# EastWest Hollywood Choirs



## George Bellas

It's been a long time coming... EastWest will be making an announcement next week about Hollywood Choirs. I'm not sure if it's regarding demo's, a walkthrough, the release date, or more details about the contents of the library, but it's at least something from what has been an all too silent board over there since the initial announcement back in June.

I'm very much looking forward to it! I'm hoping for SATB sections, great legato, marcato, staccato, a wide range in dynamics, and of course a Wordbuilder that a mere mortal could use.


----------



## JonSolo

Nice to hear. I have been wondering what was going on.


----------



## Johnny

Well, we all must remember the dramatic red curtains of theatrical suspense? Holding us in eager anticipation before the majestic drop of the $1499.99 release price? I still hold zero regrets and hold the strings and HW Brass as (still) some of the best Orchestral VST's on the market to date- EW did it right the first time and I suspect the new HW Choirs to be the same. Hang tight everybody, because I'm sure that HW Choirs will be more than worth the wait! EW is about perfection, pushing all boundaries, releasing high quality products, I have great confidence that this time will be no different. (Hence the extended wait time ;p)
-Johnny-


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

In the forum, the admin said November 1st will be the announcement (whatever that is). Regardless, my credit card is ready and waiting, I'm sure it will be worth the wait.

@Johnny I agree, and I still use all of my EW libraries on a regular basis. They are excellent, especially Hollywood Strings. I remember shelling out $1400 for the old Complete Composer Collection (NI version) years ago....including Colossus which was the predecessor to Goliath. Best VI purchase I ever made.


----------



## wcreed51

They said this week, not a specific day


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=55112


----------



## JonSolo

Yea they said Wednesday specifically. Let’s hope it is just the release.


----------



## wcreed51

Somebody else said Wednesday; the Admin said "We'll be making an announcement next week!"


----------



## Quanah

JonSolo is correct. They did say Wednesday specifically on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/eastwestsound/


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

Johnny said:


> Well, we all must remember the dramatic red curtains of theatrical suspense? Holding us in eager anticipation before the majestic drop of the $1499.99 release price? I still hold zero regrets and hold the strings and HW Brass as (still) some of the best Orchestral VST's on the market to date- EW did it right the first time and I suspect the new HW Choirs to be the same. Hang tight everybody, because I'm sure that HW Choirs will be more than worth the wait! EW is about perfection, pushing all boundaries, releasing high quality products, I have great confidence that this time will be no different. (Hence the extended wait time ;p)
> -Johnny-


Out of interest though? What do you use for your staple Woodwinds?
Since I am not someone who has yet, still really got to use the woodwinds properly and find out how good they are

Would be great to get some feedback on experiences there


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

My staple woodwinds are those found in EW Symphonic Orchestra. Although dated, they are excellent IMO. Plus, it has a great selection of solo woodwinds and FX. I picked up the Fluffy Audio Stefania Maratti flute as part of a bundle a few months ago, and it is also really good if you want a great sounding flute.


----------



## JonSolo

I like the Symphonic Orchestra Woodwinds too. But I had the original Berlin Woodwinds. If you missed that deal, I am sorry because they are awesome. So awesome, in fact, that I hesitate to update them because I just have no reason to.

Currently on sale are Auddict's Solo Woodwinds, but I do not own those and therefore have nothing to offer. I would snag them, except I have Chris Hein Woodwinds, and find those to be enough.


----------



## pfmusic

Guesswork...What price range do you all think for Hollywood Choirs?


----------



## JonSolo

We have seen $499 Gold and $599 Platinum in the Sweetwater catalog.

I do hope there is some introductory sale, and am really hopeful for a cross-grade price (either for owners of Hollywood Orchestra which would make a lot of sense, or for owners of the past Symphonic Choirs...which COULD make sense but less so).


----------



## mcalis

Looks like we'll be getting a news update on HW Choirs on the 1st of November, which is tomorrow. The official East West facebook page said so at least!



East West said:


> We will have some HOLLYWOOD CHOIRS news for you on Wednesday, November 1 - stay tuned!



Let's hope they don't plan to release it at the same time as Play Pro xD

Personally, I am hoping to hear a sound demo most of all.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

mcalis said:


> Looks like we'll be getting a news update on HW Choirs on the 1st of November, which is tomorrow. The official East West facebook page said so at least!
> 
> 
> 
> Let's hope they don't plan to release it at the same time as Play Pro xD
> 
> Personally, I am hoping to hear a sound demo most of all.


Guess I will be getting the Platinum one then since I have Composer Cloud Plus


----------



## Johnny

mcalis said:


> Looks like we'll be getting a news update on HW Choirs on the 1st of November, which is tomorrow. The official East West facebook page said so at least!
> 
> 
> 
> Let's hope they don't plan to release it at the same time as Play Pro xD
> 
> Personally, I am hoping to hear a sound demo most of all.


I'm still waiting for Forbidden Planet...


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

Johnny said:


> I'm still waiting for Forbidden Planet...


I don't think that is ever coming 

Think they had a change of vision and realised there is a greater demand for other things


----------



## mcalis

I just realized I posted the same as the OP -.-, I thought this was a different Hollywood Choirs thread. Sorry for repeating what OP had already said!


----------



## Mystic

Johnny said:


> I'm still waiting for Forbidden Planet...


I waited for that one forever but realised a few years ago that I don't think EW could do it as well as others have.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

And all was quiet in the EW Offices at CA

Or perhaps tense, begging the systems not to give way when the downloads begin, checking the network for any sign of a weakness


----------



## nicoroy123

The announcement was made on FB. Only says it will be available this month, with a screenshot of the GUI.


----------



## Zhao Shen

They needed a teaser to hype us about a GUI reveal? We really have reached peak levels of marketing bullshit.


----------



## driscollmusick

nicoroy123 said:


> The announcement was made on FB. Only says it will be available this month, with a screenshot of the GUI.



The image is just a screenshot of an enhanced Play, with a new choral positioning element--nothing there about the word engine (though there is a "WORDBUILDER" button in the top left, so it seems likely it will just be an update to the existing engine).

EW has made very strong claims about this, so I hope it doesn't disappoint: "No single choir virtual instrument has managed to deliver a fluid, intuitive and great sounding choir that was capable of singing any words in any language, soft or loud ... until now."


----------



## George Bellas

From the EastWest Facebook page:

"_We are pleased to announce HOLLYWOOD CHOIRS will be released this month. Meanwhile here is a sneak peak at the HOLLYWOOD CHOIRS interface._"


----------



## I like music

Zhao Shen said:


> They needed a teaser to hype us about a GUI reveal? We really have reached peak levels of marketing bullshit.



100% agreed. Utter bollocks.


----------



## JonSolo

Wow. That was the big announcement? They are better than this. What is up?


----------



## pfmusic

Anti-Marketing! Why did they even bother with this announcement?


----------



## John Busby

pfmusic said:


> Why did they even bother with this announcement?


it's probably not finished yet and they're scrambling, just a guess


----------



## Steve Lum

Gotta keep the chum in the water to keep the fishies from swimming elsewhere. For my part, I am circling.


----------



## nicoroy123

johnbusbymusic said:


> it's probably not finished yet and they're scrambling, just a guess



EastWest Sounds: The product page will be updated next week with more details.


----------



## Jaap

Mmm I wonder why VU meter is completely full while the gain is completely down 

Beside that I am looking forward to it. Loved the old Symphonic Choirs and curious to see how the worldbuilder is, but East West is solid in production so I don't doubt this will be a good release again.


----------



## Architekton

0 voices 23% cpu
Interesting hahah


----------



## benatural

Hoping this is just part of the mock-up! Also, I admit I'm very curious to see what they do with this library.


----------



## JonSolo

The only thing is...they made an announcement that they would make an announcement today, and part of that announcement is that they will be announcing more on their page later.

It is disappointing. It is empty. If they had a 30 second video or audio snippet of a choir singing a line in English then maybe switching to Spanish and then to Japanese we would all have our credit cards poised and ready to fire, even if it was a year away! Instead they give a "sneak peak" of an interface, which outside of the center section, is basically unchanged. The center section clearly represents the mic positions they were talking about. Goodie! But we knew this, just like we knew it was coming this month...and we knew that because they told us it was to be released in the Fall, and this is the last month of Fall, therefore...something we knew already.

I want to hear it. At the very least. That would get my attention.

Now to go find some cheese.


----------



## mcalis

JonSolo said:


> The only thing is...they made an announcement that they would make an announcement today, and part of that announcement is that they will be announcing more on their page later.
> 
> It is disappointing. It is empty. If they had a 30 second video or audio snippet of a choir singing a line in English then maybe switching to Spanish and then to Japanese we would all have our credit cards poised and ready to fire, even if it was a year away! Instead they give a "sneak peak" of an interface, which outside of the center section, is basically unchanged. The center section clearly represents the mic positions they were talking about. Goodie! But we knew this, just like we knew it was coming this month...and we knew that because they told us it was to be released in the Fall, and this is the last month of Fall, therefore...something we knew already.
> 
> I want to hear it. At the very least. That would get my attention.
> 
> Now to go find some cheese.


I agree that it's a little disappointing. I would've liked to see more to be honest (and I was fully expecting to see/hear more). Now, at the end of the day, what really matters is if it's good, and I am happy to hear it'll be released this month. I had just... expected more.

The marketing departments of sample library devs should _really_ take note of how Alex Wallbank markets CSS & CSSS. He shows us exactly the thing we care about, no BS, no endless teasing. If you just look at how much attention CSS gathered on here (wasn't it the biggest thread on all of VI-C?)... I'm honestly a little baffled that there aren't more devs who take the same approach.


----------



## Mystic

nicoroy123 said:


> EastWest Sounds: The product page will be updated next week with more details.


They will add a picture of the back of the box and the words "More information coming soon"


----------



## George Bellas

Posted by EastWest:

_ 
"The MAIN is a mix the producers feel is a good blend of the highlighted mic positions; if you activate any other mixer channel you will have individual control of the mics in each location and the MAIN mix is automatically turned off. You can however add more SURROUND to the MAIN mix."_

Attached is an 'actual screenshot' of the interface whereas the previous GUI posted yesterday was just a 'mockup' that appeared to have a low ram footprint, no voices, a CPU spike, gain faders down, yet signal in the VU meters.


----------



## George Bellas

Update from EastWest:

_"Audio/video demos etc. cannot be completed until the product is final, or it will be misrepresented. We anticipate rolling these out in the next 2-3 weeks."_


----------



## ModalRealist

George Bellas said:


> cannot be completed until the product is final



Oh lordy lord...


----------



## Mystic

Translation: We must make sure that the demo is 100% perfect and has gone through 5 producers to make sure you will never be able to achieve as good a sound as we have achieved in our own demos.


----------



## jamwerks

Wondering how big the interest is for the word builder. Do most people really want to deal with that? Also wondering if they recorded again at there own venue, or went to a larger place?


----------



## Mystic

jamwerks said:


> Wondering how big the interest is for the word builder. Do most people really want to deal with that? Also wondering if they recorded again at there own venue, or went a larger place?


If the new word builder works well and is easy to use, that would be game changingly huge and I think most people would adopt it instantly. No doubt the sample quality will be there.


----------



## Darren Durann

jamwerks said:


> Wondering how big the interest is for the word builder. Do most people really want to deal with that? Also wondering if they recorded again at there own venue, or went a larger place?



It's heavy on my mind. Also, I seriously doubt they'd be doing another choir library without making this top the old EWSCP. The sound is probably going to be incredible.


----------



## J-M

jamwerks said:


> Wondering how big the interest is for the word builder. Do most people really want to deal with that? Also wondering if they recorded again at there own venue, or went a larger place?



I'd love to have a choir singing cheesy lyrics in my metal stuff...


----------



## Darren Durann

MrLinssi said:


> I'd love to have a choir singing cheesy lyrics in my metal stuff...



Isn't that what we all, really want?


----------



## Fleer

Darren Durann said:


> Isn't that what we all, really want?


Tell us what you want, what you really, really want. Girls on film!


----------



## Ashermusic

Mystic said:


> Translation: We must make sure that the demo is 100% perfect and has gone through 5 producers to make sure you will never be able to achieve as good a sound as we have achieved in our own demos.



Doesn't need 5, Nick Phoenix will make it sound better than we ever will. But then he would do so with competitors libraries as well.


----------



## Casiquire

jamwerks said:


> Wondering how big the interest is for the word builder. Do most people really want to deal with that? Also wondering if they recorded again at there own venue, or went to a larger place?



WordBuilder is the only reason I've never purchased a different choir library than Symphonic Choirs, and WordBuilder will be the only reason I even consider Hollywood Choirs. I enjoy writing choral music.


----------



## George Bellas

EastWest confirmed that: There is no Children's Choir in Hollywood Choirs.


----------



## Darren Durann

George Bellas said:


> EastWest confirmed that: There is no Children's Choir in Hollywood Choirs.



Hi George I have one of your old records, good to have you here.


----------



## Mystic

George Bellas said:


> EastWest confirmed that: There is no Children's Choir in Hollywood Choirs.


That would be a nice expansion in the future.


----------



## Darren Durann

I do use the boys' choir in EWSCP a lot. The surround microphone is pretty darn wunnerful if you ask me, and I think the whole library benefits from those ensemble patches.

In fact I'm pretty darn sweet on everything EWSCP except the solo voices and of course (I probably don't even need to mention the obvious).


----------



## J-M

Darren Durann said:


> I do use the boys' choir in EWSCP a lot. The surround microphone is pretty darn wunnerful if you ask me, and I think the whole library benefits from those ensemble patches.
> 
> In fact I'm pretty darn sweet on everything EWSCP except the solo voices and of course (I probably don't even need to mention the obvious).



Are there even a lot of sampled children choirs around? Mercury, Arva and EWSCP are all I know of.


----------



## Mystic

MrLinssi said:


> Are there even a lot of sampled children choirs around? Mercury, Arva and EWSCP are all I know of.


Those are the only ones I know of. I can imagine what a nightmare it would be to sample a kids choir. Props to any producers who have that kind of patience and to the kids who are professional enough to spend hours upon hours singing the same things over and over and over.


----------



## J-M

Mystic said:


> Those are the only ones I know of. I can imagine what a nightmare it would be to sample a kids choir. Props to any producers who have that kind of patience and to the kids who are professional enough to spend hours upon hours singing the same things over and over and over.



I remember mr. Strezov stating on this forum that recording Arva was definitely a challenge...


----------



## EuropaWill

I bought Symphonic Choirs years ago and would really appreciate a crossgrade to the Hollywood version!

Also I really hope they fixed some of the problems that were inherent in their Symphonic Choir. First is each section *shouldn't* have voices from other sections to extend their range. For instance, Tenors shouldn't sound like basses at the low end of their range because in a real choir they still have the timbre of tenors not the round and boomy qualities of a bass. For the same reason you dont add cello's to the Viola section when sampling, you shouldn't add basses to the tenors. Think of how a violin section would sound if you threw in a few violas at the low end, not authentic at all, and hurts the ability to write for the section's own unique timbres. This was done a bit in the women's and men's sections and I really hope they are purists to keep each section timbrally consistent and authentic.

It would be great to have smaller sections for divisi and true legatos for melisma style writing. Carefully selecting the singers for blending purposes is critical here as you never want to hear a single voice stand out even in a smaller group which at times can be a bit noticeable in Symphonic Choir.

A revamp of wordbuilder would be great since one has to jump through hoops to get certain words to sound halfway passable and its a workflow killer. Hard to complain because its the best system out there but I know the system could be so much better and more usable.


----------



## prodigalson

MrLinssi said:


> Are there even a lot of sampled children choirs around? Mercury, Arva and EWSCP are all I know of.



8dio have Liberis and Orchestral Tools recorded a children's choir for Metropolis Ark 2


----------



## Polkasound

MrLinssi said:


> Are there even a lot of sampled children choirs around? Mercury, Arva and EWSCP are all I know of.



There's one in Voxos 2.


----------



## wpc982

Looking forward to a new substantial choir. Fluffy audio again disappointed with the same kind of weak stuff as offered by 8dio requiem "latin phrases", with the requirement that you word-speak in advance, up to 10 words. I'm afraid Fluffy has joined 8dio now in my not ever again camp. Fundamentally, I'm in favor of developers spending their time and money and energy on RECORDING THE INSTRUMENT not on fancy script writing that may or may not suit the user.


----------



## Casiquire

Hmm, in a real choir I do think that tenors in their low range start to get booming sounds because most good choral singers have classical training and have strength throughout their range. The thing is, the writing shouldn't go so low that their voices start to have that quality, but it occasionally does. I don't ever recall feeling as though there are any shared samples between vocal sections in Symphonic Choirs.

To be perfectly honest I would be happy to keep Symphonic Choirs and just add divisi and legato. I don't recall reading anything about either of those regarding Hollywood Choirs, but either of those two would be enough for me to upgrade.


----------



## wpc982

Casiquire said:


> I don't ever recall feeling as though there are any shared samples between vocal sections in Symphonic Choirs.



Good grief!!! That is the SINGLE biggest problem in SC. Tenors forced to be used as baritones and baritones as tenors; sopranos as altos and altos as sopranos. You need to sing in a choir if you think that a low tenor sounds "booming".


----------



## paoling

wpc982 said:


> Looking forward to a new substantial choir. Fluffy audio again disappointed with the same kind of weak stuff as offered by 8dio requiem "latin phrases", with the requirement that you word-speak in advance, up to 10 words. I'm afraid Fluffy has joined 8dio now in my not ever again camp. Fundamentally, I'm in favor of developers spending their time and money and energy on RECORDING THE INSTRUMENT not on fancy script writing that may or may not suit the user.



No problem William. If you are so disappointed by our library we would be glad to refund your order. We only had really satisfied Dominus Choir customers until now and we don't want disappointed people to mark us in this way.


----------



## Darren Durann

wpc982 said:


> Good grief!!! That is the SINGLE biggest problem in SC. Tenors forced to be used as baritones and baritones as tenors; sopranos as altos and altos as sopranos. You need to sing in a choir if you think that a low tenor sounds "booming".



It's true, I've always found that puzzling about EWSCP.

It's still sooo good, and that makes HC seem even more interesting. I'll be riding the subscription THAT month lol!


----------



## shakuman

paoling said:


> No problem William. If you are so disappointed by our library we would be glad to refund your order. We only had really satisfied Dominus Choir customers until now and we don't want disappointed people to mark us in this way.



Bought Dominus Choirs Last month, it's really awesome..Thanks Paolo for your great work..


----------



## wpc982

Thanks for the offer. I'd rather be free to use my big mouth sometimes and criticize, though generally I support small developers and nice people! I've also criticized Symphonic Choirs repeatedly, though in the 10 years or so since it came out have had to accept that there hasn't been much else that succeeded (in the ways I need a choir for .. of course). Most recent choir was an impulse purchase where an elvish singer sounds doubled by an oboe for every note ....


----------



## wpc982

Probably too late for Hollywood choir, but future developers: record the darn vowels! All of them used by your customers in their languanges. Get yourself a clip board or a spreadsheet, and complicated as it may be organizationally, record the darn BEGINNING consonants and then record the darn ENDING consonants. They aren't the same, and putting them onto a latin word for the convenience of the singer leads to foolishness. And please please please record TENORS as tenors and BASSES as basses. What gender they may be has no relevance, and the fact that they are capable of singing some of the same notes is a coincidence, not an excuse to cut short your recording sessions!! (Note that the flute and the oboe and the clarinet all cover the same territory, more or less...)

And yes, you must tune the recordings to a fixed standard, even though that's difficult with multiple voices.


----------



## JonSolo

Wow. Paoling offers a refund... and you would rather criticize? That just about sums up Twitter, most forums, and current fake news agencies. It's all steam I tell ya! Oh well...

It is hard to get excited further about Hollywood Choirs till I hear something. I do hope that is soon.


----------



## mcalis

Mystic said:


> Those are the only ones I know of. I can imagine what a nightmare it would be to sample a kids choir. Props to any producers who have that kind of patience and to the kids who are professional enough to spend hours upon hours singing the same things over and over and over.


Virharmonic has the Czech Boys Choir. In terms of dynamic range and sound quality, it is really good. The soloist has a great tone too. The legato isn't great though and though it has a word builder, it's not always convincing. That said, I like it as much as the boy's choir in EWSC, and that's saying something.


----------



## MarcelM

i remember the hype about the hollywood solo instruments back then, and also how disappointed quite alot of people have been when it was released. that said, my expectations are pretty low this time but i dont really need a choir anyway.


----------



## wpc982

JonSolo said:


> you would rather criticize? Oh well...



Well, sure. What value this forum has is from real people voicing real opinions. Sure, it too can be overloaded with fake news, but I'm pretty sure many of us are individuals, fallible for sure, but without any particular need or secret payment to say or do anything other than what we think.


----------



## wpc982

In terms of choirs, maybe only Nick Phoenix remembers the quality of the singers used in one of the first of all the choir packages: "Voices of the Apocalypse" has plenty of flaws, but the singers themselves stand out, for the most part, as being real singers and very good singers, and a lot of what they did (again despite the many flaws) hasn't been bettered.


----------



## George Bellas

Better or worse is of course highly subjective. But I’ll tell you what, I feel quite fortunate to have created music that I feel good about using an assortment of the following choir libraries despite their strengths and weaknesses. I believe the first major contender was Eric Persing with Symphony of Voices, and if I remember correctly those samples were even used in the JV2080 “Voices” expansion.

Symphony of Voices
Voices of the Apocalypse
Symphonic Choirs
Requiem
VSL Choir
Lacrimosa
Insolidus
Liberis
VOXOS Epic Choirs
Storm Choir I
Storm Choir II
Wotan
Freyja
Arva
Olympus
Mercury Boys Choir
Oceania
Cantus
Mystica
Metropolis Ark Choir
Voices of Prague
Czech Boys Choir
Dominus Choir

*To Be Released:*

Hollywood Choirs
Storm Choir III
Spitfire Choir


----------



## Casiquire

wpc982 said:


> Good grief!!! That is the SINGLE biggest problem in SC. Tenors forced to be used as baritones and baritones as tenors; sopranos as altos and altos as sopranos. You need to sing in a choir if you think that a low tenor sounds "booming".



I DO sing in a choir, actually. I guess I've never pushed the tenors low enough to hear that.


----------



## George Bellas

EastWest stated on their forums yesterday that:

"*Hollywood Choirs will be released in 10 days!*"


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

George Bellas said:


> EastWest stated on their forums yesterday that:
> 
> "*Hollywood Choirs will be released in 10 days!*"


----------



## Casiquire

So technically still November lol


----------



## constaneum

Looks like it. Lol


----------



## George Bellas

*Hollywood Choirs - Wordbuilder Screenshot*

This multiple window screenshot of Hollywood Choirs shows the new 'Wordbuilder' with the "HC Mens" patch loaded and the phrase "Prepare for Battle" written in Votox.

Other than the refined and flattened interface, Wordbuilder looks the same.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

George Bellas said:


> *Hollywood Choirs - Wordbuilder Screenshot*
> 
> This multiple window screenshot of Hollywood Choirs shows the new 'Wordbuilder' with the "HC Mens" patch loaded and the phrase "Prepare for Battle" written in Votox.
> 
> Other than the refined and flattened interface, Wordbuilder looks the same.


Hopefully there are some major under-the-hood changes though. I hope we don't end up paying for something that 'looks' reworked, only to find out they sold us a new library with the illusion of new programming :/


----------



## Darren Durann

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> Hopefully there are some major under-the-hood changes though. I hope we don't end up paying for something that 'looks' reworked, only to find out they sold us a new library with the illusion of new programming :/



Well, that is what makes Composer Cloud so useful.


----------



## benatural

Looking at the picture... I hope it's not votox again. It isn't very intuitive, but I'm willing to withhold judgement until more info is released.


----------



## George Bellas

benatural said:


> I hope it's not votox again.



Votox is indeed used in Hollywood Choirs (along with Phonetics and English) as shown in the screenshot posted by EastWest. In the screenshot it is Votox that is used to form the phrase "Prepare for Battle" using the patch "HC Mens".

Here is a closeup of the new Wordbuilder showing the aforementioned phrase:


----------



## George Bellas

*Hollywood Choirs - Individual SATB Sections*

Also worth mentioning, as seen in the EastWest screenshot, separate SATB sections are included in Hollywood Choirs along with Mens and Womens sections. The shown articulation list appears to be in a similar format as the older Symphonic Choirs, with Soft Mod, Hard Mod, Dyn Mod, and NV available, as well as VOTA patches.

Here is a closeup of the Hollywood Choirs articulation list from the screenshot EastWest posted:


----------



## constaneum

i've never own Symphonic Choirs so i'm not sure how's the word builder is used. Is it very tedius to use for someone who doesn't know anything on Votox?


----------



## Steve Lum

constaneum said:


> i've never own Symphonic Choirs so i'm not sure how's the word builder is used. Is it very tedius to use for someone who doesn't know anything on Votox?



Votox is one of three ways you can enter the "words" you want the choir to sing. It's a sort of phonetic language; it lets you enter phonetic combinations that might not be easily described in your chosen native language. Once you get past the learning curve it's fairly intuitive (it was my preferred entry style ins Symphonic Choirs).

Some people didn't like the complexity of the original Symphonic Choirs word builder. I was fine with it and enjoyed crafting my lines. I think folks are generally hoping East West will have improved the UI and workflow so that this part of the system is more user friendly. I also think that the screen shots we are seeing are making us feel like maybe.... not?


----------



## benatural

Steve Lum said:


> Votox is one of three ways you can enter the "words" you want the choir to sing. It's a sort of phonetic language; it lets you enter phonetic combinations that might not be easily described in your chosen native language. Once you get past the learning curve it's fairly intuitive (it was my preferred entry style ins Symphonic Choirs).
> 
> Some people didn't like the complexity of the original Symphonic Choirs word builder. I was fine with it and enjoyed crafting my lines. I think folks are generally hoping East West will have improved the UI and workflow so that this part of the system is more user friendly. I also think that the screen shots we are seeing are making us feel like maybe.... not?


Definitely a matter of taste and workflow. My experience with symphonic choirs was that I found votox to be obtuse and indirect, and the word builder was fiddly for the way I work. Granted this was the NI version of WB. Having the grid be time based makes sense for granular adjustments, but there are more times where a tempo/meter based grid would have been desireable and would help produce more musical. That and the fact that not all nouns and consonants across all pitches behaved in a predictable way made the whole package harder to use than I would normally prefer. No small feat to achieve, I'm sure, but still it would be highly desireable. That said, you can get great results if you invest the time into tuning timings, it's just that I personally rarely have that luxury, and would prefer a 'works out of the box' solution.

But it's too early to tell. We'll see if they made the process more efficient and ergonomic. I hope they did! I generally don't find their libraries very intuitive.

One last gripe. Their names are also confusing to me, and not always what you would expect them to be. I know it's tricky when it comes to sampled articulations - i.e. ones staccato might be another's marcato -but using musical terms rather than highly situational bespoke ones in the name would help make what to expect clearer. It doesn't help that their documentation doesn't do the greatest job explaining things.

All this to say, I'm looking forward to this library and will probably buy it if it's good. I've invested in a decent amount of their libs over the years, and I still use them. But my usual EastWest gripes seem to be represented in these screenshots, and I wish they were more flexible and open to customer feedback.


----------



## Casiquire

I loved Votox! Once I learned the syllables which took like a half hour of playing around, it was easy to type in how I wanted it to sound. Then it takes the rest of your life playing with timing to make it sound good haha


----------



## constaneum

would really like to see how it'll be used in compositions. How does the word builder actually work? Do you get to assigned your created word / phrases to a particular keys and then you use keyswitch to switch words/phrases? You also get the flexibility to assign the which notes (C,D,E or what ?) to a particular word (for example: Battle or Batul...I can assign C to Ba and then D to Tul?). As for the note length, i can have like Ba to be a Quarter note and then Tul to be a Half note? (this is something like what Dominus, Freyja and Wotan have?)

Hopefully a more detailed walkthrough on this will be shown. Curious with Votox, will it be easier to have the choir singing other languages like Japanese?


----------



## Casiquire

All I want is for Play to be smart enough to know where I am in a track. They did it with Prodrummer, why can't they with choirs. Resetting position every time is......


----------



## Casiquire

Wait. I just zoomed in on that graphic and there's still a Reset Position button. I weep.


----------



## George Bellas

*Hollywood Choirs includes:*


A collection of men and women choir instruments
A WordBuilder program that turns text into sung words
Approximately 59 GB of 24-bit, 44.1 kHz samples, All Mixes (Diamond Edition); 8 GB of 16 -bit, 44.1 kHz samples, Main Mix (Gold Edition); 16 GB of 16 -bit, 44.1 kHz samples, Main and Surround Mixes (Gold X Edition)
EastWest's PLAY 6 System (earlier PLAY versions are not supported with this library)
A license that identifies the product you bought
Hollywood Choirs and Play 6 User Manuals (PDFs)
An Installation Center application to set up the library, software, and documentation
An iLok account is required for a machine-based (electronic) license to be placed on your computer. You may also place the license on an optional iLok key. An internet connection is required for a one-time product activation.
*The Differences Between the Diamond, Gold and Gold X Editions*:


Diamond Edition of Hollywood Choirs contains approximately 59 GB of 24-bit 44.1k samples, featuring 5 Microphone Mixes: Main, Close, Stage, Mid, and Surround.
Gold Edition of Hollywood Choirs contains 8 GB of 16-bit, 44.1 kHz samples, featuring the Main Microphone Mix.
Gold X Edition of Hollywood Choirs is 16 GB of 16-bit, 44.1 kHz samples, featuring the Main and Surround Microphone Mixes.


Hollywood Choirs at EastWest


----------



## Musicam

Ahhhhhhh!


----------



## JonSolo

Play 6...I think we knew that was coming. Well I should be grateful for details. But my ears are burning! I want to hear this!!!


----------



## Fleer

Can’t wait for this one. EW’s Hollywood range still fulfills my main orchestral demands.


----------



## jamwerks

Play 6? The giu looks just like 5?


----------



## prodigalson

jamwerks said:


> Play 6? The giu looks just like 5?



From their website:

*What's Included*? Hollywood Choirs includes:

EastWest's PLAY 6 System (earlier PLAY versions are not supported with this library)


----------



## jamwerks

This must not be the Play Pro that was announced a couple years back.


----------



## Dominik Raab

jamwerks said:


> Play 6? The giu looks just like 5?



Take a look at post #84 in this thread. The screenshot there shows filter settings for the browser settings that, to my knowledge, are not in PLAY 5 (Favourites/Installed/Licensed). I *think* Doug mentioned a cross-product search option ("Which of my libraries had the Accordion again?" - "Was the Duduk in Ra or in Silk?") coming soon-ish a couple months back. My guess would be it's in PLAY 6, and that would be great


----------



## Casiquire

Just out of curiosity, no legato then?


----------



## I like music

Casiquire said:


> Just out of curiosity, no legato then?


What? Have you seen something I haven't?


----------



## Casiquire

I like music said:


> What? Have you seen something I haven't?



Not sure what you mean--I was responding to the comment above which seemed to go over the articulations.


----------



## constaneum

it's not mentioned on the website though. perhaps it's meant for word / phrase building. Therefore, u don't really need legato for that? It doesnt mention anything on Ah, Oo and etc as well. Therefore, that could be the reason no scripted or True Legato mentioned?

Anyway, get ready to be "SHOCKED" fellas as mentioned on their product page ! SHOCKING REALISM !! LOL ! Makes me really anticipated with the release in 3 days time.

oh yeah, any idea what's the difference between main and stage mics? I thought all this while that main mic is basically the stage mic?


----------



## Lassi Tani

I'm sure legato is included. It's not mentioned, because they haven't said anything about any articulations yet. And actually you can see Legato under Performance, if you look at the Hollywood Choirs UI.


----------



## trumpoz

constaneum said:


> oh yeah, any idea what's the difference between main and stage mics? I thought all this while that main mic is basically the stage mic?



IIRC the Main Mics are a Decca Tree placed in the 'ideal position' to capture the 'best' ensemble sound.


----------



## constaneum

trumpoz said:


> IIRC the Main Mics are a Decca Tree placed in the 'ideal position' to capture the 'best' ensemble sound.



Ahhhh...that explain.


----------



## Casiquire

sekkosiki said:


> I'm sure legato is included. It's not mentioned, because they haven't said anything about any articulations yet. And actually you can see Legato under Performance, if you look at the Hollywood Choirs UI.



That's a common feature in Play libraries and doesn't indicate whether or not there are true legato samples recorded. That Legato button is there even in the now-ancient original Symphonic Choirs.


----------



## constaneum

Casiquire said:


> That's a common feature in Play libraries and doesn't indicate whether or not there are true legato samples recorded. That Legato button is there even in the now-ancient original Symphonic Choirs.



That legato button is basically scripted right ? Same goes with the portamento button.


----------



## calebfaith

constaneum said:


> That legato button is basically scripted right ? Same goes with the portamento button.



Yeah


----------



## Casiquire

constaneum said:


> That legato button is basically scripted right ? Same goes with the portamento button.



That's my impression, yes. Which would be unfortunate. I've been dying to have a library with both a good word builder and a good true legato. I would love a pleasant surprise.


----------



## George Bellas

Hollywood Choirs will be released tomorrow, November 30, 2017. Once it is released we shall see if the previously posted screenshots were legitimate or mere mockups.


----------



## husker

I haven't been able to find anything, but has pricing been released for this?


----------



## George Bellas

As of today, price points for the various iterations of Hollywood Choirs have not yet been announced.

More info can be found here: EastWest Hollywood Choirs


----------



## George Bellas

*Official Pricing from EastWest:*

Diamond $599 / Gold $499 / included in ComposerCloud. 

_"Hollywood Choirs is not an upgrade for Symphonic Choirs, it is a brand new ground up product that took 9 months to produce."_


----------



## nicoroy123

I am a bit disappointed that there is no introduction price.


----------



## George Bellas

Merely speculating, but those price points I assume are the normal cost and may not be an indication of EastWest not offering a time limited introductory price. We shall find out tomorrow when Hollywood Choirs is released.


----------



## nicoroy123

George Bellas said:


> Merely speculating, but those price points I assume are the normal cost and may not be an indication of EastWest not offering a time limited introductory price. We shall find out tomorrow when Hollywood Choirs is released.



Hopefully. Lets wait and see. 
Thanks


----------



## Audio Birdi

Here's the manual that's on EW's Hollywood Choirs webpage:

There appears to be legato patches!
http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs/EW-Hollywood-Choirs-User-Manual.pdf


----------



## constaneum

George Bellas said:


> *Official Pricing from EastWest:*
> 
> Diamond $599 / Gold $499 / included in ComposerCloud.
> 
> _"Hollywood Choirs is not an upgrade for Symphonic Choirs, it is a brand new ground up product that took 9 months to produce."_



They have Gold and Gold X edition. $499 is the Gold X i presume ? What about the Gold edition? $399 ?


