# Spitfire vs Eastwest



## MitchellFields (Jul 27, 2016)

What's your preference?

I personally like both.

I don't like PLAY, but I do enjoy the clean sound from EastWest.

I love Kontakt, but to me the sound from spitfire is almost a little muddy in the low mids for strings and I can't seem to get it out. Now, I do only have Albion One Legacy (which may be the problem?)

edit* the low mid muddiness could be the room that I'm hearing...

any suggestions?


----------



## erica-grace (Jul 27, 2016)

Spitfire vs Eastwest 

Apples vs Oranges.

Some days I prefer an apple, and some days I prefer an orange. 

For the muddiness, try an EQ to cut some of the frequencies you hear that you don't like. Try to stay away from filters for this purpose.


----------



## Kejero (Jul 27, 2016)

I light EQ dip between 300 and 400 Hz (give or take) could cure your mud. Just some general advice, as I don't have Albion.


----------



## MitchellFields (Jul 27, 2016)

I've tried several EQ options. any where from heavily EQ to just slightly and I cant seem to get rid of it.


----------



## guydoingmusic (Jul 27, 2016)

Use less of the Room and more of the Close mics.


----------



## MitchellFields (Jul 27, 2016)

@guydoingmusic that may work, but when I've tried that in the past the sound is a little lifeless. Maybe I need a good reverb too.


----------



## ModalRealist (Jul 27, 2016)

I find the sound of Spitfire's samples to be very musical in and of themselves. I wrote this sketch with Loegria, and despite my best efforts with fuller, more complex libraries from other debts, I continue to prefer it:



But I have yet to come across a more ready-to-roll orchestra than the Hollywood series. There has been very, very little that I've seen it unable to do (measured trills, so to speak, being the one exception off the top of my head - but that's true of almost every library). I also find it remarkably intuitive to use - the legato-speed-by-velocity is something I really wish we saw in other libraries.

I should note though that some of the newer BML products from Spitfire appear to have very good flexibility for playing complex lines (e.g. Sable/SCS and the later Woodwinds). Sadly, I do not (yet) own any of these. My BML Horns were my last orchestral Spitfire purchase, and the relative inflexibility of their legatos (viz. success at playing fast lines) was a little disappointing. But oh boy, if Spitfire do for all their instruments the range of legatos in SCS...

So, in the end, I like both very much. Given my current setup, I'd use EW for complex music, and SF for anything more... textural. And I'd recommend EW for anyone on a budget (the price these days is an insane deal). But! Were I a little richer, I'd certainly put the BML on my SSDs.

P.S. Talking of deals, I really dig eDNA Earth. Not orchestral, but an occasion where, like the new pricing on Sable/SCS, SF have a very competitive price.


----------



## guydoingmusic (Jul 27, 2016)

MitchellFields said:


> @guydoingmusic that may work, but when I've tried that in the past the sound is a little lifeless. Maybe I need a good reverb too.


Maybe post an example of what you are dealing with. I'm sure some more constructive recommendations/advice would follow. List the reverbs you are using with the current set up as well. Don't feel like you have to go buy the biggest and most expensive reverb just to get a good sound. The stock reverb in Cubase (Roomworks) can do a great job. Sometimes - it's just small adjustments to be made. Maybe orchestration, too much verb, not enough verb, or slight eq. Most times it's an orchestration issue. Still hard to say without hearing an example though.


----------



## nas (Jul 27, 2016)

They both have great sounding libraries and get used here pretty much on every project.

In the case of SF, you are most likely getting some of the low-mid buildup from the hall they where recorded in. So I actually wouldn't go too cray EQing the instruments themselves except for a little dip in the low-mids... and be careful not to make your instruments sound too thin.

You can also send the strings to a subgroup and apply a gentle low-mid dip on the subgroup channel to address the buildup that occurs when you start to stack the tracks.

I also agree with *guydoingmusic*, you can use less of the Tree and Ambient mics and more of the close and leader mics. Then apply a couple of good reverbs - one for early reflections (if needed) and a nice hall. Then roll-off or HPF some of the lows on the reverbs.


----------



## MitchellFields (Jul 27, 2016)

I actually did this as a project last week and I'm not really sure which is best... if there is a best.

