# SPITFIRE AUDIO string orchestra - libraries with greatest realism you can feel in your whole body + inspirational with playable full ensemble patches?



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 23, 2020)

*Question for you Spitfire sample library experts among us:*


I don't actually own any real orchestral libraries (yet) but today, in preparation for the upcoming Spitfire Audio sale - as I was taking inventory of what I have so far in my sample library collection, I stumbled upon the LABS STRINGS 2 library and got very inspired by it. Oh yes indeed. Eight and a half hours later, I had written something that surprisingly even blew me away. A very romantic and gorgeous heartbreaking love theme. It was a very special day!


"SWELLS ENSEMBLE" string orchestra patch was the one I spent all day playing/writing with and while it sounds very good, I can still tell that I am listening to a sample library and not a real orchestra, even with some really detailed dynamic expression added in and with a majestic concert hall reverb added from Exponential Audio's Nimbus. And even if I playback the recording I made of the piece and stand out in the hallway and listen outside of the room. I am not fooled by it...but I want to be!

_________________________________________________________________________________

One thing I really like about this patch is that it seems to include separate samples of the various sections of the orchestra divided up and mapped across the different octaves of the keyboard. To my ears, it does not sound like one single strings sample that has simply been mapped across all the keys. So that part is good indeed.

In practical use, this means I can sit at the piano keyboard and play/write a whole composition as a performer using both of my hands which allows me to stay connected to the emotions I am feeling and endeavor to emote everything from within myself, happening in the moment. I love the idea of being able to stay in the moment and while I am not against overdubbing different parts/sections when I write music, I had a lot of fun today. I enjoyed being able to play a whole gorgeous sounding orchestra with my eight fingers and two thumbs.

I do understand that the way many composers work with sample libraries is by recording each part/section of the orchestra individually, into the DAW on separate tracks. Many of these orchestral libraries are built by creating very detailed samples of each articulation from each section. I am sure this also increases the realism for several obvious reasons, including having each section performed separately rather than "playing/recording" the whole orchestra as a single performance using a single ensemble sample <--- less nuanced. I get it.
_________________________________________________________________________________


While I understand the advantages and disadvantages of overdubbing separate samples for each section vs doing a single performance using a single sample set, I want to know which of Spitfire Audio's Orchestral libraries are they very best suited to sitting down at the MIDI piano controller and playing/writing an entire string arrangement as a single performance?



Best sounding orchestra that is "playable" and "expressive"
LUSH sounding and could fool anyone into thinking it's a real orchestra
Most realistic sounding full orchestra "ensemble" patches
Most expressive legato articulations with playable full orchestra ensemble patches

I am not sure if orchestral music will ever be a part of my musical output but I find it a great deal of fun to compose using a full orchestra sound that I can play, write and perform by myself in the moment.



*Thank you* for any advice you can give, suggestions you might have, and thank you to Spitfire libraries which take my breath away!

:emoji_violin:


----------



## Greeno (May 23, 2020)

Hi Asta

I don't know a great deal but from what I gather, Albion One is well regarded as a good all rounder so might be a good place to start? -(please correct me anyone if I'm wrong!)
I've got the NI Symphony series as part of Komplete 12 Ultimate, that is a very good way to get hold of a full library as well as tonnes of other sounds.

Maybe the Olafur Arnaulds one also? The BBCSO sounds well rounded but quite a clean sound.


----------



## muziksculp (May 23, 2020)

Hi,

You might want to take a look at Spitfire's British Drama Toolkit Library. I don't have it, so I can't provide much feedback, but it sounds like it might be useful for what you are looking for.

https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/british-drama-toolkit/


----------



## Marsen (May 23, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> *Question for you Spitfire sample library experts among us:*
> 
> 
> I don't actually own any real orchestral libraries (yet) but today, in preparation for the upcoming Spitfire Audio sale - as I was taking inventory of what I have so far in my sample library collection, I stumbled upon the LABS STRINGS 2 library and got very inspired by it. Oh yes indeed. Eight and a half hours later, I had written something that surprisingly even blew me away. A very romantic and gorgeous heartbreaking love theme. It was a very special day!
> ...


If I´m getting you right, you mean playing a string section in a single performance sounding most real?
Or a tutti orchestra single performance?

First one, I could recommend all pro ensemble string patches like Spitfire Albion One, Orchestra Tools Inspire 1/2 or ProjectSAM Symphobia,
For second OT Inspire, VSL Smart Orchestra or maybe better Big Bang Orch. Andromeda and still ProjectSAM Symphobia.

Before I go any further, is it just strings or full orchestra?


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 23, 2020)

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> You might want to take a look at Spitfire's British Drama Toolkit Library. I don't have it, so I can't provide much feedback, but it sounds like it might be useful for what you are looking for.
> 
> https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/british-drama-toolkit/



Thank you for the suggestion. The playable aspect is definitely good. 

I have watched the walk through video for BDT and while it is designed to be playable and certainly is, the sound is a group of soloists from both strings and winds rather than offering a set of samples of a full string ensemble where each instrument has a section of players.

I find that BDT sounds fake because of the very nature of the soloists being more naked which is always the dead giveaway with libraries where you have soloists. I think it is easier to make larger ensembles where you have sections of players for violin, viola, cello and bass sound more realistic. Easier to disguise the subtleties when you have a larger group and more layers of the same instrument.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 23, 2020)

Marsen said:


> If I´m getting you right, you mean playing a string section in a single performance sounding most real?
> Or a tutti orchestra single performance?
> 
> First one, I could recommend all pro ensemble string patches like Spitfire Albion One, Orchestra Tools Inspire 1/2 or ProjectSAM Symphobia,
> ...


This would just be for string orchestra or string ensemble. No winds or percussion.

The Albions are more generalized if I am not mistaken. Is there not a library that is more focused on strings where more attention has been paid to how realistic the strings sound? Libraries like Spitfire Chamber Strings or Spitfire Studio Strings?

What I mean is tutti - being able to play all of the strings within the strings sections of an orchestra in a single performance and sounding most real, yes!


----------



## JohnG (May 23, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Libraries like Spitfire Chamber Strings or Spitfire Studio Strings?



Those are both excellent.

It also depends a bit on your budget. If you want to have great sounds, both those libraries are superb.

If you don't want to spend so much, you could also investigate Spitfire's BBC Orchestra, even though it also has brass, percussion and woodwinds. There are several versions, I believe, including one that starts at an extremely low price.

Are you writing songs, or trying to write string symphonies, or something experimental?


----------



## ism (May 23, 2020)

I think your intuitions here are spot on. And as you probably know by now, I can't resist an opening to theorize about the way these kinds of musical and aesthetic moments arise from the technical dimensions of sample libraries. So I'll apologize in advance for any long windedness.

I suppose there's a simple answer to your question of ensembles - that ensemble patches are always good to sketch on in any string library, and with any library you just layer some longs, and then you can start improving. Then if you need more defined voice leading or counterpoint you might copy and paste your ensemble performance on Vl 1/2, Va, Vc tracks.


But I'd argue that this misses something important in the experience of composing with samples.


Specifically there's also the quality of "performability", which, more phenomenologically, I think is something closer to the experience of composing with a sampled instrument that you're describing. And I feel this is is an extremely important dimension to consider if you mean to compose *for* sample libraries, as opposed to composing on paper and merely mocking up you paper composition *with* sample libraries.


There are various dimension to this. But the bottom line is that the ensemble you choose to start writing on can be very important.


At one extreme you have, for instance, the way in the Olafur Chamber evolutions. If you sit down to improvise with the waves, you can just feel the emotion of the ebb and flow of the crescendos and decrescendo.

And you can feel youself in these waves, the dynamics and the orchestration and the sound are just so gorgeous that I feel it really impacts what I feel I want to write. And then, for instance if I write some woodwinds over the waves, or the evos for that matter, this emotion of the waves that has guided the composition to that point (hopefully, at least) this informs the emotion of the clarinet, and then the bassoon ... The point is that the specific quality of the OACE patch - it's dynamics, and the sound of the AIR hall (I often like to add some further valhalla cathedral long reflections).

But a key thing here is that the playability and emotional force of the Olafur waves as a sketching patch comes from the performance having been captured in the samples themselves.

And of course the waves are limited in their scope in that the arcs are pre-recorded (which is also why they sound so amazing). So when I need more control, my next favourite patch is (following a tip in one of Christian's videos) is to take the Vl + Vc flautandos from SStS, (though SCS would be even better if I had it) as a sketching pad.

And again, there's a particular quality to the sound and the dynamics, and the way I can control the entry of the violins (just by playing in the cello range below) is something I find a really gorgeous and fluid way to improvise and sketch.

One of the limits of this approach however, is that I find I don't tend to write very sophisticated countrpuntal textures when improvising like this. The 5ths just sound so gorgeous in the flautandos, and without legato, a lot of contrapuntal lines feels jerky and break the gorgeousness. So there's a different type of line I tend to write with this ensemble patch for sketching.

