# Do you feel that EW-Hollywood Strings is a must have String Library ? or ... Not Anymore ?



## muziksculp (May 9, 2014)

Hi.

Just wanted to get some feedback as to what others feel about *EW-Hollywood Strings* ? 

Do you feel that it is a must have Strings Library ? Given the newer libraries available today from companies such as : Orchestral Tools, Spitfire, VSL, Cinematic Strings, Cinesamples Stirngs, ...etc. 

Do EW-Hollywood Strings offer something unique that you couldn't work without ? 

Your feedback would be very interesting, and helpful.

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## olajideparis (May 9, 2014)

I'll put it this way; there are a lot of great new libraries out there but few of them come close to the completeness of bowings that HS offers. Those few are: Berlin Strings and Dimension...okay so not even few a couple. The others sound great sonically but there are a lot of compromises articulation wise so if that is important to you have a wide variety of bowings AND you have super high spec windows based machine then by all means get it.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 9, 2014)

I am not sure there ever is or was such a thing because we all work in such different ways and have such different ears.

But when you factor in price, full compliment of articulations, multiple mic positions, and great sound, you can certainly make an argument for HS. But no doubt others will argue for competing products like LASS, OT, and VSL.

Most of the others besides those however , like Cinematic Strings II which sounds great to my ears also, AFAIK simply do not have the depth of articulations.


----------



## jaeroe (May 9, 2014)

LASS offers something that no one else offers with the groups per section (Vln 1 A, B, C plus first chair). this offers a huge amount of flexibility in tuning, timing, precision, and size. takes a bit to setup, but once done it is amazingly powerful and flexible. you might have to tweak the sound a bit and get a decent reverb, but this ends up also giving you a lot of flexibility. you can also just use their 'stage and color' settings, which offer a lot, but i prefer not emulate others so much. either way - lot of flexibility in sound there.

for the less involved, 'just sound great out of the box and work quickly' approach, the spitfire stuff is fantastic - mural and sable. very playable, very fast, and sounds great.

i don't use my HW Strings (diamond) anymore. i'm happier with LASS and Spitfire.


----------



## Mahlon (May 9, 2014)

My 2 cents, Hollywood Strings is not essential at all, but the timbre and believability is almost unsurpassed. That's for a large sound, I mean. There's a realism there that I haven't heard in anything else except Berlin Strings and the _really_ best examples of LASS. But HS seems to hit the mark more consistently. And HS is nearly comprehensive.

Berlin Strings is the strongest otherwise, imo, and with the coming releases of the new modules, it may be top dog for a while. The weakest link in BST, though, is the technical deficiencies. Hopefully, they'll continue to fix them.

Mahlon

EDIT: Wow. That was post 1111.


----------



## Peter Alexander (May 9, 2014)

In my articles I noted that it was a workhorse string library, and I still believe it is. Whether it's must have or not for you individually depends upon how well you really know the string bowings (or are willing to take the time to learn them) and appreciate the number of variations the library provides to enable you to become a true virtual concertmaster.

Since you're in LA, consider making an appt with Jay and hear for yourself.


----------



## Lawson. (May 9, 2014)

I think it's a must have string library for sure. I play violin in an orchestra, so I actually know how strings should sound first-hand, and HS nails everything right on the head. (In fact, I think the HS celli sound better than ours!) The legatos are amazing, and all the shorts and runs are great, too. My only problem is that I can't get it to sound quite right for that smaller, more "classical" sound. From what I've heard, Berlin Strings or Spitefire's Sable would work better for that.

So yes, I think HS is by far the best thing on the market for a big, lush, string sound.

EDIT: I meant to say "Sable" and not "Mural."


----------



## Nick Phoenix (May 9, 2014)

Hollywood Strings is an over the top library that is far more than most composers will ever use or in many cases even understand. It's unlikely that it will ever be obsolete or surpassed. I still find new gems to this day. None of the newer libraries have put as much effort or money into their libraries as we did (unless you combine all the Vienna libraries) You have to understand that we were trying to make the end all of string libraries. Not that we succeeded, but it's in the ballpark. The only reason it isn't generally accepted as number one, is the PC you need to run it. That being said, variety of sound in other libraries is a great thing, but if you want the sound of the movies, HS is it. HS is a library for Pros, in spite of it's affordable price tag, and that's where it falters, in a sense.


----------



## bobulusbillman (May 9, 2014)

I totally agree Nick. HS is the best library sonically. I'd love to think that perhaps there might be an update in the future to correct a few of the remaining bugs. Is that something on the cards or is the library no longer in active development?


----------



## Simon Ravn (May 9, 2014)

Yes 8)


----------



## mk282 (May 9, 2014)

Nick Phoenix @ 10.5.2014 said:


> None of the newer libraries have put as much effort or money into their libraries as we did (unless you combine all the Vienna libraries)



Or Spitfire.


----------



## Hanu_H (May 9, 2014)

mk282 @ Sat May 10 said:


> Nick Phoenix @ 10.5.2014 said:
> 
> 
> > None of the newer libraries have put as much effort or money into their libraries as we did (unless you combine all the Vienna libraries)
> ...


What about Orchestral Tools? They have not even finished their strings, more expansions coming...


----------



## BachRules (May 10, 2014)

I'm shopping for strings right now and passing on EW-Hollywood Strings. My reason isn't its price or the capabilities of my PC -- my PC surpasses the specs EW lists as "recommended" for Hollywood Strings. I'm passing on Hollywood Strings because in my experience EW's software outputs defective audio:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5ZYXb_HdIQhYTE3aU5pUlJvMTQ/edit?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5ZYXb ... sp=sharing)

I'm also put off by EW's practice of hiding their "Support" forum from general view:

http://i.imgur.com/Oe7MJTa.png

I'll be looking for companies with not so much to hide.


----------



## muk (May 10, 2014)

jaeroe @ Fri May 09 said:


> LASS offers something that no one else offers with the groups per section (Vln 1 A, B, C plus first chair).



Well, the VSL Dimension Strings offer just that, and even more (you can control each player individually). And in terms of articulations it's probably as comprehensive as Hollywood Strings. But it has smaller groups, and is more expensive.
If you write large film music, HS seems to be a really good call. Especially if they are at a discount, which they frequently are. The things that kept me from buying it so far is the resource hunger and the Play engine.


----------



## feck (May 10, 2014)

Nick Phoenix @ Fri May 09 said:


> Hollywood Strings is an over the top library that is far more than most composers will ever use or in many cases even understand.


I've often wondered why EW doesn't do a comprehensive tutorial series showing hands on usage and full utilization of HS for just that reason. Any thoughts on that?


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 10, 2014)

bobulusbillman @ Sat May 10 said:


> is the library no longer in active development?



That's a good question, isn't it?

IMO the frustration for HS really is that while the recording, articulation and sonics are indeed pretty much best in class, both the UI and engine really isn't. In my fantasy world, EW would take all that great material and start from scratch with how we interact with it - adaptive legato, sample streaming on the fly, all the stuff that is becoming standard now from other libraries. But I think the chances of a redux are somewhere around zero, so the decision to buy the library library really becomes purely about workflow - can a) your system handle it and b) can you work with the hundreds of distinct but often subtly different patches?


----------



## jamwerks (May 10, 2014)

One thing that cripples HS a bit is the combo: Play (resource management) & no mix positions. Any library (or live ensemble) comes alive with a mix of close, tree & ambient mics.

All BML libraries will reportedly have these (3 different stereo mixe options). HS would greatly benefit from this.

EW could even do a HS "redux", charge maybe 40-50 bucks, and provide two or three different stereo mixes (that we could open using one of the 5 existing options), as well as a few fixes.


----------



## Rv5 (May 10, 2014)

Nick Phoenix @ Sat May 10 said:


> Hollywood Strings is an over the top library that is far more than most composers will ever use or in many cases even understand. It's unlikely that it will ever be obsolete or surpassed. I still find new gems to this day. None of the newer libraries have put as much effort or money into their libraries as we did (unless you combine all the Vienna libraries) You have to understand that we were trying to make the end all of string libraries. Not that we succeeded, but it's in the ballpark. The only reason it isn't generally accepted as number one, is the PC you need to run it. That being said, variety of sound in other libraries is a great thing, but if you want the sound of the movies, HS is it. HS is a library for Pros, in spite of it's affordable price tag, and that's where it falters, in a sense.



This is why I have such problems with it - I like using the extensive areas of Hollywood Strings and taking advantage of what is in this library and not others, but, often they're broken. Updates in Play have stopped the Bow Change Legato patches working. Updates in Play caused polyphonic behaviour in Legato Divisi patches. Running Play 3 alongside Play 4 means dealing with problems of both... emailing EastWest support has resulted in no response to this. Even making videos of the problem didn't help. Also "the PC you need to run it" - this should be addressed on the system requirements where the mac specs are totally unrealistic. The library is genius; brilliant library, brilliant ideas, brilliant sound. Amazing flexibility and depth. Poor platform and poor support.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 10, 2014)

jamwerks @ Sat May 10 said:


> One thing that cripples HS a bit is the combo: Play (resource management) & no mix positions



Er, Hollywood Strings Diamond has 4 mix positions...


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (May 10, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sat May 10 said:


> jamwerks @ Sat May 10 said:
> 
> 
> > One thing that cripples HS a bit is the combo: Play (resource management) & no mix positions
> ...




+1, yes, it has close, mid, main & Surround Mics, and you can load them all, and mix them. (Diamond Edition off course)

And in general: 

I think the HWS are a very powerful and great sounding lively library. There are minor issues in some patches, which I struggle from time to time. But overall it is a fabulous product, even more when you consider the relatively convenient price (in comparrison to other competitive products like the Berlin Strings, or the LASS)


----------



## muziksculp (May 10, 2014)

Hi,

Thanks to all for your helpful, and interesting feedback regarding EW-Hollywood Strings. 

Given that _Spitfire_ has released _Mural (Vol.1 & 2)_ , which focus on larger string sections. What do you feel EW-Hollywood Strings offers that Mural (vol.1 & 2) doesn't ? i.e. The timbre/Sonic character ? Articulations offered ? or ... ? 

So here is the critical question : If you were faced with choosing between *EW-HS* and *Spitfire Mural (Vol 1 & 2)*, Would you still pick EW-HS ?


----------



## jamwerks (May 10, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sat May 10 said:


> Er, Hollywood Strings Diamond has 4 mix positions...


It has I think 5 mic positions, but 0 stereo mixes. I mean of course combination mixtures of close, mid, main, ambient & vintage. Thus my example of what BML has done.