This is completely EastEasy Hollwood Orchestra- minus the paino (Not much EQ at all)


This is the strings and perc of Albion Legacy and brass of Cinesamples Lite. (I like the "bite" from the brass in C-Lite)

(heavily EQ'd)


----------



## MitchellFields (Jul 27, 2016)

@nas thank you for your advice. I look forward to trying that out.


----------



## MitchellFields (Jul 27, 2016)

ModalRealist said:


> I find the sound of Spitfire's samples to be very musical in and of themselves. I wrote this sketch with Loegria, and despite my best efforts with fuller, more complex libraries from other debts, I continue to prefer it:




Awesome track man. And I don't mean to use you as an example, but I hear that room build up your track as well. @nas hit the nail on the head.


----------



## 5Lives (Jul 27, 2016)

EW has some nice sounding things, but overall Spitfire's quality is more consistent in my opinion. To me, Spitfire also sounds better - with better interfaces and usability and update cycles. On top of that, not that it matters from a composition standpoint, but the Spitfire guys seem very pleasant. Every interaction I've had with them has been great and they do actively listen to their customers. Can't say the same about EW...not even close (and this forum has more than enough examples of that).


----------



## DaviYouu (Jul 27, 2016)

_East West Pros:_
Price-Content (e.g Hollywood Orchestra Diamond)
Good for mockups (if you have great PC incl SSD)
Spaces
Divisi
Good for layering and it gives a warm sound most of the times.

_East West Cons:_
Play Engine, Loading times (kontakt 5 is faster, more stable, and more organized, more features like purge, NKS support etc)
Sound (Spitfire sounds more realistic and just better for my taste)
Mics (Even though you have the basic control for all the mics in the Diamond edition, Spitfire has more Mics most of the times
Control (Spitfire has more options for controlling the instruments via Midi CC)
Articulations (Spitfire has more Articulations available)
East West is old (most of the libraries from east west are a few years old and are behind of the Quality standard from Spitfires brand new libs)

This is my personal opinion and I prefer Spitfire


----------



## uselessmind (Jul 28, 2016)

DaviYouu said:


> East West is old (most of the libraries from east west are a few years old and are behind of the Quality standard from Spitfires brand new libs)


How many dynamic layers do the legato and portamento transitions have in current spitfire libs?
Always liked the tone but a while back they only had 1 dynamic layer for the transitions.


----------



## StatKsn (Jul 28, 2016)

Hollywood Strings' divisi is quite a bit weird and perhaps not a real one. It is mono close-mic only and importantly, some (but not all) patches are simply using L-mono/R-mono close samples. Other than that, the library is fairly consistent, very clean and still a bliss to play (get an SSD if you want Diamond!).

If I'd compare Hollywood Strings with something, Cinematic Strings 2 (not Cinematic Studio Strings) is pretty close in terms of the sound (HS is a bit more compressed-sounding than CS2), though the design philosophy and articulation-list are quite different. Or perhaps Mural.


----------



## novaburst (Jul 28, 2016)

I wonder if the Thread should be called, Us Vs a decent String library,

Have not got spitfire but from reviews I can say they are pretty decent strings, 

It is true that you do need a good to very good string library to work with, but I am kind of getting the feeling that the attitude is if I have a great string library I can do great work or orchestral pieces, 

The truth is have hered some using perhaps the best string library, or even lets say the latest string library and the pieces sound pretty poor, so a great string library does not mean great work,

Weather it be VSL, eastwest, spitfire, soaring strings, CSS, ...........it is the user and his or her understanding of what or how strings should sound for a great piece of music to be achieved,

I found out very early that it was not just about pressing the note on the keyboard and relying on a great tone or sound, 

I soon needed to ask lots of questions and do a lot of studying, and listening,

When this was achieved to a small degree as I still have tons to learn, but when this was achieved I soon found out it was not about VSL,or eastwest , spitfire and all the latest library's, it was about your own application and understanding of how the instruments works that is what can bring out a great sound, and great piece of music


----------



## MitchellFields (Jul 28, 2016)

@novaburst great point; however, I'm not trying to find the best library because I think it'll make me write better music. I'm simply comparing the two libraries as an example from my own experiences to see if anyone could help.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2016)

DaviYouu said:


> _\_
> Mics (Even though you have the basic control for all the mics in the Diamond edition, Spitfire has more Mics most of the times



Spitfire has more than 5 mic positions?


