# Spitfire Symphonic Strings (SSS)



## markleake (Nov 18, 2016)

Hi all, I'm starting the obligatory forum topic here, because I need to pretend to myself that I'll use some objective method of reviewing people's feedback here to stop me from the inevitable path of purchasing Spitfire Audio's newly released Symphonic Strings. 

I will undoubtedly succumb and buy it. But I am still interested in people's thoughts on the product, now that it is released.

For those who haven't heard (but I'm sure you have), this is Spitfire Audio's combination of the previous Mural products into one product with the Close/Tree/Ambient mics only, with a coming expansion that will include additional mics.

Link to SSS at Spitfire's website: http://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/spitfire-symphonic-strings/


----------



## Ashermusic (Nov 18, 2016)

I think the Spitfire strings sound great, just great. I would absolutely buy them if I did not already have, and was not totally happy with and my clients were not totally happy with, 5 others.

So my advice is as always, buy if you feel what you have is lacking something important the purchase would bring to the table.


----------



## markleake (Nov 18, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> I think the Spitfire strings sound great, just great. I would absolutely buy them if I did not already have, and was not totally happy with and my clients were not totally happy with, 5 others.
> 
> So my advice is as always, buy if you feel what you have is lacking something important the purchase would bring to the table.


Thankyou Jay. A very reasoned response that has me immediately questioning my needs for the library. You are a wise man. 

I will sleep on it a bit and think through what my answer to this is.


----------



## khollister (Nov 18, 2016)

Listening to the professional demo compositions of any of the major string libraries will confirm that it is possible to create very believable mockups with HS, CSS, SSS, BST, Adagio, LASS, etc. It is also probably true that you can always find a particular style/phrase that will be in the sweet spot of one lib and another will be particularly weak on. The workflow of various libs is also quite different as is the out of the box audio style.

That said (along with I'm not nearly as experienced or talented as some on here), I have HS Diamond and LASS full and purchased SCS and SSS anyway. Partly is was to integrate easier with Albion IV/V and Mural Evoslutions (all of which I have recently become enchanted with for my style of music), but I am also in love with the sonics and mic variations of the Spitfire Lyndhurst stuff. SSS is both lush and fairly romantic but also reasonable detailed and delicate. HS is certainly lush, but a bit more opaque, and I find the articulations a bit fussy at times. LASS is still the king in terms of detail and ultimate realism due to the divisi, but it is pretty fussy as far as workflow and sonics go - it requires (to my ear) a fair amount of processing to get a sound that I like.

The Spitfire strings biggest advantage IMHO is how easy they are to get to sound beautiful (talking sonics here) and their sonic integration with other Spitfire libraries recorded in Lyndhurst. The GUI is fairly straightforward now and the articulations pretty complete. 

This is a very personal opinion but for me, LASS is too much work, HS and CSS are a bit too "Hollywood" and opaque sounding, Berlin Strings are great except for the price and I'm not a big fan of the tone and that leaves Spitfire. Considering the effects and unusual articulations available in Albion IV, V and Mural Evo (eventually SSS Exp 2), there isn't much you can't do from a compositional standpoint.


----------



## Christof (Nov 18, 2016)

I am downloading it right now and will do a demo of this piece for comparison tomorrow:


----------



## Polarity (Nov 18, 2016)

I'm in the same situation about SSS...
I was having a different project during Black Friday/Christmas sales for updating my strings and fill their gaps and missings...
My intention was to get Soaring Strings, go on using LASS Lite for shorts and other longs (I equalized recently them to sound more like Cinematic Studio Strings tone), layering them with articulations from Albion One and Metropolis Ark1... still keeping a window open for CSS for an eventually good BF sale or for a future purchase also.
It's rare nowadays that I use strings from EW QLSO (for layering mostly) and CineStrings, that I regret as purchase, even if with intro price offer three years ago, also for having loved instantly the tone of Mural vol.1 when it came out not much later. 

So I was going to ignore SSS, but after watching the walkthrough that love fro the tone of its articulations came back and now I'm very tempted to change my mind and also trash almost all my other strings (Albion One included) already owned.
I like very much all those alternative articulations: flautando, Rachmanicoc, Sul G Legato (wonderful tone), the alternative length shorts...

Well, it seems that the intro price offer is till 30th of November; I found on Best Service shop that date.

I wonder now (and will try to understand it) if SSS could make all that I was looking for getting Soaring Strings... that is an intense emotional/war sound and legato e/o runs very fast playing...
for this latest I'm thinking to the new Performance Legato patch I saw in the walktrough.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Nov 18, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> I think the Spitfire strings sound great, just great. I would absolutely buy them if I did not already have, and was not totally happy with and my clients were not totally happy with, 5 others.
> 
> So my advice is as always, buy if you feel what you have is lacking something important the purchase would bring to the table.



This. I have plenty for strings. All I need is a good solo violin.


----------



## stonzthro (Nov 18, 2016)

I too have a bunch of other string libraries, but I've grown tired of having to match them all up and deal with weird programming issues; and all my Spitfire stuff works really well together... mulling this one over carefully.


----------



## Thorsten Meyer (Nov 18, 2016)

I have both Spitfire Chamber String (former Sable) and Spitfire Symphonic Strings (former Mural). Beside the Spirfire Audio Strings I have a few more string libraries installed (LASS, SS, CSS, 8Dio String libraries, Albions, etc). 
Both Spitfire Libraries do sound great, when it comes to the size Spitfire Chamber String can be ramped up (SA has a video on Youtube about it). So that could mean you are able to manage the costs by using Spitfire Chamber String only.

A string library like HS Gold or another one at a lower price point will sit in a mix and the consumer (average listener) will not notice it. With that in mind the leading sonic tone of the Spitfire Chamber String and Spitfire Symphonic Strings will outshine many other VI's, but may not be noticed. 

If I would have (or could) to reduce my to many string libraries for sure all spitfire libraries would stay.


----------



## Scamper (Nov 18, 2016)

Is anybody up to create a Hedwig mockup as it was done here? 
-> http://vi-control.net/community/thr...ire-chamber-strings.54483/page-4#post-3991305

I'd be curious how the faster legatos can keep up with it compared to the Mural 1 legatos or other libraries.


