaves? Horns and Cellos? They are all taken from scores recorded in AR.


----------



## Bman70

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Well they have released the "primary" colors in the Foundations set. If you only consider it primary when it has legato, well...


Can we go one day without talking about legato . I meant Foundations itself, are the strings recorded in unisons? I've stopped trying to keep track of the combinations, but I seem to recall octaves in it. Unison and octaves, while useful, aren't as broadly flexible as pure sections. Whether with legato or not.



ALittleNightMusic said:


> Are they really niche combinations? Cellos and Basses in octaves? Flutes and Piccolos in octaves? Horns and Cellos? They are all taken from scores recorded in AR.


Relatively niche at least, in that if you don't want unison or octaves you'll need to bring in a different library, without that hip room vibe.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Bman70 said:


> Can we go one day without talking about legato . I meant Foundations itself, are the strings recorded in unisons? I've stopped trying to keep track of the combinations, but I seem to recall octaves in it. Unison and octaves, while useful, aren't as broadly flexible as pure sections. Whether with legato or not.
> 
> 
> Relatively niche at least, in that if you don't want unison or octaves you'll need to bring in a different library, without that hip room vibe.


Sounds like what you want is individual sections recorded in detail at Abbey Road Studio One. Lucky for you, Spitfire is recording that - but AROOF was never meant to be that or a replacement for that. It serves a different function (like for sketching quickly and if you want true recorded blends). Complaining that it isn't individual sections is a bit like saying the car you bought isn't a plane.


----------



## Bman70

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Complaining that it isn't individual sections is a bit like saying the car you bought isn't a plane.



Not complaining, I like my car that only drives up to 45mph, with no reverse, giving me the "foundations" of the driving experience. It even has upgradable GPS maps for only Idaho and Wyoming. It's just for quicker jaunts to the store! 

Really though I'm overall happy with Foundations, although I bought it partly because I wanted in on the coming expansions. Which in the initial chaos I did allow myself to believe might include more granular, non-paired sections.


----------



## Russell Anderson

Same. Instead, we got some sweet mic positions on some shorts and great percussion, and a few marcatos and the occasional sustain as well. A discount on the modular library will be the cherry on top but by the time it’s released it’ll be still up to whether I’d even want it anymore, it’s been a year and since that first-ever-library purchase of AROOF I’ve gotten a pretty fully-fledged lot of orchestral samples and I’m not sure there’s going to be room by the time it’s released for a “but the room!” library


----------



## Alex Fraser

I suspect it _is_ a release strategy. I think I remember PH describing the modular orch as a long term project with AROOF being a way to get the sound of Abbey Road into user hands now, rather than wait on the modular stuff.

Personally, I'd like them to take all the time in the world to cook up the modular orchestra properly. This might be Spitfire's last big orchestra - for a decade at least. They might as well go to town on it.


----------



## Daniel Wilson Compos

Just bought this earlier this week and boy are my arms tired.

...uhh, I mean I'm loving it. The percussion is fantastic, and I'll definitely be shamelessly using some of these ensemble patches as shortcuts in my production. I don't miss legatos because I can fill those in with some other libraries I have and I'm pretty satisfied overall with the product.

I just wish that the instruments worked the first time I downloaded them. I'm having to reinstall because every time I get to the high woodwinds, if I try to select any patch that isn't the default long it doesn't sound and then ends up crashing the Spitfire app.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

Daniel Wilson Compos said:


> Just bought this earlier this week and boy are my arms tired.
> 
> ...uhh, I mean I'm loving it. The percussion is fantastic, and I'll definitely be shamelessly using some of these ensemble patches as shortcuts in my production. I don't miss legatos because I can fill those in with some other libraries I have and I'm pretty satisfied overall with the product.
> 
> I just wish that the instruments worked the first time I downloaded them. I'm having to reinstall because every time I get to the high woodwinds, if I try to select any patch that isn't the default long it doesn't sound and then ends up crashing the Spitfire app.


Have you contacted Spitfire support about your issues? They’re quite good.


----------



## Daniel Wilson Compos

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Have you contacted Spitfire support about your issues? They’re quite good.


I sure have, Christian Henson's secret account.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

New AR Selection coming tomorrow it seems - one of their marketing images had clarinets in it.


----------



## CT

Marimba + clarinets?


----------



## rnb_2

Interesting - wonder what they'll do with the bundle, since Abbey Road One and the bundle are both currently on sale (ARO is 30% off, so not its lowest price, but I think the bundle is still at its lowest price of $485). Also curious to see what price is offered on the new Selection for those that already own the Bundle.


----------



## Zanshin

rnb_2 said:


> Interesting - wonder what they'll do with the bundle, since Abbey Road One and the bundle are both currently on sale (ARO is 30% off, so not its lowest price, but I think the bundle is still at its lowest price of $485). Also curious to see what price is offered on the new Selection for those that already own the Bundle.


