# BBC Fever and the Reality of Existing Libraries



## robgb (Oct 23, 2019)

I have to say that I've spent a lot of time drooling over Spitfire's BBC offering. Watched all the videos, thinking it sounds great (for the most part. Not sure about the woodwinds). But the price, even at its pre-sale discount, left me a bit hesitant. Yes, I could probably afford it, but do I really NEED to afford it? Is it money well spent for me? Should I instead take that money and maybe put it toward new landscaping on my house, which seriously needs it?

To try to convince myself not to be hasty (about the library, not the landscaping), I went back and carefully listened to each of the section demos. And while I was listening, I pulled up some of my favorite current orchestral libraries and began playing along with them.

And you know what? My current libraries sounded just as good to my ears. Even some of the older ones, like my old VSL Opus 1 Kontakt instruments, which I've spent a considerable amount of time rejuvenating with new scripting and GUIs. And the Spitfire Studio Strings I bought a few months back sound every bit as wonderful as the BBC strings, and have many of the same articulations.

So it seems to me that, unless you're already lacking a full compliment of orchestral sample libraries, this new BBC Symphony is probably not a necessary purchase. If we can't make fantastic music with what we already have, no shiny new purchase is going to change that. I went back and listened to some of Andy Blaney's demos pre-BBC. They sound amazing. Funny how he managed to do that without having this glorious new library.

Is this a dig on Spitfire? Not at all. I think they too often put the hype machine on overdrive, and did so here, but the library seems very, very well thought out and programmed and probably deserving of the hype. And if a copy were to fall from the cloud into my computer (are you listening Spitfire? ) at no cost to me, I'd be all over it.

But the truth is, I don't really need it. If this place has taught me anything at all, it's that wanting and needing are two very different things.

Now back to planning that landscaping.


----------



## chapbot (Oct 23, 2019)

Yep if I was just starting with all this I would jump on it but I have so many orchestral libraries that I really love I just can't justify the price and the hard drive space.


----------



## MarcusMaximus (Oct 23, 2019)

Thinking the same thing really, though I have to say that Andy Blaney demo sounds fantastic. (I'm sure the others do as well, just haven't listened to them yet). The problem I find with demos like this though is that the production is so good on them that it's hard to tell how much you're hearing the actual product or the amazing mixing/mastering that's gone into it. I doubt that lil ole me is going to be able to make the same fabulous noise with the same set of samples.. So I dunno, on the fence for the moment. It'll be interesting to read what folks who do jump on it think once they put it through its paces.

Edit: Only just realised there's a massive thread on this - of course there is! That's what I get for failing to hang around here enough! Will have a peruse there and see what people are saying.


----------



## robgb (Oct 23, 2019)

MarcusMaximus said:


> It'll be interesting to read what folks who do jump on it think once they put it through its paces.


I have no doubt that they will love it. I probably would, too. But like Chapbot said, I have so many libraries I love that I can't justify the purchase. Honestly, it almost makes me wish I were just starting out, so I could buy the library without thinking about it.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

Well, as I have nothing by way of an orchestral library, I was thinking that the BBC SO library would be a great starting point for me.

My only real concern is that I don't have the skills to use it, or anything like it.

And I also have to admit that I was really drawn into the whole BBC hype, and still am. I mean, it's the B B effing C FFS.

The BBC runs through my veins... I have their website as my home page... I rarely watch any other channel... If you broke me in half I'd have British Broadcast Corporation running right through me like a stick of Blackpool rock.


I suppose I could ask the missus for permission to buy but would probably have a hissy fit on the floor when I say how much it is and, even worse, would start asking, "so, have you already bought other stuff like this?" And I'd kinda capitulate like some soft Golden Retriever.

Best not to go there......


----------



## Patrick.K (Oct 23, 2019)

I think exactly the same thing !.


----------



## cqd (Oct 23, 2019)

I've been watching Mike Verta's template masterclass today thinking I could probably have spared myself spending whatever on it, but shur..more money than sense..


----------



## borisb2 (Oct 23, 2019)

Hey Rob, we could make it easy for you:

2 statements that necessarily don't work well together:

- You recently started a well rewarded thread called "I bought my last string library.."
- BBC Orchestra has strings included


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 23, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> I was thinking that the BBC SO library would be a great starting point for me.


Definitely.



synkrotron said:


> And I also have to admit that I was really drawn into the whole BBC hype, and still am. I mean, it's the B B effing C FFS.


I've been in the orchestra biz my entire life. When they make "Berlin Phil sample library", then and only then will I be excited about the group playing the samples.


----------



## Bluemount Score (Oct 23, 2019)

borisb2 said:


> Hey Rob, we could make it easy for you:
> 
> 2 statements that necessarily don't work well together:
> 
> ...


And this shall not be forgotten! 

Clever decision to only buy what you actually need and use. This time however, I lost (and am happy about it, for now).


----------



## AndyP (Oct 23, 2019)

I haven't owned a single Spitfire library until recently. 
EWHO and VSL were, and still are, my main libraries.
I still ordered BBCSO. One reason was the purchase of the BHCT, which I like very much from the sound. And the BBCSO sounds similarly good, and there are sections and first chair strings, which suits me.

EWHO and VSL are still top libraries. But they all differ in sound and handling. 
I've always mixed libraries.

For me the attraction of the BBCSO is to get a new sound to it, and maybe also to have a somewhat simpler handling than e.g. with EWHO. Whereby I got used to EWHO already very much.
So I see it as a supplement. 

Do I need BBBSO? Really absolutely need it? No. Supplement and a new sound? Absolutely!

I am still very fond of the KH 4D strings. The playability is great. But the sound is not suitable for every purpose. Like Anthology and what they're all called.

What hasn't really convinced me so far are the OT librarys. That's because of the Teldex room I couldn't get used to yet. I use them for other purposes, for mixing with other librarys I find them hard to use. This is due to my not so good mixing skills.

And there I promise myself from the BBCSO something more, particularly since it does not come along drowned with hall.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Oct 23, 2019)

@robgb you sound like you're trying to justify GAS  Resistance is futile!

To me it's not only the sound, but the whole package (GUI, instruments, etc). I just love how it's a top notch all-in-one orchestral library...which will finally get me into something other than my good ol' EW stuff. Plus, the intro price is excellent.


----------



## CT (Oct 23, 2019)

I'm extremely picky about orchestral virtual instruments, and I am also quite broke.

These have combined to create an ideal situation for me where I don't have a massive surplus of such tools already, and can look at BBCSO and say, "maybe this is the thing that will finally tick all the boxes for me, or at least, come closer than anyone else has or will for a while."

The only complete, standard orchestral package I have is Spitfire's Studio Orchestra, which, while a great thing to have access to, isn't quite what I had hoped for. Other than SSO, every choice out there has at least a few strikes against them from my perspective, so the fact that I have none of the usual misgivings when watching the BBCSO walkthroughs, and that this is something that exists at a fraction of the price of SSO, is not to be ignored.


----------



## jbuhler (Oct 23, 2019)

I think this library sounds great, and it is priced quite attractively. If I was just starting I wouldn't hesitate to buy it. But it doesn't generally sound better than libraries I have, so I'm in no rush to buy on that count. My initial impression is that it is far more consistent across the library than either SSO (which I have) or the Studio series (where I have both the strings and brass). If once folks start using it I learn it does indeed have that consistency, that will be a good reason to consider adding it.


----------



## MarcusMaximus (Oct 23, 2019)

I'm not a Spitfire convert, for no other reason than I seem to satisfy most of my needs with EWHO/SO and prefer to keep things simple rather than have too many options. And whenever there's yet another Spitfire product released, I go to their website to explore further and actually find it overwhelming in terms of how many different orchestral packages there are there. Each release seems to promise never-before-heard greatness, at least according to the polished, though pretty insistent promo and marketing they use..

Anyway, I'm not being down on Spitfire - I've no doubt their libraries are excellent and so many people swear by them. It's just they have so many orchestral products available already, why yet another one?


----------



## Saxer (Oct 23, 2019)

First of all: landscaping is great. Make the place where you live the best you can.
Do we need BBCSO? Well, I know people who survive completely without any sample library. Some of them are even musicians. So probably nobody needs it.
But maybe itˋt fun to play with, useful in mockup world, another color in a different room or just something new to explore. That‘s mainly it. Probably enough for a lot of people (including me) to get it.


----------



## MarcusMaximus (Oct 23, 2019)

Yes of course, good enough reason. However I already have so many libraries I’ve bought over the years, not necessarily orchestral ones, that look at me longingly from their installed folders, just waiting for me to notice them amongst the crowd and spend time with them, lovingly discovering their sonic delights..

I haven’t had time to properly explore what I already own, let alone embark on a whole new adventure with yet another fabulous orchestra-in-a-box!


----------



## ism (Oct 23, 2019)

BBCSO does sound legitimately better - at a certain type of sound. 



I don't think that I necessarily prefer it to SSO (especially the winds - I especially love SSW). But there is a clarity or a sense of space ... or something that I'm not sure I can quite describe ... that I hear in it that I just don't think you can get anywhere else.


Again, its this quality of clarity or of a definition of the stereo field or ... yeah really not quite sure. But definatly something.


I would like to be able to write in this sound, and BBCSO is definitely going on my wishlist. (

Though probably not ahead of SCS.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Oct 23, 2019)

If I knew how to make use of it AND had the money, I’d have preordered it. As it was, I don’t on either count, so am happy with what I had preordered for a nice discount that recently came out and that I'm using (this thread isn’t about that library) - I’ll probably never outgrow it. But there’s always the desire for new hotness 😀


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 23, 2019)

robgb said:


> new landscaping on my house


Go ahead ... drop your cash into azaleas and hibiscus. But just remember, there will be the new Pro hibiscus coming out in a few months with more colors and more deeply branched. There'll be no upgrade.


----------



## robgb (Oct 23, 2019)

borisb2 said:


> Hey Rob, we could make it easy for you:
> 
> 2 statements that necessarily don't work well together:
> 
> ...


Yes! Exactly why I brought up those strings in my OP.


----------



## erica-grace (Oct 23, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I've been in the orchestra biz my entire life. When they make "Berlin Phil sample library", then and only then will I be excited about the group playing the samples.



Wouldn't that be OT's orchestral series? I know they recorded at Teldex - didn't they use players from the Berlin Phil?


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 23, 2019)

I'm just glad I'm not one of the tempted ones. I'd rather by the BH toolkit over BBC, as well as the upcoming S4.

For real though, it's going to take a lot for me to spend that kind of cash on a conventional orchestral library, especially with everything i currently have. It just doesn't make any sense from my standpoint. If i were just starting out? Then sure, I'd definitely consider it.


----------



## 5Lives (Oct 23, 2019)

I think anybody evaluating this solely on the sound is missing half the point. This is Spitfire’s iMessage. The universal template to allow composers to “communicate” with each other more easily than ever before. From collaborating to education, BBCSO is going to open up so many possibilities far beyond the sound of the library.


----------



## erica-grace (Oct 23, 2019)

5Lives said:


> I think anybody evaluating this solely on the sound is missing half the point. This is Spitfire’s iMessage. The universal template to allow composers to “communicate” with each other more easily than ever before. From collaborating to education, BBCSO is going to open up so many possibilities far beyond the sound of the library.



This is SO true. To the point that I wonder if SF took a page out of Peloton's playbook. For Peloton, they aren't really selling the bike. They are selling the on-demand, live-streaming trainer-led cycling classes, and other exercise classes, in a group fitness environment, thereby allowing everyone the opportunity to be part of a community. So, whereas Paul and Christian for certain are not going to sell access to templates, and the ability to connect with others, the BBC orchestra is not all about the orchestra and the samples; it's about the community aspect as well.


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 23, 2019)

5Lives said:


> I think anybody evaluating this solely on the sound is missing half the point. This is Spitfire’s iMessage. The universal template to allow composers to “communicate” with each other more easily than ever before. From collaborating to education, BBCSO is going to open up so many possibilities far beyond the sound of the library.



I don't get it. What's stopping other composers (who wish to collaborate) from already doing that with any library currently on the market?

Btw, just how popular is collaborating/"communucating" anyway? I always held the perspective that composing was a rather solitary artform, generally speaking, of course.


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 23, 2019)

5Lives said:


> The universal template to allow composers to “communicate” with each other more easily than ever before.


I haven't been reading all the hype (and the extremely long thread) or viewing the videos - I'm just assuming it's a great library that I probably don't need. But this idea of using it for collaboration - the lingua franca of the VI library world - is intriguing. Any general MIDI file for an orchestral piece would be 'standard' if it drove this BBC library, and nonstandard otherwise. But that could've been done with SSO (a bit expensive) or NotePerformer (great value, mid-range realism). I guess it points out that no one library is sufficient for all purposes. Also, all the other vendors would revolt.


----------



## robgb (Oct 23, 2019)

5Lives said:


> I think anybody evaluating this solely on the sound is missing half the point. This is Spitfire’s iMessage. The universal template to allow composers to “communicate” with each other more easily than ever before. From collaborating to education, BBCSO is going to open up so many possibilities far beyond the sound of the library.


This whole line of hype has always been a bit murky to me. What exactly are they saying? how is this library going to allow composers to communicate any more than they already do? I don't quite get it. And it hasn't really been explained. It simply sounds like one of those nebulous things marketers say to make you think they've got a next level product.

Can someone please explain to me what it really means?


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 23, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> Btw, just how popular is collaborating anyway?


You would hear something cool on VI-C and you would ask the composer if he/she would like to share it in 'BBC format'. They would go into their DAW and do a 'BBC export'.


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 23, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> You would hear something cool on VI-C and you would ask the composer if he/she would like to share it in 'BBC format'. They would go into their DAW and do a 'BBC export'.


Seriously?


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 23, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> Seriously?


Well ... that's taken to the extreme. What Spitfire obviously wants is to have BBC in the hands of all folks and thus it becomes a standard platform. In that world, it's "Nice piece ... if it was done in _BBC standard template_, please send the MIDI over, I'll reproduce it _exactly_." Wily bastards are looking audaciously into the future.


----------



## Brian99 (Oct 23, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> Well ... that's taken to the extreme. What Spitfire obviously wants is to have BBC in the hands of all folks and thus it becomes a standard platform. In that world, it's "Nice piece ... if it was done in _BBC standard template_, please send the MIDI over, I'll reproduce it _exactly_." Wily bastards are looking audaciously into the future.



So you made up the whole "BBC Export" thing?


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 23, 2019)

bzyboy said:


> So you made up the whole "BBC Export" thing?


Look for it in the next rev. of Reaper.


----------



## constaneum (Oct 23, 2019)

basically, SA is saying with this universal sound and plugin, you get to share your work, the instruments you use, the expression maps you used when scoring. It's universal coz everyone who uses it has 
1) the same ochestral strings, brass, woodwinds & percussions
2) the same mic offered...just different settings..
3) no need to use 3rd party reverbs or spaces if you purely stick with room simulation with the available mic. 

with SSO, not everyone owns the entire orchestral collections. Therefore, it may be hard to exchange your mix or settings with other composers. I believe this is what SA is trying to convey when say a universal starting point, collaborate and exchange knowledge with one another which are made possible with BBC SO coz everyone has the exact same orchestral strings, brass, woodwinds and percussion


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 23, 2019)

The whole "collaboration" thing amuses me. It's just a nifty way of saying "everyone should buy this library". How is any of this magnificent collaboration potentiall different from that between all composers who own Edirol Orchestral or Garritan Instant Orchestra? That's silly to me.

Tbh. the main reason why I'm not particularly interested in BBSCO (other than not wanting to spend 750 bucks) is the hassle with organizing and storing it somewhere. That's a bunch of data that needs to be somewhere, tons of instruments and expression maps to configure, all this new stuff to learn and wrap one's head around. CBA.

I got all these libraries, top of the line stuff. It's already some of the best you can get today, and BBCSO is no quantum leap either. I got more samples than I get to do music with. Do I really need more bread and butter orchestral samples? So, I can totally relate to @robgb here. Awesome new stuff is always tempting, but I'm a practical guy first and foremost.


----------



## David Kudell (Oct 23, 2019)

I think the ”universal starting point” has a lot of exciting opportunities for sharing tracks and collaboration.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Oct 23, 2019)

I bought BBC because I like the sound. I could care less about the collaboration thing, I don’t understand the intention. I never have, and never plan on sharing my sequences with other composers.


----------



## lgmcben (Oct 23, 2019)

It's not about "need" or "want". It's our "responsibility" as composers. Our GAS is the lifeline of sample library industry. Now bring out your wallets and credit cards.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Oct 23, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Do I really need more bread and butter orchestral samples?



Hell yes!!! You deserve it!


----------



## averystemmler (Oct 23, 2019)

I'm curious to see how the "universal" aspect pans out. It all seems a bit presumptuous, counting it a standard before it's hatched, but Spitfire has had some very effective marketing shenanigans in the past. I've been having dreams about spill mics.


----------



## Consona (Oct 23, 2019)

I rather missed the point of this library. Is it way more playable than their previous libraries, has way more dynamic layers or what? Their previous stuff was recorded in some same space anyway, the symphonic range at Air hall, the studio range at Air studio. Even if I was just starting I don't know if you'd buy it. It doesn't seem more playable than libraries we have already, and the sound? It's nice but we those libraries as well.
Like I've said, I kinda don't know what this library is about in this day and age. Maybe Spitfire's EWQLSO? But they have their symphonic range anyway. I must be missing something.


----------



## CT (Oct 23, 2019)

I'm not sure there's anything to "miss." 

They had the opportunity to do another library in collaboration with a renowned orchestra, to push forward their own player's development, and to position it as part of their community-building efforts. So they did.

The result either strikes you as a useful tool, or it doesn't. Redundancy is hardly new to the VI world, and I don't think it's a bad thing. Some of us are picky, some of us have many different needs, some of us fit both of those. More choices can't hurt.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 23, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Hell yes!!! You deserve it!



Yeah, go and ruin it for me, don't you see I'm trying to be all grown up and reasonable?


----------



## Bluemount Score (Oct 23, 2019)

For me, it is both, a gap filler when it comes to my current lack of e. g. harp, piccolo and cor anglais samples and an all in one orchestra in itself that will hopefully do better than the NI Symphony Series.
The collaboration aspect, not sure. Sounds like a good idea, but it appears that the overall composer world either isn't quite ready for it or doesn't like it at all.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 23, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> I'm just glad I'm not one of the tempted ones. I'd rather by the BH toolkit over BBC, as well as the upcoming S4.
> 
> For real though, it's going to take a lot for me to spend that kind of cash on a conventional orchestral library, especially with everything i currently have. It just doesn't make any sense from my standpoint. If i were just starting out? Then sure, I'd definitely consider it.


What is S4? Curious.


----------



## Geomir (Oct 23, 2019)

josejherring said:


> What is S4? Curious.


I suppose he meant Symphobia 4.


----------



## constaneum (Oct 23, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I bought BBC because I like the sound. I could care less about the collaboration thing, I don’t understand the intention. I never have, and never plan on sharing my sequences with other composers.



i like what i've heard too. ahha


----------



## Manaberry (Oct 23, 2019)

Great post @robgb

I was promised an SSO global update this y... next year. I'm still dreaming of it.
I want my libraries fixed and supported, not a new one.


----------



## David Kudell (Oct 24, 2019)

The most compelling aspect of the BBCSO is the value proposition. The amount of content for the price is unparalleled. I was pricing the Berlin series by comparison and even if that were to go on sale for 40% off, it would still cost $1850 for the 4 main collections.


----------



## AndyP (Oct 24, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> I don't get it. What's stopping other composers (who wish to collaborate) from already doing that with any library currently on the market?
> 
> Btw, just how popular is collaborating/"communucating" anyway? I always held the perspective that composing was a rather solitary artform, generally speaking, of course.


It may be important for some composers, especially if they work in a team spread over several locations.

Basically, I can do this with other libraries as well, so this aspect is not a particular advantage of the BBCSO for me.
Furthermore, this is only intended for Logic users now. Cubase, Reaper and co have to be taken care of by the users themselves.

I don't see the library as a milestone and from a composer's point of view I can do everything with other libraries (maybe even better, with more articulations etc.). 

Since I haven't used this new library yet, I can't even say if I use everything or parts, because I might like the wooodwinds or percussion of other libs better. And then again I have the case that I have to find a way to mix that, so the advantage melted in that moment.

Still, I like the sound I've heard so far and as I wrote, it's a supplement, not a panacea.

The hype about the library also annoys me a little bit, even though there are some remarkably interesting and funny contributions in the BBC thread. But more than 200 pages of discussions and speculations about the features are exaggerated. It seems as if many people can't live without this library anymore.

The hype will subside and the next object of desire will appear. Interesting is, I get for the same money which I paid earlier today much more, both qualitatively and quantitatively. 

Unfortunately, it also leads to the collection of really great librarys getting bigger and bigger, and the time to get to know them and use them smaller. That's what bothers me the most (my own consumer behaviour).


----------



## Jdiggity1 (Oct 24, 2019)

AndyP said:


> ...
> It seems as if many people can't live without this library anymore.
> ...


Or the "likes"


----------



## Saxer (Oct 24, 2019)

I understand this collaboration thing. I share a lot of song files in collaborations. If all users use the same libraries (what happens rarely) in Kontakt, the song will not simply load. Kontakt asks for every sample location on another system. You have to click "search Spotlight" (on Mac) for each Kontakt patch. Click...wait...click...wait... 50x. And you have to have the same Kontakt version. And when you add something to the song and save it on your system and send it back the same happens on the other side again.
It's already possible to share compatible songs with other "all in one" orchestras. VSL SE complete with VEPlayerPro works great for example. It's also very flexible. But there are also SE "basic" and "plus" versions and different volumes. Either all have to have all or it's again food for incompatibilities. HWO might work well if all have the same Gold or Platinum version and all sections. But that rarely fits on one computer and collaborators have to have the same slave configuration (never happens!). It goes on and on like this. So if BBCSO turns to be a useful resource friendly and flexible "load and share" library that will be a big plus!


----------



## M0rdechai (Oct 24, 2019)

But if you want to share like this it soon becomes #one-andONLY-orchestra.
meaning; you can only use BBC SO.

It looks like a very good library, for starters and what it gets you for the price.
Does it look like a very good library if it is the only one you can use, though?
perhaps.. I don't know...
but I understand people with large libraries would not feel all that happy to be using ONLY BBC SO...


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

I think that the "your mileage may vary" adage applies...


----------



## Saxer (Oct 24, 2019)

M0rdechai said:


> But if you want to share like this it soon becomes #one-andONLY-orchestra.
> ...
> Does it look like a very good library if it is the only one you can use, though?


We will see. I the collaborations I was involved and when it comes to orchestral things nobody asked "what strings did you use". There had to be additional orchestra and often it was replaced by a real one. So it's mainly to get through the composition and acceptance process. Alone at home on my own projects I can still use anything I want.


----------



## I like music (Oct 24, 2019)

Some of you have probably heard me say this about 20 times on this forum, to the point that it gets boring. I have a friend, who for close to 10 years, has used Hollywood Orchestra (Gold I believe) Strings and Brass + the basic VSL SE woods, with Truestrike, every single day for 12 hours a day. NO other libraries.

He's an award winning composer (a pretty prestigious and universally recognised award) and has scored some big game titles. For each and every single one of these projects, he used his 16gb machine with libraries that came out almost 10 years ago. The crazy thing is, he knows these 4 libraries inside out to the point that I've seen him write whole lines, with accompanying orchestration, without actually listening to the playback until the whole phrase is done, and he draws every CC in like lightening knowing exactly how the libraries will respond. Because he put the hours into what he had (he had very little money as he went full-time with this, so he made do with these libraries)

And the best part is, he got some of that stuff for free for writing demos for some of those companies. He had a new piece recorded by a live orchestra just a few weeks ago, but some of the stuff in there is still from HO.