----------



## Polarity (Nov 18, 2016)

markleake said:


> Hi all, I'm starting the obligatory forum topic here, because I need to pretend to myself that I'll use some objective method of reviewing people's feedback here to stop me from the inevitable path of purchasing Spitfire Audio's newly released Symphonic Strings.
> 
> I will undoubtedly succumb and buy it. But I am still interested in people's thoughts on the product, now that it is released.


What strings do you have at the moment, if you don't mind to share the info?
Just to know what you would like to substitute with SSS and if they are some of the same I have.


----------



## Scamper (Nov 18, 2016)

Scamper said:


> Is anybody up to create a Hedwig mockup as it was done here?
> -> http://vi-control.net/community/thr...ire-chamber-strings.54483/page-4#post-3991305
> 
> I'd be curious how the faster legatos can keep up with it compared to the Mural 1 legatos or other libraries.



To help with that, I created the part with Sable/Spitfire Chamber Strings and used the "Legato Performance" patches.




Here's the MIDI file:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8vxgl9l9wazdl28/HedwigsStringRun.mid?dl=0
Tempo is 160bpm.


----------



## coprhead6 (Nov 18, 2016)

Scamper said:


> To help with that, I created the part with Sable/Spitfire Chamber Strings and used the "Legato Performance" patches.



Spitfire needs a "humanize" slider to account for the fact that 1/2 of the string section can't play all those notes...


----------



## ctsai89 (Nov 18, 2016)

OK SO I FINALLY GOT MY HANDS ON TO PLAY AROUND WITH PERFORMANCE LEGATO PATCHES OF SSS

Here are my thoughts (so far):

This is again, ALMOST perfect patches and closest to perfection yet. It WOULD'VE been perfect if the staccato overlays at lower velocity in the viola performance legato patches were more well blended to the longs that follows the overlay... It seems too loud or the attack (ADSR) of the sustain was too high causing the sustain to trigger too late. Anyhow, I'm 95% satisfied as of now until I find bugs/other flaws.


----------



## JohnG (Nov 18, 2016)

markleake said:


> I will undoubtedly succumb and buy it.




It's candor like this that we need in politics.

Spitfire Strings, in its Mural incarnation, is great. I like having several string libraries up all the time, especially for short strings, which seem to have a life of their own, but Mural is absolutely awesome.


----------



## rap_ferr (Nov 18, 2016)

How would you guys buy it and manage all the great opportunities of the Black Friday?

I' stuck!


----------



## khollister (Nov 18, 2016)

rap_ferr said:


> How would you guys buy it and manage all the great opportunities of the Black Friday?
> 
> I' stuck!



Don't buy stuff just because its a good deal or new - buy what you really love or need.


----------



## markleake (Nov 18, 2016)

Polarity said:


> What strings do you have at the moment, if you don't mind to share the info?
> Just to know what you would like to substitute with SSS and if they are some of the same I have.


This relates back to Jay's post at the top of the thread about what is the gap in my current libraries. I think it is a very good question. My string libs include CS2, CSS, HWS Gold, CSC and the Albions.

I don't use HWS much anymore because I find it harder to use. The Albions are great but obviously don't have full individual parts. CSC is also great and I am starting to use it more - it is full sounding chamber size, and you can get it to sound bigger in size. CS2 and CSS are both excellent, and serve different purposes for me - I find I use CS2 the most out of them for the big symphonic sound. I am very happy with using CS2 as my base for larger sounding tracks and pulling in CSC & CSS as needed. With CSS the vibrato can be very strong sometimes, and while I really like the tone, I find I actually prefer CS2's tone a bit better because it is *less* detailed.... its hard to describe... CSS is more "Hollywood" style to me, and I actually prefer the Spitfire/Air Lyndhurst sound.

What attracts me to SSS is that it is recorded in the same hall as CSC / Albions / SSB, all of which I have and use a lot. Plus it has a lot more articulations that CS2. So I see it as being a very easy (desirable even) match for the libraries I already have, and a good way to get more variety in articulations than I have with CS2. I also have been very intentionally building up my Spitfire libraries, as I find them very easy to use compared to some other products, the sound and quality is always excellent, they support their libraries, and their libraries work very well together. I get sick of trying to get everything to match up all the time, and Spitfire solves that problem for me.

Plus... the sound is just awesome!!!

Listing to Paul's walkthrough, when he starts playing and turns up the tree mics (at the 1:44 mark), who here can't say they don't just melt a little bit on the inside?? 

The sound is so warm and full, and it all sounds very real. And that legato Sul G articulation... wow!


----------



## markleake (Nov 18, 2016)

stonzthro said:


> I too have a bunch of other string libraries, but I've grown tired of having to match them all up and deal with weird programming issues; and all my Spitfire stuff works really well together... mulling this one over carefully.


Yep... this describes almost exactly where I am at!!


----------



## markleake (Nov 18, 2016)

rap_ferr said:


> How would you guys buy it and manage all the great opportunities of the Black Friday?
> 
> I' stuck!


Prioritise what you want and just focus on your immediate "To Do" list. Don't get distracted by the marketing. Ask yourself, am I really going to use this library? Would I start using this library tomorrow?


----------



## markleake (Nov 18, 2016)

Christof said:


> I am downloading it right now and will do a demo of this piece for comparison tomorrow:



I'd very much like to hear a SSS version of this, thanks Christof. I very much appreciate these kind of comparisons between libraries.


----------



## meradium (Nov 19, 2016)

Christof said:


> I am downloading it right now and will do a demo of this piece for comparison tomorrow:




Looking forward to this one.


----------



## Polarity (Nov 19, 2016)

markleake said:


> This relates back to Jay's post at the top of the thread about what is the gap in my current libraries. I think it is a very good question. My string libs include CS2, CSS, HWS Gold, CSC and the Albions.
> 
> I don't use HWS much anymore because I find it harder to use. The Albions are great but obviously don't have full individual parts. CSC is also great and I am starting to use it more - it is full sounding chamber size, and you can get it to sound bigger in size. CS2 and CSS are both excellent, and serve different purposes for me - I find I use CS2 the most out of them for the big symphonic sound. I am very happy with using CS2 as my base for larger sounding tracks and pulling in CSC & CSS as needed. With CSS the vibrato can be very strong sometimes, and while I really like the tone, I find I actually prefer CS2's tone a bit better because it is *less* detailed.... its hard to describe... CSS is more "Hollywood" style to me, and I actually prefer the Spitfire/Air Lyndhurst sound.
> 
> ...



