# What's your favourite string library?



## John R Wilson (Jan 10, 2020)

Obviously a very subjective topic and confined to what you personally own and what you have tried. Furthermore, there probably is not any singular best (all have strengths and weaknesses) and some are better suited for different purposes and styles of music. However, what would you vote as the best overall string library providing a good choice of articulations, good playability, sound and usability?


----------



## BenG (Jan 10, 2020)

As someone who has tried a lot of strong libraries over the years, I think it comes down to two real options here. 

Cinematic Studio Strings with the edge in sound and Hollywood Strings with the edge in playability. It's really a toss up for me depending on the style, track, or even particular day.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Jan 10, 2020)

How about Dimension Strings?


----------



## John R Wilson (Jan 10, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> How about Dimension Strings?



Just added VSL.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Jan 10, 2020)

wish there was an included poll for which libraries people actually own before they vote 

I own half of these and unfortunately the question becomes "which library's strengths match what you want most out of library"

berlin is the most comprehensive, followed by SCS and SSS. 
Legatos are good in most of those in general, but some have a better toolset to emulate runs like OT, but CSS has best rebow legato. 
LASS is the only one of those with divisi, but has even less bread and butter articulations(however is also the lightest on resources)
CSS is some of the most consistent bread and butter but it's just bread and butter. 
Tone wise is subjective. I'm much more into the more filmic tone of berlin/Hollywood strings/lass - but SCS definitely sounds good but it's ultimately got audible saturation from the neve and the churchesque hall built into it. SSS sounds kind of washed out and dull to me, and CSS has weird buildup and out of all those(even lass) it's the one I find needs the most EQ. 

8dio strings is a very broad statement, they had many iterations - and different libraries in general. Some of their older stuff is apparently still extremely good(I was tempted by the like 19 different legatos they have, but they only have violins, no VI VII) But the tone on those is generally very good aswell, except century if I recall was recorded centered(which is a real PITA)

different strokes for different folks is a bit of an understatement, i'd have completely different suggestions depending on who asked me, and what their situation is.


----------



## markleake (Jan 10, 2020)

ProfoundSilence said:


> different strokes for different folks is a bit of an understatement, i'd have completely different suggestions depending on who asked me, and what their situation is.


^ This.

To the OP... I hate to be the old man waving people off his lawn, but really these kind of polls can be misleading. They make people think that certain libraries are better than they could be for their specific needs. They also don't inform people how to evaluate the libraries for their own use. Bottom line is, the poll will pretty much only tell you how many people bought those particular libraries.

"Which library is the best?" is the the wrong question. You touched on this already in your OP.

The best at what?
At what price point?
For what size sections do you mean?
With what kind of hall ambience?
Covering which articulations?
With what kind of tone? Classical, modern film, old-style film, underscore, epic, etc.?
Quick use or needing lots of tweaking?
etc.
*I can tell you now, CSS will win*. It always does in these polls.

Why? Because it is a good priced library with all the basics covered extremely well, and so we all bought it. Hence it always comes first if you only have one choice in a poll.

Do most of us _just_ use CSS? Nope. It's a good library, but hardly the end of the story.


----------



## El Buhdai (Jan 10, 2020)

Hollywood Strings has really grown on me. When you get past the bandwagoned hatred and look at it head on with its _actual_ benefits and drawbacks, the sound still holds up, but the performance is still admittedly subpar, as is the lack of intuitiveness and patch streamlining.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Jan 10, 2020)

markleake said:


> ^ This.
> 
> To the OP... I hate to be the old man waving people off his lawn, but really these kind of polls can be misleading. They make people think that certain libraries are better than they could be for their specific needs. They also don't inform people how to evaluate the libraries for their own use. Bottom line is, the poll will pretty much only tell you how many people bought those particular libraries.
> 
> ...



yeah the amount of people who own for instance CSS vs berlin strings is going to be something like 15:1 or something. CSS is extremely cheap, solid, and popular bargain or not. HWS + LASS + SCS + CS2 + adagio/ect ownership really depends on when you started buying sample libraries. nobody in 2020 would spend 999$ on LASS vs CSS. HWS can be rented for like 30$ a month. 

my top 3 in terms of desert island libraries would be:
berlin
scs
css

my top 3 desert island libraries I'm most likely to suggest to people(depending on how new they are) is the exact opposite:
css
scs
berlin


----------



## John R Wilson (Jan 11, 2020)

markleake said:


> ^ This.
> 
> To the OP... I hate to be the old man waving people off his lawn, but really these kind of polls can be misleading. They make people think that certain libraries are better than they could be for their specific needs. They also don't inform people how to evaluate the libraries for their own use. Bottom line is, the poll will pretty much only tell you how many people bought those particular libraries.
> 
> ...