I guess what I'm saying is, if you are willing to spend all your time on what already exists in the market, you'll find that you can write amazing shit without spending another penny on new stuff.

I say this, knowing full well that I've bought 10 libraries in the last year, and used none of them.


----------



## MA-Simon (Oct 24, 2019)

Imho I will be honest here. I don't get the hype.

I still love my Spitfire Chamber Strings & Cinematic Studio Strings.

When I first listened to the strings walktrough of this new library I was not impressed at all.
I got all (most) other string libraries on the market and some are better.
At least from that short listen.
The legato sounded like a synthy blur. I am not shure what everybody hears in this?
I am questioning my ability to listen, because apparently everybody is ravinous about it.
Although this might not be a library to best them all, but a package for starting out.

At that point only a hands on demo for me to play could sway me.
Because I already have... everything. 
Maybe the new performance Samples Quartet could tempt me...

The woodwinds sounded fantastic though. If this library is ever split, I might buy the winds.
The rest though, I have covered, _for now_.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Oct 24, 2019)

miket said:


> I'm not sure there's anything to "miss."
> 
> They had the opportunity to do another library in collaboration with a renowned orchestra, to push forward their own player's development, and to position it as part of their community-building efforts. So they did.
> 
> The result either strikes you as a useful tool, or it doesn't. Redundancy is hardly new to the VI world, and I don't think it's a bad thing. Some of us are picky, some of us have many different needs, some of us fit both of those. More choices can't hurt.


Nicely put, Miket.

The "does it sound better than what I already have" argument is kind of redundant now. All but the worst libraries sound amazing and whilst we're still driving midi bits around, the workflows aren't going to get magically better either.

There are a lot of attractions here: The BBCSO itself, Maida Vale (never sampled before with an orchestra) and of course the price. For someone looking for a first orchestra, it's a fine proposition. The templates etc are a nice cherry on top.


----------



## Guffy (Oct 24, 2019)

Im quite confident EW HWO will stay as my main bread and butter libraries (along with all the other little gems i've implemented), but i feel like BBCSO will fill certain holes well, and also do a less "hollywood" sound well.


----------



## Geomir (Oct 24, 2019)

For someone that has a high-end PC or Mac and doesn't own any big/full/complete/all-in-one orchestral library, I cannot think how BBCSO could not satisfy his/her taste. The price for what you get is excellent! Really now, how bad can it be? The possibility that BBCSO will NOT be an amazing very high quality library is close to zero imho.

But for someone (i.e. like me) that has an average PC (i5, 16GB, SSD), and already own some good quality older and less demanding orchestral libraries (like EWQLSO Gold, EWHO Gold, Palette Sketchpad), I think BBCSO is not so tempting, I am just not crazy to pre-order. (of course being on low budget always helps to resist GAS!)

Now if all this hype is justified, if BBCSO is going to be the next reference sound library for the years to come, and if it's going to be the "new age EWQLSO", this remains to be seen... I wouldn't bet on that though... Not only because EWQLSO was excellent (and still is very good!) and ahead of its age when it was first released, but also because nowadays there are so many high quality libraries of every type, that's it's not so easy to stand out.


----------



## tomosane (Oct 24, 2019)

Spitfire's site seems to have gone down, lmao

I wonder if Spitfire has estimated that the vast majority of people who are realistically going to buy SSO (at its current price) have already bought it? That would, in and of itself, explain why they are selling BBCO at this price.

Then again, it may well be that at this point you just can't sell a new orchestra at a SSO/Berlin price unless you have done something actually groundbreaking -- as in, something more than a shitload of mics.

I was thinking about BBCO but decided to finally invest in SCS instead, assuming it's available in the christmas sale. Seems to bring more to the table for me than BBCO at the moment.


----------



## Consona (Oct 24, 2019)

miket said:


> I'm not sure there's anything to "miss."
> 
> They had the opportunity to do another library in collaboration with a renowned orchestra, to push forward their own player's development, and to position it as part of their community-building efforts. So they did.
> 
> The result either strikes you as a useful tool, or it doesn't. Redundancy is hardly new to the VI world, and I don't think it's a bad thing. Some of us are picky, some of us have many different needs, some of us fit both of those. More choices can't hurt.


Thx.

Hm, that makes the hype even stranger. I was expecting something like "new amazing legato scripts in our new engine" or "best dynamics range ever" or "most playable sample-based library". But it's just another orchestral lib with more mics? The price is great for the amount of content, but even if I was starting, I probably wouldn't buy it.
I don't know how open the library is, in Kontakt I can tweak samples, groups, etc. And I don't feel this library will make my Williams-wannabe woodwinds runs and horn melodies sound any more natural compared to other libs.


I'm waiting for JXL Brass since that actually is supposed to be something really new and pushing the envelope of playability forward, which is exactly what I'm waiting for, together with their a la carte approach. Now that's something truly big to be hyped about!
Wish something like Infinity instruments had an option to be bought separately.



Thx for making this thread since I didn't want to rain on their parade in the hype thread and so remained silent up until now.


----------



## Drundfunk (Oct 24, 2019)

I'm not even impressed by the sound of it. There might be something wrong with me, since you guys hype it so much. But listening to the walkthroughs etc. I hear some stuff I like and many things I don't like. This is a really easy pass for me. I'll buy SCS and Olafurs Chamber Evos and LCO Evos for Christmas instead. Also I beg all of you to use BBCSO as much as you can and for every single piece you'll write for the next 60 years. Maybe that way my crappy music will be interesting to listen to since the tone is different to everything else on the market


----------



## gpax (Oct 24, 2019)

At 4 am, I start to get philosophical, lol.

In the vein of a thread focusing on what some plan not to do, the only universal realty is that new sample library releases do not magically evaporate that which you have created using other tools.

Nor does it make your existing tool better if the newer thing, subjectivity speaking, turns out to be inferior. These seem to be the enduring myths of VI-Control, but where in the end, a product either stands on its own merits (to greater or lesser degrees), or it does not. Only time will tell, and even then, mileage and opinions will still vary.

I take measured and tempered solace in public opinions, as I’m sure we all have our lists of those voices we know and value after spending any time here. And reality of choice is not affected by what some plan not to do, any more than those who invest can be wizards to sway the outcome of others’ personal choice. As an exercise when pondering how to enhance my template, I will often invoke what my workflow was like before any pre-announcement hype, when I had no clue who was developing what without my knowledge or expectations, all of that beyond my control - and without consulting me! lol.

There was no existential crisis to speak of less than three months ago. I would argue there still is not one either, if you ascribe to such ways of thinking. New sample libraries simply are - Pooh.

It’s the forum that often contorts, or praises, or then wages battle, some saying they despise so-called hype while lending their voice to it, believing they are countering such, nevertheless. This thread, focusing on those who opted out, is still juxtaposed to “it.”

In terms of reality, I look at where things are. There is, represented in this much shorter thread, a measure of regret, wishful thinking, rationalization for choices made, a defense for preordering with no guarantees, economic disparity on display, thinly veiled bragging, jealously, resignation, and protest against buying based on prior experiences and unmet expectations - all of which are our realties, are they not?

back to sleep...


----------



## novaburst (Oct 24, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I got all these libraries, top of the line stuff. It's already some of the best you can get today, and BBCSO is no quantum leap either. I got more samples than I get to do music with. Do I really need more bread and butter orchestral samples? So, I can totally relate to @robgb here. Awesome new stuff is always tempting, but I'm a practical guy first and foremost.



I cant believe what i am reading in some post, so every one is now into landscaping or gardening than a new instrument, whats going on are you losing your musical gift and talents, getting a bit stiff in the fingers are you all going into retirement. 

You should be coming up with reasons why you should have this library not reasons why you do not want it.

As far as i am concerned a new sound should always be welcomed in to your music tools especially if the cash is there to get it, as far as i can see Spitfire do not disappoint. 

Spitfire is a well known developer and you can be assured of a high end instrument that will be more than useful, by now we should be talking about how it feels and the legato and the staccatos.

If Spitfire developed a new library it meant they wanted to do something different than there existing package, and i am sure those with hot ears and fingers cant wait to get there hands on it.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Oct 24, 2019)

I like music said:


> I guess what I'm saying is, if you are willing to spend all your time on what already exists in the market, you'll find that you can write amazing shit without spending another penny on new stuff.



As a user of EastWest SO and HO Gold (since their release), I love them, but my stuff all has that same tone for every piece. If your buddy just does mockups for a live orchestra, that's okay because it's just for that purpose. Plus, the same sounds get moldy and uninspirational after years of listening to them in my studio. BBCSO will be a nice change for me, as I won't have to fiddle around trying to blend strings/brass/winds from other libraries just to get a different overall tone. IMO, it's the 2019 version of EW Symphonic Orchestra. I shelled out $750, but if it lasts me as long as SO did, that's a fart in the wind in the big scheme of things.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 24, 2019)

novaburst said:


> I cant believe what i am reading in some post, so every one is now into landscaping or gardening than a new instrument, whats going on are you losing your musical gift and talents, getting a bit stiff in the fingers are you all going into retirement.
> 
> You should be coming up with reasons why you should have this library not reasons why you do not want it.



Well the whole point is that it inspires me to absolutely nothing because it's literally just more of the same. Which some people can't get enough of nonetheless, but that's them.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath (Oct 24, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> Definitely.
> 
> 
> I've been in the orchestra biz my entire life. When they make "Berlin Phil sample library", then and only then will I be excited about the group playing the samples.


For me it would be the Wiener Philharmoniker 😊


----------



## JohnG (Oct 24, 2019)

Maybe the Whiner Philharmoniker, judging by some of these posts.

Don't like it? Don't buy it. I didn't buy a Tesla and don't plan on it, but plenty of my friends did.

One of the goofiest threads ever.


----------



## novaburst (Oct 24, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Well the whole point is that it inspires me to absolutely nothing because it's literally just more of the same. Which some people can't get enough of nonetheless, but that's them.



I must admit it is hard to keep up, and we cant have every single library out there, but i think it a little to far when we label all the same, unless we are intensive to tone and sound and feel, 

Library hunting comes with the territory, hunting for a fresh sound, fresh feel, tone the use of different violins, and cellos so on hall is a big deal plus it is an exiting time when the birth of a new library comes out.

OK yes some do get fed up of the speed of development of new library but to voice that notion is like saying SF do something else when really SF are developing for every one not just the few and especially not those that dont have interest anymore.

We have our role, the developers have there role if they can make it the slightest better then go for it, let them push the boundary and let us reap the reword of their hard work. 

But if people lose interest i guess its time for a new generation to take over


----------



## Consona (Oct 24, 2019)

novaburst said:


> If Spitfire developed a new library it meant they wanted to do something different than there existing package


Different in what? It's basically an another orchestra in another room with more mics, in a new sample player, but that's all, as far as I've noticed. Maybe some new instruments?
When I look at the articulation list, it's all the same stuff all over again. Some people remarked the dynamic range is nothing to write home about, so what's really new there?..

It's just your usual Spitfire sample set, 2019 this time. Seems as convincing and playable as any of their libraries. I've heard Blaney's Admiral Benbow and honestly is sounds as robotic as the majority of sample-based performances out there. Seems you'd need the same time and care to polish the BBCSO performance to sound somewhat organic and vivid as with any other library if not more. The faster passages sound outright fake.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 24, 2019)

novaburst said:


> We have our role, the developers have there role
> 
> But if people lose interest i guess its time for a new generation to take over



You're the dream customer, haha.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Oct 24, 2019)

I can imagine this library becoming the exchange standard, especially in cases where it's going to be shared by multiple copyists for projects that will be eventually realized with real orchestras. 

The massive templates that the SA folks are crafting might also become exchange standards. That, in turn, might make Logic Pro X more of a standard (especially since SA seems to have Apple's ear).


----------



## novaburst (Oct 24, 2019)

Consona said:


> Different in what? It's basically an another orchestra in another room with more mics, in a new sample player, but that's all,



There is nothing i can say if this does not mean anything to you, but it is very big to someone else


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 24, 2019)

People also buy every new phone model or the yearly FIFA games for no reason. That's capitalist society - void must be filled by consuming, literally or in terms of product purchases.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Oct 24, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Maybe the Whiner Philharmoniker, judging by some of these posts.
> 
> Don't like it? Don't buy it. I didn't buy a Tesla and don't plan on it, but plenty of my friends did.
> 
> One of the goofiest threads ever.



Ha ha! I think the thread title should be translated to "I really want to buy this but help me justify not pulling out the credit card".


----------



## Consona (Oct 24, 2019)

novaburst said:


> There is nothing i can say if this does not mean anything to you, but it is very big to someone else


Of course. Depends on what you want and need. I don't need just another library that sounds robotic, only recorded in another room.

Dunno, all this huge London calling hype and it's just another ordinary sample library.


----------



## Patrick.K (Oct 24, 2019)

novaburst said:


> But if people lose interest i guess its time for a new generation to take over



They arrive


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 24, 2019)

josejherring said:


> What is S4? Curious.


Symphobia 4.


----------



## novaburst (Oct 24, 2019)

Consona said:


> Of course. Depends on what you want and need. I don't need just another library that sounds robotic, only recorded in another room.
> 
> Dunno, all this huge London calling hype and it's just another ordinary sample library.



I guess its hype to someone that is not interested as is the norm when we lose interest in something we start to be negative towards it.


----------



## constaneum (Oct 24, 2019)

I love the woodwinds but I'll hold up and see how CSW gonna sound


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 24, 2019)

Manaberry said:


> Great post @robgb
> 
> I was promised an SSO global update this y... next year. I'm still dreaming of it.
> I want my libraries fixed and supported, not a new one.


They did updates on all sections this year. If you open the Spitfire app you'll see them. Now whether or not they were the updates you wanted, I don't know.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Oct 24, 2019)

Consona said:


> Of course. Depends on what you want and need. I don't need just another library that sounds robotic, only recorded in another room.
> 
> Dunno, all this huge London calling hype and it's just another ordinary sample library.



It's always going to be a YMMV situation, but I'm hearing something in the SA demos that I don't hear in a lot of other products. Things sound big, but in a warm, rich and unified way (and they sound that way without sounding like they're slathered with reverb). They sound like a quality traditional film score. 

You can take a warm, rich and present sounding library and make it sound aggressively hyped, but it's not as easy to take samples that start out sound aggressively hyped and make them sound warm and rich. 

All products have their place and use, but BBCSO seems like it might be the quick ticket to big, full, warm and rich.


----------



## Beluga (Oct 24, 2019)

I agree with the statement that the sound is cohesive, rich and warm. But man what is it with synth sounding strings and Spitfire... Are they serious in that first demo? The strings are absolutely awful sounding. While I believe the brass and woodwinds sound lovely from what I can tell, the strings are really spoiling it for me. The campaign, presentation, and marketing are really outstanding though, beautiful, sober look overall. But then again, "the new standard"? I don't know about that with all these great-sounding libs out there.


----------



## ag75 (Oct 24, 2019)

This feels like a group therapy thread. 


robgb said:


> I have no doubt that they will love it. I probably would, too. But like Chapbot said, I have so many libraries I love that I can't justify the purchase. Honestly, it almost makes me wish I were just starting out, so I could buy the library without thinking about it.






robgb said:


> I have to say that I've spent a lot of time drooling over Spitfire's BBC offering. Watched all the videos, thinking it sounds great (for the most part. Not sure about the woodwinds). But the price, even at its pre-sale discount, left me a bit hesitant. Yes, I could probably afford it, but do I really NEED to afford it? Is it money well spent for me? Should I instead take that money and maybe put it toward new landscaping on my house, which seriously needs it?
> 
> To try to convince myself not to be hasty (about the library, not the landscaping), I went back and carefully listened to each of the section demos. And while I was listening, I pulled up some of my favorite current orchestral libraries and began playing along with them.
> 
> ...


----------



## Consona (Oct 24, 2019)

novaburst said:


> I guess its hype to someone that is not interested as is the norm when we lose interest in something we start to be negative towards it.


It goes hand in hand. I lose interest because it's the same old same old, hence negative comments.

At least we have this sceptic thread. Saying fast passages sound like using 15 years old EWQLSO in the main 200+ thread would lead to the drama zone in no time I suspect.



Lee Blaske said:


> It's always going to be a YMMV situation, but I'm hearing something in the SA demos that I don't hear in a lot of other products. Things sound big, but in a warm, rich and unified way (and they sound that way without sounding like they're slathered with reverb). They sound like a quality traditional film score.
> 
> You can take a warm, rich and present sounding library and make it sound aggressively hyped, but it's not as easy to take samples that start out sound aggressively hyped and make them sound warm and rich.
> 
> All products have their place and use, but BBCSO seems like it might be the quick ticket to big, full, warm and rich.


The biggest plus is the sound no doubt. It's one orchestra in one room, seated, an abundance of mics, etc.

But what's the use of a nice and fine sound, when the performance sounds rigid and stale?

@AlexanderSchiborr Are you going to buy BBCSO?


----------



## noises on (Oct 24, 2019)

I was all set to move on Afflatus strings for what I percieved to be the most meaningfull "ground breaking" offering out there at this stage. Now with BBCSO beckoning, I am confused as to where to allocate my $$$. Afflatus really appeals with its emphasis on many different moods built into one product.....but it is just the strings. So the question for me is whether there is enough in the concept of everything under one roof by the same band to sway me to go in BBCSO direction, or go with Afflatus, which to me does seem ground breaking both in terms of mood versatility as well as by all accounts its immediacy in terms of play-ability and other powerful tools.


----------



## novaburst (Oct 24, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> People also buy every new phone model or the yearly FIFA games for no reason.



For no reason?...... people do understand tech and games more than others, when they do go for the latest item it can appear they are doing it for show when really they found and researched what they needed or was waiting for.

Simply because there interest is involved in gaming, or that tech weather how small it may be meant they can now do much more with there phone that made the money they spent on it seem very small.

Concerning games it may of meant more pixel management to a certain graphic card.

I am sure you can understand technology can move very fast and insight to something can suddenly be revealed by developers and there interest is to get it out there for the user yes to make the money plus for the satisfaction of the user 

Izotope is a very good example for that, you may say why purchase Izotope 9 when you have 8, because there are things that only a user who is interested in the depth of mixing will only understand but to someone else it looks like the user is just showing off or throwing their money away but they understand even if they have Izotope 4,5,6,7,8, Izotope 9 is going to be a game changer but only in their realm something the norm just does not understand so we just label it because it is above us.

And when we cant understand the reason for purchasing something we just label it or put our own interpretation to it, and that is kind of not fair.


----------



## I like music (Oct 24, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> As a user of EastWest SO and HO Gold (since their release), I love them, but my stuff all has that same tone for every piece. If your buddy just does mockups for a live orchestra, that's okay because it's just for that purpose. Plus, the same sounds get moldy and uninspirational after years of listening to them in my studio. BBCSO will be a nice change for me, as I won't have to fiddle around trying to blend strings/brass/winds from other libraries just to get a different overall tone. IMO, it's the 2019 version of EW Symphonic Orchestra. I shelled out $750, but if it lasts me as long as SO did, that's a fart in the wind in the big scheme of things.



Very, very true. He's in the fantastic position of mocking stuff up, knowing that it'll usually get performed by a real orchestra. Additionally, in cases where it won't, there are mastering engineers etc who clean it all up. He, and this is no word of an exaggeration, takes his libraries, sends them all to a stock Cubase reverb, and that's it, job done. I've never seen him EQ anything.

The great irony here is that he's really excited by the BBCSO. However, as his profession doesn't require him at this point, to change things up, he doesn't do anything different.

I think if he's ever writing stuff for himself (he doesn't have the time to) he'd probably buy many more libraries.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 24, 2019)

the idea that the next library is the next "last one" is the problem with this community. I, personally, dislike the idea that any one library is all we ever need. It's just boring to know that every song is made with the same library and players all the time. BBCSO is another library. one that fits some projects better than others, and should be used with what libraries are necessary to make great music with a unique tone and variety. hopefully, there is something different about BBCSO, but I don't expect it to be anything that takes away from the other great libraries out there.


----------



## noises on (Oct 24, 2019)

On the other hand I loaded my three solo violins alongside one another. Bohemian Violin, Emotional violin, and Spitfire Solo performance violin. I then compared what each one is capable of. You can achieve similar results with all three, but at the same time you would use bohemian for very emotional passages, emotional violin for its diversity of articulations, and spitfire for its nimble character, and great attack. They are all excellent instruments, each deserving praise. Similarly I feel that if $$$$ is not important to you, you can never have too many options. Oh yes...and in the case of full orchestras.....SSD real estate would also be of great necessity.


----------



## Saxer (Oct 24, 2019)

I only had two hours with BBCSO so far and have to do other things now. But my first impression is that Spitfire did a lot of things right with this library.


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 24, 2019)

noises on said:


> I was all set to move on Afflatus strings for what I percieved to be the most meaningfull "ground breaking" offering out there at this stage. Now with BBCSO beckoning, I am confused as to where to allocate my $$$. Afflatus really appeals with its emphasis on many different moods built into one product.....but it is just the strings. So the question for me is whether there is enough in the concept of everything under one roof by the same band to sway me to go in BBCSO direction, or go with Afflatus, which to me does seem ground breaking both in terms of mood versatility as well as by all accounts its immediacy in terms of play-ability and other powerful tools.


I LOVE Afflatus! So much so that I did an in depth review of it. However, it is NOT the be-all, end-all string library. It's a gorgeous and unique sounding string library, and I'd buy it just for the Psychatto strings alone, but it isn't a "definitive" collection, and It does come with its own issues. Afflatus is also expensive!!! You could get BBC (an entire orchestra) for about the same price, whereas the additional Afflatus sections are probably going to cost the same price as the strings. Will it be worth it? I dunno. What i do know is that no sample library is 100% perfect or complete (I'm willing to bet that we will be seeing both a lot of praise and complaints for BBC in the not too distant future). Even with Afflatus, I still find myself reaching for other string libraries. That's just the reality of the sample world.

The best recommendation i can make is to go with the library that sounds best to you. Don't buy into the hype, and don't follow the heard mentality (pretty much every big release suffers from this). Sample libraries are expensive in general, and it's so easy to lose yourself in the perpetual sea of consumerism. I've done it myself, and the end result can be a waste of money. Go with the library that is the most appealing to your ears, and your workflow.


----------



## robgb (Oct 24, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> What Spitfire obviously wants is to have BBC in the hands of all folks and thus it becomes a standard platform.


If they want that, they'd need to drastically lower the price.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 24, 2019)

This is a funny thread. All this came up on the 200 pages, interspersed between talk of the demos, walkthroughs, quality chocolate vs Cadbury, and sleigh bells. I did not preorder BBCSO. I just bought SSO last Xmas. Along with a whole lot of other stuff. What I like about this whole thing is all the tutorials that have been coming out of Spitfire along with the library. Christian said one of the reasons they set this up was because even within their team, they don't all have the same libraries to make collaboration easy, which kind of surprises me. 

But I think the big pull for me will be if it is all balanced. No need for fiddling with reverbs. 

And? The 200+ pages has been a lot of fun. It is not Spitfire hype as it is in the Sample discussion section. Negative views were allowed. But really, until there was an actual product, not much negative could really be said. Other than "Is this something I really need?" No is an acceptable answer. A number of those joining in and having fun weren't actually buying. Didn't matter. It was fun.


----------



## Patrick.K (Oct 24, 2019)

Difficult to make a choice, especially by simply watching videos ... The problem with these virtual libraries is that it is impossible to try them, or to send them back or exchange. It's a bit like buying shoes on the webmarket, they can hurt our feets, even at 800 or 900 dollards !.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Oct 24, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> the idea that the next library is the next "last one" is the problem with this community. I, personally, dislike the idea that any one library is all we ever need. It's just boring to know that every song is made with the same library and players all the time. BBCSO is another library. one that fits some projects better than others, and should be used with what libraries are necessary to make great music with a unique tone and variety. hopefully, there is something different about BBCSO, but I don't expect it to be anything that takes away from the other great libraries out there.