Thank you for the detailed reply in the meanwhile, it brought light on your need.
I'll be back about it for more later.


----------



## Coldsound (Nov 19, 2016)

Scamper said:


> To help with that, I created the part with Sable/Spitfire Chamber Strings and used the "Legato Performance" patches.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Hi, while waiting for SSS to download, I took your MIDI file and and rendered it in my template with Mural


----------



## humco (Nov 20, 2016)

I've heard some really incredible stuff come out of the old evo grid on the old mural and sable walk through videos, and I hate that it's not included in any of these new collection libraries from spitfire. Can anyone comment on this, having owned both (say the old sable and SCS). I mean, can you get similar results from these new collections, because the evo grid was totally unique and always was in the back of my head, but now that I have some money to invest, they no longer exist! Any opinions on the matter are welcome!

Ehh, and one more rookie question... I could really use some help with the abbreviations used for all of these libraries. I know at least half of em, LASS or CSS etc, but would love someone to give me 3 mins of their life to just post out a list of these VI library abbreviations you guys so commonly use so I can google and investigate further.


----------



## markleake (Nov 20, 2016)

SCS = Spitfire Chamber Strings (repacked BML Sable)
SSS = Spitfire Symphonic Strings (repacked BML Mural)
SSB = Spitfire Symphonic Brass (repacked BML brass libraries)
CS / CS2 = Cinematic Strings 2; CS could also mean Cinestrings, but usually is Cinematic Strings
CSS = Cinematic Studio Strings
HWS = Hollywood Strings
HWB = Hollywood Brass
BS = Berlin Strings
LASS = LA Scoring Strings

I'm sure I missed one of the usual suspects.


----------



## holywilly (Nov 20, 2016)

I'm also deciding whether to buy SSS or not, since I have VSL appassionata full library, it is also a large string ensemble size similar to SSS. One reason to consider SSS is there's a sample for violins 2, VSL App string so only have violins group sampled. 

I have the spitfire chamber string, really love the playability and the sound from Air studio; and have high expectations toward SSS. 

Anyone here have both VSL APP strings & SSS, I really love to hear from the actual user. Thanks.


----------



## dhlkid (Nov 20, 2016)

holywilly said:


> I'm also deciding whether to buy SSS or not, since I have VSL appassionata full library, it is also a large string ensemble size similar to SSS. One reason to consider SSS is there's a sample for violins 2, VSL App string so only have violins group sampled.
> 
> I have the spitfire chamber string, really love the playability and the sound from Air studio; and have high expectations toward SSS.
> 
> Anyone here have both VSL APP strings & SSS, I really love to hear from the actual user. Thanks.


SSS is better


----------



## Coldsound (Nov 20, 2016)

holywilly said:


> I'm also deciding whether to buy SSS or not, since I have VSL appassionata full library, it is also a large string ensemble size similar to SSS. One reason to consider SSS is there's a sample for violins 2, VSL App string so only have violins group sampled.
> 
> I have the spitfire chamber string, really love the playability and the sound from Air studio; and have high expectations toward SSS.
> 
> Anyone here have both VSL APP strings & SSS, I really love to hear from the actual user. Thanks.


I also have both. and I used vsl app string for a long time, but you spend a lot of time and computer power to make it sound good. vsl are more cold (and dry obviously) to my ear. Sometimes it can be good depending on what you want to achieve. But with SCS or SSS the sound is already warm and you have one of the few best sounding reverb in the world, which no plugin will give you right now. and you have far more articulation too. So you spend less time tweaking the sound (and less cpu power) because it's already there. I do have vsl dimension string, that I still use when I want something very dry (and scalable). But other than that, SSS/(Mural) is my go to library when I need a more "classical" film sound


----------



## thesteelydane (Nov 20, 2016)

humco said:


> I've heard some really incredible stuff come out of the old evo grid on the old mural and sable walk through videos, and I hate that it's not included in any of these new collection libraries from spitfire. Can anyone comment on this, having owned both (say the old sable and SCS). I mean, can you get similar results from these new collections, because the evo grid was totally unique and always was in the back of my head, but now that I have some money to invest, they no longer exist! Any opinions on the matter are welcome!



Totally different libraries mate, recorded in different studios. There has never been an evogrid for sable/SCS. For Mural/SSS there is the Symphonic Evolutions, which will be released as an expansion pack. 

All the EVO grid libraries are as available as ever, with the exception of symphonic evolutions which you will only be able to buy if you buy SSS. Same as it always was...


----------



## Sebastianmu (Nov 20, 2016)

Scamper said:


> Is anybody up to create a Hedwig mockup as it was done here?
> -> http://vi-control.net/community/thr...ire-chamber-strings.54483/page-4#post-3991305
> 
> I'd be curious how the faster legatos can keep up with it compared to the Mural 1 legatos or other libraries.


I did this, using the MIDI-File Scamper provided (I changed the CC1 a little).
First version is tree mics only, second a slightly dryer mix, third one a wet mix using also the ambient mics.
Here we go:



(High quality version http://www.sebastianlande.com/SSS_HEDWIG_4824.WAV (here))

EDIT: Just realized that it's way to slow, sorry about that.


----------



## Scamper (Nov 20, 2016)

Sebastianmu said:


> I did this, using the MIDI-File provided (I changed the CC1 a little).



Thanks, I probably forgot to add that the tempo is 160.


----------



## Christof (Nov 21, 2016)

markleake said:


> I'd very much like to hear a SSS version of this, thanks Christof. I very much appreciate these kind of comparisons between libraries.


Here you go:


----------



## WhiteNoiz (Nov 21, 2016)

Christof said:


> Here you go:



I like the CSS one better... (Mostly the tone, as some artics are still kinda off) This one has a few inconsistencies. Just one question: I'm wondering... Did you choose to have those little runs played by shorts or there isn't a "proper" articulation in your opinion? (Since you also play the cello)

For example, this has a lot of alterations between shorter and blurrier/more tied. I guess they are both valid. There's shorter, blurrier/more legato and varying lengths in the shorts themselves... Have you tried messing with the tightness control? I'm curious.
https://instaud.io/private/49c6ea8954f6a14e264b1077acc0b108cb0a19e4


----------



## markleake (Nov 21, 2016)

Thanks @Christof. Excellent stuff!