Something else you might find interesting if your on a budget and are interested in a chamber sound is the Light and Sound Chamber Strings (which I also like to drench in a cathedral reverb). They have this brilliant innovation that when you hold the sustain pedal at the beginning or end of a note you get a recorded crescendo or decrescendo. It's not as smooth at the Olafur waves, and in a big epic piece you'd probably not notice, but for subtler pieces, it really opens the possibility of a very different emotional quality - though it takes some practice to understand how to perforated and write for this aesthetic dimension. And so I find that to start improvising with LSCS has a real impact of the emotional quality of what I end up writing.


At the other end of the spectrum are solo strings. I find that improvising a string quartet on a solo string ensemble patch is almost a complete waste of time. Here I'm more likely to lay down some chords with one of the above ensemble patches, and start improvising over them with a cello (for instance), and then add futher lines.

For solo strings, I think that playability (or it's more extreme form of "plonkability", where you can just plonk in notes like a piano) is less important the performability - the ability to really craft the performance of your arcs, and to coordinate the arcs between different instruments. (I can point you to threads on this if you're interested. )


But the point is there is a point where improvising on an ensemble patch looses this quality of inspiring the musicality.

And one of the most obvious places is when you need a contrapuntal texture, or even just finely wrought voice leading. Here is where I'll often start working things out on piano, or else by improvising and tweaking each string part on their own, from their own legato patch. This makes a difference too. For instance, Spitfire Studio String and Light and Sound Chamber strings have very, very different expressive qualities in the their legatos, and I like to try write to the kind of emotional qualities each library really excelled at. And to really write to these strengths, I feel I need to be improvising and crafting the performance one instrument at a time.



I think that a second dimension to your question is about the lushness of a patch.

And here's where layering libraries can be really fun. Check out Christian's video for the Spitfire Solo strings, for instance. He isn't academically trained in orchestration and counterpoint to the extend that Paul is. But where I find his compositions brilliant is in the way he crafts just the right "lushness", or sound quality. And the Solo string video show him mixing quite a lot of Solo String and SCS articulations (with not a legato in sight) quite virtuosically to expertly craft a sound.

At least, I think this might be what you mean by "lush". But I'd argue it's much more virtuosic in it's how that sound have been crafted from multiple articulations than the word "lush" implies.

It's a bit like an Olafur Arnalds record - it's not just chamber musics in a standard room. Olafur's background is in production and sound engineering, and you can really tell that this is different from classical-music-as-usual in the sonority, right down to the nuances of the close mics on each cello, and the creaking of the piano.


LCO is another library to look it for it's ability to really craft a sound in the mix. Individually, the patches have this micro-tuning, which I was first sceptical about. And true enough, this quality of LCO can be used for horror and dissonance to great effect. But this same quality of mico-tuning also gives LCO strings a real richness - someone on one thread somewhere suggested that it's like adding "detune" to a synth patch, in ensemble you get a chorus effect and it in effect it gives you warmth and richness, rather than harshness and dissonance. Check out what Homay does with LCO to see this in action.


----------



## Wunderhorn (May 23, 2020)

Don't get hung up on the _tutti_ patches. If you load individual section up in a multi in Kontakt you can play them together as if they were a pre-recorded _tutti_ patch.
After recording, in post-production so to speak, you'll actually be grateful for the individual sections as you can then go in and edit things individually.


----------



## method1 (May 23, 2020)

You can also build your own multi patches in kontakt, or with the VSL VI/Synchron players. 
It's a bit more effort but allows finer control over the individual elements. 

I really like VSL dimension strings, which is more of a chamber size, but they also can be stacked creatively to sound big, I've built patches that have all the players together in one patch etc.

So with whatever library you find that sounds good to you, keep in mind that you can build your own patches even if the library doesn't come with a dedicated ensemble patch.

Also keep in mind that if your aim is "total realism" you're in for a lot of work, I don't think there's any out of the box solution for this yet.


----------



## Marsen (May 23, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> This would just be for string orchestra or string ensemble. No winds or percussion.
> 
> The Albions are more generalized if I am not mistaken. Is there not a library that is more focused on strings where more attention has been paid to how realistic the strings sound? Libraries like Spitfire Chamber Strings or Spitfire Studio Strings?
> 
> What I mean is tutti - being able to play all of the strings within the strings sections of an orchestra in a single performance and sounding most real, yes!


Ok, realistic is relative. Where are so much different attempts on this.
If you are talking 'bout a single live Performance without Daw, you have to do a lot of keyswitching articulations for lively play. This is for ensemble patches regardless if Chamber Str. Or Studio. The only none keyswitch patches, I know from Spitfire are the Total Performance Legato patches, which are monophonic,.
Maybe best way to handle this switching live with an ensemble would be a small seperate midi-controller, like Guy Michelmore does.


----------



## AndyP (May 23, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Thank you for the suggestion. The playable aspect is definitely good.
> 
> I have watched the walk through video for BDT and while it is designed to be playable and certainly is, the sound is a group of soloists from both strings and winds rather than offering a set of samples of a full string ensemble where each instrument has a section of players.
> 
> I find that BDT sounds fake because of the very nature of the soloists being more naked which is always the dead giveaway with libraries where you have soloists. I think it is easier to make larger ensembles where you have sections of players for violin, viola, cello and bass sound more realistic. Easier to disguise the subtleties when you have a larger group and more layers of the same instrument.


I have the BDT and I'm not very fond of it. When I bought it, I was hoping for something different. I don't find it very playable.
SStS Pro is good, especially because you can highlight the "first chair" player with the close mics.
But it is not a solo library, not a real "first chair".
Weak points of SSts are the legatos and there is only spiccato, no staccato articulation.

For moving strings I like to use Heavyocity for layering. Intimate Textures and Rhythmic Textures.


----------



## muziksculp (May 23, 2020)

Hi,

*Divisimate* by Next Midi is not a library, but rather a MIDI Performance Tool that might interest you. 

Maybe you know about it, but in case you don't, here is a link to their website. I don't have it, so can't elaborate much on it. But I have been checking what it offers once in a while, and seems to gain more popularity lately. 

Divisimate by NextMidi

https://divisimate.com/


----------



## purple (May 23, 2020)

If you want to spend $600 on strings and you want realism, I'd look at Cinematic Studio Strings and Cinematic Studio Solo Strings. They work well together and the solo strings are intended to work basically like a first chair microphone for each section in addition to being a quartet. Mix in some of the solo strings to increase expression and focus, dial it back for more depth and to make the section sound bigger. These 2 have the best legato sound of any library, and are so consistent that you can easily copy and paste stuff you do with each of them to the other and even to Cinematic Studio Brass. I don't have to worry about whether stuff I am writing down at the piano will come across well with CSS. It all just works exactly the way it needs to no matter the key or register of the instrument.

While Spitfire certainly has a sound to it that many find inspiring and wonderful, I find that most demos I have heard from those collections leave much to be desired when it comes to realism in a more traditional orchestral context. Consistency issues also have me avoiding most of their collections (although I really do give most of them a shot when I see their youtube walkthroughs). Most of their libraries have some portions of the instrument that have bad samples and bad legato transitions and so on. The performance of the players is baked in in a lot of cases, which is great when it's what you want but horrible when it isn't. In some cases i've seen people complain that some instruments are just plain out of tune.


----------



## Mike Fox (May 23, 2020)

I have just about every major string library out there, and in terms of playability, Afflatus is an absolute breeze. It's much more user friendly than anything Spitfire has ever done, imo.

Afflatus also has ensemble patches that are true polyphonic legato, which allows you to play with both hands and achieve smooth legato transitions!

Tone is subjective, but in terms of realism? More often than not, that has more to do with the composer's programming skills.
In the right hands, a 20 year old string library can sound amazing!

With that being said, if you're set on Spitfire, then i highly recommend SCS. It's a great string library and can achieve just about anything you throw at it. It also has ensemble patches, and the flautando articulations are absolutely gorgeous.

Many people will recommend CSS, but i personally am not a fan of the playability, as I find it to be very cumbersome. Also, if you go that route, make sure you like the tone, because it has a dark, and sometimes even a "lo fi" sheen to it. The ensemble patch also sounds very synthy to me. Regardless, CSS is fully capable of producing some very beautiful results.

Good luck with your search!


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (May 23, 2020)

+1 for Cinematic Studio Strings. Based on what you wrote, I think it's exactly what you are looking for. 

If you read up on this forum there is a general agreement that Cinematic Studio Strings has a legato that is as good as any available, even in libraries that cost a lot more money. Listen to it and see if you like the way it sounds.


----------



## jaketanner (May 23, 2020)

Playing an ensemble patch, which is what you are describing, is not going to be very realistic...at least not at first without a LOT of dynamic programming afterwards. Also you will want a library with polyphonic legato, and Spitfire doesn't have that. You can fake it a bit if you properly overlap the notes slightly so that the notes blend gently into each other.