Opening a full template of HS with 3 mic positions open is something that Play doesn't handle very well, but makes it sound much better.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 10, 2014)

jamwerks @ Sat May 10 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Sat May 10 said:
> 
> 
> > Er, Hollywood Strings Diamond has 4 mix positions...
> ...



Oh, got you.


----------



## StatKsn (May 10, 2014)

Nick Phoenix @ Fri May 09 said:


> The only reason it isn't generally accepted as number one, is the PC you need to run it.



So what is the "real" minimum spec for HS?

Sound-wise HS is hands down my favorite, but often I have to settle with the other strings libraries I own because I feel like the performance is still a bit dodgy when running a large template (or an ensemble with multiple mics enabled).

My main rig has following: 3930k 6-core/32GB DDR3 mem/Intel 730 series SSD with Windows 7, minimum amount of services running in the background. I even replaced the SSD just for HS. Realistically speaking, you NEED a 320GB SSD in order to run HS Diamond legato patches or else you'll fall asleep while waiting for mic positions to be loaded - I am not kidding! This is not the case for HB though.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 10, 2014)

StatKsn @ Sat May 10 said:


> This is not the case for HB though.



Out of interest, does anyone know, technically, why HB is so much less demanding? The HB legato patches still have lots of velocity layers which have to stream at once...

EDIT - light bulb, is it adding vibrato / non vibrato as well?


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (May 10, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sat May 10 said:


> StatKsn @ Sat May 10 said:
> 
> 
> > This is not the case for HB though.
> ...



The Requirements are for the Diamond Edition: 




MAC MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
Intel Core 2 Duo Processor 2.1GHz or higher
4GB RAM
Mac OS X 10.5 or later
7200 RPM or faster (non energy saving) hard drive for sample streaming
310GB free hard drive space / iLok Security Key (not supplied)

PC MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS

Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD Dual Core 2.1GHz or higher
4GB RAM
Windows XP SP2, Vista, Windows 7, or Windows 8
Sound card with ASIO drivers
7200 RPM or faster (non energy saving) hard drive for sample streaming
310GB free hard drive space / iLok Security Key (not supplied)

MAC RECOMMENDED SYSTEM

Mac Pro Quad-Core Intel Xeon 2.66GHz or higher
8GB RAM or more
7200 RPM or faster (non energy saving) hard drive for sample streaming
310GB free hard drive space / iLok Security Key (not supplied)

PC RECOMMENDED SYSTEM

Intel Core 2 Quad or AMD Quad-Core 2.66GHz or higher
8GB RAM or more
64-bit Windows/Host Sequencer
7200 RPM or faster (non energy saving) hard drive for sample streaming
310GB free hard drive space / iLok Security Key (not supplied)

MAC OPTIMAL SYSTEM

Mac Pro Eight-Core Intel Xeon 2.26GHz or higher
16GB RAM or more
SSD (Solid State Drive) for optimal sample streaming
(SSD adapters are available for Mac Pro at online resellers.)
310GB free hard drive space / iLok Security Key (not supplied)

PC OPTIMAL SYSTEM

Intel Core i7 2.66GHz or higher
16GB RAM or more
64-bit Windows/Host Sequencer
SSD (Solid State Drive) for sample streaming
310GB free hard drive space / iLok Security Key (not supplied)

(Source: Eastwest Website)



In my Case I am running it "only" on an i5 @ 3Ghz mit 16 GB Ram, and I am streaming it via USB 3 from a normal Harddrive. Besides some loading times with the project, I can work properly with the library. 

I am not sure about the HW Brass, and why it is less demanding, but I can say is, that the HW BRass Patches are loading not so many samples, so I guess that could be one of the reasons? Just that the HWS have more patches with lots of more "Samples". Also when you compare the sizes of the librarys, you see the HWS Library is the biggest one of the 3 in the Series.


----------



## Dan Mott (May 10, 2014)

HS actually has 5 mic positions.

I love to use the close mics, combined with the vintage mics.

I am not a pro, but HS has THE sound I want personally and no other string lib has impressed me as much, except sometimes Berlin Strings can sound very expressive and realistic.

One thing IMO about HS is that the shorts are not so great. They sound fine, but they are certainly not smooth dynamically and I am guessing every string lib has a sloppy short note or two. 

I think HS is definitely a timeless library.


----------



## JohnG (May 10, 2014)

I agree with Dan Mott about HS; I love how it sounds, even the most minimal, least demanding patches sound amazing. It seems that many people lurch straight for the "super ultimate" patches, but I only use a few of those. The most basic ones still have this gorgeous sound that I really love.

For those having any issues with the demands of the library, try one of the simpler patches. They offer an enormous reduction in processing / disk demand.



Guy Rowland @ 10th May 2014 said:


> Out of interest, does anyone know, technically, why HB is so much less demanding? The HB legato patches still have lots of velocity layers which have to stream at once...



Hi Guy,

For better or worse, HS' "most ultimate" patches trigger a torrent of samples for each note played, most of them silent at any one time, depending on where you have cc11 and cc1 set. That's what produces the smooth transition from pp to ff and from senza vib to molto. The result is awesome if you have a killer setup (which I do for HS).

So for those who like the sounds, try the less demanding patches. They still sound great. I generally prefer the highest hand positions, for example, so there's no need to have that feature "on" -- just adds complexity.

Plus I think legato is hugely, massively overrated (most of the time!).


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


----------



## Dan Mott (May 10, 2014)

Hey John

What lite patches are you using? LT 12s?


----------



## StevenOBrien (May 10, 2014)

I used Hollywood Strings (Gold) as my main library for two years. It sounds fantastic when it works, but I finally dropped it completely in favor of 8dio's Adagio after the long awaited release of PLAY 4.

I know this is said in almost every EW product thread, but the annoying performance issues and bugs that come with the PLAY engine made the library impossible to use efficiently as a part of my template (Even with my setup of 2 computers with VE Pro, 6 core i7s, and 64GB of RAM each). I really would advise against buying it. :( 

In the end, HS just turned out to be a horrible waste of money for me. I even found myself often avoiding writing for strings during jobs with tight deadlines so I wouldn't have to deal with HS's problems. I have never had such problems with any other library, and I'm glad to be rid of it. Sorry.


----------



## AC986 (May 10, 2014)

StevenOBrien @ Sat May 10 said:


> In the end, HS just turned out to be a horrible waste of money for me. I even found myself often avoiding writing for strings during jobs with tight deadlines so I wouldn't have to deal with HS's problems. I have never had such problems with any other library, and I'm glad to be rid of it. Sorry.



Thats a shame Steve. I remember talking to Daryl about the same issues with Berlin strings.

What it boils down to in the end is becoming apparent. Most people want something that sounds like strings that just work. That said, just working doesn't cut it anymore.

When you listen to Andy Blaney's most recent demo for Mural you might question why anyone would use anything else. But everyone wants a different sound that fits their style and what their ears have habitually told them sounds right.

Even if it's not right. :wink:


----------



## rgames (May 10, 2014)

StatKsn @ Sat May 10 said:


> This is not the case for HB though./quote]
> I agree - HB is perfectly playable on my i5 slave and gives me the same number of voices (160 or so) as I get on my i7 4930k. So, for HB, CPU seems not to matter. Granted, that's many fewer voices than other libraries (e.g. VSL or Cinebrass), but it's still sufficient for most music and it's rare that I encounter a streaming problem. (There are other bugs in HB, though, that make it tough to use sometimes...)
> 
> I wonder what's different about the strings and if it could be fixed.
> ...


----------



## Stephen Baysted (May 10, 2014)

I've had HS Diamond since it was released - it's an essential part of my setup now - it props open the door of my machine room without any glitches or streaming issues.  Absolute waste of £1k for me. I've always admired those that can make it work for them though. 

So to the OP - nope and never. 

Spitfire bespoke, Sable, Solo strings all the way for me.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (May 10, 2014)

@stevenOBrien: Your system should be perfectly fine with the requirements of the HWS. That is surprising me a lot I have to say. Sorry to hear that bad experiences with Play...:/


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 10, 2014)

adriancook @ Sat May 10 said:


> When you listen to Andy Blaney's most recent demo for Mural you might question why anyone would use anything else.



I do know what you mean. It's just extraordinary. And it helps that its much more concert than filmic. Andy B is one of that very rare breed - Thomas B is another - who can apparently effortlessly make samples sing. TB has also made extraordinary demos with HS (more filmic in style of course). Shame I'm Guy R not Guy B.... hmm, actually there's something in this B surname business, isn't there?. Perhaps its significant that all of those Bs have close ties with developers or have very close ties with them, although probably not nearly as significant as them being supremely talented buggers.

How a library plays in the hands of mere mortals with fallible systems is an important question for the rest of us though.


----------



## emid (May 10, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sat May 10 said:


> *How a library plays in the hands of mere mortals with fallible systems is an important question for the rest of us though*.



+1

On a side note I am thinking of becoming the new '+1' supporter of the forum. Don't you guys miss the old one? :wink:


----------



## Synesthesia (May 10, 2014)

emid @ Sat May 10 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Sat May 10 said:
> 
> 
> > *How a library plays in the hands of mere mortals with fallible systems is an important question for the rest of us though*.
> ...



Bear in mind there's no crazy setup issues with Spitfire libs. No masters level EQ/Reverb diplomas to learn.

Andy usually just loads up the A and O mics and plays.. 

You can load it into Kontakt and you have the same sound he has..

We've worked hard (insanely hard) over the years on eliminating the stuff that could bog the patches down and are not actually necessary because their effect is close enough to inaudible..


----------



## AC986 (May 10, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sat May 10 said:


> adriancook @ Sat May 10 said:
> 
> 
> > When you listen to Andy Blaney's most recent demo for Mural you might question why anyone would use anything else.
> ...



It's true, but everyone has their own way of doing things. Much simpler sounding maybe, but I'm sure in no way lesser in the sense of their usefulness, or indeed what they are designed to do. That's in no way a cop out either. It's a given that Andy and some others just have that knack of making a cow pat sound good if they wanted to. Daryl is very good at demos too; I've been lucky enough to hear some of those too.

You're a bit of a film buff Guy. When I listened to the latest Andy B demo for Mural, I was _reminded_ immediately of that old Pressburger & Powell film, The Red Shoes. Just reminded; it's in no way a copy or anything like that. It's just got that vibe.

But back to the OP I still think you have to wind up using what is suitable to the type of music you're writing. There is not just one string library out there that will do that, although in my case, finances dictate I generally stick to Sable & Mural atm.