It does make you wonder when traditional sampling will mature to the point that it essentially all has been done. It seems that for a number of libraries, VSL has come to the conclusion that they can't top what they did years ago and are just re-releasing products with a new player (which, in some cases, is the fourth major player change/upgrade for the same library).

Obviously, samples can be recorded with different performers using different instruments in different acoustic spaces with different mic configurations. But, is there something fundamentally new that can be done with, say, a pizzicato performance that will set it apart from all the libraries already out there?


----------



## AndyP (Oct 24, 2019)

Jdiggity1 said:


> Or the "likes"


I like likes.


----------



## Patrick.K (Oct 24, 2019)

I hesitate, I need a complete library, I'm ready to put the price, still reasonable, but do not know what to do? ... Looking at my garden through the window?


----------



## Alex Fraser (Oct 24, 2019)

AndyP said:


> I like likes.


Then have your filthy like.


----------



## robgb (Oct 24, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Ha ha! I think the thread title should be translated to "I really want to buy this but help me justify not pulling out the credit card".


Only partly true. More accurate: "I really want to OWN this but I don't want to pay for it."


----------



## Consona (Oct 24, 2019)

Patrick9152 said:


> I hesitate, I need a complete library, I'm ready to put the price, still reasonable, but do not know what to do? ... Looking at my garden through the window?


Wait for user compositions. It will go on sale eventually, then you can buy it for a good price.


----------



## robgb (Oct 24, 2019)

Consona said:


> The biggest plus is the sound no doubt. It's one orchestra in one room,


This is an attraction. But I recently watched a video where the engineer mixed an orchestral piece with sampled and live instruments, and by the time he was done it all sounded as if it was recorded in one room. If people learn to mix (which every composer should these days) they'll be okay.


----------



## VinRice (Oct 24, 2019)

It sounds truly excellent and the nature of the players used means a level of consistency across the entire orchestra that you don't normally get. Spitfire have leant into that with the a clear emphasis on their end in trying to get the presentation as consistent as possible also. This is a weakness in other Spitfire libraries. 

The recording chain is different and more 'pristine' than their previous set-ups, the acoustic is unique, historic and in a year or so will be unrepeatable. Spitfire have also leant into that aspect by recording all the mics all the time. The acoustic also particularly lends itself to film/TV/game scoring (more so than Air I would say). 

The price point is exceptional for such a comprehensive library and it covers 95% of anybody's orchestral needs, and it has a single plug-in interface This makes it perfect for education and first-timers. The coverage of the orchestra and a single interface make the collaboration aspect obvious, but that's one of those things that people don't see the need for, until they do. It probably aligns with Spitfire's internal mission statement, hence the emphasis; plus, every good marketing campaign needs a narrative hook (just like every good song).

I think the 'hype' is perfectly understandable. If you don't need or want it, don't buy it but this library, taken as a whole, is without peer at this point in time.

I also think this single library is likely to double Spitfire's user base and revenue within the year. This is a good thing. We want companies in our space to be successful so that they will endure and make us more things.


----------



## CT (Oct 24, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> the idea that the next library is the next "last one" is the problem with this community.



But that may in fact be the case for some of us, at least, for a significant stretch of time, and that's hardly a problem. Look at the anecdote about the guy still using Hollywood Brass/Strings, VSL SE winds, and Truestrike. 

If developers give us versatile, well thought-out tools, and we commit to learning them inside and out, surely they can be something as close to the "last one" as a group with chronic GAS can get, at least as far as straight orchestral music goes.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> I really want to OWN this but I don't want to pay for it





robgb said:


> And if a copy were to fall from the cloud into my computer (are you listening Spitfire? ) at no cost to me, I'd be all over it



What are you suggesting, Rob?


----------



## robgb (Oct 24, 2019)

Patrick9152 said:


> I hesitate, I need a complete library, I'm ready to put the price, still reasonable, but do not know what to do? ... Looking at my garden through the window?


If you need a complete library, I doubt you'll be disappointed if you buy it.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Oct 24, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> It does make you wonder when traditional sampling will mature to the point that it essentially all has been done. It seems that for a number of libraries, VSL has come to the conclusion that they can't top what they did years ago and are just re-releasing products with a new player (which, in some cases, is the fourth major player change/upgrade for the same library).
> 
> Obviously, samples can be recorded with different performers using different instruments in different acoustic spaces with different mic configurations. But, is there something fundamentally new that can be done with, say, a pizzicato performance that will set it apart from all the libraries already out there?


Good points.

You'd be hard pressed to say that the BBCSO sounds night and day better than Spitfire's SSO or similar offerings. That's not a criticism - there's only so far to go once you've recorded the best musicians in the best room with the best signal chain that money can buy. Where else to go?

To me, what's amazing is the price point and content included. Spitfire's other complete orchestra solution (SSO + perc) is a hit well north of a grand. BBCSO looks like a targeted package, easy to use and sounds great. Judging by the black smoke coming out of Spitfire's servers this morning, it looks like a lot of folk came to the same conclusion.

Maybe Black Friday..


----------



## robgb (Oct 24, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> What are you suggesting, Rob?


Hmm. I wonder.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Maybe Black Friday



When is that, again? I never usually partake.

And do you think that the BBC SO library would be pitched at the same price as it is now, or cheaper, or not offered as a deal at all?


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> Hmm. I wonder.



That you want to get a job with Spitfire Audio...


----------



## Alex Fraser (Oct 24, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> When is that, again? I never usually partake.
> 
> And do you think that the BBC SO library would be pitched at the same price as it is now, or cheaper, or not offered as a deal at all?


29th of November. Spitfire site says the library will return to its intro price. Same with xmas sale.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> 29th of November. Spitfire site says the library will return to its intro price. Same with xmas sale.



Interesting, and thanks


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 24, 2019)

miket said:


> But that may in fact be the case for some of us, at least, for a significant stretch of time, and that's hardly a problem. Look at the anecdote about the guy still using Hollywood Brass/Strings, VSL SE winds, and Truestrike.
> 
> If developers give us versatile, well thought-out tools, and we commit to learning them inside and out, surely they can be something as close to the "last one" as a group with chronic GAS can get, at least as far as straight orchestral music goes.



you can take my opinion with a grain of salt, but the issue is not the composition. No matter what tools we have, bad composition makes bad music. 

The problem is complacency and satisfaction in the same old sound. It's so dangerously obvious now in the days of streaming media. You hear how many people write the same. How many good writers write so alike. How many people use the same presets. How many people go their whole careers with the same players until it all becomes so easy and stale. 

There is potential for growth in using multiple instruments and different tools. Of course, you could get the job done with one, but what possibilities are lost when we don't utilize all our various options?

I would hope that people don't just settle into one library because it gets the job done, and instead keep searching for artistic possibilities they're not so comfortable with.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> You can take my opinion with a grain of salt, but the issue is not the composition.
> 
> No matter what tools we have, bad composition makes bad music.
> 
> ...



Sorry about that... I just struggle to read stuff when it is presented without any paragraphs or bullet points. I appreciate that you may be in a rush or replying on your phone.


cheers

andy


----------



## AndyP (Oct 24, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> People also buy every new phone model or the yearly FIFA games for no reason. That's capitalist society - void must be filled by consuming, literally or in terms of product purchases.


Consumption keeps the economy on its toes!


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 24, 2019)

Markus Kohlprath said:


> For me it would be the Wiener Philharmoniker 😊


Good choice of course. I've seen Berlin live 2x and Vienna once. Vienna did Mahler #3, at Musikverein. Awesome. Berlin did Alpine Symphony (on tour in the States) which was great. I heard them do Falstaff by Elgar, very obscure, in the Philharmonie. Best orchestral concert I've ever seen.


----------



## CT (Oct 24, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> you can take my opinion with a grain of salt, but the issue is not the composition. No matter what tools we have, bad composition makes bad music. The problem is complacency and satisfaction in the same old sound. It's so dangerously obvious now in the days of streaming media. You hear how many people write the same. How many good writers write so alike. How many people use the same presets. How many people go their whole careers with the same players until it all becomes so easy and stale. There is potential for growth in using multiple instruments and different tools. Of course, you could get the job done with one, but what possibilities are lost when we don't utilize all our various options? I would hope that people don't just settle into one library because it gets the job done, and instead keep searching for artistic possibilities they're not so comfortable with.



The actual BBCSO has been around for some time now. Are we complacent with that same old sound, and is that a bad thing? People have done a lot of different music with the orchestra....

I am all for new sounds and not being complacent, but when it comes to the orchestra, that doesn't date, and I don't see the harm in committing to one's ideal virtualized version of that if it happens to come along.

I don't think we can blame stagnant sameness on people using the same tools and presets or whatever. Nobody ever accused the piano of causing that. It's on the person using the tool, ultimately.


----------



## Consona (Oct 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> This is an attraction. But I recently watched a video where the engineer mixed an orchestral piece with sampled and live instruments, and by the time he was done it all sounded as if it was recorded in one room. If people learn to mix (which every composer should these days) they'll be okay.


There goes the only valuable thing about this product.  



VinRice said:


> We want companies in our space to be successful so that they will endure and make us more things.


Hopefully they won't stagnate. BBCSO feels like a library from 10 years ago.


----------



## AndyP (Oct 24, 2019)

Saxer said:


> I only had two hours with BBCSO so far and have to do other things now. But my first impression is that Spitfire did a lot of things right with this library.


Good to read this from you!


----------



## AndyP (Oct 24, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Then have your filthy like.


give it to me, give it all


----------



## Patrick.K (Oct 24, 2019)

Consona said:


> Wait for user compositions. It will go on sale eventually, then you can buy it for a good price.


or buy "Amadeus Symphonic Orchestra", it's cheap (149 us dollards), and I think we can do great things with if we have a talent and solid knowledge in orchestration ... even if I buy the same tennis racquet as Raphael Nadal, I will not play better tennis ... and I will never win the "Us Open".


----------



## Patrick.K (Oct 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> f you need a complete library, I doubt you'll be disappointed if you buy it.



I think too


----------



## noises on (Oct 24, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> I LOVE Afflatus! So much so that I did an in depth review of it. However, it is NOT the be-all, end-all string library. It's a gorgeous and unique sounding string library, and I'd buy it just for the Psychatto strings alone, but it isn't a "definitive" collection, and It does come with its own issues. Afflatus is also expensive!!! You could get BBC (an entire orchestra) for about the same price, whereas the additional Afflatus sections are probably going to cost the same price as the strings. Will it be worth it? I dunno. What i do know is that no sample library is 100% perfect or complete (I'm willing to bet that we will be seeing both a lot of praise and complaints for BBC in the not too distant future). Even with Afflatus, I still find myself reaching for other string libraries. That's just the reality of the sample world.
> 
> The best recommendation i can make is to go with the library that sounds best to you. Don't buy into the hype, and don't follow the heard mentality (pretty much every big release suffers from this). Sample libraries are expensive in general, and it's so easy to lose yourself in the perpetual sea of consumerism. I've done it myself, and the end result can be a waste of money. Go with the library that is the most appealing to your ears, and your workflow.


Hi Mike, thanks for you input,.....Will listen to your review....specifically to hear your take on "its own issues". I do have Hollywood Gold orchestra as well as Spitfire Chamber Strings as well as Tundra...a couple of EVO's, so Afflatus would be a nice varied addition to my existing arsenal....rather than overlap with BBCSO....so thats what I am trying to make sense of.


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 24, 2019)

Consona said:


> @AlexanderSchiborr Are you going to buy BBCSO?


I think he quit this shit show to go hang out with his pals on Redbanned. Too bad .. he was generous with his advice.


----------



## Consona (Oct 24, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> I think he quit this shit show to go hang out with his pals on Redbanned. Too bad .. he was generous with his advice.


I'd love to hear what he could do with the library.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 24, 2019)

I believe Daniel James will be doing a live review on Saturday at 1 PM PT. They tend to go long as he runs through everything and then tries to write something quick using it. And based on the walkthroughs from Spitfire, there shouldn't be any big surprises. But you never know. I do like his walkthroughs if I'm trying to decide on a library because they are usually very thorough. Kind of like most of us would do with a new library.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> this shit show



I don't understand. What "shit show," exactly.

Is it because I am still new here?


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> If they want that, they'd need to drastically lower the price.


On the subtopic of a universal/standard orchlib - I personally think it would be an exciting development. Spitfire would probably be in the best position to promote such a thing. The history of tech (and VI libraries are definitely tech) shows that standardization is a good thing. What I wouldn't want would be to squelch innovation. If you had a standardized orchlib specification, all Devs could offer it as well as their specialized libraries.


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 24, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> What "shit show," exactly.


I believe Alexander didn't like all the drama that turns up occasionally. Call it a shit show, a circus ... pick your favorite colorful word.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 24, 2019)

VinRice said:


> It sounds truly excellent and the nature of the players used means a level of consistency across the entire orchestra that you don't normally get. Spitfire have leant into that with the a clear emphasis on their end in trying to get the presentation as consistent as possible also. This is a weakness in other Spitfire libraries.


It would be very interesting to know the exact details of this, especially as an American. Did they license the name "BBC"? Are they the actual players? On and on. 

An American orchestra could never, ever, do anything remotely close to this. I chuckle at the thought:

Management: "You're going to make a sample library."
Orchestra Committee: "The hell we are, go screw yourself". 

I would love to know if the BBC players were actually obligated to do this. It's not covered in the audition.  Or in music school. Freelancers of course are far more willing to do anything. 

A lot of orchestra types don't take kindly to samples and know nothing about them. To many, it would be "Hey, principal oboe, be here at 9 tomorrow to blow whole notes for 4 hours, making recordings of them so someone can have a fake orchestra and not hire us any more". Orchestras, especially here, have wildly different pay rates per player. A "celeb" principal can make 2x as much or more. A Concertmaster 3x as much. So I would be curious if those types in the BBC were involved etc.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> I believe Alexander didn't like all the drama that turns up occasionally



Ah, I see... A delicate individual then... Not meant as a criticism as I have never met the guy.

So, this Redbanned place is a nicer place to hang out then?


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 24, 2019)

My understanding, and I could be wrong, was that the BBC SO came to Spitfire and asked to collaborate.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> My understanding, and I could be wrong, was that the BBC SO came to Spitfire and asked to collaborate.



That is what I also understand, having watched quite a few of SA's YouTubes


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 24, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> Ah, I see... A delicate individual then... Not meant as a criticism as I have never met the guy.
> 
> So, this Redbanned place is a nicer place to hang out then?


I've been there. It is not as busy.


----------



## CT (Oct 24, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> So, this Redbanned place is a nicer place to hang out then?



It has its own... quirks.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

miket said:


> It has its own... quirks.



I think I understand... As does most forums


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 24, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> A delicate individual then


Well, hehe, delicate isn't the first word that comes to mind - as a German he swears in English with gusto. Never met the man, but he's helped me on occasion. Head over to Redbanned and check it out.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 24, 2019)

novaburst said:


> For no reason?...... people do understand tech and games more than others, when they do go for the latest item it can appear they are doing it for show when really they found and researched what they needed or was waiting for.
> 
> Simply because there interest is involved in gaming, or that tech weather how small it may be meant they can now do much more with there phone that made the money they spent on it seem very small.
> 
> ...



The very reason why I named phones and FIFA is exactly because it's literally the same bullshit it was the year before, with miniscule, irrelevant changes for the mere sake of it. Entirely unnecessary bullshit products that exist for the sole reason of making even more money off of the obtuse victim consumer.

There's absolutely nothing significantly better, more improved, innovative or even remotely interesting about the follow up model of your phone and next years' FIFA. This complete lack of sensefulness will be dutifully, routinely compensated by a bunch of threadbare justifications and self-conciliation on the consumers' part. They will do this because they're unable to admit to themselves that their actions are motivated by the urge to consume because in our society this excites the pathways of our brains' reward system.

Getting very much off topic here, and I must ephasize that I'm absolutely not trying to lump BBCSO into this category. But since you went there ...


----------



## newman (Oct 24, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> Head over to Redbanned and check it out.


That's Mike Verta's forum. I have enjoyed several of his educational videos.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> Head over to Redbanned and check it out.



Had a quick shufty.

I think that one "classical music" place is enough for me... Getting kinda settled here.


----------



## robgb (Oct 24, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> That you want to get a job with Spitfire Audio...


Yikes. No thanks.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

robgb said:


> Yikes. No thanks



I see.


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 24, 2019)

newman said:


> That's Mike Verta's forum. I have enjoyed several of his educational videos.


Yep. Verta is awesome. He knows his shit, and is generous about dispensing advice.


----------



## brenneisen (Oct 24, 2019)

VinRice said:


> The recording chain is different and more 'pristine'



what do you mean?


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 24, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> The very reason why I named phones and FIFA is exactly because it's literally the same bullshit it was the year before, with miniscule, irrelevant changes for the mere sake of it. Entirely unnecessary bullshit products that exist for the sole reason of making even more money off of the obtuse victim consumer.
> 
> There's absolutely nothing significantly better, more improved, innovative or even remotely interesting about the follow up model of your phone and next years' FIFA. This complete lack of sensefulness will be dutifully, routinely compensated by a bunch of threadbare justifications and self-conciliation on the consumers' part. They will do this because they're unable to admit to themselves that their actions are motivated by the urge to consume because in our society this excites the pathways of our brains' reward system.
> 
> Getting very much off topic here, and I must ephasize that I'm absolutely not trying to lump BBCSO into this category. But since you went there ...


There's so much undeniable truth to this. I know people who buy shit just to buy shit. Just watch those Black Friday videos of people stampeding over eachother for a generic tv that's going to break in a few months.

I was a lifelong Apple user, but the direction they went in several years ago left me with the decision to stick with my 2008 mac pro, and switch from my iphone to my MUCH better LG. 

This video pretty much sums up my experience with Apple. 



Newer doesn't always mean better.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 24, 2019)

When iPhones first came out, I jumped on the bandwagon. My flip phone had "web access" which was totally useless. The first iPhone was amazing. But since then? I'm on Android. I like that my Samsung Note is large, I can read it easier, and it has this cool little pen where I can actually write notes. Or shopping lists. And I can add memory if I need it. I kept my Note 3 longer than I should have because the battery was easy to switch out. Now I have a Note 8 and can't change the battery. And I am being forced to upgrade all my computers to Windows 10. I liked 7. It worked. 

I do spend a lot on stuff that I probably don't need, but also see no reason to buy something just because it is the newest thing. If the workflow is easier for me? The sounds inspire me to want to write something new? The price is good? I'm there. And I can also wait for a wishlist sale....


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Oct 24, 2019)

Side note that's OT: one thing Android sucks at vs iOS is making music on device. That's a big reason I'm sticking with Apple (it's not because of Apple per se). Less of a concern for people using high end sample libraries, since you wouldn't do that anyway. Quite yet.

Well the BBC library is out. Though I won't be getting it, I still plan to watch some video reviews.


----------



## novaburst (Oct 24, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> The very reason why I named phones and FIFA is exactly because it's literally the same bullshit it was the year before, with miniscule, irrelevant changes for the mere sake of it. Entirely unnecessary bullshit products that exist for the sole reason of making even more money off of the obtuse victim consumer.



Developers are innovators if you are able get the latest library because the latest latest library would address a lot of complaints and dissatisfaction of users, even of other library's at least this is the path developers should be taking and for the most part i think they are taking with new products.

I dont think these comments would be made if it was O T or CSS2 developed a new library how many http://www.orchestraltools.com/metropolis_ark/index.html (METROPOLIS AR)ks are out but every one has a use for it and some have all the ARKs . if it was CSS2 you would have been saying wow the tone the tone so silky nice and dark....... so i do have my suspension why some are negative towards this new Spitfire library. 

Concerning phones and tech so you will stay with 4G when 5G network is widely available because you do know it means purchasing a new phone, but hay capitalism right. 

We cant paint everything with the same color Some would prefer to invest in a new landscape some would prefer a new library and we all can justify why we should do it but to be judged for doing it is a little narrow.

Because some are fed up or lost interest in music and library's for what ever reason why now start championing the notion its like your beating your self up because people have not lost interest like you and like the latest library or who find an interest in it.

As long as we are beyond the age of consent we are free to choose what we want, and if we say it meets a need who is anyone to judge.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 24, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> Symphobia 4.


Thx Broh!


----------



## VinRice (Oct 24, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> It would be very interesting to know the exact details of this, especially as an American. Did they license the name "BBC"? Are they the actual players? On and on.
> 
> An American orchestra could never, ever, do anything remotely close to this. I chuckle at the thought:
> 
> ...



They are the actual BBC Symphony Orchestra players that rehearse and perform together every week. They were very happy and enthusiastic by all accounts. Benefits of the relative security of a national institution.


----------



## VinRice (Oct 24, 2019)

brenneisen said:


> what do you mean?



Super-clean Millenia pre-amps straight to PT instead of the Neve Monseratts in to SSL to PT at Air. I don't think they bothered with any of the tape machine shenanigans either with so many live mics.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 24, 2019)

novaburst said:


> I dont think these comments would be made if it was O T or CSS2 developed a new library how many http://www.orchestraltools.com/metropolis_ark/index.html (METROPOLIS AR)ks are out but every one has a use for it and some have all the ARKs . if it was CSS2 you would have been saying wow the tone the tone so silky nice and dark....... so i do have my suspension why some are negative towards this new Spitfire library.



Absolute nonsense and not sure where you're getting that from.



> Because some are fed up or lost interest in music and library's for what ever reason why now start championing the notion its like your beating your self up because people have not lost interest like you



Same applies here.


----------



## VinRice (Oct 24, 2019)

Consona said:


> BBCSO feels like a library from 10 years ago.



Why?


----------



## CT (Oct 24, 2019)

I actually agree that it feels like a library from 10 years ago, in a good way. A full orchestra, in its own plugin, released all at once instead of doled out in one section every few years.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Oct 24, 2019)

I really like the look of BBC SO. I'd be intrigued to spend some time with it. But....

I have a very wide array of libraries open to me already, including the complete Spitfire Symphonic Series with both SSS & SCS & Perc. I also bought the expansions when they were sold on sale before being withdrawn.

Next year we've been promised a major upgrade for this library, too. I suspect a complete re-brand (and possibly a price drop) are on the cards. Also maybe a transition to Spitfire Player.

As far as BBC SO being already balanced - well that's hardly unique, both the VSL Synchronised SE's, and Steinberg Iconica are all positioned and balanced out of the box.

So the reason I won't be buying it just now is I really don't need it, and frankly, don't have the time to play with it just now. I have many libraries I haven't fully exploited yet - and I suspect many others here are the same. I've probably got all I ever will need right now.

However, I do wish the Spitfire chaps all the best with their latest product. Though I have no doubt that one month I will have an excess of cash coinciding with a Spitfire sale and think to myself... what the hell....


----------



## novaburst (Oct 24, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Absolute nonsense and not sure where you're getting that from.



Ok i stand corrected,



Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Same applies here.



So its good to know your fire is still burning.


Nice


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 24, 2019)

miket said:


> I actually agree that it feels like a library from 10 years ago, in a good way. A full orchestra, in its own plugin, released all at once instead of doled out in one section every few years.


I'm not gonna lie. I kinda wish more developers took this approach, instead of releasing libraries section by section. If i were to buy BBC, the uniformity would be the biggest selling point.


----------



## ag75 (Oct 24, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> It would be very interesting to know the exact details of this, especially as an American. Did they license the name "BBC"? Are they the actual players? On and on.
> 
> An American orchestra could never, ever, do anything remotely close to this. I chuckle at the thought:
> 
> ...