----------



## Daniel James (Jul 28, 2016)

Having been subscribed to the EW Composer Cloud for a few months and having plenty of Spitfire libraries I think that they both have amazing sounds, very comparable.

I think at the end of the day for me it comes down to Kontakt vs PLAY. Even with PLAY working much better for me these days it still loads slower and feels a tad sluggish compared to Kontakt so I will always reach for Spitfire before EW 100% of the time. If the EW libs were still on Kontakt it may be a completely different question for me. So yeah for OP's question. Spitfire hands down.

-DJ

(p.s Saying that, if you have a project coming up that will only take you a few months and has a budget, the EW Composer Cloud is amazing value! I have been dipping in and out on it per project and its low cost negates alot of the PLAY issues.)


----------



## rocking.xmas.man (Jul 28, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> Spitfire has more than 5 mic positions?


in some cases yes. you get CTAO + close ribbons, stereo (lowered tree) and gallery mic, for mural add a leader mic, for some libraries a second tree (not shure of thats the same as 'stereo'). Also there are Jake Jackson mixes in some of their products. While beeing premixed mic-positions for instance in albion 4 you should count them as additional perspectives because there you don't have everything that made the mix


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2016)

rocking.xmas.man said:


> in some cases yes. you gut CTAO + close ribbons, stereo (lowered tree) and gallery mic, for mural add a leader mic, for some libraries a second tree (not shure of thats the same as 'stereo'). Also there are Jake Jackson mixes in some of their products. While beeing premixed mic-positions for instance in albion 4 you should count them as additional perspectives because there you don't have everything that made the mix




Interesting, did not know that. But while HO Diamond has 5, I rarely ever use any but two personally.


----------



## procreative (Jul 28, 2016)

I have both HW Strings and Sable and many other string libs, all have their place. Here in my opinion are main differences between HWS and Spitfire:

1. Room sound
HWS was recorded in a studio, Spitfire (Mural/Chamber) in Air (formerly a large church). Hence the Ambient/Far Mics in both have very different effects. HWS is a very dry library, the Mic positions offer very subtle differences (compared to their other HW ranges as strings are less lively is a smaller space than Winds and Brass).

2. Dynamic Layers
The legato patches in HWS can have many more dynamic layers and vibrato layers, but consequently need a lot more memory/CPU to run.

3. Keyswitches
If these are your thing, then HWS offers much less in the way of comprehensive KS patches.

4. CC Control
HWS seems to be missing some controls, I cannot seem to find a legato transition volume control.

It took me until I set up a PC slave with VEP to get a workable setup with HWS due to its memory needs (unless you run with 1 mic position and HWS does not have a "mix" mic so thats equivalent of Decca I think). Also forget it without an SSD.

Also to get around the KS issue after much experimenting with 1 track/1 articulation I have opted for Art Conductor to facilitate switching articulations while using one track (Ski Switcher or AG Logic Toolkit would also do the job).

Despite the fact that HWS is now 6 years old, it still holds up well. However there are a few inconsistencies and (as is usual with many devs) differing ranges of articulations between the instruments, some programming bugs and a feeling of end of life by the fact that it has been largely untouched over the years (I am sure I read Jay mention that Doug had said he was done with large scale orchestral/symphonic sampling).


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2016)

procreative said:


> Despite the fact that HWS is now 6 years old, it still holds up well. However there are a few inconsistencies and (as is usual with many devs) differing ranges of articulations between the instruments, some programming bugs and a feeling of end of life by the fact that it has been largely untouched over the years (I am sure I read Jay mention that Doug had said he was done with large scale orchestral/symphonic sampling).



Yes, Doug did say that, but:

1. He did not say there would never be more updates. However, I think that with the exception of the solo libraries perhaps, what we now have with the HO libraries is what they are going to be.

2. Doug used to tell me things very strongly and then later change his mind. He is somewhat mercurial (but wicked smart.)