----------



## JohnG (May 10, 2014)

> It has I think 5 mic positions, but 0 stereo mixes. I mean of course combination mixtures of close, mid, main, ambient & vintage. Thus my example of what BML has done.
> 
> Opening a full template of HS with 3 mic positions open is something that Play doesn't handle very well, but makes it sound much better.



You are mistaken. It's simple to add multiple mic positions in PLAY. I do it all the time, and blend them to taste.



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


----------



## rpaillot (May 10, 2014)

HS pros : great sustains, great legato ( Celli legato are among the best sampled celli currently available ) , great playable runs articulations, great tremolos. Great pizzicatos ( you can get that "Desperate housewives" sound easily)

HS cons : here comes the biggest flaw imo, the shorts articulations. You clearly hear release cutting when using the staccatos.
Staccatissimo sound great but only at a fast tempo (that way, you dont hear the annoying release cut)


Nick Phoenix, if you still read this topic, would you PLEASE consider making a Kontakt version of Hollywood Strings, please please ! Even if it's a private version and we must sign a NDA that proves we'll never distribute the library in any way (even as a legacy to our child ) , because honestly if you stay on Play, it's certainly not for the stability, just because its been the greatest protection against piracy ever made. But please!!!!
I know you said HS couldnt be made on Kontakt, but it really improved since version 5, I'm sure it could handle H.S fingers in the nose.


----------



## JohnG (May 10, 2014)

rgames @ 10th May 2014 said:


> Are there really that many more voices for HS than HB? How many?



Hi Richard,

Good question. HS' largest patches use many more voices than the big patches in HB. That's why I recommend using the smaller patches. For many situations, they are fine and they still sound great.

When I hit a single note with one mic position open on "1st violins marc legato slur Ni" it uses 14 voices, but that goes up on the release. Using a LT 12 Ni patch "only" uses 9 voices. 2nd Violins legato slur RR LT 12 Ni uses 9 voices too. (the "LT" stands for "light").

But the less-demanding patches also sound great and use a fraction of these resources. For example, using the "Quick Start" menu, one sees 1st Violins legato slur LT 3 Ni, which uses (1 mic position) only 3 voices.

By contrast, in HB using 6FH Leg Slur Rep, a single note with a single mic position uses only 4 voices. 6FH Stop Sus uses only two voices for a note.

To answer your question, Dan, I use many LT 12 patches. I have had LT 9 and LT 6 patches in the template at times too. I think I read that Thomas B likes the patches that have staccato incorporated into them, for what that's worth.



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


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 10, 2014)

Synesthesia @ Sat May 10 said:


> Bear in mind there's no crazy setup issues with Spitfire libs. No masters level EQ/Reverb diplomas to learn.
> 
> Andy usually just loads up the A and O mics and plays..
> 
> ...



That's fair really. My comments earlier re HS don't apply to Spitfire. and I think with each passing release and update the bumps get smoothed out. The new combined legato patches must have been a ton of work, but so worth it. If only other devs worked as hard after recording and editing.

But Andy B is - I think anyway - still a genius beyond mortals


----------



## JohnG (May 10, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ 10th May 2014 said:


> But Andy B is - I think anyway - still a genius beyond mortals



Yep, he's mighty fine.


----------



## muziksculp (May 10, 2014)

Hi,

For those that have both EW-HS, and Spitfire Mural. How would you characterize/describe the sonic difference of these two libraries ? and would it be possible to emulate the EW-HS sound using Mural ? 

Looking at the variety of articulations that Mural (Vol. 1 & 2) offer, Spitfire has included quite a comprehensive set in the Mural Series. I also like the overall warm and lush sound I hear in the demos, imho. Mural sounds impressive and beautiful to my ears !

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## antoniopandrade (May 10, 2014)

To me, the thing about HS is knowing HOW to to use it. Which patches, which mic positions and how to properly work with the programming. It takes a bit of time to get to know the library, but compared to everything out there, and I've extensively programmed with every single top library with the exception of Berlin Strings, it is the most comprehensive and sonically consistent. The sus powerful patches are bar none the most useful string patches I've ever used, they just work, and seep into the music like butter, especially the non-vibs, even in many "legato" situations. The legato patches work as well, but you need to know how to program them, and set a BIG negative delay on the midi track. I don't think they're essential if you have a combination of other libraries, but if you were to use just ONE string library, than HS is probably a good choice.


----------



## clarkus (May 10, 2014)

Hi, Antonio, Always eager to learn. A Google search ch of "Negative delay" yields nothing clearcut. I assume you mean setting things up so that the strings actually sound where you want them to rather than a tad late.

If that's what you mean, is this a function of latency & if so why not adjust that.

And if you in fact make this change via digital delay can you give me a quick run down of how? Be as specific as you have time for.

Appreciate it. Sorry for my ignorance.

I'm looking at the big string libraries & I'm real interested in your qualification, i.e. HS is great IF. I'd like to know how to make it work well.

Many thanks.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (May 10, 2014)

muziksculp @ Sat May 10 said:


> For those that have both EW-HS, and Spitfire Mural. How would you characterize/describe the *sonic difference* of these two libraries ? and would it be possible to emulate the EW-HS sound using Mural ?



Sonically, I would say that HS has a _softer _sound than Mural or LASS. Less "bite".

But, that is just my personal opinion. You really just have to listen to the demos and decide which sound YOU like best.

To your second question, I do not think it would be possible or even advisable to try to make one stringslibrary emulate another. These tools were recorded in certain halls by certain engineers with certain gear and the sum of all that is what you hear baked in to those samples. 

Those characteristics DEFINE the library and I don't think you'd want to fight against that.


----------



## Lawson. (May 10, 2014)

clarkus @ Sat May 10 said:


> Hi, Antonio, Always eager to learn. A Google search ch of "Negative delay" yields nothing clearcut. I assume you mean setting things up so that the strings actually sound where you want them to rather than a tad late.
> 
> If that's what you mean, is this a function of latency & if so why not adjust that.
> 
> ...



It's a MIDI setting that causes the notes to be played a tiny bit before they're written, which helps keep the legato in-time, and not slightly late. I personally prefer just editing the times by hand; however, it's a lot more time-consuming.


----------



## Dan Mott (May 10, 2014)

I have Mural and HS.

HS sounds buttery and smooth. Rich and hollywood.

Mural sounds like a classic string sound. Intimate and delicate. Downton Abbey comes to mind when I hear it. 

For me anyway.


----------



## Mahlon (May 10, 2014)

Dan Mott @ Sat May 10 said:


> I have Mural and HS.
> 
> HS sounds buttery and smooth. Rich and hollywood.
> 
> Mural sounds like a classic string sound. Intimate and delicate. Downton Abbey comes to mind when I hear it.



Totally agree with that. Mural has a beautifully clear and intimate sound. And Downton does indeed come to mind. 

Mahlon


----------



## muziksculp (May 10, 2014)

Dan Mott @ Sat May 10 said:


> I have Mural and HS.
> 
> HS sounds buttery and smooth. Rich and hollywood.
> 
> ...



Hi Dan Mott,

That's very helpful, and gives me a very good idea as to how these two libraries differ.

I guess it would make sense to have both EW-HS and Mural, if one needs to have both String-flavors. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## muziksculp (May 10, 2014)

Hi,

For those using EW-HS, are you running it on the latest *PLAY 4* engine ? 

Just wondering if PLAY 4 (latest version) has offered any optimizations over PLAY 3 when using EW-HS (Plat.) ?

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## The Darris (May 10, 2014)

clarkus @ Sat May 10 said:


> If that's what you mean, is this a function of latency & if so why not adjust that.
> 
> And if you in fact make this change via digital delay can you give me a quick run down of how? Be as specific as you have time for.
> 
> ...



If I am thinking of the right thing, I think he means that in some sample libraries you get a sample start that is just before the actual note audio, thus getting the room sound in there. CineSamples and Spitfire do this. SF has a 'tightness' feature that allows you to tighten up those sample start times to make your playing feel less laggy. This of course takes away that natural room sound you get before a sample. 

How I keep that natural sound is by shifting my midi data forward until it sound naturally lined up with the tempo I am playing at. Some, if not all DAWs have a built in feature to do this as well which is known as "negative delay." Which is another way of saying, "bring your notes in earlier rather than later."


----------



## clarkus (May 10, 2014)

Thanks, Lawson.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 11, 2014)

rpaillot @ Sat May 10 said:


> Nick Phoenix, if you still read this topic, would you PLEASE consider making a Kontakt version of Hollywood Strings, please please ! Even if it's a private version and we must sign a NDA that proves we'll never distribute the library in any way (even as a legacy to our child ) , because honestly if you stay on Play, it's certainly not for the stability, just because its been the greatest protection against piracy ever made. But please!!!!
> I know you said HS couldnt be made on Kontakt, but it really improved since version 5, I'm sure it could handle H.S fingers in the nose.



Even if K5 could handle it, andI am told it can not; even if Nick were predisposed to do so, and he has never given any indication he is, it is not something Doug Rogers would ever agree to. Play is the EW engine, period.


----------



## Martin K (May 11, 2014)

Jay, do you know if there's a demo version of Play in the works?

thanks,
Martin


----------



## Dan Mott (May 11, 2014)

muziksculp @ Sun May 11 said:


> Hi,
> 
> For those using EW-HS, are you running it on the latest *PLAY 4* engine ?
> 
> ...




I am on Windows 7 64bit - Reaper - PLAY 64bit - HS has it's own dedicated crucial SSD.

I think PLAY 4 is better. Seems to be less poppy and clicky. 

PLAY seems to work differently on every system. I do get a click or pop here and there, but not often enough to stop me from using it. The library is heavy. Lot's going on under the hood and it can only be run on good systems. I think quite a few have bought it and have been disappointed from the results because their computer does not handle it, plus they are most likely not using an SSD. I bought an SSD just for HS because I was committed to doing anything I could to make it run perfectly. I did not want this sample lib to gather dust or I would be quite sad.

I would say. Plenty of memory - i5/i7 quad processor - SSD. cannot go wrong with that.


----------



## blougui (May 11, 2014)

muziksculp @ Sat May 10 said:


> Hi,
> 
> For those that have both EW-HS, and Spitfire Mural. How would you characterize/describe the sonic difference of these two libraries ? and would it be possible to emulate the EW-HS sound using Mural ?
> 
> ...