----------



## Audio Birdi

constaneum said:


> They have Gold and Gold X edition. $499 is the Gold X i presume ? What about the Gold edition? $399 ?


Gold X = Composer Cloud X only.


----------



## constaneum

KaBirdi said:


> Gold X = Composer Cloud X only.



oh. Composer Cloud user gets more mic then. Sad. haha. Would really like to hear how good is the Gold edition. Hopefully it's good enough. 8GB content for $499. hmm....


----------



## constaneum

KaBirdi said:


> Here's the manual that's on EW's Hollywood Choirs webpage:
> 
> There appears to be legato patches!
> http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs/EW-Hollywood-Choirs-User-Manual.pdf



Ah and Oh Legato patches. Wonder whether it's true legato or not. hmm...


----------



## dtcomposer

constaneum said:


> Ah and Oh Legato patches. Wonder whether it's true legato or not. hmm...



It says true legato in the manual.


----------



## STec

Bad timing to release a sample library, right after Black Friday, we're all broke!


----------



## constaneum

we might as well wait for another year. East West frequently has sales. haha


----------



## George Bellas

_"For convenience you can now sync WordBuilder to your DAW so it follows the track."_

Hallelujah! What a tremendous time saver that is.


----------



## Dominik Raab

George Bellas said:


> _"For convenience you can now sync WordBuilder to your DAW so it follows the track."_
> 
> Hallelujah! What a tremendous time saver that is.



I *literally* started dancing when I read that. ... And I can't even dance. My back hurts now.


----------



## Jaap

Dominik Raab said:


> I *literally* started dancing when I read that. ... And I can't even dance. My back hurts now.



I join your dance! 

Really pleased to hear this and really looking forward to start using this. I have used Symphonic Choirs since release, but the last couple of years I didn't use it that much anymore, but looks like this one might get up in my workflow again!


----------



## George Bellas

*Now Available for Purchase:*

Hollywood Choirs at Sweetwater.com


----------



## George Bellas

EastWest still needs to officially release PLAY 6 (later today) in order to run Hollywood Choirs.


----------



## George Bellas

_"For convenience you can now sync WordBuilder to your DAW so it follows the track."_

Hopefully this means at any point within the Wordbuilder text and not just automatically from the beginning when the DAW starts from the beginning, which has already been possible in Symphonic Choirs using a user-definable MIDI Control Code.


----------



## Britpack50

I'm surprised there is only $100 between the 8GB 16bit Gold and 56GB 24bit Diamond editions. Will await the walkthroughs with interest, gone a little choir crazy this past Black Week. Particularly interested to put it next to Olympus and Stormchoir.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

constaneum said:


> oh. Composer Cloud user gets more mic then. Sad. haha. Would really like to hear how good is the Gold edition. Hopefully it's good enough. 8GB content for $499. hmm....



Seems a little excessive for 8GB, doesn't it?


----------



## Guffy

Wolfie2112 said:


> Seems a little excessive for 8GB, doesn't it?


If those 8GB does an amazing job, does it matter? I'd rather not have every library take up 100GB on my SSDs.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Fair enough, but it seems crazy that for only $100 more you get 7X the content.


----------



## husker

Agree - I would rather pay $100 for the extra content. Not sure I will bite now. Kind of wish they offered some type o introductory offer.


----------



## Prockamanisc

Are there no demos?


----------



## jamwerks

There is so much awesome sounding competition now, there's a chance we might be disappointed.


----------



## husker

I actually have NO choirs right now. What are the best alternatives?

I'm fairly new to all of this - the only "orchestral stuff" I have is the Hollywood Orchstra Gold + Solo instruments. And the symphony essentials stuff I got with Komplete.


----------



## bvaughn0402

jamwerks said:


> There is so much awesome sounding competition now, there's a chance we might be disappointed.



I'm beginning to wonder! I mean no demos even on the day of release? I would think everything they did before, and the improvements this time, they would be shoving demos down our throats!

I'm SO ready to buy this ... but I linger on my credit card ... just wanting some glimpse of it.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Was going to jump on it at release, but I'll hold out until I hear the reviews...especially the real-world reviews. I love EW, but I really hope this one's a hit. With the goofy exchange rate, I'll be shelling out $750cdn.


----------



## Britpack50

Think I will do the same. I am also (still) hovering over Insolidus at 40% off, and of course (still) waiting for the Spitfire/Whitacre Lib...


----------



## Zhao Shen

Hold your horses, people. It hasn't been released yet on EastWest's official site - Sweetwater is just a retailer, and they jump the gun quite often. Demos/specs/walkthroughs will come as soon the official announcement is made.


----------



## jamwerks

Seems EWQL always does the demos after the product release.


----------



## Prockamanisc

Those California people gotta wake up with the rest of the country...


----------



## George Bellas

*Backwards Compatibility with EWQLSC*

"The 110 new phrases and support for the unique WB features of Hollywood Choirs, such as the 26 additional phonemes that were recorded for Hollywood Choirs, are not backward compatible."


----------



## Orchestrata

I forgot not all digital products get released at midnight in each territory like video games, so it's been something of an anti-climactic day. 8pm here now, but at least I'll be able to download over night


----------



## Mystic

Orchestrata said:


> I forgot not all digital products get released at midnight in each territory like video games, so it's been something of an anti-climactic day. 8pm here now, but at least I'll be able to download over night


They still didn't say what year it would be releasing


----------



## JonSolo

Pushed up to December 4th. Really? Really?


----------



## Jaap

JonSolo said:


> Pushed up to December 4th. Really? Really?



Related to a bug that was found and needed to be fixed. To be honest I prefer that they fix it instead of releasing it and fixing it later, but I would love to see some demos and walkthrough videos in the weekend


----------



## reutunes

OF COURSE they've pushed the date back... literally a few minutes after I put out the new episode of The Samplecast with the Hollywood Choirs release date included in the news section! I am ABSOLUTELY STEAMING right now!!!

Now I automatically hate these choirs... whatever they turn out like!


----------



## Zhao Shen

Wow EastWest is really bad with this marketing stuff aren't they. You _never _push back the date on the day of release. Jesus.


----------



## jamwerks

Well at the least you gotta hand it to them for being consistent!


----------



## Seycara

Zhao Shen said:


> Wow EastWest is really bad with this marketing stuff aren't they. You _never _push back the date on the day of release. Jesus.



This certainly takes it down a notch; I think it's bad QA to do additional testing that has not been done previously _*on the day of the release.*_


----------



## Orchestrata

The pill would be easier to swallow if we had some demos and/or walkthroughs to tide us over. Sigh.


----------



## mcalis

That's rather poor. I'd be a lot more forgiving if they hadn't messed up before already with their whole announcing announcements spiel. At the end of the day, I care more about having a stable product, but I can't deny this puts a dent in my trust in EW. I really think (as @Seycara pointed out) you've made a pretty bad mistake if you find an error this late. QA should've been wrapped up aeons ago!


----------



## dtcomposer

I am glad they decided to wait a bit and fix some things before release. They've been killed in the past for releasing some buggy products. I will always applaud a company for keeping it real and not using customers for beta testing.


----------



## ChazC

Zhao Shen said:


> Wow EastWest is really bad with this marketing stuff aren't they. You _never _push back the date on the day of release. Jesus.


Heh, you think that's bad? A Kickstarter I backed is due to start shipping in 2 days - they've just put out an update that release is now pushed back to December 2018!

As has been stated, I'd rather they get it right but yeah it's all a bit disappointing. Not that I was going to buy on release anyway - I'll wait 6 months and grab it at 60% off - this is EW after all...


----------



## SoundChris

Well ok. Went for Fluffy Audio´s Dominus now as long as it is on sale. I cant exactly say why. But i am not really expecting a lot at this point (the same happened once hollywood solo strings violin and cello were released. The expectations were high because i stil LOVE Hollywood Strings Diamond a lot - and finally was totally disappointed. So I am sceptic again now tbh). If I understood correctly there are just women and men, no girls / boys choir anymore? The legato is only happening in oh / ah legato patches - is that correct? The wordbuilder looks almost exactly like the old one. I was really looking forward to this product - even I have got almost any choir libraries existing out there these days. But something tells me especially after that sudden change of the release date not to expect much :/ Well ... I stil hope they nail it ...


----------



## Orchestrata

mcalis said:


> That's rather poor. I'd be a lot more forgiving if they hadn't messed up before already with their whole announcing announcements spiel. At the end of the day, I care more about having a stable product, but I can't deny this puts a dent in my trust in EW. I really think (as @Seycara pointed out) you've made a pretty bad mistake if you find an error this late. QA should've been wrapped up aeons ago!



Agreed. It's also a little odd that they haven't actually "announced" the delay, not even a Facebook post (as of this writing); just a small note on the product page. Their communication has been shoddy to say the least. 

But hopefully despite the poor lead-up since the initial announcement they surprise us with a great, polished product.


----------



## constaneum

now 4th. what's next? Are we going to anticipate further delays ? Probably gonna end up being released in Year 2018.


----------



## Mystic

This isn't really anything new with EW. They tend to delay everything at least twice after the initial date before it actually gets released.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

Yep every single time.

They can never actually just release something that comes out when they say anymore :/


----------



## erica-grace

_Unfortunately one of our beta testers found a Windows bug that needs to be fixed, so the release has been delayed to December 4, we apologize for the delay, only a few more days._

-Admin, on the SO forum.

I wonder if those of you who are complaining about the delay, would complain more if it was released with a bug, or less?


----------



## Mystic

erica-grace said:


> I wonder if those of you who are complaining about the delay, would complain more if it was released with a bug, or less?


You're assuming that when it releases, it won't have bugs anyway. lol


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

erica-grace said:


> _Unfortunately one of our beta testers found a Windows bug that needs to be fixed, so the release has been delayed to December 4, we apologize for the delay, only a few more days._
> 
> -Admin, on the SO forum.
> 
> I wonder if those of you who are complaining about the delay, would complain more if it was released with a bug, or less?


I beta test things all the time, I don't mind the odd bug
It would have to be a very big bug to bother me really, I do Ableton betas and run them to write tracks

So not so fussed here


----------



## prodigalson

so the beta tester reported the bug ON the day of release??


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

prodigalson said:


> so the beta tester reported the bug ON the day of release??



^ That.

And it took a beta tester....not the developers themselves. Yikes!


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire

Wolfie2112 said:


> ^ That.
> 
> And it took a beta tester....not the developers themselves. Yikes!



Well of course it took the beta tester, that's what they're there for. A dev is there to develop, not to test every single possibility how something could break.
The fact that it was on release day was not so glorious, but still.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Well, I can understand some of you are dissapointed with the delay. I also was watching out at least to check out some of their demos though though just for me personally I feel that the last couple of releases from eastwest were quite dissapointing for me where I felt that they lost a bit of their thing in "setting standards and put themselves above the rest of the market". And sure it is not only that. Other companies offer these days very good products so I am not sure if they will impress you here with their hollywood choirs that much. I read their description for the HWchoirs on their page and it seems they tailor their product and approach to the needs and trends of these days blockbuster and probably trailer music (Quote from their page "...HOLLYWOOD CHOIRS delivers that powerful, blockbuster sound that all composers are seeking...". So SATB writing and super detailed sections are not a huge part of those trailer music business and another point is anyways how choirs in epic filmmusic are used mostly as layering "Ahs and ohs" over parts to give them the typical epic dramatic sound.

The last choir library I bought was the oceania choir where I see personally more the future in sampling which means to create a better "playability". I am getting more and more a performer on the piano and I am tired of doing for every piece this kind of excessive midi editing as it feels for me so much unmusical way of how I would like to create music. It is tedious and even after hours of tweaking the results are not quite satisfying. So I watch out to sample developers more and more who try to create more specific libraries who are maybe not covering every articulation but what they offer sounds more convincing in performance and context than everything else on the market. And it is because I believe that part of the realism in the samples but actually more in the performance and dynamics.


----------



## nas

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I see personally more the future in sampling which means to create a better "playability". I am getting more and more a performer on the piano and I am tired of doing for every piece this kind of excessive midi editing as it feels for me so much unmusical way of how I would like to create music. It is tedious and even after hours of tweaking the results are not quite satisfying. So I watch out to sample developers more and more who try to create more specific libraries who are maybe not covering every articulation but what they offer sounds more convincing in performance and context than everything else on the market. And it is because I believe that part of the realism in the samples but actually more in the performance and dynamics.



Agree with this 100%. I'm seeing this trend happening more those days with more focused but playable libraries. Domius Choir seems to illustrate this with it's ease of use, beautiful tonal character, and more focused choir style. Recently I bought Virharmonic's Cello/Vln and they are very much designed for intuitive playing with lots of smart scripting in the background. I'm preferring this approach as it allows for a much more natural workflow and performance... and these libraries do sound excellent and quite realistic to my ears with a little less time spent on MIDI programming.


----------



## trumpoz

Damn there are some whingers here. 

A bug is found and people are complaining about a delay so it can be fixed. Get over it.


----------



## Mystic

trumpoz said:


> Damn there are some whingers here.
> 
> A bug is found and people are complaining about a delay so it can be fixed. Get over it.


More like people are tired of East West pulling the same bullshit over and over. *shrugs*


----------



## jcrosby

I laughed a little, followed by various pointed obscenities when I went to soundsonline and saw the date moved to Dec. 5th.

Announcing it when they did was a predictably stupid move on their part. They never release anything on schedule. Same old shit, different product...


----------



## Lassi Tani

I'm not sure if someone already posted this, but the manual is here: http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs/EW-Hollywood-Choirs-User-Manual.pdf


----------



## pfmusic

Glossary of Phonetic Alphabets added to Hollywood choirs page...

http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs/EW-Hollywood-Choirs-Glossary-of-Phonetic-Alphabets.pdf


----------



## Zhao Shen

sekkosiki said:


> I'm not sure if someone already posted this, but the manual is here: http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs/EW-Hollywood-Choirs-User-Manual.pdf



Yikes, only two legato vowel patches, and no alto/soprano or tenor/bass separation. This Wordbuilder hype better not disappoint...


----------



## JonSolo

Well we should know something by tomorrow. Looking forward to seeing or hearing some examples. I hope they deliver.


----------



## jamwerks

Oceana has some kinda of revolutionary features with chorus. Hoping to hear some novelties and advancements from EW!


----------



## SoundChris

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I also was watching out at least to check out some of their demos though though just for me personally I feel that the last couple of releases from eastwest were quite dissapointing for me where I felt that they lost a bit of their thing in "setting standards and put themselves above the rest of the market". And sure it is not only that. Other companies offer these days very good products so I am not sure if they will impress you here with their hollywood choirs that much.
> 
> The last choir library I bought was the oceania.



Absolutely agree here. I always have been a huge fan of EWQL once they released their Pianos Platinum, Hollywood Strings and Brass, but while other competitors on the market made huge steps in sound and playability and also came with quite innovative concepts i was also missing this in the last EWQL products. I remember that i was super excited to finally see Hollywood Solo Strings being released - i have never felt that disappointed tbh. IMO this was FAR from being state of the art so i was thinking with myself: are these guys already saturated? Where is the massive drive they had in the past?

If you look at the choir products - the Strezov Choirs (Wotan, Freyja and Arva) can deliver super nice results for epic music, the new Dominus Choir by Fluffy that i purchased a few days ago also impressed me because of the fantastic sound and depth. I really wished that Hollywood Choirs would bring EWQL back on track. I understand that they are focusing on the composer cloud and to try to earn with that. But i would prefer them to create groundbreaking products again - just as they did a decade ago... When i saw that the GUI of HC and the Wordbuilder looked ULTRA similar to the Symphonic Choirs one and that you have Oh and Ah legatos it was clear for me, that this would become an overhauled version of the old product. I am sure it will sound better than the old one - that at least can be expected for that price. But i have my doubts if they really will make it to deliver a choir with a beautiful sound AND the possibility to write words in a believable way, that also works as a standalone choir for lets say sacred music approaches and stuff. I really would love to see a very strong product happening... but i am not expecting anything exciting , too :/ Also - just as you said Alex: Its designed for blockbuster stuff where the choir mostly is covered by massive orchestral brass, effects and whatever. I would love it to have the ability to create intimate and beautiful / soft passages - also without any accompanyment. Well - lets see how this will turn out.


----------



## George Bellas

Apparently Hollywood Choirs is now available for download to Composer Cloud subscribers via the Installation Center, as reported by subscribers based in the UK.


----------



## Orchestrata

Confirmed, downloading it now


----------



## JonSolo

Please let us know how you find it.


----------



## Jaap

Nothing here yet in the Netherlands


----------



## Dominik Raab

Germany here. I can download the "GoldX Surround" option (doing that right now), but I can't download the base Gold version. With other products, you always need both. Also, there is no update to PLAY 6 yet - which is required for Choirs. Since there's no official announcement that it's released, maybe they're just in the process of unlocking those downloads.


----------



## George Bellas

From the EastWest Admin:

"Make sure you update the IC. We're still posting all of this, give us time."


----------



## Dominik Raab

George Bellas said:


> From the EastWest Admin:
> 
> "Make sure you update the IC. We're still posting all of this, give us time."



Glad I'm not the only one furiously refreshing my browser window to get all the latest news... :D


----------



## Jaap

The EW Hollywood Choirs GoldX shows up to be downloaded and under more download I find EW Hollywood Choirs Diamond and Gold, but cant download Gold self. Will see tomorrow how this opens and also PLAY 6 is not in the installation centre and can't find a way to update the IC (normally it shows if there is an update)


----------



## JonSolo

It shows for sale now.


----------



## calebfaith

There are audio demos on the website now too http://www.soundsonline.com/hollywood-choirs


----------



## George Bellas

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Is there one audio demo or something available?​




Yes, demos are now available.


----------



## erica-grace

Sounds good - but they need to give us naked demos.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

*<<Deleted by moderator. A swear word here and there is okay, but this is over the top.>>*


----------



## lucor

Video Tutorial is up as well!


----------



## Seycara

The legato is quite the letdown, doesn't sound as good as requiem and that is "ancient" tech by what EW says in the marketing.


----------



## John57

The choirs are too large and too much reverberation to really pick up on the lyrics. Maybe the close mics would be any better?


----------



## kimarnesen

It sounds great in the demos for sure, and with a library like this, it's not really very useful to hear naked demos because they all sound bad anyway. You kinda have to hide a choir library behind instruments anyway, and for big epic tracks, this sounds smashing.


----------



## Jdiggity1

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> The tutorial video is no tutorial but the most shittiest self boasting bullshit advertising video for 14 year old mousehead composers I have seen in the history of eastwest. And the choirs sounds ridicolous considering how they advertise it. Obnoxious self cock sucking company attitude.


But tell us how you *really *feel


----------



## erica-grace

Just watched the entire video, and this:



AlexanderSchiborr said:


> The tutorial video is no tutorial but the most shittiest self boasting bullshit advertising video for 14 year old mousehead composers I have seen in the history of eastwest. And the choirs sounds ridicolous considering how they advertise it. Obnoxious self cock sucking company attitude.



is an absolute ridiculously false and ignorant comment.

Sure, Nick does say "we went through great lengths" and "the quality is in another league" and "it feels great to play this" and other things that talk up the library. Which is no different than what other developers do. First one that comes to mind is Paul Thompson in the Spitfire walkthroughs. And you know what? There is nothing wrong with it.


----------



## calebfaith

Here's an example of the 'legato' which I'm not too impressed with

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/hc-legato-men-mp3.10662/][/AUDIOPLUS]

Also the tenors are much louder than the basses

EDIT: I must have done something wrong...


----------



## calebfaith

John57 said:


> The choirs are too large and too much reverberation to really pick up on the lyrics. Maybe the close mics would be any better?



They actually sound quite dry without the default reverb on


----------



## erica-grace

calebfaith said:


> Here's an example of the 'legato' which I'm not too impressed with



That doesn't sound bad. Not great, but it's samples. It will never sound like the real thing. Why not post another example of the same, with some of the further mic positions?


----------



## Audio Birdi

erica-grace said:


> That doesn't sound bad. Not great, but it's samples. It will never sound like the real thing. Why not post another example of the same, with some of the further mic positions?


The different mic positions with no added reverb would be great to hear!


----------



## Jdiggity1

In case you missed it, at about 14 minutes into the tutorial video, Nick drops info on Spaces 2 due to come out soon.


----------



## rap_ferr

Does anyone know up to when we can take advantage of the introductory discount?


----------



## calebfaith

Here's a short passage I played in with the Women's choir both dry and with the default reverb boosted by 10Db. All Main mic pos.

Sounds pretty natural to me even with my bad modwheel swells. Definitely an improvement over Symphonic Choirs.

The last note has a full range modwheel swell

Bonus points if you can work out what it says 

I only have composer cloud so I can't demo other mic pos sorry!

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/10db-hc-women-default-reverb-mp3.10663/][/AUDIOPLUS]

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/10db-hc-women-dry-mp3.10664/][/AUDIOPLUS]

[AUDIOPLUS=https://www.vi-control.net/community/attachments/10db-hc-women-default-reverb-mp3.10663/][/AUDIOPLUS]

[AUDIOPLUS=https://www.vi-control.net/community/attachments/10db-hc-women-dry-mp3.10664/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## zolhof

Jdiggity1 said:


> In case you missed it, at about 14 minutes into the tutorial video, Nick drops info on Spaces 2 due to come out soon.



Now that's some kick ass news! Spaces still is the indisputable king of glue in my master buss. Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## Audio Birdi

calebfaith said:


> Here's a short passage I played in with the Women's choir both dry and with the default reverb boosted by 10Db. All Main mic pos.
> 
> Sounds pretty natural to me even with my bad modwheel swells. Definitely an improvement over Symphonic Choirs.
> 
> The last note has a full range modwheel swell
> 
> Bonus points if you can work out what it says
> 
> I only have composer cloud so I can't demo other mic pos sorry!
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/10db-hc-women-default-reverb-mp3.10663/][/AUDIOPLUS]
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/10db-hc-women-dry-mp3.10664/][/AUDIOPLUS]


Cheers for showing HWC with and without default reverb Caleb! The main mic position is indeed rather dry sounding! Wish the tutorial video didn't have any external reverb, it would give a better representation of the rest of the positions, as the reverb Nick Pheonix was using did make the choir sound a lot wetter than it actually is.


----------



## Seycara

erica-grace said:


> Just watched the entire video, and this:
> 
> 
> 
> is an absolute ridiculously false and ignorant comment.
> 
> Sure, Nick does say "we went through great lengths" and "the quality is in another league" and "it feels great to play this" and other things that talk up the library. Which is no different than what other developers do. First one that comes to mind is Paul Thompson in the Spitfire walkthroughs. And you know what? There is nothing wrong with it.



Except in this case, Paul Thompson @ Spitfire actually delivers the extraordinary products as claimed; Spitfire Orchestra is still top of the line and has a sound that will rank in the top 3 of orchestral libraries out there for any composer. 

However for Hollywood Choirs, my opinion is that EW has released yet another "ok" choir that has albeit 13 microphone positions. The wordbuilder is still not "revolutionary" compared to EWQLSC and legato/everything else is lackluster when we compare it to 8dio's requiem and storm choir 2. I genuinely do not see any of the innovation "12 years in the making" that EW is claiming for this library.


----------



## Seycara

calebfaith said:


> Here's an example of the 'legato' which I'm not too impressed with
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/hc-legato-men-mp3.10662/][/AUDIOPLUS]
> 
> Also the tenors are much louder than the basses



Yeah this reminds me of QLegato or scripted legato in EWQLSO, perhaps not even as good in an actual applied scenario because the transitions sound very disjointed. Would probably only work hidden in a FFF tutti section.


----------



## erica-grace

Seycara said:


> Except in this case, Paul Thompson @ Spitfire actually delivers the extraordinary products as claimed;



And you can argue that EW does the same. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, right?

Besides - one person complaining about talking up a product, and someone else saying that everyone does it has nothing whatsoever to do with the overall quality of the products in question.


----------



## Seycara

erica-grace said:


> And you can argue that EW does the same. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, right?
> 
> Besides - one person complaining about talking up a product, and someone else saying that everyone does it has nothing whatsoever to do with the overall quality of the products in question.



Making the case that EWHC is better than other choir libraries available right now is a challenging task (if we count realism as the final goal). But the consensus will be up to the community to decide.

I personally think this was as much of a letdown as the Hollywood solo instruments; onwards to Spitfire's choir!


----------



## mcalis

Seycara said:


> Making the case that EWHC is better than other choir libraries available right now is a challenging task (if we count realism as the final goal). But the consensus will be up to the community to decide.
> 
> I personally think this was as much of a letdown as the Hollywood solo instruments; onwards to Spitfire's choir!


I will have to doodle with it myself for a bit, but I found the posted demos on the EW website to be rather poor. Nothing against the composers who made those pieces, but the choir certainly wasn't the standout in any of the compositions. Is there something wrong with my ears or do all those mixes (especially Anna's piece) sound incredibly washy and blurry (aka drowned in reverb)? That said, I do think the sound is quite good in a more "spoken" kind of singing at a medium tempo. The legato honestly sounds rather dreadful.


----------



## bvaughn0402

Anyone found a cheaper price than $599?


----------



## Jdiggity1

mcalis said:


> Is there something wrong with my ears or do all those mixes (especially Anna's piece) sound incredibly washy and blurry (aka drowned in reverb)?


It's not just you. Unfortunately, even though the demo writers are fine composers, their production chops are lacking. Which is kind of the opposite of what you want in a demo composer.


----------



## jamwerks

First impression is that it sounds usable. Not as realistic as the competition imo, but in cases where you really want to sing a specific text, this should get the job done.

Am I right in seeing that they didn't record at their own studio?


----------



## Audio Birdi

jamwerks said:


> First impression is that it sounds usable. Not as realistic as the competition imo, but in cases where you really want to sing a specific text, this should get the job done.
> 
> Am I right in seeing that they didn't record at their own studio?



That's what I was thinking too, it seems that they've perhaps recorded at somewhere called "St. Mary's"? as that's the default reverb that can be turned on it seems. Not sure though!


----------



## SoundChris

Well ... expected more ...

Really: Can this choir offer anything else than just FF to FFFFFFF? For my taste it is really lacking soul - sorry. The transitions are audible and the legato patches sound far from being smooth for my taste. This again is a choir which only works hidden behind a large orchestral piece. Standalone its (at least IMO) just too fake. And IF you have to hide the choir behind a full piece then you dont need lyrics at all. I would prefer Performance Samples´Oceania or the goold old Strezov Choirs (even Storm Choir I which is already quite old now) - IMO more epic, incredible large dynamic range and wonderful legato. For soft and more ecclesiastic pieces I just can recommend to check Fluffy Audio´s Dominus or Tarilonte´s Mystica. Also there will be a Spitfire Audio Choir if I remember correctly. To show that the industry standard for samples choirs is in fact very high these days, i have posted a few links to other competitor´s products below to be able to compare the sound to HC.

I also just have to agree with @AlexanderSchiborr : The presentation and the way this product was advertized was a little bit embarressing for my taste and somehow i felt like an idiot while watching. Also there really is no need that EWQL drags down the competitor´s products of today in any way (maybe i missunderstood that, but it felt as if they really would that arrogant to claim that the libraries out there would be far below their quality level they achieved with Hollywood Choirs.

Check these here existing choirs which are said to be not on the same standard level (lol):
Michal Cielecki´s Demo for *8Dio´s Emperium* (which i own but not like much tbh - nevertheless you can (!) get great results with it): 
Maybe the most epic track I have heared using a virtual choir.

Or the good old *8Dio Requiem* Choir:




There also is that new *8Dio Insolidus* ir how its called. Didn´t check that yet. The demos also sound nice IMO and seem to offer a good dynamic range:


*Strezov Sampling Choirs*:
*- Arva*
Even these 2 demos only show the vowel legato, the sound is far more vivid and has just more soul - at least for my opinion:
https://soundcloud.com/strezov-sampling/remembering-james-by-benny-oschmann
https://soundcloud.com/strezov-sampling/somewhere-in-wonderland-by-jean-gabriel-raynaud

*- Storm Choir I and II*
https://soundcloud.com/strezov-samp...o?in=strezov-sampling/sets/storm-choir-2-core
https://soundcloud.com/strezov-samp...rezov-sampling/sets/storm-choir-2-core#t=0:28

Especially what the Choir Library "Oldtimer" Storm Choir I can deliver is stil FANTASTIC. A timeless product which really was groundbreaking in terms of playability and sound! Do these demos not sound up to date? I think they do.
https://soundcloud.com/strezov-samp...r?in=strezov-sampling/sets/storm-choir#t=0:36
https://soundcloud.com/strezov-samp...y-pontus?in=strezov-sampling/sets/storm-choir

*- Freyja & Wotan*
https://soundcloud.com/strezov-sampling/city-of-ashes-by-adam-hochstatter
https://youtu.be/ALY6dMIG11E?t=1m3s

*Performance Sample´s Oceania*:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTiU9FTAmh8

*Fluffy Audio´s Dominus Choir*:
https://soundcloud.com/fluffyaudio/morten-lauridsen-magnum-misterium

Or *Eduardo Tarilonte´s Mystica Choir*:
https://soundcloud.com/eduardotarilonte/sacerdotes-sanctuarii

These are just a few Examples of what the competition is / was doing. To claim that HC would set new sound standards far beyond whats on the market these days is a little bit ridiculous. Sometimes its better to stay humble. Thats just my two cents.

P.s.: I have no idea why sometimes the soundcloud embedded player is shown and sometimes not. I just wanted to post the links. Can´t make it to get the player out or to make it look uniform. Sorry for that


----------



## ChazC

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> The tutorial video is no tutorial but the most shittiest self boasting bullshit advertising video for 14 year old mousehead composers I have seen in the history of eastwest. And the choirs sounds ridiculous considering how they advertise it. Obnoxious self cock sucking company attitude.


Stop sitting on the fence & tell us what you _really_ think!


----------



## kimarnesen

calebfaith said:


> Here's a short passage I played in with the Women's choir both dry and with the default reverb boosted by 10Db. All Main mic pos.
> 
> Sounds pretty natural to me even with my bad modwheel swells. Definitely an improvement over Symphonic Choirs.
> 
> The last note has a full range modwheel swell
> 
> Bonus points if you can work out what it says
> 
> I only have composer cloud so I can't demo other mic pos sorry!



It's bot very natural, which is why choir libraries in general have to hide between instruments.


----------



## Darren Durann

Fiddled with it a bit the past few days. As usual, if you want samples that are clean (and thus eminently mixable), EW is the place to go. I'm not having the problems with legato that others are apparently having, in fact I find them in some contexts a bit smoother than SC.

I guess the one negative I have is that this is expensive, especially for people like me, whom already own (and have owned for many years) EWSCP. And...well, put it this way: it's still waaay too early for me to make a firm judgement here, but this certainly isn't going to have me using EWSCP any less. Give me a couple more weeks with my Cloud and I'll get back to ya.

I'm not sure what library is more "realistic" than the EW (realism can at times be at least as much in the hands of the person using the library as it is in the recorded content...and even then you ain't gonna get "completely realistic" from ANY library people, you know that. Even Strezov, good as it undoubtedly is...sorry folks it's true).


----------



## Geocranium

Jdiggity1 said:


> It's not just you. Unfortunately, even though the demo writers are fine composers, their production chops are lacking. Which is kind of the opposite of what you want in a demo composer.



I'd love to hear another TJ demo... Though he could make just about any library sound incredible.


----------



## MarcelM

i expected more after all the hype, and the price tag is... *cough*


----------



## kimarnesen

Heroix said:


> i expected more after all the hype, and the price tag is... *cough*



Yes, I let the huge sales from Soundiron, 8Dio and Stretzov go only to wait for this. It’s not bad, but not sure if it’s any better.


----------



## MarcelM

kimarnesen said:


> Yes, I let the huge sales from Soundiron, 8Dio and Stretzov go only to wait for this. It’s not bad, but not sure if it’s any better. The world builder seems quite useless because of the poor pronunciation. Quasi-words would have been just as good.



xmas will bring some more sales - but for sure not on this one... more expensive than the whole diamond orchestra


----------



## Zhao Shen

calebfaith said:


> Here's an example of the 'legato' which I'm not too impressed with
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/hc-legato-men-mp3.10662/][/AUDIOPLUS]
> 
> Also the tenors are much louder than the basses


... Oh. My. Fucking. God. This sounds 100x worse than libraries that came out 5 years ago. What the fuck was EastWest thinking??


----------



## tehreal

calebfaith said:


> Here's an example of the 'legato' which I'm not too impressed with
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/hc-legato-men-mp3.10662/][/AUDIOPLUS]
> 
> Also the tenors are much louder than the basses



Yikes. That doesn't sound good.

Does your example use "true legato"? I think they call it "Other" in the Hollywood Choir interface (according to the manual).

Here's Soundiron Mercury Symphonic Boys' Choir as an example of how a VI true legato should sound:

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/msbc-legato-mp3.10665/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## Beltur

I'm not the target audience for these libraries (I don't really use choir much) but this sounds rather dreadful compared to what has been on the market for years now (and the expectations they set).


----------



## Mystic

Wow, I'm floored that this is it. Considering Nick was producing it... even the demos didn't wow me like they usually do.

I'm now convinced that EW is focused on consumer market rather than professionals much like Waves has. That trailer was just shockingly bad. And virtual reality? Really?


----------



## tehreal

What do people think of the word builder? I think it sounds much better than it did with Symphonic Choirs but it doesn't seem to provide legato along with it.


----------



## Polkasound




----------



## CT

I have nothing useful to say about the thread subject, but, just as a friendly PSA to anyone and everyone who ever quotes the Force theme....


----------



## Daniel James

Been a while since I cringed so hard a trailer xD

-DJ


----------



## tehreal

miket said:


> I have nothing useful to say about the thread subject, but, just as a friendly PSA to anyone and everyone who ever quotes the Force theme....



Hey I was copying Caleb. It's all his fault!


----------



## calebfaith

tehreal said:


> Hey I was copying Caleb. It's all his fault!



I take full responsibility XD


----------



## reids

I'm quite disappointed with this. Pass.


----------



## InLight-Tone

Next...Spitfire!


----------



## Steve Lum

Man... as mentioned above by others, I feel sad I passed on some black friday choirs in anticipation of EWHC. Watching the demo/tutorial made me break out my EWSCP for a sanity check (and right away we see - as far as I could tell - only one addition to votox -> h!) and, between me and EWSCP and the demo... I am not seeing a huge difference. I reproduced the "troll in the dungeon" example almost identically.

There may be some workflow improvements I can't examine but... 600-800 $ worth? Frankly I am mystified. I thought there would be an order-of-magnitude improvement. I may be uninformed but my senses tell me this is some polish on a previous iteration. For what it does I am sticking with SCP and spending the money on.. probably Fluffy's Dominus. I have all the vowels I need from other libraries.

Edit: I guess I just failed to see the virtual reality component (j/k)


----------



## Casiquire

This doesn't sound like a significant enough improvement over the original SC to consider it.