The BBC players get a royalty check acording to the Sound on Sound review:
"If you're considering buying BBCSO, it's worth bearing in mind that Spitfire pay performance royalties twice-yearly to every artist who has performed on their recordings. Paul Thomson explains: "As with all of our products, the players receive a royalty on sales, but as this is a partnership with the BBC, a proportion of sales revenue also goes back into supporting music at the BBC." This supportive, co-operative attitude is a welcome contrast to certain big Internet companies who would sooner set fire to their beards than pay musicians a royalty."


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 24, 2019)

ag75 said:


> The BBC players get a royalty check


Good for them (Spitfire). That would definitely sweeten the pot for the players. American Orchs. tend to be myopic when it comes to, well, basically everything. Good for the BBC to embrace something that's not a Tchaikovsky Symphony. 

I went on an SSS (Spitfire Spending Spree) recently, bought a whole bunch of stuff. I'm happy to hear that they give back to the players.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Oct 24, 2019)

@Sears Poncho You'd be hard pressed to find an orchestral library of players that would not get royalties for VI, as i understand it, speaking with an older film composer friend of mine, he was telling me in the late 80s and early 90s none of the players and orchestras wanted to be sampled. they saw this as a huge disadvantage.

but today its in BBC SO interests to come to SA with a product they would make money from, and one would assume that it would have to be lucrative for them to do so as well. 

I'm kind of confused why some people are coming across a little concernd by this lib, the price point is amazing, the symphonic series all up costs more. bbcso is cheaper for a whole orchestra, so be it if you have other libs that have the same artics and what not.
it seems nobody is really talking about all the bleed in the other mics (in that this is the main difference to other libs), this is amazing, its another level of control in real sampling of an orchestra. like what superior drummer has done with bleed. your able to capture a realistic recorded live sound of an orchestra and manipulate each mic, there is no other library that does this, and this alone is an amazing feat (600gbs of amazing feat) i'm not saying anyone 'needs' this ability, but its pretty great that this option exists, personally i love it.

i do wonder how big the lib would be if it were just a tree mic though XD


----------



## dcoscina (Oct 24, 2019)

This was an easy choice for me. I had to pass because i just dont have the funds and even when it looked like i did, i perused my 12 SSDs of various Orchestral sample libraries and thought “nope”. when Andy’s demo first came out, i was convinced that i needed this library. Luckily, for me, subsequent demos didnt impress me the same way. I mean Andy Blaney could make a Roland Sound Canvas sound brilliant after all. 

I‘m not chiming in to join the sour grapes bandwagon by any stretch. If i were just starting out, this is probably the library i would choose. But i seriously have so many and i am loving Nucleus (i prefer their solo legato oboe to the one i have heard from BBC to be quite honest) So i am all good. 

I also just started a new project which has motivated me to just compose. I’m actually amazed at the selection of stuff I have at my disposal. Plenty of SFA, OT, CineSamples, Project Sam, EW, etc etc to choose from. If I can’t make with all these libraries then I shouldn’t be making music at all. 

Anyhow, congrats To Spitfire for their BBC release and to those early adopters. Make great music with it and post it!


----------



## Markus Kohlprath (Oct 24, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> Good choice of course. I've seen Berlin live 2x and Vienna once. Vienna did Mahler #3, at Musikverein. Awesome. Berlin did Alpine Symphony (on tour in the States) which was great. I heard them do Falstaff by Elgar, very obscure, in the Philharmonie. Best orchestral concert I've ever seen.


You have been at Musikverein? Unbelievable. I grew up there a 5 minutes walk away. Have been there and in Wr. Konzerthaus regularly my whole youth. The acoustics of Wr. Musikverein are the best I’ve ever experienced.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 24, 2019)

Markus Kohlprath said:


> You have been at Musikverein? Unbelievable. I grew up there a 5 minutes walk away. Have been there and in Wr. Konzerthaus regularly my whole youth. The acoustics of Wr. Musikverein are the best I’ve ever experienced.


I've played there several times. Konzerthaus too. Great memories and history.


----------



## kitekrazy (Oct 24, 2019)

Is it really any different with EQs, compressors, verbs, and soft synths.
I do this as a hobby and I probably couldn't list 10% of what I have.


----------



## Wolf68 (Oct 24, 2019)

I won't buy it, too. although I am sure it is a great library.
time to spend the money for the real life.


----------



## jaketanner (Oct 24, 2019)

5Lives said:


> The universal template to allow composers to “communicate” with each other more easily than ever before


This is the part that I am missing here...HOW exactly is this unity going to happen through BBC? I mean sure, if many people have the same library, and use only that library, collaboration is easy, but this is true for many composers who also have similar libraries...what is it that I am missing here?


----------



## 5Lives (Oct 24, 2019)

Think about it this way - what is sheet music notation but a standardized, agreed upon communication protocol. It works because many people (all in the western world) adopt it. If a composer you wanted to learn from or work with didn’t use the same notation, that would make things challenging - not impossible, but more challenging. The same goes for sample libraries. They’re a dime a dozen these days so what are the odds you and I have the same exact set with the same exact template? Almost zero. And that’s where BBCSO comes in. It allows the transfer of ideas in a much more seamless way than previously. You could say well Garritan had an all in one orchestra and that’s true, but it didn’t achieve what Spitfire is trying to achieve (and don’t think Garritan had the ambition or vision to do so). Spitfire has explicitly said this is their vision and they are going to do whatever they can to support it - even publishing midi mockups of existing pieces or allowing the community to do so is such a great opportunity for all of us. You may ask, why would anybody share for free? Well the same reason anybody who has attained knowledge is willing to share it - because they care...or they’re getting something back (and perhaps Spitfire will enable that too in the future). Either way, this hasn’t been done before or even attempted before - and that’s what makes it interesting IMO.


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 24, 2019)

5Lives said:


> standardized, agreed upon communication protocol


MIDI is a standard communication protocol as well. General MIDI assigns sounds to specific Pgm #s, and was an attempt to allow people to share music. There are thousands of free General MIDI songs on the Web and if you have GM playback HW or SW, you will get an acceptable rendition of a GM song, but it is likely not identical to the originator's rendition unless you have the same playback module. Standardized playback these days would need to include protocols for using CC#, VST effects, automation .. anything needed to drive the complicated VI libraries we all use.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 24, 2019)

What was this thread originally about? lol

Since the hype train is over. Maybe it’s time to focus on what this library actually does and how well it manages to nail its concept (or not)..


----------



## Markus Kohlprath (Oct 25, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I've played there several times. Konzerthaus too. Great memories and history.


Wow, what do you play?


----------



## ag75 (Oct 25, 2019)

constaneum said:


> I love the woodwinds but I'll hold up and see how CSW gonna sound


When are those expected to be out?


----------



## ag75 (Oct 25, 2019)

robgb said:


> Only partly true. More accurate: "I really want to OWN this but I don't want to pay for it."


Feels very Jane’s Addiction. Im assuming that’s partly why they are using their own player engine. 😂


----------



## I like music (Oct 25, 2019)

ag75 said:


> When are those expected to be out?



Believe plan was end of this year, but I heard they might be released v early 2020...


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 25, 2019)

Markus Kohlprath said:


> Wow, what do you play?


Violin. I did 8 long European tours with a small orch. We backed up guitarist Pepe Romero. You're very lucky to have grown up in Vienna, arguably the best city on the planet. Love it, and Austria too. Played in Salzburg, Linz, Welz, Innsbruck, etc. Loved Villach, wanted to not get back on the bus and just stay there. The first year (1991) was near Christmas and everything was decorated, lots of snow etc. Magical.


----------



## AdamKmusic (Oct 25, 2019)

I would love to be able to buy individual elements eg the strings by themselves


----------



## jaketanner (Oct 25, 2019)

5Lives said:


> Think about it this way - what is sheet music notation but a standardized, agreed upon communication protocol. It works because many people (all in the western world) adopt it. If a composer you wanted to learn from or work with didn’t use the same notation, that would make things challenging - not impossible, but more challenging. The same goes for sample libraries. They’re a dime a dozen these days so what are the odds you and I have the same exact set with the same exact template? Almost zero. And that’s where BBCSO comes in. It allows the transfer of ideas in a much more seamless way than previously. You could say well Garritan had an all in one orchestra and that’s true, but it didn’t achieve what Spitfire is trying to achieve (and don’t think Garritan had the ambition or vision to do so). Spitfire has explicitly said this is their vision and they are going to do whatever they can to support it - even publishing midi mockups of existing pieces or allowing the community to do so is such a great opportunity for all of us. You may ask, why would anybody share for free? Well the same reason anybody who has attained knowledge is willing to share it - because they care...or they’re getting something back (and perhaps Spitfire will enable that too in the future). Either way, this hasn’t been done before or even attempted before - and that’s what makes it interesting IMO.


From what you're saying, this mentality kind of forces people to all have the same workflow and template and sounds. I get the whole collaboration thing, but if this is their vision, it's certainly not one that any established composer would get in to...I mean this is for up and coming composers and people trying to make.(myself included), but I wouldn't partake much in a community like this if I am trying to secure my own work...I'd be too tied up. So until this actually is realized, I may just not get it.. LOl But I understand I am in the minority.


----------



## jaketanner (Oct 25, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> What was this thread originally about?


I think having two threads on the BBC is not gonna work. There are posts on both of these about the same thing. I think the admins should block any comments on the original BBC thread, and start a new one that talks about the actual library in it's practical use. I'm going nuts trying to keep up with these threads.. LOL


----------



## robgb (Oct 25, 2019)

ChristopherRock said:


> I'm kind of confused why some people are coming across a little concernd by this lib, the price point is amazing,


Amadeus Symphonic Orchestra's price point is amazing. Spitfire's price point seems on par or even a little high compared to many packages out there.


----------



## El Buhdai (Oct 25, 2019)

robgb said:


> Amadeus Symphonic Orchestra's price point is amazing. Spitfire's price point seems on par or even a little high compared to many packages out there.



I don't think people are saying the price is amazing because of how it compares to other full orchestra products, but because of how it compares to building your own orchestra from individual flagship products from different developers. Getting quality strings, brass, woodwinds, percussion, and solo strings separately can add up to way more than the cost of this all-in-one library pretty quickly..


----------



## Gingerbread (Oct 25, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> I don't think people are saying the price is amazing because of how it compares to other full orchestra products, but because of how it compares to building your own orchestra from individual flagship products from different developers. Getting quality strings, brass, woodwinds, percussion, and solo strings separately can add up to way more than the cost of this all-in-one library pretty quickly..


Perhaps, but the question that I'm still waiting on is whether the quality actually stacks up to the best-in-class section libraries. The sonic cohesiveness of BBC is certainly impressive, from the examples I've heard. But I rather doubt that the strings (sampling and programming) are as good as CSS or Afflatus, the woods as good as Berlin Woodwinds, etc. But obviously, the price is very different too.


----------



## ism (Oct 25, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> Perhaps, but the question that I'm still waiting on is whether the quality actually stacks up to the best-in-class section libraries. The sonic cohesiveness of BBC is certainly impressive, from the examples I've heard. But I rather doubt that the strings (sampling and programming) are as good as CSS or Afflatus, the woods as good as Berlin Woodwinds, etc. But obviously, the price is very different too.




I'm curious about this also. 

But I'd just add this qualification that "best in class" is a large term. CSS is clearly the best in class for drippingly romantic legatos (which are wonderful). SCS however, clearly isn't trying to outclass CSS at what it CSS does, but it's just as clearly best in class for what it does. Berlin is probably best in class in sheer depth of sampling, in a way that spitfire generally doesn't try to be. 


In particular Spitfire's approach is to push the envelope on sonority over deep sampling. Which we see in the breadth of articulation and sound quality of SStS or the solo strings, for instance, rather that CSS of CSSS's focus on more dynamic layers and legato programming. While I'd like more dynamic layers in the spitfire libs something, I chose them because ultimately the breadth or articulations and the sonority is more important (not that I would love to have all of the other libs also).


So I'm looking forward to getting a sense of where BBCSO fits in the landscape - it feels like its best in class for some notion of class. But its also kind of creating a new class, so .. yeah, not sure. 

But I'm not interested in whether it's better at being CSS than CSS (which I'm quite certain it isn't). And it's certainly not going to out-Audio-imperia Audio-imperia (Which is a good thing, but probably also has implications for how I imagine the Daniel James review is likely to go).


----------



## El Buhdai (Oct 25, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> Perhaps, but the question that I'm still waiting on is whether the quality actually stacks up to the best-in-class section libraries. The sonic cohesiveness of BBC is certainly impressive, from the examples I've heard. But I rather doubt that the strings (sampling and programming) are as good as CSS or Afflatus, the woods as good as Berlin Woodwinds, etc. But obviously, the price is very different too.



I actually share those concerns. I'm in the process of easing away from ComposerCloud and building my own orchestra, but when I heard demos of BBC, I wasn't so impressed that it tore me away from the other libraries I had my mind set on. Someone else has said this somewhere, but it sounds like more of the same quality we're used to from flagship libraries, just with a more unified sound. What does that mean? If you have their Symphony Orchestra, you probably don't need this too.

Additionally, I'd likely rarely or never use all the mics in the library, so they'd just be wasting space, or I'd basically have to buy the SSD.

If they sold this library by section (which, I wish they would but I know they probably won't) I'd likely purchase the strings including section leaders at least, because I'm still looking for a strings library.


----------



## Gingerbread (Oct 25, 2019)

ism said:


> But I'd just add this qualification that "best in class" is a large term. CSS is clearly the best in class for drippingly romantic legatos (which are wonderful). SCS however, clearly isn't trying to outclass CSS at what it CSS does, but it's just as clearly best in class for what it does. Berlin is probably best in class in sheer depth of sampling, in a way that spitfire generally doesn't try to be.


That's a very good point, and certainly in the sonority department, it's clear that BBC excels. I'm loving the timbre and cohesiveness that I've heard, which is exactly why I've been so tempted to buy it. 

But one important aspect of a library attaining best-in-class status is the programming, with a minimum of glitches, bugs, off-tonality, etc. No library is perfect in this regard, but some really shine. I've found Spitfire to be hit-or-miss in this department, and my worry with BBC SO is that it's such a _huge_ library, that the odds of there being many bugs and issues, large and small, inevitably increases. 

It's very early, so the jury is still out, and I'm curious to hear feedback from the early buyers---are any issues big enough to be annoyingly frustrating, or are they small enough not to be any real concern?


----------



## prodigalson (Oct 25, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> Perhaps, but the question that I'm still waiting on is whether the quality actually stacks up to the best-in-class section libraries. The sonic cohesiveness of BBC is certainly impressive, from the examples I've heard. But I rather doubt that the strings (sampling and programming) are as good as CSS or Afflatus, the woods as good as Berlin Woodwinds, etc. But obviously, the price is very different too.



I can somewhat speak to this. I just spent 20-30 mins last night going through each sound yesterday and out of curiosity started comparing each with my other “full (or mostly complete) orchestras”.

TL;DR: BBCSO, in my opinion, certainly stacks up with “best-in-class” libraries. Better? Worse? No, just different and ultimately dependent on your taste and goals. Flute? Gorgeous. Oboe? Preferred the SSO. Clarinet? Def preferred BBCSO - SSO Clarinet is a honky mess - but ultimately preferred OT BWW over both others.

Afflatus is well programmed and has great patches but I far prefer the recorded tone and sonics of BBCSO. So you shouldn’t doubt that the sampling of BBCSO compares. It very much does.

CSS is stunning in it’s legato execution and phenomenally consistent. But BBCSO strings, IMO, are some of the best symphonic strings I’ve heard and might actually be my favorite string library I own now. Is it programmed as well as CSS? That depends on your goal. BBCSO might not have the immediate flexibility in terms of legato but it does have a variety of intuitively programmed legato transitions that, on first blush, sound very flexible and convincing. It also has short notes programmed into them which are very useful. So, don’t doubt that the programming isn’t as good. It’s very well done in it’s own right. You also don’t have to deal with the convoluted multiple delay values per legato transition that is such a feature of CSS. I will still use CSS though...when I want that sound and flexibility and have the time to drag every single note a different value of ms earlier. 

BBCSO has it’s fair share of niggles, however. Frustrating lack of dynamic layers in certain instruments (looking at you, French horn!), some not so smooth cross fades and some bumpy legato transitions. But do not be under the impression that this is in any way different to OT BWW, for example. BWW has a ton of phasey crossfades, bumpy legatos and inconsistent programming. Also, it doesn’t exactly have more dynamic layers than BBCSO. BWW sounds gorgeous and my OT orchestra is some of my favorite samples, but, they are certainly NOT the epitome of sampling and programming, IMO.

Finally, while I was initially somewhat disappointed by some of the apples to apples comparisons of some instruments to my current favorites, I’m keenly aware that a sampled orchestra only comes into it’s own when used in battle and multiple sections are combined. Sure, my SSO oboe might sound sweeter than BBCSO’s but I’ve grown frustrated with SSO as a whole. The sound of AIR Lyndhurst is stunning but it’s just so damn characteristic, bordering on oppressive in complex orchestrations. I still have hope that BBCSO when similarly used will come into it’s own as a beautiful, fresh and most importantly CLEAR sonic landscape

...but I’ll still be using my SSO and OT orchestras...which, ultimately, is totally fine by me.


----------



## Consona (Oct 25, 2019)

VinRice said:


> Why?


Feels like EWQLSO 2.0. I'm curious about user demos.


----------



## CT (Oct 25, 2019)

Here's a key thing I'm noticing, which I was cautiously expecting/hoping: the first user demos trickling in are pretty uniformly "good sounding," meaning that the usual issues that give away samples and detract from musicality are, as yet, not poking out at me. 

Maybe it's harsh, but that is something I rarely encounter, least of all in the first few days after something's release. Either all the people who already have this and are sharing have an exceptional touch with virtual instruments, or it's just a very straightforward and musical offering with great sonic integrity.


----------



## Consona (Oct 25, 2019)

miket said:


> Here's a key thing I'm noticing, which I was cautiously expecting/hoping: the first user demos trickling in are pretty uniformly "good sounding," meaning that the usual issues that give away samples and detract from musicality are, as yet, not poking out at me.
> 
> Maybe it's harsh, but that is something I rarely encounter, least of all in the first few days after something's release. Either all the people who already have this and are sharing have an exceptional touch with virtual instruments, or it's just a very straightforward and musical offering with great sonic integrity.


What was the last time you were listening to a real orchestra playing? :dodgy:


----------



## CT (Oct 25, 2019)

Consona said:


> What was the last time you were listening to a real orchestra playing? :dodgy:



Oh give me a break. You're not into this one, we get it.


----------



## Consona (Oct 25, 2019)

Just a few hours ago I was listening to some Berlin Woodwinds demo and it sounded fake. So what...


----------



## CT (Oct 25, 2019)

Consona said:


> Just a few hours ago I was listening to some Berlin Woodwinds demo and it sounded fake. So what...



I didn't say it sounded like the real thing, I said it isn't bugging me in many of the ways that samples usually do. No need for the snarky questioning of my "listening credentials," yeah?


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 25, 2019)

See, this always confuses me. When people say "It doesn't sound like a real orchestra!" Do they mean a recording of a real orchestra? Or a live orchestra? Because if you want it to sound like the recording of a real orchestra (which would be the equivalent of samples) I think you need to add more noise. Actually, for a live one too. I think ISW's Orchestral Colors has some that can be added.


----------



## Consona (Oct 25, 2019)

That wasn't snarky. I've noticed I used to think some sample lib demos sounded so great, yet it was just due to not being listening to the real stuff. Then I returned and thought, how could have I ever thought this sounds good?... (It was the Bernard Herrmann toolkit, just for the record. I thought they captured some liveliness there, then I put some actual Herrmann on and... don't want to be mean, but samples were just laughable in comparison.)

I think in the modern television environment, these libraries are totally ok, it has all one need to produce the neutered orchestral music that's in vogue these days. But the minute you want to make some 80s Star Trek or a Hitchcock movie stuff, it's over.


----------



## CT (Oct 25, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> See, this always confuses me. When people say "It doesn't sound like a real orchestra!" Do they mean a recording of a real orchestra? Or a live orchestra? Because if you want it to sound like the recording of a real orchestra (which would be the equivalent of samples) I think you need to add more noise. Actually, for a live one too. I think ISW's Orchestral Colors has some that can be added.



Well I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it isn't so much about sounding like a real orchestra, either live or recorded (I don't think anything ever will, so I'm not trying to fool anyone), as much as it is about letting the actual music come across above the samples. There has to be the right balance between musicality and flexibility in the programming, and natural sound. Very few strike that balance well.



Consona said:


> it was just due to not being listening to the real stuff



I've been listening to the real stuff, in person or recorded, for a couple decades now.


----------



## Bluemount Score (Oct 25, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> See, this always confuses me. When people say "It doesn't sound like a real orchestra!" Do they mean a recording of a real orchestra? Or a live orchestra? Because if you want it to sound like the recording of a real orchestra (which would be the equivalent of samples) I think you need to add more noise. Actually, for a live one too. I think ISW's Orchestral Colors has some that can be added.


Just cough in your microfon at the most annoying times while your track is playing and simple layer everything afterwards. Done, 100% like the real thing!


----------



## Consona (Oct 25, 2019)

miket said:


> There has to be the right balance between musicality and flexibility in the programming, and natural sound. Very few strike that balance well.


That's something I was expecting from someone like Spitfire, one of the leading and biggest sample developers to do. Not to create another library that cannot do what their other stuff can't do as well.

Or maybe it's just the people doing those demos, making them sound dead and flat. Dunno. Ride those CCs more I guess?


----------



## Bluemount Score (Oct 25, 2019)

miket said:


> Well I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it isn't so much about sounding like a real orchestra, either live or recorded (I don't think anything ever will, so I'm not trying to fool anyone), as much as it is about letting the actual music come across above the samples. There has to be the right balance between musicality and flexibility in the programming, and natural sound. Very few strike that balance well.


This is a topic as old as sampling itself and most likely older than myself.
Keeping it short, realism in my eyes is crucial when you are into _realistic _mockups of real recordings and such. Otherwise, the muscial main idea, things like a great melody inside an overall great context and orchestration, a catching rythm, are what makes music enjoyable, yes, even traditional orchestral or film music. Music is much more about emotion than realism. Personal opinion. Also, keep in mind that barely any unexperienced listener is not gonna notice the difference between a high tier sample library in good hands, BBCSO for example, and a real recording. And by saying that I'm talking about the majority of people out there by far.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 25, 2019)

Consona said:


> That's something I was expecting from someone like Spitfire, one of the leading and biggest sample developers to do. Not to create another library that cannot do what their other stuff can't do as well.
> 
> Or maybe it's just the people doing those demos, making them sound dead and flat. Dunno. Ride those CCs more I guess?


It will probably take a few days to get the hang of it. I'm looking forward to what DJ does with it tomorrow.

Edit: I think some are having issues with the new player as well. I think it is set to the - I don't want to say wrong middle C, but maybe what is standard for Logic and not so standard for others? That is what I am hearing. I didn't buy it yet. I will probably wait until next year when the price is closer to my budget (and I don't have to buy expensive appliances) Plus by then the majority of the bugs should be worked out.


----------



## CT (Oct 25, 2019)

Consona said:


> That's something I was expecting from someone like Spitfire, one of the leading and biggest sample developers to do. Not to create another library that cannot do what their other stuff can't do as well.
> 
> Or maybe it's just the people doing those demos, making them sound dead and flat. Dunno. Ride those CCs more I guess?



I think we're far from having heard enough to judge what this can or can not do, and in any case, I think people tend to pin more blame on the tools than is warranted. Most of what's out there right now is good enough to do 1980's Goldsmith or whatever your benchmark is, to a reasonably satisfying degree, if *you're* good enough (see Andy Blaney). My point was that BBCSO is maybe a little more user-friendly in that regard, shrinking the gap between good writing and VI voodoo.