I own Mural. All I can say is the demos do her justice. They nail the sound : no bad surprise when I played it first time - and I'm no maestro composer at all. This is just it. Yes it's delicate, very detailed, not big sounding nore compressed or overly processed but with lot of precious air.

- Erik


----------



## mk282 (May 11, 2014)

JohnG @ 10.5.2014 said:


> > It has I think 5 mic positions, but 0 stereo mixes. I mean of course combination mixtures of close, mid, main, ambient & vintage. Thus my example of what BML has done.
> >
> > Opening a full template of HS with 3 mic positions open is something that Play doesn't handle very well, but makes it sound much better.
> 
> ...



You seem to fail to understand what Jake Jackson stereo mixes in Spitfire libraries are, which is what jamwerks is talking about.


----------



## Casiquire (May 11, 2014)

muk @ Sat 10 May said:


> jaeroe @ Fri May 09 said:
> 
> 
> > LASS offers something that no one else offers with the groups per section (Vln 1 A, B, C plus first chair).
> ...



I'm a bit late here, but I have to disagree a bit. Dimension Strings simply doesn't offer the ensemble size of LASS. Peter Alexander and I openly disagree about this but I have yet to hear an example of DS-only that sounds like an ensemble larger than about 12 first violins. I think it's down to the playing style that was recorded. Also it's a hassle to set up all of the transposed DS instruments to try to achieve that sound in the first place. LASS right out of the box gets whatever size ensemble you want, but the larger groups sound better. Personally the ideal mix is LASS+DS. Any kind of divisi you could ever dream of, up to 25 first violins.

As for whether HS is still a must-have library, I'm fine without all the complications. HS couldn't do anything I write anyway--a string library without proper divisi cannot, by nature, be a must-have library in my opinion.


----------



## rpaillot (May 11, 2014)

Dan Mott @ Sun May 11 said:


> muziksculp @ Sun May 11 said:
> 
> 
> > Hi,
> ...



PLAY doesnt seem to work properly without clicks and pops on MAC . 

I have a Hack with I7 6 cores 4930 and 64 gb, and SSD for HS, and I get clicks with 3 legato patchs loaded and playing at the same time.

Some friends have exactly the same issues with a genuine Mac ( latest MP 2013 ).

If Kontakt can perform nearly the same on Mac and PC, Play should. It might be time to get a real programer East West


----------



## Dan Mott (May 11, 2014)

rpaillot @ Sun May 11 said:


> Dan Mott @ Sun May 11 said:
> 
> 
> > muziksculp @ Sun May 11 said:
> ...



Yep. Works differently on all systems.

Perhaps some optimizing could do you well.

Other than that....... you'd be barking at nothing but air if want PLAY to change or HS to be for Kontakt.

EW already have enough money and enough pros using their software that I do not think they would really care if someone was having issues.

I think Jay has a MAC and his PLAY setup works fine, but I do not think he is using the powerful patches though.



-



Curious though. What program are you hosting PLAY in?


----------



## parnasso (May 11, 2014)

rpaillot said:


> PLAY doesnt seem to work properly without clicks and pops on MAC .
> 
> I have a Hack with I7 6 cores 4930 and 64 gb, and SSD for HS, and I get clicks with 3 legato patchs loaded and playing at the same time.
> 
> ...



That's true for Play 4, even if you're running HS on a Windows machine... I also get clicks with 3 powerful system legato patches and two mic positions loaded and playing at the same time, even though I have a sample slave with a i7 4770 Haswell processor, 32 GB of RAM and SSD's dedicated entirely to HS.
The problem didn't exist with Play 3 and was introduced as they reworked the legato engine for Play 4. Indeed the clicks occur only during the legato transitions and have nothing to do with streaming. I contacted East West support and they acknowledged the problem and said that they're working on it. I really hope that they'll manage to restore the efficiency of Play 3... the thing is that for me Play 4 sounds a bit clearer, the transitions are less smeary and I like the mixer a lot, so going back to Play 3 would not be ideal for me.

As for the situation on the Mac, additionally to the CPU problems described above, another big problem is the Play memory server that occupies huge amounts of RAM when loading up many patches which will make you go out of RAM in a short time. If you load the same patches under Windows you'll see that Play occupies far less RAM. Imo as long as they'll continue to rely on the memory server Play will never be as efficient in OS X as in Windows.


----------



## muk (May 11, 2014)

Casiquire @ Sun May 11 said:


> muk @ Sat 10 May said:
> 
> 
> > jaeroe @ Fri May 09 said:
> ...



No disagreement here. I was under the impression jaeroe was talking about the divisi capability of individual sections, not the section sizes. And so was I. I agree that DS sounds like smaller sections than LASS. Which of course they are, somewhere around half the sizes of LASS. But both libraries can do divisi, and DS even more extensively so as you can control each individual player vs three groups in LASS.


----------



## jamwerks (May 11, 2014)

JohnG @ Sat May 10 said:


> You are mistaken. It's simple to add multiple mic positions in PLAY. I do it all the time, and blend them to taste.


Well, I've sure tried, but with a full template (16 arts) per (all 5) instruments. I couldn't even get 2 mic positions open across the board, without pops. And I'm using all SSD's.

Something I didn't yet try, is using two distinct instances of Play, V1 & V2 in 1, Vla Celli & DB in the other for example. That would probably work better. I also found that layering the close mics (with the mains) yielded the same (nice) sound as using just the mains with Sable layered in. So that's a possibility.


----------



## JohnG (May 11, 2014)

jamwerks @ 11th May 2014 said:


> Something I didn't yet try, is using two distinct instances of Play, V1 & V2 in 1, Vla Celli & DB in the other for example. That would probably work better. I also found that layering the close mics (with the mains) yielded the same (nice) sound as using just the mains with Sable layered in. So that's a possibility.



If you really want to use the powerful patches, this is one way to go. I don't know if this is the best setup or not, but it works, so I haven't changed it for some time.

1. Use a PC slave

2. Use SSDs; if possible, a PCIe card interface.

3. I host multiple instances of PLAY in VE Pro, one for each general type of articulation (sus violins, short violins, sus low strings, short low strings, high FX, low FX)

4. Within each instance of PLAY, group similar articulations so you don't inadvertently load the same base samples twice. So, for example, if you are going to use a sus violin patch, be sure to load the legato violin patch into the same instance of PLAY.

5. In the strings, I'm using version 3.0.47 of PLAY -- out of inertia, not calculation. I use PLAY 4 in SD3.


----------



## JohnG (May 11, 2014)

Just to get back to the original question about whether HS is a / the must-have string library.

One can only speak for oneself on these decisions. To me, by far the most important choice in strings or any library is the sound. The next thing is playability. Much further down the list is breadth of articulations. I bought HS because of the magic of the sound -- full stop.

So I personally would recommend that anyone considering the same decision today should use his or her ears first. Remember that people spend many, many hours on some demos, and get very familiar with all the cc1 and cc11 and what-not that's needed to drive these programs successfully. Still, I believe that demos are still the best way to choose a string library.

If you fall in love with Mural, get it. If you prefer LASS or HS, get that instead. I use LASS and HS. They sound very different to me and they work best in different settings. (The old "LASS is harsher" comment has been obviated since v2.5 and the settings one can apply to it, by the way.)

I also like the real time walk-throughs of the developers who release the libraries.

Technical hurdles can be overcome. I would gladly list the exact specs of my strings computer -- the one that houses HS, LASS, Symphobia and other products -- to anyone interested. PLAY has worked fine for me, on numerous OS setups and six different computers -- Mac and PC. Otherwise I wouldn't use it or recommend it.

As a final note, just so it's clear where I'm coming from, I am very happy that LASS has such a clever divisi setup, but I don't think that's a good reason to choose one library over another. Compared with picking the right notes, divisi when coping with electronically-realised music is far, far, far down my list of things to fuss about.



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


----------



## Casiquire (May 11, 2014)

JohnG @ Sun 11 May said:


> As a final note, just so it's clear where I'm coming from, I am very happy that LASS has such a clever divisi setup, but I don't think that's a good reason to choose one library over another. Compared with picking the right notes, divisi when coping with electronically-realised music is far, far, far down my list of things to fuss about.
> 
> 
> 
> [note: I have received free products from East West]



I can't agree with that. The difference in sound between three instances of Hollywood Strings violins splitting a chord and three small sections of LASS splitting a chord is so huge that we come full-circle back to your original statement of using your ears. Divisi so dramatically changes the sound of a library that saying a person's primary concern should be sound and divisi shouldn't even be near the top of the list of importance is self-contradictory.


----------



## JohnG (May 11, 2014)

Suit yourself. I disagree.


----------



## Peter Alexander (May 11, 2014)

JohnG is right. All of the libs sound different and each lib has its own purpose/setting it works best in. If divisi is important for Mural users, then Spitfire has set up a method of achieving that with Sable.

Based on empirical testing, which VSL signed off on, you can use a similar approach with DS as used with LASS in "enlarging" the string section size by:

A. simply doubling meaning use two inserts of the each section to double the section size;

B. Use the transposition trick to create Violin 2s and use two inserts of each to double the section size. 

One can use this technique to create larger divisi sections, or use the lib "as is" to create divisi but with smaller sections.

Only HS and Mural have recorded as a single section, 16 first violins. These, then, become the benchmarks as to what 16 violins sound like and to which DS and LASS can be compared aand individual potential customers can decide from there.


----------



## Sovereign (May 11, 2014)

rpaillot @ Sun May 11 said:


> PLAY doesnt seem to work properly without clicks and pops on MAC .
> 
> I have a Hack with I7 6 cores 4930 and 64 gb, and SSD for HS, and I get clicks with 3 legato patchs loaded and playing at the same time.
> 
> Some friends have exactly the same issues with a genuine Mac ( latest MP 2013 ).


While Play is not my favorite sample player here's my experience after upgrading to a new Mac Pro 2013, currently with 32 gigs of ram, thunderbolt UAD Apollo Twin Solo, and samples streamed from SSD using a Blackmagic thunderbolt disk dock. Daw is Logic X.

Using the 'powerful' system patches and spreading a basic set of legato slur patches across two instances of Play 4 I find things quite workable, I experience no pops or clicks. Logic seems to spread the load rather evenly across the 8 available CPU threads. I can imagine though that playing 3 legato patches simultaneously is too much for a single CPU thread, so why not record those separately?