Also, as other have mentioned...if you don't have the skills to program the strings, no matter how good of a pianist you are, you will not achieve any realism. You can't play a string patch like a piano and expect it to sound real...totally different approach...It's all about balance, proper chord structure and arrangement. Unfortunately, you can't get good balance from an ensemble patch...why? Because sections overlap, and when they do, you may need one of those instruments louder or softer...not gonna happen with an ensemble patch, unless you have full control over each layer (some libraries do)...SF doesn't.

Ensemble patches are for sketching out ideas quick, then you go back and split out the MIDI notes and assign them to the appropriate articulation, or you replay it. Unfortunately, what you are asking isn't really a possibility in ANY library (again not without serious programming).

However...LOL Since SF only has 3 full sectioned string only libraries...your choices are limited. SCS, SStS and SSS...there is BBC but that is not string only. So if you have a direct question based off those three libraries, I can help you narrow it down...they are also all priced differently and if you have a budget cap, that will also determine which library you can get.

Best of luck!...BTW, if you haven't already, get the Discover library and you can test out the sustains from BBC to see if that works for you.


----------



## Saxer (May 23, 2020)

Ensemble patches (sections spread across the keyboard) for both hand playing are nice improvisation tools but they have their borders. Especially strings sound emotional and realistic through the independent dynamic of the voices. And no long note string patch sounds good if you don't add continuous dynamic movement. I think orchestration and dynamic are 90% of good sample strings. Maybe you should think about a midi pedal or breath controller to add dynamic to your performance. Normally dynamic is driven by the modulation wheel (like the Spitfire Epic Strings) but you need a free hand for that.

A lot of the bigger string libraries have ensemble libraries as an additional goody beside the single instrument sections. You will pay a lot if you don't need those.
Cornucopia by Strezov Sampling is a good sounding pure ensemble library, only the basses are separate. It's one of the few string ensemble libraries I know which are not part of a bigger package.

This might be interesting too...





Part writing or the importance of not being lazy – complete with fancy pictures and sound


Have you ever heard of some arcane device called ‘part writing’? Ever wondered if it could help you improve your writing? If the answer to the second question is no then congratulations. You can save yourself the hassle of reading through this and just have a quick glance at the fancy pictures...




vi-control.net


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

Hello,

I am overwhelmed by all the excellent responses. Thank you! I needed some time to think about everything that everyone wrote about. Overflowing informations. I appreciate all of the generous feedback. For me, it is an education. I am not new to sample libraries but I have never used sample libraries or a professional level scoring template in Logic or any other DAW to develop an orchestral score. Not yet. I may have an opportunity for it in my third of fourth year of my graduate program. For now, I dip my toes in the water while continuing to learn to transcribe and compose on paper and with music notation software apps.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 24, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> Tone is subjective, but in terms of realism? More often than not, that has more to do with the composer's programming skills.
> In the right hands, a 20 year old string library can sound amazing!



My opinion as well.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

JohnG said:


> Those are both excellent.
> 
> It also depends a bit on your budget. If you want to have great sounds, both those libraries are superb.
> 
> ...



Thank you John,

I will look into the BBC Orchestra and see how it compares to others I have been looking at.

The Spitfire Chamber Strings seems to have a sound I like, at least in the demonstration videos. It sounds perhaps a bit warmer, raw and less sterile/refined than the Studio Strings but I could be wrong about that. In general, I do like the general Spitfire library sound as compared to other companies.

There is a full size version of Spitfire Chamber Strings and a smaller pared down version. For myself, I am not too sure if I would really need the full size one of if the smaller one would give me everything that I would need for now?

Perhaps if you buy the smaller Spitfire Chamber Strings product, they offer a later upgrade path to the full size one?


----------



## MA-Simon (May 24, 2020)

Honestly if you want to just play multible lines *at the same time*, then maybe rather Afflatus by Strezov Sampling then Spitfire? Altough, very expensive for a starting library.








AFFLATUS CHAPTER I Strings


The online library for premium sound samples




www.strezov-sampling.com





It has polyphonic legato.


----------



## JohnG (May 24, 2020)

Afflatus is a great suggestion. Probably, for what you are seeking, the best idea.


[note: I have received free products from Strezov Sampling]


----------



## Mornats (May 24, 2020)

ism said:


> So I'll apologize in advance for any long windedness.


I actually went and made a cup of tea at this point. Wasn't disappointed in my decision.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

ism said:


> I think your intuitions here are spot on. And as you probably know by now, I can't resist an opening to theorize about the way these kinds of musical and aesthetic moments arise from the technical dimensions of sample libraries. So I'll apologize in advance for any long windedness...



Hello again ISM,

Once more, thank you kindly for all of your words. It is so appreciated!



*Ensemble Patches*
Ensemble patches are good for sketching out ideas but not the best way to high realism. I do enjoy having the full orchestra at my fingertips for moments of inspiration.

I agree that playing a sample changes the way we play. I certainly did not play the STRINGS 2 "ENSEMBLE SWELL" patch how I would play a piano! The patch dictates how one plays it. What I found in general is that I had to play slower. Any moving melody lines that I was hearing on top were not possible so I found myself writing more slow moving top lines.

"phenomenologically" <---- now there is a new word I have just learned! 


*Perform-ability*
The point you touch on about the perform-ability of the ensemble patch chosen to write with from the very beginning is absolutely right. I could not agree more. The patch dictates how and what you play for certain; sensitive to what is under your fingers and what you are hearing back. A specific set of limitations largely sets things in motion in a very specific way, determining not only the path taken towards the final outcome of the music but also how one "performs" with the sample under the fingers.

I actually find that a properly weighted key-bed that feels like a real piano is not very good for playing sample libraries and has the wrong feel under my fingers for libraries. I started with a weighted Studio Logic controller but then I was at a friend's studio that had a cheap M-Audio semi-weighted controller and I found it a lot better to play on for samples. I bought one and it is indeed more useful. Most libraries do not respond like a piano, even most piano libraries. I approach sample libraries as its own instrument. Piano is not my main instrument. Violin and Guitar are. This allows me to be more open minded about how I approach the piano keyboard as I am not strictly tied to a regimented technique from any serious piano studies with a private teacher in the same way I am with my violin.



*Connecting Emotionally*
I have the Ólafur Arnalds Chamber Evolutions library.

It is the only full library that I own so far. It is the first one that I purchased, even before I had any of the LABS libraries. I could not agree with you more about the WAVES samples. They really allow me to feel an emotion and reflect back the energy they give to me as I respond to them while playing.

The Flautando articulation of samples in the Chamber Strings library you speak of sounds enticing! This particular library has a sound that I love in the demo videos. A full orchestra sound is a grandiose thing and it just sort of comes on top of you, it is so powerful. You have no choice but to be intoxicated by it immediately as it pours and washes over you. At the same time, it feels like there would be a deeper connection with a 16 player string ensemble. The more intimate sound still having power but revealing more individual details could prove to be even more emotionally moving perhaps? Connecting you more to the individual personality of the players?



*Perfect 5ths*
Yes! Most of what I wrote yesterday with the LABS ensemble swell patch was built in chord structures laid out across the keyboard in 5ths on the bottom. A few 6ths for brief moments. Quite right that 5ths sound gorgeous when laid out across a few octaves, even if not very sophisticated. Small steps for me towards more sophisticated composing. I am not sure I will ever make anything atonal except for a school project or exercise.



*Divisi, Feathered, High, Low etcetera*
I understand your point and other's points about using different libraries for their different strengths and performing separate section and solo parts, especially with contrapuntal phrases. You definitely have me thinking about acquiring a library that will allow me to do both the improvised / inspired performance but then sketch in more detailed melody and counter melody.

I do understand that in Kontakt, I can have several different samples open at the same time and use Divisi samples simultaneously to attain more control of expression within different sections of the ensemble. It seems Spitfire go for this "Feathered" approach more than Divisi, where they combine the violin sections into a separate high and low patch, then a celli patch and separate double bass patch. In some libraries they "feather" the celli and double basses into a single patch. I do understand the benefits of being able to control each.



*Making the right purchase ...decisions, decisions*
Maybe the $29 Originals Epic Strings library would give me what I am looking for or at least be a huge improvement over the LABS STRINGS 2.

The Spitfire Chamber Strings is quite enticing. I am not sure I would need the full version. The smaller version still has a lot of samples in it. Hopefully the important patches are not missing from the smaller version and it covers all the best techniques; the larger version of SCS just adding more variety of the same techniques?

First I would like to have a library with a sound I most like. Second criteria is having one that I can use for sketching out full ensemble ideas (perhaps by running multiple samples at once in Kontakt). Third is having the section samples to get more detailed with adding layers.

More samples in a library = more time consuming to get work completed. I do understand the benefits of the extra layers of nuance. I still want to have some fun and enjoy myself. Staring at the computer screen in search for that one sample to use out of the ten available is not creative to me.