WhiteNoiz said:


> I like the CSS one better... (Mostly the tone, as some artics are still kinda off) This one has a few inconsistencies.


Really? I actually like both of them. They have a very different tone, which is not surprising I guess.

CSS sounds a bit more polished/softer in tone, and less overall dynamic. SSS sounds less polished (with the advantage that it is closer to like real players would sound when playing this, IMO, and fits with Spitfire's philosophy on recording I guess) and sounds like the players are hitting the strings harder. I'm not a string player though, so maybe there's someone here who plays strings who can give their input?

What mics were used Christof?


----------



## Christof (Nov 21, 2016)

WhiteNoiz said:


> Did you choose to have those little runs played by shorts or there isn't a "proper" articulation in your opinion? (Since you also play the cello)


The spiccato patches worked best for this piece.


markleake said:


> What mics were used Christof?


I loaded C and T positions, both at full level.

CSS is more brilliant and crispy, SSS has more warmth and AIR 
I had to edit a lot for the SSS version, especially dynamics.
The part at 0:43 didn't sound convincing so I had to change the patches, it is more blurry now which is fine as well.
For me it was very interesting to learn how the music, mood and the character changes by just using a different library.
I think both are very different but equal.


----------



## markleake (Nov 21, 2016)

Christof said:


> I loaded C and T positions, both at full level.


OK. I guess that explains why the strings sound closer and more bold with SSS, due to the close mic.

Yes, I like the sound of both of them.


----------



## WhiteNoiz (Nov 21, 2016)

Hm, yeah, they both sound quite good. I just prefer CSS for this particular piece maybe. I don't really disagree with what was said about SSS. They're a bit looser overall, which is not necessarily bad (and has some timing issues because of that for example, but I do like the grittier timbres as it feels more live [CSS feels more limited dynamically and freedom-of-performance-wise; can't have everything, I guess) They definitely have a lot of character. CSS sound a bit more nimble and playful.



Christof said:


> The spiccato patches worked best for this piece.



So, it was a conscious choice. Some times it's just difficult to know what would work best/sound more realistic. I guess there's a definite threshold of amount of notes/speed where it starts to sound blurry, but I guess it's also an artistic/stylistic/performance preference in some situations. Nice piece, btw. (I'd probably bring the C mic down a bit)


----------



## khollister (Nov 21, 2016)

While the CSS version is more precise, I much prefer the feel and tone of the SSS version myself. It has more of a sense of humans actually playing the notes than CSS IMHO. I also much prefer the acoustics and tone of the Spitfire strings, particularly the violins. There is a sheen that is missing from CSS. I ultimately decided to got for SCS & SSS recently instead of CSS (in spite of the substantial price difference) due to tone and articulations (the spic/stac thing aside) as well as the integration with Albion IV/V (which I already owned). CSS is a great library (especially considering the cost), but I just am not crazy about the rather dark and "lifeless" tone - just my opinion. I was also rather dubious about the delay issue with respect to the shorter articulations.

It's interesting that my first reaction after downloading SSS and just playing some chords was how "real" they sounded (less "synthy") compared to other libs I have. 

Great writing and mockups, Christof (as usual).


----------



## Christof (Nov 21, 2016)

Here is a new version with SSS but with time machine patches, much clearer now:


----------



## Polarity (Nov 21, 2016)

uh, well actually I would get SSS for the long articulations (espaecially the Performance Legato and all those extra missing in CSS) but I would get CSS for the short ones perhaps, for this kind of tracks.
Really I won't buy both for now... thinking of going on using LASS Lite when I need its Shorts grittiness and buying SSS and eventually Soaring Strings too, instead of CSS.
That delay thing of the legatos keeps me going to reach the more immediate and playable patches of SSS and SS.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Nov 21, 2016)

khollister said:


> ..but I just am not crazy about the rather dark and "lifeless" tone - just my opinion. I was also rather dubious about the delay issue with respect to the shorter articulations..



Sorry, I know it is just your opinion, but you are so wrong at this point when you really think that..


----------



## khollister (Nov 21, 2016)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Sorry, I know it is just your opinion, but you are so wrong at this point when you really think that..



Perhaps you don't totally understand the concept of an _opinion? _


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Nov 21, 2016)

khollister said:


> Perhaps you don't totally understand the concept of an _opinion? _



Sure no problem, perhaps it would be more of a valid claim when you would try to explain why think and feel about CSS in that way? Just labeling a lifeless tone on CSS makes me wonder about your general approach how strings should sound like? Sure it is just an opinion, still I would like to know how you come to such a conclusion because CSS has its flaws but definitely not lacking in a lifeless tone here.


----------



## khollister (Nov 21, 2016)

Opinions aren't right or wrong, valid or invalid - that's the point. You can certainly say you disagree or hold a different opinion, but telling me I'm "wrong" is pretty condescending.

To me, CSS sounds very pleasing (I would use terms like _warm, rich, smooth_) but doesn't quite achieve the realism of something like the Spitfire strings (or a properly treated LASS mockup). Listening to every CSS demo/mockup I've run across, I just don't get that "not sure I would realize it's sampled if I didn't already know" moment. It's a little like much of the VSL stuff for me - in spite of the amazing mockups on the VSL site, the strings never completely fool me into thinking the track could be live players like some other libs do. CSS demos (to a much lesser degree) strike me similarly. There is nothing I can objectively point out, but I personally don't get the same sense of reality as with some other string libraries.

Part of it may be the players and the British classical recording ethos. As a classical musician (no longer performing) and audiophile, I have always preferred the orchestral tone of the LSO/LPO over the CSO, VPO, BPO etc. The combination of the brit players, venue and engineering approach may just dovetail better into my sonic memory of 50 years of listening to Decca & EMI recordings of the LSO, LPO, RPO etc.