I completely agree. I wouldn't want to mislead people into believing one string library is better than the other based on this poll. As you said their is very little validity in a poll such as this. I also agree that it will more closely reflect what people have used and own rather than the question at hand. It may have been much better if I had more carefully considered a more precise and focused question.


----------



## Mike Fox (Jan 11, 2020)

Johnrwilsonmusic said:


> It may have been much better if I had more carefully considered a more precise and focused question.



Maybe change the title to: "What's your favorite string library?".

I own most of these libraries. There definitely isn't a "best" one, as you already pointed out. That being said, Afflatus is my go-to for just about everything.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 11, 2020)

Just my two cents, but these kind of threads never end up being all that useful. Too many musical scenarios, too many choices, too subjective an evaluation.


----------



## Noeticus (Jan 11, 2020)

I wish this thread was about creating a comprehensive reference list of what libraries offered in terms of articulations, dynamics, RR etc. CSS might be very loved, but is not a very full strings library.


----------



## ism (Jan 11, 2020)

A bit of a how long is a piece of string question. Its all about sweet spots.

In addition to the above I'd add:


First - Fluffy's Venice Modern Strings - there's a exquisite quality of sound here that's completely unmatched anywhere else. Arguably it's a bit niche, but however bread and butter vs niche you consider this sweet spot as a musical universe, I don't hear anything else that can do what Venice does. (Also, the Italian notion of "modern" is kind of hilarious here by north american standards. I love it.) 


Second - Light and sound Chamber strings. It's not that this is in the same league, or even necessarily trying to compete with SCS. But it has a couple of features that in certain circumstances really set it apart. 

- the quality of the 7 mics. Normally 7 mics on a dry library feels like filler, or a feature for the uber-pros with seriously diminishing returns for one such as myself. But here they really do allow you to meaningfully craft the dimensions and character of the chamber strings sound in interesting and useful ways that you'd never get with SCS or VSL or anything else that I know of.

- But my favourite sweet spot comes from the recorded dynamic arcs. There's some real subtlety to this, that's taken me a while to get my head around. But it comes down to holding down the sustain pedal whey you're playing legato, which triggers recorded crescendo and decrescendos on the attack and release of notes. And, significantly, also interacts wonderfully with re-bowings. 

Combined with its other strengths (I especially love the dynamics, and the "range" and "split" features) there'are moments when these arcs really add a quality of delicacy that no other library can match. 

And to get even into a more specific sweet spot - this expressive delicacy can be blended with subtly of the Olafur Chamber Evo in a way that I really love.


- I could make a similar case for the sonic qualities of Spitfire Studio strings. The flautandos, sul tastes, half con sords really open up a sonic space that you won't get with CSS. If that's what you're looking for. 


My point is that "best string" library really is a "how long is a piece of strings question. Its all about sweet spots. (And, of course, owning as many string libraries as possible, and appreciating them for what they are).


----------



## ism (Jan 11, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> Maybe change the title to: "What's your favorite string library?".
> 
> I own most of these libraries. There definitely isn't a "best" one, as you already pointed out. That being said, Afflatus is my go-to for just about everything.



Or maybe "what's or Favourite String Library Today?".

Or maybe "What's your Favourite String Library in the last 15 Minutes?"

Or even just "Bit of String: how long is it?"


----------



## awaey (Jan 11, 2020)

actually I have 9-10 from the list and some more .....if you want to work with midi composition you should have some of them ...there isn't best string library ,all have different tone ,color.


----------



## John R Wilson (Jan 11, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> Maybe change the title to: "What's your favorite string library?".
> 
> I own most of these libraries. There definitely isn't a "best" one, as you already pointed out. That being said, Afflatus is my go-to for just about everything.