Meanwhile for everybody saying that it sounds worse than other libraries...well that's up for debate. I haven't yet heard a full word builder that sounds better. That's a deal breaker for me. Unfortunately because of that, I'm sticking with SC despite my feelings for EW.


----------



## zeng

Zhao Shen said:


> ... Oh. My. Fucking. God. This sounds 100x worse than libraries that came out 5 years ago. What the fuck was EastWest thinking??


It is not sounding like this in tutorial video (9:12 men legato). I think there is something wrong with this test.


----------



## chrisphan

zeng said:


> It is not sounding like this in tutorial video (9:12 men legato). I think there is something wrong with this test.


Agreed. I'm not questioning Caleb's ability, but maybe it's a new library and he did something wrong


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Good Morning Boys and girls,
As I was reminded that my comment wasn´t that nice, I apologize for calling eastwest in public a self cock sucking company. And before someone asked: Nobody told me, but I feel so. But let me tell you:

This product as it seems to me is a far cry from their glorious times doing products like Hollywood strings and brass
First I meant the "Trailer" not the "Tutorial" video, but in this trailer you can see two things: First they dump down competitors products, in particular they say this: "Are you tired of using choir libraries using the same boring latin phrases?" Yeah, than come to eastwest with their nice boring complicated worldbuilder bullshit where your words will sound like a person talking through a microphone of an analphabet chimpanzee. Come one..eastwest..really..and then they say that with that obnoxious trailervoice "YOUUUU NEEEEED SOM! MAAAGIC!!!" Oh boy...I felt like thrown into a Michael Bay Transformers movie at that point already. What a degredation at its best.
Next self boast cocky thing: Type in ANY Word (someone please try out that phrase: "Eastwest is talking chimpanzee" and it will be sung by a blockbuster choir. rofl..and then you see the guy doing this chord while he tries to act soo surprised..like he has a moment with GOD. Wow..What a bullshit. And What they are saying in their chimpanzee phonetics, I can´t understand you dudes. Even a parrot would talk better words. So I would hire a parrot choir. But anyways you are epic blockbuster choirs so you dissapear in the background.
What is that bullshit? I remember back in 2011 they had serious videos for professionals, AND serious demos. I did listen through the demos and got some laugh, sorry to say..where are the demo qualities of a bergersen? Don´t get me wrong the demos are ok..but nothing more, the choir sound at best ok. The arrangement in the demos don´t sound like professional composers for me. But it is enough for 14 year old aspiring trailer composer to belief that this mediocre product will let them be the next wannabe Hansboy. This whole thing is in my opinion a sign that eastwest either has lost perspective or really don´t know what excellent competitive products are on the market.
I tell you something: I would choose most other choir over this product not only because it doesn´t feel like magic, revolutionary and blabla, but simply I don´t like companies which advertise their own product and start this by letting people know how shitty other competitors products are. And that virtual reality helmet is the most laughable part of that video..it is so laughable..man I can stop. So for me this whole thing has so no style, no manneers and it is where I say to EW: F**** Y..!..with your shitty magic chimpansee quik quak super choir from Hollywood recorded at the edge of ridiculousness. I go and look somewhere else.

Thank you!

**** This is just my opinion ****


----------



## calebfaith

chrisphan said:


> Agreed. I'm not questioning Caleb's ability, but maybe it's a new library and he did something wrong



Yeah maybe I did. I'm thinking my install might be bugged.

This is what I did: I loaded up the Men's 'Ah Legato' patch but it played polyphonically unless i selected the 'other' script button which I had enabled when I played the demo I uploaded to here. Maybe I shouldn't have?

I'm hoping that I did it wrong and maybe the legato is actually better. I'll check when I get back home


----------



## calebfaith

Here it is without 'other' clicked which I don't think I was meant too :/

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/hc-mens-legato-take-2-mp3.10671/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

calebfaith said:


> Here it is without 'other' clicked which I don't think I was meant too :/
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/hc-mens-legato-take-2-mp3.10671/][/AUDIOPLUS]



Yikes..


----------



## Christof

The first entry of the mens vocal section in the trailer made me laugh already, sounds weak and like amateurs against the epic visuals.
The trailer is a joke, probably aimed towards teenagers who adore Michael Bay movies.
Amazing visuals that try to distract from the weak sound.
$599?


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

Christof said:


> The first entry of the mens vocal section in the trailer made me laugh already, sounds weak and like amateurs against the epic visuals.
> The trailer is a joke, probably aimed towards teenagers who adore Michael Bay movies.
> Amazing visuals that try to distract from the weak sound.
> $599?



I am still downloading it at home.
But now I am wondering whether I bother. The comments on here certainly confirm my doubts though. I pay for Composer Cloud Plus and think it’s time to cancel. Been over a year now.

Was thinking about going to Composer Cloud X as I would like to still have Ghostwriter, SD3, HOP Percussion and more than Gold for Woodwinds

UPDATE: I just cannot leave Composer Cloud Plus, there is something I have come to appreciate about the versatility of using it now.
Also HC is not the library I was worried it was, it is a high quality well recorded product that I may have only use a short while, but have no regrets of owning


----------



## Orchestrata

"Improved sound design options!"
[T-Rex Roars]
"And virtual reality!"
[Puts on headset]

[Also, sports cars for some reason]

Sigh.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

Hollywood Woodwinds was my first concern, since I still feel it does not shine like Brass and Strings :(

Really like the other libraries though

But not sure I can justify £49/month anymore. Especially when the support staff member told me to own HC before Sweetwater I could always buy it myself so I am not bothered about it being purchasable for others before Composer Cloud subscribers


----------



## IdealSequenceG

Legato is connected unnaturally. In my standards, the Legato sound of 'VOXOS' was very useful.

Here's an example of 'voxos' (Legato I usually want)


----------



## Orchestrata

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> Hollywood Woodwinds was my first concern, since I still feel it does not shine like Brass and Strings :(



https://vi-control.net/community/threads/nick-and-thomas-speak-about-woodwinds.27072/


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

Orchestrata said:


> https://vi-control.net/community/threads/nick-and-thomas-speak-about-woodwinds.27072/



Oh I have read that
But (this is only opinion) this thread about that issue shows me that there are much deeper issues at EW than sample developing

I don’t know who was in the right with the legal stuff that happened with QL, but suing here and there just serves to confirm profit profit profit as a focus for me :(

EDIT: I have to admit, I was responding a little too emotionally here. Since I do not have the information about this, I will just sound like a moron stating these things.

As I have stated I have used EastWest products for a long time now and they are not rubbish or low quality from my experience.

Okay, I admit I did sound like a moron and I will be the first to admit it


----------



## Orchestrata

Yeah, I have no interest in the legal stuff, just agreeing that the sense of concern started around that time with the rocky release of HOW and that apparent falling out.


----------



## Paul Owen

Seriously? Whoever signed that trailer off needs a slap on the lips.


----------



## SoundChris

And just before I forget it: to advertize a product by saying this new choir would have "better singers" isn´t really nice. These "worse" singers of the past that were recorded for Symphonic Choirs were part of a very successful product and helped to generate a big profit for the company. But thank god the recorded singers are far better now. Makes me feel a little bit confused and if I would have been one of these singers from Symphonic Choirs, I would even feel quite disturbed and angry reading that.


----------



## Orchestrata

Here's the default phrase, posted for entertainment purposes only

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/a-new-beginning-mp3.10678/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## Slipperhero

Please somebody tell me East West are being ironic with this new trailer. At first I was sure it was either a mediocre SNL sketch, or a new promo for Toast of London. And sorry... Better Singers? Umm, i think all we need do is load up the Women Vowels Epic Ah patch, crank up CC1 and play a G2 to answer that one. I mean, i'm all for Spitfire's philosophy of "loose" performances, but East West are taking it to a whole new level here.


----------



## utopia

Just skipped through the demos. Wow, this sounds embarrassing. What's up with all the attacks? Also the transitions sound very unnatural to my ears.


----------



## skyforestblaze

That trailer is a prime example of vicarious shame...Michael Bay's movie trailers are Oscar material compared to this.
And notice how the 'actor' just types in the words in normal English instead of Votox...
I can't understand how a company with such a great history can release a product in this way.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Orchestrata said:


> Here's the default phrase, posted for entertainment purposes only
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/a-new-beginning-mp3.10678/][/AUDIOPLUS]



That is pure magic there.  I think there we have the Orang-Utan section available. Nice.


----------



## nas

Just watched the trailer.... they can't be serious.

OUCH that was painful.


----------



## mcalis

Okay, so after all the scorching hate this has received (including some disappointment from yours truly) I feel it's time to play devil's advocate.

First of all, I am not going to defend the legato. It's bad, it really is, I can't imagine how anyone at EW sincerely thought it was good. I mean... legato notes are supposed to sound _connected _and this doesn't sound connected at all.

The claim that you can have the choir sing anything you type in is, of course, complete bollocks, but we all _knew_ that, didn't we? I mean, even if you didn't think so when the announcement was first made, some alarm bells should have gone off when the total size of 59GB for diamond and 8GB for gold was announced. Unless they had some kind of alien compression algorithm, there's just no way you can fit the enormous range and diversity of a full choir in just 8GB.

That said, the _tone _can't be argued with. The demos on the EW site do not do this product justice _at all_. For a real representation of the tone, go watch Nick Phoenix's tutorial and skip to the last minute or so and hear what it really sounds like (without the washiness that plagues the demos).

I'm currently more of a hobbyist so I can afford to fiddle around with the worldbuilder for far too much time. It's not like I am getting paid anyway . Just like with Symphonic Choirs, you can actually get really good results if you're willing to mess around with it. For working composers this is unlikely to be a viable option, but I just want to emphasize that the WB can achieve good results. HWC is not revolutionary, but it _is_ a step or two up from SC, especially in having a far wider dynamic range (though I really wish they'd included a P or PP layer). The mic positions offer good variety too (ignore their VR buzzword marketing, it's just a mic position, and a good one at that).

Another thing in HWC's defense: some of EW's earlier products simply have a steep(er) learning curve than other products. I kid you not when I say that I feel I've only recently mastered Hollywood Strings, which I've been using over a year now. Point being: I think it's a little too soon to really judge this product, as people are just getting their hands on it. I realize that I was quick to judge too, but that was more in relation to the demos, so I don't feel too hypocritical 

The area I feel HWC shines is in medium-fast to slow sustained chords. I doubt you'll be able to discern what the choir is singing, but frankly that's a problem with every choir library (and with some RL choirs too, lol).

It also has to be said that, since I have the EW subscription, I am getting _more_ value than what I bargained for. This doesn't exclude the product from criticism, but you won't hear me complain about getting more products at no additional monthly expenditure.

*EDIT:* another area I've been meaning to give EW credit for is that, as far as I can tell, all their Hollywood libraries are half-tone sampled, not whole-tone. It's actually rather surprising how many libraries these days do only half the sampling work by doing whole-tone sampling, or sometimes even tri-tone sampling and rely on pitch shifting to get the unsampled notes (Spitfire being a serious offender here. I think all their products are whole tone sampled which makes the $ you pay per sample even higher xD).

Is anyone going to notice it? Maybe not, but I just don't like pitch shifting trickery


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

mcalis said:


> Okay, so after all the scorching hate this has received (including some disappointment from yours truly) I feel it's time to play devil's advocate.
> 
> First of all, I am not going to defend the legato. It's bad, it really is, I can't imagine how anyone at EW sincerely thought it was good. I mean... legato notes are supposed to sound _connected _and this doesn't sound connected at all.
> 
> The claim that you can have the choir sing anything you type in is, of course, complete bollocks, but we all _knew_ that, didn't we? I mean, even if you didn't think so when the announcement was first made, some alarm bells should have gone off when the total size of 59GB for diamond and 8GB for gold was announced. Unless they had some kind of alien compression algorithm, there's just no way you can fit the enormous range and diversity of a full choir in just 8GB.
> 
> That said, the _tone _can't be argued with. The demos on the EW site do not do this product justice _at all_. For a real representation of the tone, go watch Nick Phoenix's tutorial and skip to the last minute or so and hear what it really sounds like (without the washiness that plagues the demos).
> 
> I'm currently more of a hobbyist so I can afford to fiddle around with the worldbuilder for far too much time. It's not like I am getting paid anyway . Just like with Symphonic Choirs, you can actually get really good results if you're willing to mess around with it. For working composers this is unlikely to be a viable option, but I just want to emphasize that the WB can achieve good results. HWC is not revolutionary, but it _is_ a step or two up from SC, especially in having a far wider dynamic range (though I really wish they'd included a P or PP layer). The mic positions over good variety too (ignore their VR buzzword marketing, it's just a mic position, and a good one at that).
> 
> Another thing in HWC's defense: some of EW's earlier products simply have a steep(er) learning curve than other products. I kid you not when I say that I feel I've only recently mastered Hollywood Strings, which I've been using over a year now. Point being: I think it's a little too soon to really judge this product, as people are just getting their hands on it. I realize that I was quick to judge too, but that was more in relation to the demos, so I don't feel too hypocritical
> 
> The area I feel HWC shines is in medium-fast to slow sustained chords. I doubt you'll be able to discern what the choir is singing, but frankly that's a problem with every choir library (and with some RL choirs too, lol).
> 
> It also has to be said that, since I have the EW subscription, I am getting _more_ value than what I bargained for. This doesn't exclude the product from criticism, but you won't hear me complain about getting more products at no additional monthly expenditure.
> 
> *EDIT:* another area I've been meaning to give EW credit for is that, as far as I can tell, all their Hollywood libraries are half-tone sampled, not whole-tone. It's actually rather surprising how many libraries these days do only half the sampling work by doing whole-tone sampling, or sometimes even tri-tone sampling and rely on pitch shifting to get the unsampled notes (Spitfire being a serious offender here. I think all their products are whole tone sampled which makes the $ you pay per sample even higher xD).
> 
> Is anyone going to notice it? Maybe not, but I just don't like pitch shifting trickery



Definitely agreed. I guess the whole hate comes the way how they do their marketing in a very boasting way Plus obviously speaking bad of other sample libraries. If they would not have done that, I would welcome and ignore all the flaws of that choir easily. Because let me make that very straight: Recording human voices and make a virtual singing instrument with them is not easy, was never easy and will never be probably easy. It is just the self righteous strange behaviour of marketing with them. Actually I will avoid buying future products of them because nobody needs to tell me in a video that their product is the best, and other is not. I decide that on my self. I guess that is the whole point.


----------



## Orchestrata

mcalis said:


> Is anyone going to notice it? Maybe not, but I just don't like pitch shifting trickery



It's a fair point, especially if there aren't numerous round robins. If a note has a very prominent defect, and its neighbour shares it, it's frustrating (have this issue in 8Dio's 8W).


----------



## jamwerks

To do a word builder in a believable way, you'd really have to record several hundred phonemes. There are so many possibilities.


----------



## kimarnesen

Just a quick little test with "women oh". I'm in a hurry so please excuse me for the unpolished playing and fading.


----------



## John Busby

kimarnesen said:


> Just a quick little test with "women oh". I'm in a hurry so please excuse me for the unpolished playing and fading.



@ 1:11 it sounds like an artifact in one of the samples....

this library man... what a tragedy lol


----------



## Guffy

Having only heard Nick Phoenix' walkthrough, i guess i'm the only one that thinks this actually sounds good.
The actual sound and dynamic range looks impressive. 
If that delivers, i can live without orgasmic legatos.
Of course.. i haven't actually played with it myself yet, so i can't really tell, but soon!


----------



## kimarnesen

johnbusbymusic said:


> @ 1:11 it sounds like an artifact in one of the samples....
> 
> this library man... what a tragedy lol



Sorry, that was me, turned down the output now.


----------



## constaneum

I have to admit that the legato doesn't sound good but I think the key selling point of this library is its wordbuilder which is almost capable of singing any words or phrases you've typed. From word building perspective, I'll say it's a good library and it has serves its purpose well as a sample library. If you really want great sounding vocal with extraordinary realism, just hire real choir for that. Samples have limitations for sure. I'm not defending EW or what but I think they've done their best. 

Hollywood Choir has improved a lot in terms of choir clarity compared to symphonic choir. I can hardly hear what's being pronounced in symphonic choir. At least Hollywood Choir is much better.

However, I'm a bit disappointed with their walk through videos. I was expecting a more thorough walk through. For someone who never uses symphonic choir before, there are lots of things I'm curious. Such as:-

1) are the words or phrases assignable to keyswitches?
2) if i have a long phrases like "Abcde...fghi...jlm...op", how do I get the choir to sing fghi twice before going to the next word ? It's just like a song.....u start with verse, then chorus or even bridge but if I after chorus, I wanna highlight chorus again before getting into outro, how do I do that ?
3) how do u assign each vowels or alphabets to be 1/2 note, 1/8 note or full note like what u can do with Dominus or even Wotan or Freyja? Is that done by doing the time adjustment as shown in the walk through ?


----------



## Dominik Raab

I'm a bit baffled here. Not trying to defend East West against appropriate criticism, and the product certainly isn't perfect, but some of the audio examples in this thread were apparently made to sound as bad as possible to jump on the hate bandwagon. I'm not pointing names and calling fingers (or the other way around, who knows?). I'm in no way the best composer (or VST expert) out there, and I just fiddled around with it for a few minutes so far, but seriously, nothing I've done in WordBuilder or with legato patches was in *any* way as bad as the demos here.

This library requires some fiddling, micro-editing of phonemes and syllables and (hold on to your desks, this is going to be shocking) might even require you to read the manual (OH MY GOD!) which offers hints on how to improve your results. It's not a plug-and-play, instantly-great magic wand, and it certainly has its weak points, but if you give it some thought and approach it in an unbiased way, the results are more than decent.

Funnily enough, when libraries from other developers require some editing, CC riding and tinkering, that doesn't seem to be a problem for folks here. But the fact that Hollywood Choirs doesn't blow you away after hitting a few random keys is somehow shocking. I knew there was a certain anti-EW stance prevalent on this forum, but *wow.
*
True, the marketing makes it sound like the best thing since sliced bread and Betty White (who is actually older than sliced bread, who knew?), and the trailer ... again: *wow. *The discrepancy between marketing speak (which, let's be fair, isn't an EW-exclusive phenomenon) and the real product isn't as huge as people are pretending here. I'm not advocating sweeping real problems under the rug, but all potential buyers (or tryers, one month of CC is quite affordable) should be aware that the audio demos here have been created by normal users just a few hours after the library came out in the best case and, in the worst, by people jumping on a bandwagon. Not saying anyone's trying to make the library look (and sound) bad, but I, for one, have not achieved results as staggeringly bad as the demos here. And again: I'm not an expert. If I can do it...


----------



## Dominik Raab

constaneum said:


> 1) are the words or phrases assignable to keyswitches?
> 2) if i have a long phrases like "Abcde...fghi...jlm...op", how do I get the choir to sing fghi twice before going to the next word ? It's just like a song.....u start with verse, then chorus or even bridge but if I after chorus, I wanna highlight chorus again before getting into outro, how do I do that ?
> 3) how do u assign each vowels or alphabets to be 1/2 note, 1/8 note or full note like what u can do with Dominus or even Wotan or Freyja? Is that done by doing the time adjustment as shown in the walk through ?



1) Nope. Every time you hit a new note, WordBuilder will sing the next word in chronological order.

2) If the choir is supposed to sing something twice, you type it twice. See my answer to 1).

3) High velocity results in a staccato onset, and there's a symbol (>) for staccato. Other than that, you can play around with the relative length of individual phonemes in relation to each other in the WordBuilder interface. Also keep in mind that some parts of a syllable get triggered when the not ends. Example: "reEn" (rain). You press and hold your note(s), and "re" start's playing. The "e" is held. When you let go, "En" plays (sounding like the "-ain" in "rain").


----------



## sin(x)

SoundChris said:


> And just before I forget it: to advertize a product by saying this new choir would have "better singers" isn´t really nice. These "worse" singers of the past that were recorded for Symphonic Choirs were part of a very successful product and helped to generate a big profit for the company. But thank god the recorded singers are far better now. Makes me feel a little bit confused and if I would have been one of these singers from Symphonic Choirs, I would even feel quite disturbed and angry reading that.



Couldn't agree more. Think of how you'd feel if a client of yours gave you the boot mid-show and advertised new episodes as “now with a better composer”. LA-style blowhard marketing is obnoxious enough already, but throwing former collaborators under the bus to score a cheap bullet point is really low.


----------



## Ashermusic

So glad that I no longer work for EW and therefore don't have to respond to some of the over the top, nasty and frankly silly comments.

I will be reviewing it for AskAudio but spoiler alert: I don't have every choir in the marketplace, but I have several of the popular choirs, and when I go from one to the other Hollywood Choirs just sounds like it was recorded better, more high fidelity somehow.


----------



## Daniel James

The choir sounds almost identical to the old library to me in terms of tone. And the wordbuilder on it was always great fun, but the technology of actual transitions between phrases has moved on and if the user examples of it here are anything to go by its still stuck in the techniques of yesterday. Would probably sound better in a mix where it wasnt being pushed to the front, but out front...or worse...on its own, it just doesnt compete IMO.

-DJ


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Ashermusic said:


> So glad that I no longer work for EW and therefore don't have to respond to some of the over the top, nasty and frankly silly comments.
> 
> I will be reviewing it for AskAudio but spoiler alert: I don't have every choir in the marketplace, but I have several of the popular choirs, and when I go from one to the other Hollywood Choirs just sounds like it was recorded better, more high fidelity somehow.



Jay, I won´t argue that the sample content is not bad at all, but the scripting seems really a huge point here what takes out a lot of the realism and I even found the examples in the worldbuilder quite not well, sometimes even a bit laughable. I wrote some nasty words because a developer who boast himself over others but can´t even proove in his previews that his big mouth attitude is at least backing up a high quality product is a bit questionable, isn´t it? Overall even if the samples are "better recorded" (whatever that means by your standards) it doesn´t make a good final product. And nothing what I heard really was "magic" and "better" and "revulotionary" and ...blabla..you know why I like small developers like Jasper Blunk, Fluffy Audio, and many more? They do great products and probably much better what they think they are. Modesty was never a strong point of EW, I guess? I mean you worked for them, you should know that.


----------



## Ashermusic

Daniel James said:


> The choir sounds almost identical to the old library to me in terms of tone. And the wordbuilder on it was always great fun, but the technology of actual transitions between phrases has moved on and if the user examples of it here are anything to go by its still stuck in the techniques of yesterday. Would probably sound better in a mix where it wasnt being pushed to the front, but out front...or worse...on its own, it just doesnt compete IMO.
> 
> -DJ



I disagree with the tone comment totally. To my ears they sound quite different, though both have a lovely tone, and for me, tone is always king. And I think that the techniques are what Nick likes for his composing, and he is a pretty, pretty, good and successful composer. And they are consistent with the rest of the Hollywood Series, which is important.

But you are entitled to disagree.

And Alexander, as you probably know, I don't give a big rat's hiney about chasing the whole realism thing. If it sounds good to my ears when I am composing with it so that I feel inspired to write, that is what I care about.


----------



## constaneum

Ashermusic said:


> I disagree with the tone comment totally. To my ears they sound quite different, though both have a lovely tone, and for me, tone is always king. And I think that the techniques are what Nick likes for his composing, and he is a pretty, pretty, good and successful composer. And they are consistent with the rest of the Hollywood Series, which is important.
> 
> But you are entitled to disagree.
> 
> And Alexander, as you probably know, I don't give a big rat's hiney about chasing the whole realism thing. If it sounds good to my ears when I am composing with it so that I feel inspired to write, that is what I care about.



Chasing the whole realism thing....that's exactly what I thought too!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

From the EW site: "WordBuilder allows the composer to type in any word or phrase and have it sung by the choir"

From what I saw in the video tutorial, it's still a lot like the old WB....you still need to fart around with certain phonetics, symbols, etc. That's the main reason I never bothered with it (stuck to the pre-made phrases). I'm sure it's brilliant, but not as simple as it's made out to be from what I can see.


----------



## jamwerks

kimarnesen said:


> Just a quick little test with "women oh". I'm in a hurry so please excuse me for the unpolished playing and fading


Not commenting on your audio, but posting anything unpolished or done in a rushed way, has no place on this forum imo, and even less so in a thread treating the quality of a new product.

And if people want word-builders, they should expect to have quite a bit of editing to do.


----------



## Puzzlefactory

Just been watching the Nick Phoenix video. Looks pretty good to me.

Too expensive, but pretty good.

Not sure all the hate is justified.


----------



## Daniel James

Ashermusic said:


> I disagree with the tone comment totally. To my ears they sound quite different, though both have a lovely tone, and for me, tone is always king. And I think that the techniques are what Nick likes for his composing, and he is a pretty, pretty, good and successful composer. And they are consistent with the rest of the Hollywood Series, which is important.
> 
> But you are entitled to disagree.
> 
> And Alexander, as you probably know, I don't give a big rat's hiney about chasing the whole realism thing. If it sounds good to my ears when I am composing with it so that I feel inspired to write, that is what I care about.



Ok then we disagree on the tone. 

Also its totally up to the developer how they make their library...but how successful or good they are as a composer doesnt change the fact that based on the audio demos I have heard thus far, this library sounds like it is already a few years out of date.

-DJ


----------



## nas

While listening to online demos and reviews alone without actually having tried out a library shouldn't necessarily be the final conclusion, one should consider that most of these online demos from the manufacturers are usually made to show the product in the best possible light. Compositions that may highlight the library's strength and hide weakness are chosen. High quality orchestration technique and painstaking MIDI programming and mixing are all employed by very skilled people... in essence you are presented with a sample of the library at its best. In reality the library may live up to much of this or may prove to be difficult or limited in some capacity - and there is no perfect library that can do it all. Of course there is room for improvement in updates, bug fixes, and newer versions.

With this in mind, and listening to the demos on the site and samples presented here, I couldn't help feeling that this library simply does not live up to quite the same standard as some of the other excellent libraries by EW - of which I own several. I am not impressed with what I've heard so far and to me it does not sound that realistic for an"up front" presentation. There seem to be too many artifacts in the transitions and some of the samples having an overly synthetic quality at their higher respective registers (yet still within the acceptable _singing _ranges of SATB parts). Comparing this library to some of the others in the current market I feel there are much better offerings for those focused on the word building, smooth legato transition style of writing. Fluffy Audio's Dominus choir immediately comes to mind as the latest offering that has set a new standard in realism for what it is focused on stylistically... at least to my ears.

Maybe things will improve with better scripting and updates down the line, but for now from what I've heard so far, it doesn't quite do it for me.

Just my 2 cents of course - YMMV.


----------



## TintoL

The trailer... Ohhh, the trailer.... It's just painful to see it. It's not even the product. I am sure is good enough for a full tutti trailer ensemble. But, the trailer man.... THE TRAILER.... It's just in a different league.... so amateur, over blown and acted. It's so over the top, that it shows the weakness of the contrast between the choir average sound and the over exaggerated voice over and comments.....

It's the trailer what is destroying their reputation, not the product. If they have sold the product as an honest update to the original one without making such a pathetic trailer, it would be fine.

How can a company do this to themselves.....

I honestly think is decent as an update. But, still suffers from the same abrupt rough connection between consonants.
It definitely doesn't stands beside the same legato options currently in the market. IMHO


----------



## ysnyvz

TintoL said:


> How can a company do this to themselves.....


I'm guessing they're wearing virtual reality headsets, so they see things differently.


----------



## TintoL

ysnyvz said:


> I'm guessing they're wearing virtual reality headsets, so they see things differently.



That's the only way it would make sense that trailer.


----------



## Daniel James

Puzzlefactory said:


> Just been watching the Nick Phoenix video. Looks pretty good to me.
> 
> Too expensive, but pretty good.
> 
> Not sure all the hate is justified.



Criticism isn't hate. I think collectively more people need to understand that.

-DJ


----------



## kimarnesen

jamwerks said:


> Not commenting on your audio, but posting anything unpolished or done in a rushed way, has no place on this forum imo, and even less so in a thread treating the quality of a new product.
> 
> And if people want word-builders, they should expect to have quite a bit of editing to do.



Was this too unpolished? Showing things you can do very quickly is good imo, thinking of deadlines etc.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

I guess puzzlefactory referred more to me. But I don´t hate HWC at all..my comment had used some explicit language, but in the core of argumentation I don´t think that it was hate. I actually will rewatch the trailer after I am buzzed from beers and see what effect has it on me then. I think I need this 3d Helmet because I am starting to feel that my compositions will turn into magic hopefully after I got this fancy penis enhancement.


----------



## Audio Birdi

Providing feedback on something that may be incorrect or need improving is always useful to library developers. The legato transitions feel more like sustains with bumpy transitions, a lot like how HW Woodwinds was when it came out, they did get better with updates but more tweaking was needed frustratingly. The simulated legato script appeared to work better than the legato patches in all honesty.

I'm looking forward to video reviews of HW Choirs from various resources, as the overview video from Nick seemed to focus more on the wordbuilder and didn't play through the different patches and show off the choir's individual areas as much, since there are a lot more patches in the manual, which weren't even touched. Perhaps David Earl is creating a more extensive overview video to show off patches. 

Either way, there seems to be room for improvement, which hopefully will happen. EW are not ones to update libraries too much though. The library so far is an improvement I feel in terms of dynamic range and word-builder functionality, but legato transitions are similar / the same as how the HW Woodwinds and HW Solo Series instruments were, which definitely needed improving.


----------



## JohnG

Most new libraries are fairly complex, with multiple mic positions and other important "infrastructure" (I'm thinking for example of Spitfire's HZ percussion) that can radically alter the sound. Sometimes it takes me a week or more to uncover important features like that, and so I am quite skeptical of anyone who condemns a library within a day or so of its release. Some of these comments come across as glib and superficial, some oddly full of anger. 

Like many here, I already have multiple string / choir / brass / winds / percussion / fx / etc. libraries. Consequently, the second level, what's under the hood (bonnet), matters more to me now than the first demo I hear.

So I will wait a little to see what's up with this or any library. East West have produced a lot of excellent libraries and, from my perspective, not too many duds that I have bought. That's a much better track record than some others, and I'm willing to give them a healthy benefit of the doubt in consequence.

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


----------



## zolhof

Ashermusic said:


> I disagree with the tone comment totally. To my ears they sound quite different, though both have a lovely tone, and for me, tone is always king. And I think that the techniques are what Nick likes for his composing, and he is a pretty, pretty, good and successful composer. And they are consistent with the rest of the Hollywood Series, which is important.
> 
> But you are entitled to disagree.
> 
> And Alexander, as you probably know, I don't give a big rat's hiney about chasing the whole realism thing. If it sounds good to my ears when I am composing with it so that I feel inspired to write, that is what I care about.



Hi Jay, it must feel quite liberating to not have to worry about that, but for most (if not all) working composers, realism is the norm nowadays. Not everyone can afford a real choir and orchestra, so sample libraries are the way to go. And if you do have the budget, directors and producers expect to hear a fairly realistic mock-up of what hopefully will be better performed by an orchestra. But don’t take my word for it, here are two successful composers talking about it:


10:54



4:26



The role of a sample library goes far beyond the inspiration thing. That’s why some folks feel underwhelmed and emotional when EastWest plays the “mine is bigger than yours” game. It’s also hard to manage expectations when the trailer throws random buff torsos, pirate ships, a shot of the Universe and a fucking T-Rex in a span of 30 seconds.


----------



## ricoderks

I know there is a lot going on right now here on this particular topic. However, despite all the criticism I wanted to give the library a go... I really do think you can achieve pretty okay legato sounds with the legato patches. It seems some of you tried to enable the "other" script or the "legato" button. When I looked at the walk through it came to my attention all those buttons were off. Just play those legato lines by simple playing it legato. Result layered with some CSS and Soaring Strings:



Also tried the wordbuilder. I don't think its that bad. Of course it is not magical at all and you cant expect really clear pronunciation. My point of view is that there is way too much negativity about this release. People seem to rush through the patches and form a opinion in about an hour without truly knowing what the library can do.

Rico


----------



## Simon Ravn

Orchestrata said:


> Here's the default phrase, posted for entertainment purposes only
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/a-new-beginning-mp3.10678/][/AUDIOPLUS]



Oh my goodness.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Simon Ravn said:


> Oh my goodness. I'll pass...



Good Lord people, this is crazy. Someone posts a quick snippit and you're judging the whole library based on that?? If someone posted an out-of-the-box demo from Hollywood Strings after owning it for five minutes (without actually learning how to play it), would you buy it? Probably not. Let's give it an honest chance and see how it progresses. My only complaint thus far is the price and WB itself, but I will buy it on sale at some point. Do the demos and trailer suck? IMO, absolutely, but I never let the demos do the talking unless they are from a developer I do not know yet. This is EW afterall...just sayin'...


----------



## chrisphan

kimarnesen said:


> Was this too unpolished? Showing things you can do very quickly is good imo, thinking of deadlines etc.


Doesn't apply to products you're not fully adapted to yet


----------



## goblin

No close mics with any of the composercloud options?


----------



## ricoderks

No, the surrounds in this case


----------



## axb312

Yikes. Examples up above sound horrible and dated AF. Still hunting for that perfect choir...:(


----------



## Dominik Raab

goblin said:


> No close mics with any of the composercloud options?



ComposerCloud Plus has the Diamond edition, including all the microphones.



Daniel James said:


> Criticism isn't hate. I think collectively more people need to understand that.
> 
> -DJ



Since I'm one of the proponents of Hollywood Choirs, as it seems, let me respond to that. I absolutely agree with you - but I think we're seeing both in this thread. There was one person telling EW to "f*** you," and while I do love to swear in a lot of contexts (ask my dad, he's gonna kill me one day and be right to do it!), delivering constructive criticism isn't one of those contexts. So we've got at least one example of what I'd call inappropriate hate in here. I'm a horrible EW fanboy, but even I understand that there is valid criticism in this post. I'm sure other people know that too and are not referring to that kind of criticism when they speak of "hate."


----------



## Dominik Raab

axb312 said:


> Yikes. Examples up above sound horrible and dated AF. Still hunting for that perfect choir...:(



They're not representative of my experience with out-of-the-box Hollywood Choirs, if that helps. Some of those examples, as I said before, do sound horrible - but that says more about a potentially flawed installation or the user behind them than about the library itself. My personal experience with the library is comparable to Nick Phoenix's tutorial video and the examples in it. Strongly recommend watching that and, of course, trying the library yourself.


----------



## goblin

Dominik Raab said:


> ComposerCloud Plus has the Diamond edition, including all the microphones.


great, didn't see this option at first.


----------



## axb312

Dominik Raab said:


> They're not representative of my experience with out-of-the-box Hollywood Choirs, if that helps. Some of those examples, as I said before, do sound horrible - but that says more about a potentially flawed installation or the user behind them than about the library itself. My personal experience with the library is comparable to Nick Phoenix's tutorial video and the examples in it. Strongly recommend watching that and, of course, trying the library yourself.