----------



## SymphonicSamples (May 12, 2014)

Hey , I'd have to say asking if HS is a must have is very specific to what style of music you compose , and the internalized string section sound you hear , be it intimate or a large lush sound . I think it's a superb product as long as spend the time to tame the beast and run it off an SSD . From my own experience as a user it's performed wonderfully from Play 3 through 4 . It has a large number of patches which could be overwhelming to a new user at first , but you tend to find the patches that you gravitate towards the most and sound/fit best your writing style . It really depends on the sound your after . There are things it does better than my other string libraries and vice-versa , some of which have already been mentioned in this thread . Although I'd like to add I think it's short articulations are one of it's strengths given the shear amount of choices available , and how effective they can be when layered with other articulations . 

Just in case Nick Phoenix is still following this thread , I've added a partial quote as a reference to my following thoughts . 



Thomas_J @ Mon Jan 06 said:


> HS has 3 dynamics of true legato, 4 in the violins. I did a lot of the original scripting and we had implemented adaptive legato playing, where it would switch between bow change legato to slurred legato to runs depending on the playing speed .



I'd love to see a version 3.0 of HS , building on an already great library . So is HS a must , well as a user I'd still be happy to pay for an update , which I think reflects on the quality of the product and it's strengths . Could I completely replace it with another library and shelve it , no I couldn't and the same could be said for the other strings libraries I have , Adagietto and Mural , which are superb . None can completely replace the others for me , they all shine and are very effective in their own area's . If you love the sound of the HS product demos , then it's a must


----------



## Cat (May 12, 2014)

Rv5, could you (or anyone else) explain what is the issue with the BowChange Legato in POlay 4.1.8? I have found other threads where this was mentioned as well but I couldn't find any description of this. Also on the Soundsonline/Support forum I couldn't find any mention of it at all. Also what about the polyphonic problem with the Divisi Mics?

I am contemplating HS Diamond + Play 4.1.8 so I would like to be aware of any possible (big) issues. 

Thanks guys!



Rv5 @ Sat May 10 said:


> Updates in Play have stopped the Bow Change Legato patches working. Updates in Play caused polyphonic behaviour in Legato Divisi patches.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 12, 2014)

[quote="SymphonicSamples @ Mon May 12, 2014 1:21 am" It has a large number of patches which could be overwhelming to a new user at first , but you tend to find the patches that you gravitate towards the most and sound/fit best your writing style . It really depends on the sound your after . There are things it does better than my o.[/quote]

)[/quote]


Two folders that are often overlooked are the Quick Start and Template Pro folders. They were a big help to me when I first started with HS., especially the Quick Start because I was using a single under powered Mac at the time.


----------



## Diffusor (May 12, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sat May 10 said:


> jamwerks @ Sat May 10 said:
> 
> 
> > One thing that cripples HS a bit is the combo: Play (resource management) & no mix positions
> ...



And you can barely run one of the mic positions real time. I think it has nothing to do with computer requirements and everything to do with Play's inefficiency. I had a realization when I loaded the Berlin String adaptive legato patches (very equivalent to HS's Powerful system legato imo) on all 5 string sections, with all 6 mix perspectives active and it all plays back perfectly off one SSD on one computer, with other sample libraries playing simultaneously. Back when I was trying to get HS to run I was told I needed a super computer with SSDs but it really didn't make any difference even when I got all that. One mic perspective is all I got reliably and I had to split the strings sections over two computers. The sound of HS is perfectly great though, just too bad it's wrapped in Play. And then I won't even mention paying over $1200 for it not long after release and since I've seen firesales for 300 to 400 dollars. I much prefer other companies policies of cheaper presales then the price goes up, with maybe modest sales down the road like Spitfire, 8dio, OT etc.


----------



## muziksculp (May 12, 2014)

Hi,

One of the other reasons I posted this question, was the fact that I'm trying to switch my studio from using slave PCs to consolidating everything on one-super PC. 

But, given that I would like to use EW-HS (Plat.) , I will most likely have to dedicate a slave-PC just for using EW-HS (Plat.) 

The feedback I got so far on this thread, points out that EW-HS is still a great sounding Strings Library, and it is worth dealing with all the negatives in running it. (i.e. keeping a dedicated slave, and using PLAY, which I'm not a fan of using), but.. there is a price for everything. Decisions.. Decisions.. Decisions. :roll: 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 12, 2014)

muziksculp @ Mon May 12 said:


> Hi,
> 
> One of the other reasons I posted this question, was the fact that I'm trying to switch my studio from using slave PCs to consolidating everything on one-super PC.
> 
> ...



You are welcome to come over here and try some stuff out if you like.


----------



## muziksculp (May 12, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Mon May 12 said:


> muziksculp @ Mon May 12 said:
> 
> 
> > Hi,
> ...



Thank You Jay ! 

I will be selling three of my PC-Slaves, and keeping one PC-slave for EW-HS. If anyone here is interested, I will post the specs of the three PC-systems, and pricing in the near future on this forum's 'For Sale' section, they will be priced at a great discount. So.. If you need to add a slave-PC to your current system, this might be a good opportunity. 

Cheers,
Muziksulp


----------



## Mahlon (May 12, 2014)

muziksculp @ Mon May 12 said:


> Hi,
> 
> One of the other reasons I posted this question, was the fact that I'm trying to switch my studio from using slave PCs to consolidating everything on one-super PC.
> 
> ...



What do you like about HS as compared to Mural and Berlin Strings? I mean, what put you over. From the demos. Just curious.

Mahlon


----------



## chimuelo (May 12, 2014)

Well FWIW EW stuff works in real time for me fine after years of not buying it for that very reason.
Yuze guys wanting to have a single PC can do so if you want, but you'll need SAS Enterprise devices, or at least SATA III on PCI-e slots.
I have the ASRock Z87 11/a w/ 4 x HGST SAS devices, the built in LSI Controller chip instead of the consumer ASmedia or Marvel, and 1.8GBps does the job just fine, several patches use up half of the 32GBs of RAM but it is well worth it.

I would suggest the non SAS Enterprise Z97 ASRock using NGFF M.2 PCI-e Ultra devices, and SATA Express. 
Speeds of non RAIDed devices are @ 1.1GBps which is plenty fast, my rig is actually overkill, but the new Z97 Extreme 6 from ASRock is a DAW dream IMHO, it will replace my spare since it's cheap.

Check out the reviews and also worth mentioning you can use a short depth 1U if Supermicro fans don't scare you, they sure have no effect on my sounds with their noise, even if not performing and just recording there's no leakage what so ever.

PLAY isn't inefficient, it's just a resource hog, but you can surely overcome that in the next year with new NGFF and SATA Express devices, might have to RAID the SATA Express units, but the Samsung XP941s.....those Dogs Hunt by themselves.
A pair of 512s built onto the mobo take no extra room and even if you use a ribbon extender for a PCI-e 1X audio connector, they designed the board around that as if they were thinking audio.

ASRock is no longer the cheap red headed step child. Their enterprise models are getting great reviews everywhere, and mine loads a DAW with tons of PLAY, Kontakt PTEQ 5 and even VST FX from Sonalksiss I bought years back like the split comp.

Don't build w/o looking at ASRocks new storage beasts, especially if you need 128 tracks and want real time efficiency, the Z87 11/a is a monster.

I can even fill entire 128 slots of Kontakt instrument banks x 4 in Bidule as if I had 4 giant Yamaha ROMplers, with GB sized PCM samples.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (May 13, 2014)

To the performance thing: 

Today morning I looked into my template which is main orchestral Template for the Big lush HW esqued Sound. I am using in this case particular 24 instances of the Play Engine to cover the Instruments (HW STR, HW BR, HW WW). + some other Virtual Effect Plugins like Quantum Leap Spaces etc. I have off course in the beginning some loading time, but within the project no glitches or performance problems. So I am very curious about the people who have a faster PC than I have but still getting these performance issues. 

My system is a: 

Intel Core 5 750 @2,8 Ghz, 16 GB Black Dragon Kingston Ram (1333 Mhz, CL 9-9-9-24 Timings). 

I m using the Play 3.047 Version with Cubase 6.5 64 Bit on OS Win 7 64 Bit. 

I have no dedicated Server running, so my pc can handle that somehow. 

The Play Engine is "Standard", so I didn´t changed any settings regarding that.

A reason can be, that I am not using "much" these powerful Patches. Sometimes when I have a delicate situation, then I might tend to use them. But most of the time you can go by the "economic" versions which are already more than fine..lets say. I can imagine that you need a monster of a pc with dedicated servers to use a lot of these Powerful patches.

So in the end for me: I can recommend the Hollywood Strings as long you are aware of these matters.


----------



## jamwerks (May 13, 2014)

chimuelo @ Tue May 13 said:


> Well FWIW EW stuff works in real time for me fine after years of not buying it for that very reason...


Love reading your tweek-head posts. Keep 'em coming!


----------



## janila (May 13, 2014)

I love HS but absolutely loathe PLAY. PLAY was a bad call from EW from the get-go and it continues to be so. Considering that I had to buy a new slave and spend days to get it working it would have been cheaper to get Berlin Strings. My 2 cents would be waiting to see how 8DIO Agitato will turn out and then choose something that doesn't use PLAY. :wink:


----------



## KEnK (May 13, 2014)

muziksculp @ Mon May 12 said:


> The feedback I got so far on this thread, points out that EW-HS is still a great sounding Strings Library, and it is worth dealing with all the negatives in running it.


I drew the opposite conclusion,
but I think nothing is a "must have".

My own experience using Play is that I can get a piece of music to sound just as good w/ 
other products. 
So to me it isn't worth the unpredictability and extra time interrupting my workflow that 
I've invariably encountered when trying to use my EW products.

k


----------



## José Herring (May 13, 2014)

AlexanderSchiborr @ Mon May 12 said:


> To the performance thing:
> 
> Today morning I looked into my template which is main orchestral Template for the Big lush HW esqued Sound. I am using in this case particular 24 instances of the Play Engine to cover the Instruments (HW STR, HW BR, HW WW). + some other Virtual Effect Plugins like Quantum Leap Spaces etc. I have off course in the beginning some loading time, but within the project no glitches or performance problems. So I am very curious about the people who have a faster PC than I have but still getting these performance issues.
> 
> ...



The Powerful patches are more streaming intensive than CPU intensive. So when I switched to SSD for Play libraries, I was able to run powerful system patches without a glitch.

Successful Play experience requires a good PC, lots of Ram and SSD. To the OP if you can get that you'll have no problems at all.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 13, 2014)

Some of you who complain about Play might want to ask yourselves why, if Play is so extraordinarily difficult to run smoothly, I have pretty much extended an open invitation to people in LA to come and see how well a 22 GB Hollywood Series VE Pro template runs on my mid-level now three year old PC slave.