Changed it to "What's your favorite string library?" as that is better than simply saying "what is the best".


----------



## John R Wilson (Jan 11, 2020)

ism said:


> First - Fluffy's Venice Modern Strings - there's a exquisite quality of sound here that's completely unmatched anywhere else. Arguably it's a bit niche, but however bread and butter vs niche you consider this sweet spot as a musical universe, I don't hear anything else that can do what Venice does. (Also, the Italian notion of "modern" is kind of hilarious here by north american standards. I love it.)



Sounds interesting, ill have to check this out as I have not come across Fluffy's Venice Modern Strings before.


----------



## Noeticus (Jan 11, 2020)

Also, there are two SSS on the list.


----------



## mralmostpopular (Jan 11, 2020)

I feel like CSS is my favorite because the legatos and transitions between dynamic layers sound smoother, but I really like the tone of Spitfire stuff. I feel like we’ve reached a point with string libraries where nothing coming out is really better than anything else. It’s all just different flavors. Until someone really focuses on some of the weaker areas (e.g. realistic playable runs, more dynamic layers, etc), we’ve reached a bit of a plateau for the moment.


----------



## AEF (Jan 11, 2020)

ism said:


> A bit of a how long is a piece of string question. Its all about sweet spots.
> 
> In addition to the above I'd add:
> 
> ...



Venice Modern Strings has been tempting me but the shorts seem to be really synthy sounding from all the demos Ive heard. Do you find that the case? Any demos of the library with the shorts would be MUCH appreciated.


----------



## Mike Fox (Jan 11, 2020)

mralmostpopular said:


> I feel like we’ve reached a point with string libraries where nothing coming out is really better than anything else. It’s all just different flavors.



Concerning sound quality, 100%.

Playability is another story.


----------



## jbuhler (Jan 11, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> Concerning sound quality, 100%.
> 
> Playability is another story.


But playability is not the same as plonkability or programmability. And libraries that optimize one frequently struggle with the others.


----------



## avocado89 (Jan 11, 2020)

Spitfire Chamber Strings, is still my go to. There is something about the sound, that just can't be described, it's not too cold and sharp and not too warm and lush - weird way of putting it I know. It just seems to hit that sweet spot for me.


----------



## Brasart (Jan 11, 2020)

I have to say I'm grabbing Aperture Strings more and more when in need of quick sketching or actually layering, and "refractions" sounds so good when coupled with Olafur Chamber waves


----------



## dhowarthmusic (Jan 11, 2020)

ProfoundSilence said:


> wish there was an included poll for which libraries people actually own before they vote



You may find this poll useful that I made a couple of years ago. I can’t add any newer libraries to the poll as there is a maximum of 100 entries for each poll.






NEW POLL: Which string ensemble libraries do you currently own? (Not solo string libraries)


After last weeks poll asking for the strings libraries that we are happy with I thought it would be interesting to do a separate poll asking which string libraries each of us currently own so we can compare it to the list of the ones we are actually happy with. I added a few extra ones onto the...



vi-control.net




[/QUOTE]


----------



## jononotbono (Jan 11, 2020)

ProfoundSilence said:


> wish there was an included poll for which libraries people actually own before they vote


----------



## kessel (Jan 11, 2020)

For me it's LA Scoring Strings, between choosing what people vote the most and what sounds the best to my ear the decision is easy


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Jan 11, 2020)

dhowarthmusic said:


> You may find this poll useful that I made a couple of years ago. I can’t add any newer libraries to the poll as there is a maximum of 100 entries for each poll.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


[/QUOTE]
I voted. interesting


----------



## jononotbono (Jan 11, 2020)

Berlin Strings needs to be listed.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Jan 11, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Berlin Strings needs to be listed.


it is, just that Orchestral Tools proceeds it. 

for some reason we call spitfire chamber strings "SCS" but we don't call Berlin strings "OTBS"


----------



## markleake (Jan 11, 2020)

Shouldn't we just call it BS?

Er, wait...


----------



## tack (Jan 11, 2020)

It's hard to beat the musicality of CSS. It's effortlessly musical. (Well, that's hyperbole: dealing with the latency requires some effort, but you are rewarded for it.)