I think it was $34 when I owned all but one for the bundle. I expect this one will be about the same for current bundle owners.


----------



## dzilizzi

Michaelt said:


> Marimba + clarinets?


I was about to laugh at this, but then, knowing how these things work, this might be right.


----------



## muziksculp

These look like Bassoon Reeds.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts

muziksculp said:


> These look like Bassoon Reeds.


There hasn't been a bassoon in any of the film scoring selections so far.


----------



## CT

How about bassoon, clarinet, cor anglais, alto flute, harp, and vibraphone? That's a good _magical_ combination.


----------



## muziksculp

The Bassoon is a very lyrical, and expressive instrument. I wonder what other instrument/s they decided to layer Bassoons with ..... ? 

We will find out tomorrow. 

I'm still super excited to see one of the AR1 Modular Orchestral Modules released , maybe during Q1-2022 ?


----------



## rnb_2

Assuming that 9 Selections holds up, it looks like the cost for the complete ARO set will be $600-650. We're at $485 with 5 Selections included, and later today, we should have an idea if the ~$34 "upgrade" for bundle owners holds true. If it does, we'd be at $519, and have three Selections left, for a total of just over $100 more.

While it would still be around $900 if you purchased everything separately, I don't think anyone should end up paying that, given the "complete your bundle" deals that are being offered. Of course, that means buying everything to get the maximum discount, so there will be a point at which completing the bundle will make more sense than just buying a few of the Selections individually.

A lot depends on what those final four (three after today's announcement) Selections cover, but ARO is a much more attractive proposition at ~$620 than at ~$900.


----------



## Ricgus3

Now that Aroof has been out a while, what are peoples impressions of it? I am interested in picking it up but also no legato, is it a break o make it? I have heard some really good mock-ups. But appassionata might be the high string legato it needs?

Will wait anyway for the 5-6 feb sale and see what has been voted


----------



## muziksculp

Ricgus3 said:


> But appassionata might be the high string legato it needs?


Maybe. Because I doubt they will release any legato strings for AROOF.


----------



## Bman70

muziksculp said:


> Maybe. Because I doubt they will release any legato strings for AROOF.


Doesn't Legendary Low Strings have legato? It wouldn't be unheard of to do the same in the high registers.


----------



## jbuhler

muziksculp said:


> Maybe. Because I doubt they will release any legato strings for AROOF.


I still think there will be legato high strings. Indeed it still seems like they were supposed to have been released last May but were pulled for some reason at the last minute. And with the recent release of SAS the intrigue on that grows.

But you likely won't like the legato high strings, because they will mostly likely be octave violins, possibly also with a unison violin 1 and 2 in a smallish range.


----------



## muziksculp

jbuhler said:


> But you likely won't like the legato high strings, because they will mostly likely be octave violins, possibly also with a unison violin 1 and 2 in a smallish range.


Yup, you are very correct, you already know my taste, that's not my cup of coffee. and I'm surely not excited about it if that's what they have in their plans. I don't even know if I will be excited about what they plan to show us tomorrow. 

On the other hand, I'm super excited about AR1 Mod-Orch.


----------



## doctoremmet

Bman70 said:


> Doesn't Legendary Low Strings have legato? It wouldn't be unheard of to do the same in the high registers.


Like Jim and yourself I still expect these high strings legato patches to drop some day, in an orchestrated fashion. It seems highly “logical” doesn’t it?


----------



## jbuhler

doctoremmet said:


> Like Jim and yourself I still expect these high strings legato patches to drop some day, in an orchestrated fashion. It seems highly “logical” doesn’t it?


The story teller in me wants SAS to have been a most happy experiment that SF did to solve a problem they were having with the high strings of the AROOF legato, and they went into Air with a small group of musicians (because Abbey Road was booked) and the experiment worked so well they decided to make a full library of it. A second possible story would be that they were finishing up the AROOF high string legatos and having some issues, meanwhile they had decided to do SAS as a quick side project, and the results came in so spectacularly impressive that they decided to redo/rework the AROOF high string legatos along the same principles. That's complete speculation of course, and it all presumes that with this newfangled impulse legato SF worked out a new method of recording and/or scripting legato that is something other than simply throwing more labor at the editing of the transitions. Neither of those scenarios is likely remotely true, but I like them as stories.


----------



## mussnig

Are those clarinets with bassoons?


----------



## tritonely

Never expected I had to BEG Spitfire to release a strings library  (high / mid strings legato for AROOF)


----------



## ridgero

Sounds like LOTR :D


----------



## Baronvonheadless

Yup another wind patch that edges into the territory of sounding like an organ! Yay.


----------



## Vlzmusic

Baronvonheadless said:


> Yup another wind patch that edges into the territory of sounding like an organ! Yay.


Look how many keys he pushes down. It's an excellent patch, if it manages to sound as good as it sounds in this soup.