I currently have OACE, OPW and LABS. Right now, the libraries I am planning to buy are:

1. Ólafur Arnalds Composer Toolkit
2. Albion Tundra


These have been in my Spitfire wish list for a while. Which strings library do you think would compliment these best and give me a great writing tool for inspirational times? Or do you think the strings in Tundra combined with my OACE library will be more than enough?



*LCO Textures & Homay*
For my more ambient style work, LCO Textures is perfect for creating background textures with added filters and ambient reverb/delay effects. The detuning you mentioned may add interest and be refreshing. LCO textures add another level of harmonic complexity.

Regarding Homay's demonstration of LCO and any other library where she does a walk trough or example composition, she had me at "Hello this is Homay from Spitfire Audio". Her compositions she makes with the libraries are my honest favorites out of everyone's at Spitfire. They are all amazingly talented composers but her compositions are so emotional...so beautiful. I love her and her music so much. I would love to be a fly on the wall for all of her writing sessions.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson (May 24, 2020)

LA Scoring Strings is probably the best fit for what you described - auto divisi in 4 or 5 parts from live keyboard input.


----------



## purple (May 24, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> My opinion as well.


I see realism like computer parts. There is always a bottleneck. That bottleneck can be either the user or the samples they're using. In most cases I would say it is the former, though.


----------



## jbuhler (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> The Spitfire Chamber Strings is quite enticing. I am not sure I would need the full version. The smaller version still has a lot of samples in it. Hopefully the important patches are not missing from the smaller version and it covers all the best techniques; the larger version of SCS just adding more variety of the same techniques?


SCS has the same articulation content as SCS Pro, just fewer mics (close, tree, ambient). Pro comes with the outriggers, which I use quite a lot, as well as a close ribbon, a stereo mic and—what might be of particular interest to you—a gallery mic that gives a distant perspective where you hear lots of the big hall. Pro also has two mixes by Jake Jackson, and I tend to use those in my basic composing template, because they sound great and save considerably on resources. SCS in either version has tons of legatos and articulations. It has an ensemble patch that is useful for sketching as well as the individual sections. It's the string library that I use as the foundation of my template, often alone, sometimes as a divisi addition to larger libraries like SSS or HZS. I don't know where I would be without it. It also plays very nicely with OACE (I tend to think of OACE as an extension of SCS). Indeed, I find that SCS layers pretty well with any other string library I have. It also layers well with itself (layer, say, the main legato patch and the con sord legato patch).

I have struggled plenty with some of the libraries I've purchased (SSS, for instance), but SCS has never given me much grief. I would say its main downsides are the somewhat nasal tone (if that bothers you) and the legatos of the second violins and violas are such that they can pose issues if you use them in exposed contexts. Like many libraries, SCS also often struggles with the kinds of legato ostinato figures you encounter in lots of traditional string accompaniment patterns.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> SCS has the same articulation content as SCS Pro, just fewer mics (close, tree, ambient). Pro comes with the outriggers, which I use quite a lot, as well as a close ribbon, a stereo mic and—what might be of particular interest to you—a gallery mic that gives a distant perspective where you hear lots of the big hall. Pro also has two mixes by Jake Jackson, and I tend to use those in my basic composing template, because they sound great and save considerably on resources. SCS in either version has tons of legatos and articulations. It has an ensemble patch that is useful for sketching as well as the individual sections. It's the string library that I use as the foundation of my template, often alone, sometimes as a divisi addition to larger libraries like SSS or HZS. I don't know where I would be without it. It also plays very nicely with OACE (I tend to think of OACE as an extension of SCS). Indeed, I find that SCS layers pretty well with any other string library I have. It also layers well with itself (layer, say, the main legato patch and the con sord legato patch).
> 
> I have struggled plenty with some of the libraries I've purchased (SSS, for instance), but SCS has never given me much grief. I would say its main downsides are the somewhat nasal tone (if that bothers you) and the legatos of the second violins and violas are such that they can pose issues if you use them in exposed contexts. Like many libraries, SCS also often struggles with the kinds of legato ostinato figures you encounter in lots of traditional string accompaniment patterns.


Great info James Buhler!

A few questions:

1. What in your estimation are the main differences and strengths and weaknesses of Spitfire Chamber Strings vs Spitfire Studio Strings?

2. Do you think SCS or SSS will work better with and compliment OACE and Tundra?

3. Spitfire Studio Strings comes in a pared down version that is only $250 regular price and will be an extremely good deal with tomorrow's sale. What does this library miss in comparison to the full version? Is it mic perspectives like the SCS or is it so much that the cheaper version of SSS isn't really giving you a very usable tool when compared to other options?


----------



## Sears Poncho (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> 3. Spitfire Studio Strings comes in a pared down version that is only $250 regular price and will be an extremely good deal with tomorrow's sale. What does this library miss in comparison to the full version?


On the left: Studio Strings at top, Studio strings pro at bottom. On the right: the differences between mics.


----------



## jbuhler (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Great info James Buhler!
> 
> A few questions:
> 
> ...


There are three libraries here: SCS, SSS, and SStS. SCS=Chamber Strings; SSS=Symphonic Strings; SStS=Studio Strings.

SCS comes in two versions: core and pro. The difference is microphones. SStS also comes in two versions, core and pro, and the difference is microphones and some of the combinations and articulations. SSS currently only comes in one version, though the pro mics (same as what's available in SCS Pro) used to be available and I picked them up. 

I have all three. SCS is my principal string library. I started with the three mic version, and that was perfectly adequate. I got a good deal on an upgrade to the pro version and have been very happy to have the additional mics and especially the stereo mixes. But even now I would be happy with just the core version.

SSS is a very large section, and I find it sluggish and heavy (as you would expect). I also found it much harder to program than SCS. Oddly Hans Zimmer Strings, which is even larger, often feels much more nimble to me and so I've gravitated toward it rather than SSS when I feel I need the additional weight.

SStS is the library I've used least of the three, mostly because I prefer wet libraries. But in general, I've liked the library when I've played around with it. I like the modular structure in the pro version, and I like that when you stack the libraries the weight of the orchestra seems to increase, which is not always the case in my experience with layering libraries. The biggest shortcoming for me is that it does not have much variety for shorts, and the tree mic that is available in the core isn't the best one available for most uses. Many complained about its legato when it first came out, but I've found it pretty credible for what it is, and there are passages that it handles more adeptly than SCS or SSS.

I haven't ever worked with SStS and OACE, so I can't speak to that (though @ism likely can), but SCS and OACE work extremely well together (recorded in the same hall). SCS also works very well with Tundra (also recorded in the big hall at Air), and the core version of SCS has the same mics as Tundra with the exception of the outrigger that Tundra has (the outrigger is available for SCS in the Pro version). (And of course Neo works very well with both Tundra and OACE as well, Neo also having been recorded in the big hall at Air.)


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> On the left: Studio Strings at top, Studio strings pro at bottom. On the right: the differences between mics.


Wow, huge difference. Thank you for sharing that Sears Poncho!

The smaller one almost seems like a give away free sampler more than a full product when you look at the full product. Not sure this is for me. I would always wonder what I am missing! Thank you for the screen shot. Pictures are worth a thousand words.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> There are three libraries here: SCS, SSS, and SStS. SCS=Chamber Strings; SSS=Symphonic Strings; SStS=Studio Strings.
> 
> SCS comes in two versions: core and pro. The difference is microphones. SStS also comes in two versions, core and pro, and the difference is microphones and some of the combinations and articulations. SSS currently only comes in one version, though the pro mics (same as what's available in SCS Pro) used to be available and I picked them up.
> 
> ...


I must apologize. I have gotten the abbreviations wrong for the library names. I was calling Spitfire Studio Strings SSS, when I should have been calling it SStS. SSS is Spitfire Symphonic Strings which is one library I am not really looking at (yet).

Thank you for sharing your experience. It does seem to continue to point me towards Spitfire Chamber Strings. The greater variety of mics and articulations available even in the pared down version of SCS when compared to the pared down version of SStS definitely makes SCS the better choice if I am to only get one of the smaller version libraries.

Good to know that SCS and OACE work well together. I love OACE so that is important for me. I really appreciate your advice. Thank you again. This place is so awesome!


----------



## BeeF_DriPPings (May 24, 2020)

one time, i bought two of these little boxes that let you hook up 4 regular expression pedals via usb and have 4 foot pedals to control the expression of string sections. I had seen Vangelis doing it and thought it was cool, it totally works to create an uber ensemble type setup and you can control things with note filtering and transpose as well. I had an 88 key controller and 8 moog ep3s. lol






MIDI Expression







www.audiofront.net


----------



## ism (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Wow, huge difference. Thank you for sharing that Sears Poncho!
> 
> The smaller one almost seems like a give away free sampler more than a full product when you look at the full product. Not sure this is for me. I would always wonder what I am missing! Thank you for the screen shot. Pictures are worth a thousand words.