On the other hand, Spitfire Chamber Strings has a range of tone that's hard to surpass. 



I am happy to own them both.


----------



## Dave Connor (Jan 11, 2020)

tack said:


> It's hard to beat the musicality of CSS. It's effortlessly musical. (Well, that's hyperbole: dealing with the latency requires some effort, but you are rewarded for it.)


 That’s the best I've heard from those strings and a great piece. Was that your own reverb solution or does the library come with impulses etc? Very nice job on that.


----------



## John R Wilson (Jan 12, 2020)

tack said:


> It's hard to beat the musicality of CSS. It's effortlessly musical. (Well, that's hyperbole: dealing with the latency requires some effort, but you are rewarded for it.)
> 
> 
> 
> ...




lovely piece. Also, CSS does sounds great in the track you posted.


----------



## John R Wilson (Jan 12, 2020)

ProfoundSilence said:


> berlin is the most comprehensive, followed by SCS and SSS.
> Legatos are good in most of those in general, but some have a better toolset to emulate runs like OT, but CSS has best rebow legato.
> LASS is the only one of those with divisi, but has even less bread and butter articulations(however is also the lightest on resources)
> CSS is some of the most consistent bread and butter but it's just bread and butter.
> Tone wise is subjective. I'm much more into the more filmic tone of berlin/Hollywood strings/lass - but SCS definitely sounds good but it's ultimately got audible saturation from the neve and the churchesque hall built into it. SSS sounds kind of washed out and dull to me, and CSS has weird buildup and out of all those(even lass) it's the one I find needs the most EQ.



I haven't got Spitfire Chamber Strings, however, I do have the Symphonic one. It's been my main string library for a while now but I do agree that they sound quite washed out at times and although the room sound is lovely I have started to become a lot less keen with the baked in sound of the hall.


----------



## Uiroo (Jan 12, 2020)

tack said:


> It's hard to beat the musicality of CSS. It's effortlessly musical. (Well, that's hyperbole: dealing with the latency requires some effort, but you are rewarded for it.)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have and love SCS, but CSS sounds really good.
Shit...


----------



## SoNowWhat? (Jan 12, 2020)

ism said:


> "Bit of String: how long is it?"


Twice the distance from the middle to one end. You’re welcome. 

Seriously though, I have CSS and SCS and love them both but, if I had to pick just one right now, my favourite would be Afflatus. It does things the others can’t or perhaps “don’t” is a better way to put it. Do you have it @ism ? If you do, I’m interested to know your thoughts on its sound compared to L&S and Venice Modern. I’ve looked at both of those before and they’ve both tempted me but I’ve resisted up til now.


----------



## Akarin (Jan 12, 2020)

8Dio Century Strings. Love them and don't need a ton of processing or layering to do what I want them to do.


----------



## rottoy (Jan 12, 2020)

I'm quite fond of Cinestrings Core.
The versatility of the beautiful Sony sound and the players used hits the spot for me.
I contemplated getting the much lauded CSS before I got Cinestrings, as I'd previously bought CSSS and completely fallen in love with it.
What settled it in the end (apart from the lovely sound) was the fact that I could go under the hood with Cinestrings Core, which I'm unable to do with anything from the Cinematic Studio series.
No matter how stellar the product, I inevitably feel a bit stifled if I can't go in and make my own modifications to the patches to optimize workflow and occasionally correct problematic samples.


----------



## kessel (Jan 12, 2020)

It's hard to beat how truthful LASS sounds...


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 12, 2020)

I think Hollywood Strings is best.....err... wait a minute.....no, I think CSS is overall best.....

Uh-oh, now I have Afflatus and Venice Modern Strings and they both have great polyphonic legato so they must be best.....
but, but, but, for my pop songs, the Strings in Kirk Hunter’s Virtuoso Ensembles are the right sound and so easy....

You get the picture.


----------



## tack (Jan 12, 2020)

Dave Connor said:


> Was that your own reverb solution or does the library come with impulses etc?


That one had quite a lot of processing on the mix bus as I was trying to approximate the actual recording.