----------



## Consona (Oct 25, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> It will probably take a few days to get the hang of it. I'm looking forward to what DJ does with it tomorrow.


What are you expecting to hear and see, actually?


----------



## Consona (Oct 25, 2019)

miket said:


> I think we're far from having heard enough to judge what this can or can not do, and in any case, I think people tend to pin more blame on the tools than is warranted. Most of what's out there right now is good enough to do 1980's Goldsmith or whatever your benchmark is, to a reasonably satisfying degree, if *you're* good enough. My point was that BBCSO is maybe a little more user-friendly in that regard, shrinking the gap between good writing and VI voodoo.


Agreed. I sometimes use some "older" libraries, while layering even 3+ articulations of the same instrument to get something that sound vivid and live. Not noticing anything like that from other people using those libs. Then again, I immediately notice their stuff sounds flat. Not saying my things sound like a real thing, of course they don't. But I agree I should probably stop criticizing the library that much and should focus on why people make it sound lifeless.

edit: bazillion typos, sorry


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 25, 2019)

ism said:


> sonority is more important



Is it? I'm almost leaning the other way. The sound must only be "good enough", but if you can't get a musical performance out of a library, you can have all the greatest sound in the world, it's still gonna be hard to make it sound like music. Conversely, even more realistic sound doesn't expand the possibilities of expression. It just sounds more shiny. A deeper sampled library does.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 25, 2019)

Consona said:


> What are you expecting to hear and see, actually?


A very good walkthrough. And if it is usable right out of the box. DJ says what he is thinking as he goes. It has gotten him in trouble when people only hear part of it. But I definitely listened to all his walkthroughs before deciding which Met Arks to get when they were on sale. i'm not so much listening to his opinion, but he basically does what I do when I get a new library. Go through everything at least once and then try to do something with it. They other walkthroughs tend to be picking and choosing articulations.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath (Oct 25, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> Violin. I did 8 long European tours with a small orch. We backed up guitarist Pepe Romero. You're very lucky to have grown up in Vienna, arguably the best city on the planet. Love it, and Austria too. Played in Salzburg, Linz, Welz, Innsbruck, etc. Loved Villach, wanted to not get back on the bus and just stay there. The first year (1991) was near Christmas and everything was decorated, lots of snow etc. Magical.


Haha, I think our little conversation highjacked the thread. I’ve seen Pepe Romero once with his family and once in a solo recital. Unfortunately not with the chamber orchestra. Must have been great.


----------



## dcoscina (Oct 25, 2019)

It’s a little early to speculate but perhaps down the line they will have a BBC Lite that will include decca tree mics and that’s it. That might be attainable both financially and space/download wise for many interested parties on the fence. Just a suggestion..


----------



## Consona (Oct 25, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> A very good walkthrough. And if it is usable right out of the box. DJ says what he is thinking as he goes. It has gotten him in trouble when people only hear part of it. But I definitely listened to all his walkthroughs before deciding which Met Arks to get when they were on sale. i'm not so much listening to his opinion, but he basically does what I do when I get a new library. Go through everything at least once and then try to do something with it. They other walkthroughs tend to be picking and choosing articulations.


You know what I wish he'd do? I want him to make some 30 seconds of Star Wars-like action music, put a lot of effort into those 30 seconds to make it sound as good and vivid as possible. I already know this can pull off some Dark Knight spicc ostinati and loud drum sounds. I want to know whether a sampled BBC orchestra can actually create some unleashed old-school orchestral stuff, ffs!  I don't want to hear another string sustains + spiccs + horns + synth + big drums stuff. I want to hear how the fricking BBC sampled orchestra handles some lively musical phrases.  Will I get this? Probably no...


----------



## ism (Oct 25, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Is it? I'm almost leaning the other way. The sound must only be "good enough", but if you can't get a musical performance out of a library, you can have all the greatest sound in the world, it's still gonna be hard to make it sound like music. Conversely, even more realistic sound doesn't expand the possibilities of expression. It just sounds more shiny. A deeper sampled library does.



Well, you're certainly right that to say "sonority is more important" risks speaking in overly broad strokes. 


But CSS vs SStS is illustrative. No question that CSS has better legato programming, and an extra dynamic layers. Which is really important for the particular sort of high-romantic lush line that I associate with CSS (and probably lots of other things, just that there's a certain type of like that CSS is the undisputed king of).

But I went with spitfire studio strings because of the sound. On one level its apples to oranges, they're not trying to do the same thing, and I knew perfectly well what I was looking for. But also, StSS when it presumably could have focus on a core legato articulation, it instead invests in more articulations - con sort and flautando and all kind of other great stuff. So there's a particularly design decision, typical of Spitfire I think, that "sonority is more important that extra legato programming etc" 



And it's taken me a while, but as I discover all the sonic spaces I can go to with StSS, I'm quite happy to have gone with StSS even at the cost of inferior legato. Because the legato is almost always perfectly good, while hitting all the right notes in its sonority. 

So when I say "sonority is more important" I'm not remotely suggesting this is a universal principle. Just in the very specific context of choosing library A over library B. 

If I were writing Elgar mock ups, CSS would kill it, and all the StSS-seque sonority of StSS would be of little consolation. 

And there are days when I really would trade the flautando in StSS for a legato approaching CSS quality. (Well maybe not the flautando, but maybe the sul tasto. Or at least the 1/2 con sord - with the caveat that I'd hardly scratched the surface on that one, so just what I'm willing to trade for better legato is actually not such an easy question not that I think of it). But there's more days when all the amazingness of CSS legato just isn't going to compensate fort very different sonority I can get with StSS.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Oct 25, 2019)

Consona said:


> You know what I wish he'd do? I want him to make some 30 seconds of Star Wars-like action music, put a lot of effort into those 30 seconds to make it sound as good and vivid as possible. I already know this can pull off some Dark Knight spicc ostinati and loud drum sounds. I want to know whether a sampled BBC orchestra can actually create some unleashed old-school orchestral stuff, ffs!  I don't want to hear another string sustains + spiccs + horns + synth + big drums stuff. I want to hear how the fricking BBC sampled orchestra handles some lively musical phrases.  Will I get this? Probably no...


I’m 100% certain it can. It’s just a hard style to pull off.


----------



## Consona (Oct 25, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> I’m 100% certain it can. It’s just a hard style to pull off.


Well, I'm waiting for someone to f***ing do it.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 25, 2019)

Consona said:


> You know what I wish he'd do? I want him to make some 30 seconds of Star Wars-like action music, put a lot of effort into those 30 seconds to make it sound as good and vivid as possible. I already know this can pull off some Dark Knight spicc ostinati and loud drum sounds. I want to know whether a sampled BBC orchestra can actually create some unleashed old-school orchestral stuff, ffs!  I don't want to hear another string sustains + spiccs + horns + synth + big drums stuff. I want to hear how the fricking BBC sampled orchestra handles some lively musical phrases.  Will I get this? Probably no...


Actually, considering the type of music DJ usually does? He might try for something like this. And he will probably have the same complaint others have about lack of ff. I don't really do ff stuff, so it is not a big deal for me. At least not at this time. Things change. And Spitfire isn't really known for their extra loud libraries when you think about it. But an all in one should include p to f at least. My opinion.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Oct 25, 2019)

robgb said:


> Amadeus Symphonic Orchestra's price point is amazing. Spitfire's price point seems on par or even a little high compared to many packages out there.



You can say that about every Spitfire library though, their prices are just that little bit higher compared to others BUT there are still many devs that charge premium amounts too, I dont think you can compare this to armadues or nucleus. its not the same product at all, the quality, sound, mic options and articulations make it a completely different library. I wish all libraries where value for money like armadeus though. 

Finally finished downloading bbcso, I must admit after playing with it for an hour. I'm pretty impressed. its nothing innovative in terms of what it sounds like or what it does, except for the mic options, it really lives up to the hype in that regard. the articulations are fantastic as expected from SA, but that is what seperates bbcso from these other libs everyone is comparing it too. i would compare it to SA symphonic series if anything.

I'm not sure about the 1000 price point for this either. the pre order price should be the full price and have discounts from there, that is much more reasonable for what it is. I think if you have symphonic series you wouldn't need this lib, unless you want more control of the room sound, and have a more clean, dry sounding orchestral tone. 

I also have been able to get quite a bit of bite out of the strings when layering the string sections to play any given articulation. i think it holds up with aggressive strings if its layered. it sounds great!


----------



## CT (Oct 25, 2019)

Consona said:


> Well, I'm waiting for someone to f***ing do it.



I'll oblige for a very reasonable fee.


----------



## Gingerbread (Oct 25, 2019)

prodigalson said:


> I can somewhat speak to this. I just spent 20-30 mins last night going through each sound yesterday and out of curiosity started comparing each with my other “full (or mostly complete) orchestras”.
> 
> TL;DR: BBCSO, in my opinion, certainly stacks up with “best-in-class” libraries. Better? Worse? No, just different and ultimately dependent on your taste and goals. Flute? Gorgeous. Oboe? Preferred the SSO. Clarinet? Def preferred BBCSO - SSO Clarinet is a honky mess - but ultimately preferred OT BWW over both others.
> 
> ...


Thank you! That's among the best objective reviews I've seen in these early stages, and I'm glad you compared it to some of the other great libraries. Good to hear that it holds its own (or bad, maybe, for my wallet!). This is the kind of information I'm interested to hear, and it's impressive that Spitfire seems to have pulled this especially ambitious one off. Still time to get the intro price....


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 25, 2019)

BBCSO is a fine library. Entirely sufficient. Perhaps that's the point. It's not meant to break the industry. It's just a sufficient all in one solution for composers who want that. It does most everything well enough to get the job done, without needing other libraries. However, I still feel you'll get a lot more from continuing to use your other libraries with it.


----------



## robgb (Oct 26, 2019)

Consona said:


> Just a few hours ago I was listening to some Berlin Woodwinds demo and it sounded fake. So what...


In a blind test, most people can't tell the difference between real and fake. So what...


----------



## Willowtree (Oct 26, 2019)

I don't have BBCSO, and I've been one of those people reminding everyone to be wary of the hype.

Still, to me, it seems a bit ridiculous some are judging BBSCO after an hour or two of playing around with it.

I've had Chris Hein Solo Violin for years and my opinion on it is still evolving. Something the size of BBCSO would at least need a couple weeks or months in my opinion.


----------



## Consona (Oct 26, 2019)

Then maybe I'll buy it.


robgb said:


> In a blind test, most people can't tell the difference between real and fake. So what...


Some people listen to near white noise electro industrial music and love it, so my argumet is invalid on so many levels it's pointless to defend it...


----------



## robgb (Oct 26, 2019)

So apparently loading times are extremely slow? Is this true for anyone who has bought it?


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 26, 2019)

I'm going to guess there will be a lot of early pains with this new player. This may be the first big test of it. I don't think it easily purges like Kontakt, so loading a full template is taking more RAM than expected. At least this is my understanding of the problem. And I'm glad I'm waiting until next year to get it.


----------



## MaxOctane (Oct 26, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> I'm going to guess there will be a lot of early pains with this new player. This may be the first big test of it.



Hans Zimmer Strings and Eric Whitacre Choir would disagree


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 26, 2019)

MaxOctane said:


> Hans Zimmer Strings and Eric Whitacre Choir would disagree


You didn't have a full orchestra with either.


----------



## El Buhdai (Oct 27, 2019)

[I]W[/I]illowtree said:


> I don't have BBCSO, and I've been one of those people reminding everyone to be wary of the hype.
> 
> Still, to me, it seems a bit ridiculous some are judging BBSCO after an hour or two of playing around with it.
> 
> I've had Chris Hein Solo Violin for years and my opinion on it is still evolving. Something the size of BBCSO would at least need a couple weeks or months in my opinion.



As a newer composer who's just now building his orchestra and leaving Composer Cloud (and lurking a lot on VI-Control these days), I can't help but be perplexed by the insane level of hype for what seems to be just... another orchestral library. Like, I would kill to have the library collections that some of the people have here (or the thousands of dollars it takes to get them), but people are always looking for more libraries, even if they bring so little new to the table other than a slightly new flavor of what they already have.

I understand that each one has their own strengths and weaknesses and having a lineup of libraries for the same instruments can be useful, but I only own a few orchestral libraries and even I couldn't help but yawn at BBC. It sounds good, and it seems good, but so do most of Spitfire's other libraries. This seems to be an excellent library if you don't have much to begin with, but I cannot fathom why someone with, say, Spitfire's own SSO would need BBC. I mean, I can, but I don't understand how it would be worth the money. $700 - $1000 is a lot of money that could go towards so many things in life. Retirement funds, house work, repairs, the best weekend of your life, etc. I just don't think buying another orchestral library when you have so many already is worth missing out on so many other potential things that such a large sum of money could buy.

(Hopefully) Without getting _too_ preachy, I kind of view it almost as a compulsion for some folks. They remind me of those guys on Steam with 2000 games, but they only play CS:GO and have hundreds that they've barely spent any time with, and a significant portion they haven't used at all. When the Steam sales roll around, they think "just one more game..."

Maybe I'm just too parsimonious, but if I'm spending that much money on something new, it'd better be _new_ and improved, and not just different. Otherwise I don't think it's worth the money. If you really think about the difference in quality between products in this industry as it compares to other industries, sample libraries are very, very close in quality to each other, and many of the differences among high-end libraries are so insignificant that almost nobody can appreciate them except us as composers. Additionally, the fact that they're so similar in quality is why we don't all use the same few products, and why it comes down to personal preference more than an objective best set of libraries. If you can express your musical ideas and emotions with the stuff you already have even with its flaws, why keep buying and buying?

Anyway, back to lurking before I'm devoured.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 27, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> *snip*



You're a down to earth thinker, which is becoming rare.


----------



## Willowtree (Oct 27, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> As a newer composer who's just now building his orchestra and leaving Composer Cloud (and lurking a lot on VI-Control these days), I can't help but be perplexed by the insane level of hype for what seems to be just... another orchestral library. Like, I would kill to have the library collections that some of the people have here (or the thousands of dollars it takes to get them), but people are always looking for more libraries, even if they bring so little new to the table other than a slightly new flavor of what they already have.
> 
> I understand that each one has their own strengths and weaknesses and having a lineup of libraries for the same instruments can be useful, but I only own a few orchestral libraries and even I couldn't help but yawn at BBC. It sounds good, and it seems good, but so do most of Spitfire's other libraries. This seems to be an excellent library if you don't have much to begin with, but I cannot fathom why someone with, say, Spitfire's own SSO would need BBC. I mean, I can, but I don't understand how it would be worth the money. $700 - $1000 is a lot of money that could go towards so many things in life. Retirement funds, house work, repairs, the best weekend of your life, etc. I just don't think buying another orchestral library when you have so many already is worth missing out on so many other potential things that such a large sum of money could buy.
> 
> ...


I'm one of those people who keep spending more and more ridiculous money on new libraries. I don't have a lot of time tonight, so I can't make such a lengthy and excellent post at yours. But let me just tell you this ... *You're right*. It's silly. People (including me) need to stop and admire what they have more.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Oct 27, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> Anyway, back to lurking before I'm devoured.



I have Spitfire SSO, and quite a lot of other stuff besides. I haven't purchased BBCSO, largely because i don't need it, and I what I really need is more time, not more stuff.

But you seem awfully concerned what other people do with their money. My wife likes to buy shoes and bags. Try telling her that the new Michael Kors handbag is a complete waste of money. I'll drop you off at A&E afterwards.

There are people here who just love playing with a new sample library. I don't drink much, don't smoke, don't waste money on fancy cars or expensive clothes etc. For many it's a business expense and therefore tax deductible. Myself, I'm even VAT registered. I also work bloody hard, and earn a decent wedge - so if I wanted to buy BBCSO I could and I would.

But I already have Spitfire SSO. But if I didn't I may well have bought this, or I may have gone with VSL, or OT. If I'd had this in the early days the time I would have saved learning about templates, routing, signal paths.... I'd have hit the ground running a damn site faster. And the one thing that I am is time poor. 

Also, I'm bemused why people think this is an expensive library - Looking at other offerings I don't think it is.

So don't worry about what others spend their money on. Just worry about how you spend yours.

As the late footballing legend George Best was reported to have said:

_'I spent most of my money on booze, fast cars and beautiful women. The rest of it I wasted.'_


----------



## jbuhler (Oct 27, 2019)

SSO is not the most consistent library in the world. And you are pretty much stuck with the sound of the big hall. I like SSO quite a lot (which is why I didn’t rush out to buy BBCSO) but if it turns out that BBCSO has better consistency between instruments the improvement in workflow would be worth it.


----------



## robgb (Oct 27, 2019)

After watching Daniel James's and Nick Murray's videos and listening to their conclusions, I'm feeling less GAS about this orchestra. DJ feels the library should be in the $300-400 range.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 27, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> $700 - $1000 is a lot of money that could go towards so many things in life. Retirement funds, house work, repairs, the best weekend of your life,


The best weekend of my life would be to stay in my apt. alone and play with the $700-$1000 software I just purchased. 



El Buhdai said:


> Without getting _too_ preachy, I kind of view it almost as a compulsion for some folks.


Some here do. I'm not one of them, fortunately. I had my biggest spending year this year by a mile, but only because I had some big musical projects that paid well and some upcoming ones that do too. It was time to up my game considerably. I am very happy I did. 

FOr those around here that do have a compulsion: I bet they don't drink much, spend money on drugs, eat out a ton etc. I bet most have computer/IT type jobs, make real money, and can afford to do so. Even those who spend quasi-impulsively: my rent is very affordable, people would faint if they could pay what I do (I live in the city in a rust belt city). I'm a cheap date. So, I am guessing that there is a balance along the way. Some people might say "geez, those guys have 15 orchestral libraries" but don't figure in that they probably have 2 pairs of shoes, hunt for bargains, drive modest cars, on and on. Yin/Yang. 



El Buhdai said:


> If you really think about the difference in quality between products in this industry as it compares to other industries, sample libraries are very, very close in quality to each other, and many of the differences among high-end libraries are so insignificant that almost nobody can appreciate them except us as composers.


I'm a pro musician and composer. I have a very good musical resume. You'd probably shit your pants if you saw it. So, let me give you and anybody the one piece of musical advice that is above all others:

The difference between Joe Blow Violinist/Sax Player/Composer/Pianist whatever and Hans von Williams Zimmerovsky can be .00000000001%. That one instrument/library/new strings might be the difference between winning an audition and not. Or, that one new library might impress a producer enough. If a sample library is your axe, get the best possible axe you can get. My violin is a badass and I just spent a grand getting it re-awesomed/set up. It's not only how I pay my rent, it's my voice. It's me. As a composer, a library is ones voice as well. So, if one thinks that CSS will be the right tone for a project and Spitfire won't and vice-versa, they may be correct. And that might be what puts them over the finish line. And that's true for so many things in pro music. I'm not saying that Joe Amateur is gonna wake up and compete with Hans von Zimmerofsky, but there are many solid pros that have the same talent level etc and can. So, getting and keeping topflight gear isn't a waste for many, it's part of the gig. And more importantly...... it's part of _getting_ the gig and it's part of _keeping_ the gig.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> FOr those around here that do have a compulsion: I bet they don't drink much, spend money on drugs, eat out a ton etc. I bet most have computer/IT type jobs, make real money, and can afford to do so. Even those who spend quasi-impulsively: my rent is very affordable, people would faint if they could pay what I do (I live in the city in a rust belt city). I'm a cheap date. So, I am guessing that there is a balance along the way. Some people might say "geez, those guys have 15 orchestral libraries" but don't figure in that they probably have 2 pairs of shoes, hunt for bargains, drive modest cars, on and on. Yin/Yang.




I'm andy and I eat far too much chocolate.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> Hans von Williams Zimmerovsky



Hmmm... Is he a real person?

Google doesn't turn up much


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 27, 2019)

It's not overly expensive for a good full orchestra. SSSO doesn't have percussion. EWHO's winds are not good. OT uses too much RAM. They all have issues. And? The big attraction of the BBCSO is a potentially balanced and cohesive orchestra. They all play together all year round. They know the quirks of the other players and how to work together to get a great sound. You don't get this with most sample libraries. 

The extra mics are also an attraction.

Edit: stupid phone is messing up my words.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 27, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> I'm andy and I eat far too much chocolate.


I'm David, my shoes smell like the 1970s.


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I'm a pro musician and composer. I have a very good musical resume. You'd probably shit your pants if you saw it.



Quite possibly the most pretentious comment I've ever read on this forum.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 27, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> Quite possibly the most pretentious comment I've ever read on this forum.



Well I, for one, was very impressed. Managed not to shit me pants though...


----------



## I like music (Oct 27, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> Quite possibly the most pretentious comment I've ever read on this forum.



I don't know, man. Did you not visit the "Romantic Symphony" thread over in Members' Compositions? I shit my pants every 20 minutes, when that was going on.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I'm a pro musician and composer. I have a very good musical resume. You'd probably shit your pants if you saw it.







> So, let me give you and anybody the one piece of musical advice that is above all others:
> 
> The difference between Joe Blow Violinist/Sax Player/Composer/Pianist whatever and Hans von Williams Zimmerovsky can be .00000000001%. That one instrument/library/new strings might be the difference between winning an audition and not. Or, that one new library might impress a producer enough. If a sample library is your axe, get the best possible axe you can get. My violin is a badass and I just spent a grand getting it re-awesomed/set up. It's not only how I pay my rent, it's my voice. It's me. As a composer, a library is ones voice as well. So, if one thinks that CSS will be the right tone for a project and Spitfire won't and vice-versa, they may be correct. And that might be what puts them over the finish line. And that's true for so many things in pro music. I'm not saying that Joe Amateur is gonna wake up and compete with Hans von Zimmerofsky, but there are many solid pros that have the same talent level etc and can. So, getting and keeping topflight gear isn't a waste for many, it's part of the gig. And more importantly...... it's part of _getting_ the gig and it's part of _keeping_ the gig.



But what does that tell us, in regards to the post you're replying to? What's the moral of the story? Buy every library you can get you hands on - ideally all and any of them? And then what? Then you got all the libraries and still don't impress the producer that one elusive 0,0001% more because you happened to use the wrong one (because it's such a gamble to make the stars align and impress these wondrous, enigmatic creatures).

To make it more clear: of course it makes sense to upgrade to better tools if you don't have top of the line tools. But the guy was talking about owning a whole bunch of high end stuff already and still buying more and more stuff despite the fact that none of it is an upgrade, because the differences are so insignificant that nobody call tell other that the person using it (and no, the client can't and they will most unlikely attribute their approval of something to your choice of a string library!).

To me it sounds more as if people were telling this stuff to _themselves_ in order to create some kind of illusion of reason and predictability in a trade where success so often can't be rationalized.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 27, 2019)

It is good to buy the best you can afford. But really, you shouldn't go into debt to get this stuff. I am one of those who does buy too much. However, my bills get paid every month, I have no real debt (except my mortgage), my 401K is maxed out annually, and I have savings. I make my living outside of music. I travel for work, so the thought of getting on a plane for fun is not fun. We don't eat out much. And my kindle is full. I have more purses and shoes than any woman needs. 

But I am able to wait for sales. Sales are my Achilles heel.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 27, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> ........To make it more clear: of course it makes sense to upgrade to better tools if you don't have top of the line tools. But the guy was talking about owning a whole bunch of high end stuff already and still buying more and more stuff despite the fact that none of it is an upgrade, because the differences are so insignificant that nobody call tell other that the person using it (and no, the client can't and they will most unlikely attribute their approval of something to your choice of a string library!).