----------



## doctoremmet

Baronvonheadless said:


> Yup another wind patch that edges into the territory of sounding like an organ! Yay.


Wait. That wasn’t an harmonium?


----------



## Tom Ferguson

I can never tell if they show that stuff (chords using ensemble patches that make for muddy orchestration) because they actually think it sounds good, or they just want the sustain patches to appear more valuable to novices or something?


----------



## dzilizzi

Vlzmusic said:


> Look how many keys he pushes down. It's an excellent patch, if it manages to sound as good as it sounds in this soup.


It's funny, but this is something I learned from watching Paul's walkthroughs and tutorials, and a couple of Rick Beato videos. Orchestra instruments only play one note at a time. Closed chords cause organ sounds in woodwinds and synth sounds in strings. As a semi piano player (I'm not good), this is hard to remember when playing around.

Of course if you want organ or synth sounds.....

This should be interesting. Don't we already have Legendary low winds though?


----------



## roman_o

dzilizzi said:


> It's funny, but this is something I learned from watching Paul's walkthroughs and tutorials, and a couple of Rick Beato videos. Orchestra instruments only play one note at a time. Closed chords cause organ sounds in woodwinds and synth sounds in strings. As a semi piano player (I'm not good), this is hard to remember when playing around.
> 
> Of course if you want organ or synth sounds.....
> 
> This should be interesting. Don't we already have Legendary low winds though?


No, we've only got wondrous high and vibrant mid winds.


----------



## doctoremmet

Monster Low Winds


----------



## dzilizzi

roman_o said:


> No, we've only got wondrous high and vibrant mid winds.


I get them all mixed up after a while. I guess it was low strings. Strings, winds, they all sound alike after a while! 

Yes, I am kidding. I think.


----------



## Vlzmusic

It reminds me one of my favorite low winds patches in ARK5.


----------



## Evans

Baronvonheadless said:


> Yup another wind patch that edges into the territory of sounding like an organ! Yay.


I like organs.


----------



## doctoremmet

[New release 3 February] Spitfire AR1 Film Scoring Selection: Mysterious Reeds







vi-control.net


----------



## NoamL

Another Abbey Road select, another instant buy...

I love all the wind selects, they're great for workflow because I can just "pick an orchestration" and go, instead of mocking up multiple unison woodwind parts. It's also a plus that the musicians play together and tune together.

If they have any more winds in the 3 Scoring Selections that have yet to be released, they will've covered most of the basic wind combinations.

You could have 2 perspectives on this, put them all together and you have a "$200-$250 woodwind library" that they sold to you piece by piece. At the same time, that wind library has a TON of great stuff.

I didn't find the string and brass selects to be as useful. And unfortunately I can't really use selects that cross instrument families (hn+cellos) cuz I have to turn in stems for everything.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts

To hell with suspense.
It's 2ob + 2cl and 2cl + 2bn in octaves. Legato and staccato.


----------



## doctoremmet

NoamL said:


> Another Abbey Road select, another instant buy...
> 
> I love all the wind selects, they're great for workflow because I can just "pick an orchestration" and go, instead of mocking up multiple unison woodwind parts. It's also a plus that the musicians play together and tune together.
> 
> If they have any more winds in the 3 Scoring Selections that have yet to be released, they will've covered most of the basic wind combinations.
> 
> You could have 2 perspectives on this, put them all together and you have a "$200-$250 woodwind library" that they sold to you piece by piece. At the same time, that wind library has a TON of great stuff.
> 
> I didn't find the string and brass selects to be as useful. And unfortunately I can't really use selects that cross instrument families (hn+cellos) cuz I have to turn in stems for everything.


Cool analysis. I’m a bit of a woodwind fan myself and I couldn’t agree more. Since I have started to work with BHCT I have really learned to appreciate pre-orchestrated patches. This iteration sounds nice (based on hearing one demo and half-watching Paul’s walkthrough).


----------



## Germain B

NoamL said:


> Another Abbey Road select, another instant buy...
> 
> I love all the wind selects, they're great for workflow because I can just "pick an orchestration" and go, instead of mocking up multiple unison woodwind parts. It's also a plus that the musicians play together and tune together.
> 
> If they have any more winds in the 3 Scoring Selections that have yet to be released, they will've covered most of the basic wind combinations.
> 
> You could have 2 perspectives on this, put them all together and you have a "$200-$250 woodwind library" that they sold to you piece by piece. At the same time, that wind library has a TON of great stuff.
> 
> I didn't find the string and brass selects to be as useful. And unfortunately I can't really use selects that cross instrument families (hn+cellos) cuz I have to turn in stems for everything.


I agree with everything.
I haven't picked a selection yet, but I'm really enjoying their focus on woodwinds as it's my favorite section of the orchestra and use them all the time.
I'll get them when they will all be out as a complement to the upcoming Modular Orchestra to have those unique sounds of instruments recorded together.