Today, a great library needs to be inherently playable (for all) and sound great out of the box. Eg. Cinematic studio strings. 

I mean, I'd rather avoid wasting time on technical f**kery and get straight down to the music. As you say though, I'll wait for some more audio demos and reviews to come out....


----------



## Dominik Raab

axb312 said:


> Today, a great library needs to be inherently playable (for all) and sound great out of the box. Eg. Cinematic studio strings.



I definitely understand why that would be someone's priority. Music isn't my living, and I love tinkering, so I actually prefer libraries with a learning curve. To each their own, I guess.


----------



## Zhao Shen

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> Oh I have read that
> But (this is only opinion) this thread about that issue shows me that there are much deeper issues at EW than sample developing
> 
> I don’t know who was in the right with the legal stuff that happened with QL, but suing here and there just serves to confirm profit profit profit as a focus for me :(



I think it's pretty telling that since TJ and Nick stepped off, EastWest has never produced a well-scripted product. Hollywood Percussion is nice because there's minimal scripting involved, but any time EastWest try to put their hat in the ring they get laughed out... and for good reason.


----------



## MarcelM

Dominik Raab said:


> I definitely understand why that would be someone's priority. Music isn't my living, and I love tinkering, so I actually prefer libraries with a learning curve. To each their own, I guess.



its not only about the learning curve, its about realism. give some the hollywood orchestra and spitfire sso. you will get better results with spitfire sso and also it needs less programming compared to the hollywood orchestra (which can sound good but needs more programming).

same goes for strings. play css out of the box and then hollywood strings. css wins!

iam sure there are better choirs coming out soon...


----------



## Mucusman

Daniel James said:


> this library sounds like it is already a few years out of date



Well, EW has said that this has been nine years in the making...


----------



## Orchestrata

Wolfie2112 said:


> Good Lord people, this is crazy. Someone posts a quick snippit and you're judging the whole library based on that?? If someone posted an out-of-the-box demo from Hollywood Strings after owning it for five minutes (without actually learning how to play it), would you buy it? Probably not. Let's give it an honest chance and see how it progresses. My only complaint thus far is the price and WB itself, but I will buy it on sale at some point. Do the demos and trailer suck? IMO, absolutely, but I never let the demos do the talking unless they are from a developer I do not know yet. This is EW afterall...just sayin'...



That was my snippet, but I totally agree; I thought the little "For entertainment purposes only" disclaimer would suffice to say that this was just a funny thing that happened while playing with it, and not somehow a representative review of the whole product (it had me in stitches, and I thought someone else might get a laugh out of it). But I do apologize; in retrospect I should probably have held off on posting it, when so many people were looking for independent clips to help them decide whether or not to purchase (I'm on CC, so didn't consider the hefty price tag). FWIW I've been having fun with the choir; mixed results, some bad, some lovely, but it's early days yet. 

I'm very much looking forward to some in-depth walkthroughs and proper demos


----------



## Simon Ravn

Wolfie2112 said:


> Good Lord people, this is crazy. Someone posts a quick snippit and you're judging the whole library based on that?? If someone posted an out-of-the-box demo from Hollywood Strings after owning it for five minutes (without actually learning how to play it), would you buy it? Probably not. Let's give it an honest chance and see how it progresses. My only complaint thus far is the price and WB itself, but I will buy it on sale at some point. Do the demos and trailer suck? IMO, absolutely, but I never let the demos do the talking unless they are from a developer I do not know yet. This is EW afterall...just sayin'...



The problem with this is that it highlights some really evident scooping issues in the recorded notes. Those should have been corrected during recording and not made it to the final product.


----------



## Simon Ravn

Dominik Raab said:


> They're not representative of my experience with out-of-the-box Hollywood Choirs, if that helps. Some of those examples, as I said before, do sound horrible - but that says more about a potentially flawed installation or the user behind them than about the library itself. My personal experience with the library is comparable to Nick Phoenix's tutorial video and the examples in it. Strongly recommend watching that and, of course, trying the library yourself.



Please enlighten me on how to install a choir library in such a flawed way that it causes the singers to scoop on the notes.


----------



## Dominik Raab

*IMPORTANT
*
For those of you who have the Gold version (GoldX apparently not affected, since I don't have that): an update for HC Gold is available now on the Installation Center, and it fixes a problem with the Mens WB patch that could be responsible for some of the problems that are being discussed here.


----------



## Dominik Raab

Simon Ravn said:


> Please enlighten me on how to install a choir library in such a flawed way that it causes the singers to scoop on the notes.



System incompatibility? Weird hiccough? Damned if I know every single thing that can go wrong on a computer. I'm glad I know how to keep mine from exploding. The fact is, my installation doesn't do many of the things highlighted here. Not saying those things don't exist - just saying they're not happening for me, which suggests some kind of error that can hopefully be fixed.


----------



## SoundChris

Well if that product was 9 years in the making i really dont understand what happened during all the time. Btw i do NOT think that the learning curve is the problem. The first choir ever that i had was Symphonic Choirs and I worked A LOT (!) with the wordbuilder. I claim that i can handle it pretty decent. But listening to the demos and also the tutorial video i just see / hear issues which already have been there 9 years ago. Like someone posted above: If this would have been a free / affordable update or upgrade of Symphonic Choirs (and tbh: in my eyes it just isnt more - sorry) i would have been ok with it. But telling that this is the new benchmark for virutal choirs is far over the top. This unfortunately isnt the case. I really wished this would be because I was hoping so much the successor product would be as groundbreaking as SC was 9 years ago. So here is my question: If there is just such a little improvement - what did they do during all these 9 years? 9 Years ago companies like fluffy audio, 8dio, cinesamples, orchestral tools, performance samples, strezov and almost any other developers didnt even exist yet. So how can it be that you are the company that always set new standards and totally dominated the market and a few years later so many completely new companies produce libraries that just obviously sound stronger, are more playable and easy to work with plus sound great out of the box? Has it got to do that they never really made the step to the play engine? Why is it that all the successful companies these days (again: these didnt even exist years ago) often offer such fantastic kontakt scripting? Is it a problem with the engine itself, lacking attitude, other priorities? I really dont mean this to be a hate comment. Even this really annoys me a lot i am a huge fan of hollywood orchestra (even its not that playable, but the sound is just strong) and especially pianos platinum and spaces. So i was honestly hoping this would turn out as a success. And no matter if you say "the recordings are what matters" or "learning curve" has to be taken serious - or just be it that you think "realism isnt that necessary": Already after watching the tutorial video it was obvious for me that this definitely is not a big step in the history of choir sampling. It stil can be used in a few situations. But in my own subjective view most of the other choirs out there these days just bring better results. But again: Preferrences are different. Nevertheless: Some of the problems with the library at least seem serious from what i have seen so far . . .


----------



## Simon Ravn

Dominik Raab said:


> System incompatibility? Weird hiccough? Damned if I know every single thing that can go wrong on a computer. I'm glad I know how to keep mine from exploding. The fact is, my installation doesn't do many of the things highlighted here. Not saying those things don't exist - just saying they're not happening for me, which suggests some kind of error that can hopefully be fixed.



I know enough about computers and installation (=copying files from one place to another basically) to know that this can't cause these things. Either the samples plays or they don't. Or if it was a script/patch bug (in the original product), it wouldn't be an installation issue. If installations go wrong (=files missing), the samples won't play, maybe the patches won't even load or give you a warning. But certainly scooping isn't an installation issue.


----------



## Ashermusic

Zhao Shen said:


> I think it's pretty telling that since TJ and Nick stepped off, EastWest has never produced a well-scripted product. Hollywood Percussion is nice because there's minimal scripting involved, but any time EastWest try to put their hat in the ring they get laughed out... and for good reason.



Nick was totally involved in the creation of Hollywood Choirs. So if you don't like it, it has nothing to do with that.


----------



## Ashermusic

zolhof said:


> Hi Jay, it must feel quite liberating to not have to worry about that, but for most (if not all) working composers, realism is the norm nowadays. Not everyone can afford a real choir and orchestra, so sample libraries are the way to go. And if you do have the budget, directors and producers expect to hear a fairly realistic mock-up of what hopefully will be better performed by an orchestra. But don’t take my word for it, here are two successful composers talking about it:
> 
> 
> 10:54
> 
> 
> 
> 4:26
> 
> 
> 
> The role of a sample library goes far beyond the inspiration thing. That’s why some folks feel underwhelmed and emotional when EastWest plays the “mine is bigger than yours” game. It’s also hard to manage expectations when the trailer throws random buff torsos, pirate ships, a shot of the Universe and a fucking T-Rex in a span of 30 seconds.




There is wanting it to sound "fairly realistic" and then there is the pursuit of hyper reality uber alles that has become the norm on forums. I embrace the former, choose to reject the latter. If they want that, they should indeed hire someone else.


----------



## TimCox

Orchestrata said:


> "Improved sound design options!"
> [T-Rex Roars]
> "And virtual reality!"
> [Puts on headset]
> 
> [Also, sports cars for some reason]
> 
> Sigh.



PREEEPARE FOR BATOLE!


----------



## thov72

I like the wordbuilder. ok, legato is not the best...


----------



## mcalis

Heroix said:


> its not only about the learning curve, its about realism. give some the hollywood orchestra and spitfire sso. you will get better results with spitfire sso and also it needs less programming compared to the hollywood orchestra (which can sound good but needs more programming).
> 
> same goes for strings. play css out of the box and then hollywood strings. css wins!
> 
> iam sure there are better choirs coming out soon...


Don't want to derail this thread too much, but it's far too easy to say that "you will get better results with spitfire sso". There are three major factors you're failing to take into account. #1 the mockup skills of the composer, #2 the type of music you're writing (SSO isn't all that great at doing fast stuff. It's beautiful on slow moving, textural things thought) and last but not least, #3 mixing versatility. SSO has room baked in pretty hard and is dripping wet with reverb. I find HWO much more flexible in that regard (because it's much, much drier).

Even your comparison between CSS and HWS isn't entirely correct. CSS misses _three _things that HWS has: finger position (on which string the note is played), vibrato control (ok, CSS has _some _vibrato control, but it ain't smooth), bow change legato. Don't get me wrong, CSS's legato is unbeatable, but HWS is more versatile and its legato is pretty great too!

You're free to dislike HWC, but don't touch my babies HWS and HWB!  (I kid, of course. To each his own!)


----------



## Puzzlefactory

Isn’t the trailer just a “tongue in cheek/spoof”? 

That’s how it seemed to me.

Like an “honest trailers” version of an advert...


----------



## mcalis

Puzzlefactory said:


> Isn’t the trailer just a “tongue in cheek/spoof”?
> 
> That’s how it seemed to me.
> 
> Like an “honest trailers” version of an advert...


I am not sure where I read it, but someone else seemed to think this too. Honestly... I _very_ much doubt it. It seemed to me like they were dead serious, and failing. The trailer is a part of HWC history that I can't really defend, it was absolutely horrid.


----------



## Dominik Raab

TimCox said:


> PREEEPARE FOR BATOLE!



"Prepare your butthole?"
That's a bit crass for a virtual instrument trailer...


----------



## TintoL

THE TRAILER MAN.... EW, GUYS... TAKE IT OFF.... Do yourselves a favor... TAKE IT OFF. It's hurting you in your bones.

I have hs a hb they are great. Do it for them... TAKE IT OFF....


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

mcalis said:


> ..(SSO isn't all that great at doing fast stuff. It's beautiful on slow moving, textural things thought)...



I know this thread is about HWC talking, but I am wondering how somebody come to such in my opinon wrong conclusion. I wrote many pieces with the whole SSO and they range from slow to very very fast stuff. And they do imo great at every pace at almost every dynamic.

Anyways back to the HWC: Everybody who likes their new HWC is totally ok to like it. I know I used some harsh words, but I am no EW Hater at all. I truely respect their efforts from the past. I believe with that trailer that they trying to tailor the product more to mainstream kids and I guess that brings more money into the pocket. We are living in mousehead composer times where you need that kind of advertising at it seems.


----------



## John Busby

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> efforts from the past.


imo this is the issue, they're still feeding off the success of the past
ever since CC went live EW have literally given us nothing new that's been worth any fuss


----------



## Audio Birdi

johnbusbymusic said:


> imo this is the issue, they're still feeding off the success of the past
> ever since CC went live EW have literally given us nothing new that's been worth any fuss


It feels they're rushing libraries in a sense because of CC being a subscription based service, and users may feel that at least a product or 2 need to come out to be worth it. So the last 2 / 3 hollywood series instruments have suffered in quality compared to HB and HS as a result.


----------



## camelot

Well, what I hear from the overview done by Nick Phoenix and ricoderks did not sound so terribly bad as one might get the impression from reading the thread. However, I didn't noticed so much improvement over the old one. But it has been a long time since I used SymphonicChoirs. I have to test it again. But everyone with CC can do this and verify the amount of improvement. The Men legato ohs sound particularly terrible to me, in the video as well as in the composition given above. I am sorry to say that. Things like the solo voices from VSL are so much better in comparison, that this does not feel like an up-to-date choir library at all. 

I never had much trouble using the old world builder and the votox language as I picked it up quickly. So, I do not have a problem using it again if I want and need to. But I was really interested to see the improvements made on this nevertheless, which seems like none unfortunately.

I would assume, if you have Voxos2 and the old SC, there is nothing to gain from HWC.

Maybe this trailer was the idea of some external commercial media guy. It does certainly not feel like an advertisement for a professional-level choir library.


----------



## curtisschweitzer

HC seems to follow the usual EW formula, with samples that are recorded in much broader, more "classic" style. Like Symphonic Choirs before it, the choral samples are of a very large ensemble that has a full sound as is necessary when paired with large, modern orchestra. (EDIT: I originally stated here that there was a lot of vibrato in the samples-- that isn't the case, as I've found they are very straight tone, but with a very "large-ensemble" ala Hollywood Strings) The sound very similar to Symphonic Choirs, but they seem to be largely cleaner and, thus far, after an afternoon of fiddling with them, I hear a lot of improvements especially when using Word Builder. I rarely used WB in Symphonic Choirs because syllables would often "stick out". Again, it has only been out for a day, but I have not run into this problem using them after a few hours. That's a big improvement to me.

I so far don't love the legato samples, as the transitions seem a little quiet to me, and with no ability to independently adjust them (so far as I can tell), it doesn't sound dramatically different than running a sus patch from Symphonic Choirs. The lack of boy choir is also a little disappointing, but I suppose if you're running Composer Cloud you already have the Symphonic Choirs versions that are absolutely gorgeous.

If you're looking for a more modern, Eric Whitacre-sounding library with non-vib samples with a small(er) ensemble, HC isn't for you. If you're looking for something that will blend with HO or other large-scale, classical Hollywood-style "epic" trailers, then it is more on the mark. If you already own Symphonic Choirs and are happy with it, I'd still look into HC, as the headline WordBuilder feature seems to my ears to be improved significantly.

Really, what EW has that I haven't seen done (at least as well), is Word Builder. I have several other choral libraries from the likes of 8Dio, etc., and although I definitely like those better in some contexts, WB is something that no other software that I've run across does as easily or intuitively. WB in Hollywood Choirs seems to be much improved, and I'm looking forward to spending time with it to see what kind of improvements I can make in my MIDI realizations.


----------



## Johann F.

Ok so I spent some solid hours using Hollywood Choirs and it really felt like a repacked release. Not impressed at all. Symphonic Choirs blew me away back in 2005 but not this one. I'm glad Composer Cloud is a thing, otherwise I'd be feeling really stupid. Time to play the waiting game... your move, Spitfire.


----------



## woafmann

I wish I wouldn't have rushed into getting this. I had been so excited about this release, literally checking the SO site EVERY day since August, and seeing a "good price" at B&H. Fearing that the sale would end, I just jumped. 

Downloading Diamond as we speak. At least I got a better deal than EW's offering. Picked it up for $509 all-in.

For choirs, I only have "Cantus" and "Mystica", Bella D's "V Alto", "Vocalisa", and "Venus Women's Choir" so was in need of a larger sound for certain pieces. Maybe I should have gone with Dominus to match up with the Latin phrases with Cantus and Mystica (both excellent libs).

I'm sure I'll still find use for HC, and with the pre-build Latin phrases, I can blend them under Cantus' and Mystica's sweet legato transitions to essentially be a crutch for HC if warranted. Plus, as I already own HO Diamond, at least the room ambiance (in theory) should match up. 

Last year, I was considering "Voices of Prague" as a word-builder solution but held off in hopes that someone would make a better one. I'm still hopeful that HC will fit that bill.


----------



## Johann F.

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Anyways back to the HWC: Everybody who likes their new HWC is totally ok to like it. I know I used some harsh words, but I am no EW Hater at all. I truely respect their efforts from the past. I believe with that trailer that they trying to tailor the product more to mainstream kids and I guess that brings more money into the pocket. We are living in mousehead composer times where you need that kind of advertising at it seems.



So you tell EW to fuck off, call them bullshitters, cock suckers, all sort of degrading adjectives and then say you respect them? HA! Come on you can't seriously tell people to fuck off and then play the just kidding I respect you card later... you know you don't have to buy the darn thing, right? Chill dude...

By the way, I know a lot of 14 year old aspiring composers, or "mousehead wannabe Hansboy" composers, that act way more professional and mature than you here. Being young doesn't mean shit. You should leave your bubble of anger and take a good look at the world around, you'd be surprised at how many young talents are out there!


----------



## ricoderks

camelot said:


> Well, what I hear from the overview done by Nick Phoenix and ricoderks did not sound so terribly bad as one might get the impression from reading the thread. However, I didn't noticed so much improvement over the old one. But it has been a long time since I used SymphonicChoirs. I have to test it again. But everyone with CC can do this and verify the amount of improvement. The Men legato ohs sound particularly terrible to me, in the video as well as in the composition given above. I am sorry to say that. Things like the solo voices from VSL are so much better in comparison, that this does not feel like an up-to-date choir library at all.
> 
> I never had much trouble using the old world builder and the votox language as I picked it up quickly. So, I do not have a problem using it again if I want and need to. But I was really interested to see the improvements made on this nevertheless, which seems like none unfortunately.
> 
> I would assume, if you have Voxos2 and the old SC, there is nothing to gain from HWC.
> 
> Maybe this trailer was the idea of some external commercial media guy. It does certainly not feel like an advertisement for a professional-level choir library.


You dont have to be sorry about that  It just does not sound great. Just wanted to prove a point here. To compare it with earlier 'legato' demos here which just sounded really terrible imo. Doest mean my version sounds fantastic. But I do think it can be usable in context, not in solo if you ask me.

Rico


----------



## Mike Fox

Johann F. said:


> Ok so I spent some solid hours using Hollywood Choirs and it really felt like a repacked release. Not impressed at all. Symphonic Choirs blew me away back in 2005 but not this one. I'm glad Composer Cloud is a thing, otherwise I'd be feeling really stupid. Time to play the waiting game... your move, Spitfire.


Either Spitfire or OT. The choir in Ark1 is still the best sounding choir to my ear, and I feel like that was just a tease of what could be groundbreaking.


----------



## JonSolo

I have hesitated to say anything about this yet.

My first impression, coming from a semi-fanboy, is that it feels like more of the same. I was really hoping for a versatile product. It is an epic choir that, at least from the demos, isn't playing in the same field as current epic choirs...and in this case, that is a bad thing.

Maybe I set my expectations high. Afterall, the Hollywood series can do so much. I am sure the sampling is incredible and took a lot of time. The attention to details are also clearly in place. But it is not a product that I want. It is not new or groundbreaking (which was what the hype wanted us to expect). Maybe the word builder is better. But has it improved in genuine leaps and bounds? Are the samples so far advanced from Symphonic that I should consider trashing their previous offerings? No.

I probably will not buy this product. I too was holding off on other choir products, but no more. Eastwest is a great company. And they make great products. I don't believe this is one of those. And that is just my opinion.


----------



## Daniel James

Ashermusic said:


> There is wanting it to sound "fairly realistic" and then there is the pursuit of hyper reality uber alles that has become the norm on forums. I embrace the former, choose to reject the latter. If they want that, they should indeed hire someone else.



Funny that you say that when it comes to EW, but when performance samples were about to put out their Oceana choir (which aims for playability over uber realism....but did it way better than EW IMO) You had this to say:


> "It is not exactly a secret that I am not a fan of bombastic Epic music. Not that I want to outlaw it, or would not even write it myself if paid to do so, but I am not seeking it out to listen to *nor am I excited about the the creation of libraries for creating it.*



When the first phrase they advertise their library with is "Prepare for battle" while epic shit flys around in the background, I think we can see who its being marketed to. And what kind of music they are trying to push can be done with it.

If you are going to biased at least try not to be _too_ obvious which team you bat for xD

-DJ

As a side note, even though you all know my opinions on the PLAY engine and this library in general, the subscription service is still a really good deal! I may have to jump in for another month just to make the choir sing horrible filthy things back to me XD


----------



## Steve Lum

camelot said:


> I would assume, if you have Voxos2 and the old SC, there is nothing to gain from HWC.



That's me. I gotta say I feel a little stood up cuz I had been refreshing the EWHC threads once a day for forever. I am one whose expectations were too high, more fool me.


----------



## Ashermusic

Daniel James said:


> Funny that you say that when it comes to EW, but when performance samples were about to put out their Oceana choir (which aims for playability over uber realism....but did it way better than EW IMO) You had this to say:
> 
> 
> When the first phrase they advertise their library with is "Prepare for battle" while epic shit flys around in the background, I think we can see who its being marketed to. And what kind of music they are trying to push can be done with it.
> 
> If you are going to biased at least try not to be _too_ obvious which team you bat for xD
> 
> -DJ
> 
> As a side note, even though you all know my opinions on the PLAY engine and this library in general, the subscription service is still a really good deal! I may have to jump in for another month just to make the choir sing horrible filthy things back to me XD



I have not said specifically how I feel about Hollywood Choirs yet, have I? You will have to wait for my review.

And marketing is marketing, I don't go by that, I go by what I hear.


----------



## JeremyWiebe

Glad I wasn't holding by breath for this library. Overall I agree some of the negative reactions have been overstated, but it's hard to say that EW didn't invite this kind of a response after putting out such a mess of a trailer.

Overall the library feels like a half-hearted upgrade to SC, still a valuable library in its own right, but given it's over 10 years old now, one would expect HC to feel like more than just an upgrade.

Anne's demo has a very undefined washiness to the choir samples, which kind of negates the whole point of the word builder. If we can't hear what they're saying what's the point? That seems to me to be the fundamental conceptual problem with this library. It's marketed as the "epic trailer" choir library, in which case, why do we need word builder? Those "repetitive latin phrases" of other developers that they criticize suffice in this genre.

Anne's EW demos are usually a treasure to enjoy. Even her demo for HOW was gorgeous despite that libraries failings. So the fact that her demo comes off as fairly mediocre hear suggests to me that this library is really lacking.

As for the other demo and the trailer demo, they sound very unrealistic to me. And the male legato in the walkthrough sound absolutely terrible.

That said, the Word Builder does sound nice in the walkthrough and seems to improve on SC. And the addition of a main mix is nice (something I wish HO had). But overall there's not enough hear to pique my interest, despite being a satisfied owner of HO and user of Play 5, and certainly not for 600. 

I was planing on getting a month's subscription of ComposerCloud again just to try it out, but I honestly think I'll pass on that too.


----------



## woafmann

Steve Lum said:


> That's me. I gotta say I feel a little stood up cuz I had been refreshing the EWHC threads once a day for forever. I am one whose expectations were too high, more fool me.



Ha! I think I have you beat there friend. Not only had I been visiting SO's HC page EVERY day for months on end, I actually bought the blasted thing today. All that anticipation got the best of me. Now who's more the fool, eh?


----------



## Ashermusic

Oh, and while I have no real dog in this hunt anymore, no, Hollywood Choirs and Symphonic Choirs do not sound alike. Here they both are with the reverbs turned off and the default mics.



And think for a moment people. They were recorded what, 10 years apart? One was recorded in a concert hall the other at EW studios with different singers and different mics. How _could_ they sound alike?


----------



## stixman

well the bubble has definitely burst on this library that was quick


----------



## constaneum

Ashermusic said:


> Oh, and while I have no real dog in this hunt anymore, no, Hollywood Choirs and Symphonic Choirs do not sound alike. Here they both are with the reverbs turned off and the default mics.
> 
> 
> 
> And think for a moment people. They were recorded what, 10 years apart? One was recorded in a concert hall the other at EW studios with different singers and different mics. How _could_ they sound alike?




EXACTLY !! which is why i'm puzzled with everyone's statement on the same tone. Hollywood Choir sounds so much better and clearer.


----------



## MacTomBie

Is there really no discounted upgrade path for the owners of the original Symphonic Choirs? Is it only me who finds it strange?

As to the absurd trailer, the only way I can explain it to myself is that someone at EW realized that they don't need to do any marketing to reach the professional crowd (everyone follows them and this thread is a fine of example of that) and decided to go for the casual music making market instead and sell extra copies of the composer cloud. I don't like it but hey, EW is a business and who could blame them for making cold calculated business decisions in their interest. Especially in the situation where you have a product coming up that might disappoint many in the professional crowd.


----------



## Pianolando

Ashermusic said:


> Oh, and while I have no real dog in this hunt anymore, no, Hollywood Choirs and Symphonic Choirs do not sound alike. Here they both are with the reverbs turned off and the default mics.
> 
> 
> 
> And think for a moment people. They were recorded what, 10 years apart? One was recorded in a concert hall the other at EW studios with different singers and different mics. How _could_ they sound alike?




The men are very much louder in the Symphonic Choirs example, maybe if they were balanced a bit more similary the difference wouldn't be that big? Sure, different hall (as can easily be heard), but not sure how big the difference would be with similar balance and a proper reverb.


----------



## Jaap

Pianolando said:


> The men are very much louder in the Symphonic Choirs example, maybe if they were balanced a bit more similary the difference wouldn't be that big? Sure, different hall (as can easily be heard), but not sure how big the difference would be with similar balance and a proper reverb.



I really wished that people wouldn't just post this quick examples. That never does justice to a library. And not just Jay his example, but also the others.
This is a kind of library that requires work and dedication and works really well in certain content settings, but posting some quick standalone results doesn't do justice to this library to be honest.


----------



## woafmann

MacTomBie said:


> Is there really no discounted upgrade path for the owners of the original Symphonic Choirs? Is it only me who finds it strange?
> 
> As to the absurd trailer, the only way I can explain it to myself is that someone at EW realized that they don't need to do any marketing to reach the professional crowd (everyone follows them and this thread is a fine of example of that) and decided to go for the casual music making market instead and sell extra copies of the composer cloud. I don't like it but hey, EW is a business and who could blame them for making cold calculated business decisions in their interest. Especially in the situation where you have a product coming up that might disappoint many in the professional crowd.



I agree with your take on the trailer. EW has every right to reach out to any market segment they wish. To be offended by their trailer seems a touch petty to me. I mean, who cares, unless some people don't want to be associated with products that are now being marketed to "14 year olds". 

I imagine that EW hired a marketing agency to produce the trailer. I may be wrong, but with the launch delay, they were probably just scrambling to get something up and obviously, didn't really think the whole thing through. It seemed hurried as evident by only having 3 demos and a chintzy promo video. 

Now, as for the actual library, yes, there are some concerns. Reading on the SO forum, looks like EWQL is dealing with bugs quickly as they've fixed some things as of this morning. I do hope the legato transitions get ironed out soon. I expect that EW will work on this. They didn't take all these years and spend who knows how much money to just throw in the towel and suffer a loss. I think it's pretty obvious there will be patches to smooth things out. Who knows if it will ever be brought up to everyone's expectations though. We'll see.

As for the price, a discount for SC owners would have been nice for sure, and $599 is a touch steep I think for this library _in it's current state_. I got Diamond for $509 at B&H Photo and ya, I do have some buyer's remorse, but it's not a horrible library as far as I can hear. I think people were just let down (like myself) because of all the hubbub proceeding the launch. We'll see if I change my opinion AFTER it finishes downloading however. 

Who's next for the soapbox?


----------



## Nils Neumann

Daniel James said:


> As a side note, even though you all know my opinions on the PLAY engine and this library in general, the subscription service is still a really good deal! I may have to jump in for another month just to make the choir sing horrible filthy things back to me XD


The „c u n t“ thing wasn‘t enough for you?^^


----------



## Oliver

legato not working? 
trailer not good?
promo video strange?

ehmmmm... just thinking ...what did they do the last 9 years??
now updating errors with patches within one day????

if lets say a car company would do that, then hopefully nobody will be hurt the first days of driving a new car...

just my humble opinion, and not bashing EW on anything, but that all seems strange to me...


----------



## Puzzlefactory

What is it in psychology of musicians and producers, that makes them always use a car analogies when criticising companies?


----------



## NoamL

I wasn't annoyed at the trailer, it was kind of funny, except that the guy was typing in plain English and not the votox code so that's a misrepresentation.

Since we are ok with posting competitor products on SampleTalk, here is what *Oceania* can do. This is an incomplete, and therefore very unforgivingly exposed, mockup of the choir in the main theme from Jeremy Soule's score for Skyrim.

The beginning and ending uses the shouts & risers articulations (there's a limited selection so I did my best there...), the middle has syllable singing and really shines:



The truth is I haven't yet heard a choir library that has intelligibility approaching the real thing. Maybe the Eric Whitacre library will do that, maybe not.

Oceania creates the feeling of musical *intention *- this seems to me more important than word-by-word intelligibility. It is also at least as important to me as "tone" or the other values mentioned by Jay and others. "Intention" means that phrases rise and fall and have the rhythm of speech. The phrases feel complete and coherent and not like bits glued together, even though that's exactly what they are.

And most importantly of all, intention means that this feeling of unity and coherence happens not just when you play the library out of the box giving you a superficial feeling of "playability," but that you can dive in and start tweaking things without it all falling apart and reverting to the "bits glued together" feeling.

As for Oceania's tone, the consonants are rich and forceful and even though the dynamic range is narrow (hold on, let me Spitfire that:_ "Oceania - On The Edge Of Shouting"_) it's well targeted to a particular use case.

That is the problem with HWC. I don't see the use case. I don't write for choir much so can someone explain to me, who out there is the target VI composer for whom INTELLIGIBILITY is the beat-all selling feature? Especially if you have to compromise musicality to get intelligibility? Are people having trouble getting mockups approved because the choir's not intelligible? Or are they having trouble selling VI tracks because the music library wants clear lyrics? Is there a demand for 90-piece choir lyrics on TV shows?

In fairness the actual tone of HWC is lovely and the mic positions look very versatile, but they're selling this as next-gen wordbuilding and it's not that far advanced.


----------



## Oliver

Puzzlefactory said:


> What is it in psychology of musicians and producers, that makes them always use a car analogies when criticising companies?



sorry...
change car company with food/phone/solar/machine company (whatever you like)...

as i said, no bashing, but just wondering...
BTW i am an EW supporter since the first days...


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

NoamL said:


> I wasn't annoyed at the trailer, it was kind of funny, except that the guy was typing in plain English and not the votox code so that's a misrepresentation.
> 
> Since we are ok with posting competitor products on SampleTalk, here is what *Oceania* can do. This is an incomplete, and therefore very unforgivingly exposed, mockup of the choir in the main theme from Jeremy Soule's score for Skyrim.
> 
> The beginning and ending uses the shouts & risers articulations (there's a limited selection so I did my best there...), the middle has syllable singing and really shines:
> 
> 
> 
> The truth is I haven't yet heard a choir library that has intelligibility approaching the real thing. Maybe the Eric Whitacre library will do that, maybe not.
> 
> Oceania creates the feeling of musical *intention *- this seems to me more important than word-by-word intelligibility. It is also at least as important to me as "tone" or the other values mentioned by Jay and others. "Intention" means that phrases rise and fall and have the rhythm of speech. The phrases feel complete and coherent and not like bits glued together, even though that's exactly what they are.
> 
> And most importantly of all, intention means that this feeling of unity and coherence happens not just when you play the library out of the box giving you a superficial feeling of "playability," but that you can dive in and start tweaking things without it all falling apart and reverting to the "bits glued together" feeling.
> 
> As for Oceania's tone, the consonants are rich and forceful and even though the dynamic range is narrow (hold on, let me Spitfire that:_ "Oceania - On The Edge Of Shouting"_) it's well targeted to a particular use case.
> 
> That is the problem with HWC. I don't see the use case. I don't write for choir much so can someone explain to me, who out there is the target VI composer for whom INTELLIGIBILITY is the beat-all selling feature? Especially if you have to compromise musicality to get intelligibility? Are people having trouble getting mockups approved because the choir's not intelligible? Or are they having trouble selling VI tracks because the music library wants clear lyrics? Is there a demand for 90-piece choir lyrics on TV shows?
> 
> In fairness the actual tone of HWC is lovely and the mic positions look very versatile, but they're selling this as next-gen wordbuilding and it's not that far advanced.




I wanted to bring in a post with Oceania but you were faster and I completely agree here.


----------



## J-M

MacTomBie said:


> Is there really no discounted upgrade path for the owners of the original Symphonic Choirs? Is it only me who finds it strange?
> 
> As to the absurd trailer, the only way I can explain it to myself is that someone at EW realized that they don't need to do any marketing to reach the professional crowd (everyone follows them and this thread is a fine of example of that) and decided to go for the casual music making market instead and sell extra copies of the composer cloud. I don't like it but hey, EW is a business and who could blame them for making cold calculated business decisions in their interest. Especially in the situation where you have a product coming up that might disappoint many in the professional crowd.



I am in no way a professional, I make music because I like it so I guess I would fall into their intended audience? (Not 14 years old though ) But oh boy, that trailer sent shivers down my spine - and not in a good way.


----------



## Ashermusic

Jaap said:


> I really wished that people wouldn't just post this quick examples. That never does justice to a library. And not just Jay his example, but also the others.
> This is a kind of library that requires work and dedication and works really well in certain content settings, but posting some quick standalone results doesn't do justice to this library to be honest.



My example was not meant to show how good either library sounds or can sound. I no longer work for EW and I don't care what people think about HC, like it or hate it, buy it or don't buy it. What I _do_ care about is truth and the truth is that since I own both, I am telling you that when you load a Symphonic Choirs instrument and play it, you hear a certain sound. Then when you do the same with Hollywood Choirs you hear a very different sound, period. My example illustrates that process and the result. And that is as far as I care to get involved in the discussion.


----------



## Simon Ravn

Oliver said:


> legato not working?
> trailer not good?
> promo video strange?
> 
> ehmmmm... just thinking ...what did they do the last 9 years??
> now updating errors with patches within one day????
> 
> if lets say a car company would do that, then hopefully nobody will be hurt the first days of driving a new car...
> 
> just my humble opinion, and not bashing EW on anything, but that all seems strange to me...