----------



## rocking.xmas.man (Jul 28, 2016)

procreative said:


> I cannot seem to find a legato transition volume control


my understanding is that once you're in the player view after loading a legato patch there are the different sample groups listed - sustain, release and the different legato styles. There's a volume knob right next to them that in my understanding should control the transition volume


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2016)

rocking.xmas.man said:


> my understanding is that once you're in the player view after loading a legato patch there are the different sample groups listed - sustain, release and the different legato styles. There's a volume knob right next to them that in my understanding should control the transition volume



Yes.


----------



## procreative (Jul 28, 2016)

Your are right. Is there any way to automate that? For example you might want portamento slides at a different volume from slurs or to iron out inconsistent volumes?


----------



## JohnG (Jul 28, 2016)

They both are excellent and, as others have noted, they definitely sound different. I would hate to do without either.

One misconception about HS is that it requires an enormously powerful computer to use _at all, _which isn't accurate. HS comes with dozens of light patches that capture the essential sound of the library.

It is true that you need a strong computer to use the very powerful patches, some of which offer over 10 velocity layers and multiple vibrato etc. That said, an average computer these days provides far more muscle than was the case when HS came out, so what once was an out-of-the-ordinary PC (SSDs, 3.5 GHz or higher CPU) now looks routine. Many of the builds I see people put up for inspection here nowadays could run HS comfortably.

I understand that some people don't like PLAY that much (PLAY being the required playback engine for East West libraries, including HS), in part because it's a closed system. I am not a huge tweaker, so that doesn't bother me. However, if you habitually edit your samples yourself and fine-tune your libraries one patch at a time, that will not be possible with PLAY.

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


----------



## DaviYouu (Jul 28, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> Spitfire has more than 5 mic positions?


Strings have 4-5 but some of the Spitfire Libraries do e.g the Piano by HZ is just crazy with over 60 mics


----------



## DaviYouu (Jul 28, 2016)

JohnG said:


> They both are excellent and, as others have noted, they definitely sound different. I would hate to do without either.
> 
> One misconception about HS is that it requires an enormously powerful computer to use _at all, _which isn't accurate. HS comes with dozens of light patches that capture the essential sound of the library.
> 
> ...



Nowadays most of the PCs are powerfull enough to handle HS but still I just think the loading times are longer and that you are not able to e.g batch resave your samples is a bit enjoying


----------



## novaburst (Jul 28, 2016)

MitchellFields said:


> @novaburst great point; however, I'm not trying to find the best library because I think it'll make me write better music. I'm simply comparing the two libraries as an example from my own experiences to see if anyone could help.



I here you @MitchellFields ,


----------



## novaburst (Jul 28, 2016)

DaviYouu said:


> East West is old (most of the libraries from east west are a few years old and are behind of the Quality standard



Dont feel i need to give a shout for eastwest, but I must say this is the amazing thing about them (H S), the fact that Hollywood string is dated but not sure if i have herd anything as good as that old out dated library from hollywood strings and i mean 4 real i am more VSL but i have to give eastwest credit for there great sound quality

if i were to take my money back and choose again from the very latest string librarys apart from VSL i would choose that old out dated Hollywood strings again and again, even the latest librarys are struggling to match the sound of the out dated east west, once more if you have the ears for it you can bump it up to 24bit


----------



## owenave (Jul 28, 2016)

I will say when I was shopping for strings and watching video's from East West for Gold HS.
They had video's labeled at demo's of Gold which were NOT Gold but Diamond with all the
different options & mike positions. I like the sound of EW HS Gold. But also like the Spitfire Chamber Strings.
Both different and would be nice to have both.


----------



## ein fisch (Jul 28, 2016)

My Vote for Spitfire.. Only own Albion and Solo Strings, and im using them both in every composition..

I dont have experience with EW but what i heard, it eat's ressources as f**k. Or is it just the PLAY engine? I dont know.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 29, 2016)

DennisL said:


> I dont have experience with EW but what i heard, it eat's ressources as f**k. Or is it just the PLAY engine? I dont know.