Nobody from EW has come over and tweaked it nor did I ever bring it to EW to tweak or even ask them how I should have it set.

Jose' Herring told me what to order, how to set the BIOS, and that is it.

This is not to say that in various incarnations of Play there have not been issues that needed updates to solve, but as an N.I. beta tester, I can tell you the same has been true of Kontakt.

Now if you object to having to use a slave PC if you want to run a lot of the Hollywood series, object to having to buy SSDs, then yes, I understand that. And if you have libraries that will do for you all you need them to do that do not require any of that, I understand that.


----------



## BachRules (May 13, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 13 said:


> ... I have pretty much extended an open invitation to people in LA to come and see how well a 22 GB Hollywood Series VE Pro template runs on my mid-level now three year old PC slave.


Maybe they care more how it works on their own systems?



EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 13 said:


> Some of you who complain about Play might want to ask yourselves why....


Incompetent programmers and negligent customer support?



EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 13 said:


> Now if you object to having to use a slave PC if you want to run a lot of the Hollywood series, object to having to buy SSDs, then yes, I understand that.


SSD is neither 'required' nor 'recommended'; and slave PC isn't even an aspect of 'optimal'. See "Specifications":

http://www.soundsonline.com/Hollywood-Strings

If it doesn't work as advertised, can you understand why people are complaining?


----------



## JohnG (May 13, 2014)

I'm starting to get the impression you don't like East West.


----------



## José Herring (May 13, 2014)

BachRules @ Tue May 13 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 13 said:
> 
> 
> > ... I have pretty much extended an open invitation to people in LA to come and see how well a 22 GB Hollywood Series VE Pro template runs on my mid-level now three year old PC slave.
> ...



I don't quite get what you're saying. 

When I was interested in the HS I knew it had challenges. So I asked Jay to get the original specs of what they had tested HS on. He got them, and we were off and running with killer Play PC's. 

They've since put the specs up as a recommended system. That system is now 4 years old I believe and since then there have been a ton of advances in PC. 

So provided that you have a PC that's been built in the last 4 years, you should have no problem. 

I use Play on my main machine hosted in VEPro and I kid you not it has never, ever crashed or been any problem. As a matter of fact in the last year I've had 2 VePro crashes both of which were caused by Kontakt. :mrgreen: 

@Musiksculp, if you're willing to meet Play and the Hollywood series on it's own terms you'll have very little problems. It has its annoyances, but every library I have has that. And, I swear that sometimes it actually does sound like I'm using the real thing, which, is a feeling I rarely get with samples.

YOu can run things on one monster PC. I run almost everything on one modest PC, but I keep at least one slave going too. I still don't think it that beneficial to have everything on one machine. Two good PC's will do it. One monster and one i750 or better.


----------



## muziksculp (May 13, 2014)

josejherring @ Tue May 13 said:


> @Musiksculp, if you're willing to meet Play and the Hollywood series on it's own terms you'll have very little problems. I has its annoyances, but every library I have has that. And, I swear that sometimes it actually does sound like I'm using the real thing, which, is a feeling I rarely get with samples.
> 
> YOu can run things on one monster PC. I run almost everything on one modest PC, but I keep at least one slave going too. I still don't think it that beneficial to have everything on one machine. Two good PC's will do it. One monster and one i750 or better.



Hi josejherring,

Thanks for your valuable feedback. 

Yes, that's what I plan to do for now. Have one Super-PC , and one powerful enough PC-Slave for EW-HS. 

Since I don't yet have Mural or Berlin-Strings (yet), I have no way to find out if they will change my mind, and make me eliminate EW-HS completely, including its Slave-PC  which could be a possible scenario in the future. 

Interestingly, I wonder if anyone has eliminated EW-HS and it's Slave-PC from their setup, in favor of Berlin and/or Mural Strings without any regrets. Has anyone done that ? 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## rpaillot (May 13, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 13 said:


> Some of you who complain about Play might want to ask yourselves why, if Play is so extraordinarily difficult to run smoothly, I have pretty much extended an open invitation to people in LA to come and see how well a 22 GB Hollywood Series VE Pro template runs on my mid-level now three year old PC slave.
> 
> Nobody from EW has come over and tweaked it nor did I ever bring it to EW to tweak or even ask them how I should have it set.
> 
> ...



Then write on your website that having a Slave PC is better than having the last Mac Pro 2013.

Seriously, please just hire a good OSX programmer, period. Just look at how many complains you get, especially from mac users, that answer "get a slave PC" is not a good answer.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 13, 2014)

And if told you the lead programmer for Play OSX used to program Kontakt for OSX ?


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 13, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 13 said:


> And if told you the lead programmer for Play OSX used to program Kontakt for OSX ?



Wow, that does raise all sorts of interesting questions.

Genuine question, Jay - your rig (which I don't doubt works exactly as you say), are you able to stream multiple mic positions and run several legato instruments at once or do you use freezing?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 13, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Tue May 13 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 13 said:
> 
> 
> > And if told you the lead programmer for Play OSX used to program Kontakt for OSX ?
> ...



I have not frozen a track in three years. I use two mic positions with Legato patches in HOW; two on some instruments with HB; only one in my large template for HS because it would take more RAM than the 24 GB I have on my PC.

The template I use most often however is smaller and I am testing using 2 mic positions with HS. It doesn't create problems but I am not sure yet how much I think it improves the sound as I layer HS with either Kirk Hunter Concert Strings or Sonic Implants Strings on many projects.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 13, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 13 said:


> I have not frozen a track in three years. I use two mic positions with Legato patches in HOW; two on some instruments with HB; only one in my large template for HS because it would take more RAM than the 24 GB I have on my PC.
> 
> The template I use most often however is smaller and I am testing using 2 mic positions with HS. It doesn't create problems but I am not sure yet how much I think it improves the sound as I layer HS with either Kirk Hunter Concert Strings or Sonic Implants Strings on many projects.



Cool - useful to know.

I'm glad I got HB, it works really well and it's not too demanding. It does sound like its fair to say that serious use of HS could do with its own machine though, definitely something to factor in to the purchase price.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 13, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Tue May 13 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 13 said:
> 
> 
> > I have not frozen a track in three years. I use two mic positions with Legato patches in HOW; two on some instruments with HB; only one in my large template for HS because it would take more RAM than the 24 GB I have on my PC.
> ...



Indeed, and I have been candid about that.


----------



## José Herring (May 13, 2014)

muziksculp @ Tue May 13 said:


> josejherring @ Tue May 13 said:
> 
> 
> > @Musiksculp, if you're willing to meet Play and the Hollywood series on it's own terms you'll have very little problems. I has its annoyances, but every library I have has that. And, I swear that sometimes it actually does sound like I'm using the real thing, which, is a feeling I rarely get with samples.
> ...



Not a problem and if you need any help with the setup or computer configuration, just let me know. I've made PC building and setup kind of a hobby.


----------



## JohnG (May 13, 2014)

Jose is great at it. He has very kindly helped me many times.


----------



## StatKsn (May 14, 2014)

Sovereign @ Sun May 11 said:


> Using the 'powerful' system patches and spreading a basic set of legato slur patches across two instances of Play 4 I find things quite workable, I experience no pops or clicks. Logic seems to spread the load rather evenly across the 8 available CPU threads. I can imagine though that playing 3 legato patches simultaneously is too much for a single CPU thread, so why not record those separately?


This raised me an interesting question. Is it an ill-supported multi-threading that is also causing a problem?

So I disabled "stream from disk" and loaded all the samples into the memory, played around with the 1st Violin Sus 13 DB 4th pos. patch with all the mics enabled. It sounds like this: http://stak.dnsd.info/attic/HS_dfm_4mics.mp3

Whenever I hit chords, some notes get eliminated in the middle with occasional noises. While I'm doing this, my CPU load at a glance is not spiking at all.







However, it turned out the overload protection is causing the issue (Play's internal CPU meter often spikes over "150%") and after disabling it, I can play this patch without trouble so long as the samples are streamed directly from the memory.

Bottom line: Play doesn't seem to support multi-threading well or maybe it isn't really supported, so using multiple instances (running on a different process) of Play would definitely help. We just need to disable the overload protection and I doubt if a slave PC is must for HS (to be honest it sounds silly to me).

Tested with Play 4.1.8 standalone, Windows 7 x64.


----------



## Markus S (May 14, 2014)

Only judging from the demos, I think EW HS is one of the best sounding string libraries out there, if not the best sounding, IMO, at least for the typical film Hollywood sound.

That said, personally I still wouldn't go for it now, as there are so many PLAY problems. I just tested PLAY once with SD2 and it didn't work, whereas all other libraries/VSTs work on my system.

Certainly hope it will be save to buy this lib, it sounds just fantastic and I'm keeping my eye on it.


----------



## bbunker (May 14, 2014)

I always find it funny that all the discussions about EW HS always revolve around how people AREN'T able to use it. Something along the lines of "well, I loaded up every single patch for every section in HS, and sure enough, it stresses the crap out of my computer."

I use 5 (Count them, FIVE) patches in my Template from HS. Each Section's 6 RR 4th Pos longs. They use like 300 MB of RAM, and 3-4% of my CPU (yeah, Reaper doesn't like Play very much...).

I use LASS for everything else, because it's leaner and meaner, and a "every patch" of those shorts takes up 1/20th of what Hollywood Strings' shorts would.

This is usually where a Play-ter would jump in and cry foul at the obvious inferiority of EW products, or Hollywood Strings, et al..

I won't do that. Because I'd consider $20 a patch for each of those to be a huge bargain, and I'd buy it again tomorrow. Those longs are silky and smooth, the Senza Vibrato is rich and emotional and blends nicely into a passionate and rich "Normal" Vibrato, and...well, I wouldn't trade them for $100.

Maybe I'll get that Slave if I get some scoring work for a project that's more AAA than "Flash-and-lucky-to-be-on-Kongregate." Then I can dance around with every Powerful System patch making joyous Round Robins of love to my scores.

Until then, I'll just say that Hollywood Strings is one of the best value-for-money purchases you can make. Even if, like me, you only use Five Patches.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 14, 2014)

If you go to the Developers: I would value MIDI files thread, look at what I just posted I can run on my iMac w/32 GB and no SSDs when I turn off my slave PC. Frankly, I was pleasantly surprised.


----------



## bbunker (May 14, 2014)

Jay, I saw those screencaps you posted on the other thread with your VE-Pro setup. Do you think hosting in VE gives any kind of performance improvement beyond just the "not having to load up your session for every track" factor? I've been kind of keen on VE-Pro for a while...