Some moderate EQ (bringing up the lows a couple dB and tapering off the highs above 1k, which is a surprising choice considering how dark CSS is anyway, but again I was trying to get close to the tone of a recording), saturation (by means of the Clariphonic on the highs and FabFilter Saturn below 600Hz -- and it might seem like a strange choice to cut the highs and then saturate them with the Clariphonic, but it brought things closer to the sound I was looking for), and a nontrivial amount of compression to boot.

Reverb was a mixed bag. The original recording is fairly drenched. I turned off CSS's built-in reverb and put the FabFilter Pro-R on the strings bus mixed around 45%, but then each of the individual sections had their own sends (of varying amounts) to a Lexicon PCM RHall instance. And finally, the celli and viola had their own instances of Pro-R which I brought in through automation when needed. (For example, at 0:38 in the video, the arpeggios in the celli sounded terrible to me -- as they so often do with samples -- so my solution was to drown their sins in more reverb.)



Dave Connor said:


> Very nice job on that.


Thanks!

Mocking it up was fun, but the real point of the exercise was the ear training and transcription. Corrections/suggestions from anyone on the notation are graciously received as I don't really know what I'm doing there.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 12, 2020)

tack said:


> That one had quite a lot of processing on the mix bus as I was trying to approximate the actual recording.
> 
> Some moderate EQ (bringing up the lows a couple dB and tapering off the highs above 1k, which is a surprising choice considering how dark CSS is anyway, but again I was trying to get close to the tone of a recording), saturation (by means of the Clariphonic on the highs and FabFilter Saturn below 600Hz -- and it might seem like a strange choice to cut the highs and then saturate them with the Clariphonic, but it brought things closer to the sound I was looking for), and a nontrivial amount of compression to boot.
> 
> ...



Well done, Jason.


----------



## ism (Jan 12, 2020)

tack said:


> It's hard to beat the musicality of CSS. It's effortlessly musical.



It is *a* musicality. And CSS certain succeeds at its laser focus on delivering this particular musicality. And there's no question the CSS delivers the CSS-style musicality more effortlessly than anything else.

But of course, there are other musicalities, and other origins of musicality.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 12, 2020)

ism said:


> It is *a* musicality. And CSS certain succeeds at its laser focus on delivering this particular musicality. And there's no question the CSS delivers the CSS-style musicality more effortlessly than anything else.
> 
> But of course, there are other musicalities, and other origins of musicality.



Bill Clinton : “It depends on what the meaning of _is_, is.”


----------



## ism (Jan 12, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> Bill Clinton : “It depends on what the meaning of _is_, is.”



I don't thing the nuances around the notion of musicality need reduce to empty semantic quibbles. And I think there's a lot to be learned about them from some of the debates that perennially return here.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 12, 2020)

ism said:


> I don't thing the nuances around the notion of musicality need reduce to empty semantic quibbles. And I think there's a lot to be learned about them from some of the debates that perennially return here.



But if we don’t agree on the definitions, we talk past each othe and
“ musicality “ is both vague and subjective.

For instance, I will get a lot of blowback for writing e.g. that I think 90% of ”epic” music lacks musicality, but that is because how I define musicality, which others could easily take issue with.


----------



## ism (Jan 12, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> But if we don’t agree on the definitions, we talk past each othe and
> “ musicality “ is both vague and subjective.
> 
> For instance, I will get a lot of blowback for writing e.g. that I think 90% of ”epic” music lacks musicality, but that is because how I define musicality, which others could easily take issue with.



Excellent point.


And I'd further argue that that the reason debates like "VSL vs Spitfire" end up with so many hurt feelings is that there's an underlying ill-definedeness that prevents us from adequately understanding the particular musicalities we're both defending and criticizing.


The Daniel James' "pirate-member" Hans Zimmer musicality vs the actual real life Hans Zimmer's musicalities is another example of this disconnect. Or the dismissal of neo-classical as "Scandinavian nihilism", or allegations that the VSL sounds "cheap", or objections its absurd and insulting to compare Wagner to Williams ... or the "all you sul tasto sound the same to me" attitude that occasionally finds expression. Or I suppose I feel that the relentless valorization of CSS as the "best" string library assumes, implicitly, a particular musicality that might helpfully be foregrounded so as, while not to deny CSS its due, to avoid stepping on other types of musicality.