What if EW is basically just Doug Rogers and a customer support employee full time? Then Nick Phoenix invests some time in developing a library once in a while, same goes for a programmer updating PLAY, fixing bugs etc. I am sure EW don't have a huge monthly staff bill and that there are not many people working for them either, and all freelance. Which also explains the snail-crawling pace development of PLAY, and now that Nick is doing so much more than being a sample developer, why new libraries are so few and far apart.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Simon Ravn said:


> What if EW is basically just Doug Rogers and a customer support employee full time?



I highly doubt that, EW is a big company with thousands of customers. He is probably involved in a lot of other production projects as well.


----------



## Simon Ravn

Wolfie2112 said:


> I highly doubt that, EW is a big company with thousands of customers. He is probably involved in a lot of other production projects as well.



Right, I should re-iterate that; what I meant was the SAMPLE DEVELOPER part of the business.


----------



## Morodiene

Ashermusic said:


> Oh, and while I have no real dog in this hunt anymore, no, Hollywood Choirs and Symphonic Choirs do not sound alike. Here they both are with the reverbs turned off and the default mics.
> 
> 
> 
> And think for a moment people. They were recorded what, 10 years apart? One was recorded in a concert hall the other at EW studios with different singers and different mics. How _could_ they sound alike?



Thanks for sharing this. Is anyone else thinking that HWC is missing vibrato? The women sound like choir boys by singing straight tone, and that's not at all what would happen if you wanted a choir to sing loud/epic music. I don't think that any choir director in his right mind would ask choirs to sing anything epic with straight tone, because there's only so loud straight tone can go. Vibrato adds more volume.

Anyways, I know that any software choir will have limitations, but I was really looking forward to the alleged improvements to Word Builder in addition to the sound quality. 

Can HWC use vibrato and just no one has posted anything with that? I listened to all the demos and didn't hear vibrato anywhere.


----------



## Puzzlefactory

Oliver said:


> sorry...
> change car company with food/phone/solar/machine company (whatever you like)...
> 
> as i said, no bashing, but just wondering...
> BTW i am an EW supporter since the first days...



No need to apologise. 

It’s just an observation I’ve made from the various music forums I’ve frequented over the years.


----------



## Christof

Morodiene said:


> Thanks for sharing this. Is anyone else thinking that HWC is missing vibrato? The women sound like choir boys by singing straight tone, and that's not at all what would happen if you wanted a choir to sing loud/epic music. I don't think that any choir director in his right mind would ask choirs to sing anything epic with straight tone, because there's only so loud straight tone can go. Vibrato adds more volume.
> 
> Anyways, I know that any software choir will have limitations, but I was really looking forward to the alleged improvements to Word Builder in addition to the sound quality.
> 
> Can HWC use vibrato and just no one has posted anything with that? I listened to all the demos and didn't hear vibrato anywhere.


Same here


----------



## Sosimple88

I was interested to see this product, but after so much bashing, I'm really not sure...


----------



## woafmann

Morodiene said:


> Thanks for sharing this. Is anyone else thinking that HWC is missing vibrato? The women sound like choir boys by singing straight tone, and that's not at all what would happen if you wanted a choir to sing loud/epic music. I don't think that any choir director in his right mind would ask choirs to sing anything epic with straight tone, because there's only so loud straight tone can go. Vibrato adds more volume.
> 
> Anyways, I know that any software choir will have limitations, but I was really looking forward to the alleged improvements to Word Builder in addition to the sound quality.
> 
> Can HWC use vibrato and just no one has posted anything with that? I listened to all the demos and didn't hear vibrato anywhere.



Yes. In the manual, it explains about vibrato settings. Can't remember exactly in which contexts, but the PDF can be found HERE


----------



## Morodiene

woafmann said:


> Yes. In the manual, it explains about vibrato settings. Can't remember exactly in which contexts, but the PDF can be found HERE





> Vib FF instruments contain looped double forte (ff) sustain vibrato samples that use the Mod Wheel (CC1) and Expression (CC11) to control loudness. • Epic instruments are made up of looped sustain layers, including a vibrato mezzo-forte (mf) layer and a vibrato double-forte (ff) layer that can be crossfaded between with the Mod Wheel (CC1), with CC11 to control loudness.


OK, so it does exist - that's good at least. Now if only I can hear it


----------



## Ashermusic

The modwheel switches between dynamic layers and increases/decreases vibrato, although there is not that much vibrato since a poll of Classical composers apparently didn't want it and that is how EW decided to go.
http://www.talkclassical.com/13016-vibr ... horal.html


----------



## Ian Dorsch

Morodiene said:


> Thanks for sharing this. Is anyone else thinking that HWC is missing vibrato? The women sound like choir boys by singing straight tone, and that's not at all what would happen if you wanted a choir to sing loud/epic music. I don't think that any choir director in his right mind would ask choirs to sing anything epic with straight tone, because there's only so loud straight tone can go. Vibrato adds more volume.
> 
> Anyways, I know that any software choir will have limitations, but I was really looking forward to the alleged improvements to Word Builder in addition to the sound quality.
> 
> Can HWC use vibrato and just no one has posted anything with that? I listened to all the demos and didn't hear vibrato anywhere.



I had the same reaction. Aside from the much improved word builder, that's the main difference I can hear between Symphonic Choirs and HWC. It makes for some nicely tuned chords, but I'm really not a big fan of women yelling in straight tone.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Ashermusic said:


> The modwheel switches between dynamic layers and increases/decreases vibrato, although there is not that much vibrato since a poll of Classical composers apparently didn't want it and that is how EW decided to go.
> http://www.talkclassical.com/13016-vibr ... horal.html



Seriously? They based it on just that instead of surveying the real-world composers using sequencers?


----------



## Ian Dorsch

Yeah, that poll is bogus. No one in that thread talks like they know a damn thing about singing or choral technique. Or composing, for that matter.


----------



## curtisschweitzer

After having some time to work with HWC today, I have to say that I'm enjoying them a lot more that Symphonic Choirs, especially at a low dynamic. Been working on some more ambient-style cues, and the ability to not only have a beautiful, lush, straight tone ensemble that is singing the words that I chose is, so far, pretty great. I think this is a library that takes some time to finesse, but the results that I've gotten after a couple of days have been significantly better than what I was able to produce with Symphonic Choirs. The straight tone so far has mixed really nicely with other manufacturer's libraries. I haven't messed with controllers that might increase or decrease the vibrato much at this point, but I can see how someone might find the lack of a heavy vibrato a real downside. I prefer the straighter tone, again, especially at low dynamic levels. (I would definitely have loved to have seen a Hollywood Strings style set of controls with 11 controlling volume and 1 vibrato).

It its also worth pointing out that the library definitely has its day-one flaws--I've been having a lot of stuck notes, especially in the men's WordBuilder multi, and occasionally I've run into a few phonetic issues that I've had to massage out in the WorldBuilder interface.

I definitely think folks who are outright trashing this library have missed the mark. It seems very good to me.


----------



## jamwerks

I think non vib is much easier to loop for sus patches


----------



## Simon Ravn

jamwerks said:


> I think non vib is much easier to loop for sus patches



I'd say it's about the same. Looping usually uses crossfade anyway so it shouldn't matter.


----------



## Darren Durann

Sometimes I wonder how many people plan to read the manual as they dip into HC. From what's been written, I don't see a lot of that.

HC is only relatively unexciting until you hit the manual and start applying what's in it. I've discovered quite a bit more than most seem to, so I highly recommend such a tactic.

Otherwise I'm with the poster above...not much to say; mostly I'm just waiting to hear from people who have spent more time with it (which can be hard due to the regular grind, daily duties, etc.).

I'm lucky enough to have had the time to delve deeper into it and I can tell you: this is a fine library, one which I get the feeling hasn't delivered all its treasures yet. It's not SC and it shouldn't be.

Ultimately, file under Pending Further Investigation.


----------



## woafmann

curtisschweitzer said:


> After having some time to work with HWC today, I have to say that I'm enjoying them a lot more that Symphonic Choirs, especially at a low dynamic. Been working on some more ambient-style cues, and the ability to not only have a beautiful, lush, straight tone ensemble that is singing the words that I chose is, so far, pretty great. I think this is a library that takes some time to finesse, but the results that I've gotten after a couple of days have been significantly better than what I was able to produce with Symphonic Choirs. The straight tone so far has mixed really nicely with other manufacturer's libraries. I haven't messed with controllers that might increase or decrease the vibrato much at this point, but I can see how someone might find the lack of a heavy vibrato a real downside. I prefer the straighter tone, again, especially at low dynamic levels. (I would definitely have loved to have seen a Hollywood Strings style set of controls with 11 controlling volume and 1 vibrato).
> 
> It its also worth pointing out that the library definitely has its day-one flaws--I've been having a lot of stuck notes, especially in the men's WordBuilder multi, and occasionally I've run into a few phonetic issues that I've had to massage out in the WorldBuilder interface.
> 
> I definitely think folks who are outright trashing this library have missed the mark. It seems very good to me.



Make sure you're updating HC often as it has been the men's section that had the most issues. It seems that many of the issues had been fixed. I'm still downloading it so I couldn't tell you.


----------



## woafmann

Finally! HC is now unpacking and installing. I'll try and get some various examples up (including vibrato)...Inundated with work ATM and only able to sleep a few hours a night, but hopefully I can at least record some noodling. I'm especially interested in the close mic positions and legato testing. I'll report back.


----------



## PaulieDC

I'm a noob(ish) at all this and have been waiting/wondering when to look into a choir library. Even though there's no upgrade path to HC, SC Platinum is 249 bucks now, is starting out with that at that price good enough without worrying about HC? It's not exactly knocking people's socks off at the moment, lol.


----------



## Darren Durann

PaulieDC said:


> I'm a noob(ish) at all this and have been waiting/wondering when to look into a choir library. Even though there's no upgrade path to HC, SC Platinum is 249 bucks now, is starting out with that at that price good enough without worrying about HC? It's not exactly knocking people's socks off at the moment, lol.



Platinum is great, and a lot of pros use it. For that price you're knocking it out of the park. HC is good later.


----------



## PaulieDC

Darren Durann said:


> Platinum is great, and a lot of pros use it. For that price you're knocking it out of the park. HC is good later.


For that price, yeah, I'll bite. I'd rather stay with one or two players right now as I concentrate and work on composing and laying down tracks. Play and Kontakt are enough to start, so having a first choir library with a familiar player sounds good to me. Thanks for the reply!


----------



## sostenuto

PaulieDC said:


> I'm a noob(ish) at all this and have been waiting/wondering when to look into a choir library. Even though there's no upgrade path to HC, SC Platinum is 249 bucks now, is starting out with that at that price good enough without worrying about HC? It's not exactly knocking people's socks off at the moment, lol.



Enjoying ComposerCloud X with both SC and HC at the moment. This was great choice (only very recently) and so much content to explore. 
Was sooooo against for long time _ for illogical reasons ..... 

Now off to read the User manual for HC __ THX @ Darren Durann !


----------



## woafmann

I've only played the women's patches so far. The vibrato FF patch sounds OK while wearing mixing cans. The vibrato seems more subtle to my ears.

A couple of notes playing a preset English line sound rather synthy and odd with artifacts that blurt out delayed after key depress. Quick staccato repetitions on this key doesn't even sound like a voice at all with close mic only and zero reverb. Sounds like some rhythmic glitch synth. Speaking of which, you totally need reverb with this library or it will sound worst. In all fairness, I've yet to year a good sounding choral library when played dry.

I can see no way to play true legato notes yet. Need to re-read the manual. Everything's in poly mode. 

*So far, and without fully exploring this lib yet and only noodling for 10 minutes, my first impressions:*

An ok lib for backing tracks...For me, this won't be in the forefront often if at all. I still have much to go through and read again and spin knobs and whatnot, but at this point, I feel I could have made a much better choice (here's looking at you Dominus). In the end, having the power of WB results in sacrifices in other aspects. IMO, too many sacrifices. So far, I would take a refund if I could and would gladly give this back to EW.

I'll keep reporting.


----------



## JohnG

I was very positively struck in the walkthrough, both by the tone, which I think sounds very easy to work into a mix, and with the consonants landing more accurately than with the old Symphonic Choirs. I sing in a choir every week, and even getting _live_ singers to get 'S' sounds to start early enough to be on the beat is not always easy. 

I thought the sound from the walkthrough was actually excellent, and I vastly prefer the Wordbuilder approach to they "syllable-assembly" of other choir libraries. I keep returning all these years to SC but HC does seem like an improvement in clarity and on the Wordbuilder front. Over the years I have bought, in hope, a number of other choir libraries and been horribly disappointed. 

Plus I detest vibrato in choirs, except soloists, and so if it's "low vibrato" that's preferable to me. And I think that legato is wildly overrated in sample-ville. It's either inaudible or too loud; of the two I prefer too quiet (or none at all).

As far as "dated," what on earth does that even mean? It's a choir, and it sounds like -- a choir. I don't want some "latest cool sound" if there even is such a thing. I want to write for a choir that sounds relatively alive and this sounds that way to me.

Had internet problems with the fires here but once that's over I will be getting this.

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


----------



## curtisschweitzer

JohnG said:


> And I think that legato is wildly overrated in sample-ville. It's either inaudible or too loud; of the two I prefer too quiet (or none at all).



Yes. I agree strongly here-- even in EW's own products (I'm looking at you Hollywood Woodwinds), legato really ruins some beautiful samples, and I find myself mixing it down aggressively wherever possible.


----------



## erica-grace

I find it comical at best, that several people posted snippets of the library, which didnt sound all that great, and people were all over those, and NoamL posts an entire track featuring the library back on page 18, which sounds really good - way better than any of the other user offerings here - and nobody says a damn thing. Do you all hate EW that much, regardless?


----------



## ricz

I could be wrong, but I believe that example was using Oceania.


----------



## NoamL

Here is the MIDI if anyone wants to try it with HWC. 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/19h9y4967ridgag/SKYRIM_MIDI.mid?dl=0

Lyrics here-


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

erica-grace said:


> I find it comical at best, that several people posted snippets of the library, which didnt sound all that great, and people were all over those, and NoamL posts an entire track featuring the library back on page 18, which sounds really good - way better than any of the other user offerings here - and nobody says a damn thing. Do you all hate EW that much, regardless?



Go and read the comment right, did you? I guess not. Noam featured Oceania choir.

As it comes to John G´s comment: I guess then the HWC are really good? Ah..he gets the stuff from EW for free. Was HWC also on the free list? Imo his comment reads it like that the flaws are somehow worth to overlook and so my advice take such comments with care. Most of the other people I read here who have used HWC actually didn´t let much of good words on it which speaks also a language and back up my own thoughts that I found the demos not really good as well the very average tutorial and not to speak of that horrendous trailer...

Noam is offering the midi so I would ask you @JohnG as it is seems you find HWC beeing that good: Are you willing to make a rendition with the midi file to showcase the capabilities of HWC in order to back up your posting a bit so hopefully that everybody sees how good HWC can sound really like? ...


----------



## markleake

Yes, @AlexanderSchiborr is right, in the sense that I'd much prefer to listen to what people can achieve with it as evidence that it is a good library.

It seems quite costly for what it does, so give us some demos that show it as good (not the ones on the EW website as they are not very good IMO) like we get with other good libraries... only then will I be interested in the library.

On the topic of some rough pieces... I don't understand why people wouldn't want to hear these and why they are objected to so strongly. Rough sketches are just as informative as polished ones, sometimes more so, so long as they are presented honestly as a rough sketch.

I think people are in the main not anti-EW as some here like to think. We just want a library to sound good, be good quality, be easily playable and easy to integrate into our templates. And we will try our best to judge the library on these merits and make our own decisions.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

Strange... some of the examples here sound terrible. But in this walkthrough everything sounds pretty nice to me. (except from the men legato). I also find it rather moderate, not super duper over the top boasty.


----------



## Morodiene

DarkestShadow said:


> Strange... some of the examples here sound terrible. But in this walkthrough everything sounds pretty nice to me. (except from the men legato). I also find it rather moderate, not super duper over the top boasty.



It could be the fact the Nick was using Spaces 2 in his tutorial, which may not have been available for these demos?


----------



## woafmann

Played with it a little more. Lowering the non-pitched consonant global volume really helped a lot. Sounding much sweeter for sure. Also, riding CC11 is adding some nice emotion to my playing.

I was able to coax out some softer, more lyrical riffs; although this library is certainly geared towards a more bombastic and epic sound out of the box. There is a gentler side to HC that I didn't realize was there. I suppose just like with any instrument, virtual or otherwise, it's gonna' take some time to discover it's deeper nature and learn how to gel with it.

Feeling better about my purchase as I learn the settings more and starting to appreciate HC for what it is. Time will tell though!


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

woafmann said:


> Played with it a little more. Lowering the non-pitched consonant global volume really helped a lot. Sounding much sweeter for sure. Also, riding CC11 is adding some nice emotion to my playing.
> 
> I was able to coax out some softer, more lyrical riffs; although this library is certainly geared towards a more bombastic and epic sound out of the box. There is a gentler side to HC that I didn't realize was there. I suppose just like with any instrument, virtual or otherwise, it's gonna' take some time to discover it's deeper nature and learn how to gel with it.
> 
> Feeling better about my purchase as I learn the settings more and starting to appreciate HC for what it is. Time will tell though!



Feel free to let some soundexamples speak..


----------



## Simon Ravn

omiroad said:


> Why do they let someone who worked at the company review the library? Even this reply seems bitter about people not liking it. It's a far cry from neutrality...



Because he is an expert at being unbiased and neutral. And in reviewing, using and composing with orchestral sample libraries.


----------



## Audio Birdi

woafmann said:


> Played with it a little more. Lowering the non-pitched consonant global volume really helped a lot. Sounding much sweeter for sure. Also, riding CC11 is adding some nice emotion to my playing.
> 
> I was able to coax out some softer, more lyrical riffs; although this library is certainly geared towards a more bombastic and epic sound out of the box. There is a gentler side to HC that I didn't realize was there. I suppose just like with any instrument, virtual or otherwise, it's gonna' take some time to discover it's deeper nature and learn how to gel with it.
> 
> Feeling better about my purchase as I learn the settings more and starting to appreciate HC for what it is. Time will tell though!


I was wondering whether it's possible to show off microphone positions of Diamond without any reverb applied? The walkthrough video had Spaces 2 applied and wasn't exactly a true representation of how dry / wet HWC actually is. Thanks!


----------



## erica-grace

Ok, I made a mistake... sorry!


----------



## camelot

When I watched the overview video, I wondered why adding more reverb if audience and surround mics are there and already in the mix. Adding layers and layers of room will make the sound washy in the end.


----------



## Ashermusic

omiroad said:


> Why do they let someone who worked at the company review the library? Even this reply seems bitter about people not liking it. It's a far cry from neutrality...



Because I got fired? Do you think that makes me still prejudiced? And those who have been here a long time know that I have stood up for lots of other developers as well and criticized the general tone of many here and left and then returned. I will now probably leave again.

This I can say : Before I worked for EW I never wrote anything I didn't believe to be true. While I worked for EW I never wrote anything I didn't believe to be true. Now that I no longer work for EW I don't write anything I don't believe to be true. And if you don't believe that, you can take any of your body parts and insert them into any of your other body parts.


----------



## Vischebaste

Ashermusic said:


> you can take any of your body parts and insert them into any of your other body parts.



That's a lot of potential combinations. Could you at least give us a hint?


----------



## Paul Owen

Ashermusic said:


> Because I got fired? Do you think that makes me still prejudiced? And those who have been here a long time know that I have stood up for lots of other developers as well and criticized the general tone of many here and left and then returned. I will now probably leave again.
> 
> This I can say : Before I worked for EW I never wrote anything I didn't believe to be true. While I worked for EW I never wrote anything I didn't believe to be true. Now that I no longer work for EW I don't write anything I don't believe to be true. And if you don't believe that, you can take any of your body parts and insert them into any of your other body parts.



I don't believe that.


----------



## Vischebaste

Paul Owen said:


> I don't believe that.



Then you can take your big toe and insert it into your nostril.


----------



## Mike Greene

Ashermusic said:


> Because I got fired? Do you think that makes me still prejudiced? And those who have been here a long time know that I have stood up for lots of other developers as well and criticized the general tone of many here and left and then returned. I will now probably leave again.
> 
> This I can say : Before I worked for EW I never wrote anything I didn't believe to be true. While I worked for EW I never wrote anything I didn't believe to be true. Now that I no longer work for EW I don't write anything I don't believe to be true. And if you don't believe that, you can take any of your body parts and insert them into any of your other body parts.


To be fair, it's not like you were "fired" under bad terms. In fact, if I recall correctly, Doug asked you to post a Hollywood Choirs teaser here a few months ago, and ... you did it. So I think it's fair for people to assume that ties haven't been severed completely.

Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt your integrity at all. But when it comes to East West, it's not unreasonable for people to believe there might be lingering allegiances. Appearances matter, and in the case of EW, you made your bed, so you have to lie in it.


----------



## Vischebaste

Mike Greene said:


> To be fair, it's not like you were "fired" under bad terms. In fact, if I recall correctly, Doug asked you to post a Hollywood Choirs teaser here a few months ago, and ... you did it. So I think it's fair for people to assume that ties haven't been severed completely.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt your integrity at all. But when it comes to East West, it's not unreasonable for people to believe there might be lingering allegiances. Appearances matter, and in the case of EW, you made your bed, so you have to lie in it.



Earlobe into belly button, please.


----------



## nas

I don't see why anybody needs to be attacking or doubting anyone else? So what if someone is biased (or neutral)? If YOU listen to something and YOU like it either buy it or do further research - not only here but from the numerous sources available. Just go with your own experience and own up to your decision...the rest is just noise IMHO.


----------



## Ashermusic

Mike Greene said:


> To be fair, it's not like you were "fired" under bad terms. In fact, if I recall correctly, Doug asked you to post a Hollywood Choirs teaser here a few months ago, and ... you did it. So I think it's fair for people to assume that ties haven't been severed completely.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt your integrity at all. But when it comes to East West, it's not unreasonable for people to believe there might be lingering allegiances. Appearances matter, and in the case of EW, you made your bed, so you have to lie in it.



That is correct, it was not an angry firing, but getting fired because you are no longer deemed necessary doesn't make you feel warm and fuzzy. But even when I worked for EW, there were several of their libraries that I was noticeably silent about or said very little, so it did not take a sleuth to figure out I was unimpressed.

I have written my review and I think it is fair and balanced. And again, there is not a dishonest word in it so while others may disagree with my conclusions, when it comes out, compare it to THIS review and tell me if you didn't know, which developer you thought I had previously worked for.

https://ask.audio/articles/review-strezov-sampling-arva-for-kontakt

Spoiler alert: In my Conclusions I wrote: "Like all the Strezov choir libraries, this is a terrific library and well worth your consideration."


----------



## Casiquire

I'm


omiroad said:


> Why do they let someone who worked at the company review the library? Even this reply seems bitter about people not liking it. It's a far cry from neutrality...



While what you're saying is factually true, Ashermusic has a history of being fair, at least with me personally.


----------



## NoamL

Assume good faith folks. 

I've never taken Jay or John's opinions less seriously because they got products from EW, although perhaps my judgement was impaired by the elbow in my esophagus.


----------



## JohnG

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Was HWC also on the free list?



No.

I have bought a lot of East West products for which I have paid full price. I have, however, received some for free over the years and it's correct, in my view, to let people know that. I find your vulgar attack on EW and then insinuating that my opinion is somehow tainted to be surprising, actually. I don't work for them, and I am totally transparent that I have, in the past, received some free stuff, in part because I have been an extremely enthusiastic user of their libraries for about 12 years or more. Maybe I should add that I paid over $4,000 just for the old EWQLSO library? And paid full price for Hollwood Strings? And many others?

To turn to this new choir library itself, I liked what appears to be an excellent implementation of syllables and consonants, which is not easy and appears to me to be an improvement over the older SC. Also, the sound is a little drier, which gives more flexibility than the older SC.

*Other Choirs*

I own a lot of choir libraries and yet consistently find that the old SC library works very well for me; since this new one seems an improvement, I am inclined to get it. I also mentioned in an earlier post that other, more recent releases, don't accommodate what I like to do with choir, which is to be able to write my own lyrics without the constraints that pre-baked syllables impose.

*Cut and Paste Midi? No.*

I haven't bought the library and don't have it, but the suggestion that you can paste the midi created for Library A into a track tied to Library B and create a valid comparison is wrong-headed. I would never subject _any_ library to midi that was generated using a different library, since the results could be nonsense because they are set up differently. Implementation of CC11 and CC1, just to take two examples, can be very different, and the CC assigned to vibrato often differs as well, not to mention other parameters. To take an example, you can't paste a string line tailored for LASS onto Hollywood Strings or a Spitfire strings library and get an accurate result.

I guess my question is, why are you so wound up about this release? It doesn't seem like your typical post. If you don't like the library, then don't buy it. I like it and when Los Angeles stops burning and our internet stabilises, I will likely buy it.

Kind regards,

John

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


----------



## Jaap

While I definately not always agree with Jay I find him one of the most honest and trustworthy persons and I have totally no doubts about his integrity to write an honest review for HWC, even not with his background at EW.


----------



## reddognoyz

Jaap said:


> While I definately not always agree with Jay I find him one of the most honest and trustworthy persons and I have totally no doubts about his integrity to write an honest review for HWC, even not with his background at EW.



With the exception of his vehement, unfair and unreasonable hatred for the greatest, most storied, team in all of sports, I'm talking of course about the New York Yankees, I find him to be fair and unbiased.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

JohnG said:


> No.
> 
> I have bought a lot of East West products for which I have paid full price. I have, however, received some for free over the years and it's correct, in my view, to let people know that. I find your vulgar attack on EW and then insinuating that my opinion is somehow tainted to be surprising, actually. I don't work for them, and I am totally transparent that I have, in the past, received some free stuff, in part because I have been an extremely enthusiastic user of their libraries for about 12 years or more. Maybe I should add that I paid over $4,000 just for the old EWQLSO library? And paid full price for Hollwood Strings? And many others?
> 
> To turn to this new choir library itself, I liked what appears to be an excellent implementation of syllables and consonants, which is not easy and appears to me to be an improvement over the older SC. Also, the sound is a little drier, which gives more flexibility than the older SC.
> 
> *Other Choirs*
> 
> I own a lot of choir libraries and yet consistently find that the old SC library works very well for me; since this new one seems an improvement, I am inclined to get it. I also mentioned in an earlier post that other, more recent releases, don't accommodate what I like to do with choir, which is to be able to write my own lyrics without the constraints that pre-baked syllables impose.
> 
> *Cut and Paste Midi? No.*
> 
> I haven't bought the library and don't have it, but the suggestion that you can paste the midi created for Library A into a track tied to Library B and create a valid comparison is wrong-headed. I would never subject _any_ library to midi that was generated using a different library, since the results could be nonsense because they are set up differently. Implementation of CC11 and CC1, just to take two examples, can be very different, and the CC assigned to vibrato often differs as well, not to mention other parameters. To take an example, you can't paste a string line tailored for LASS onto Hollywood Strings or a Spitfire strings library and get an accurate result.
> 
> I guess my question is, why are you so wound up about this release? It doesn't seem like your typical post. If you don't like the library, then don't buy it. I like it and when Los Angeles stops burning and our internet stabilises, I will likely buy it.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> John
> 
> [note: I have received free products from East West]



No..probably you misunderstood me. You don´t take the midi and make copy / paste..this is not how it works. You take the midi and make it as good as possible with the library you are trying with. Those lazy copy and paste approach I see all the time here, but that was not the point. Noam could have given also a score sheet for it, but he gave the midi file for simplicity. I know that it is no fair comparison to copy paste things and that is not the point at all. But you can make a comparison when you take the midi and sculpture the midi data tailoring to the specific characteristics of the product, in that case Hollywood choir.

And yes, my comment was vulgar, again: I apologize for it. I actually have a lot of Eastwest products bought in the past and it was my big dissapointment in the self boasting trailer, which I never liked regardless if EW does that or some other vendor. BUt yes..I could have said that in a bit more appropiate way for sure. So I agree.

John, why you always mention that you received in the past free products from them. I saw that in the couple of others posts too. Is that just because you have to do. I don´t get that. I was always interested why you always do mention it.


----------



## NoamL

JohnG said:


> I haven't bought the library and don't have it, but the suggestion that you can paste the midi created for Library A into a track tied to Library B and create a valid comparison is wrong-headed. I would never subject _any_ library to midi that was generated using a different library, since the results could be nonsense because they are set up differently. Implementation of CC11 and CC1, just to take two examples, can be very different, and the CC assigned to vibrato often differs as well, not to mention other parameters. To take an example, you can't paste a string line tailored for LASS onto Hollywood Strings or a Spitfire strings library and get an accurate result.



I agree 100%, that is why I removed all CC and keyswitch data from the Oceania track before I posted the MIDI. For example, Oceania uses the pitch bend wheel to control the release length. I used that extensively in the mockup.

All that is included in the MIDI I posted is the sounding notes, to save people time on transcribing.


----------



## Ashermusic

Thank you to those who have vouched for my integrity. It means a lot to me and folks like you are the reason that I do eventually return here each time. To be fair, the majority here try to be fair and reasonable but the ones who are not tend to be the most vocal. Just the nature of the internet I guess.


----------



## Puzzlefactory

I don't think it sounds bad IMO. 

Just overpriced. 

If it was about £200 cheaper I would snap it up.


----------



## bvaughn0402

Ashermusic said:


> Thank you to those who have vouched for my integrity. It means a lot to me and folks like you are the reason that I do eventually return here each time. To be fair, the majority here try to be fair and reasonable but the ones who are not tend to be the most vocal. Just the nature of the internet I guess.



I for one always appreciate your insight.

When will this review be ready? I for one really want to read it. I saved up for this library over 6 months ... I'm hesitant to pull the trigger.

Curious for you (or anyone else) ... if you were going to accent background vocals for pop/rock songs ... to get as close to actual words (maybe at a minimum mimicking the prominent vowel sound) ... what would you recommend?

I was going to use this for that. Just bury it in the mix enough to where you hear a different singer (than me), but not so upfront that it sounds like a choir.


----------



## woafmann

I'm going to make a screen & audio recording of HC soon. Inundated with end of the year projects with clients, but will try and get on this as soon as possible. I know it would be a big help to the community.


----------



## constaneum

anyway, let's get down to actual library reviewing business. Has anyone actually come out with any demos (apart from the official demos) and shows how bad or good this library it instead of just showing the presets. Assuming the presets sux and you're better than the EW guys in terms of tweaking the phonics. At least, can anyone come out with a proper compositions featuring the HWC in action instead? Would really love to hear how. 

Apart from French, Latin or English phrases which people are bashing about the poor pronunciation, what about using it to build "new" languages. like what you hear in Nier soundtracks or even Lord of the Rings soundtrack where by they create their own future / elven languages for the soundtracks. With the creation of rare languages, i doubt anyone will actually mind HWC singing these rare languages which at the first place, nobody actually understand the language or even know how it should be pronounced. Anyone tried creating their own languages with HWC? just curious.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

As HWC is heavily advertized as an *epic (trailer) choir* where _*EW claims that their product is better than the competitor stuff*_ I am still interested in how HW will sound in comparison to the Oceania choir. 

The Reference track is on _Page 18, Post #351_
The download for the midi is on _Page 20, Post #384_

If anybody wants to give it a try, I would welcome that..


----------



## Josh Richman

Jdiggity1 said:


> In case you missed it, at about 14 minutes into the tutorial video, Nick drops info on Spaces 2 due to come out soon.



YES! SOLD.


----------



## Darren Durann

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> And yes, my comment was vulgar, again: I apologize for it. I actually have a lot of Eastwest products bought in the past and it was my big dissapointment in the self boasting trailer, which I never liked regardless if EW does that or some other vendor. BUt yes..I could have said that in a bit more appropiate way for sure. So I agree.



I was actually surprised you wrote like that...though I'm not on here too much I've seen your posts in the past and from the beginning thought you seemed like a nice person (and iirc a cool composer). I think some folks here might have been just as surprised by that.

Anyhoo, everyone please give both the HC manual and library ride or two and _*then*_ post what you know; trust me your estimations are bound to get more gracious. The undue amount of knee-jerkism here can be pretty daunting imo.


----------



## paoling

I followed this discussion with great interest. I suppose that some of the concerns here have been taken into account by Eastwest, since they finally released nice(r) demo (as a developer I feel that I can publicly say only nice things ) and removed some other demos:
http://media.soundsonline.com/mp3/hc_nick-phoenix_fallen-soldier.mp3

I just want to thank all the people mentioning Dominus in this thread, I think the two products are aimed at very different styles of music. And, also, we have some exciting plans for Dominus next year.


----------



## Jaap

paoling said:


> I followed this discussion with great interest. I suppose that some of the concerns here have been taken into account by Eastwest, since they finally released nice(r) demo (as a developer I feel that I can publicly say only nice things ) and removed some other demos:
> http://media.soundsonline.com/mp3/hc_nick-phoenix_fallen-soldier.mp3
> 
> I just want to thank all the people mentioning Dominus in this thread, I think the two products are aimed at very different styles of music. And, also, we have some exciting plans for Dominus next year.



Now that is a great demo showcasing its potential! Thanks for sharing Paolo


----------



## ChazC

Puzzlefactory said:


> I don't think it sounds bad IMO.
> 
> Just overpriced.
> 
> If it was about £200 cheaper I would snap it up.


It's EastWest. Wait 6-8 months and it'll be in one of the monthly 60% off sales...


----------



## Morodiene

paoling said:


> I followed this discussion with great interest. I suppose that some of the concerns here have been taken into account by Eastwest, since they finally released nice(r) demo (as a developer I feel that I can publicly say only nice things ) and removed some other demos:
> http://media.soundsonline.com/mp3/hc_nick-phoenix_fallen-soldier.mp3
> 
> I just want to thank all the people mentioning Dominus in this thread, I think the two products are aimed at very different styles of music. And, also, we have some exciting plans for Dominus next year.


Much better! Although the women still sound very straight-toned/choir-boyish. Perhaps that's just the sound they were going for.

I own SC, and so I was really excited to see what HWC had changed. With SC, to get the legato and presence of sound I wanted, I had to overdub all of the parts with my own singing, about 3-4 layers per part. If the "epic" settings sound straight toned, then I think I'd still have to overdub at least the women's voices to achieve the desired sound.

Something like how they sound here (and this is a relatively small choir for this piece):


----------



## Tatu

Dominik Raab said:


> "Prepare your butthole?"


//Puts on VR-glasses.

Seriously, what was the thing about virtual reality, mentioned on that very interesting trailer?


----------



## Ashermusic

bvaughn0402 said:


> I for one always appreciate your insight.
> 
> When will this review be ready? I for one really want to read it. I saved up for this library over 6 months ... I'm hesitant to pull the trigger.
> 
> Curious for you (or anyone else) ... if you were going to accent background vocals for pop/rock songs ... to get as close to actual words (maybe at a minimum mimicking the prominent vowel sound) ... what would you recommend?
> 
> I was going to use this for that. Just bury it in the mix enough to where you hear a different singer (than me), but not so upfront that it sounds like a choir.