But Jimmy, here's another reason in defence of new sound (even if it's only slightly different) and that is about keeping fresh within an industry that knows no clock and an inspiration that needs to be on tap. Using the same sound day in day out for long periods can be tiring, boring and might even induce predictability and creative lethargy. New, fresh sounds and approaches can enliven jaded creativity.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 27, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> But Jimmy, here's another reason in defence of new sound (even if it's only slightly different) and that is about keeping fresh within an industry that knows no clock and an inspiration that needs to be on tap. Using the same sound day in day out for long periods can be tiring, boring and might even induce predictability and creative lethargy. New, fresh sounds and approaches can enliven jaded creativity.



Sure. A new coat of paint every now and then is refreshing.


----------



## I like music (Oct 27, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Sure. A new coat of paint every now and then is refreshing.



When you can open the tin, that is


----------



## kitekrazy (Oct 27, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> As a newer composer who's just now building his orchestra and leaving Composer Cloud (and lurking a lot on VI-Control these days), I can't help but be perplexed by the insane level of hype for what seems to be just... another orchestral library. Like, I would kill to have the library collections that some of the people have here (or the thousands of dollars it takes to get them), but people are always looking for more libraries, even if they bring so little new to the table other than a slightly new flavor of what they already have.
> 
> I understand that each one has their own strengths and weaknesses and having a lineup of libraries for the same instruments can be useful, but I only own a few orchestral libraries and even I couldn't help but yawn at BBC. It sounds good, and it seems good, but so do most of Spitfire's other libraries. This seems to be an excellent library if you don't have much to begin with, but I cannot fathom why someone with, say, Spitfire's own SSO would need BBC. I mean, I can, but I don't understand how it would be worth the money. $700 - $1000 is a lot of money that could go towards so many things in life. Retirement funds, house work, repairs, the best weekend of your life, etc. I just don't think buying another orchestral library when you have so many already is worth missing out on so many other potential things that such a large sum of money could buy.
> 
> ...



Give it time. You too will be converted to the dark side.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 27, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Sure. A new coat of paint every now and then is refreshing.


A new coat of paint smells pretty bad. Maybe all the open windows are refreshing though.


----------



## jaketanner (Oct 27, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> As a composer, a library is ones voice as well


Often times a new library helps with inspiration, and puts you in a new mindset to compose something different...Say a new Performance Samples library would have me in a different direction than a Spitfire one would...sometimes libraries are inspirational..  Thought I'd add that in. LOL


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 27, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Often times a new library helps with inspiration, and puts you in a new mindset to compose something different...Say a new Performance Samples library would have me in a different direction than a Spitfire one would...sometimes libraries are inspirational..  Thought I'd add that in. LOL


I've bought libraries or effects that just make me want to write something. I hear it during the walkthroughs or demos. to me that makes it worthwhile buying. And free stuff does that as well, so it is not spending money.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Oct 27, 2019)

There has been some amazing points in this thread, I'm really enjoying hearing everyone's leveled opinion about bbcso and vi's in general.

DJ saying that bbcso is worth 300-400 is not a fair analysis. someone during the stream kept mentioning in chat that 'do you think project chaos is worth the same price of bbcso?' (for 300usd), which is a valid point to make considering what hybridtwos products are compared to SA. 
There are loads of libs that cost too much, heavyocitys vi's (Novo,gravity) cost way too much imo, but people arent ragging about that? is it coz theres not hype marketing behind it? even symphobia is overpriced for what it is. so many products in the vi world are over priced, but if we closely looks at bbcso it seems to be somewhat fair in comparison.

If i were to play devils advocate, lets assume you pay 750 for bbcso, thats 187.5 per orchestra section. i think for this price, you are getting what you pay for in that there is not as much dynamic layering in the legatos and vibratos, but there is more gold than dirt over all if you look at it in that price range, 
at 1000? now you start pushing it, 250 for that brass library that cant go ff?
the price by itself is cheap when comparing to how SA price their other products too. the complete SSO including perc is 2694 individually or ‭1885.8‬ as a package with 30% off.

So bbcso at 750 in comparison to SSO. is bbcso really worth less than half of SSO? in some cases the bbcso strings are better, its more dry and has fantastic sounding articulations its a different tool than SSS.

The bbcso strings get over 20 articulations, how can you compare that to a lib that doesnt have more than 6 for each string section? and most don't even offer a vib control when its an 'all in one' orchestral library, or it is only 1 dynamic layer of vib.

The problem with this lib is the marketing they threw behind it with 'most ambitious project yet' and 'universal starting point', to a degree you could argue that this is what bbcso is, but due to its shortcomings it kind of makes those statements seem ludicrous.
also because youll need a DAW and computer that can handle the ram and HD speeds, thats not 'universal' thats for people who are serious about orchestral programming and have a hefty pc, people who are already heavily invested in this. 

what person beginning their journey in orchestration is going to know the difference and use between con sordino, col legno, Flautandos and sul pont? that is not a selling point for a beginner, thats somone who wants more from their orchestral library. a universal starting point to someone who is already invested in orchestration and wanting to make that leap to more artics maybe??

I'm saying all this because i think this product actually has a very good place in the VI world, it definately fills a gap, ESPECIALLY with the mic options, i know a lot of people dont care about this, but personally i fcking love it. 90% of regular people (producers & hobbyists included) this is not something they need, this is a small group of 10% of composers who might want to have those mic options available, as a tool and as a toy just to play with, nobody else has this as part of their product.

SA's marketing has failed them on this one. they should not have billed this as the next evolution in orchestral libraries. they should have made the selling point the BBC SO,mic options and the price.

If this lib was around 600 full price, people would be saying its the best all in one lib out there, if you could pick it up on sale from that price too. but it would not be inline with what SA already sells and markets, so why is it a problem at 1000 down to 750? 

TLDR; to conclude, my observation seems to be the marketing and 1000 price is what has driven a lot of dislike towards the lib, which is fair in its own right, but i still think 750 for this lib is a fair starting point if your already in the composing world.


----------



## motomotomoto (Oct 27, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> As a newer composer who's just now building his orchestra and leaving Composer Cloud (and lurking a lot on VI-Control these days), I can't help but be perplexed by the insane level of hype for what seems to be just... another orchestral library. Like, I would kill to have the library collections that some of the people have here (or the thousands of dollars it takes to get them), but people are always looking for more libraries, even if they bring so little new to the table other than a slightly new flavor of what they already have.
> 
> I understand that each one has their own strengths and weaknesses and having a lineup of libraries for the same instruments can be useful, but I only own a few orchestral libraries and even I couldn't help but yawn at BBC. It sounds good, and it seems good, but so do most of Spitfire's other libraries. This seems to be an excellent library if you don't have much to begin with, but I cannot fathom why someone with, say, Spitfire's own SSO would need BBC. I mean, I can, but I don't understand how it would be worth the money. $700 - $1000 is a lot of money that could go towards so many things in life. Retirement funds, house work, repairs, the best weekend of your life, etc. I just don't think buying another orchestral library when you have so many already is worth missing out on so many other potential things that such a large sum of money could buy.
> 
> ...



your view can change once you are making significant income from your music. say you earn six figures a year or more with your music. at that point spending another 750 bucks on a library just to get another flavor / different sound in your productions just starts to make more sense as a business expense. personally I spend a percentage of my income from music each month on new tools and it keeps things feeling fresh for me and always exploring new sounds.


----------



## MaxOctane (Oct 27, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> Quite possibly the most pretentious comment I've ever read on this forum.



Eh, I didn’t think it was so bad. I’m not a pro composer though, and maybe I would really be impressed by his credits.

Plus, I shit my pants regularly, so that wouldn’t be anything new. (I should probably see a doctor about that...)


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 27, 2019)

motomotomoto said:


> your view can change once you are making significant income from your music. say you earn six figures a year or more with your music. at that point spending another 750 bucks on a library just to get another flavor / different sound in your productions just starts to make more sense as a business expense. personally I spend a percentage of my income from music each month on new tools and it keeps things feeling fresh for me and always exploring new sounds.



when you're making that amount of money its because you are well employed. Continuous creative work for some people goes smooth and they always know how to put out new ideas, but in my experience, most busy people burn out eventually and this leads to them doing what is usual and safe, or just losing creative juice and searching for new sparks. New libraries can be that spark. is it necessary? no, but if it helps, its that person's business. I've got more libraries than I need, but when I make the time to go through them, I find something I wanted or needed or something that sparks a new idea. For me it makes sense. Better to have the tools I need when I want them, rather than need the tools I want, when I don't have them.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 28, 2019)

If I paid myself $30 an hr, I could have bought this library INSTEAD of wasting time reading this whole fucking thread for no apparent reason.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 28, 2019)

NYC Composer said:


> If I paid myself $30 an hr, I could have bought this library INSTEAD of wasting time reading this whole fucking thread for no apparent reason.



give yourself a raise. you've earned it


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Oct 28, 2019)

ChristopherRock said:


> SA's marketing has failed them on this one. they should not have billed this as the next evolution in orchestral libraries. they should have made the selling point the BBC SO,mic options and the price


Dunno man, everyone is still talking about it.


----------



## Consona (Oct 28, 2019)

Consona said:


> I already know this can pull off some Dark Knight spicc ostinati


Wow, I was wrong.  Watching DJ's first look, a flagship 2019 orchestral library can't apparently do a simple string ostinato.


----------



## TomislavEP (Oct 28, 2019)

There isn't any doubt that BBCSO is a fine product in every possible aspect. The question "is it worth the asking price" depends on the particular case and the particular user. In my case, the answer is quite simple: I cannot afford myself to purchase this but also many other libraries that are significantly cheaper. I'm struggling to make a living only from music for several years now and despite a very limited budget, I've managed to build a "solid" collection of Kontakt libraries and other VI's. However, as the time passes by, more and more often I'm asking myself "do I really need any more of this stuff" and "do I use what I already have to the full" and the answer is most often "not really" if not a simple "no".

Also, I've come to the conclusion that doing orchestral mockups in a traditional sense was never really my thing. I've had several orchestral libraries over the years such as EWSO Gold, Garritan, Miroslav Philharmonik and I've hardly ever used them. Then I've heard of Albion and had made a vow since that I'm going to get this one day somehow. And today, against all the odds, I have not only one but three Albion libraries and I'm still using them not nearly to their full potential. I often find it difficult to move away from my personal comfort zone: mixing solo piano and other keyboard instruments, classical and ambient electric guitars, various synthesizers, etc. with strings and other orchestral elements and finally stepping into a realm of true "orchestral music". And however great BBCSO might sound and how comprehensive orchestral package it might be, I seriously doubt it would motivate me to move more in this particular direction then the tools I already have. Instead, if the situation permits me, I would rather add BDT and perhaps some EVO-based orchestral libraries to my toolkit. And in general, I'm aiming to purchase new libraries, especially more expensive ones, only if I get a truly justifiable reason to do so.


----------



## dgburns (Oct 28, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I'm a pro musician and composer. I have a very good musical resume. You'd probably shit your pants if you saw it.



Dude, love to see a link, now curious to know more then anything.

Also, leaning towards getting BBC myself, fwiw


----------



## ag75 (Oct 28, 2019)

Michael Antrum said:


> I have Spitfire SSO, and quite a lot of other stuff besides. I haven't purchased BBCSO, largely because i don't need it, and I what I really need is more time, not more stuff.
> 
> But you seem awfully concerned what other people do with their money. My wife likes to buy shoes and bags. Try telling her that the new Michael Kors handbag is a complete waste of money. I'll drop you off at A&E afterwards.
> 
> ...


Exactly. I don’t have kids and get a lot of joy out of buying new sample libraries. I have no regrets.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 28, 2019)

Consona said:


> Wow, I was wrong.  Watching DJ's first look, a flagship 2019 orchestral library can't apparently do a simple string ostinato.



Hm. Watched some of it ... it actually doesn't seem all that impressive. Apparently has the usual SF drawbacks (sloppy editing, tuning issues/pitched samples, few dynamic layers etc.), which further lets me doubt that this product is all that interesting if you already have the Spitfire symphonic stuff.


----------



## Consona (Oct 28, 2019)

TomislavEP said:


> There isn't any doubt that BBCSO is a fine product in every possible aspect.


----------



## jaketanner (Oct 28, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> when you're making that amount of money its because you are well employed. Continuous creative work for some people goes smooth and they always know how to put out new ideas, but in my experience, most busy people burn out eventually and this leads to them doing what is usual and safe, or just losing creative juice and searching for new sparks. New libraries can be that spark. is it necessary? no, but if it helps, its that person's business. I've got more libraries than I need, but when I make the time to go through them, I find something I wanted or needed or something that sparks a new idea. For me it makes sense. Better to have the tools I need when I want them, rather than need the tools I want, when I don't have them.


However, most people earning that kind of a living are most likely having their music played live. In which case it doesn’t much matter about any different sound orchestrally, since it’s gonna sound like the orchestra they’re hiring. Unless BBC is used for unique sound design ideas, having new libraries for different sounds doesn’t seem like a priority for those composers. However IF the new library can do certain things to make your mockups sound better that’s different, but don’t think that’s what we are talking about here. The only advantage that I can really see from a composers' standpoint is that if your score is actually going to be performed by the BBC orchestra, then knowing what it might sound like in the end is a plus...


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 28, 2019)

MaxOctane said:


> Eh, I didn’t think it was so bad. I’m not a pro composer though, and maybe I would really be impressed by his credits.
> 
> Plus, I shit my pants regularly, so that wouldn’t be anything new. (I should probably see a doctor about that...)


The real impressive musicians are the ones who don't brag about how amazing their resume is (save it for a job interview). 

Composers like Zimmer, Williams, and Elfman who are beyond talented, yet are as humble as one could possibly be. Now that's impressive.

Yes, get your condition checked out immediately by a healthcare professional!


----------



## kitekrazy (Oct 28, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> The real impressive musicians are the ones who don't brag about how amazing their resume is (save it for a job interview).
> 
> *Composers like Zimmer, Williams, and Elfman who are beyond talented, yet are as humble as one could possibly be. Now that's impressive.*
> 
> Yes, get your condition checked out immediately by a healthcare professional!



The average movie goer doesn't care who wrote the music. Their interest is somewhere along with who the gaffer is.


----------



## Patrick.K (Oct 28, 2019)

ChristopherRock said:


> There has been some amazing points in this thread, I'm really enjoying hearing everyone's leveled opinion about bbcso and vi's in general.
> 
> DJ saying that bbcso is worth 300-400 is not a fair analysis. someone during the stream kept mentioning in chat that 'do you think project chaos is worth the same price of bbcso?' (for 300usd), which is a valid point to make considering what hybridtwos products are compared to SA.
> There are loads of libs that cost too much, heavyocitys vi's (Novo,gravity) cost way too much imo, but people arent ragging about that? is it coz theres not hype marketing behind it? even symphobia is overpriced for what it is. so many products in the vi world are over priced, but if we closely looks at bbcso it seems to be somewhat fair in comparison.
> ...


They should have two versions, as with the Studio strings: a cheaper standard, with less microphone positions so less gourmet ram, and a Pro version with all positions of microphones?


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 28, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> However, most people earning that kind of a living are most likely having their music played live. In which case it doesn’t much matter about any different sound orchestrally, since it’s gonna sound like the orchestra they’re hiring. Unless BBC is used for unique sound design ideas, having new libraries for different sounds doesn’t seem like a priority for those composers. However IF the new library can do certain things to make your mockups sound better that’s different, but don’t think that’s what we are talking about here. The only advantage that I can really see from a composers' standpoint is that if your score is actually going to be performed by the BBC orchestra, then knowing what it might sound like in the end is a plus...



In my mind this library is like a high end sketching library. Together all the pieces work coherently together so well that once you’re done, you could leave it as is and have a sufficient product. Nothing incredible but enough with little headache. I have libraries that do a lot of little things better than BBCSO, but all of them take some balancing to sit well together. I would say this library could be inspirational for composing if you set up a template and go. In the end I wouldn’t be surprised if people end up blending other libraries with it to cover things it can’t do. So the whole “all players and seats in the same room thing” probably isn’t the biggest selling point.


----------



## AndyP (Oct 28, 2019)

BBSCO is a good library. Not as good as the hype that was made about it, but it has the potential to become better. If SA also implements its big announcements promptly! If it takes 2 years for the library to reach the status advertised, it will be a big disappointment and SA would lose a lot of credit.

The release is not a week old, so I think problems are relatively normal. On the other hand, other manufacturers manage to bring a library onto the market that does what it is supposed to do right away without much fuss.
Sometimes less is more, especially for marketing.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 28, 2019)

I really don’t understand why a very large company releasing a huge project wouldn’t have a dedicated QC control team to hunt out bugs and problems. Then, if things couldn’t be fixed ahead of a firm release date, why not put together a list of “bugs and issues we are aware of and we’re working on”. This would lead to a feeling of security for the customer who invests in the product.


----------



## cqd (Oct 28, 2019)

NYC Composer said:


> I really don’t understand why a very large company releasing a huge project wouldn’t have a dedicated QC control team to hunt out bugs and problems. Then, if things couldn’t be fixed ahead of a firm release date, why not put together a list of “bugs and issues we are aware of and we’re working on”. This would lead to a feeling of security for the customer who invests in the product.



Yeah.. exactly.. the whole "Well, everyone at spitfire uses logic" thing is a bit weak.. what in the f*ck like?.. perhaps you should employ someone with a windows system.. just to be on the safe side like..


----------



## Patrick.K (Oct 28, 2019)

cqd said:


> Yeah.. exactly.. the whole "Well, everyone at spitfire uses logic" thing is a bit weak.. what in the f*ck like?.. perhaps you should employ someone with a windows system.. just to be on the safe side like..


Mac OS and Logic are the best...


----------



## tomosane (Oct 28, 2019)

I've been super skeptical about the new player all this time, and for a reason it seems.

Spitfire seems to be more or less in bed with Apple, and I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, but they should be more transparent about all this when it comes to the actual functionality of their software. Like, is the Windows version of the plugin in an experimental state of development? If so, why did they release it at all? If they don't openly address this, as a Windows user I won't be buying any of their non-Kontakt libraries for at least several years going forward.


----------



## motomotomoto (Oct 28, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> However, most people earning that kind of a living are most likely having their music played live. In which case it doesn’t much matter about any different sound orchestrally, since it’s gonna sound like the orchestra they’re hiring. Unless BBC is used for unique sound design ideas, having new libraries for different sounds doesn’t seem like a priority for those composers. However IF the new library can do certain things to make your mockups sound better that’s different, but don’t think that’s what we are talking about here. The only advantage that I can really see from a composers' standpoint is that if your score is actually going to be performed by the BBC orchestra, then knowing what it might sound like in the end is a plus...



I know quite a few people at this range who are not having their stuff played live. With that said, having your stuff played live would be amazing.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Oct 28, 2019)

Patrick9152 said:


> They should have two versions, as with the Studio strings: a cheaper standard, with less microphone positions so less gourmet ram, and a Pro version with all positions of microphones?



That'd then likely be competing with the excellent Audio Imperia Nucleus (MSRP $450) and maybe The Orchestra Complete, depending on the theoretical price. Nothing wrong with competition and options, though!


----------



## jaketanner (Oct 28, 2019)

motomotomoto said:


> I know quite a few people at this range who are not having their stuff played live. With that said, having your stuff played live would be amazing.


I'd imagine that might be trailer music though...unless there are more jobs for virtual orchestras than I realized...Although I suppose a lower budget film might not have the budget for live music. Anyway, I'd like to be one of those composers at that level.


----------



## Patrick.K (Oct 28, 2019)

vitocorleone123 said:


> That'd then likely be competing with the excellent Audio Imperia Nucleus (MSRP $450) and maybe The Orchestra Complete, depending on the theoretical price. Nothing wrong with competition and options, though!


I would have to look more closely at Audio Imperia Nucleus, maybe it's an alternative, why not?


----------



## motomotomoto (Oct 28, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> I'd imagine that might be trailer music though...unless there are more jobs for virtual orchestras than I realized...Although I suppose a lower budget film might not have the budget for live music. Anyway, I'd like to be one of those composers at that level.



Custom music for TV / adverts


----------



## jaketanner (Oct 28, 2019)

motomotomoto said:


> Custom music for TV / adverts


Ah, that makes sense.


----------



## jaketanner (Oct 28, 2019)

Patrick9152 said:


> I would have to look more closely at Audio Imperia Nucleus, maybe it's an alternative, why not?


Nucleus has far less content for sure than BBC. However, all that doesn't matter if the sound is better for you than BBC, then get Nucleus. I considered it at one point, but with 3 articulations and limited content I really didn't need it...If it were my first library, I'd go with Nucleus over BBC hands down. Far less expensive and for a first timer you may not need things like tonguing.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Oct 28, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> Nucleus has far less content for sure than BBC. However, all that doesn't matter if the sound is better for you than BBC, then get Nucleus. I considered it at one point, but with 3 articulations and limited content I really didn't need it...If it were my first library, I'd go with Nucleus over BBC hands down. Far less expensive and for a first timer you may not need things like tonguing.



Sounds right. The previous poster had speculated about a lower end BBC with one mic position, etc. That's the reason I brought up Nucleus, since a more intro-ish version would be less expensive than the full, which brings it down toward Nucleus. But that's theoretical, anyway.

That said, I didn't have a full orchestra and bought Nucleus for $350 pre-order... And have zero regrets or product envy (since I don't know enough to even make the most of Nucleus yet).


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 28, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> But what does that tell us, in regards to the post you're replying to? What's the moral of the story? Buy every library you can get you hands on - ideally all and any of them?


Get what you need to get the job done.

I'm sure guys who work in excellent computer gigs can afford 10X more than a musician, good for them. The "point" in my rant was that nobody should feel ashamed or be made to feel ashamed for any purchase, there's usually a yin/yang situation that might not be seen. If a hobbyist wants to buy 15 string libraries, more power to them. As far as pro musicians go, it's usually a solid investment to keep up with technology, it usually pays off either literally, inspiration-wise, etc. 

I appreciated the comments that El Budhai made, I was just pointing out a different way of looking at things. When some people are spending on "the best weekend of their lives" etc, others are sacrificing, avoiding those weekends so they can be the best at their craft that their situation can afford. Music can be a huge sacrifice, whether financially or time-wise.

There's a flip side of course that's equally important to remember. Springsteen made "Nebraska" on a Portastudio cassette. Sgt. Pepper was made on a four track. (A bit of a myth, some of it was 3 4-tracks chained together). Since it's that time, "Halloween" was made for $300K. Blair Witch Project was chump change and one hell of a marketing campaign. Ideally, a good idea trumps all else.

Orchestral is a bit different, unfortunately, whether real or samples. "Low budget Orchestra" is part of a Frank Zappa song title, not a mantra. We're all very fortunate that the technology is so advanced that we have these amazing tools at a relatively reasonable cost. Those of a certain age will remember that a DX7 was like 1800 bucks...in 80s money. Didn't even have reverb. So no, the point isn't to buy everything in the universe, just to buy exactly what you need................. then a lil more for the hell of it.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 28, 2019)

Being of a certain age, I can say that there are so many more choices these days that “what you need” is a moving target.

Back in the day, we just went into debt and bought the cool new keyboard mostly. Along with effects, drives, cords, mics, then samplers, drives, Cd-roms, computers, submixers, you know....burgers, fries, drugs and gear. What else mattered?


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 28, 2019)

NYC Composer said:


> Back in the day, we just went into debt and bought the cool new keyboard mostly.


Well, keyboard(s) if one was really cool enough. I wasn't. Curse you Rick Wakeman!  I do miss those days, with my trusty QX21 sequencer and Fostex 4 track. Eventually, a friend had a computer and showed me Dr. T's sequencer. It's been pretty much downhill ever since.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 28, 2019)

NYC Composer said:


> Being of a certain age, I can say that there are so many more choices these days that “what you need” is a moving target.
> 
> Back in the day, we just went into debt and bought the cool new keyboard mostly. Along with effects, drives, cords, mics, then samplers, drives, Cd-roms, computers, submixers, you know....burgers, fries, drugs and gear. What else mattered?