Well, I do know. It is library specific. HS and ProDrummer e.g, very demanding, the Hollywood Orchestral Percussion and others, not nearly so. But as John said, even with HS, it is easy to simply stay away from the powerful system folder and find other patches that sound great and run them, unless your system is woefully under-powered.

Two great devlopers with two totally different approaches to sampling.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jul 29, 2016)

Best off with both (as I've said WAY too many times). The two complement themselves perfectly imo. Having those two together has definitely brought a lot of joy in my music making. I couldn't part with either, I'd probably just stop writing if I lost one or the other (until I saved up again lol!).


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jul 29, 2016)

If you want a bald, blemishes and all sound, something that is more likely to require 3rd party tweaking, East West is there. The sound is terrific, you can hear the rough side of string attacks most prominently, which can be fabulously helpful at times. The downside is the play engine, which is still a far from ideal vst.

If you want an often usable sound right out of the box, go Spitfire. There's a double edged sword there, however. First off, you can usually (especially in the older One and Two) hear the room the samples are recorded in, and they are recorded really well in obviously an environment that is conducive to great sound. The other side of the dragon's fang is that you can usually here the room the samples are recorded in.


----------



## nas (Jul 29, 2016)

novaburst said:


> I wonder if the Thread should be called, Us Vs a decent String library,
> 
> Have not got spitfire but from reviews I can say they are pretty decent strings,
> 
> ...



I think what *novaburst* has brought up cannot be overstated. The first port of call should always be the orchestration. One can’t simply EQ out issues that at their core have more to do with orchestration, harmonic spacing , voice leading etc. - and believe me, in the past I’ve tried and it doesn’t work! 

Trying to blend individual tracks and articulations through the use of equalization, fx processing, and balancing levels to create a convincing, and transparent aural landscape is a challenge, so making creative decisions and deciding what to feature in the mix and when is important so you can focus your attention on enhancing the music through the various processing tools available. 

You don’t necessary need to or want apply the same processing to all the articulations of the piece. With sustain patches for example, you can afford a little low end build up and let it swell up a little along with the reverb. But when a pumping ostinato kicks in, the last thing you want is that low end flopping around and the reverbs making things sound mushy. What I like to do is either automate my EQ when I need more cut and also ride my fx returns (or sends) as well as the various mic position levels if available. You could also have some of your articulations on different tracks and have each track balanced with just the right dosage of reverb, delay, and EQ. The trick is to make these switches seamless and natural so that the entire piece is transparent and seduces the listener on an emotional level.

At any rate, if you’re doing the kind of compositions that involve a lot of heavy lifting with the string section, then it is defiantly worth allocating some serous financial resources on building a good string library... in that respect , SFA does deserve some serious consideration.


----------



## Mike Fox (Jul 30, 2016)

I'll mainly focus on the strings here, 

Basing this completely off of memory when I demoed Albion 1 a few months back, my initial thoughts were, "Geez, these strings sure do sound thin", and I was immediately turned off. This could have been user error, and I just wasn't tweaking it right, or maybe I didn't spend enough time with them. I also seem to remember having difficulty stripping the reverb from the patches. Is reverb caked into the samples? I do remember really enjoying everything else about the library though!

Hollywood Strings on the other hand, were immediately appealing to my ears. They are incredibly lush and romantic. I absolutely love how these strings are dry. Being able utilize Spaces with them, and not have overwhelming reverb is a major plus for me. HS may be an older library, but that doesn't mean anything, because some libraries were way ahead of their time when they were released. I believe HS is one of those libraries, and there's a reason why so many people still use them as their go to. They still hold up incredibly well, and compete with even the newer string libs. HS are a resource hog, but today's modern computers can easily handle them. Hell, I have a 2008 mac pro, and I have absolutely no problems with HS, or PLAY. Sure, they are a tad slower to load, but not to the point where I don't want to use them.

Just for the record, I'll take Symphobia 1 strings over anything else. 

As far as a general comparison goes, it's apples and oranges. EastWest does have a lot of older libraries that I'm not too impressed with, but their good libraries are incredibly good! Hollywood Brass is amazing, and Hollywood Percussion is one of the cleanest sounding percussion libraries I've ever heard. 

Spitfire has tons of good stuff though. Yeah, apples and oranges.


----------