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 14, 2014)

bbunker @ Wed May 14 said:


> Jay, I saw those screencaps you posted on the other thread with your VE-Pro setup. Do you think hosting in VE gives any kind of performance improvement beyond just the "not having to load up your session for every track" factor? I've been kind of keen on VE-Pro for a while...



Yes I do. I think VE Pro distributes between the cores better than any DAW. Certainly better than Logic Pro.


----------



## bbunker (May 14, 2014)

Thanks for the tip. I might send a message to Herb and see if I can get another go at the VE-Pro Demo.


----------



## StatKsn (May 15, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 14 said:


> If you go to the Developers: I would value MIDI files thread, look at what I just posted I can run on my iMac w/32 GB and no SSDs when I turn off my slave PC. Frankly, I was pleasantly surprised.



Interesting test. My 3930k PC w/ WD30EZRX HDD was already having trouble playing 1st Violins/2nd Violins powerful legato patches with close+surround mic (one instance per patch, ASIO 312 samples/7ms). I needed to go as far as 1760 samples/40ms to play without a buffering noise.

In other words, yes, you can actually play powerful legato patches with a 7200rpm HDD (it took 6 min to load). But it seems like your iMac fares much, much better than my PC...

If anybody can chime in with their testing report, that'd be welcome 8)


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 15, 2014)

StatKsn @ Thu May 15 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 14 said:
> 
> 
> > If you go to the Developers: I would value MIDI files thread, look at what I just posted I can run on my iMac w/32 GB and no SSDs when I turn off my slave PC. Frankly, I was pleasantly surprised.
> ...



I have never used it but it seems like performance is all over the map with ASIO.

And yes, from a 7200 HD it takes a _long_ time to load.


----------



## StatKsn (May 15, 2014)

Yeah, I have a hunch that something might be not right between ASIO and Play, but no idea why and how to fix it.


----------



## Hannes_F (May 15, 2014)

BachRules @ Sat May 10 said:


> I'm shopping for strings right now and passing on EW-Hollywood Strings. My reason isn't its price or the capabilities of my PC -- my PC surpasses the specs EW lists as "recommended" for Hollywood Strings. I'm passing on Hollywood Strings because in my experience EW's software outputs defective audio:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5ZYXb_HdIQhYTE3aU5pUlJvMTQ/edit?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5ZYXb ... sp=sharing)
> 
> ...



BachRules,

I'll be on your heels for a while now. Maybe you did not get some answers yet to your questions.

1. It is good practise here to post mp3 files for demonstrations purposes. Most problems can be heard with mp3 @ 320 kB/s.

2. That being said I _think _what bothers you here is the loop point in these samples and not the EW software per se. Are you familiar with the concept of looping?

If not, please ask here and we'll try to work from there.


----------



## BachRules (May 16, 2014)

Hannes_F @ Thu May 15 said:


> BachRules @ Sat May 10 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm shopping for strings right now and passing on EW-Hollywood Strings. My reason isn't its price or the capabilities of my PC -- my PC surpasses the specs EW lists as "recommended" for Hollywood Strings. I'm passing on Hollywood Strings because in my experience EW's software outputs defective audio:
> ...





Hannes_F @ Thu May 15 said:


> I'll be on your heels for a while now.


Whatever.



Hannes_F @ Thu May 15 said:


> 1. It is good practise here to post mp3 files for demonstrations purposes. Most problems can be heard with mp3 @ 320 kB/s.


It's better practice to use WAV when demonstrating a commercial product's defect, to avoid MP3 artifacts being mistaken for defects in the product. Unless there's some forum rule against posting WAV's, I'll just have to endure your disapproval.



Hannes_F @ Thu May 15 said:


> Are you familiar with the concept of looping?


Yes, Hannes, I learned about looping at CCRMA, and I implemented it when I was programming the world's first commercial software synth for Intel and Creative Labs.



Hannes_F @ Thu May 15 said:


> 2. That being said I _think _what bothers you here is the loop point in these samples and not the EW software per se.


What bothers me isn't a loop point. What bothers me is the clear crackling noise:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5ZYXb_HdIQhYTE3aU5pUlJvMTQ/edit?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5ZYXb ... sp=sharing)

On KVR, no one mistook it for loop-points:

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 3&t=408856 ,

and on May-14, EWQL acknowledged this crackling-noise defect in Spaces and promised to fix it "ASAP"; but if you want to continue "on my heels" about this, I'm game.


----------



## bbunker (May 16, 2014)

edit


----------



## StatKsn (May 16, 2014)

You are using Reaper, aren't you? It's worth a try disabling media buffering and anticipative FX from track performance options. Some users reported that this fixed wacky behavior of QL Spaces with Reaper.

Edit: For some reason pops and crackles never happen on me with Reaper, but Play/Spaces are very picky about host block-size and often it goes very poppy in FL Studio unless I assign a new mixer track (or force fixed block-size).


----------



## BachRules (May 16, 2014)

StatKsn @ Fri May 16 said:


> You are using Reaper, aren't you? It's worth a try disabling media buffering and anticipative FX from track performance options. Some users reported that this fixed wacky behavior of QL Spaces with Reaper.


Thank you, I appreciate the tip. I use Reaper, but I also tested on Cubase and reproduced the problem in Cubase with Spaces.


----------



## Deleted member 8496 (May 16, 2014)

I've been thinking about upgrading my HS/HB to diamond from gold. Does the loading times increase drastically with the additional mic positions? 

So far i haven't had any issues loading from a 7200 rpm drive. Even the biggest HS patches isnt that bad. I'm guessing the diamond edition is much worse.

I'm loving the sound of it, but as someone mentioned, the short notes could be better (imo).


----------



## JohnG (May 16, 2014)

It's not so much the load times as the streaming (and to some extent the CPU) demands. 

If you are using the less-demanding patches it might be just fine. If you are using the advanced system patches and writing many notes for many instruments, adding mic positions doubles / triples the load, so you could run into a bottleneck.


----------



## Nathan Allen Pinard (May 16, 2014)

I keep telling myself I can skip Hollywood Strings, but a track I'm working on just tells me no, I can't. I'm using Cinematic Strings 2 now. It sounds good, but doesn't sound "silky" like HS. I think this is due to Shawn Murphy more than anything.

So while HS takes a lot of resources, I still think it's the most convincing string lib on the market. It's smother sounding. The only one I would guess that is playable and competitive is Dimension Strings. (which I do not have)

However, using ALL FIVE mic positions is insane, and despite my system I don't think I can use them. (so basically just HS gold) But just using one mic position sounds extremely good. And I may post some comparisons on the piece I'm working on to see what the difference really is.


----------



## Nathan Allen Pinard (May 16, 2014)

Here is a real world example of a track dong with HS using a real violin and vocal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g81surwXU0

The highs of HS are really what sticks out. Most string libs suffer from very tinny highs. These just kind of have that "soaring" sound to them.

I obviously can't say this isn't possible with all other string libs as I don't own all of them. But from what I have, and what I've heard (user demos or real compositions) they don't seem to match.

Maybe Berlin Strings, but the legato sounds iffy to me on that lib.

My two cents.

EDIT: Another track (WIP) that is more string heavy http://www.immortalaria.com/music/FLTD.mp3


----------



## Hannes_F (May 16, 2014)

BachRules @ Fri May 16 said:


> What bothers me isn't a loop point. What bothers me is the clear crackling noise:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5ZYXb_HdIQhYTE3aU5pUlJvMTQ/edit?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5ZYXb ... sp=sharing)
> 
> ...



I see you posted a demo project file on KVR and will try to reproduce it when I am back in studio, but that will not be before monday. Until then I could only listen on laptop and the loop point was the first guess (in order to take your concern serious).


----------



## muziksculp (May 16, 2014)

Hi,

Does EW-HS (Gold) have the same _silky_ sound that EW-HS (Plat.) offers ?

I was wondering if using the (Gold) version is a big compromise compared to using (Plat.), given that (Gold) seems to be less of resource hog. 

What do you feel is the biggest sacrifice/compromise when using EW-HS (Gold) instead of (Plat.) ? 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## artsoundz (May 16, 2014)

I think it's remarkable for a company to respond so quickly with a fix for pretty much a very small group of folks. Frankly, it seems like one guy. Couldnt find similar complaints but I assume there must be a couple more.

Kind of goes against the the myth.


----------



## Nathan Allen Pinard (May 16, 2014)

> Does EW-HS (Gold) have the same silky sound that EW-HS (Plat.) offers ?



Im my opinion yes. Diamond's worth seems to be more of an acoustic space value, not how the strings ACTUALLY sound and are recorded/played.

The demos (I believe) I posted actually use both Gold. I had not purchased Diamond till after.

I am noticing a pretty minor difference in Diamond straight out the box. I would invite anyone to state any bigger differences.

There is bow change legato, but apparently that only works at very slow tempos and is not possible to simply trigger when you want it.

I haven't played with Divisi at all.


----------



## Mystic (May 16, 2014)

My big problem with Hollywood is that it's not at all user friendly and there are no resources available to learn how to use it specifically and make it sound good. I've hit a lot of brick walls when trying to learn how to make a proper sounding song using it and it's been a never ending source of frustration to me. Granted, I don't come from a background in composing actual orchestral music but it's something I'm actively learning but even learning that would still make Hollywood a challenging program to use.

I've been told "it's a tool for professionals" which is fine as it is what it is, but that is extremely unhelpful to someone trying to learn how to use it whom has already spent the money on it.

There are no educational starting tutorials available online and I've gotten the excuse "there is no one right way to do things and you should just play around with it and learn it". What people who say this fail to realize is that an instructional video at least showing the creation of a song from beginning to end would give people a starting point to build from. Then with this I also sometimes get "we're not giving you our trade secrets" which always makes me laugh. Even highly competitive fields like photo editing have whole university style courses dedicated to learning Photoshop. Why would learning something like this be any different?

Looking back, I'd likely still buy it down the road but I would have bought something much more user friendly to start like LASS or even ProjectSAM.


----------



## artsoundz (May 16, 2014)

Start with asking Jay Asher what go-to patches he uses. They are a small handful. 
Then find a small section of your favorite score and recreate the violin lines if only for a few seconds. Concentrate on cc1 ,7 , 11. Pick up the E.T score and pick a section.

The hard work advice is golden. There are countless resources on how to create string lines.

Ive never met a pro unwilling to share his knowledge. Perhaps the entitlement is a turn off?