Sears Poncho said:


> Well, keyboard(s) if one was really cool enough. I wasn't. Curse you Rick Wakeman!  I do miss those days, with my trusty QX21 sequencer and Fostex 4 track. Eventually, a friend had a computer and showed me Dr. T's sequencer. It's been pretty much downhill ever since.


I was cool enough 

I had Dr T on a Commodore SX-64...portable! 5 inch COLOR screen!! About 25 lbs!!! Heh.


----------



## Zero&One (Oct 29, 2019)

hbjdk said:


> I actually made music for a couple of Commodore 64 games back in the 1980's.
> That was by plotting in stuff like A8 FF E2 in an editor to play a note, get vibrato on it for so-and-so long etc.
> Kids nowadays - they don't believe stuff like that for a second :D



I want to take this moment to thank you for the endless hours of enjoyment you created. I also done terrible in my exams... thanks for that too!


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 29, 2019)

jaketanner said:


> However, most people earning that kind of a living are most likely having their music played live. In which case it doesn’t much matter about any different sound orchestrally, since it’s gonna sound like the orchestra they’re hiring. Unless BBC is used for unique sound design ideas, having new libraries for different sounds doesn’t seem like a priority for those composers. However IF the new library can do certain things to make your mockups sound better that’s different, but don’t think that’s what we are talking about here. The only advantage that I can really see from a composers' standpoint is that if your score is actually going to be performed by the BBC orchestra, then knowing what it might sound like in the end is a plus...



Jake, I was one of those earning and doing live recordings. It didn't stop me from getting new sounds at all. Using the same old sounds day in and day for many months and often under pressure enervated me at times, especially when I was at it 24/7. But new sound refreshed me and did so crucially, _at the composing stage, _bringing new enthusiasm regardless if there was a live session planned. Sorry, I've just sort of repeated my post238 in this thread, to which @Jimmy Hellfire said it was like a fresh coat of paint...yeah.


----------



## I like music (Oct 29, 2019)

hbjdk said:


> I actually made music for a couple of Commodore 64 games back in the 1980's.
> That was by plotting in stuff like A8 FF E2 in an editor to play a note, get vibrato on it for so-and-so long etc.
> Kids nowadays - they don't believe stuff like that for a second :D



Please tell me you were involved in Fantasy World Dizzy (remember the Dizzy games?) or Rastan! I was 4/5 years old, and then my brother's commodore broke. Never played them again, but always always remembered the music. Still top 10 in my all-time game music.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Oct 29, 2019)

@I like music 
I remember the dizzy games well! i had a c64 and then an amiga500, they golden days of gaming!! so much awesome music on the amiga


----------



## I like music (Oct 29, 2019)

ChristopherRock said:


> @I like music
> I remember the dizzy games well! i had a c64 and then an amiga500, they golden days of gaming!! so much awesome music on the amiga



Remember the hawk that would come and eat you if you didn't time that bit with the dog, right? Oh man, I want to play it again. Might go and mock up the music with my modern VIs...


----------



## jaketanner (Oct 29, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> Jake, I was one of those earning and doing live recordings. It didn't stop me from getting new sounds at all. Using the same old sounds day in and day for many months and often under pressure enervated me at times, especially when I was at it 24/7. But new sound refreshed me and did so crucially, _at the composing stage, _bringing new enthusiasm regardless if there was a live session planned. Sorry, I've just sort of repeated my post238 in this thread, to which @Jimmy Hellfire said it was like a fresh coat of paint...yeah.


I mentioned the same thing many times also...for composers that have tons of libraries, sometimes a new one is used more for inspiration rather than using it for a "new" sound.


----------



## gpax (Oct 29, 2019)

What is BBC fever and the reality of existing libraries?

The answer is six. Wait six months to consider buying any sample library of consequence. The realty of more clarity in six months time cannot be overstated here.


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 29, 2019)

hbjdk said:


> I actually made music for a couple of Commodore 64 games back in the 1980's.
> That was by plotting in stuff like A8 FF E2 in an editor to play a note, get vibrato on it for so-and-so long etc.
> Kids nowadays - they don't believe stuff like that for a second :D


Man, that's just plain awesome! What games were they?


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 29, 2019)

hbjdk said:


> No, that wasn't me
> 
> @Mike Fox
> Unitrax and KGB Agent


So cool!


----------



## I like music (Oct 29, 2019)

hbjdk said:


> No, that wasn't me
> 
> @Mike Fox
> Unitrax and KGB Agent



Amazing! Didn't play these myself, but oh man, what a reminder that you don't even need a fricking sample library to make good music!!!


----------



## markleake (Oct 29, 2019)

gpax said:


> What is BBC fever and the reality of existing libraries?
> 
> The answer is six. Wait six months to consider buying any sample library of consequence. The realty of more clarity in six months time cannot be overstated here.


^ This.

I have no problem with other people buying libraries like this on release. In fact I *want* people to do this and create noise about the library, even though that may sound a bit self-serving.

It gives others who are more patient plenty of time to read through and see people's reactions, listen to demos, see how the technology performs, what are the weak points in the library, etc. That, and just the entertainment of reading people's reactions.

Anyway, in 6 months time it will be a known quantity, we will know much better what the verdict is. My impression so far is the dynamics are going to be the Achilles heel of this library. 2 dynamic layers just aren't enough.


----------



## MartinH. (Oct 29, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> Blair Witch Project was chump change and one hell of a marketing campaign. Ideally, a good idea trumps all else.



And in that case they didn't even need an original idea, good marketing was enough. "Found footage" horror film had been done before.


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 29, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> And in that case they didn't even need an original idea, good marketing was enough. "Found footage" horror film had been done before.


It had, but the Blair Witch Project poured gasoline on a fire that was burning out, or perhaps even rekindled a fire that had died out, and created an uncontrollable wildfire that swept through mainstream cinema for years to come.


----------



## El Buhdai (Oct 29, 2019)

gpax said:


> What is BBC fever and the reality of existing libraries?
> 
> The answer is six. Wait six months to consider buying any sample library of consequence. The realty of more clarity in six months time cannot be overstated here.



Yeah, this is important. The prevalence of hype culture among VI-Composers is disturbing to me. I've heard a rumor sourced from a Spitfire insider about how many people pre-ordered BBC and it made me a little sick because it reminds me of video game consumers. The difference is that if a new game sucks, you've lost $60 - $100. If BBC was not to your liking (sample libraries tend to be more subjective in quality than new video games, which often release in outright unplayable states these days and can be objectively bad), you lost $700 to hype.

I get that a lot of VI-Composers are part of a privileged class that doesn't have to consider $700 a lot of money, but for 99% of people, it's a lot to spend on one thing (and I don't mean privilege in a derogatory way. If you can do a $700 impulse buy, more power to you!). Unless or until that changes for me, I'll always be purchasing few libraries, slowly, and only after at least a month of research and a wealth of opinions have been released about it.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 29, 2019)

I’m delighted to have hobbyists, pros and semi-pros beta-testing for me. I consider it a service. Post user demos, the more the merrier.


----------



## Paul_P (Oct 29, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> I get that a lot of VI-Composers are part of a privileged class that doesn't have to consider $700 a lot of money, but for 99% of people, it's a lot to spend on one thing (and I don't mean privilege in a derogatory way. If you can do a $700 impulse buy, more power to you!).



How many people have spent way more than that on a single instrument, like a guitar ?

With the BBC you get a whole orchestra of instruments with players thrown in .


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 29, 2019)

Paul_P said:


> How many people have spent way more than that on a single instrument, like a guitar ?
> 
> With the BBC you get a whole orchestra of instruments with players thrown in .





El Buhdai said:


> Yeah, this is important. The prevalence of hype culture among VI-Composers is disturbing to me. I've heard a rumor sourced from a Spitfire insider about how many people pre-ordered BBC and it made me a little sick because it reminds me of video game consumers. The difference is that if a new game sucks, you've lost $60 - $100. If BBC was not to your liking (sample libraries tend to be more subjective in quality than new video games, which often release in outright unplayable states these days and can be objectively bad), you lost $700 to hype.
> 
> I get that a lot of VI-Composers are part of a privileged class that doesn't have to consider $700 a lot of money, but for 99% of people, it's a lot to spend on one thing (and I don't mean privilege in a derogatory way. If you can do a $700 impulse buy, more power to you!). Unless or until that changes for me, I'll always be purchasing few libraries, slowly, and only after at least a month of research and a wealth of opinions have been released about it.



A privileged class of professionals who spend money to make more money? 

This is my only problem with price moaning. Hobbyists should not moan about the prices of professional tools. If you want a library priced at an accessible range for hobbyists, plenty of those exist too.

As for BBCSO, price aside, I feel like if spitfire had market from the bottom up, we’d feel differently. If they had said that this was the best sounding most complete sketching tool on the market, we’d probably agree and be praising it. Here’s what they said on Facebook:

“ Available now – BBC Symphony Orchestra is the definitive orchestral sample library of epic proportions, offering control like no other.”

It offers no more control than any other library out there. If offers less in many cases, but more articulations than most sketching libraries. If their claim to fame is mics, I can’t think of many similar priced libraries that don’t offer the same control. I really feel like if they had said less and just let the product speak for itself, we’d have different expectations and responses. Their marketing was over the top, and in turn so was the response from a lot of fevered fanatics.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 30, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> As for BBCSO, price aside, I feel like if spitfire had market from the bottom up, we’d feel differently. If they had said that this was the best sounding most complete sketching tool on the market, we’d probably agree and be praising it. Here’s what they said on Facebook:
> 
> “ Available now – BBC Symphony Orchestra is the definitive orchestral sample library of epic proportions, offering control like no other.”
> 
> It offers no more control than any other library out there. If offers less in many cases, but more articulations than most sketching libraries. If their claim to fame is mics, I can’t think of many similar priced libraries that don’t offer the same control. I really feel like if they had said less and just let the product speak for itself, we’d have different expectations and responses. Their marketing was over the top, and in turn so was the response from a lot of fevered fanatics.



I too feel that the way the library was marketed indeed inspired some very inflated expectations, especially from the fanboy crowd. They made it sound as if the intention was to create the magnum opus, a new standard in sampling, or perhaps the most potent SF orchestra to date. While in reality BBSCO to me seems more like a contemporary take on EWQLSO or VSL Special Edition. Not the most detailed, the most comprehensive, the most deeply sampled library, but an all-in-one, cohesive package where (mostly) the right corners had been cut to offer a streamlined baseline product that could get the job done without relying on additional libraries, if need be.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 30, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I too feel that the way the library was marketed indeed inspired some very inflated expectations, especially from the fanboy crowd. They made it sound as if the intention was to create the magnum opus, a new standard in sampling, or perhaps the most potent SF orchestra to date. While in reality BBSCO to me seems more like a contemporary take on EWQLSO or VSL Special Edition. Not the most detailed, the most comprehensive, the most deeply sampled library, but an all-in-one, cohesive package where (mostly) the right corners had been cut to offer a streamlined baseline product that could get the job done without relying on additional libraries, if need be.



Exactly, and even what we get is a valuable addition. I think the problem is few people would have agreed to the price point for what we got had it been advertised honestly. I bought on a student discount and the price seemed fair. At full price, we’re likely paying mostly for the BBC branding than the actual library contents.


----------



## Sovereign (Oct 30, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> Exactly, and even what we get is a valuable addition. I think the problem is few people would have agreed to the price point for what we got had it been advertised honestly. I bought on a student discount and the price seemed fair. At full price, we’re likely paying mostly for the BBC branding than the actual library contents.


Had they been more open about how many dynamics were recorded I might have had doubts about purchasing, so in that sense I feel like they cheated and were not entirely honest. All the mics in the world can't make up for those missing dynamics.


----------



## JeffvR (Oct 30, 2019)

I'm glad I didn't buy this library. It's always a risk to buy in advance with sample libraries but when the hype is so big (well played Spitfire) it's only going to disappoint. There where a couple of things I already saw on beforehand:
- When you calculated the uncompressed wav size per mic you could see there would only be 2 or 3 dynamic layers and/or few round robins. But nobody really listened... The Symphonic collection is almost 3 times the size.
- The HZ Strings sample player isn't stable, efficient and fast at all, especially not on Windows. Why would the BBCO suddenly be better than Kontakt? Nobody really listened.


----------



## MartinH. (Oct 30, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> Yeah, this is important. The prevalence of hype culture among VI-Composers is disturbing to me. I've heard a rumor sourced from a Spitfire insider about how many people pre-ordered BBC and it made me a little sick because it reminds me of video game consumers. The difference is that if a new game sucks, you've lost $60 - $100. If BBC was not to your liking (sample libraries tend to be more subjective in quality than new video games, which often release in outright unplayable states these days and can be objectively bad), you lost $700 to hype.
> 
> I get that a lot of VI-Composers are part of a privileged class that doesn't have to consider $700 a lot of money, but for 99% of people, it's a lot to spend on one thing (and I don't mean privilege in a derogatory way. If you can do a $700 impulse buy, more power to you!). Unless or until that changes for me, I'll always be purchasing few libraries, slowly, and only after at least a month of research and a wealth of opinions have been released about it.



A friend once said to me "I won't preorder, we have to honor TotalBiscuit's memory". And I thought he has a good point. Can't remember the last time I preordered anything.

Hope you can appreciate this meme, maybe we have enough gamer's here to get this going on VI:C, or make a version that clicks better with composers.


----------



## acomposer (Oct 30, 2019)

I am sorry if I am going to offend people here but I have read alot of posts over multiple threads now and it seems that some of you just want a good moan. OK, a moan is good occasionally but you are like moaning and then re-moaning as if we had not seen your first moan. Maybe moaners could put your moan in your signature and then we would be aware of what it is you are moaning about to save you the trouble of re-moaning over and over about the same thing? There are even people moaning who don't own the product. That seems silly. I don't own a Ferrari but I wonder what they would say if I emailed them complaining of turbo lag on the 488 and the rather large steering wheel.

I think some guys here should just get on with their composing and stop moaning tbh.


----------



## M0rdechai (Oct 30, 2019)

As someone thats not emotionally or financially involved in any of these discussions: 

Before it was released there where people saying "this is going to be the best evaaah" and people saying "might not be..."

Now that it's out, there are people saying "best evaah" and people saying "it has flaws".

Don't really feel like there is much moaning going on.
Create buzz, get buzz... both positive and negative...


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 30, 2019)

acomposer said:


> I am sorry if I am going to offend people here but I have read alot of posts over multiple threads now and it seems that some of you just want a good moan. OK, a moan is good occasionally but you are like moaning and then re-moaning as if we had not seen your first moan. Maybe moaners could put your moan in your signature and then we would be aware of what it is you are moaning about to save you the trouble of re-moaning over and over about the same thing? There are even people moaning who don't own the product. That seems silly. I don't own a Ferrari but I wonder what they would say if I emailed them complaining of turbo lag on the 488 and the rather large steering wheel.
> 
> I think some guys here should just get on with their composing and stop moaning tbh.



#moan


----------



## Anevis (Oct 30, 2019)

True, listening though the demos and such and comparing it to other libraries, it isn't such difference. But to be honest I see it more as a universal starting point for people that are either new to samples or people that want one library that covers the whole orchestra. At least that's my interpretation of Spitfire's intentions although it wasn't marketed that way.


----------



## markleake (Oct 30, 2019)

acomposer said:


> There are even people moaning who don't own the product.


On VI-C?! Never! 

It's almost like we think we know stuff about, <gasp> _*virtual instruments*_. And, you know... opinions.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 30, 2019)

acomposer said:


> I am sorry if I am going to offend people here but I have read alot of posts over multiple threads now and it seems that some of you just want a good moan. OK, a moan is good occasionally but you are like moaning and then re-moaning as if we had not seen your first moan. Maybe moaners could put your moan in your signature and then we would be aware of what it is you are moaning about to save you the trouble of re-moaning over and over about the same thing? There are even people moaning who don't own the product. That seems silly. I don't own a Ferrari but I wonder what they would say if I emailed them complaining of turbo lag on the 488 and the rather large steering wheel.
> 
> I think some guys here should just get on with their composing and stop moaning tbh.



It's called critical thinking. I know it scares the shit out of millenials.

There's an official BBCSO thread. It wouldn't very cool to drag down or derail that one. This one was kind of created from a bit more critical perspective, as you can surely tell from the OP. You're actually the guy who's moaning.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 30, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> There's an official BBCSO thread



Where?


----------



## Simon Ravn (Oct 30, 2019)

JeffvR said:


> I'm glad I didn't buy this library. It's always a risk to buy in advance with sample libraries but when the hype is so big (well played Spitfire) it's only going to disappoint. There where a couple of things I already saw on beforehand:
> - When you calculated the uncompressed wav size per mic you could see there would only be 2 or 3 dynamic layers and/or few round robins. But nobody really listened... The Symphonic collection is almost 3 times the size.



Aaaaah... That's a bit far fetched. There is no way you can foresee the number of layers just by looking at the collective sample pool size:

- You don't know if they sampled chromatically (or even less) or every half tone.
- You don't know the ranges they sampled.
- You don't know the length of the samples (especially: How long are the longs, are they looped etc).

So many variables come into play here that you could easily do a 4-layer sampled violins longs patch that used the exact amount of space, or even less, than a 2-layer one.


----------



## Sovereign (Oct 30, 2019)

Simon Ravn said:


> Aaaaah... That's a bit far fetched. There is no way you can foresee the number of layers just by looking at the collective sample pool size:
> 
> - You don't know if they sampled chromatically (or even less) or every half tone.
> - You don't know the ranges they sampled.
> ...


SFA deafening silence on this issue and repeated attempts of them trying to evade the question were surely better indicators.  Though I have to honestly say, I never really expected them to do no more than 2-dynamic layer patches, ever. Given how they already lacked that ff layer, I was expecting three. That is IMO so wrong and outdated for a library which is supposed to be the core of your sample template.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 30, 2019)

Anevis said:


> True, listening though the demos and such and comparing it to other libraries, it isn't such difference. But to be honest I see it more as a universal starting point for people that are either new to samples or people that want one library that covers the whole orchestra. At least that's my interpretation of Spitfire's intentions although it wasn't marketed that way.



Thats the part where I find it a bit mixed in its perceived goal. 

Someone who is new to samples putting down $925 for their first library on a proprietary player even though a majority of libraries are kontakt? That sounds unlikely, if not for aggressive misleading marketing. 

For professionals that want the best damn sketching library out there? yeah I can see that, but still is it worth $925 for even that use? I've thrown quick stuff together with BBCSO and it is absolutely a "no-thought, get up and go" library. That is a very valuable asset, but then when you change out those samples with other libraries its easy to remember what this library lacks in character and expression. It's sufficient, but is sufficiently good enough at that price? 

I don't mean to sound like Spitfire stole people's money. I don't regret buying it, but the fever around this library was insanely unusual for what we got and all of the shortcomings were easy to see if you've used their player before. I'd totally recommend this to professionals who don't have a tight budget and those who have tons of libraries or are likely to record a live orchestra. For people with money concerns, I'd easily tell them to get a nucleus or something else.


----------



## M0rdechai (Oct 30, 2019)

Simon Ravn said:


> Aaaaah... That's a bit far fetched. There is no way you can foresee the number of layers just by looking at the collective sample pool size:
> 
> - You don't know if they sampled chromatically (or even less) or every half tone.
> - You don't know the ranges they sampled.
> ...



I actually remember some people questioning the 'sample depth' based on these kind of calculations, way before the release...
Not gonna dig into that thread to find it though 

It does appear those concerns wheren't far off.





Jimmy Hellfire said:


> It's called critical thinking. I know it scares the shit out of millenials.



To me it seems people that tent to have been racists are now aware that they can't be racist anymore in this day an age. They seem to have switched to bashing millenials instead of (other) minorities.
great job. solid effort.


----------



## danbo (Oct 30, 2019)

I'm a Spitfire Skeptic. I dislike their marketing (don't trust any company that is trying to be your friend) and this is no better. "The Page", and a "Universal Plugin". Give me a break, you can join Composer Cloud and everybody in the world can play one plugin together, namely "Play", and it has way more libraries (choirs, vocals, ethnic) than you have Spitfire. The fact that it's the BBC? Meh, it's a _sample library, _which means it's so stripped of soul there's little of the original musicians in there. And honestly Christians efforts and making a big time YouTube channel aren't sitting with me. I know too much, an impersonal company has become too personal, and I imagine my money going towards Christians and Pauls gardening (they both have nicer houses than I do). Finally, I hate that they did everything in Air studios. That's a crazy hall that the engineers do their best to damp. I've played plenty in Davies Symphony hall which is less of a mess - don't give me some big echo chamber and pretend it's something special. That's the negatives for me.

Having said that I'm actually considering getting it. On the positive side I like how they have the principle parts - a necessity I think and I'm surprised it's not more common. Also they have a rational articulation setup where you can use CC's and not some stupid MIDI channel thing like EWHO (which I have). Finally the hall. My principle library - EWHW, is a little dry, having been done in the famous Western Recorders studio. But BBCSO is done in a larger hall designed for an orchestra - it should sound great. The EW studio is a little on the small side IMO. Also I love that they made a professional template for our use - this in itself was a big deal to me. Another huge feature is that they let you use it on two computers. It's absolutely obnoxious that East West doesn't support this. Finally I've been I've been dealing with a bug with Play for the last year, which they were never able to reproduce. I've got a workaround, but having a backup orchestra would be useful. 

So yeah. I don't need it, but it would be a complement to my existing setup, and allow me to work in both my studios with the dual computer licensing, and generally I like the approach. So I'll pop for it.


----------



## AndyP (Oct 30, 2019)

hbjdk said:


> Haha!  I spent countless hours with the C64 too, in fact I remember two of the most used comments by my mom were: "Aren't you gonna go outside in this fine weather", and "Dinner! Come now before it gets cold! This is the third time I have to say it!!"


My mother had to take some of her cooking pots out of my room to be able to cook. I had abused them as percussion. 2 2 track tape machines with 3 audio inputs where I bounced until I could only hear noise.


----------



## Anevis (Oct 30, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> Thats the part where I find it a bit mixed in its perceived goal.
> 
> Someone who is new to samples putting down $925 for their first library on a proprietary player even though a majority of libraries are kontakt? That sounds unlikely, if not for aggressive misleading marketing.
> 
> ...



I can't disagree with you. I see your point. I wasn't trying to uphold the library and make out of it something very special, I'm not saying that. 
I was just trying to say my point of view on the matter that if I'd be a person starting out and looking for some better full orchestra library, it definitely would be on my choosing-library-list.
About the price. I don't really see an issue in that if you look at other "competing" libraries such as the EWHO (which is way older) costs about $900 as well. Yes true, that you could hand-pick libraries (Strings, Brass, Woodwinds, Percs) and build your own orchestral as a starting point for lower price, but as I've mentioned I don't see the cost that much of a deal for a full orchestra.
Their own dedicated plugin is the only reason I see as a very big disadvatage as you actually lose the option to use other libraries, because you the same one (Kontakt). That is a fair point and it would be something to consider when choosing between a Kontakt Library and BBCSO.


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 30, 2019)

Paul_P said:


> How many people have spent way more than that on a single instrument, like a guitar ?
> 
> With the BBC you get a whole orchestra of instruments with players thrown in .


When someone purchases a real instrument (like a guitar), not only do they actually own it (you can't own a sample library unless you make it yourself), but there is also resale value to that instrument.

You can also try/play the intrument before you buy it. Can't really do that with sample libraries.

If someone doesn't like a sample library, they generally are stuck with it.