The converse of this is that from all this potential for drama, there's the opportunity to learn to understand and communicate not only across our different understandings and appreciations of different musicalities, but our own. In much the same way that elephants would have something to teach fish about water (it they could only sit down and find a meaningful and respectful common language in which to discuss it).


Which I think is happening, at least a little, on this thread. And perhaps even more pronouncedly (although frustratingly incompletely) on the VSL vs BBCSO thread.


----------



## ism (Jan 12, 2020)

incidentally: fun book:







Ashermusic said:


> but that is because how I define musicality, which others could easily take issue with.




And I guess my point is that I don't feel musicality is purely subjective. It does originate from ... somewhere - actually it has multiple, complex, interacting, origins.

Counterpoint and the musicality of a Bach chorale arises (at least plausibly) from the pleasure of (our evolved capacity to parse) perceptual streams. Other aspects emerge as (arguably) epiphenomenal interactions with the human capacity for language, and presumably social connection. Other origins might be the pleasure of mathematical abstraction. Or the vicerality of embodiment.

The science of this is of course in its infancy. But there's amble evidence that the capacity for musicalities is as innately a human capacity as language.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 12, 2020)

ism said:


> incidentally: fun book:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




But Ism, it is worth noting that there are ton of people here who I am sure think they have a valid idea of musicality that totally eschews those techniques and traditions.

And the same is true of language btw. How many people value proper syntax or haveever diagrammed a sentenc?

It’s a different time with different standards.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Jan 12, 2020)

"If it sounds good, it IS good"...


----------



## Dewdman42 (Jan 12, 2020)

People should just explain WHY they like or dislike a certain library, be specific, put it in perspective. If someone says they love a certain library because it’s so expressive, for example; that is actually not enough information to mean anything. WHY is it more expressive? What specifically makes it more expressive then another one?

i do feel that many times people love a certain library because it’s bathing in the reverb of a beautiful sounding room. And that is a perfectly valid reason to love it! Just identify that as the reason.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 12, 2020)

InLight-Tone said:


> "If it sounds good, it IS good"...



Indeed, the one golden rule of audio. But I don’t apply it to composition necessarily as their is a lot of crap pile composed music that sounds good because it’s easier now to make it sound good.


----------



## Greg (Jan 12, 2020)

My absolute favorite is CSS combined with Albion One. The top end of Albion One gives me that "air" lacking in CSS. The midrange of CSS is so detailed and glorious but the high end seems cut off and almost makes it sound retro. Then I usually add another eq on top to add a little control to the shimmery top top end like the lindell te-100 or massive passive. If you automate that eq to rise and fall along with the modulation it almost sounds like the bowing is really getting stronger. So many fun things you can do with strings :D


----------



## Anders Wall (Jan 12, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> People should just explain WHY they like or dislike a certain library, be specific, put it in perspective. If someone says they love a certain library because it’s so expressive, for example; that is actually not enough information to mean anything. WHY is it more expressive? What specifically makes it more expressive then another one?
> 
> i do feel that many times people love a certain library because it’s bathing in the reverb of a beautiful sounding room. And that is a perfectly valid reason to love it! Just identify that as the reason.


Out of those we could choose from I picked LASS.
Got some of the libraries listed, not all but most.

I do not use LASS all the time, maybe 30% of the time. I think it blends well with others, has a “gritty” quality I like. The lights and sound library has some of that grit. Completely different sound, but gritty. Anyway. I love all the variations of pitch LASS gives, sometimes they are so out of tune it’s adorable 
So, when I layer with real strings the difference in pitch are a match from heaven.

This latest project I work on is cluttered with Spitfires Olafur waves combined with Bunker samples strings and live players. The one before had a lot of LCO. No library can do it all.
It’s all about context.

To summarise.
LASS, gritty but plays well with others.