I'm using "lifeless" to exclusively reflect my sense of "is it live or is it Memorex" (for those old enough to remember that ad back in the cassette tape days). Maybe things are just too perfect - something I have always suspected in my reaction to VSL as well.


----------



## Erik (Nov 21, 2016)

Very well done Christof!

I just uploaded tonight a few tracks on my blog, dedicated to a small fragment from http://eotte.blogspot.nl/2016/11/bruch-serenade-for-strings.html (Serenade for strings by Bruch). The Spitfire Chamber Strings (tripled) were already my favorite. I'll certainly consider to make a second version now with the time machine patches like you did with the Robber SSS TM. Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Marma (Dec 18, 2016)

Hi guys!
I've bought the Spitfire Symphonic Strings a few weeks ago. I'm generally very happy about it, the sound quality is great. Just one thing that bothers me: no control over the envelope and especially the sustain of the note (adjusted to midi note length) and release. I've made a short video to show the issues I'm having with creating a "natural" sounding phrasing in staccato passages, with some notes being longer than others. Any suggestions/tips welcome!


----------



## Saxer (Dec 18, 2016)

Marma said:


> Hi guys!
> I've bought the Spitfire Symphonic Strings a few weeks ago. I'm generally very happy about it, the sound quality is great. Just one thing that bothers me: no control over the envelope and especially the sustain of the note (adjusted to midi note length) and release. I've made a short video to show the issues I'm having with creating a "natural" sounding phrasing in staccato passages, with some notes being longer than others. Any suggestions/tips welcome!




The performance legatos also react differently when playing at different velocity. Hitting the keys harder gives faster attack.
But maybe you should try the time machine patches for that kind of articulation changes. It has a limit in note length change but for your shown example it should work well.


----------



## Scamper (Dec 18, 2016)

Marma said:


> I've bought the Spitfire Symphonic Strings a few weeks ago. I'm generally very happy about it, the sound quality is great. Just one thing that bothers me: no control over the envelope and especially the sustain of the note (adjusted to midi note length) and release. I've made a short video to show the issues I'm having with creating a "natural" sounding phrasing in staccato passages, with some notes being longer than others. Any suggestions/tips welcome!


For those spiccato passages, I would also recommend time machine patches or the new performance legatos.

Also, the tightness doesn't change note length (that's what time machine does), but the starting point in the sample to give a more responsive playability. 
Check that: http://www.syntheticorchestra.com/blog/?7


----------



## Marma (Dec 18, 2016)

Aaaah, thanks a lot guys! I'll try that and post the result!


----------



## khollister (Dec 18, 2016)

Uh, turn the Release slider down? Right above Tightness. Looks like you left it at the default position from what I can see.

Also play the line more staccato (shorter note durations) if the releases are too gradual for the line. Looking at the piano roll in your video, it appears the notes in the fastest part near the end of the phrase (which is what's giving you the most trouble) are almost or actually overlapping in a couple cases. With some of the HWS patches that are quite dry with almost no default release, you can get away with this. I find I often go turn UP the releases in HWS or HWB, so we clearly have different playing styles

This has been discussed on here several times before, but no 2 libraries are going to react the same to the exact same MIDI file - you need to adapt your playing to the particular library and the articulation selected.

Just noodling around with some similar tempo and articulations, I don't have the problem agility you seem to be. But I'm playing aline live and not trying to match an articulation to a recorded MIDI performance.

Interestingly enough, I have always struggled a bit playing HWS whereas SSS/Mural "feels" more natural. I often feel folks try to "program" their way to victory when they just ought to try playing the line differently.


----------



## Drago (Dec 18, 2016)

Scamper said:


> Check that: http://www.syntheticorchestra.com/blog/?7



Thanks a lot, I was stuck all day with this slow attack, putting my velocity to 127 saved me ^^


----------



## The Darris (Dec 18, 2016)

Marma said:


> Hi guys!
> I've bought the Spitfire Symphonic Strings a few weeks ago. I'm generally very happy about it, the sound quality is great. Just one thing that bothers me: no control over the envelope and especially the sustain of the note (adjusted to midi note length) and release. I've made a short video to show the issues I'm having with creating a "natural" sounding phrasing in staccato passages, with some notes being longer than others. Any suggestions/tips welcome!



You could use the TM Pro patches and adjust the speed of the sample real time.


----------



## Marma (Dec 18, 2016)

Hi guys!
Thanks for all your feedback!
I tried the "time machine" feature with automation, and it sounds a lot closer to what I wanted to achieve! Thanks a lot! I'm not that good at playing stuff "live" so unfortunately, I have to compose with my mouse...


----------



## markleake (Dec 18, 2016)

Marma said:


> Hi guys!
> Thanks for all your feedback!
> I tried the "time machine" feature with automation, and it sounds a lot closer to what I wanted to achieve! Thanks a lot! I'm not that good at playing stuff "live" so unfortunately, I have to compose with my mouse...



Time to learn? 

Actually this kind of line really is showing that it's been programmed in -- to my ears it is lacking a natural rhythm to it, it sounds very awkward. No offense to you, but its a good case for why you should learn to play in your melodies. I know it takes time and effort to learn, but it's really not hard to get a one line phrase played in via keyboard.

Edit: The upside to playing things in: it actually takes less time, once you know how, to get a good result.


----------



## Marma (Dec 18, 2016)

Hi Markleake, 
Yes, you're right of course... I do own a midi keyboard so I guess I'll be practicing..
The only problem, is that if the instrument I'm playing does not have an envelope that reacts to the length of my keystrokes, then the result still sounds bad..
If I want to do a phrasing in a staccato passage where some notes are "tied" to the next one, then I need the "sustain" and "release" to react to my keystroke lengths. And in Spitfire Symphonic Strings, there is only the Legato performance patch and the "timed short" option in the 0.5sec shorts that enables this.. 
With the time machine, I have to "programme" them in... I agree that the Spitfire library, overall, sounds more realistic, but the I'm really missing the envelope feature from the EWQL Hollywood Strings library...


----------



## Scamper (Dec 18, 2016)

Marma said:


> And in Spitfire Symphonic Strings, there is only the Legato performance patch and the "timed short" option in the 0.5sec shorts that enables this..
> With the time machine, I have to "programme" them in... I agree that the Spitfire library, overall, sounds more realistic, but the I'm really missing the envelope feature from the EWQL Hollywood Strings library...