----------



## emilio_n

34$ if I complete my collection...
Sound great. I feel like Indiana Jones... Downloading


----------



## Baronvonheadless

I just wish they'd offer one interesting articulation. Of course they aren't going to pack it full of content at this price, but for each one they could offer some kind of interesting flutter or something. IMO.

For example, look at what you get when you buy one ark 2 low wind for the same price.

It's crazy.

Where they succeeded IMO are the Mordants included in the other two winds, and in the Sparkling Woodwinds (not very popular here but I Love it) They offer the blending tool option so u can blend the level of the Glock or completely take it out. 

It's little features like that, that make these selections worth it and interesting. But the grand brass doesn't shine here and this library sounds great via the walkthrough but seems a bit plain articulation wise/not much extra special sauce involved?


----------



## Land of Missing Parts

NoamL said:


> If they have any more winds in the 3 Scoring Selections that have yet to be released, they will've covered most of the basic wind combinations.


Flutes + oboes unison?

Here's what they've covered so far:
picc + 2fl + 2ob + 2cl -- Sparkling Woodwinds
picc + 2fl 8ve -- Wondrous Flutes
2ob + 2cl unison -- Mysterious Reeds
2ob + 2cl (+ optional cor anglais) 8ve -- Vibrant Reeds
2cl + 2 bn 8ve -- Mysterious Reeds

AROOF also has:
picc, 2fl, 2ob, cor anglais unison
2cl, 1 bcl, 2bn, 1cbn unison

(AROOF doesn't have legato, all Selections contain at least leg/sus and stacc)


----------



## roman_o

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Flutes + oboes unison?
> 
> Here's what they've covered so far:
> picc + 2fl + 2ob + 2cl -- Sparkling Woodwinds
> picc + 2fl 8ve -- Wondrous Flutes
> 2ob + 2cl unison -- Mysterious Reeds
> 2ob + 2cl (+ optional cor anglais) 8ve -- Vibrant Reeds
> 2cl + 2 bn 8ve -- Mysterious Reeds


Yeah, agree on flutes + oboes. Also should go lower, maybe contrabassoon + bassoons, or even bass clarinet + clarinets.


----------



## Flyo

Sounds amazing, I will wait till Hi Strings with Legato 😅


----------



## muziksculp

Flyo said:


> Sounds amazing, I will wait till Hi Strings with Legato 😅


Good Luck waiting for that.


----------



## filipjonathan

So what's mysterious legato?! I can't be bothered to watch the walkthrough.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts

filipjonathan said:


> So what's mysterious legato?! I can't be bothered to watch the walkthrough.


2cl + 2 bn in octaves








Spitfire Audio — Abbey Road One: Mysterious Reeds






www.spitfireaudio.com


----------



## Saxer

ok...


----------



## filipjonathan

Land of Missing Parts said:


> 2cl + 2 bn in octaves
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spitfire Audio — Abbey Road One: Mysterious Reeds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spitfireaudio.com


Oh so it's called "mysterious" just because it's cl + bn? I thought it was some special legato technique.


----------



## Stevie

I don't understand why we get so many ensemble libraries. That completely defeats the purpose of learning orchestration and to create your own colors...


----------



## Land of Missing Parts

filipjonathan said:


> Oh so it's called "mysterious" just because it's cl + bn? I thought it was some special legato technique.


These names are suggesting what kind of mood and color they evoke (wonder, sparkle, vibrant, mystery). 

Kind of silly, I know, but there's some logic to it. Anyway, I tried my best to decode into plain language in my above post.


----------



## NoamL

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Flutes + oboes unison?
> 
> Here's what they've covered so far:
> picc + 2fl + 2ob + 2cl -- Sparkling Woodwinds
> picc + 2fl 8ve -- Wondrous Flutes
> 2ob + 2cl unison -- Mysterious Reeds
> 2ob + 2cl (+ optional cor anglais) 8ve -- Vibrant Reeds
> 2cl + 2 bn 8ve -- Mysterious Reeds
> 
> AROOF also has:
> picc, 2fl, 2ob, cor anglais unison
> 2cl, 1 bcl, 2bn, 1cbn unison
> 
> (AROOF doesn't have legato, all Selections contain at least leg/sus and stacc)


It's cool to see it laid out like this.

If there's any remaining wind selects here are some likely candidates I can think of: Fl+Ob unison, AFl+Bsn unison (maybe with EH too), Fl+Cl unison, maybe Cl+Hn unison?


----------



## NoamL

Stevie said:


> I don't understand why we get so many ensemble libraries. That completely defeats the purpose of learning orchestration and to create your own colors...


I get where you're coming from but honestly, using these libraries you are still in control of your orchestration choices. These are common + basic doublings. You don't have to use them and can bring in some solo winds (SSO, CSW etc) where you want.

Much more control here than in an Albion style library where in a "high strings" patch _they_ decided how high the violas would play not you. etc.