The review usually, after being submitted, takes about 3 weeks to work its way through the queue to get posted.

I don't know any library that does pop background vocal words. I usually use Mike's Realivox Ladies ( I wish he would do the men already), Omnisphere, or I sing them myself, as I did (SHAMELESS SELF-PROMOTION ALERT!) on my new album, "Honestly."


----------



## HardyP

JohnG said:


> Plus I detest vibrato in choirs, except soloists, and so if it's "low vibrato" that's preferable to me.


Exactly. I backed Strezovs SC2, but was a bit disappointed afterwards by the general usability because of the "too loud" vibrato. And that seems to be the case for other products as well, so from a market perspective I can see the logic behind ew´s decision to go the more "low vibrato" route.


----------



## HardyP

paoling said:


> (as a developer I feel that I can publicly say only nice things ) and removed some other demos:
> http://media.soundsonline.com/mp3/hc_nick-phoenix_fallen-soldier.mp3
> 
> I just want to thank all the people mentioning Dominus in this thread, I think the two products are aimed at very different styles of music. And, also, we have some exciting plans for Dominus next year.


Paolo, in the meantime I really regret to not have taken the plunge on the introductory offer... the sound is great, you have a great love for voices, thus made the right decision for the recorded choirs - and beside that you´re a great guy (showed it again with your kind postings about a competitors product)...
I just had the impression, that I might not feel comfortable with Dominus in terms of clarity of the words, and on the other hand some consonants seemed to stick out too much.
Hm, let´s see what you will present to us next year ...


----------



## Ashermusic

Indeed, Paolo is one of my very favorite developers. He is a great guy and has wonderful ears.


----------



## Oliver

Fluffy and Paolo are amazing!
And Dominus is my most favourite Choire right now!!! (and that of my girlfriend  )


----------



## tehreal

As someone relatively new here, I find the political aspects of this discussion quite fascinating.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

tehreal said:


> As someone relatively new here, I find the political aspects of this discussion quite fascinating.



And that's pretty much what it is....politics. Take it with a grain of salt, and don't judge anything based on this, form your own opinion on products based on your own experience. There are a lot of great members here, with a wealth of valuable information, but sometimes things get placed under a microscope; it's just human nature.


----------



## tehreal

Wolfie2112 said:


> [...] form your own opinion on products based on your own experience [...]



Unfortunately, the sample industry is a "no trials/no refunds" industry so I have to read everything available and take it all into account (especially when buying from the bigger players).


----------



## peter5992

constaneum said:


> anyway, let's get down to actual library reviewing business. Has anyone actually come out with any demos (apart from the official demos) and shows how bad or good this library it instead of just showing the presets. Assuming the presets sux and you're better than the EW guys in terms of tweaking the phonics. At least, can anyone come out with a proper compositions featuring the HWC in action instead? Would really love to hear how.
> 
> Apart from French, Latin or English phrases which people are bashing about the poor pronunciation, what about using it to build "new" languages. like what you hear in Nier soundtracks or even Lord of the Rings soundtrack where by they create their own future / elven languages for the soundtracks. With the creation of rare languages, i doubt anyone will actually mind HWC singing these rare languages which at the first place, nobody actually understand the language or even know how it should be pronounced. Anyone tried creating their own languages with HWC? just curious.




Here's a very brief demo of the new Hollywood Choirs, with my own lyrics. The esses sound a little whacky, but that could be soundcloud -- I've had weird audio artifacts before after I uploaded tracks. Can I upload audio tracks directly, by the way? Maybe that would be better. 

 

I was one of the beta testers, I can tell you that the new wordbuilder is a helluva lot easier to program than the old one (which was, quite frankly, a pita). That's probably the biggest difference in terms of usefulness. Also, the new mike positions for the Diamond choirs are really nice.


----------



## tehreal

peter5992 said:


> Here's a very brief demo of the new Hollywood Choirs, with my own lyrics. The esses sound a little whacky, but that could be soundcloud -- I've had weird audio artifacts before after I uploaded tracks. Can I upload audio tracks directly, by the way? Maybe that would be better.
> 
> 
> 
> I was one of the beta testers, I can tell you that the new wordbuilder is a helluva lot easier to program than the old one (which was, quite frankly, a pita). That's probably the biggest difference in terms of usefulness. Also, the new mike positions for the Diamond choirs are really nice.




Nice.

What do you think the strengths and weaknesses of this library are regarding the types of music it can perform?

For instance, can it do quiet/legato/andante phrasing?


----------



## reddognoyz

I loaded up the mens wordbuilder multi in VEP on my pc slave and get nothing but stuck notes. ???? I looked in the manual but don't see what I'm doing wrong....


----------



## Jaap

reddognoyz said:


> I loaded up the mens wordbuilder multi in VEP on my pc slave and get nothing but stuck notes. ???? I looked in the manual but don't see what I'm doing wrong....



If you use the Gold version, be sure to apply the update available on the Installation Centre since it fixes the issues (and hopefully also yours) with the WB Multi Men patch


----------



## bvaughn0402

paoling said:


> I just want to thank all the people mentioning Dominus in this thread, I think the two products are aimed at very different styles of music. And, also, we have some exciting plans for Dominus next year.



Maybe now would be a good time for a 30% Dominus "I wish I would have bought this!" sale?!

Or maybe a weekend only 30% Dominus "Did they really say all other Choir libraries suck?!" sale!!

I'd go for it ...


----------



## markleake

paoling said:


> I followed this discussion with great interest. I suppose that some of the concerns here have been taken into account by Eastwest, since they finally released nice(r) demo (as a developer I feel that I can publicly say only nice things ) and removed some other demos:
> http://media.soundsonline.com/mp3/hc_nick-phoenix_fallen-soldier.mp3
> 
> I just want to thank all the people mentioning Dominus in this thread, I think the two products are aimed at very different styles of music. And, also, we have some exciting plans for Dominus next year.


Now that's a better demo... it's what we've been asking for. Thanks for pointing us to it.

What an odd release for a much anticipated product, if they are struggling to get some good demos up and taken some down.

I heard Daniel James play with Dominus the other day, and it sounded absolutely beautiful, well... apart from his choice of words.  It's near the top of my buy list now.


----------



## peter5992

tehreal said:


> Nice.
> 
> What do you think the strengths and weaknesses of this library are regarding the types of music it can perform?
> 
> For instance, can it do quiet/legato/andante phrasing?



Thanks --- yes, you can do piano passages and legato phrasing. For some reason EW promotes it heavily with trailer like demos, and I agree that those sound good, but personally for me the test of a good choir library is how well it can handle traditional SATB scores, such that they are intelligible and sound somewhat realistic, without being buried under tons of heavy orchestra or percussion. 

You should just try it for yourself. The cloud subscription allows you to play around with everything they have for $20 to $30 a month, which is really a no brainer if you just want to test things.


----------



## constaneum

peter5992 said:


> Here's a very brief demo of the new Hollywood Choirs, with my own lyrics. The esses sound a little whacky, but that could be soundcloud -- I've had weird audio artifacts before after I uploaded tracks. Can I upload audio tracks directly, by the way? Maybe that would be better.
> 
> 
> 
> I was one of the beta testers, I can tell you that the new wordbuilder is a helluva lot easier to program than the old one (which was, quite frankly, a pita). That's probably the biggest difference in terms of usefulness. Also, the new mike positions for the Diamond choirs are really nice.





actually, it's not too bad but curious with what's all those hhsss-ing sound which sounds very loud?


----------



## Zhao Shen

Now that the initial explosion of negative reactions has died down and we can all look at things with a more measured perspective, I think it's safe to say that HWC is decent. It's definitely no disaster (as was the case with the solo strings). I think the issue is that the library doesn't do anything better than (or maybe even as well as) its competitors, which makes its premium price point a bit of a shame. The only somewhat compelling feature in the library is the Word Builder, which seems a bit overhyped when you think about what it actually is - an interface for easier access to syllables.

Also, to the people who keep arguing that at least this library is better than EWSC - stop. You're weakening your own argument by comparing this to a VST released over a decade ago that has been surpassed in every way imaginable by modern choir libraries.


----------



## Lode_Runner

Lyrics like "prepare for battle" and "I will fight for justice" make me think that the word builder might not be such a great idea. Latin is a much more tasteful option.



kimarnesen said:


> The world builder seems quite useless


Blasphemy! I'd like to see you build a better world. 



Ashermusic said:


> Oh, and while I have no real dog in this hunt anymore


Maybe not a dog in the hunt, possibly a fox. 



Okay, I'm done being a smart ass now.


----------



## conan

I subscribed to CC so that I could try out this choir. It would be exceptionally premature for me to pass judgement, but I will share some initial observations:

1) The overall tonal quality can be pleasant, especially in the sweet spots.
2) Some of the individual male RR's are not so nice and really stick out, e.g. raspiness in the middle range and pitch problems in the upper. Only certain RR's exhibit a problem.
3) _pp_ and _p_, while passable, are not entirely convincing.
4) The WB annunciations are not very articulate or distinguishable, although I guess that's to be expected.
5) This is my first experience with Play, and I am finding it a bit buggy - especially when multiple instances are open.
6) The walkthrough shows a Latin option and a right-side legend for Votox elements. I haven't been able to locate either of these items.
7) There seems to be some annoying pitch sliding going on before and after some of the notes; it's a slight portamento effect that I'm guessing can be disabled somewhere.
8) Some of the male notes have a weird release that creates a pitch changing effect. Once again, only certain RR's.

I'm getting the impression so far that this choir can be made to sound really good; but that it will take a good bit of practice, tinkering, and production technique to maximize its potential. I will continue to work with it to see if I can improve my skill to the point where I can use it effectively a cappella. Otherwise, I have consigned myself to purchasing Dominus.


----------



## Darren Durann

/


Zhao Shen said:


> Also, to the people who keep arguing that at least this library is better than EWSC - stop. You're weakening your own argument by comparing this to a VST released over a decade ago that has been surpassed in every way imaginable by modern choir libraries.



I must have missed that memo. EWSC has been mostly _*complemented *_well by libraries like Strezov and a couple of others, or should I add to that Strezov (for instance) has proven itself as a fine set of libraries unto itself. But the fact that quite a few pros still use EWSC at length in their productions tells us it hasn't been surpassed, otherwise it would have been jettisoned at first slaying.

Most of the people I deal with are pros, and every one of them use EWSC (btw, many of them have tried the others and stuck with EWSC anyway).

EWSC has plenty of problems. But if you need a one stop for a mock up (I've used it plenty of times for final tracks, personally), sorry but the others don't work as well as consistently as SC. Admittedly, that's if you've actually read through the manual and took the time to really learn how to use the library (see @Morodiene).

People keep playing up how much libraries have "evolved" and improved over the years....that's what the developers want you to think. Spitfire sure seems to be making a living at it, for just one of dozens of examples. All I've seen from them since Albion IV has been a lot of rerecorded stuff and novelty libraries (and yes I own SSS and all the Albions). I mean, I enjoy using several of their libraries but none of that replaces my Hollywood instruments...far from it. The Spitfire stuff is sketchpad only...and I'm far from the only one who thinks that way in the business.

Fact of the matter is, most novice composers could do themselves a huge favor just sticking to Composer Cloud, at _*least *_into their first year or more. Then decide if you want to throw more money into potential-buyer-regret/NFR libraries.

I just want to make sure no one here gets the idea that things coming out that are "new" are automatically superior in the sample library world. Those developers have to keep putting out products because they're a business *first*.

I have a ton of libraries and yet haven't heard anything that strikingly surpasses (or is as eminently useful) as the EWSC or the Hollywoods (well...there is Berlin Woodwinds, have to give it up to them, also CSS seems to be at least in the running from the little experience I've had with it).

Spend your money on your musical education...most really need it. At least as good advice: stay off the sample library forums for the most part (@Ashermusic has written insightfully (yet discreetly) about forum addicts and the unlikelihood of their getting somewhere in music, iirc). Weening yourself off of an all-about-buying-sample-libraries forum gives you time to check out the composer's forums, youtube educational videos, and so much more that will make you a far,_* far*_ better writer than you'll ever be putting in an hour minimum a day on forums like this (not that this is a bad forum, it certainly is more mature and well moderated than most).

Disregard what I say now (you won't hurt my feelings), but you'll see the truth as you progress in your own musical journey.

I'm out...so I can go learn more fully my craft and earn money while applying what I've learned. I wish all of you great success and a wonderful holiday season.


----------



## jonathanprice

Tatu said:


> Seriously, what was the thing about virtual reality, mentioned on that very interesting trailer?



One of the mid-mics is a Neumann Binaural Dummy-Head, which can capture a surround sound in two channels. Useful in virtual reality for people wearing headphones who want a surround environment. I scored a VR project by creating a 5.0 mix and then using HEar to encode it binaurally. Binaural samples would have made that a lot easier.



Lode_Runner said:


> Lyrics like "prepare for battle" and "I will fight for justice" make me think that the word builder might not be such a great idea. Latin is a much more tasteful option.



I think it's funny that the trailer is pushing English language as a plus. My memory doesn't serve me well, but how many films have used its own language in the score, non-ironically? It's very distracting. I've only ever used an English-language choral section in a comedy. I do love word-builders. I've got EWQLSC, Soloists of Prague, and a handful of Vocaloids, but I've used them mainly for mockups for live singers in opera, not film/media scores.

Of course, the WordBuilder could be used for made-up/non-distracting languages, so that's cool. But to lead with English, as if it's a great thing for a film/media score...which, with a name like Hollywood, I'm assuming is the target use...

But that's advertising. It sounds good to me in the walk-through, especially the piano end of the dynamics, and I'm looking forward to checking it out.


----------



## Anders Wall

Darren Durann said:


> Fact of the matter is, most novice composers could do themselves a huge favor just sticking to Composer Cloud, at _*least *_into their first year or more.


Hahahahahahahahahaaaaa!


----------



## Paul Thomson

Darren Durann said:


> /
> 
> The Spitfire stuff is sketchpad only...and I'm far from the only one who thinks that way in the business.



Thats hilarious.

:D


----------



## Puzzlefactory

paulthomson said:


> Thats hilarious.
> 
> :D



Maybe he’s referring to Albion.


----------



## Zhao Shen

Darren Durann said:


> I just want to make sure no one here gets the idea that things coming out that are "new" are automatically superior in the sample library world. Those developers have to keep putting out products because they're a business *first*.



Yes, devs are a business first. So is Apple. So is Google. When's the last time you heard someone claim that the iPhone 3G was better than the iPhone 8? You can't expect people to believe that companies are releasing mediocre, worse-than-what-came-before products just because "they're a business first". If anything, being a business first in the sampling industry encourages innovation and quality, because the market is getting pretty crowded, and if someone isn't impressed by your offerings, they can get to your competitors in a few clicks.



Darren Durann said:


> People keep playing up how much libraries have "evolved" and improved over the years....that's what the developers want you to think. Spitfire sure seems to be making a living at it, for just one of dozens of examples. All I've seen from them since Albion IV has been a lot of rerecorded stuff and novelty libraries (and yes I own SSS and all the Albions). I mean, I enjoy using several of their libraries but none of that replaces my Hollywood instruments...far from it. The Spitfire stuff is sketchpad only...and I'm far from the only one who thinks that way in the business.



Look, Spitfire has its issues, and I'll be the first to admit that this forum is immensely biased toward them, to the point where Spitfire threads aren't worth browsing for reviews/opinions. But "sketchpad only"... Don't make me laugh. If you can't think of a single situation where one of their products does something the Hollywood series can't, you simply haven't done your research.



Darren Durann said:


> Most of the people I deal with are pros, and every one of them use EWSC (btw, many of them have tried the others and stuck with EWSC anyway).



Let us not fall into the trap of believing that just because someone does something for a living, they must be able to do it well. Now, I'm certainly not implying that the pros you know are bad at their job - that would be both rude and completely unfounded. But it's not as if knowing a number of pros that use EWSC means that every pro agrees that EWSC is a great baseline. Believe it or not, pros don't all hold the same opinions on every VST, and some are much better at their job than others.


----------



## Rudankort

I think it was Mike Verta who said that his clients were happy with the quality of samples 15 years ago and did not want any improvement in this particular area. On one hand, this reinforces the point that there are things more important than samples (the clients still want good music which communicates the right ideas and emotions to the listeners), but it also illustrates why for many pros it might not make sense to invest money and especially time into buying and learning new tools. And without actually learning new instrument, it may be difficult to compare it to the old one objectively. Which does not mean new tools are not better than the old ones. I would rather expect the opposite, because yes, it's a competitive environment, and accumulated experience and advances in technology allow to make better things as we go forward.

Having said that, within ComposerCloud ecosystem getting a choir better than EWQLSC is good news, so it's not such a bad argument per se. For many people who are not invested in expensive libraries and rely solely on CC for their production, this could be all they really need. And the fact that user experience and interface is similar, would also help.


----------



## JohnG

Leaving Spitfire aside for the moment, @Darren Durann makes a lot of great points:

*1. The Next Great Library probably won't improve your music as much as learning about music itself.* Many would do better to focus on learning _at least_ the "top 25" orchestration ideas, or learning better how the libraries you already have work under the hood, or even painstakingly going through all the patches and playing them to see what they can really do. I purchased EW's new choir library and will download it pretty soon; I expect to spend at least a few weeks getting to know it.

*2. There isn't a short cut to composing good music *and, judging by the innumerable "famous composers use this one simple trick" threads here and elsewhere, many people seem to believe that there is. Legions of threads about "your favourite plugin," mastering "tricks," quick and dirty harmony lessons -- these reek of the very human desire for shortcuts. I think there _are_ some shortcuts, but I don't think you can buy them; you have to learn them one at a time. Each little thing helps but it takes a thousand, or ten thousand of these "little things" to get to something genuinely worthwhile. It takes a lot of practice and at least a little study -- without the latter you waste enormous time (that nobody has) reinventing or groping toward techniques that are well known.
*
3. People are susceptible to thinking "new and shiny" is better than what they already have*. c.f. divorce rate, new car purchases, and so on. In that regard, the Apple iPhone example is both accurate and misleading -- yes, the newest one can do more, faster, but maybe a better question is whether it will in fact improve anything about your life materially? Similarly, if you already have HS and / or LASS and / or 8dio / and / or Spitfire, it's time to get to work really learning to work with those samples, not shopping for even more.  Put another way, I have heard fabulous writing using each of the major library sets, and a lot of mediocre writing from them as well. Many people here have reminded us that Thomas Bergersen was writing stunning demos 15 or even 20 years ago.

*4. Some old libraries are still awesome*: Symphobia, LASS, EWQLSC, RA, SILK -- these are just a handful I can think of (there are more) that I still use because they sound really good in some circumstances. I even use some ancient Roland patches now and then. They sound good, and they don't stop sounding good.

On Spitfire, I can't agree at all that it's just for sketching, even if you are talking only about the Albions. There is wonderful stuff in Spitfire's treasure trove. Andy Blaney's lovely, exciting, and musically rich demos prove that to me beyond a reasonable doubt.

That said, Darren's throw down that most new composers would do well to stick with Composer Cloud (or another library set) for a year before wasting a lot of money buying more stuff is directionally correct. Distracting oneself by shopping for new libraries, downloading and skimming through them, and then repeating the process can postpone -- sometimes forever! -- the inevitably somewhat tedious process of learning to compose, orchestrate, shape, and finalise one's pieces. I'm going to go through the Total Recall score as soon as I stop typing.

Yes, you need some plugins if you want to get the sheen that is popular in some areas today, and learning something about mastering is good, but honestly -- you probably don't need a single _new_ thing for that, if you own one good reverb and any of the major DAWs. They all come with EQ and delay and dozens of other processors; reverb too in many cases.

We all would do well, instead of buying more stuff, to get on youtube and learn about what we already have, or buy a score and work out what's going on.

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


----------



## Ashermusic

I think John's last post is fair, balanced, and spot on.


----------



## Morodiene

Darren Durann said:


> /
> 
> I must have missed that memo. EWSC has been mostly _*complemented *_well by libraries like Strezov and a couple of others, or should I add to that Strezov (for instance) has proven itself as a fine set of libraries unto itself. But the fact that quite a few pros still use EWSC at length in their productions tells us it hasn't been surpassed, otherwise it would have been jettisoned at first slaying.
> 
> Most of the people I deal with are pros, and every one of them use EWSC (btw, many of them have tried the others and stuck with EWSC anyway).
> 
> EWSC has plenty of problems. But if you need a one stop for a mock up (I've used it plenty of times for final tracks, personally), sorry but the others don't work as well as consistently as SC. Admittedly, that's if you've actually read through the manual and took the time to really learn how to use the library (see @Morodiene).
> 
> People keep playing up how much libraries have "evolved" and improved over the years....that's what the developers want you to think. Spitfire sure seems to be making a living at it, for just one of dozens of examples. All I've seen from them since Albion IV has been a lot of rerecorded stuff and novelty libraries (and yes I own SSS and all the Albions). I mean, I enjoy using several of their libraries but none of that replaces my Hollywood instruments...far from it. The Spitfire stuff is sketchpad only...and I'm far from the only one who thinks that way in the business.
> 
> Fact of the matter is, most novice composers could do themselves a huge favor just sticking to Composer Cloud, at _*least *_into their first year or more. Then decide if you want to throw more money into potential-buyer-regret/NFR libraries.
> 
> I just want to make sure no one here gets the idea that things coming out that are "new" are automatically superior in the sample library world. Those developers have to keep putting out products because they're a business *first*.
> 
> I have a ton of libraries and yet haven't heard anything that strikingly surpasses (or is as eminently useful) as the EWSC or the Hollywoods (well...there is Berlin Woodwinds, have to give it up to them, also CSS seems to be at least in the running from the little experience I've had with it).
> 
> Spend your money on your musical education...most really need it. At least as good advice: stay off the sample library forums for the most part (@Ashermusic has written insightfully (yet discreetly) about forum addicts and the unlikelihood of their getting somewhere in music, iirc). Weening yourself off of an all-about-buying-sample-libraries forum gives you time to check out the composer's forums, youtube educational videos, and so much more that will make you a far,_* far*_ better writer than you'll ever be putting in an hour minimum a day on forums like this (not that this is a bad forum, it certainly is more mature and well moderated than most).
> 
> Disregard what I say now (you won't hurt my feelings), but you'll see the truth as you progress in your own musical journey.
> 
> I'm out...so I can go learn more fully my craft and earn money while applying what I've learned. I wish all of you great success and a wonderful holiday season.


Thanks for the mention, @Darren Durann . I agree with the statement about CC simply because no other developer to my knowledge offers a free trial or a paid trial of their products. For someone who is just getting started in the world of software instruments, having access to high-quality sounds like EWQL without breaking the bank is a huge plus.

Even if you do not like those libraries and eventually purchase something else, learning the steps in using plugins in your DAW, playing them, developing your skills in composing, and even in mixing are things that carry over into any software out there - you just have to learn how that particular library works.

As for the claims that EWSC has been a staple for many pros, I can't speak to that, except to say that if a composer wants real words of their own choosing, the pickings are few and far in between. This is why I chose SC when I was looking at a choir library - choosing my words and having them be somewhat intelligible was very important to my work. I will admit, SC is a pain in many respects, and I'm hopeful that some of that finickiness has been worked out in HWC so I'm eager to hear what others can do with it. 

Actually, I may just subscribe to CC and give it a shot myself.


----------



## NoamL

Rudankort said:


> I think it was Mike Verta who said that his clients were happy with the quality of samples 15 years ago and did not want any improvement in this particular area



I always thought that's true BUT misleading.

You can give someone an EWQLSO mockup and indeed, even today, they will say "Wow that sounds like an orchestra!"

But if _you're_ pitching with an EWQLSO mockup and _I'm_ pitching a track with modern libraries and equal musical merits (or indeed a live track!), suddenly the EWQLSO mockup's seams start to show. Things start to become obvious, even to laypeople, about how "samply" the EWQLSO mockup is, that wouldn't be immediately obvious in isolation.

We never pitch our stuff in isolation, it's always in context and that means it's always an arms race of sorts.

The very first time I ever heard "Mind Heist" those amped trombone stabs practically blew my head off. Me and everyone else in the theater practically were turning to each other going "WTF WAS THAT."

But now 7 years later in the context of everything that's been written, those are some pretty tame brams. And the track no longer feels like such a massive leap beyond the other tracks that used to be used in that era (Requiem For A Dream, Adagio in D). The context of other music changes everything. 

There's a reason so many professional composers have privately recorded libraries, they recognize that it's a career necessity to be one step ahead of what's publicly available. Although that has become less so, it certainly was the case back in EWQLSO times.

That being said I agree 100% with the two ideas that EWQLSO still has some great patches, and that those "SECRETS OF JOHN WILLIAMS" youtube videos are mostly bs. There's a cottage industry of people teaching "one simple trick" on YouTube. Mike Verta is better than all of them as he emphasizes in every lesson that you have to score read to become a good composer.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

JohnG said:


> Leaving Spitfire aside for the moment, @Darren Durann makes a lot of great points:
> 
> *1. The Next Great Library probably won't improve your music as much as learning about music itself.* Many would do better to focus on learning _at least_ the "top 25" orchestration ideas, or learning better how the libraries you already have work under the hood, or even painstakingly going through all the patches and playing them to see what they can really do. I purchased EW's new choir library and will download it pretty soon; I expect to spend at least a few weeks getting to know it.
> 
> *2. There isn't a short cut to composing good music *and, judging by the innumerable "famous composers use this one simple trick" threads here and elsewhere, many people seem to believe that there is. Legions of threads about "your favourite plugin," mastering "tricks," quick and dirty harmony lessons -- these reek of the very human desire for shortcuts. I think there _are_ some shortcuts, but I don't think you can buy them; you have to learn them one at a time. Each little thing helps but it takes a thousand, or ten thousand of these "little things" to get to something genuinely worthwhile. It takes a lot of practice and at least a little study -- without the latter you waste enormous time (that nobody has) reinventing or groping toward techniques that are well known.
> *
> 3. People are susceptible to thinking "new and shiny" is better than what they already have*. c.f. divorce rate, new car purchases, and so on. In that regard, the Apple iPhone example is both accurate and misleading -- yes, the newest one can do more, faster, but maybe a better question is whether it will in fact improve anything about your life materially? Similarly, if you already have HS and / or LASS and / or 8dio / and / or Spitfire, it's time to get to work really learning to work with those samples, not shopping for even more. Put another way, I have heard fabulous writing using each of the major library sets, and a lot of mediocre writing from them as well. Many people here have reminded us that Thomas Bergersen was writing stunning demos 15 or even 20 years ago.
> 
> *4. Some old libraries are still awesome*: Symphobia, LASS, EWQLSC, RA, SILK -- just a handful I can think of that I still use because they sound really good in some circumstances. I even use some ancient Roland patches now and then. They sound good, and they don't stop sounding good.
> 
> On Spitfire, I can't agree at all that it's just for sketching, even if you are talking only about the Albions. There is wonderful stuff in Spitfire's treasure trove. Andy Blaney's lovely, exciting, and musically rich demos prove that to me beyond a reasonable doubt.
> 
> That said, Darren's throw down that most new composers would do well to stick with Composer Cloud (or another library set) for a year before wasting a lot of money buying more stuff is directionally correct. Distracting oneself by shopping for new libraries, downloading and skimming through them, and then repeating the process can postpone -- sometimes forever! -- the inevitably somewhat tedious process of learning to compose, orchestrate, shape, and finalise one's pieces. I'm going to go through the Total Recall score as soon as I stop typing.
> 
> Yes, you need some plugins if you want to get the sheen that is popular in some areas today, and learning something about mastering is good, but honestly -- you probably don't need a single _new_ thing for that, if you own one good reverb and any of the major DAWs. They all come with EQ and delay and dozens of other processors; reverb too in many cases.
> 
> We all would do well, instead of buying more stuff, to get on youtube and learn about what we already have, or buy a score and work out what's going on.
> 
> [note: I have received free products from East West]



Actually this is really a good post and applies very good to this forum I have to say.


----------



## Rudankort

NoamL said:


> I always thought that's true BUT misleading.
> 
> You can give someone an EWQLSO mockup and indeed, even today, they will say "Wow that sounds like an orchestra!"
> 
> But if _you're_ pitching with an EWQLSO mockup and _I'm_ pitching a track with modern libraries and equal musical merits, suddenly the EWQLSO mockup's seams start to show. That doubt might be a deciding factor if the final product is intended to be VI not live.
> 
> We never pitch our stuff in isolation, it's always in context and that means it's always an arms race of sorts.



You are of course right, in direct comparison the difference will be obvious even to an average person. But in reality, such comparisons do not necessarily happen. They might be important is certain cases (e. g. Library music) and totally irrelevant in others. Mike Verta also says that more often than not you need to know the right people to get the job, not impress them with your skills and libraries. This happens on all levels, and I personally have seen it happening as well. What does matter for the client is that the music is good enough, including the sound. And here, some old libraries are definitely up to the task.


----------



## John57

John post is good. Good advise to novices to try out Composer Cloud at least a year. That way you know what libraries you use the most and gets you a better idea on what your future libraries needs or requirements will be. EastWest libraries are not the easiest to use but with effort and learning you can get great results from it. For me EWQLSC which I own works great for my needs. My last Choir purchase was Oceania by Performance Samples which is great to get inspiration ideas down on "paper" faster for latter tweaking with other libraries.


----------



## chrisphan

To take the iPhone comparison further (unnecessarily so), technological development always reaches a plateau after a while, and yes after that they just put out new products because they're *business* first. Comparing an iPhone 8 to a 3 is extreme, but if you compare an 8 to a 6, or even 5, there's not that much difference. Miroslav Philharmonik is probably the sample library equivalent of an iPhone 3. Since then, I believe we have reached a plateau with the Hollywood Series, VSL and LASS. Things that came afterwards are marginally better.


----------



## thereus

Lode_Runner said:


> Lyrics like "prepare for battle" and "I will fight for justice" make me think that the word builder might not be such a great idea. Latin is a much more tasteful option.
> 
> 
> Blasphemy! I'd like to see you build a better world.
> 
> 
> Maybe not a dog in the hunt, possibly a fox.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, I'm done being a smart ass now.


Smart?


----------



## thesteelydane

JohnG said:


> Leaving Spitfire aside for the moment, @Darren Durann makes a lot of great points:
> 
> *1. The Next Great Library probably won't improve your music as much as learning about music itself.* Many would do better to focus on learning _at least_ the "top 25" orchestration ideas, or learning better how the libraries you already have work under the hood, or even painstakingly going through all the patches and playing them to see what they can really do. I purchased EW's new choir library and will download it pretty soon; I expect to spend at least a few weeks getting to know it.
> 
> *2. There isn't a short cut to composing good music *and, judging by the innumerable "famous composers use this one simple trick" threads here and elsewhere, many people seem to believe that there is. Legions of threads about "your favourite plugin," mastering "tricks," quick and dirty harmony lessons -- these reek of the very human desire for shortcuts. I think there _are_ some shortcuts, but I don't think you can buy them; you have to learn them one at a time. Each little thing helps but it takes a thousand, or ten thousand of these "little things" to get to something genuinely worthwhile. It takes a lot of practice and at least a little study -- without the latter you waste enormous time (that nobody has) reinventing or groping toward techniques that are well known.
> *
> 3. People are susceptible to thinking "new and shiny" is better than what they already have*. c.f. divorce rate, new car purchases, and so on. In that regard, the Apple iPhone example is both accurate and misleading -- yes, the newest one can do more, faster, but maybe a better question is whether it will in fact improve anything about your life materially? Similarly, if you already have HS and / or LASS and / or 8dio / and / or Spitfire, it's time to get to work really learning to work with those samples, not shopping for even more. Put another way, I have heard fabulous writing using each of the major library sets, and a lot of mediocre writing from them as well. Many people here have reminded us that Thomas Bergersen was writing stunning demos 15 or even 20 years ago.
> 
> *4. Some old libraries are still awesome*: Symphobia, LASS, EWQLSC, RA, SILK -- these are just a handful I can think of (there are more) that I still use because they sound really good in some circumstances. I even use some ancient Roland patches now and then. They sound good, and they don't stop sounding good.
> 
> On Spitfire, I can't agree at all that it's just for sketching, even if you are talking only about the Albions. There is wonderful stuff in Spitfire's treasure trove. Andy Blaney's lovely, exciting, and musically rich demos prove that to me beyond a reasonable doubt.
> 
> That said, Darren's throw down that most new composers would do well to stick with Composer Cloud (or another library set) for a year before wasting a lot of money buying more stuff is directionally correct. Distracting oneself by shopping for new libraries, downloading and skimming through them, and then repeating the process can postpone -- sometimes forever! -- the inevitably somewhat tedious process of learning to compose, orchestrate, shape, and finalise one's pieces. I'm going to go through the Total Recall score as soon as I stop typing.
> 
> Yes, you need some plugins if you want to get the sheen that is popular in some areas today, and learning something about mastering is good, but honestly -- you probably don't need a single _new_ thing for that, if you own one good reverb and any of the major DAWs. They all come with EQ and delay and dozens of other processors; reverb too in many cases.
> 
> We all would do well, instead of buying more stuff, to get on youtube and learn about what we already have, or buy a score and work out what's going on.
> 
> [note: I have received free products from East West]



Post of the year!


----------



## Lode_Runner

thereus said:


> Smart?


Okay, maybe silly rather than smart


----------



## JonSolo

I agree that was a great post. Hopefully, I was not hard in my initial reaction. Honestly I was hoping to having a variety of ranges on this choir. At some point I may get it. For right now, I have epic covered well, and am not at the point in my career where lyrics take a forefront in my scoring.


----------



## Leandro Gardini

EW produces some of the best sample libraries in the world but they really need to bring back great composers like Thomas to the team.
They've been struggling for many years to make a realistic legato since the QLSO and they finally got it right with the Hollywood Orchestra.
They decided to go back and produce other products without the need of a good composer and now their legato does not work anymore.
They've been persistently programing their legato samples with a very fast attack which is not like the real thing.
With the exception of the Hollywood Orchestra, from the old QLegato to their newest library they didn't succeed in programing their connected notes. What a waste!


----------



## peter5992

constaneum said:


> actually, it's not too bad but curious with what's all those hhsss-ing sound which sounds very loud?



That is probably a programming issue --- you get much better results when you program lyrics in votox. I think I did that, but I didn't tweak the lyrics individually. 

It might also be soundcloud adding strange audio artifacts to the render.