Please note the difference between "legato performance patches" and the newer "performance legato patches". The latter are quite versatile now.


----------



## Marma (Dec 18, 2016)

Thanks Scamper!
In the very first example I posted, I used the new "performance legato patches". 
It seems that the "phrasing" sounds less natural when you diminish the vibrato. 
I didn't load or try the "legacy" legato patches. I also tried the "legato sul G", but the range is limited of course..


----------



## Gabriel Oliveira (Dec 18, 2016)

Marma said:


> I'm not that good at playing stuff "live" so unfortunately, I have to compose with my mouse...



No problem in that. 

You can edit a painted midi to get the same nuances of a played midi.

Blake Robinson (Synthetic Orchestra) do like this.


----------



## Marma (Dec 18, 2016)

Hi Gabriel,
Well, so far, I managed just with the mouse... 
As an example of a work entirely composed with the mouse, here is an orchestral piece I've composed with the EWQL Hollywood series...


----------



## tack (Dec 18, 2016)

Marma said:


> As an example of a work entirely composed with the mouse


This does have the problem of sounding too quantized and rigid in tempo, though. That's maybe fine for something like EDM, but at least for me it's really jarring in an orchestral piece.

Building your mockups by drawing notes doesn't preclude humanization -- I seem to recall @Carles saying he does his mockups this way and they sound https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OsGjbl0vbY (great) -- but performing in your lines does make this happen more naturally.

A common approach is to perform in a section (perhaps as a piano reduction), build a tempo map around your natural performance, and then play in the individual sections. Even if you drew in the notes with the mouse using your performance as a guideline you'd be much further ahead IMO. Especially when you're dealing with samples, they need every advantage we can give them to avoid sounding fake.


----------



## markleake (Dec 18, 2016)

Marma said:


> Hi Gabriel,
> Well, so far, I managed just with the mouse...
> As an example of a work entirely composed with the mouse, here is an orchestral piece I've composed with the EWQL Hollywood series...



I agree with @tack. I don't pretend to be great at composing (I'm very far from it), but one of the biggest things I've learnt so far is that this kind of quantised orchestration really doesn't succeed. Your example contains repeated phrases that sound exactly the same each time, and are so strongly quantised that they loose any emotion. I find it jarring to my ears because real people don't play like this.

I'm guilty of the same. Go have a listen to some of my early stuff on SoundCloud. It really doesn't sound that great, due to my lack of experience at the time, and having the same quantisation issues I see with your example.


----------



## Marma (Dec 19, 2016)

Very impressive work by Carles Piles! I listened to his mock up of Holst's Mars, amazing!
Markleake, very nice orchestral work too.
I am just wondering, do you guys play absolutely everything live?
For instance, I don't think I'd ever manage a very fast spiccato passage on my midi keyboard.
Perhaps some melodic/lyrical passages, yes, of course... But not a prestissimo spiccato accompaniement! 
It's true that so far, I've concentrated on the "composition" itself (variations, harmony, themes...) then making it fully realistic.. I guess it's all about priorities.. But I should get started!


----------



## markleake (Dec 19, 2016)

Marma said:


> Very impressive work by Carles Piles! I listened to his mock up of Holst's Mars, amazing!
> Markleake, very nice orchestral work too.
> I am just wondering, do you guys play absolutely everything live?
> For instance, I don't think I'd ever manage a very fast spiccato passage on my midi keyboard.
> ...



Thanks for listening and liking, but I am still very much learning. 

No, I don't play in everything, but it is now the great majority of each track I write. Some people play in all their very fast sections by slowing the tempo down, playing it in, then speeding it back up... I don't bother with that... when it is fast ostinatos I just set Cubase to feed it in a note at a time and have it quantise it. But I will still fiddle a bit with the timings to add some human element to it.

It's a common sense decision in terms of what you play in live... whatever is fastest in terms of getting it recorded, but still sounding good and natural. Often I do two passes per instrument... one for playing the notes, one for the mod wheel / expression.

Sometimes if its an instrument setting the rhythm where it needs to be tightly timed, such as a drum, then I may want it to be quantised. I still would play it in, but then I hard quantise it.

I'm a hobby-ist, so not really the best person to answer if you are looking for what the pros do.


----------



## Arbee (Dec 19, 2016)

Erik said:


> Very well done Christof!
> 
> I just uploaded tonight a few tracks on my blog, dedicated to a small fragment from http://eotte.blogspot.nl/2016/11/bruch-serenade-for-strings.html (Serenade for strings by Bruch). The Spitfire Chamber Strings (tripled) were already my favorite. I'll certainly consider to make a second version now with the time machine patches like you did with the Robber SSS TM. Thanks for sharing!


I know I'm in the vast minority when it comes to Spitfire, but hey that's why there is more than one string library in the world. I totally love the sound of Spitfire strings one note at a time but the transition between notes, even listening through the blurring effect of that big room sound on what would/should be legato phrases if played live, distracts me every time from enjoying the otherwise great sonic experience.


----------



## Marma (Dec 19, 2016)

@markleake Thanks, I'll try all of that in my next pieces! 
In the end, each library requires some learning and experimentation... Since I've mostly worked with EWQL Hollywood Strings, I'll need to get used to the sounds and overall functioning of the SSS series! Looking forward to exchanging with you guys further!


----------



## tack (Dec 19, 2016)

Marma said:


> I am just wondering, do you guys play absolutely everything live?


I often don't bother playing in simple one or two note phrases, although I'll still overdub CCs like mod and expression if applicable. Otherwise I do try to play it in.

I still tweak MIDI events after. I've just found I need to do less tweaking to humanize the performance later. But you can certainly do that the manual way (adjusting note offsets and durations, velocity variations, etc.).



Marma said:


> For instance, I don't think I'd ever manage a very fast spiccato passage on my midi keyboard.


Sure, or runs. Try slowing down the tempo for those.


----------



## markleake (Dec 19, 2016)

tack said:


> Sure, or runs. Try slowing down the tempo for those.


For runs, you can do what Oliver does in his latest Spitfire video where he is walking us through how he put the SSW promo together... he just does a gliss on the keyboard and leaves it at that. Not how I do it, but if it works...