I'd add a bit of texture to this picture.

Arguably, there's two type of people who buy SStS.

People like Sears Poncho - who (as I understand it) go in it for the aesthetic of the dry studio sound. The artistry of the mix is in really using the dryness and the definition and the nuance at a level in which the extra mics really make a big difference. 


Then there's people like myself who buy it as "SCS lite". I'd argue that it's really good value as "SCS lite", and I really do love it. Even though for most of what I do, SCS would at least arguably, be a bit better. 

So the first thing I do with SStS is drench it in a cathedral reverb. 

I don't like the room sound of SStS I would never use it dry, and I don't think it was even intended to be used dry, the idea is that it gives you the flexibility to add your own sound. But the important point is that it has enough room tone, with enough spatial information and presence that when you drench it in a nice Valhalla cathedral reverb, it really does sound lovely. This, to my ear is fundamentally different from completely dry libraries (VSL especially) which don't have enough early reflections to get away with this. And it's a fundamentally different aesthetic space from the studio sound that really benefits from all the different mics.

I probably don't like things quite a wet as yourself, but I do like them pretty wet. And to get this sound I feel the extra mics are largely irrelevant. 

The woodwinds are a different story. I love SSW, and would never use them without tree and close. But I feel the absence of the close mics in SStW is a deal breaker. But for the strings, I doubt that even if I had pro I'd have ever bothered with the extra mics.


My sense is that for what you describe, SCS would be better. But SStS (non-pro) is a viable "SCS-lite". The legato is good, but more limited than SCS, the sections are a bit larger, and of course you don't have the AIR room tone. I wouldn't use it for Mahler. But SStS does what it does really well, sounds great (when drenched in enough reverb), and has a lot of articulations, so there's a lot of ways you can craft the sound. And it does work well with textural libraries - OACE in particular. 

If you can afford SCS, I doubt you'll regret it. But if you're looking at SStS, I can share some of my early experiments in exploring SStS that might give you an idea of the sound in this space. (I find the official demos all a bit dry).


----------



## Sunny Schramm (May 24, 2020)

btw: spitfire starts the spring-sale in some minutes


----------



## ism (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> I actually find that a properly weighted key-bed that feels like a real piano is not very good for playing sample libraries and has the wrong feel under my fingers for libraries. I started with a weighted Studio Logic controller but then I was at a friend's studio that had a cheap M-Audio semi-weighted controller and I found it a lot better to play on for samples. I bought one and it is indeed more useful. Most libraries do not respond like a piano, even most piano libraries. I approach sample libraries as its own instrument. Piano is not my main instrument. Violin and Guitar are. This allows me to be more open minded about how I approach the piano keyboard as I am not strictly tied to a regimented technique from any serious piano studies with a private teacher in the same way I am with my violin.



My main instrument is the guitar, and when I used to writing on guitar, the point was always to write to the nuance and expressiveness of the instrument. And I suspect this drives the way I obsess over both the expressiveness of textural libraries as well as these these detail of performability vs plonkability - trying to recover that ability to write in the dimensions of nuance and texture and performance and gesture that were lost to me, at least temporarily, when I shifted to samples.

And all those youtube videos that "review" a violin or a cello played by plonking notes onto a keyboard and expecting it to react like a keyboard ... well I console myself that this not the worst travesty of humanity that Youtube has brought us. Still pretty bad though.




Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> *Perfect 5ths*
> Yes! Most of what I wrote yesterday with the LABS ensemble swell patch was built in chord structures laid out across the keyboard in 5ths on the bottom. A few 6ths for brief moments. Quite right that 5ths sound gorgeous when laid out across a few octaves, even if not very sophisticated. Small steps for me towards more sophisticated composing. I am not sure I will ever make anything atonal except for a school project or exercise.



I'm with you on this. It is one of my great adult pleasures to be able to write parallel 5th anything I want.

This is my favourite (if also the simplest) of the official SCS demos.



(Doesn't mean that I don't also like good voice leading though. I love a nice bit of good voice leading).



Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> *LCO Textures & Homay*
> For my more ambient style work, LCO Textures is perfect for creating background textures with added filters and ambient reverb/delay effects. The detuning you mentioned may add interest and be refreshing. LCO textures add another level of harmonic complexity.
> 
> Regarding Homay's demonstration of LCO and any other library where she does a walk trough or example composition, she had me at "Hello this is Homay from Spitfire Audio". Her compositions she makes with the libraries are my honest favorites out of everyone's at Spitfire. They are all amazingly talented composers but her compositions are so emotional...so beautiful. I love her and her music so much. I would love to be a fly on the wall for all of her writing sessions.



I sometime think it's Homay's personal mission to bankrupt me.  And her LCO demo is among my favourite of hers.

I was actually talking about LCO strings though, should have been specific. Though I agree that this is all equally true LCO textures. It has an entirely other dimension of crazy textural possibilities.

If you're looking at the Olafur toolkit - be sure to check out her demo for Stratus also. And note that it does come with the non-stratus piano patches also.




Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> *Connecting Emotionally*
> I have the Ólafur Arnalds Chamber Evolutions library.
> 
> It is the only full library that I own so far. It is the first one that I purchased, even before I had any of the LABS libraries. I could not agree with you more about the WAVES samples. They really allow me to feel an emotion and reflect back the energy they give to me as I respond to them while playing.
> ...



To this I'd add - brace you self for other libraries taking more work to sound good. Few, if any, libraries sounds as amazing right out of the box as OACE. My cat could write something beautiful on OACE. (And I don't even have a cat).

But the flautandos in SStS are to die for also. (There's some shockingly anti-flautando people around vi-c. I am not one of them).




Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> *Making the right purchase ...decisions, decisions*
> Maybe the $29 Originals Epic Strings library would give me what I am looking for or at least be a huge improvement over the LABS STRINGS 2.



Make sure you're looking for this sound though. I don't have this, but I have Albion One which replaced this. And it's not that it's a bad library, but it's just too ... epic, I suppose ... for what I do.

Of course that's exactly what it says on the tin, so this isn't a complaint against it, exactly. But it just isn't right to match the quality I get with these other libraries. Not quite sure what that quality is, but I think "lyricism" is as good a word as any. And Albion One / Origionals tends to excel particularly for bombast and aggressiveness. And so, by design, possibly the single least lyrical library Spitfire has on offer. In particular, most of the strings are orchestrated in octaves, which makes me crazy.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

AndyP said:


> I have the BDT and I'm not very fond of it. When I bought it, I was hoping for something different. I don't find it very playable.
> SStS Pro is good, especially because you can highlight the "first chair" player with the close mics.
> But it is not a solo library, not a real "first chair".
> Weak points of SSts are the legatos and there is only spiccato, no staccato articulation.
> ...



Hello Andy P,
Thank you for this clarification and suggestion


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

muziksculp said:


> Hi,
> 
> *Divisimate* by Next Midi is not a library, but rather a MIDI Performance Tool that might interest you.
> 
> ...



Hi Muziksculp,

This is very cool technology and could be very useful in the future for me. Thank you for sharing!


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

@purple & @TigerTheFrog 

I listened to lots of Cinematic Studio Strings demos. It sounds really great but I'm afraid that it does not have the kind of sound I am looking for. It sounds very cinematic and perfect for creating blockbuster film scores. I am looking for libraries for composing my own music. I am not a media composer. I really like the more raw and intimate sound of Spitfire Audio's products in general. Call me a fangirl if you like but it is just what resonates for me. For my music, I want something more personal that can reach a listener on a more personal level without being too over the top and intimidating. Cinematic Studio Strings sounds massive. It is very impressive and very cinematic. What I seem to be leaning towards is Spitfire Chamber Strings. It has a sound that feels more personal, warm and inviting to me.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

Mike Fox said:


> I have just about every major string library out there, and in terms of playability, Afflatus is an absolute breeze. It's much more user friendly than anything Spitfire has ever done, imo.
> 
> Afflatus also has ensemble patches that are true polyphonic legato, which allows you to play with both hands and achieve smooth legato transitions!
> 
> ...


Hello Mike, 

I appreciate you sharing your opinions based on vast experience with string libraries. Tone is subjective indeed but from so many different demonstration and walk through videos that I have been watching, I have found that I keep coming back to Spitfire Chamber Strings. I just love the sound of it. It sounds warm and inviting and so rich and warm, like it just reaches out and hugs you, if you know what I mean?

The sounds from the Cinematic Studio Strings library do sound like they are specific to blockbuster cinema composition. I think they would work well for any movie with Dunce "The Rock" Johnson as the star, or any of the Marvel movies. Not so much my cup of tea but I can hear why many people love it.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

Saxer said:


> Ensemble patches (sections spread across the keyboard) for both hand playing are nice improvisation tools but they have their borders. Especially strings sound emotional and realistic through the independent dynamic of the voices. And no long note string patch sounds good if you don't add continuous dynamic movement. I think orchestration and dynamic are 90% of good sample strings. Maybe you should think about a midi pedal or breath controller to add dynamic to your performance. Normally dynamic is driven by the modulation wheel (like the Spitfire Epic Strings) but you need a free hand for that.
> 
> A lot of the bigger string libraries have ensemble libraries as an additional goody beside the single instrument sections. You will pay a lot if you don't need those.
> Cornucopia by Strezov Sampling is a good sounding pure ensemble library, only the basses are separate. It's one of the few string ensemble libraries I know which are not part of a bigger package.
> ...