----------



## Noeticus

Stevie said:


> I don't understand why we get so many ensemble libraries. That completely defeats the purpose of learning orchestration and to create your own colors...


We have other libraries for that, plus you can still learn all that with ensembles.


----------



## dzilizzi

Stevie said:


> I don't understand why we get so many ensemble libraries. That completely defeats the purpose of learning orchestration and to create your own colors...


The AROOF and extensions are part of the media composer library. They are made for quick use in writing music for things like TV, games and trailers. Having instruments play together in octaves not only works well for orchestration, they sound better than using separate VI's for the same techniques. 

The Abbey Road Modular library will be individual instruments/sections. Hopefully it will start coming out this year. It got delayed by quarantines. I'm assuming they have completed most of the recording by now, though this may not be correct.


----------



## Noeticus

We are so, so, spoiled with all the great libraries coming out.


----------



## dzilizzi

Noeticus said:


> We are so, so, spoiled with all the great libraries coming out.


I remember when I wouldn't even have tried to write music. Now it is so easy. Well, I have always been able to come up with melodies, it is the rest that was hard for me. And now I can play (almost) any instrument in the world. It is so great!


----------



## Living Fossil

NoamL said:


> I get where you're coming from but honestly, using these libraries you are still in control of your orchestration choices. These are common + basic doublings. You don't have to use them and can bring in some solo winds (SSO, CSW etc) where you want.


I have to agree with @Stevie on this. I use woodwinds permanently, however, i almost never have a situation where a keep a specific combination for longer than a few bars (usually a phrase). Woodwinds are extremely sensible; even if you maintain a combination you may want to change the register of one or the other instrument at different points. What may start as an octave may become a unison, depending on the instruments range. Or you may double some important accents of a melody. Or change the exact combination in the second part of a melody. Etc.
The possibilities are endless; and readymade combinations seem to me extremely counterintuitive.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts

Living Fossil said:


> I have to agree with @Stevie on this. I use woodwinds permanently, however, i almost never have a situation where a keep a specific combination for longer than a few bars (usually a phrase). Woodwinds are extremely sensible; even if you maintain a combination you may want to change the register of one or the other instrument at different points. What may start as an octave may become a unison, depending on the instruments range. Or you may double some important accents of a melody. Or change the exact combination in the second part of a melody. Etc.
> The possibilities are endless; and readymade combinations seem to me extremely counterintuitive.


I think ensemble writing is about saving time, and writing with broad strokes. I think the benefits pay off more with dense arrangements. Anyway, I like having the option to write with pre-baked ensembles and individual instruments case-by-case. If it's going to be recorded with live players...yeah, definitely not how you'd want to write.


----------



## Noeticus

Living Fossil said:


> I have to agree with @Stevie on this. I use woodwinds permanently, however, i almost never have a situation where a keep a specific combination for longer than a few bars (usually a phrase). Woodwinds are extremely sensible; even if you maintain a combination you may want to change the register of one or the other instrument at different points. What may start as an octave may become a unison, depending on the instruments range. Or you may double some important accents of a melody. Or change the exact combination in the second part of a melody. Etc.
> The possibilities are endless; and readymade combinations seem to me extremely counterintuitive.


But, it is still great to have these ensembles as an option.


----------



## Baronvonheadless

Hope this isn't rude but...

It's weird, this made me open up ark 2 to combine my mysterious winds already there to see if this is worth the discount or if I'm already set with this type of mood and instead of going back and forth and deciding if I want mysterious reeds I got inspired and wrote a track with ark 2 instead hahahahaha.

 

(& I love spitfire and have all the selections thus far, but I'm not jumping at this. Should I?) 

Anyone get it yet that also has ark 2?


----------



## Stevie

Land of Missing Parts said:


> I think ensemble writing is about saving time, and writing with broad strokes. I think the benefits pay off more with dense arrangements. Anyway, I like having the option to write with pre-baked ensembles and individual instruments case-by-case. If it's going to be recorded with live players...yeah, definitely not how you'd want to write.


Keeping track of all the different ensemble patches on my disks is an impossible task and actually makes composing way harder, than using single instruments and forging my own sound.
I just find it too limiting on the long run. And by the time I dig out an ensemble patch that works for me, I cobbled together the single instruments. But that's just me. Not trying to convince anyone 

EDIT: btw, I get goosebumps when I see people using a pre arranged ensemble patch and playing a triad 😂


----------



## NoamL

Living Fossil said:


> I use woodwinds permanently, however, i almost never have a situation where a keep a specific combination for longer than a few bars (usually a phrase).


that's precisely why these are good. You can use them for those 2 bars. They don't have to determine your orchestration choices unless you let them. I completely agree with you and @Stevie that winds are an important source of color in the orchestra and an exciting orchestration knows when to pivot to a new sound.