Tada!
/Anders


----------



## Dave Connor (Jan 12, 2020)

tack said:


> That one had quite a lot of processing on the mix bus as I was trying to approximate the actual recording.
> 
> Some moderate EQ (bringing up the lows a couple dB and tapering off the highs above 1k, which is a surprising choice considering how dark CSS is anyway, but again I was trying to get close to the tone of a recording), saturation (by means of the Clariphonic on the highs and FabFilter Saturn below 600Hz -- and it might seem like a strange choice to cut the highs and then saturate them with the Clariphonic, but it brought things closer to the sound I was looking for), and a nontrivial amount of compression to boot.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the detailed response. It all makes sense. If you did tutorials on this kind of thing I think people would be interested.

So you did a transcription by ear and notated it. What recording? As far as the notation, if you slurred the eighth note pairs you would have it about right.


----------



## ism (Jan 12, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> But Ism, it is worth noting that there are ton of people here who I am sure think they have a valid idea of musicality that totally eschews those techniques and traditions.
> 
> And the same is true of language btw. How many people value proper syntax or haveever diagrammed a sentenc?
> 
> It’s a different time with different standards.



Yes, very much my point. The book cited explores the "origins of musicality" across anthropology, ethnomusicology, cognitive science, genetics, etc. 

That is to say that the origins of musicality aren't imagined as a bunch of white guys in the 1700s deciding what the "rules" are. It's the fact that underlying their "rules" (and every other set of "rules" implicit or otherwise) lies the fundamental human capacities for musicality - which has manifested in a great wealth of ways across a great wealth of cultures and eras. 

And the analogy with language is quite precise. If you find a tribe of people in some corner of the worth who have never come into contact with dictionaries or treatises on grammar, you'll find their language is just as sophisticated as English. Which is evidence for a deeply innate human capacity for language acquisition. (Earlier western beliefs in the superior sophistication of the English language have been long debunked as so much racism). 

And it's only in the last decade or so that it's been fully realized in the west that much the same is true of the human capacity for musicality. 


So yes, to agree, there are many kinds of musicality. But also, I think there's much more to be said that "well, it's all purely subjective anyway". Or rather, that this subjectivity can be the start of a conversation rather that the end.


----------



## tack (Jan 13, 2020)

Dave Connor said:


> If you did tutorials on this kind of thing I think people would be interested.


I feel like there are tutorials out there by folks far more qualified than me, but thanks for the vote of confidence. 



Dave Connor said:


> What recording?


This one from the soundtrack.



Dave Connor said:


> As far as the notation, if you slurred the eighth note pairs you would have it about right.


Ah, this is one of those things that remains a bit elusive to me, when to notate slurs for strings.

To the extent that slurs indicate bowing directions for the players, I understand that it's generally best for non-strings players not to get into the business of notating bowing as we're almost certainly going to get it wrong. To the extent the slur indicates legato, the vast majority of this piece is played legato. Should the slurs then be used throughout most of the phrases?

Thanks Dave!


----------



## Dave Connor (Jan 13, 2020)

On the top staff, the slurs indicate the how the quarter notes are grouped. The players can determine how to bow them the most naturally and effectively. (There are bowings indicated below to avoid down-bows in certain spots but I wouldn’t sweat that.) You can see without slurs indicated on this passage, you would leave too much guesswork for the players. If you simply indicated Legato at the beginning of your score on that piece, I agree the players would get it mostly right. Even so, very basic slur indications should probably be there imho.


----------



## Dave Connor (Jan 13, 2020)

tack said:


> I feel like there are tutorials out there by folks far more qualified than me, but thanks for the vote of confidence.


In the case of getting those particular strings sounding just that way you did, I think people would certainly be interested. You did give a pretty complete description though.


tack said:


> This one from the soundtrack.


Thanks!


----------



## borisb2 (Jan 13, 2020)

as far as I remember (from theory) as a rule of thumb not more than 4 notes should be under 1 slur - except its a very fast or quiet passage - up-bow on up-beat, down bow on down-beat (if one wants to give direction at the beginning) .. well, theory 

Did a quick sketch with newly purchased century strings - start to like the sound


----------



## Vik (Jan 30, 2020)

The best string library, for me (ignoring solo/FC strings for now) is a combination of PS Con Moto, SCS, Afflatus, Berlin Strings and CSS, if I should base that opinion on libraries I use regularly. Should I include all libraries, based on stuff I've heard others do, I should mention a few more. But since string libraries can be used if so many different ways, it's impossible for me to point to only one of these libraries.