----------



## Quantum Leap

Leandro....... I will probably always be in Thomas’ shadow. He’s awesome! And my favorite composer. I am, however, the second most successful library composer in the world. And TSFH has millions of fans. We are doing a world tour next year. I am an imposter, I realize. Imposters are big these days. Look at our president. I returned to this forum after many years and you are still here complaining about legato. I see you have used your time wisely. Well EWQLSO had no legato. Qlegato was just an attempt to make connected notes from sustain samples. It was the best we could do with the limited time we had to record EWQLSO in Seattle. We couldn’t record true legato. On to the Choirs. 
HC was only done because I wanted to take the wordbuilding concept to the next level. It always bothered me that SC had so many issues and the choir itself is tame sounding. It’s a labor of love and not business as some might think. I am pretty much done with samples.
Legato is absolutely not the focus of this library at all. Are you aware that choirmasters strive to get the least amount of portamento between notes that they can 99% of the time? I will take another look and see if I can make you a Lydocane drip patch to soothe your soul. I didn’t really tweak the legato at all. However I like the fast playing legato for vocals. It’s incredibly useful for exciting music. Hollywood Choirs is really unique and has some real strengths. I just did a demo after I got the library integrated into my template a few days ago. It was fun. I realize it’s not up to your standards, but the singing is in English and I did zero tweaking of the votox in the entire demo. I only tweaked the midi timing slightly here and there. It is 100% out of the box in wordbuilder. The little issues are just not audible within a piece of music. I love the open world unrestrained aspect of Hollywood Choirs. Any language, any words and the dynamics are unsurpassed. It is very strong in the soft dynamics as well (zero noise reduction in the soft samples!). You can here that in the walkthrough and the first half of my demo. I think there are still a few bugs in the release but they have an update in the next few days. 
The most important thing to remember is HC is not another “me too” library. It is unique and some people are going to love it.


----------



## Lode_Runner

paoling said:


> also, we have some exciting plans for Dominus next year.


My imagination is running wild already. So many possibilities... I'm sure whatever it is it will be great


----------



## NoamL

Yeah the obsession over legato in choir samples... I don't get it... and also wouldn't it be called melisma instead?

The Force theme while fun does not seem like an idiomatic thing to test vocals on. Its range is more than an octave and contains lots of leaps.

Wouldn't the go to test for an "epic-cinematic" choral library be Beethoven 9, Carmina Burana, etc.


----------



## Leandro Gardini

Quantum Leap said:


> Leandro....... I will probably always be in Thomas’ shadow. He’s awesome! And my favorite composer. I am, however, the second most successful library composer in the world. And TSFH has millions of fans. We are doing a world tour next year. I am an imposter, I realize. Imposters are big these days. Look at our president. I returned to this forum after many years and you are still here complaining about legato. I see you have used your time wisely. Well EWQLSO had no legato. Qlegato was just an attempt to make connected notes from sustain samples. It was the best we could do with the limited time we had to record EWQLSO in Seattle. We couldn’t record true legato. On to the Choirs.
> HC was only done because I wanted to take the wordbuilding concept to the next level. It always bothered me that SC had so many issues and the choir itself is tame sounding. It’s a labor of love and not business as some might think. I am pretty much done with samples.
> Legato is absolutely not the focus of this library at all. Are you aware that choirmasters strive to get the least amount of portamento between notes that they can 99% of the time? I will take another look and see if I can make you a Lydocane drip patch to soothe your soul. I didn’t really tweak the legato at all. However I like the fast playing legato for vocals. It’s incredibly useful for exciting music. Hollywood Choirs is really unique and has some real strengths. I just did a demo after I got the library integrated into my template a few days ago. It was fun. I realize it’s not up to your standards, but the singing is in English and I did zero tweaking of the votox in the entire demo. I only tweaked the midi timing slightly here and there. It is 100% out of the box in wordbuilder. The little issues are just not audible within a piece of music. I love the open world unrestrained aspect of Hollywood Choirs. Any language, any words and the dynamics are unsurpassed. It is very strong in the soft dynamics as well (zero noise reduction in the soft samples!). You can here that in the walkthrough and the first half of my demo. I think there are still a few bugs in the release but they have an update in the next few days.
> The most important thing to remember is HC is not another “me too” library. It is unique and some people are going to love it.


Hey Nick, it is good to see you shine in.
Yes Thomas is amazing so are you, though, I didn't mean to be negative towards you or this library but it is noticeable to me how much you've improved in the sampling industry these many past years but still using the same old concept about legato programming.
QLSO didn't have sampled intervals but it did have legato. Back then the only library that was sampling intervals was Vienna. Libraries like Garritan and Sonic Implants, even though not using sampled intervals, had their own technology and programing for legatos and they were effective in many ways but not the so called "Legs" in QLSO. Several times I've found myself changing the extremely fast attack to a slower one for connected notes and it sounded much better.
I see, legato was not the focus, so why did you spend so much time, money and effort sampling the intervals? Legatos are important, and even though YOU are saying that concertmasters avoid portamentos, this is a normal characteristic of the human voice and brings a lot of expression to a phrase.
Since you have real intervals I'm sure this library has the potential to sound much better in the connected notes but as you've said, you didn't spend much time tweaking which makes wonder wonder why you release such good product with little attention to an important matter.
You don't have to learn anything from me because you are tons of time more successful than me and I have zero experience in sampling but, if you plan to improve the legato programming one day, please accept my humble suggestion - forget those super fast attacks and think more of a smearing connection! No one want to hear as if the singer is punching his chest whenever they change pitch.
You are great and as you must know, I am one of the oldest loyal consumers of your libraries and will continue to be as long as you continue to improve by learning from mistakes. Best luck!


----------



## Quantum Leap

95% of the effort in HC was put into wordbuilding and making a dynamic choir that can sing anything. We will take a look at the legato programs. We did sample intervals. But, if it’s slow pretty legato you crave, there are libraries that do it more extensively like Troel’s last effort. You should be careful what you say because even though I have a thick skin, calling me a bad composer kind of pissed me off. I feel like I am trying to add to the composer community and don’t want to be trashed for it. I guess you were just ranting about legato and didn’t mean it so thanks for the apology and I certainly don’t feel like I’m better than anyone. We are all in the same boat.


----------



## mcalis

@Quantum Leap I'll be blunt: I am not a fan of the current legato. I've sung in choirs, so I'm not completely talking out of my ass when I say in my experience, choral legato is much smoother and more connected. It depends on the music, of course. That said, I understand that the legato was not the focus and I can see limited use for it in faster passages. If, however, there is some way for "Slow Legato" patches to be added to HC, where the timing is tweaked to hear more of the interval, I'd certainly welcome it. I'm saddened to hear you're done with samples as I'd always hoped we might hear a retake om the Hollywood Woodwinds someday as I seem to recall the end product didn't quite match the original vision (I'm paraphrasing).

In any case, I'm happy with having HC as another tool in my arsenal as part of the composer cloud. You won't hear me complain about getting more tools at no increased monthly expenditure!


----------



## Leandro Gardini

Quantum Leap said:


> 95% of the effort in HC was put into wordbuilding and making a dynamic choir that can sing anything. We will take a look at the legato programs. We did sample intervals. But, if it’s slow pretty legato you crave, there are libraries that do it more extensively like Troel’s last effort. You should be careful what you say because even though I have a thick skin, calling me a bad composer kind of pissed me off. I feel like I am trying to add to the composer community and don’t want to be trashed for it. I guess you were just ranting about legato and didn’t mean it so thanks for the apology and I certainly don’t feel like I’m better than anyone. We are all in the same boat.


Nick, I have total respect for you and everything you’ve done for the music industry. For not a single moment I meant to call you a bad composer. I am sorry that you’ve had this impression and I must oppologize if I’ve made the wrong impression. Though, Thomas is an amazing composer, better than us together, and while he was there he greatly contributed to the HO success and I am sure you know it better than me. But recognizing his contribution does not, or should not, belittle you. It only occurs to me that there are some evident things that you’ve been missing during all these years.
If you are retiring from the sample industry I only have to say thank you. I guess once you look back you will have many more reasons to celebrate than to regret.


----------



## Puzzlefactory

@Quantum Leap would be good to see a walkthrough video of it being used in a session/track.


----------



## erica-grace

Quantum Leap said:


> calling me a bad composer kind of pissed me off.



I am sorry, where did he call you a "bad composer"?


----------



## Morodiene

Quantum Leap said:


> HC was only done because I wanted to take the wordbuilding concept to the next level. It always bothered me that SC had so many issues and the choir itself is tame sounding. It’s a labor of love and not business as some might think. I am pretty much done with samples.


 This is what I wanted to hear: about the improvements to Wordbuilder. SC worked, but it took a crazy amount of tweaking and workarounds. I'm really excited now to try HC out!


----------



## Mike Greene

With apologies, I've deleted the last few posts. A certain member keeps repeating himself that he doesn't think the HWC presentation was done well. We got it. Really, after a dozen or so posts saying the same thing (including a profanity-laden posts which I had to delete), we got it.

@Morodiene's point (and mine) is that it would be helpful to just chill a bit and consider how your words might be perceived. They sound like much more of an attack than I think you realize. Honesty is great, and believe me, my policy is not to protect developers. (In fact, Nick can confirm that I am quite the critic myself.  ) However, I don't believe pounding the same point over and over again is good for the discussion. Nick is a very, very talented composer and developer (EW is not an advertiser here, so I ain't just sayin' that), and I think most people here would love to hear more from him. So please, comments, even negative ones, are okay. But lets try to be aware of how our words will sound to the person reading them.


----------



## kurtvanzo

erica-grace said:


> I am sorry, where did he call you a "bad composer"?


Nick read into the lines "they really need to bring back great composers..." and "without the need of a good composer" from Leo as a dig on him (and others) who did demos. But also said he realized it may have been inadvertantly, so we should all let it slide.

Nick is great at what he does. In addition to being a top composer he records and builds sample libraries from the ground up, which few other people on the planet do regularly and know the painstaking task it is. He is only one human after all. If HC has issues we should alert him and allow him time to update and make it the best he can, for all our sakes. I'm glad and surprised after how this thread started he decided to post. But in order to increase our understanding of the process we should all encourage his involvement.

And over the past couple of years I've learned to ignore trailers, don't even watch them unless I want a chuckle, because I KNOW they won't represent the product accurately, but be a over-hyped mess that takes jabs wherever it can. That goes for Spitfire, East West, Sonuscore, or any other "Teaser" that is not meant to be informational, but a hype machine.

So Alex, perhaps we should just assume all trailers are light entertainment while waiting for the walkthrough and honest reations from uncompensated composers. And maybe when fixes are done, re-evaluate and judge for ourselves. Don't let a silly trailer get under your skin! Peace.


----------



## kimarnesen

Quantum Leap said:


> 95% of the effort in HC was put into wordbuilding and making a dynamic choir that can sing anything. We will take a look at the legato programs. We did sample intervals. But, if it’s slow pretty legato you crave, there are libraries that do it more extensively like Troel’s last effort. You should be careful what you say because even though I have a thick skin, calling me a bad composer kind of pissed me off. I feel like I am trying to add to the composer community and don’t want to be trashed for it. I guess you were just ranting about legato and didn’t mean it so thanks for the apology and I certainly don’t feel like I’m better than anyone. We are all in the same boat.



I've got no problems making HC sound smooth so don’t know where this negativity comes from.


----------



## conan

I'm not sure if it's appropriate to post an unpolished mock-up so soon after a new product's release, as I certainly wouldn't want my lack of prowess to constitute a misrepresentation of it's potential. That being said, there seems to be a dearth of audio examples right now - so I decided to contribute in the interests of being helpful.

I avoided any effects other than the included reverb. This was done by virtue of a CC subscription, so I did not have access to the other mic positions - something that I think would have been immensely beneficial. Also, the sibilance in this library can be rather extreme. I tried all of the usual tricks with Izotope RX, FabFiler DS, etc. - but the sibilance covers a fairly wide band and doesn't respond well to these tools. Removing the offending frequencies altogether, even with intelligent EQ's, leaves a dark character that may not always be desired. So, I decided to substitute other consonants in Votox for the A,T, and B parts and only use the sibilants on the S line. This is far from perfect, but works somewhat well as the consonants aren't always particularly distinguishable to begin with.

Overall, the Word Builder is very flexible. I also like the tone of the choir. Some of the individual T notes had to be altered in CC value to get a consistent volume, and there are some off-notes in the A section - but nothing that is a show-stopper.

A little Orazzio Vecchi:

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/fa-una-canzona-hc-mp3.10729/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## peter5992

Quantum Leap said:


> 95% of the effort in HC was put into wordbuilding and making a dynamic choir that can sing anything. We will take a look at the legato programs. We did sample intervals. But, if it’s slow pretty legato you crave, there are libraries that do it more extensively like Troel’s last effort. You should be careful what you say because even though I have a thick skin, calling me a bad composer kind of pissed me off. I feel like I am trying to add to the composer community and don’t want to be trashed for it. I guess you were just ranting about legato and didn’t mean it so thanks for the apology and I certainly don’t feel like I’m better than anyone. We are all in the same boat.



Hey Nick: I will say this: the effort paid off -- I've had the old SC for years and while I liked the sound quality, the WB - revolutionary as it was when first introduced - was always a pain in the ass to program. The new WB is just *so* much easier to work with. I can now use it directly in Sibelius, with a few special tweaks (WB doesn't like legato notes in a row, it gets confused, so you have to use a lot of rests) and the results are pretty impressive. In terms of work flow, this is actually pretty inspiring as I greatly prefer a notation program for traditional SATB music. 

Cheers
Peter


----------



## peter5992

conan said:


> I'm not sure if it's appropriate to post an unpolished mock-up so soon after a new product's release, as I certainly wouldn't want my lack of prowess to constitute a misrepresentation of it's potential. That being said, there seems to be a dearth of audio examples right now - so I decided to contribute in the interests of being helpful.
> 
> I avoided any effects other than the included reverb. This was done by virtue of a CC subscription, so I did not have access to the other mic positions - something that I think would have been immensely beneficial. Also, the sibilance in this library can be rather extreme. I tried all of the usual tricks with Izotope RX, FabFiler DS, etc. - but the sibilance covers a fairly wide band and doesn't respond well to these tools. Removing the offending frequencies altogether, even with intelligent EQ's, leaves a dark character that may not always be desired. So, I decided to substitute other consonants in Votox for the A,T, and B parts and only use the sibilants on the S line. This is far from perfect, but works somewhat well as the consonants aren't always particularly distinguishable to begin with.
> 
> Overall, the Word Builder is very flexible. I also like the tone of the choir. Some of the individual T notes had to be altered in CC value to get a consistent volume, and there are some off-notes in the A section - but nothing that is a show-stopper.
> 
> A little Orazzio Vecchi:
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/fa-una-canzona-hc-mp3.10729/][/AUDIOPLUS]



That's a great demo - I love it. Yes, the sibilances are a bit off, they are too prominent. But that can probably be tweaked.


----------



## aaronventure

In Christmas spirit and to see how it works with a tougher task, could someone try and recreate a few bars of



Lyrics are here.

If it fails, it fails. At least we'll know if it's capable or not. It certainly is being sold as "sing anything".


----------



## Morodiene

conan said:


> I'm not sure if it's appropriate to post an unpolished mock-up so soon after a new product's release, as I certainly wouldn't want my lack of prowess to constitute a misrepresentation of it's potential. That being said, there seems to be a dearth of audio examples right now - so I decided to contribute in the interests of being helpful.
> 
> I avoided any effects other than the included reverb. This was done by virtue of a CC subscription, so I did not have access to the other mic positions - something that I think would have been immensely beneficial. Also, the sibilance in this library can be rather extreme. I tried all of the usual tricks with Izotope RX, FabFiler DS, etc. - but the sibilance covers a fairly wide band and doesn't respond well to these tools. Removing the offending frequencies altogether, even with intelligent EQ's, leaves a dark character that may not always be desired. So, I decided to substitute other consonants in Votox for the A,T, and B parts and only use the sibilants on the S line. This is far from perfect, but works somewhat well as the consonants aren't always particularly distinguishable to begin with.
> 
> Overall, the Word Builder is very flexible. I also like the tone of the choir. Some of the individual T notes had to be altered in CC value to get a consistent volume, and there are some off-notes in the A section - but nothing that is a show-stopper.
> 
> A little Orazzio Vecchi:
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/fa-una-canzona-hc-mp3.10729/][/AUDIOPLUS]


The choir works really well in this style of music. 

You should be able to reduce the volume and length of the sibilants in Wordbuilder (at least SC could so I'm sure that has carried through to HC).


----------



## woafmann

Reducing the "Non Pitched Consonants slider helps with harsh sibilants. It seems to work better with the women's section more than the men's section from my testing thus far. Helps to sweeten the vowel/consonant transitions overall. 

Not sure if it's auto-tweaking only the volume of these non-pitched consonants or also the attack. Whatever it's doing, I think it sounds MUCH better for my tastes.


----------



## constaneum

woafmann said:


> Reducing the "Non Pitched Consonants slider helps with harsh sibilants. It seems to work better with the women's section more than the men's section from my testing thus far. Helps to sweeten the vowel/consonant transitions overall.
> 
> Not sure if it's auto-tweaking only the volume of these non-pitched consonants or also the attack. Whatever it's doing, I think it sounds MUCH better for my tastes.



hey dude. Mind to share the demos before and after reduction ? Would really love to hear the difference. Thanks


----------



## jamwerks

If I'm not mistaken, in the intro video, Nick seemed to really praise the quality of his new baby and now we hear that the legato was just a "half effort"? I'm very surprised. 

I've sung in choirs as have a lot of us. The voice uses as much if not more legato than most other instruments.

I'm also puzzled about this being a "labour of love" more than a product. I'm happy for Nick & EW for their passion, but that doesn't correspond to the tone I heard in the opening video...


----------



## JohnG

jamwerks said:


> The voice uses as much if not more legato than most other instruments



Not in my experience. I sing every week in a choir and if we started using what passes in sample-land for legato, we'd be scolded. A very small amount of transition maybe, but straight choirs these days strive for clean movement from one note to another, no "scoops," and no slides.

I realise that some people like yet more Carmina Burana, some like barbershop, some want sliding notes for more of a contemporary / pop feel and so on. I don't like any of that for choir; if I'm going for that I use a different library of soloists that is recorded with that kind of music in mind.

In general I am baffled by the focus on legato in samples. I would 10x rather use Symphobia's original sample set because of its tone, rather than some less convincing sound that has legato. Many legato implementations are far too loud or otherwise conspicuous. And portamento? When I go to the symphony I almost never hear it and if I do, it's all I can do to suppress laughter. 

I have heard old -- very old -- recordings of opera in which there's lots of exaggerated portamento and vibrato. I don't care for it.



jamwerks said:


> "labour of love" more than a product.



Given what he's written in this forum, Nick could retire tomorrow if he chose. Hence, "labour of love."

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


----------



## woafmann

WOMEN'S WB MULTI CONSONANT SETTINGS TESTS:

I turned off PLAY's reverb and used QL Spaces with the same settings for all tests:

So. Cal. Orchestra Hall
True Stereo
Choir field-position
3.4s Frontal Reflections
For mic levels within PLAY, I set them the same for all tests:

Close Overheads: 100%
Decca Tree & Outriggers: 50%
Mid Room: 100%
Surround: 50%

The only editing done is some basic CC1 and C11 level changes. These envelope edits are identical between all tests.


The same pre-built, UNEDITED Latin phrases can be heard in each track:

*semper ubi sub ubi Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo Estne Volumen*

Translated into Votox:
sem per O bE sub O bE flek te re sE nek wE o sO pe ros ak e ran ta mo ve bo est ne vo lO men

Translated into English by Google:
_"where it has taken under the If I can not bend, then Hell I will arouse a force of nature"_

The audio players are listed in this order:

Women - 100 PC - 100 NPC.mp3
_100% Pitched Consonants - 100% Non-Pitched Consonants

Women - 100 PC - 50 NPC.mp3
100% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants

Women - 75 PC - 50 NPC.mp3
75% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants
_

These files are obviously just sketches without realistic breathing rests.

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/1-women-100-pc-100-npc-mp3.10731/][/AUDIOPLUS]

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/2-women-100-pc-50-npc-mp3.10732/][/AUDIOPLUS]

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/3-women-75-pc-50-npc-mp3.10733/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## woafmann

MEN'S WB MULTI CONSONANT SETTINGS TESTS:

Everything is identical with the Women's test except the midi file was transposed minus 1 octave.

Men - 100 PC - 100 NPC.mp3
_100% Pitched Consonants - 100% Non-Pitched Consonants

Men - 100 PC - 50 NPC.mp3
100% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants

Men - 75 PC - 50 NPC.mp3
75% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants_


These files are obviously just sketches without realistic breathing rests.

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/4-men-100-pc-100-npc-mp3.10736/][/AUDIOPLUS]

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/5-men-100-pc-50-npc-mp3.10737/][/AUDIOPLUS]

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/6-men-75-pc-50-npc-mp3.10738/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## markleake

Agree on the legato not being what choirs do in the sense we are talking about here. If you listen to untrained singers they sing in a more legato style, and it really isn't great. The idea is for the choir to get the note transitions smooth, not pronounce the s's much, etc. So a good choir library doesn't need to focus on a very audible legato. That said, it is useful to have it more audible occasionally for effect.


----------



## constaneum

woafmann said:


> WOMEN'S WB MULTI CONSONANT SETTINGS TESTS:
> 
> I turned off PLAY's reverb and used QL Spaces with the same settings for all tests:
> 
> So. Cal. Orchestra Hall
> True Stereo
> Choir field-position
> 3.4s Frontal Reflections
> For mic levels within PLAY, I set them the same for all tests:
> 
> Close Overheads: 100%
> Decca Tree & Outriggers: 50%
> Mid Room: 100%
> Surround: 50%
> 
> The only editing done is some basic CC1 and C11 level changes. These envelope edits are identical between all tests.
> 
> 
> The same pre-built, UNEDITED Latin phrases can be heard in each track:
> 
> *semper ubi sub ubi Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo Estne Volumen*
> 
> Translated into Votox:
> sem per O bE sub O bE flek te re sE nek wE o sO pe ros ak e ran ta mo ve bo est ne vo lO men
> 
> Translated into English by Google:
> _"where it has taken under the If I can not bend, then Hell I will arouse a force of nature"_
> 
> The audio players are listed in this order:
> 
> Women - 100 PC - 100 NPC.mp3
> _100% Pitched Consonants - 100% Non-Pitched Consonants
> 
> Women - 100 PC - 50 NPC.mp3
> 100% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants
> 
> Women - 75 PC - 50 NPC.mp3
> 75% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants
> _
> 
> These files are obviously just sketches.
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/1-women-100-pc-100-npc-mp3.10731/][/AUDIOPLUS]
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/2-women-100-pc-50-npc-mp3.10732/][/AUDIOPLUS]
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/3-women-75-pc-50-npc-mp3.10733/][/AUDIOPLUS]



i find _100% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants sounding better than the rest. 100% Pitched Consonants - 100% Non-Pitched Consonants has too much noise and it seems like there's some low freq bass kick sound at the duration around 12/13s. _


----------



## constaneum

woafmann said:


> MEN'S WB MULTI CONSONANT SETTINGS TESTS:
> 
> Everything is identical with the Women's test except the midi file was transposed minus 1 octave.
> 
> Men - 100 PC - 100 NPC.mp3
> _100% Pitched Consonants - 100% Non-Pitched Consonants
> 
> Men - 100 PC - 50 NPC.mp3
> 100% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants
> 
> Men - 75 PC - 50 NPC.mp3
> 75% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants_
> 
> 
> These files are obviously just sketches without realistic breathing rests.
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/4-men-100-pc-100-npc-mp3.10736/][/AUDIOPLUS]
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/5-men-100-pc-50-npc-mp3.10737/][/AUDIOPLUS]
> 
> [AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/6-men-75-pc-50-npc-mp3.10738/][/AUDIOPLUS]



at least the base punch sound effect i mentioned earlier isn't that obvious for the men. Probably due to the fact that men's voice are between low and mid frequency which sort of cover up that effect. Anyway, overall, i'll have to say it's quite a good library for what it's capable of doing. I personally don't really bother much about legato when it comes to singing choir. Legato only matters to me when it comes to ah or oh legato which can be done with other libraries any way. I'm only looking at this library for its wordbuilder function.


----------



## woafmann

constaneum said:


> i find _100% Pitched Consonants - 50% Non-Pitched Consonants sounding better than the rest. 100% Pitched Consonants - 100% Non-Pitched Consonants has too much noise and it seems like there's some low freq bass kick sound at the duration around 12/13s. _



I agree. It seems that at least for the women's section, this gives the best overall tone.

For the men's section, a lowered non-pitch consonant setting seems better, but there are still some strange artifacts that jump out here and there, muddying the sound. I tried many different settings, to limit this noise without success. There still seems to be issues. Buried in the mix may be fine, but "a capella", the bass and tenor sound odd to my ears.

FYI, all of the tests were done with freshly updated library files.

EDIT: The men's section does have a rich timbre which I really love. I hope that EWQL will be able to edit out some of the artifacts in a future update if possible.


----------



## constaneum

woafmann said:


> I agree. It seems that at least for the women's section, this gives the best overall tone.
> 
> For the men's section, a lowered non-pitch consonant setting seems better, but there are still some strange artifacts that jump out here and there, muddying the sound. I tried many different settings, to limit this noise without success. There still seems to be issues. Buried in the mix may be fine, but "a capella", the bass and tenor sound odd to my ears.
> 
> FYI, all of the tests were done with freshly updated library files.
> 
> EDIT: The men's section does have a rich timbre which I really love. I hope that EWQL will be able to edit out some of the artifacts in a future update if possible.



Doing some lower freq EQ won't be able to remove those artifacts?


----------



## woafmann

constaneum said:


> Doing some lower freq EQ won't be able to remove those artifacts?



I meant "I tried many different settings _within PLAY itself_ to limit this noise without success." I'm sure I could limit them via EQ, but haven't attempted this yet.


----------



## constaneum

guess will have to try EQ. haha. anyway, thanks for the demos.


----------



## constaneum

i came across this on youtube. for an improvisation video without much tweaking, i think it sounds pretty good for hollywood choir.


----------



## jamwerks

JohnG said:


> Not in my experience. I sing every week in a choir and if we started using what passes in sample-land for legato, we'd be scolded. A very small amount of transition maybe, but straight choirs these days strive for clean movement from one note to another, no "scoops," and no slides.


By legato I do mean a small amount of transition, no scoops or slides. Unless one sings staccato (separated), notes sung in the same breath are just as legato (connected) as with any wind instrument imo. They are connected in an "inaudible" way, but they are very tightly connected.


----------



## HardyP

markleake said:


> If you listen to untrained singers they sing in a more legato style, and it really isn't great. The idea is for the choir to get the note transitions smooth, not pronounce the s's much, etc. So a good choir library doesn't need to focus on a very audible legato


Being a choir conductor, I just have to second that. Sopranos in portamento-like legato-mode - the most horrible thing I can imagine... 
That being said, the term "smooth note transitions" from Mark is to the point, and I have the feeling HC is not the smoothest in that regards ... interestingly, as soon as the provided snippets go from unison to a full SATB, it seems to be much better!

Perfect consonants are a hard thing to accomplish (even with a real choir), if you are striving for textual clarity. The ballance between harshness and understandability is walking a fine line.

Consonants are also the weaker part of Realitone's Blue (which I quite like in terms of text usability), where the (in this case) not-so-magic @Mike Greene is miserably failing to deliver the long awaited update....


Edit: that realtime YT of HC is really impressive... whow.


----------



## constaneum

jamwerks said:


> By legato I do mean a small amount of transition, no scoops or slides. Unless one sings staccato (separated), notes sung in the same breath are just as legato (connected) as with any wind instrument imo. They are connected in an "inaudible" way, but they are very tightly connected.



I believe you'll be more referring to slower lines. In fast pace music, such transition won't really be bothered. I guess Ocenia isn't meant for that fast lines as well.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Anybody wants to try it out how HWC handles such things like the CB from Orff? A while ago I did a demo for Ocenia, this medley was at an early production stage though but anyways you get an idea.



Curious how HWC as it has worldbuilder could handle that.


----------



## conan

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Anybody wants to try it out how HWC handles such things like the CB from Orff? A while ago I did a demo for Ocenia, this medley was at an early production stage though but anyways you get an idea.
> 
> 
> 
> Curious how HWC as it has worldbuilder could handle that.




I would be more interested in testing it with some of the movements other than _O Fortuna_, especially _Fortune plango vulnera_, _Chume, chum, geselle min_, or _In taberna quando sumus. _Maybe even _Swaz hie gat umbe. 

I enjoyed doing the Vecchio mock-up, maybe I'll work on some CB next._


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

conan said:


> I would be more interested in testing it with some of the movements other than _O Fortuna_, especially _Fortune plango vulnera_, _Chume, chum, geselle min_, or _In taberna quando sumus. _Maybe even _Swaz hie gat umbe.
> _
> I enjoyed doing the Vecchio mock-up, maybe I'll work on some CB next.



It is not easy to get a perspective when you have different tracks to compare so..I would anyways if you do it or somebody else appreciate the effort to do at least some bars of that main title theme here.


----------



## bap_la_so_1

Anybody compare Hollywood choir to Voices of Prague?
Both have world builder and contain full SATB


----------



## Quantum Leap

I figured it out. Lol. Actually crying a bit. I had nothing to do with that slick HC promo video. I just did that walkthrough video. Slower legato patches were done today, but it is my belief that our focus in HC was a good choice.


----------



## George Bellas

Thank you Nick for all the tedious and eye-twitching work you have sweated into this and all the other libraries to bring some invaluable composer tools to the table. It is tremendously appreciated.


----------



## woafmann

Quantum Leap said:


> I figured it out. Lol. Actually crying a bit. I had nothing to do with that slick HC promo video. I just did that walkthrough video. Slower legato patches were done today, but it is my belief that our focus in HC was a good choice.



As a licensee and user of HO Diamond, Spaces, and now HC Diamond, I want to thank you for being in touch with the community and for taking this extra effort to add value to an already versatile library (something I've just begun to discover). You did this on your own free-will and I applaud you for it.

I just updated HC, but I guess the new patches might take some days to get down the pipe. Really looking forward to it and for future updates as HC is honed and refined.

Thanks again!


----------



## FabioA

Rudankort said:


> I think it was Mike Verta who said that his clients were happy with the quality of samples 15 years ago and did not want any improvement in this particular area. On one hand, this reinforces the point that there are things more important than samples (the clients still want good music which communicates the right ideas and emotions to the listeners), but it also illustrates why for many pros it might not make sense to invest money and especially time into buying and learning new tools. And without actually learning new instrument, it may be difficult to compare it to the old one objectively. Which does not mean new tools are not better than the old ones. I would rather expect the opposite, because yes, it's a competitive environment, and accumulated experience and advances in technology allow to make better things as we go forward.
> 
> Having said that, within ComposerCloud ecosystem getting a choir better than EWQLSC is good news, so it's not such a bad argument per se. For many people who are not invested in expensive libraries and rely solely on CC for their production, this could be all they really need. And the fact that user experience and interface is similar, would also help.



I agree with this quote. At the same time we must remeber that old libraries forced you to write in a certain way: the way the library was good at.

Some of the newest libraries extended the possibilities of virtual orchestration; now it's easier or possible to include some kind of writing that in the past were absolutely common and effective in the real thing, but totally unkown in the world of muck-ups.


----------



## jononotbono

JohnG said:


> And portamento? When I go to the symphony I almost never hear it and if I do, it's all I can do to suppress laughter.



Is this a subjective thing? I mean, I really like the sound of Port Slurs but I’m trying to understand why an Orchestra would laugh when asked to play that technique? Surely it’s just one of many techniques a player can play? Much like me being able to play Pinched Harmonics on an Electric Guitar. I like them but wouldn’t over use them... unless I was drunk


----------



## J-M

jononotbono said:


> Is this a subjective thing? I mean, I really like the sound of Port Slurs but I’m trying to understand why an Orchestra would laugh when asked to play that technique? Surely it’s just one of many techniques a player can play? Much like me being able to play Pitched Harmonics on an Electric Guitar. I like them but wouldn’t over use them... unless I was drunk



One can never use too much harmonics, pinch or natural. Just ask Zakk Wylde.


----------



## Puzzlefactory

Don't know if this counts as "portamento", but I've always liked the "sliding" low brass and strings in this track...


----------



## Zhao Shen

jamwerks said:


> If I'm not mistaken, in the intro video, Nick seemed to really praise the quality of his new baby and now we hear that the legato was just a "half effort"? I'm very surprised.
> 
> I've sung in choirs as have a lot of us. The voice uses as much if not more legato than most other instruments.
> 
> I'm also puzzled about this being a "labour of love" more than a product. I'm happy for Nick & EW for their passion, but that doesn't correspond to the tone I heard in the opening video...



A sample developer is not going to kick off the latest and greatest product bearing the name of their most successful collection with "Yeah... It's alright." There's a big difference between the marketing material and the development process.


----------



## Morodiene

JohnG said:


> Not in my experience. I sing every week in a choir and if we started using what passes in sample-land for legato, we'd be scolded. A very small amount of transition maybe, but straight choirs these days strive for clean movement from one note to another, no "scoops," and no slides.
> 
> I realise that some people like yet more Carmina Burana, some like barbershop, some want sliding notes for more of a contemporary / pop feel and so on. I don't like any of that for choir; if I'm going for that I use a different library of soloists that is recorded with that kind of music in mind.
> 
> In general I am baffled by the focus on legato in samples. I would 10x rather use Symphobia's original sample set because of its tone, rather than some less convincing sound that has legato. Many legato implementations are far too loud or otherwise conspicuous. And portamento? When I go to the symphony I almost never hear it and if I do, it's all I can do to suppress laughter.
> 
> I have heard old -- very old -- recordings of opera in which there's lots of exaggerated portamento and vibrato. I don't care for it.
> 
> 
> 
> Given what he's written in this forum, Nick could retire tomorrow if he chose. Hence, "labour of love."
> 
> [note: I have received free products from East West]


I'm confused. The term legato means literally "smooth, connected". The term "portamento" refers to a slide, glissando, scoop, etc. But from the conversation, it sounds like people are speaking of legato as portamento.

If we're speaking of portamento, then I agree, in traditional choir singing there is not a whole lot of portamento. Even in operatic choruses, there is very little allowed. In solo operatic singing, however, portamento is used more liberally.

I do hear portamento used by orchestras as well, especially when playing music from the Romantic style period.

As for legato in the literal sense of the word, that should be in all singing except where notated staccato.


----------



## Jaap

Just wondering when the last time was when any of our clients mailed/phoned/said to us, damn you need to work on your legato's!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Morodiene said:


> As for legato in the literal sense of the word, that should be in all singing except where notated staccato.



Exactly what I was thinking, too. It would sound hilarious if there were no legato at all, it's the way the Human voice naturally sings. Otherwise, it sound like a bunch of robots.


----------



## paoling

In the sampling world, "legato" almost always stands for "connection between notes". You can make "legato" also with staccato notes. While _legato _in actual music, is a technique which varies according to the instrument. It's note change on the same arc on bowed instruments. It's note changing without retonguing on wind instruments.