----------



## Marma (Dec 20, 2016)

Hahaha, I'll try that!


----------



## khollister (Dec 20, 2016)

markleake said:


> For runs, you can do what Oliver does in his latest Spitfire video where he is walking us through how he put the SSW promo together... he just does a gliss on the keyboard and leaves it at that. Not how I do it, but if it works...



It works, but I find I do need to sometimes go back in and make sure the notes overlap to trigger the slurred transitions, depending on exactly how I do the glass on the keyboard. It also isn't particularly useful unless you are working in C maj or A min (no black keys).


----------



## markleake (Dec 20, 2016)

khollister said:


> It works, but I find I do need to sometimes go back in and make sure the notes overlap to trigger the slurred transitions, depending on exactly how I do the glass on the keyboard. It also isn't particularly useful unless you are working in C maj or A min (no black keys).


I think Oliver did say he goes and adjusts the notes so that it is in key. I don't do it this way, but I think I'll give it a try next time, as it sounds simpler than my normal approach.


----------



## robgb (Dec 20, 2016)

LOL. I initially read this as Spitfire Symphonic Strings ($$$).


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 20, 2016)

robgb said:


> LOL. I initially read this as Spitfire Symphonic Strings ($$$).



it pretty much is $$$. I just realized using only the tree mic position isn't as good as using at least the closed mic + another because the samples don't start on the tree and ambient mics as early as the closed mic positions do. 

And $$$ because in order to have at least 2 mic positions running in a full orchestral template, you'd better have a least 64 gigs of ram. 

They're releasing expansions where stereo mixes are pre-mixed with closed/tree/ambient all together in file sizes of just a single mic but you know what? that's $399 more for just the string library.

spitfire is all about $$$, you deserve it if you're rich and it will give you the best results if you're good enough to use it well. 

HA


----------



## khollister (Dec 20, 2016)

ctsai89 said:


> it pretty much is $$$. I just realized using only the tree mic position isn't as good as using at least the closed mic + another because the samples don't start on the tree and ambient mics as early as the closed mic positions do.
> 
> And $$$ because in order to have at least 2 mic positions running in a full orchestral template, you'd better have a least 64 gigs of ram.
> 
> ...



Priced out Berlin Strings or Brass lately? Spitfire is looking pretty good. Cinesamples strings aren't exactly cheap either. CSS or one of the periodic fire sales on HWS are the budget options.

I used to think of Spitfire as quite expensive when they had the BML libraries, but the repackaging into the Symphonic series is a lot more reasonable as long as you don't think you need the mic expansions.


----------



## robgb (Dec 20, 2016)

I got Albion One for about three hundred bucks. I consider that cheap for what you get and how amazing it sounds. That said, most of their other libraries are out of my price range.


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 20, 2016)

khollister said:


> Priced out Berlin Strings or Brass lately? Spitfire is looking pretty good. Cinesamples strings aren't exactly cheap either. CSS or one of the periodic fire sales on HWS are the budget options.
> 
> I used to think of Spitfire as quite expensive when they had the BML libraries, but the repackaging into the Symphonic series is a lot more reasonable as long as you don't think you need the mic expansions.



you don't seem to have read all of my post nor do you understand how the repackaging works. The repackging was designed to be made more affordable if the stereo mixes don't matter to you because those are released in the expansion. Why would any one want stereo mixes though? because then you wouldn't have to enable close, tree, ambient mics all at once even if you just wanted a touch of one of them along with a full mic on. That costs RAM, so stereo mixes are nice where you won't have to load up more than 1 mic. But they're released in the x-pac. Got it? that's around 700+400 so yes berlin is right there around the same price. You do get what you payed for.


----------



## markleake (Dec 20, 2016)

ctsai89 said:


> you don't seem to have read all of my post nor do you understand how the repackaging works. The repackging was designed to be made more affordable if the stereo mixes don't matter to you because those are released in the expansion. Why would any one want stereo mixes though? because then you wouldn't have to enable close, tree, ambient mics all at once even if you just wanted a touch of one of them along with a full mic on. That costs RAM, so stereo mixes are nice where you won't have to load up more than 1 mic. But they're released in the x-pac. Got it? that's around 700+400 so yes berlin is right there around the same price. You do get what you payed for.



But Berlin Strings doesn't even have a stereo mixed microphone offering, right? So you aren't comparing the same thing at all. You are comparing SSS to another library that doesn't have the feature you're talking about.

Lets break it down a bit using Berlin Strings (BS) as a comparison anyway...

Firstly, regarding cost: when I add the BS libraries up to be roughly comparable to SSS in terms of articulations, I get around US$1259. SSS is available for US$789.

That is US$470 difference, with BS being 60% more than the base SSS price. It's a huge difference.

You could argue that you get the additional AB microphones with BS, and an extra close mic for the Violins only. Is that worth US$470? Probably not to most users. The expansion pack for SSS isn't out yet, but if it's price is as indicated, it is still cheaper overall than BS by a small margin, and will include the mixed mics where BS doesn't.

Secondly: regarding what you could get SSS for. Spitfire have had sales for their Symphonic libraries already, and in the past have allowed you to combine SSS with their Symphonic libraries for up to 40% off, including on SSS. Berlin Strings haven't ever been on sale as far as I'm aware, except for when they were introduced. So Spitfire reward their existing customers well.

If you want to play it just by numbers, it looks like SSS wins pretty easily.


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 20, 2016)

markleake said:


> But Berlin Strings doesn't even have a stereo mixed microphone offering, right? So you aren't comparing the same thing at all. You are comparing SSS to another library that doesn't have the feature you're talking about.
> 
> Lets break it down a bit using Berlin Strings (BS) as a comparison anyway...
> 
> ...



well i think i'll be spending the extra 400 on the expansion for spitfire. That way i can save on RAM and use that for lots of other things in a template. Without the close mics it's hard to truly stay on beat. Spiccatos always felt like lagging behind on tree mic and no i do not like to use different mics or mix them differently on the same template. So yea i think i'll spend about as much as i would if i were to get Berlin. And yes i am going to compare: they're as good as each other, differently. Would only make sense to choose one over another if you already got another library and you would like to finish up the template all with the same hall response.

edit: by the way most of spitfire's brass don't have cuivre programmed into their regular longs and legatos. you would have to pull the cuivre patches up separately. The a6 patches do however. That can be a deal breaker for some people trying to make mockups at the same level of late romantic symphonies.