Hello Saxer,

Thank you for these important lessons. You certainly helped with further understanding the range of limitations to working with ensemble patches. I appreciate the link you shared as it was a very informative lesson for me in some new territory.


----------



## Mike Fox (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Hello Mike,
> 
> I appreciate you sharing your opinions based on vast experience with string libraries. Tone is subjective indeed but from so many different demonstration and walk through videos that I have been watching, I have found that I keep coming back to Spitfire Chamber Strings. I just love the sound of it. It sounds warm and inviting and so rich and warm, like it just reaches out and hugs you, if you know what I mean?
> 
> The sounds from the Cinematic Studio Strings library do sound like they are specific to blockbuster cinema composition. I think they would work well for any movie with Dunce "The Rock" Johnson as the star, or any of the Marvel movies. Not so much my cup of tea but I can hear why many people love it.


Yes! SCS is arguably Spitfire's greatest accomplishment in the sampling world. It's quite versitile, and definitely has that feeling of "warmth" that you mentioned. A good part of that is due to it being recorded at Lyndhurst, which is a very beautiful and warm sounding hall. You can't go wrong!


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

ism said:


> My main instrument is the guitar, and when I used to writing on guitar, the point was always to write to the nuance and expressiveness of the instrument. And I suspect this drives the way I obsess over both the expressiveness of textural libraries as well as these these detail of performability vs plonkability - trying to recover that ability to write in the dimensions of nuance and texture and performance and gesture that were lost to me, at least temporarily, when I shifted to samples.
> 
> And all those youtube videos that "review" a violin or a cello played by plonking notes onto a keyboard and expecting it to react like a keyboard ... well I console myself that this not the worst travesty of humanity that Youtube has brought us. Still pretty bad though.
> 
> ...



This is awesome ISM

You sure are a master of connecting the dots!

It seems that the Spitfire Chamber Strings has naturally become the main attraction for me. I know you love the flautandos in Spitfire Studio Strings but how are the flautandos in Spitfire Chamber Strings? Just as good and intimate? Not as good?

Homay definitely makes an incredible sales clerk without making any form of sales pitch. She makes Spitfire look good and helps them to stay connected with a younger up and coming audience.

I have watched the demo videos of Stratus many times. I decided against it because it is so specific and his signature sound for his last record. It would be too easy to end up sounding like Oli with that however, I am sure there are ways of making it sound different. When you say that Stratus comes with the non-Stratus piano patches, do you mean that Stratus comes with pianos and content from the Olafur Arnalds Composer Toolkit library?

Funny story about the cat you do not have ISM


----------



## jbuhler (May 24, 2020)

ism said:


> the flautandos in SStS are to die for also. (There's some shockingly anti-flautando people around vi-c. I am not one of them).


A corollary of the proposition that one can never have too many string libraries is that one can never have too many flautando/sul tasto patches.


----------



## jbuhler (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> how are the flautandos in Spitfire Chamber Strings?


They are the ur-flautandos. Like Christian Henson I use the ensemble flautandos for sketching. It’s nice and consistent and beautiful across the range and reacts very musically to movements of the modwheel. The SCS flautando ensemble patch was the first sample patch that I really fell in love with.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> They are the ur-flautandos. Like Christian Henson I use the ensemble flautandos for sketching. It’s nice and consistent and beautiful across the range and reacts very musically to movements of the modwheel. The SCS flautando ensemble patch was the first sample patch that I really fell in love with.


Thank you for sharing that.






Spitfire Audio — Supporting Musicians


Since 2007



www.spitfireaudio.com





People must think I am crazy about Spitfire. I am using my ears and listening and going with my intuition. The other thing is that Spitfire share the royalties on their libraries with the musicians and technicians that make the libraries and that is definitely something to consider because without the musicians, there would be no libraries and no technological advancements happening in how to make these things sound more realistic as time moves forward. There is an attitude that samples will replace real performers. It is a very strong opinion but one held by many musicians who eschew sample library music. I love that Spitfire work with musicians and treat them with the respect they deserve. It is easy to support a company that supports music and musicians and puts the money they earn back into the company by developing more innovative products.


----------



## jononotbono (May 24, 2020)

Spitfire Chamber Strings is amazing. Spitfire Symphonic Strings is also very good but much larger in player count. The Spitfire Symphonic Solo Strings Library is a great library to compliment both of these library to add more detail. All recorded in Air Lyndhurst which sounds fantastic.

Other very good String libraries I have, Orchestral Tools Berlin Strings, CSS, CSSS, HZ Strings. Actually I’ll stop there. It’s scary how much money gets spent on this stuff 😂


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

How is Spitfire Chamber Strings on the computer's CPU?

How many instances of it in Kontakt can you run on an i7 Quad Core machines with 12-16 GB of RAM?

In other words, am I going to need a new computer just to run it? 

It does seem like a massive library company to anything else I have so far.


----------



## Rex282 (May 24, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Other very good String libraries I have, Orchestral Tools Berlin Strings, CSS, CSSS, HZ Strings. Actually I’ll stop there. It’s scary how much money gets spent on this stuff 😂


I have a very strong feeling you won't be stopping there....just like most of us...."My name is Rex and I am a ....."


----------



## jononotbono (May 24, 2020)

Rex282 said:


> I have a very strong feeling you won't be stopping there....just like most of us...."My name is Rex and I am a ....."



Oh I have more. I just didn’t want to list more. And besides, I don’t have the Berlin Strings expansions yet so they are definitely on the cards. Be irresponsible not to complete it.

But yeah, SCS is an amazing library.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> @purple & @TigerTheFrog
> 
> I listened to lots of Cinematic Studio Strings demos. It sounds really great but I'm afraid that it does not have the kind of sound I am looking for. It sounds very cinematic and perfect for creating blockbuster film scores. I am looking for libraries for composing my own music. I am not a media composer. I really like the more raw and intimate sound of Spitfire Audio's products in general. Call me a fangirl if you like but it is just what resonates for me. For my music, I want something more personal that can reach a listener on a more personal level without being too over the top and intimidating. Cinematic Studio Strings sounds massive. It is very impressive and very cinematic. What I seem to be leaning towards is Spitfire Chamber Strings. It has a sound that feels more personal, warm and inviting to me.


You are the only one who knows what kind of music you want to make and the kind of sounds you want to hear, so you have to go with your judgment. 

Have fun making music with whatever you choose! I look forward to hearing the results.


----------



## ism (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> It seems that the Spitfire Chamber Strings has naturally become the main attraction for me. I know you love the flautandos in Spitfire Studio Strings but how are the flautandos in Spitfire Chamber Strings? Just as good and intimate? Not as good?



Yes, as jbuhler says, the SCS flautandos really are the ur-flautandos.

That said, Tundra has it's own amazing take on flautando. And Neo of course has some rather spectacular innovations in flautandos, and fluffy audio has it's own perfectly breathtaking take on flautandos. Not to mention the sul tastos in LCO strings. And the solo string flautandos and ... we could really be here all day. There's really no way I could ever get enough flautandos or sul tastos. I think SCS also has a legato patch for the flatlands ... so if you like flautandos, SCS is the place to go.


This is no disrespect to the SStS flautandos, which are entirely lovely. And I've also really come to appreciate them for their own qualities - the dryness of SStS can give a definition and bite, and this can be felt as warmth or dissonance, depending on your mix and reverb. (Although mostly I just drench them in reverb and pretend I'm using SCS).




Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> People must think I am crazy about Spitfire. The thing is, I am using my ears and listening and going with my intuition.



Spitfire was founded out of an angst over the absence of something - some kind of quality of the sonority of the sample libraries that were available at the time.

And I remember bashing my head into the VSL SE, which was amazing at the time, with a stunning precision and depth to sampling. But I could just never get it to sound remotely like something I could ever imagine anyone actually want to listen to. Not that it wasn't technically "realistic", just that it was sterile. I always argue that it's not about "fooling" people intellectually into thinking the samples are real instruments, it's about "fooling" them emotionally into thinking they're listening to real music.

And then I discovered, first SSW, and then Tundra. And bliss was it in that dawn to be alive. VSL could do fantastic mock ups. East West could do a fabulous hollywood sound. But suddenly I could aspire to write music that was both what I wanted to write, and with a sonority that, concieveably, someone might actually want to listen to someday.

(non-anglophones might need to google wordsworth for the bliss/dawn reference).


Enjoy SCS!