Here's a track I recently worked on, highlighting the woodwinds. The MIDI tracking is a mess because I didn't create articulation sets for AROOF yet, but you can see that I am able to use AROOF interchangeably with CSW. Layering the AROOF ensemble with a single wind solo that I want to add from another library is also very feasible. (The CSW winds are decently recorded and can be re-mic-balanced to sound pretty good alongside the AROOF winds!)


----------



## jbuhler

Stevie said:


> Keeping track of all the different ensemble patches on my disks is an impossible task and actually makes composing way harder, than using single instruments and forging my own sound.
> I just find it too limiting on the long run. And by the time I dig out an ensemble patch that works for me, I cobbled together the single instruments. But that's just me. Not trying to convince anyone
> 
> EDIT: btw, I get goosebumps when I see people using a pre arranged ensemble patch and playing a triad 😂


Yeah, if that's the case, these are probably not the libraries for you, even if you love the sound.


----------



## Stevie

Living Fossil said:


> I have to agree with @Stevie on this. I use woodwinds permanently, however, i almost never have a situation where a keep a specific combination for longer than a few bars (usually a phrase). Woodwinds are extremely sensible; even if you maintain a combination you may want to change the register of one or the other instrument at different points. What may start as an octave may become a unison, depending on the instruments range. Or you may double some important accents of a melody. Or change the exact combination in the second part of a melody. Etc.
> The possibilities are endless; and readymade combinations seem to me extremely counterintuitive.


Totally! I'm currently studying "The Secrets of Orchestration" from Rovshan Asgarzade and it is a real eye-opener for exactly the same reasons you mentioned.


----------



## Stevie

Maybe I should underline that I totally understand the meaningfulness of these patches.
My point was rather: Spitfire has given us many, many ensemble patches already (e.g. the Albions).
I'm already sorted in that department. I think it's time to finally bring on the AROOF single instruments.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts

This is a thread about ensemble-based sample libraries. I get that those aren't everyone's thing. 

But if you're reading this, it's because you navigated to and opened up a 124+ page thread that is about a line of products that consist of only ensemble-based sample libraries.


----------



## jbuhler

Stevie said:


> Maybe I should underline that I totally understand the meaningfulness of these patches.
> My point was rather: Spitfire has given us many, many ensemble patches already (e.g. the Albions).
> I'm already sorted in that department. I think it's time to finally bring on the AROOF single instruments.


My sense is that SF is using these libraries to prepare for the AR-1 modular, working out some of the kinks on more forgiving material. At the same time these libraries will help folks while they wait for the modular orchestra to roll out, since I think it unlikely that the whole modular orchestra will appear at the same time. I'm not sure even sections like woodwinds, brass, or strings will all appear at the same time. And for someone just starting down this path, AROOF is something like an alternative to Albion One. If you have the Albions or some other libraries like this, there may be nothing pressing about a library like this, but if you have AROOF and want the sound of Abbey Road, well, here you are.


----------



## Hendrixon

jbuhler said:


> My sense is that SF is using these libraries to prepare for the AR-1 modular


This^^^


----------



## szczaw

I have all of it, and I will buy whatever comes next. It sounds great and it's easy to use.


----------



## Evans

Baronvonheadless said:


> (& I love spitfire and have all the selections thus far, but I'm not jumping at this. Should I?)


It's not as if there's an intro price, so why "jump" on something before you really want to use it?


----------



## wunderflo

Baronvonheadless said:


> Hope this isn't rude but...
> 
> It's weird, this made me open up ark 2 to combine my mysterious winds already there to see if this is worth the discount or if I'm already set with this type of mood and instead of going back and forth and deciding if I want mysterious reeds I got inspired and wrote a track with ark 2 instead hahahahaha.
> 
> 
> 
> (& I love spitfire and have all the selections thus far, but I'm not jumping at this. Should I?)
> 
> Anyone get it yet that also has ark 2?



wow, this is truly beautiful! Is this all ark 2? Did you create that last part by bouncing to audio and reversing it?


----------



## Baronvonheadless

wunderflo said:


> wow, this is truly beautiful! Is this all ark 2? Did you create that last part by bouncing to audio and reversing it?


Thank you! 

Sorry there are a few other instruments in there! But the majority of the piece is all ark 2. Alto flutes, Bass Clarinets, Bass Flutes, Wagner Tuba, Low Strings, Harp, and something else I forget. (Edit its the ark 5 wind chords) Then at the end I have a tiny violin line from Appassionata strings in there, and then I add MSS Alleatoric with some Frozen Strings artifacts just doing a simple drone, and then I have some of it running backwards through Sounddust's new loop device.


----------



## CT

You can scoff at the marketing speak all you want, but I'll be damned if these libraries don't immediately conjure _the sound_.


----------



## jbuhler

Evans said:


> It's not as if there's an intro price, so why "jump" on something before you really want to use it?


yes, though if you already have AROOF, completing your bundle becomes increasingly expensive as they add expansions, so when you need one of these you are faced with $49 or whatever complete your bundle is currently at, and the latter goes up as they add expansions to it.