I really wish more developers would do something to accommodate customers who are unhappy with their purchase, but it's a one way street, for the most part.

But that's an entirely different topic.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 30, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> It's called critical thinking. I know it scares the shit out of millenials.
> 
> There's an official BBCSO thread. It wouldn't very cool to drag down or derail that one. This one was kind of created from a bit more critical perspective, as you can surely tell from the OP. You're actually the guy who's moaning.


Not sure any one is posting there. There's an "I want to buy this, does it include chocolate and sleigh bells thread" and this "I can't afford this, please tell me why I shouldn't give into the fever thread" Both are very useful for discussion but they also both get a little out of hand. 

I personally don't get preordering a product of this price range except maybe for the students who had limited time to get the extra discount. If this is your first library, it will likely be easier to use than EW or VSL. But I'm really glad a lot of others did. I enjoyed the hype, knowing I will wait about a year for this, if it sounds as good as the demos. I also get to watch and see the issues people have with the player, which also had issues after the HZ release. 

What I don't get is not falling for the hype and then complaining about it. Unless you're feeling left out? Or you really wanted to fall for the hype but couldn't afford it? I do get being disappointed after buying. I have a number of those libraries that I've spent money on and regret. You can complain. A few times. Then let it go and figure out how to make it work. Others have. 

Also, Spitfire already said the preorder price will be good at BF and Xmas wishlist, so it isn't a hurry.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Oct 30, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> What I don't get is not falling for the hype and then complaining about it. Unless you're feeling left out? Or you really wanted to fall for the hype but couldn't afford it?



That's what I've been wondering, too! It's like these people are dying to come out of the "BBCSO closet" and admit they really want it. Or....they just like to comlain for the sake of complaining. For those that already bought it, and are finding legitimate concerns, I completely understand. But there are also those that no matter what, will complain. The product could be perfect, but they'd find fault.

There's another thread in the "member's compositions" forum where a forum member posted a piece he composed with BBCSO. It is absolutely beautiful. Obviously the VI isn't THAT bad. I bought it, but won't be downloading until this weekend. Can't wait!


----------



## Mike Fox (Oct 30, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I bought it, but won't be downloading until this weekend. Can't wait!


The suspense must be killing you!


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 30, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> That's what I've been wondering, too! It's like these people are dying to come out of the "BBCSO closet" and admit they really want it. Or....they just like to comlain for the sake of complaining. For those that already bought it, and are finding legitimate concerns, I completely understand. But there are also those that no matter what, will complain. The product could be perfect, but they'd find fault.


Probably a symptom of "I just bought this other library and it's the best, so this new one which is probably pretty damn good can't be good because I have this one and I could have had that one so that one sucks". 

A bit baffled by complaints on price. $750 is awesome. Studio Orch Pro is 1K and doesn't have percussion or harp.


----------



## JeffvR (Oct 30, 2019)

Simon Ravn said:


> Aaaaah... That's a bit far fetched. There is no way you can foresee the number of layers just by looking at the collective sample pool size:
> 
> - You don't know if they sampled chromatically (or even less) or every half tone.
> - You don't know the ranges they sampled.
> ...



I looked back, the BBCSO is 70 GB/mic, the SSO 160.8 GB/mic. 

- Spitfire samples in whole tones as far as I know. 
- True, but I guess it will be almost the same as their other orchestras. Lower ranges are pretty universal, it might fluctuate in the high range, but that's not more than say 10% (?). Even so, a library with less range isn't really a positive thing right?
- True. But again, why would they make the longs half as long as their other orchestras? People thought the sample releases would be shorter in BBCSO, which is probably true... but again, it won't make a library 2.5 times smaller.

I'm not moaning. I'm just kind of sick of all the developers putting out new libraries without care for computer load, bugs, inconsistencies in programming, tuning, and in the end: the customer who puts his hard earned money on the table. All they seem to care about is getting people excited about revolutionary new sample libraries. Nothing really new or revolutionary has been made the past 10 years. That's why I love the Cinematic Studio Series so much, they put out a product that's finished, polished until it's (almost) perfect. Can't wait for their woodwinds, you just now it's going to be good.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 30, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> What I don't get is not falling for the hype and then complaining about it.



I think it has a bit to do with frustration over the lack of objectivity. SF has a bit of a messianic reputation on VI Control, their releases tend to get overhyped and possibly also a bit overrated and that will naturally trigger a bit of a reactive response here and there. You'll notice this often - the SF threads always seem to inspire the most bickering.

I do believe there's also some frustration over the fact that some people would like to buy the new library, but can't or know they shouldn't.

Finally, I belive there's also some frustration from existing SF customers who are a bit fed up with the "Apple of sampling" approach and would prefer finally seeing much needed and/or long promised fixes of issues in the back catalog and would prefer it if newer releases wouldn't routinely feature the same bugs and problems everyone's been criticizing for years.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 30, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I think it has a bit to do with frustration over the lack of objectivity. SF has a bit of a messianic reputation on VI Control, their releases tend to get overhyped and possibly also a bit overrated and that will naturally trigger a bit of a reactive response here and there. You'll notice this often - the SF threads always seem to inspire the most bickering.
> 
> I do believe there's also some frustration over the fact that some people would like to buy the new library, but can't or know they shouldn't.
> 
> Finally, I belive there's also some frustration from existing SF customers who are a bit fed up with the "Apple of sampling" approach and would prefer finally seeing old and much needed fixes of existing products and would prefer it if newer releases wouldn't routinely feature the same bugs and problems everyone's been criticizing for years.


They do fix things in their products. I am always getting updates. They don't send out emails though. I'm guessing they don't have some kind of auto emailer that knows what you own. I only notice the updates because I pick up their Labs stuff and see an update.

I also think sometimes the hype is more than they can support. But I also think they sell more products of all ranges, as compared to other companies. Embertone's Walker piano may have had about as much hype and about as much problems. It took about a year to fix most of them. And from things Paul has said, there are definitely fixes on the way. I really think it was announced earlier than it was ready because they couldn't keep it a secret anymore. And then they have to release it to take advantage of the noise. But I do like the sound I've heard. It looks very playable once they get the player fixed. And you can bet OT is watching this as they are getting ready to release their own player. And maybe rethinking things.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 30, 2019)

Anevis said:


> I can't disagree with you. I see your point. I wasn't trying to uphold the library and make out of it something very special, I'm not saying that.
> I was just trying to say my point of view on the matter that if I'd be a person starting out and looking for some better full orchestra library, it definitely would be on my choosing-library-list.
> About the price. I don't really see an issue in that if you look at other "competing" libraries such as the EWHO (which is way older) costs about $900 as well. Yes true, that you could hand-pick libraries (Strings, Brass, Woodwinds, Percs) and build your own orchestral as a starting point for lower price, but as I've mentioned I don't see the cost that much of a deal for a full orchestra.
> Their own dedicated plugin is the only reason I see as a very big disadvatage as you actually lose the option to use other libraries, because you the same one (Kontakt). That is a fair point and it would be something to consider when choosing between a Kontakt Library and BBCSO.



I would say in function, this definitely can replace EWHO and the like. I think others might disagree due to the difference in available articulations and preferred tone. At the end of the day, it's worth the money you pay, if you can find common use for it. I think anybody who buys it, will find that it's easy to use in the composition stage, and it sounds great out the gate. Over time, we'll see how many people still love it after the shine wears off.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 30, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> I really think it was announced earlier than it was ready because they couldn't keep it a secret anymore. And then they have to release it



dzlizzi-I enjoy your posts, but this notion strikes me as QUITE a stretch. They "have" to release it?? Why? The buzz would simply keep building.

I have no idea what shape this product is presently in, but if it has more bugs than it would have if they'd waited a few weeks and put a serious qc team on it, you're enabling them in my view.


----------



## cqd (Oct 30, 2019)

I dunno..CH was hinting back in March direction that what was coming was going to be a revolution in sampling..said revolution turned out to be an accompanying logic template..it's an orchestral library.. that's lacking and bloated at the same time.. dynamically it's average..like, tbh it's kind of ridiculous that they released it like they did..


----------



## barteredbride (Oct 30, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> And you can bet OT is watching this as they are getting ready to release their own player. And maybe rethinking things.



''This is Berlin calling...

The most important invention since the autobahn and the VW Beetle. 
More creative than Kraftwerk, a moment more revolutionary than the fall of the Berlin wall...

JXL Brass now on pre-order..''


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 30, 2019)

barteredbride said:


> ''This is Berlin calling...
> 
> The most important invention since the autobahn and the VW Beetle.
> More creative than Kraftwerk, a moment more revolutionary than the fall of the Berlin wall...
> ...



Almost had me checking their site lol


----------



## Kony (Oct 30, 2019)

The timing of the release seems more likely to have been influenced by catching the BF dollar before BF. There would have been a release strategy in place, planned months in advance.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Oct 30, 2019)

barteredbride said:


> More creative than Kraftwerk,


What kind of insolent blasphemy is this?? Go to your room. And listen to Boing Boom Tschak 35 times straight.


----------



## David Kudell (Oct 30, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> And you can bet OT is watching this as they are getting ready to release their own player. And maybe rethinking things.


It will certainly be interesting to see. In a way, OT going back and updating all of their old libraries into the new sample player seems ambitious and challenging. If done right, though, unifying it has benefits.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 30, 2019)

NYC Composer said:


> dzlizzi-I enjoy your posts, but this notion strikes me as QUITE a stretch. They "have" to release it?? Why? The buzz would simply keep building.
> 
> I have no idea what shape this product is presently in, but if it has more bugs than it would have if they'd waited a few weeks and put a serious qc team on it, you're enabling them in my view.


LOL! Maybe not have to release it. Although maybe there were reasons to release it early. I just know Paul was mentioning he was still working on samples and they will update the library when they are done. But they sounded like things that should have been in the initial product, not like the bass flute. The amount of samples they had to process was huge. I think from things said they really needed a few more months. But if they get it out before BF, they get the dollars without as much competition. Once BF hits, the money is just not there. But that is my thoughts from many years of retail and watching how people spend. (And how I spend)


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 30, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> LOL! Maybe not have to release it. Although maybe there were reasons to release it early. I just know Paul was mentioning he was still working on samples and they will update the library when they are done. But they sounded like things that should have been in the initial product, not like the bass flute. The amount of samples they had to process was huge. I think from things said they really needed a few more months. But if they get it out before BF, they get the dollars without as much competition. Once BF hits, the money is just not there. But that is my thoughts from many years of retail and watching how people spend. (And how I spend)


So you’re saying that from a business/pure dollars standpoint, releasing now is a good move. You’re probably right. 

However, this is why I don’t buy their products until they’re as mature as they can possibly become. For example, reading about the various glitches in Sable (which was quite pricey at release) kept me from buying it. I eventually bought SCS at a much lower price and love it. It has various bugs but none that impede my workflow terribly.


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 30, 2019)

NYC Composer said:


> So you’re saying that from a business/pure dollars standpoint, releasing now is a good move. You’re probably right.
> 
> However, this is why I don’t buy their products until they’re as mature as they can possibly become. For example, reading about the various glitches in Sable (which was quite pricey at release) kept me from buying it. I eventually bought SCS at a much lower price and love it. It has various bugs but none that impede my workflow terribly.


And it is one of the reasons I'm waiting as well. Let everyone else do the testing. 

Of course, my refrigerator dying at the beginning of the month didn't help. And I finally bought SSO last Christmas, so I figured I need to use that first. I'm in no hurry.


----------



## DerSiebteRabe (Oct 31, 2019)

robgb said:


> I have to say that I've spent a lot of time drooling over Spitfire's BBC offering. Watched all the videos, thinking it sounds great (for the most part. Not sure about the woodwinds). But the price, even at its pre-sale discount, left me a bit hesitant. Yes, I could probably afford it, but do I really NEED to afford it? Is it money well spent for me? Should I instead take that money and maybe put it toward new landscaping on my house, which seriously needs it?
> 
> To try to convince myself not to be hasty (about the library, not the landscaping), I went back and carefully listened to each of the section demos. And while I was listening, I pulled up some of my favorite current orchestral libraries and began playing along with them.
> 
> ...



The reason I didn't bother with it is for much the same as you: I just don't need to spend like a $1000 on an orchestral sample library when I already have a full-orchestra's worth and that gets the job done. That money is better spent elsewhere, and if it is to be spent on music, I'd be better off to just hire a couple live musicians to overdub at this point.

The second reason is that, and this release really made my mind up about it: I'm just _bored _with orchestral sample libraries. There are so many of them now, there's actually only a handful that are truly worth owning, and many of them just don't offer enough to justify paying full price for them.

I'm more interested these days in what's going on with solo instrument sampling, and IMHO, a lot of the libraries that have been coming out in that regard in recent years are a lot more impressive than ensemble, orchestral libraries.

I think it's just an issue of time, money and marketing.

Let's be honest: The main reason they recorded the BBC Orchestra, the main reason most of these devs record famous orchestras, is for the brand name attachment. You can own the sound of X legendary musicians in this legendary hall (and you'll run it through your own reverb anyway!) for only Y amount of dollars!

The thing is, to do that requires a lot of money and when recording orchestras, time quite literally is money. There's only so much you can do, with limited cash and no guarantee of profit, when you're recording a huge, *professional orchestra or ensemble. So stuff inevitably gets cut.

Then, you get some of these ensemble libraries which are cost like $500 and they basically only give you long notes and staccatos because that's where the budget ran out.

But guys like Chris Hein, Tarilonte, etc. who either have their own studios or otherwise just deal with a handful of musicians or one-on-one, can record a lot more. In those libraries, you get all kinds of articulations, ornamentation and all the other little details that really make a performance, *and is also where the uniqueness of a player shines — you generally don't get that in most ensemble libraries, which is why I don't see why you need to hire "virtuoso" and "the best players in the biz" for that.

For me, layering these libraries even with the lower-end ensemble libraries has yielded some very satisfying results, and for a whole lot less money than BBC Orchestra. 

Anyway, that's my


----------



## M0rdechai (Oct 31, 2019)

DerSiebteRabe said:


> There are so many of them now, there's actually only a handful that are truly worth owning, and many of them just don't offer enough to justify paying full price for them.



I'm genuenly interested to hear what you think are the few libraries worth owning?



DerSiebteRabe said:


> But guys like Chris Hein, Tarilonte, etc. who either have their own studios or otherwise just deal with a handful of musicians or one-on-one, can record a lot more. In those libraries, you get all kinds of articulations, ornamentation and all the other little details that really make a performance, *and is also where the uniqueness of a player shines — you generally don't get that in most ensemble libraries, which is why I don't see why you need to hire "virtuoso" and "the best players in the biz" for that.
> 
> For me, layering these libraries even with the lower-end ensemble libraries has yielded some very satisfying results, and for a whole lot less money than BBC Orchestra.



I am considering building my template of Symphobia's and Tarilonte's libraries. But i do fear missing out on 'tweakability' which is why I'm also interested in the Aaron Venture libraries..


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Oct 31, 2019)

@DerSiebteRabe I couldnt agree more about unique sounding smaller libraries, 

Tarilontes, Chris Hein, embertone, emotional cello/violin, bohemian cello/violin. Theres so much i want to get thats above spitfire and berlin strings, waiting for BF and Christmas to pick some of these up.

i have enough strings, but these smaller libs really make something sound unique, if you have strings underneath like symphobia, albion one and arks, it has been more than enough for the 'orchestral' sound (even though i own a few more SA string libs)

say bbcso is 750 at a discount (and thats still too expensive for most people who are concerned about that ((which i respectfully disagree)), what is that compared to full price chris hein solo strings at around 600? whats the cheapest CH strings has been?

I'm pretty sure SA made their money back and then some just with the pre release of bbcso. someone commented in the other bbc thread (i think, it gets confusing with two threads) that they were 'sickened' by someone who worked at SA who shared how many pre orders there were.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Oct 31, 2019)

Why would the success of the product make someone feel 'sickened' ?

A successful British company launching a wildly successful product - What on earth is wrong with that ?

They're not selling hard drugs or tobacco products. It seems to be a very British malaise that people seem to despise anyone else's success, and it's not healthy. 

Still, its a damn sight easier than building something from scratch yourself...


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Oct 31, 2019)

I dont know why either, it was someone salty who was saying that. i love bbcso and think its a good deal for that price, theres a few things that need fixing, but i think they will sort out most of the bugs... at the same time. if i had a pc and had all the ram/load time/cant use the product issues on launch i'd be pretty annoyed, but i didnt, so i'm pretty happy with it


----------



## barteredbride (Oct 31, 2019)

Michael Antrum said:


> Why would the success of the product make someone feel 'sickened' ?



I read that comment.

In context, the general chat around the time of that comment was that they felt Spitfire had hyped up the product so much (and perhaps had falsely advertised what the library could do) that they thought they had almost tricked a few people who had fallen for the marketing.

Perhaps including some who couldn´t really afford the library.

Not sure what I agree with, but that´s what that comment was about.


----------



## robgb (Oct 31, 2019)

Michael Antrum said:


> Why would the success of the product make someone feel 'sickened' ?


While I would never bemoan a company's success, I suspect the person was "sickened" because he or she felt there were better, less expensive alternatives. Or maybe sickened was just a poor choice of words.

Personally, I think Spitfire recording the BBC Orchestra is a great thing. The price, unfortunately, is too rich for my blood, and as I said in my OP, I already have a full orchestra (or two or three). That said, I've put both Studio Brass and Studio Woodwinds on my Spitfire wishlist, because I think THAT'S the library that really shines.


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 31, 2019)

I think this is a great sounding library and if I didn't already have so many great orchestral sounds, I would be all over it like white on rice. But I do, so I have to pass as I need to pay my DWP bill 

However, if I get a call from a composer who says, "Jay, I want you to do orchestration and/or score prep in Logic Pro for me but I need you to have BBSCO" I will buy it.


----------



## KallumS (Oct 31, 2019)

Ashermusic said:


> I think this is a great sounding library and if I didn't already have so many great orchestral sounds, I would be all over it like white on rice. But I do, so I have to pass as I need to pay my DWP bill
> 
> However, if I get a call from a composer who says, "Jay, I want you to do orchestration and/or score prep in Logic Pro for me but I need you to have BBSCO" I will buy it.



Jay, I want you to do orchestration and/or score prep in Logic Pro for me but I need you to have BBSCO.


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 31, 2019)

KallumS said:


> Jay, I want you to do orchestration and/or score prep in Logic Pro for me but I need you to have BBSCO.



PM me with how much you will pay, and a payment schedule, and after the first PayPal payment, I will buy it.


----------



## KallumS (Oct 31, 2019)

Ashermusic said:


> PM me with how much you will pay, and a payment schedule, and after the first PayPal payment, I will buy it.



No pay but I can give you unlimited exposure to both of my Soundcloud followers.


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 31, 2019)

KallumS said:


> No pay but I can give you unlimited exposure to both of my Soundcloud followers.



I know this will surprise you, but I will pass on your offer


----------



## chocobitz825 (Oct 31, 2019)

Ashermusic said:


> I know this will surprise you, but I will pass on your offer



Are you mad!? Do you know how valuable exposure is these days! You can’t buy that!


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 31, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> Are you mad!? Do you know how valuable exposure is these days! You can’t buy that!


Yeah, I pay for my groceries and utilities with it!. *insert sarcastic smiley here*


----------



## El Buhdai (Nov 1, 2019)

Paul_P said:


> How many people have spent way more than that on a single instrument, like a guitar ?
> 
> With the BBC you get a whole orchestra of instruments with players thrown in .



Apples to oranges. The costs of creating a real instrument and a virtual orchestra are completely different in nature and amount. Not to mention, you're paying for physical parts and highly-trained labor with something like a guitar. Of course, a sample library has its own insanely high costs, but the goal for pricing a guitar is to make back the money you spent on producing each unit. The goal for pricing a sample library is to make back the insane sum of money you spent on production. Everything after that is a bonus if you ignore ongoing wages and other business expenses.




chocobitz825 said:


> A privileged class of professionals who spend money to make more money?
> 
> This is my only problem with price moaning. Hobbyists should not moan about the prices of professional tools. If you want a library priced at an accessible range for hobbyists, plenty of those exist too.
> 
> ...



I'm not moaning about the price. I'm in the process of buying my own libraries and I plan to buy top-tier libraries despite the fact that I make no money from this. I just enjoy making music. If I make money from it one day, fine. If not, most of the rewarding hobbies out there are just as expensive if not more, and there's no use crying about it. The price of BBC is actually very reasonable for what it is (which is essentially a complete orchestra, even though the quality is very inconsistent).

Make no mistake about it though, if you're in a position where you can impulse buy something for $700, that's a privilege. It may very well be an earned privilege, but not everyone can do that. That was my main point in that message.

Totally with you on the marketing, by the way. Completely oversold.


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Nov 1, 2019)

robgb said:


> While I would never bemoan a company's success, I suspect the person was "sickened" because he or she felt there were better, less expensive alternatives. Or maybe sickened was just a poor choice of words.
> 
> Personally, I think Spitfire recording the BBC Orchestra is a great thing. The price, unfortunately, is too rich for my blood, and as I said in my OP, I already have a full orchestra (or two or three). That said, I've put both Studio Brass and Studio Woodwinds on my Spitfire wishlist, because I think THAT'S the library that really shines.



The symphonic series is what bbcso should be compared to. and in doing so, as i have both, value for money on the bbcso is far greater from the price difference imo. the symphonic stuff is better, but if someone cant afford it and is after a realistic orchestral sound that has the SA tone, the bbcso is really an awesome option.


----------



## NYC Composer (Nov 1, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> even though the quality is very inconsistent).


If you don’t own it, how did you come to this conclusion?


----------



## lokotus (Nov 1, 2019)

I find myself reading more about new libraries than thinking about how to get a new project. Is this a problem


----------



## chocobitz825 (Nov 1, 2019)

lokotus said:


> I find myself reading more about new libraries than thinking about how to get a new project. Is this a problem



Does it spark joy for you?


----------



## robgb (Nov 1, 2019)

ChristopherRock said:


> The symphonic series is what bbcso should be compared to. and in doing so, as i have both, value for money on the bbcso is far greater from the price difference imo. the symphonic stuff is better, but if someone cant afford it and is after a realistic orchestral sound that has the SA tone, the bbcso is really an awesome option.


I'd lean toward BBCSO simply because you can get a much drier sound. All that Air Lyndhurst crap drives me nuts. And with the Studio series, you get a VERY dry sound (in comparison). Which is why I love them.


----------



## lokotus (Nov 1, 2019)

chocobitz825 said:


> Does it spark joy for you?


yes , bit I wonder if I should not have joy right now and do what is important. As a matter of fact, getting a new project that I finish successfully is more joyful than having read about the newest VI stuff....


----------



## lokotus (Nov 1, 2019)

lokotus said:


> yes , bit I wonder if I should not have joy right now and do what is important. As a matter of fact, getting a new project that I finish successfully is more joyful than having read about the newest VI stuff....


i probably answered my own question thanks for asking


----------



## danbo (Nov 2, 2019)

robgb said:


> I'd lean toward BBCSO simply because you can get a much drier sound. All that Air Lyndhurst crap drives me nuts. And with the Studio series, you get a VERY dry sound (in comparison). Which is why I love them.



But at that this hall has a crazy amount of reverb in it. Nice reverb, not like Air, but even the close mics are wet. And if that wasn't enough you can dial the reverb up, but I don't know if that's real or IR.


----------



## Dex (Nov 2, 2019)

DerSiebteRabe said:


> The second reason is that, and this release really made my mind up about it: I'm just _bored _with orchestral sample libraries. There are so many of them now, there's actually only a handful that are truly worth owning, and many of them just don't offer enough to justify paying full price for them.



Ok, I'm very curious: What do you think are the orchestral libraries that are _truly _worth owning?


----------