----------



## Mystic (May 16, 2014)

artsoundz @ Fri May 16 said:


> Start with asking Jay Asher what go-to patches he uses. They are a small handful.
> Then find a small section of your favorite score and recreate the violin lines if only for a few seconds. Concentrate on cc1 ,7 , 11. Pick up the E.T score and pick a section.
> 
> The hard work advice is golden. There are countless resources on how to create string lines.
> ...


I'll have to get a hold of him and see if he would share. I'm actually amazed there aren't more videos on youtube with people using Hollywood considering how popular it is.

It's not so much entitlement as it is frustration. I was making sure to be very nice the first few months when I started asking for help because it means finding people who are willing to take some time to make posts. After being stonewalled for months on end, it just got really annoying and I simply stopped asking and started doing a lot of googling. I eventually found this forum.


----------



## artsoundz (May 16, 2014)

Hey man, 
I completely understand. You are in the right place, though. I don't have HS but have always lusted after them so I'm acutely aware of the challenges this library seems to impart. 
But bottom line is that so many use it with great success. One thing to remember is a sampled string section realized properly is very much dependent on good orchestration. No library can overcome poor voice leading, for example. Of course, this takes a lifetime commitment and can add to the frustration. You probably know this, but start small. Just pick a few seconds of something and go for it. One patch, 10 seconds of a John Williams score. Many recommend the E.T score since thats something you can buy. 

Anyway, good luck. I hope you get some of your questions answered soon. Just don't get too frustrated. It will happen for you, I'm certain.
Best, Kevin


----------



## feck (May 16, 2014)

I posted this earlier in the thread but got no response from Nick - I asked why it is that EW themselves don't do at least a few good tutorial videos on the product.


----------



## proxima (May 16, 2014)

Nathan Allen Pinard @ Fri May 16 said:


> > I am noticing a pretty minor difference in Diamond straight out the box.


I've been mulling over Diamond vs. Gold (and Platinum vs. Gold for EWQLSO) and from what I've read here and elsewhere, the value is almost entirely for those people who make use of close mics. I haven't heard anyone say they found 24-bit samples amazingly superior. It's interesting that you can't force bow change legato on demand, I didn't know that.

Usually, CCC is "70%" off, or starting at $700 (now that it's downloadable), and CCC pro (with diamond/platinum for HS/HB/SO) is "60%" off, but for several weeks CCC pro has been (and probably will be) also 70% off. That makes the price difference about $300. 

My problem is that I tend to really like close mics for pianos (I imagine because I'm used to playing them), but I have no idea if I'd make use of close mics for strings or brass. Some people here find they never use them, some can't live without them, and upgrading those 3 products, even with an extra-special special, would be much more than $300 in the future. I'm also operating under the assumption that my system (a 2013 iMac currently with 24 GB of RAM) is capable of playing a handful of individual patches with one mic, but that I'd need a slave if I wanted to go beyond that.

So I know it's at least in large part a matter of taste, but I'd certainly appreciate any additional comments about the usefulness of diamond/platinum vs gold. $300 goes a long way towards another sample library, but all indications are that the best deal with EW stuff is to buy everything you want right away in a CCC package.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 16, 2014)

Mystic @ Fri May 16 said:


> artsoundz @ Fri May 16 said:
> 
> 
> > Start with asking Jay Asher what go-to patches he uses. They are a small handful.
> ...



Of course, happy to. I honestly believe that for most users, excluding those trying to mockup difficult classical pieces, 85% of what they will ever need to do can be done so that it sounds quite good (my only goal) with four patches for each instrument: a legato slur patch, preferably from the Powerful System folder but if your computer will not handle that, the LT patchers sound almost as good; a KS patch which keyswitches between sustain, tremolo, trills etc. e.g1st Vln Sus KS Co-F#0 N; a mod shorts combo although lately I am finding that I am in love with the Stac On Bow patch in the Short Tight folder and am mostly using that for shorts; and finally a Pizz RR patch

That's it. 20 patches for most of what you do. Understand, you need to read about how they behave in the manual and practice with them but I am confident that if you spend even 2 hours with each kind of patch, playing and adding cc manipulation, you will be gin to "get it" in short order.

I have mostly used the Mid mics but lately I am combining the Vintage and Close mics instead and really digging it. More than that is IMHO a waste of computer resources, especially if like me you layer with other libraries.


----------



## DavidAdeyemi (May 16, 2014)

It is the best. Bar None.

I paid over £1000 Sterling for it when it came out in the early days, and I'd happily do it again. Nothing comes close. 

Period! 

Amen! 

Hallelujah! 

THOU SHALT BUY THIS SOFTWARE!

End of Discussion! 

I'm closing this thread! Lol!


----------



## Nathan Allen Pinard (May 16, 2014)

And now I have HB Gold. (I didn't know about that sale until now!)

I don't think I'll ever get Diamond again unless I get a 100% dedicated machine for samples (mine is split between music and recreation)

But HB Gold will do juuuuust fine.


----------



## Mahlon (May 16, 2014)

> Maybe Berlin Strings, but the legato sounds iffy to me on that lib.



It's definitely not iffy. The legato in BST is marginally to majorly more consistent and convincing than HS, though HS has very good legato as well.

As far as HS mic positions go, I can't tell a huge difference between any of them except for the close mics. They do make a difference. But the other mic postions -- not so much.

Mahlon


----------



## muk (May 17, 2014)

OT: Judging from Blakus's comparison video, the agile legato seems to be flawed though. Have a listen at the second violin here:

http://youtu.be/esSR5NBlyhk?t=8m37s

That agile legato at the end of that phrase doesn't sound good at all. I like BST in the complete section playthrough, though. To come back on topic, Hollywood Strings feature too in Blakus' video.


----------



## muziksculp (May 17, 2014)

muk @ Sat May 17 said:


> OT: Judging from Blakus's comparison video, the agile legato seems to be flawed though. Have a listen at the second violin here:
> 
> http://youtu.be/esSR5NBlyhk?t=8m37s
> 
> That agile legato at the end of that phrase doesn't sound good at all. I like BST in the complete section playthrough, though. To come back on topic, Hollywood Strings feature too in Blakus' video.



Hi muk,

Thanks for the link to this Blakus video comparing these String Libraries. And Thanks to Blakus for taking the time to produce it. 

It was very helpful to compare how they differed, and the unique sonic flavor of each library.

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## KEnK (May 17, 2014)

I think Blakus's vid and Daniel James's from a year or 2 ago show quite clearly
that there is no "must have" string library.

The differences between them are not glaring 
and of course much can be done to further sculpt each of them.

k


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 17, 2014)

KEnK @ Sat May 17 said:


> I think Blakus's vid and Daniel James's from a year or 2 ago show quite clearly
> that there is no "must have" string library.
> 
> The differences between them are not glaring
> ...



Wow, must have for any given one maybe not, but I think they clearly show that HS, BS, and LASS all sound so very different that I _would_ describe the differences as glaring.

Jacob Dylan, Bryan Adams, and Chris Martin are all male singers but they sure don't sound much alike


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (May 17, 2014)

muziksculp @ Fri May 16 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Does EW-HS (Gold) have the same _silky_ sound that EW-HS (Plat.) offers ?
> 
> ...




Imo, yes. Besides less articulations and 16 Bit Samples, it has the same silky sound, because it is based on the same pool and technology. From what the Diamond Version offers, I am using really a small pool of it.


----------



## KEnK (May 17, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat May 17 said:


> KEnK @ Sat May 17 said:
> 
> 
> > I think Blakus's vid and Daniel James's from a year or 2 ago show quite clearly
> ...


Personally, I think the differences are subtle.
The biggest difference seems to be that LASS is dry. (a plus in my book)
I think any of them would suffice for most mock-up needs.
They're all pretty amazing.

k


----------



## muk (May 17, 2014)

In any case in addition to the official info and demos this video helped me a lot in forming an opinion about these libraries.
Depending on the style of music and personal taste any of them can be a must-have. Personally I dig the ensemble sound of Berlin Strings in that video (eventhough, as said, I find the agile legato to sound horrible).


----------



## Mystic (May 17, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri May 16 said:


> Of course, happy to. I honestly believe that for most users, excluding those trying to mockup difficult classical pieces, 85% of what they will ever need to do can be done so that it sounds quite good (my only goal) with four patches for each instrument: a legato slur patch, preferably from the Powerful System folder but if your computer will not handle that, the LT patchers sound almost as good; a KS patch which keyswitches between sustain, tremolo, trills etc. e.g1st Vln Sus KS Co-F#0 N; a mod shorts combo although lately I am finding that I am in love with the Stac On Bow patch in the Short Tight folder and am mostly using that for shorts; and finally a Pizz RR patch
> 
> That's it. 20 patches for most of what you do. Understand, you need to read about how they behave in the manual and practice with them but I am confident that if you spend even 2 hours with each kind of patch, playing and adding cc manipulation, you will be gin to "get it" in short order.
> 
> I have mostly used the Mid mics but lately I am combining the Vintage and Close mics instead and really digging it. More than that is IMHO a waste of computer resources, especially if like me you layer with other libraries.



Thanks for that, mate. :D

The biggest issue I find that I have is that I'm a visual learner so reading a book and taking what I've read putting it into action is very difficult for me which is why DVD/Video Series style teaching (or hands on which is not really available where I live) is so imperative. I am planning on having the manuals printed out to make them easier to read though so I will see how that goes.


----------



## Peter Alexander (May 17, 2014)

After reading all this, Mystic, I'm still not sure specifically, 1-2-3, what you want to learn. Are you after operations of the player, the specifics behind the bowings and which to use when? List it out.


----------



## Mystic (May 18, 2014)

Peter Alexander @ Sat May 17 said:


> After reading all this, Mystic, I'm still not sure specifically, 1-2-3, what you want to learn. Are you after operations of the player, the specifics behind the bowings and which to use when? List it out.


Both essentially. Your course will be a huge help in learning proper orchestration as before I was spending way too much time with trial and error because I didn't understand fundamentals of the different articulations available. This is why I'm essentially starting from scratch and trying to correct the way that I work with orchestral instruments.

The other part of this is that putting it all together in a DAW has been a bit challenging because of the complexity of the program. Where I use to be able to put something together with something more user friendly program I can't do that with East West. The trade off is realism but when it comes to actually learning how to design orchestra music inside a DAW using the HW series from start to finish, there seems to be nothing out there. Could be a new video series for you because I can think of at least 5 people off the top of my head that I know who would instantly buy it.


----------