Michaelt said:


> You can scoff at the marketing speak all you want, but I'll be damned if these libraries don't immediately conjure _the sound_.



Which is a great virtue to be sure but also a bit of a failing. Everything I touch with these libraries starts to sound a little like an unused cue from some 1980s film Williams scored. I can't wash that sound out of my brain and it is starting to concern me that the AR-1 modular library is going to have that character in abundance too. Which on the one hand, yay, this is a fabulous sound. But on the other is this what I want my default orchestra to sound like?


----------



## Peter Satera

Michaelt said:


> You can scoff at the marketing speak all you want, but I'll be damned if these libraries don't immediately conjure _the sound_.



My body is reedy.


----------



## CT

jbuhler said:


> Which is a great virtue to be sure but also a bit of a failing. Everything I touch with these libraries starts to sound a little like an unused cue from some 1980s film Williams scored. I can't wash that sound out of my brain and it is starting to concern me that the AR-1 modular library is going to have that character in abundance too. Which on the one hand, yay, this is a fabulous sound. But on the other is this what I want my default orchestra to sound like?


Oh I'd not worry about that too much. Sure, these particular "scoring selections" are well-suited to that style, especially if you consciously do dopey parodies like I did, but the modular library will just be an orchestra with certain players in a certain space and anything beyond that is down to the writing and mixing. 

There is plenty of classical recording that's happened at Abbey Road, even more than AIR maybe, so in my view there's no reason why this aesthetic _has_ to be equated to the 90's cinematic sound or whatever, in spite of how it is understandably marketed.


----------



## rnb_2

jbuhler said:


> yes, though if you already have AROOF, completing your bundle becomes increasingly expensive as they add expansions, so when you need one of these you are faced with $49 or whatever complete your bundle is currently at, and the latter goes up as they add expansions to it.


This sentiment is correct, but the "complete your bundle" price is $34 per Selection (near as makes no difference to 30% off). As I noted last night, before the new Selection was announced, there will be a crossover point where being choosy about which Selections to buy no longer pays off economically. We're already at the point where buying the bundle gives you six Selections for just a bit over the cost of buying four individually, and when all nine are out, you'll be able to get the bundle for a few $/￡/€ more than buying six individually (possibly even a bit less, if they decide to round the bundle down to 599 when all are available).


----------



## muziksculp

Are there any AROOF with SAS demos ?


----------



## jbuhler

Michaelt said:


> Oh I'd not worry about that too much. Sure, these particular "scoring selections" are well-suited to that style, especially if you consciously do dopey parodies like I did, but the modular library will just be an orchestra with certain players in a certain space and anything beyond that is down to the writing and mixing.


I'm thinking of some bits I've done up with AROOF. Wasn't consciously going in any particular direction, but when I played something for a friend, they said that it sounded like it could have come out of one of the Indiana Jones films. And I often feel that, especially with the trumpets. It's that Williams trumpet sound. And those stupidly wonderful flute mordents. So delicious, but I can't wash them out of my ears!



Michaelt said:


> There is plenty of classical recording that's happened at Abbey Road, even more than AIR maybe, so in my view there's no reason why this aesthetic _has_ to be equated to the 90's cinematic sound or whatever, in spite of how it is understandably marketed.


This has been my presumption and I trust it will be true. And I do look forward to AR-1 modular, so don't get me wrong. nevertheless I do find the more I work with AROOF, the more I appreciate Air. It's not that I dislike the sound of Abbey Road, but Air feels like home. Abbey Road feels like high key lighting, Air more chiaroscuro. Well that metaphor is probably bogus, but hopefully captures something of the difference.


----------



## jazzman7

muziksculp said:


> Are there any AROOF with SAS demos ?


I halfheartedly tried SAS out with AROOF Hi string osti's. Can't say I even remember any mic settings. 

Two different beasts on the string side for sure. I did get some nice results using AROOF perc and winds along with BBCSO winds with CSS for #scorerelief2022. (SAS was not on my radar right then) 

Maybe not impossible to blend strings with some close mic setups, judicious EQ and common 'verb, but the work it might have took was not in me right then.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic

If one day my music can end up sounding like an unused John Williams cue, I think I’ll die a happy composer. I do not aspire for more.


----------



## jbuhler

ALittleNightMusic said:


> If one day my music can end up sounding like an unused John Williams cue, I think I’ll die a happy composer. I do not aspire for more.


Sure, if that’s what you are looking for. But not everyone is.


----------



## muziksculp

According to Paul Thomson, it should be possible to adapt SAS to their other Libraries using mic combinations. 

So, my guess is it won't be that difficult to integrate SAS into AROOF using more of the ambient mics in the right combo, and amounts.


----------



## CT

muziksculp said:


> Are there any AROOF with SAS demos ?