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

ism said:


> Yes, as jbuhler says, the SCS flautandos really are the ur-flautandos.
> 
> That said, Tundra has it's own amazing take on flautando. And Neo of course has some rather spectacular innovations in flautandos, and fluffy audio has it's own perfectly breathtaking take on flautandos. Not to mention the sul tastos in LCO strings. And the solo string flautandos and ... we could really be here all day. There's really no way I could ever get enough flautandos or sul tastos. I think SCS also has a legato patch for the flatlands ... so if you like flautandos, SCS is the place to go.
> 
> ...


What does ur-flautando mean? If it is the prefix for saying something is original, I thought that SCS came out long after the Flautando first appeared in a Spitfire library?


----------



## ism (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> What does ur-flautando mean? If it is the prefix for saying something is original, I thought that SCS came out long after the Flautando first appeared in a Spitfire library?



Possible that was a bit academic / wonky, especially for a non angolphone. 

I think the "ur-" prefix literally translates as "original" (or maybe "primordial"? I think it's ancient ...I want to say Babylonian? Sumarian? ... or something?). And I think SCS might have been first library to sample flautando - I think it Christian talks about it somewhere - os in one sense it's quite a literal meaning, SCS was (I think) the origional flautando.

But the implication/joke here is a little more nuanced, slightly tongue-in-cheek - that SCS flautando is the flautando by which all other flautandos are to be measured. 


ie. that SCS flautando is widely acknowledged as "One Flautando to Rule Them All" might be a slightly less obscure way to make the same point. 


Sorry for the obscurity. But seriously, who can resist a good ancient Babylonian (Sumerian?) joke? 

(If it's any consolation, I once lived with a really, really lovely (and I think maybe slightly autistic) New Zealander with PhD in history in history from Oxford who was writing a book of obscure jokes - many of which probably haven't been funny for hundreds of years outside a history department unless accompanied by lengthy lectures on, depending on the joke, anything from nuances of Mauri myth, to the conjugation of verbs in Old french, to rituals of the Australian outback, to the techniques of traditional dentistry in Botswana).


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

ism said:


> Possible that was a bit academic / wonky, especially for a non angolphone.
> 
> I think the "ur-" prefix literally translates as "original" (or maybe "primordial"? I think it's ancient ...I want to say Babylonian? Sumarian? ... or something?). And I think SCS might have been first library to sample flautando - I think it Christian talks about it somewhere - os in one sense it's quite a literal meaning, SCS was (I think) the origional flautando.
> 
> ...


Some days I feel like I might be slightly autistic but my doctor says definitely not and and I trust her!

I will have to do some research into ancient Babylonian and Sumerian civilizations. I am familiar with the Mauri as I spent a month in New Zealand last year during my travels. In Iceland we mostly study our own ancients - Viking explorers and their slaves and the Huldufólk who began the first settlement.
They were indeed brutal but not quite as much as the Mauri who ate anyone who crossed their path.

Good to hear that SCS contains the benchmark Flautando samples!

I thought that SCS was a more recent creation from Spitfire but perhaps I am wrong? What year was it released? What was released first, Chamber Strings or Studio Strings?


----------



## ism (May 24, 2020)

Yes - "benchmark" would have been a much easier way to say that, now that you mention it. Always good to be educated in the English language by non anglophones. 

And SCS was in some sense the very first spitfire library. There are some complexities around rebranding and how it evolved from the first bespoke library. But Spitfire was in a very real sense created at first only to record more or less what is now known as SCS. 

None of which was really the point of the ur-flautando jokes. But fun fact:






Anyone interested in London Chamber Strings?


Hi All. I have been planning for some time to record a small private library of Chamber Strings - with separate 1sts and 2nds - 8,6,6,4,2. I've been looking into the different ways of funding this - obviously its more expensive to do in London than in Prague, Russia etc.. I'm thinking one...




vi-control.net


----------



## ism (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> In Iceland we mostly study our own ancients - Viking explorers and their slaves and the Huldufólk who began the first settlement.
> They were indeed brutal but not quite as much as the Mauri who ate anyone who crossed their path.



I grew up in the west, where there wasn't a lot history to teach (unless of course your count the ancient histories of the first nations, but then of course that would have been awkward).

But I do remember a big middle school field trip - every middleschooler in the province made this trip, something pilgrimage really to the homestead of the greatest poet in the history of the province.

Who wrote exclusively in Icelandic. The nuance of which I'm sorry to say seemed, to my middle school self, to have been somewhat lost in the translation.


----------



## ism (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> When you say that Stratus comes with the non-Stratus piano patches, do you mean that Stratus comes with pianos and content from the Olafur Arnalds Composer Toolkit library?


And no, here I meant that you have the stratus piano sampled without the repetitions. It’s limited compared to the OACT piano, but really nice to have in its own right.


----------



## Owen Smith (May 24, 2020)

Not Spitfire, but I like the sound of Ben Osterhouse's Sospiro strings. Its $39 and seems like it would be good for an emotional ensemble strings option. I don't have it, but am highly considering.


----------



## jbuhler (May 24, 2020)

Owen Smith said:


> Not Spitfire, but I like the sound of Ben Osterhouse's Sospiro strings. Its $39 and seems like it would be good for an emotional ensemble strings option. I don't have it, but am highly considering.



It’s a very nice library, especially considering the price. I just wish it gave a bit more control over the recorded swells. I find I often have to fight it to get it to do what I want and aspects of its performability are counterintuitive. The basic sustains are nice in their own right, if limited.


----------



## doctoremmet (May 24, 2020)

Owen Smith said:


> Not Spitfire, but I like the sound of Ben Osterhouse's Sospiro strings. Its $39 and seems like it would be good for an emotional ensemble strings option. I don't have it, but am highly considering.



I have it and it is top tier stuff. Sounds great and I think it could add the ability for @Ásta Jónsdóttir to play some great sounding crescendos and decrescendos. It is one of my go to samples for sketching and layering. I also like Ben’s English Bass and Viola da Gamba. Those instruments have the same ability btw to do the arcs.


----------



## ism (May 24, 2020)

Yes Ben’s stuff is really fun. 

Here’s his cello library over StSS non-ur-flautandos:


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

ism said:


> Yes - "benchmark" would have been a much easier way to say that, now that you mention it. Always good to be educated in the English language by non anglophones.
> 
> And SCS was in some sense the very first spitfire library. There are some complexities around rebranding and how it evolved from the first bespoke library. But Spitfire was in a very real sense created at first only to record more or less what is now known as SCS.
> 
> ...


Amazing! The birth of Spitfire Audio had been recorded by this forum. It must take a significant server to back up and maintain over 20 years worth of forum posts. Humans recording their own history digitally so that it can never be disputed is an interesting topic.

This old Spitfire thread started by Paul when he was creating their first unofficial library is a reminder of how in recent times, the most altruistic people in the world who want to do good and aim to do good by helping entire communities globally, can and will rise to power; and for the advancement and prosperity of everyone, not just the chosen few rich and entitled.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (May 24, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Or do you think the strings in Tundra combined with my OACE library will be more than enough?


As another decision/option: maybe Albion neo will fit what you look for, chamber(ish) sized orchestra, has brass and woods...
albion tundra, allthough nice as a library is quite specific, and the strings in it may not do what you seem to look for.

good luck with deciding.

( and if you have the funds, afflatus as suggested is a marvelous library!, a very lively sound, with various patches that can also be divisi...
But then you still need woods n brass)


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 24, 2020)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> As another decision/option: maybe Albion neo will fit what you look for, chamber(ish) sized orchestra, has brass and woods...
> albion tundra, allthough nice as a library is quite specific, and the strings in it may not do what you seem to look for.
> 
> good luck with deciding.
> ...


Excellent points! 

How are the Flautandos in Neo compared to Spitfire Chamber Strings?


----------



## Fry777 (May 24, 2020)

ism said:


> But this same quality of mico-tuning also gives LCO strings a real richness - someone on one thread somewhere suggested that it's like adding "detune" to a synth patch, in ensemble you get a chorus effect and it in effect it gives you warmth and richness, rather than harshness and dissonance. Check out what Homay does with LCO to see this in action.



Where can we find this Homay LCO video ? I didn't manage to find it... Is it part of a "Spitfire Selects..." ?


----------



## ism (May 25, 2020)

Fry777 said:


> Where can we find this Homay LCO video ? I didn't manage to find it... Is it part of a "Spitfire Selects..." ?


I was referring to Homay's LCO strings demos, not a video, unfortunately.