----------



## TomislavEP (Jan 31, 2020)

Most of the time, I use strings from Albion Legacy, Loegria, and Tundra. I usually don't write traditional strings arrangements that span across all the strings sections, but rather combine lead, counter and bass lines with some kind of pad (preferably organic one) in the background.

I also have a few other strings libraries like Adagietto, Arctic Strings, Session Strings 2 plus a few solo strings instruments from Spitfire and Fluffy Audio.


----------



## DSmolken (Jan 31, 2020)

ism said:


> First - Fluffy's Venice Modern Strings - there's a exquisite quality of sound here that's completely unmatched anywhere else. Arguably it's a bit niche, but however bread and butter vs niche you consider this sweet spot as a musical universe, I don't hear anything else that can do what Venice does. (Also, the Italian notion of "modern" is kind of hilarious here by north american standards. I love it.)


I know I'm digging up a post from a few weeks ago, but that's interesting... can you expand a little about how Venice's flavor of "modern" is? Those strings are on my list of things to look at someday when I have diskspace (along with the Light & Sound).


----------



## ism (Jan 31, 2020)

DSmolken said:


> I know I'm digging up a post from a few weeks ago, but that's interesting... can you expand a little about how Venice's flavor of "modern" is? Those strings are on my list of things to look at someday when I have diskspace (along with the Light & Sound).


‘Modern strings’ to the good folks at Fluffy means what those of us in less storied parts of the world would call ‘strings’. So a certain late romantic sensibility, not at all unlike CSS or SCS in broad strokes.

I suspect its just that to an Italian sense of history, things like ’modern’ and ‘ancient’ means something very different.

But my initial though on ‘modern’ strings was to expect something like LCO or Angel string, which didn’t sound veryFluffy, but i was delighted to hear what they came up with.

Reminds me of a friend - a classicist and expert of some ancient Greek poet or other - putting together a curriculum. His concession to including a ‘modern’ poet on the syllabus was Tennyson.


----------



## DSmolken (Jan 31, 2020)

Thanks, makes sense and also fits very well with my impression of the articulations walkthrough.


----------



## IdealSequenceG (Jan 31, 2020)

The still impressive library for me is Agitato.


----------



## filipjonathan (Jan 31, 2020)

CSS comes in at 0:15. I might be a bit biased but they sound BEAUTIFUL!


----------



## gohrev (Mar 23, 2020)

Nice little bit @filipjonathan 


After messing around with Spitfire's Studio Strings for months now, I decided to pull the trigger: Downloading Cinematic Studio Strings as we speak!! <3

Very excited..
While I love the "special articulations" of Studio Strings (bartok, con legno, flautando, beautiful harmonics...) the legatos are disappointing and the samples have a lot of weird inconsistencies.

Here's hoping CSS will sound more _musical _!!


----------



## filipjonathan (Mar 23, 2020)

berlin87 said:


> Nice little bit @filipjonathan
> 
> 
> After messing around with Spitfire's Studio Strings for months now, I decided to pull the trigger: Downloading Cinematic Studio Strings as we speak!! <3
> ...


Thanks!! And you've made a brilliant choice! Enjoy!! 😊


----------



## Andrew_m (Nov 25, 2020)

borisb2 said:


> as far as I remember (from theory) as a rule of thumb not more than 4 notes should be under 1 slur - except its a very fast or quiet passage - up-bow on up-beat, down bow on down-beat (if one wants to give direction at the beginning) .. well, theory
> 
> Did a quick sketch with newly purchased century strings - start to like the sound



Fantastic, buying century now lol


----------



## GMT (Nov 25, 2020)

For straight up classical with a big sound - Spitfire BBCSO
For aggressive hybrid / sound design - Heavyocity Novo
For warm texturing but still with a big sound - East West Hollywood Strings
For doubling and adding extra bite to short articulations - East West Symphonic Strings
For the sound of a small section with sound design characteristics - Heavyocity Intimate Textures

That's all I have except for Spitfire Studio Strings, which I haven't found a use for yet, and Native Instruments Symphony series strings, which I don't get on with.


----------