Here.


----------



## muziksculp

Michaelt said:


> Here.



Hi @Michaelt ,

Thanks for posting this SAS with AROOF example. 

Did you use a mix of multiple mics of SAS with multiple AROOF mics ? 

Since there are many mic options in both libraries to combine, and experiment with. 

SAS sounds good in this short clip with AROOF. I think SAS can be successfully used with AROOF to provide the missing Legato Strings, especially the Mid-High Strings, with a bit of careful mic selection to get a suitable strings character that fits nicely with AROOF. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## CT

Yes. It's just the same exact mic blend on each, and in my template Appassionata is attenuated in volume a bit to better match the AR levels.

This is SAS violins and violas with AR low strings (octave legato and piz), horns, celli/horns, suspended cymbals, and the new oboes a2/clarinets a2 unison.


----------



## muziksculp

Michaelt said:


> Yes. It's just the same exact mic blend on each, and in my template Appassionata is attenuated in volume a bit to better match the AR levels.


OK. THANKS


----------



## rnb_2

Since the Star Wars scores were, in many ways, my introduction to classical music, the sound of this library causes an almost involuntary reaction. I'm not a composer by any stretch - most of what I get out of my libraries is the simple pleasure of hearing amazing sounds that I actually have some control over (I'm not a keyboardist, just a noodler), even more-so when it's the sound of an amazingly lifelike orchestra.

My dilemma with ARO is this: I've seen a number of people say that it's Spitfire's take on Big Bang Orchestra - which seems fairly accurate - the only problem being, I already took the plunge on Big Bang Orchestra, piecemeal at first, then "completing the bundle" when I realized the price via Best Service was very similar to what I would have paid by waiting for sales on the individual pieces. Needless to say, BBO is a much larger investment than ARO (I was flush at the time, and it was an aspirational purchase - I honestly don't see myself going further up-market than this, based on my skills and interests), but BBO also has a lot more content than ARO (I already have legato for all sections/ensembles, plus many things I don't see SF adding to the Foundations/Selections line).

But, as nice as BBO sounds and as amazing as the Synchron player is, BBO doesn't have That Sound, and there's a part of me that will always want it. I can't really justify having both (in addition to the small selection of other orchestral libraries I have), but selling off BBO and taking a hit on the sale - even though having the option to sell is one of the attractions of VSL libraries - for something with much less content and some odd limitations (the limited range of some of the Selections, etc) just to get That Sound also seems a little bit crazy. Again, I don't see myself in the market for the AR Modular line - I really can't see any way that I'd be able to justify it.

But....That Sound.


----------



## Trash Panda

If it helps, while it does have THAT SOUND (TM) it is a right royal pain in the ass to phrase things with it.


----------



## jbuhler

rnb_2 said:


> Since the Star Wars scores were, in many ways, my introduction to classical music, the sound of this library causes an almost involuntary reaction. I'm not a composer by any stretch - most of what I get out of my libraries is the simple pleasure of hearing amazing sounds that I actually have some control over (I'm not a keyboardist, just a noodler), even more-so when it's the sound of an amazingly lifelike orchestra.
> 
> My dilemma with ARO is this: I've seen a number of people say that it's Spitfire's take on Big Bang Orchestra - which seems fairly accurate - the only problem being, I already took the plunge on Big Bang Orchestra, piecemeal at first, then "completing the bundle" when I realized the price via Best Service was very similar to what I would have paid by waiting for sales on the individual pieces. Needless to say, BBO is a much larger investment than ARO (I was flush at the time, and it was an aspirational purchase - I honestly don't see myself going further up-market than this, based on my skills and interests), but BBO also has a lot more content than ARO (I already have legato for all sections/ensembles, plus many things I don't see SF adding to the Foundations/Selections line).
> 
> But, as nice as BBO sounds and as amazing as the Synchron player is, BBO doesn't have That Sound, and there's a part of me that will always want it. I can't really justify having both (in addition to the small selection of other orchestral libraries I have), but selling off BBO and taking a hit on the sale - even though having the option to sell is one of the attractions of VSL libraries - for something with much less content and some odd limitations (the limited range of some of the Selections, etc) just to get That Sound also seems a little bit crazy. Again, I don't see myself in the market for the AR Modular line - I really can't see any way that I'd be able to justify it.
> 
> But....That Sound.


Wait till you’re flush again or at least until AROOF is on sale at 40% off. There is indeed great joy in That Sound, and the library won’t disappoint.


----------



## jbuhler

Trash Panda said:


> If it helps, while it does have THAT SOUND (TM) it is a right royal pain in the ass to phrase things with it.


Personally I don’t find that at all. (Not saying you are wrong, just saying it hasn’t been been an issue for how I’ve used the library.) But I don’t always want my music to have That Sound, and I sometimes have to substitute instruments out, especially the trumpets, because of that.


----------