----------



## markleake (Dec 21, 2016)

ctsai89 said:


> well i think i'll be spending the extra 400 on the expansion for spitfire ...


Sure, we all do what we need to get the results we need. I was just breaking down some costs to contest the idea that...



ctsai89 said:


> spitfire is all about $$$, you deserve it if you're rich and it will give you the best results if you're good enough to use it well.



Spitfire need to make $ obviously, but I think SSS is good value for the money. It costs a bit, but you also get a lot for what you pay for and it compares very favourably to their competition.

Not sure what you are saying about SSB. If you mean having a long articulation that contains low dynamics all the way up to and including cuivre (using CC1), then yes, I'd agree. I think it'd be a good improvement. But the a6 patches don't do that, so I don't get your meaning, sorry.


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 21, 2016)

markleake said:


> Sure, we all do what we need to get the results we need. I was just breaking down some costs to contest the idea that...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



that's exactly what i meant and yes a6 patches in the performance legato patches do do it. 

Trumpets solo does it on the longs but its extremely inconsistent as some of the notes dont seem to have cuivre starting from the attack and usually take about 2 bars to reach its full dynamic level wihtout using CC.


----------



## robgb (Dec 21, 2016)

Here's the bottom line. They're BOTH expensive.


----------



## markleake (Dec 21, 2016)

My wallet will agree with that, yep!


----------



## markleake (Dec 21, 2016)

ctsai89 said:


> that's exactly what i meant and yes a6 patches in the performance legato patches do do it.
> 
> Trumpets solo does it on the longs but its extremely inconsistent as some of the notes dont seem to have cuivre starting from the attack and usually take about 2 bars to reach its full dynamic level wihtout using CC.


I hadn't noticed. With the longs it doesn't for Trombone and Horn. I'll have to go play with Trumpet, I didn't check it. We're a bit off topic tho.


----------



## khollister (Dec 21, 2016)

I own libraries from most of the major players (Spitfire, OT, Cinesamples, EWQL, Audiobro). They all do stupid s**t from time to time (at least from my limited viewpoint) but I recently made the decision to drop major coin during recent release specials, BF sale and favorable currency rate because I liked the sound, musical approach, completeness and availability of unique content all recorded in a fantastic venue. I also like I have SCS and SSS recorded in the same space that I can use together easily - this makes up for much of the pain in losing the divisi from LASS.

@ctsai89 ...

Is Spitfire perfect, cheap or without bugs? - no. No product is. Do they offer good value for what you get? - I believe so. If you don't agree, don't buy it.

And if you feel you can't play without the close mics and have limited RAM, then record with the close mics only and go back and bring in the tree or ambient ones and bounce to audio after the part is done and move on. You can argue about the cost of the expansions, but no other library that I know of gives you the huge flexibility of 6 mics plus several stereo mixes. To say nothing of the time machine shorts, new performance legatos and huge range of articulations in the strings, availability of Albion Uist and Tundra in the same venue/setup for even more esoteric articulations and performances.

Personally, I find it easier and more inspiring to make music with the Spitfire Symphonic & Albion stuff than the alternatives I've tried. Doesn't mean Spitfire is "the best", just that it fits my workflow, expectations and weird biases better than something else right now. You could be different - although I suspect you like it too, but just don't want to pay for it (or buy more RAM). Spitfire hires arguably the best venue, fantastic players and treats them fairly (and continues to get them back) by compensating them fairly. None of that comes free, especially in London.


----------



## lp59burst (Dec 21, 2016)

khollister said:


> I own libraries from most of the major players (Spitfire, OT, Cinesamples, EWQL, Audiobro). They all do stupid s**t from time to time (at least from my limited viewpoint) but I recently made the decision to drop major coin during recent release specials, BF sale and favorable currency rate because I liked the sound, musical approach, completeness and availability of unique content all recorded in a fantastic venue. I also like I have SCS and SSS recorded in the same space that I can use together easily - this makes up for much of the pain in losing the divisi from LASS.
> 
> @ctsai89 ...
> 
> ...


Well said, I do have my issues with how they do their pricing exchange rate calcs (which is their prerogative), but I have no issue with the actual price. In my opinion they make some of the best, fully featured, products on the market and along with OT, and a few others, they're a benchmark in their field. I own many of their offerings and would, without question, buy them again.


----------



## ctsai89 (Dec 21, 2016)

khollister said:


> I own libraries from most of the major players (Spitfire, OT, Cinesamples, EWQL, Audiobro). They all do stupid s**t from time to time (at least from my limited viewpoint) but I recently made the decision to drop major coin during recent release specials, BF sale and favorable currency rate because I liked the sound, musical approach, completeness and availability of unique content all recorded in a fantastic venue. I also like I have SCS and SSS recorded in the same space that I can use together easily - this makes up for much of the pain in losing the divisi from LASS.
> 
> @ctsai89 ...
> 
> ...



i do love spitfire. In fact i would say hail spitfire, viva la spitfire, etc. Its just funny to me that someone read SSS as $$$ lol and i had to kid about it a bit. But yes SSS is incredibly good value while expensive. No one can or should deny that it is expensive because it is but both orchestral tools/spitfire are the best way to go if you would like to get the best results out of your productions/mockups.


----------



## Vik (Dec 22, 2016)

I'd like to find out what it costs to update from Mural (1 & 2) to SSS, but couldn't find the link which lets me figure out the price. Does anyone here have that link?


----------



## khollister (Dec 22, 2016)

Log into your account on Spitfire's site, put SSS in your cart and it will automatically calculate the price based on what you already own


----------



## Vik (Dec 22, 2016)

Aha! Thanks for the help.


----------



## khollister (Dec 22, 2016)

Always happy to help someone else spend their money. Mine is all gone after the shopping spree at Spitfire 3 weeks ago - bastards!


----------



## timestudios (Sep 12, 2018)

Christof said:


> Here is a new version with SSS but with time machine patches, much clearer now:



Awesome!


----------