So, glissando, portamento, legato, detaché are all "legato" transitions in the sampling world. The human voice has various kind of "legato": it can change a note on the same breath (at various speeds), it can use the gut to separate notes (a skilled technique used by solo opera singers), it can use consonants to go from a note to another (like singing a song with Ta-ta-tas).


----------



## George Bellas

Morodiene said:


> ...from the conversation, it sounds like people are speaking of legato as portamento.
> 
> ... in traditional choir singing there is not a whole lot of portamento. Even in operatic choruses, there is very little allowed. In solo operatic singing, however, portamento is used more liberally.
> 
> I do hear portamento used by orchestras as well, especially when playing music from the Romantic style period.




The terms do appear to be used rather loosely in parts of this thread, however… legato and portamento/glissando by their very nature essentially imply the same thing but with varying subtle to extreme degrees per each term.

Furthermore, what humans have been conditioned to believe that is acceptable based on opinions of others and what they have been exposed to IMO is irrelevant and should be no part of a composers decision making creative process. That is not a mindset that necessarily yields profoundly unique creations nor forges innovative progress, rather it tends to produce similarities. If one chooses to utilize a certain element so much so that it becomes a staple of their style, so be it. Thank you, Mahler.

Having said that, if the goal is restricted to satisfy others and is motivated by financial gain and praise, then perhaps one should consider the popular choice.


----------



## Ashermusic

From the dictionary, and good enough for me, whether talking about real players or samples:

Legato= in a smooth flowing manner, without breaks between notes. Compare with https://vi-control.net/community/x-dictionary:r:m_en_gbus0985900:com.apple.dictionary.NOAD:staccato (staccato).
Portamento = a slide from one note to another, especially in singing or playing a bowed string instrument
Glissando = a continuous slide upward or downward between two notes.

If people want to conflate them, I guess they can, but they are different.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Ashermusic said:


> From the dictionary, and good enough for me, whether talking about real players or samples:
> 
> Legato= in a smooth flowing manner, without breaks between notes. Compare with https://vi-control.net/community/x-dictionary:r:m_en_gbus0985900:com.apple.dictionary.NOAD:staccato (staccato).
> Portamento = a slide from one note to another, especially in singing or playing a bowed string instrument
> Glissando = a continuous slide upward or downward between two notes.
> 
> If people want to conflate them, I guess they can, but they are different.



I think that sums it up nicely, Jay. When someone ask me to describe Portamento, I simply refer them to Bollywood style strings...IMO that is a perfect example.


----------



## George Bellas

Ashermusic said:


> ...but they are different.



Of course, but only in varying degrees of subtle to extreme. The terms simply attempt to make it convenient with some level of precision in conveying what is intended in the performance. A portamento is in essence a glissando which both are in essence smoothly connected as in the definition of legato. Admittedly there has always been some discrepancy between portamento and glissando throughout history.


----------



## paoling

Jay, those definitions don't apply to samples. Because stuff like "Bow-Change Legato" won't have any kind of sense. A bow change legato on sample libraries is called detaché in traditional orchestration. Which is basically the opposite of Legato.


----------



## Morodiene

Glad I'm not the only one who is confused LOL!



paoling said:


> In the sampling world, "legato" almost always stands for "connection between notes". *You can make "legato" also with staccato notes.* While _legato _in actual music, is a technique which varies according to the instrument. It's note change on the same arc on bowed instruments. It's note changing without retonguing on wind instruments.
> 
> So, glissando, portamento, legato, detaché are all "legato" transitions in the sampling world. The human voice has various kind of "legato": it can change a note on the same breath (at various speeds), it can use the gut to separate notes (a skilled technique used by solo opera singers), it can use consonants to go from a note to another (like singing a song with Ta-ta-tas).


I think I understand what you mean by connection between the notes. But can you elaborate on the statement I bolded above?

This statement by @George Bellas makes it a bit clearer for me:


> The terms do appear to be used rather loosely in parts of this thread, however… legato and portamento/glissando by their very nature essentially imply the same thing but with varying subtle to extreme degrees per each term.



Even in the true literal meaning of the musical terms portamento, legato, and slide, they are varying degrees of how quickly the connection between two notes occurs: legato is very quick so as to almost be imperceptible, whereas a portamento is a slower connection with vibrato, and a slide is a slower connection as well, without vibrato.

So now my question is, are people asking for portamentos (slower connection), or just legato (faster connection), or both, and are they currently missing from HC?


----------



## bvaughn0402

paoling said:


> Jay, those definitions don't apply to samples. Because stuff like "Bow-Change Legato" won't have any kind of sense. A bow change legato on sample libraries is called detaché in traditional orchestration. Which is basically the opposite of Legato.



Paolo, we can't tempt you with a "week only" sale on your choir library? :D


----------



## George Bellas

Morodiene said:


> ... are people asking for portamentos (slower connection), or just legato (faster connection), or both, and are they currently missing from HC?



Hollywood Choirs includes two true legato patches for each section (Ah and Oh vowels as seen in the attached screenshot) along with scripted legato that is accessible via a keyswitch for use with Wordbuilder, an ACSII symbol for use directly within Wordbuilder text, and a legato script that can be activated via a button on the Player view in PLAY.

I believe users that are complaining of disjointed connections in Hollywood Choirs are generally wanting a more smoothly connected sound, and perhaps some would enjoy the option of portamento. I think Hollywood Strings successfully accomplishes this quite elegantly by using velocity to trigger various degrees of slurring.


----------



## handz

Ooof, totally forgot to check this new lib and opinions at the forum. Well, um, I love East West, I loved EWQL, I love Hollywood Orchestra but this... well, what happened? The demos are, I do not want to hurt composers, but the demos are horrible, I remember all the amazing demos for Hollywood Strings and Brass but this is so poor in comparison. Or is the choir really so bad? In the demos it sounds horrible - for 2017, it sounds like the old EWQL Choirs! Phrasing is so artificial it hurts. This is really sad :-/


----------



## constaneum

guys. check out these youtube videos of some works on Hollywood Choirs. Seems pretty good to me. 

1) 

2)


----------



## nicoroy123

constaneum said:


> guys. check out these youtube videos of some works on Hollywood Choirs. Seems pretty good to me.
> 
> 1)
> 
> 2)




The sound is indeed excellent in these two demo. I can't comment on programmability as I don't own it yet. But as in most of EW products, the sound quality is definitely there.


----------



## constaneum

yea. sound quality is definitely undoubted but its too pricey for me at this moment. gonna wait for the sales.


----------



## JohnG

Morodiene said:


> I'm confused. The term legato means literally "smooth, connected".



I know what "legato" is _supposed_ to mean; that's why I wrote:

"...if we started using *what passes in sample-land for legato...*"

In general I find the legato in most libraries far too loud and conspicuous compared with what I like and want. I also am not a fan of much vibrato, so much so that I've asked choir directors either to eliminate vibrato from singers I'm recording, or tacet the ones who can't seem to sing without it. Or send them home.

I don't like anything that smacks of a Bugs Bunny parody of Wagner, in other words, and I think that sound is impossibly dated.

That doesn't mean never -- I've written non-traditional parts for choir too that feature weird stuff or aleatoric or huge group-sized portamento, but that's for a specific purpose.


----------



## peter5992

constaneum said:


> i came across this on youtube. for an improvisation video without much tweaking, i think it sounds pretty good for hollywood choir.


----------



## peter5992

Here's a video of how the choirs work with a notation program, in this instance, Sibelius. I used four instances of Play as playback devices, for each of sopranos / tenors / altos / basses. I did absolutely nothing to tweak WordBuilder, only thing I did tweak were (a) the exact durations of each note in Sibelius (using inspector), (b) the panning and reverb levels of the voices, and (c) a few dynamics by entering ~CC1,[number] here and there, and (d) I fiddled around with votox to get the best playback (WiSS! for "wish" instead of WiS!, which should be the appropriate phrase, but just didn't work).

Obviously there are demos out there that are sonically more realistic, and I'm still not wild about the pronunciation of "s", but for a notation program, I really like how it came out.

For anyone interested in the technical nitty gritty of how to set up Sibelius and Hollywood Choirs, in this soundsonline thread is a brief tutorial. Windows only, but it shouldn't be hard to figure out how to do this on a mac. 

http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=55260


----------



## Jdiggity1

peter5992 said:


> Here's a video of how the choirs work with a notation program, in this instance, Sibelius. I used four instances of Play as playback devices, for each of sopranos / tenors / altos / basses. I did absolutely nothing to tweak WordBuilder, only thing I did tweak were (a) the exact durations of each note in Sibelius (using inspector), (b) the panning and reverb levels of the voices, and (c) a few dynamics by entering ~CC1,[number] here and there, and (d) I fiddled around with votox to get the best playback (WiSS! for "wish" instead of WiS!, which should be the appropriate phrase, but just didn't work).
> 
> Obviously there are demos out there that are sonically more realistic, and I'm still not wild about the pronunciation of "s", but for a notation program, I really like how it came out.



Wait... so you just type the lyrics into Sibelius, and Hollywood Choirs reads those lyrics without you typing in wordbuilder??
If so, that is actually incredible.

EDIT: Nevermind. I somehow missed your guide link before. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## peter5992

Jdiggity1 said:


> Wait... so you just type the lyrics into Sibelius, and Hollywood Choirs reads those lyrics without you typing in wordbuilder??
> If so, that is actually incredible.
> 
> EDIT: Nevermind. I somehow missed your guide link before. Thanks for sharing.



No -- you still have to retype the words into wordbuilder. What a beautiful world it would be, if the lyrics in Sibelius would be automatically translated into lyrics in a program like HC ... lol. Not going to happen ever. 

That said, it's not that much work retyping everything. The work is in accurately retyping the lyrics, fixing mistakes, and fixing note durations. This took me several hours, but as I get better in votox, and more familiar with the new WB, it should take less time.


----------



## Morodiene

peter5992 said:


> No -- you still have to retype the words into wordbuilder. What a beautiful world it would be, if the lyrics in Sibelius would be automatically translated into lyrics in a program like HC ... lol. Not going to happen ever.
> 
> That said, it's not that much work retyping everything. The work is in accurately retyping the lyrics, fixing mistakes, and fixing note durations. This took me several hours, but as I get better in votox, and more familiar with the new WB, it should take less time.


That would be awesome! Maybe someday. But I think Votox is the best way to deal with words. Sometimes you have to use a different vowel sound to get the word more accurate, so Votox has that flexibility.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

peter5992 said:


> Here's a video of how the choirs work with a notation program, in this instance, Sibelius. I used four instances of Play as playback devices, for each of sopranos / tenors / altos / basses. I did absolutely nothing to tweak WordBuilder, only thing I did tweak were (a) the exact durations of each note in Sibelius (using inspector), (b) the panning and reverb levels of the voices, and (c) a few dynamics by entering ~CC1,[number] here and there, and (d) I fiddled around with votox to get the best playback (WiSS! for "wish" instead of WiS!, which should be the appropriate phrase, but just didn't work).
> 
> Obviously there are demos out there that are sonically more realistic, and I'm still not wild about the pronunciation of "s", but for a notation program, I really like how it came out.
> 
> For anyone interested in the technical nitty gritty of how to set up Sibelius and Hollywood Choirs, in this soundsonline thread is a brief tutorial. Windows only, but it shouldn't be hard to figure out how to do this on a mac.
> 
> http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=55260




"We wish you a may-wee Kwees-moss and a ha-ay-noo-dee". 

Sorry man, still sounds like the old Wordbuilder :(


----------



## Polkasound

What we need is a world builder that understands teenager texting. Entire songs could be input within minutes.

_"Hey sweetheart, would you type this in for me?"

"Sure, Dad."_

_*Ull nvr evr b wat u r 2 me, bcuz IDK if u luv me...*_


----------



## noises on

Polkasound said:


> What we need is a world builder that understands teenager texting. Entire songs could be input within minutes.
> 
> _"Hey sweetheart, would you type this in for me?"
> 
> "Sure, Dad."_
> 
> _*Ull nvr evr b wat u r 2 me, bcuz IDK if u luv me...*_


Hilarious....and probably true


----------



## Mystic

Polkasound said:


> _*Ull nvr evr b wat u r 2 me, bcuz IDK if u luv me...*_


I'm ashamed that I actually knew what that said...


----------



## constaneum

Mystic said:


> I'm ashamed that I actually knew what that said...



oh no. should i be ashamed too ? "You'll never ever be what you are to me, because i dont know you love me." Please tell me i shouldn't be ashamed for getting it correct. please ! please ??!!


----------



## peter5992

Wolfie2112 said:


> "We wish you a may-wee Kwees-moss and a ha-ay-noo-dee".
> 
> Sorry man, still sounds like the old Wordbuilder :(



No, there's a big difference. Remember that I didn't tweak WB in any way. You can probably get it a lot better with a bit of experimentation, and fiddling with consonant / vowel durations. Not to mention exporting everything into a DAW. 

By way of A/B test, I replaced the HC instances by the old Symphonic Choirs (SATB), and it's not recognizable what they're saying - could be Klingon they're singing. 

The point is, that with relatively little effort you can get decent and intelligible playback within the environment of an engraving program such as Sibelius (and probably Finale as well, though I haven't tried that, or Dorico, haven't tried that either). Some people just really prefer to work in a notation environment rather than playing around on their midi keyboard. Also, there are people for whom the most perfect playback isn't a deal breaker, but who would like a reasonable mockup for e.g. choir practice.


----------



## Morodiene

peter5992 said:


> No, there's a big difference. Remember that I didn't tweak WB in any way. You can probably get it a lot better with a bit of experimentation, and fiddling with consonant / vowel durations. Not to mention exporting everything into a DAW.
> 
> By way of A/B test, I replaced the HC instances by the old Symphonic Choirs (SATB), and it's not recognizable what they're saying - could be Klingon they're singing.
> 
> The point is, that with relatively little effort you can get decent and intelligible playback within the environment of an engraving program such as Sibelius (and probably Finale as well, though I haven't tried that, or Dorico, haven't tried that either). Some people just really prefer to work in a notation environment rather than playing around on their midi keyboard. Also, there are people for whom the most perfect playback isn't a deal breaker, but who would like a reasonable mockup for e.g. choir practice.


This is interesting, and I understood the gist of what you were doing. Ya, you can tweak it, but just to get a somewhat accurate rendering of the words just to be able to hear it is great. I work in Finale on a Mac, and haven't had much luck with getting AUs to work in Finale. If someone has, that would be valuable to know.


----------



## rmoat

constaneum said:


> guys. check out these youtube videos of some works on Hollywood Choirs. Seems pretty good to me.
> 
> 1)
> 
> 2)




Wow, I was surprised to see my video pop up in this thread (thanks for sharing constaneum). Yes, the Dunkirk video was my first run with Hollywood Choirs (and in a way was a quick rush). This was pre any EW Installation center updates for Hollywood Choirs (and I'm sure with the latest updates, it would be better).


----------



## woafmann

Nick posted his amazing new demo, _Requiem_ on the HC page.


----------



## constaneum

woafmann said:


> Nick posted his amazing new demo, _Requiem_ on the HC page.



Very nicely done indeed. He really made the library shines to its brightest quality.


----------



## George Bellas

Most importantly and regardless of the instrument, I can hear Nick's intense and totally genuine passion shine through.


----------



## woafmann

George Bellas said:


> Most importantly and regardless of the instrument, I can hear Nick's intense and totally genuine passion shine through.


Not to mention his mastery of arrangement. Beautifully done!


----------



## DANIELE

How is it this library compared to Symphonic Choirs?


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

Here are my try's with it:

This sketch was done in two minutes (realtime - just straight played into the DAW) doubling the women WB patch with some hollywood strings sustains.
Processing for the choir:
Compression with the free Klanghelm compressor (to get the beautiful lower dynamics louder), a cut around 400 and 800 hz and some more reverb.


Same processing here. I blend several sustain and legato patches with the WB patches.


There are also really nice "epic" sustain patches. Here they are in some epic context. (links lead to a player. No downloads.)
It's Raining Nails sketch 

And here a try out with the women ah legato patch. The tone is lovely, but the legato scripting... not as conncted as it should be IMO.
Bring The Lights Back To Heaven (idea)


----------



## DANIELE

DarkestShadow said:


> Here are my try's with it:
> 
> This sketch was done in two minutes (realtime - just straight played into the DAW) doubling the women WB patch with some hollywood strings sustains.
> Processing for the choir:
> Compression with the free Klanghelm compressor (to get the beautiful lower dynamics louder), a cut around 400 and 800 hz and some more reverb.
> 
> 
> Same processing here. I blend several sustain and legato patches with the WB patches.
> 
> 
> There are also really nice "epic" sustain patches. Here they are in some epic context. (links lead to a player. No downloads.)
> It's Raining Nails sketch
> 
> And here a try out with the women ah legato patch. The tone is lovely, but the legato scripting... not as conncted as it should be IMO.
> Bring The Lights Back To Heaven (idea)




So, do you think is worth the price?

EDIT

Another question: do they have some whispers patch too?

EDIT2

I can't find some staccato examples. How this library perform with staccatos?


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

DANIELE said:


> So, do you think is worth the price?
> 
> EDIT
> 
> Another question: do they have some whispers patch too?


Worth the price? Not at all - no way! I got it for free as a composer cloud subscriber. Even for half the price (Gold version costs more than 650 dollar at the moment) I would have to warn you that, for example the men oh legato patch sounds terrible. The other legatos are better but just at the "usable, I guess" level. Compared to other libraries propably even less...

And no - there are no whispers included. You might get them to whisper though if you just type consonants in the wordbuilder and play them quietly, if I think about it...
Storm Choir 2 for example features whispers, includes all microphone positions and runs in at about 500 dollars. And it sounds hyper realistic IMO.

Don't have it but it seems like a so much better library. Especially if you compare how the legatos sound.

And here again the East West women ah legato patch.
http://picosong.com/wR2b7/


----------



## DANIELE

DarkestShadow said:


> Worth the price? Not at all - no way! I got it for free as a composer cloud subscriber. Even for half the price (Gold version costs more than 650 dollar at the moment) I would have to warn you that, for example the men oh legato patch sounds terrible. The other legatos are better but just at the "usable, I guess" level. Compared to other libraries propably even less...
> 
> And no - there are no whispers included. You might get them to whisper though if you just type consonants in the wordbuilder and play them quietly, if I think about it...
> Storm Choir 2 for example features whispers, includes all microphone positions and runs in at about 500 dollars. And it sounds hyper realistic IMO.
> 
> Don't have it but it seems like a so much better library. Especially if you compare how the legatos sound.
> 
> And here again the East West women ah legato patch.
> http://picosong.com/wR2b7/




Thank you. And what about staccatos?

From what I know it is the only choir library with word builder.

So I think Symphonic Choirs is the same mess, am I right?


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

DANIELE said:


> Thank you. And what about staccatos?
> 
> From what I know it is the only choir library with word builder.
> 
> So I think Symphonic Choirs is the same mess, am I right?


Yea exactly. No staccato words (only a few single patches but only for "oh" "eh" "ih" "ah" - not "do mi nus sanc tus" and so on.) 
You can see all the articulations in the manual. http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs/EW-Hollywood-Choirs-User-Manual.pdf
Again, such a price with such a limited usability and inconsistant technical quality ranging from wonderful to terrible (most of it sort of in the middle) just doesn't work.


----------



## DANIELE

DarkestShadow said:


> Yea exactly. No staccato words (only a few single patches but only for "oh" "eh" "ih" "ah" - not "do mi nus sanc tus" and so on.)
> You can see all the articulations in the manual. http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs/EW-Hollywood-Choirs-User-Manual.pdf
> Again, such a price with such a limited usability and inconsistant technical quality ranging from wonderful to terrible (most of it sort of in the middle) just doesn't work.



Ok I think I have to look for another choir library. I like Oceania because of the high playability but it has few syllabes.

From what I read in the manual of HC the vowels has staccato mode so by combining them with consonants I could achieve many combinations. But I don't know how they sounds. I'm disappointed that there are so little details about this libraries.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

DANIELE said:


> Ok I think I have to look for another choir library. I like Oceania because of the high playability but it has few syllabes.
> 
> From what I read in the manual of HC the vowels has staccato mode so by combining them with consonants I could achieve many combinations. But I don't know how they sounds. I'm disappointed that there are so little details about this libraries.


since the oh and ahs are individual patches that seems like a LOT of work... Again, lets remember the price tag. Geh...


----------



## DANIELE

DarkestShadow said:


> since the oh and ahs are individual patches that seems like a LOT of work... Again, lets remember the price tag. Geh...



Ok, get it.

I discovered Virharmonic Voices Of Prague. Maybe I could go for it. It seems more flexible.


----------



## Casiquire

I finally had to use a choir in one of my projects and figured it would be a good chance to take an honest look at Hollywood Choirs.

Strengths: right when you open it, the reverb setting is magnificent. What a sound. The dynamic range as well is great, though I still think the original Symphonic Choirs is better in very quiet dynamics, but I could be wrong about that. There are also some sounds that the new WordBuilder is better at than the original, but there are also some that it's not as good at. It seemed like more of a trade-off than just a solid improvement.

That's about the end of the positives. Here's one really big problem I have with the library: there are not SATB sections. When HC was first announced I maybe even thought for a moment that we'd get DIVISI. I didn't think for a moment that we wouldn't even get standard four sections. The manual tells us to load two "Men" and two "Women" patches if we want SATB. Great. But what happens when the men or women sing the same note? Plus in a more middle range there won't be any distinction in tone between the sections. That's not a solution, that feels half-baked.

Next, the legatos. I think there are a lot of passable sounds there and it really isn't as bad as some of what we've heard on here, but why aren't they automatically present when using the WordBuilder? In fact true legatos don't seem possible to use with the WordBuilder at all. I could be wrong, but the manual is not exactly clear about this. So we still have no choir library with word building AND legato.

Lastly, while the sound is really nice while playing one single note, the way the articulations were recorded was so precisely identical to the original that it suffers almost all the same pitfalls. In use it sounds exactly like Symphonic Choirs, just with different singers and a different microphone setup. The underlying philosophy and the interface of the WordBuilder are identical, it's like they just swapped out samples. It's hard to believe this is marketed as not only a new library, but a revolutionary one worth so much money.

Overall this was a missed opportunity to move forward, and in fact considering we're working with half the sections, and therefore an eighth the sections a normal choir piece requires, it really disappointed me.


----------



## Ashermusic

In my review I did mention the SATB issue. https://ask.audio/articles/review-e...dio/articles/review-eastwest-hollywood-choirs

But no, it most definitely does NOT sound exactly like the Symphonic Choirs. It was recorded with different singers, different mics, in a different venue, with different engineers and it sounds it.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Jay, I enjoyed your article, and found it to be an accurate representation.

I've spent a week with HC, and although the actual samples sound great, I'm not blown away. I would have been happy if they simply rebranded SC with the new Wordbuilder. Time will tell though, I still have a long way to go with fully understanding how it's intended to work....there's a lot to it.


----------



## Ashermusic

Wolfie2112 said:


> Jay, I enjoyed your article, and found it to be an accurate representation.
> 
> I've spent a week with HC, and although the actual samples sound great, I'm not blown away. I would have been happy if they simply rebranded SC with the new Wordbuilder. Time will tell though, I still have a long way to go with fully understanding how it's intended to work....there's a lot to it.



Personally, I think HC sounds a _lot_ better than SC, much more pristine and when you turn off the reverb, drier. And better singers, I think. Certainly, it will blend better with the rest of the Hollywood Orchestra.

I am in the minority though of those who care much about Wordbuilders. I think using Latin phrases has become a cliche" and I have yet to find a library that makes English _really_ sound like native English speakers singing. Mike Greene has somehow managed to do it with pre-recorded words in Realivox The Ladies and Blue and you can sort of turn those into a choir.


----------



## Casiquire

Ashermusic said:


> In my review I did mention the SATB issue. https://ask.audio/articles/review-e...dio/articles/review-eastwest-hollywood-choirs
> 
> But no, it most definitely does NOT sound exactly like the Symphonic Choirs. It was recorded with different singers, different mics, in a different venue, with different engineers and it sounds it.



I didn't say it sounds the same. In fact I literally said that it sounds like it has different singers and mics. I said the philosophy was so near-identical that the end result suffers the same problems. In a way, it's like both libraries have the same "accent" so to speak. I also care much about wordbuilders, and it's from that point of view that I say it isn't a massive improvement, it's largely the same library over again but with a different character.


----------



## Ashermusic

You said "it sounds exactly like Symphonic Choirs just with different singers and different mics."

No, it doesn't. It also sounds like it was recorded in a different venue, because it was. It also sounds like it was recorded and mixed by a different engineer because it was. 

You are correct that the underlying philosophy is the same.


----------



## Darren Durann

Puzzlefactory said:


> Maybe he’s referring to Albion.



I meant Albion Legacy and One...the other libraries are certainly not "best" for sketching.

I have to take some of what I said back though, the Strings section on Albion One and their Legato Woodwinds, not to mention there really useful spic/stac string patch, certainly do the trick on my final mock ups. I was being way too exclusivist. But I don't regret saying "F" you, nobody likes some fool laughing in their face. I'd say it again.


----------



## Darren Durann

Learn how to make great music, study orchestration, study synthesizers, the solo violin and cello, study even when ya don't wanna. Make your ear into a trained dynamo. Try staying off here more. Works for me. 

Good luck, because this business really sucks!


----------



## woafmann

DarkestShadow said:


> Worth the price? Not at all - no way! I got it for free as a composer cloud subscriber. Even for half the price (Gold version costs more than 650 dollar at the moment) I would have to warn you that, for example the men oh legato patch sounds terrible. The other legatos are better but just at the "usable, I guess" level. Compared to other libraries propably even less...
> 
> And no - there are no whispers included. You might get them to whisper though if you just type consonants in the wordbuilder and play them quietly, if I think about it...
> Storm Choir 2 for example features whispers, includes all microphone positions and runs in at about 500 dollars. And it sounds hyper realistic IMO.
> 
> Don't have it but it seems like a so much better library. Especially if you compare how the legatos sound.
> 
> And here again the East West women ah legato patch.
> http://picosong.com/wR2b7/



You can get HC Diamond for $509 at B&H Photo. Have to log in to see the discount. That's what I paid for it.


----------



## JohnG

I paid full price for Diamond, and I am happy with it. I did a short mockup of a bit of Handel that came out better -- and much faster -- than it would have done with any other choir library I have.

The "better" is really the timing which for the most part is quite good and convincing. A couple of bars I would have to tweak, but the clarity is not bad at all considering I didn't spend any time meddling with consonant volume or anything like that.

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


----------



## Casiquire

You can nitpick all you want. The air in the building was different too. So was the date on the calendar. However I think my point was clear enough. The philosophy was the same, so the use is the same, and therefore many qualities of the performance on the user end are the same. It's no step forward.


----------



## Darren Durann

Casiquire said:


> You can nitpick all you want. The air in the building was different too.



What gets me is how sometimes mouse farts show up in recordings. I thought by now the advances is technology...heck, even plain ole eq masking would have made such emissions obsolete.


----------



## Ashermusic

Casiquire said:


> You can nitpick all you want. The air in the building was different too. So was the date on the calendar. However I think my point was clear enough. The philosophy was the same, so the use is the same, and therefore many qualities of the performance on the user end are the same. It's no step forward.



Well we will simply have to agree to disagree. Now that I have it, I doubt I will be using the Symphonic Choirs much. And again, the one fact that is unarguable is that it will blend better with the rest of the Hollywood Orchestra.

I stand by my review, which is fair and balanced I think.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

I'll probably continue with HC for full choir parts, but will always love (and use) the soloists and choral FX in SC.


----------



## Ashermusic

Wolfie2112 said:


> I'll probably continue with HC for full choir parts, but will always love (and use) the soloists and choral FX in SC.



Yes, you are right, +1 to that.


----------



## kimarnesen

woafmann said:


> Nick posted his amazing new demo, _Requiem_ on the HC page.



I don't know. This is another example of using a choir library for what it can't be used for: a cappella music. It's just not ready for that yet, no choir library is, perhaps except for some "ahs" and "ohs". And I don't see the point of presenting a library for that use. I don't think you have to be a choir expert to hear that something is not right, as our brains are quite well trained to hear voices, more than people can tell the difference from a sampled and real trumpet. And I'm not criticising the piece or the library, there are not many libraries that could do this better. But use it for what it can do.


----------



## Critz

JohnG said:


> I paid full price for Diamond, and I am happy with it. I did a short mockup of a bit of Handel that came out better -- and much faster -- than it would have done with any other choir library I have.
> 
> The "better" is really the timing which for the most part is quite good and convincing. A couple of bars I would have to tweak, but the clarity is not bad at all considering I didn't spend any time meddling with consonant volume or anything like that.
> 
> [note: I have received free products from East West]


Am I the only one **** tired of that "note"?


----------



## Casiquire

I do agree that it blends better. I don't think there's really anything we disagree about, you also said the philosophy between the two is the same. That's really the crux of my statements.


----------



## Ashermusic

Casiquire said:


> I do agree that it blends better. I don't think there's really anything we disagree about, you also said the philosophy between the two is the same. That's really the crux of my statements.



Good, glad we have reached agreement.


----------



## conan

Of course the library is deeply flawed - but it's also remarkably versatile. In spite of my disappointment in a number of significant areas, I'm pretty sure I will end up purchasing the full version. I'm reluctant to call it overpriced, only because I don't know what the financial threshold was in order to make it a worthwhile business endeavor on the part of its creator. I've already spent way too much on sample libraries this past year, but my take is that this a tool worth having.

The dynamic range is good, as is the overall tone. There are some errant round robins, but I believe they can be disabled. The biggest issue for me is lack of SATB. The excessive sibilance is also difficult to tame.

I've conducted choirs, and this is obviously no substitute. But the Word Builder - as imperfect as it is - at least makes an earnest attempt to satisfy those of us with a deep love for choral composition and performance. Yes, it needs to be a thousand times better, but that will never happen if someone doesn't support the effort with his/her wallet.

Just my feelings, and in no way meant to be normative or sanctimonious.


----------



## peter5992

Casiquire said:


> You can nitpick all you want. The air in the building was different too. So was the date on the calendar. However I think my point was clear enough. The philosophy was the same, so the use is the same, and therefore many qualities of the performance on the user end are the same. It's no step forward.



Personally, I think there's a BIG difference in terms of ease of use, and programmability. Yes, the concept of "Wordbuilder" hasn't changed, but under the hood, it's completely different. It is just so much easier to get something sounding intelligible without having to spend hours and hours programming wordbuilder. 

I would have preferred different sections for each of SATB, and I'd also like to have separate boys and girls choruses, but I think the primary market or goal is film composers, or film trailers, and this library works perfectly fine for that. You can still get a decent result if you write in traditional SATB style, if you pay attention to voice leading etc. 

No, you won't be mistaken for the Berliner Philharmoniker chorus, lol ... of course it's always nicer to have a real choir. But for $600, if you need some real and custom written lyrics, not just fantasy Latin, it's hard to beat. 

In terms of pricing, I personally would go for the Diamond edition, the close or stage mikes really make a difference in terms of realism / intelligibility ($500 for Gold, by contrast). Of course, everything is included in the cloud subscription but I'm just not a big fan of cloud, think I'll buy the Diamond version.


----------



## Casiquire

Some phrases are easier, but some aren't. In a quick phrase, I found SC much easier to program to say "silver sleigh bells ringing" than HC. Then some lines I've had better luck with HC. It's mixed in my experience.



Ashermusic said:


> Good, glad we have reached agreement.



We usually do, eventually!


----------



## Ashermusic

Casiquire said:


> We usually do, eventually!



That's true, and what I like most is that we do not treat each other disrespectfully.


----------



## JohnG

Critz said:


> Am I the only one **** tired of that "note"?



I am tired of writing it, but I think it's important to disclose where there can be the appearance of bias. I am a big fan of East West, and have been for more than ten years (which is _why_ I got some products for free, I think). But if I were reading favourable reviews by someone who'd received free products from a different company, I'd like to know that.

Personally, I think the best way to evaluate advice is to listen to the person's music.

Sorry to lengthen an already tiresome (to some) topic.



peter5992 said:


> Personally, I think there's a BIG difference in terms of ease of use, and programmability.



I do too -- a big improvement.

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


----------



## Darren Durann

Critz said:


> Am I the only one **** tired of that "note"?



The note does help to put his comments in proper context.

John has had many pertinent (and seemingly pretty objective) things to say about EW, and mentions them often, thus I can see why that's his signature.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

omiroad said:


> I get free products as well. I don't think anyone cares.



Agreed, I could care less. Whether someone gets free products or not is a moot point.


----------



## Kony

JohnG said:


> I am tired of writing it, but I think it's important to disclose where there can be the appearance of bias.


Most people around here have a bias and it's not based on whether they have received freebies or not. I personally think it's a redundant statement - it's like saying you may be biased about EW based on receiving free products, when you might be biased for other reasons - such as quality of the product etc. And why would receiving a free product mean you have to like it? A lot of film reviewers receive free copies of films for review purposes - doesn't mean they end up writing favourable reviews....


----------



## eli0s

ricoderks said:


> I know there is a lot going on right now here on this particular topic. However, despite all the criticism I wanted to give the library a go... I really do think you can achieve pretty okay legato sounds with the legato patches. It seems some of you tried to enable the "other" script or the "legato" button. When I looked at the walk through it came to my attention all those buttons were off. Just play those legato lines by simple playing it legato. Result layered with some CSS and Soaring Strings:
> 
> 
> 
> Also tried the wordbuilder. I don't think its that bad. Of course it is not magical at all and you cant expect really clear pronunciation. My point of view is that there is way too much negativity about this release. People seem to rush through the patches and form a opinion in about an hour without truly knowing what the library can do.
> 
> Rico



I really like what you have posted here. It's interesting that nobody commented your results so far, after so many pages.
I Just bought the library and I am struggling with the legato my self. When you say "Just play those legato lines by simple playing it legato", how exactly do you play these notes? Do you overlap adjacent notes, and if yes, how much?? I am asking because I can play polyphonically with the legato patches and it's making me thing that no legato transitions are being triggered when I simply overlap notes.


----------



## Vadium

Hollywood choirs platinum on www.everyplugin.com is only $266.53 for now - so, any ideas about it can be cheaper this year (black friday, etc), or this is final price?


----------



## PaulieDC

Vadium said:


> Hollywood choirs platinum on www.everyplugin.com is only $266.53 for now - so, any ideas about it can be cheaper this year (black friday, etc), or this is final price?


You're not going to see it much cheaper than that... I've seen 50% off on BF sales but right now even the EW website has everything at 60% off, wow. Wish I needed something! HC is so good and that sale is the best I've seen for HC, pull the trigger and start enjoying that amazing library. Just my $.02 (pre-tax and before 401K deduction).


----------



## DANIELE

For how many time do you think it will stay at this price?


----------