----------



## StillLife (May 25, 2020)

I've posted this one earlier (I hope it's not in this same thread, I am bit lazy/busy with work...) and it might complicate things, but here is some Studio Strings Pro with Solo Strings, so that you can listen to that combination (I couldn't find any clips combining these two when I was in the process of deciding what to get). I also have SCS (couldn't resist it at 50% off last year), but when I want a warm, detailed sound (and that's what I want most often from strings), I tend to choose the SStS-Solo Strings combi over SCS.
It all depends on the sound you are after.
In the first two minutes, you hear, in order of appearance:
1. Solo strings Cello progressive vib
2. Horns BHCT
3. Viola's a3 con sord (Studio Strings)
4. Solo Viola progressive vib
5. Basses A4 long (Studio Strings)
6. Violins A4 and A3 legato (Studio Strings)
7. A bit of Eric Whitacre Choir
8. Solo Violin Virtuoso total performance patch

And after the break, EZbass & Superior drummer, but I reckon that's not the part you'll be interested in.


----------



## Fry777 (May 25, 2020)

To add to the Studio Strings pro argument, they don't need to be used super dry as Ism was saying. Here's a good example of a more ambient writing with them, with external reverb added (the video is actually a complete review if you want to watch it all) :



(the video is not mine btw)


----------



## PaulBrimstone (May 25, 2020)

Well, I was due to fly to Iceland today for vacation, but, you know, pandemic etc. So I'll just have to make do with the Spitfire sale and saying hi to a real Icelander. Welcome, @Ásta Jónsdóttir; your thoughts are very well reasoned, and it sounds like you'll be just fine with SCS and Tundra; both are great with the Ólafur range. Good luck! (And yes, you will probably need a new Mac before long).


----------



## ism (May 25, 2020)

Fry777 said:


> To add to the Studio Strings pro argument, they don't need to be used super dry as Ism was saying. Here's a good example of a more ambient writing with them, with external reverb added (the video is actually a complete review if you want to watch it all) :
> 
> 
> 
> (the video is not mine btw)



Three cheers for parallel 5ths.

And also a great reminder that there’s more to life that flautando (ur- or otherwise). There’s sul tasto also.


----------



## RogiervG (May 25, 2020)

Imho: 
Nothing beats individual section libraries, for a great realism. (e.g. vlns 1, 2, violas, celli, double basses, trumpets 1, 2, 3, Fhorns 1, 2, 3 etc)


----------



## doctoremmet (May 25, 2020)

RogiervG said:


> Imho:
> Nothing beats individual section libraries, for a great realism. (e.g. vlns 1, 2, violas, celli, double basses, trumpets 1, 2, 3, Fhorns 1, 2, 3 etc)


This is probably true, because real orchestral bands typically consist of said sections, lol


----------



## RogiervG (May 25, 2020)

doctoremmet said:


> This is probably true, because real orchestral bands typically consist of said sections, lol



hehe .. well... what i ment was:
Ensemble libraries are just that: ensemble only pre orchestrated patches. 
No option to change the ensemble setting or which section plays what.
Many of these libraries have e.g. 8va or flute with vliolins unisono patches, but what if i don't want that?
With section libaries (e.g. Spitfire SSO libs, Orchestral Tools Berlin series, VSL VI/Synchron series etc etc), you can adjust it specifically to your needs. Hence the realism and that it beats ensemble libs in that regard.


----------



## jbuhler (May 25, 2020)

RogiervG said:


> hehe .. well... what i ment was:
> Ensemble libraries are just that: ensemble only pre orchestrated patches.
> No option to change the ensemble setting or which section plays what.
> Many of these libraries have e.g. 8va or flute with vliolins unisono patches, but what if i don't want that?
> With section libaries (e.g. Spitfire SSO libs, Orchestral Tools Berlin series, VSL VI/Synchron series etc etc), you can adjust it specifically to your needs. Hence the realism and that it beats ensemble libs in that regard.


I can write much, much faster with an ensemble library, which is important when I’m chasing inspiration, and often the detail available with sections is unhelpful for the idea of the piece, doesn’t matter for the piece, or isn’t worth the time. So it very much depends on what I’m doing and how much time I have to do it. But ensemble libraries definitely hold an important place in my workflow and I wouldn’t want to be without them.

I’ve mentioned this elsewhere but another face of Neo is that of the theater or salon orchestra. I used it frequently to do quick orchestrations of Tin Pan Alley songs, for instance, when I needed them as audio illustrations for instructional videos I was making for a course that moved online because of COVID.


----------



## RogiervG (May 25, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> I can write much, much faster with an ensemble library, which is important when I’m chasing inspiration, and often the detail available with sections is unhelpful for the idea of the piece, doesn’t matter for the piece, or isn’t worth the time. So it very much depends on what I’m doing and how much time I have to do it. But ensemble libraries definitely hold an important place in my workflow and I wouldn’t want to be without them.
> 
> I’ve mentioned this elsewhere but another face of Neo is that of the theater or salon orchestra. I used it frequently to do quick orchestrations of Tin Pan Alley songs, for instance, when I needed them as audio illustrations for instructional videos I was making for a course that moved online because of COVID.


Sure.. for quick mockups, scribbles etc.. it's fine and dandy. perfect even. And if the client likes it, awesome!
But in general for better realism you do need section control at some point, even if it needs more work.


----------



## jbuhler (May 25, 2020)

RogiervG said:


> Sure.. for quick mockups, scribbles etc.. it's fine and dandy. perfect even. And if the client likes it, awesome!
> But in general for better realism you do need section control at some point, even if it needs more work.


I’m not even sure it’s true that sections always give better realism. They give you more options and finer control but that’s not always what you want or what the music needs... Right now I’m working on pieces that need sections and uses a large template and so I wouldn’t want to be without sections but there are other pieces that benefit from the broad brush. And pieces that lean on textures often render out better in ensemble libraries than carefully composed in sections. So it very much depends.


----------



## RogiervG (May 25, 2020)

i didn't say always, i said in general (general being just above 50 percent or higher but not 100%).
with proper orchestration skills and time and midi programming, the end result is often times more than not realistic, compared to ensembles alone work will provide. And don't get me wrong, as you said, there are plenty of times where there is no need for the details and what not, and that is perfectly fine!
if the end results call for it, it works wonders for sure.


----------



## jbuhler (May 25, 2020)

RogiervG said:


> i didn't say always, i said in general. (with proper orchestration skills and time and midi programming, the end result is often times more realistic than ensembles alone will provide)


And I'm saying it very much depends. I don't find your proposed "rule" works in general for me, as it depends on what the music needs. "Realism" is also a very fraught term here. We are dealing with the constructions and conventions of recordings, so "realism" is already a divided term. That's one reason why I prefer the concept of credibility over realism.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 25, 2020)

Realism, schmealism, make it sound good.


----------



## doctoremmet (May 25, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> Realism, schmealism, make it sound good.


+1


----------



## ism (May 25, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> And I'm saying it very much depends. I don't find your proposed "rule" works in general for me, as it depends on what the music needs. "Realism" is also a very fraught term here. We are dealing with the constructions and conventions of recordings, so "realism" is already a divided term. That's one reason why I prefer the concept of credibility over realism.



Do you think that credibility in this sense is the same as what I’m trying to get at when I’m on about ‘emotional realism’? Which I tend to frame in terms a more cognative induced technical subjectivity vs a musical subjectivity.


----------



## RogiervG (May 25, 2020)

@jbuhler: i get what your vision is. and i agree in that it's very much depending on the music being written and the goals.
i disagree (in part) however, that the term realism is being a fraught term because of the constructions and conventions of the recordings:
Section libraries allow for more flexibilty and also complex compositions by nature, like traditional orchestration allows, and as such can often times provide a closer reproduction of a real orchestra in sound/timbre/articulative flow/motions than ensembles can give (think articulations, amount of instruments per section, harmonies, etc) in general. 
The constructs and convenstions are following that goal: flexibility, complexity allowed composition in an orchestral context. 
Hence it takes more time to use them and often more skills too.

But yes, it surely depends on the need, that is true.


@asher: You can do both... and make it sound good, and also close to realistic when needed.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (May 25, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Excellent points!
> 
> How are the Flautandos in Neo compared to Spitfire Chamber Strings?


That I cannot tell you as its not in my library pane. But honestly... flautando’s are flautando’s as both scs and neo have a very similar sound.
The main difference is that it’s in sections in scs


----------



## jbuhler (May 25, 2020)

ism said:


> Do you think that credibility in this sense is the same as what I’m trying to get at when I’m on about ‘emotional realism’? Which I tend to frame in terms a more cognative induced technical subjectivity vs a musical subjectivity.


If I understand your take on "emotional realism," yes. My own thinking derives from my work on soundtrack analysis and especially Michel Chion's concept of rendering, which involves constructing and evaluating sound for how it feels rather than its correspondence to reality along the lines of fidelity. (For those who are interested, I talk about this quite a lot in _Theories of the Soundtrack_.) So with a gunshot, the point is to render a sound that feels like the power of the gun, not to faithfully reproduce the sound of any actual gun. Sergi Casanelles likewise develops the concept of the hyperorchestra along similar lines. "The hyperorchestra is a musical ensemble able to produce music that might sound realistic even though it could not have been generated by physical means alone." Casanelles account is very formalistic and technocratic and he discusses technical methods of carving out frequency spectrum so that everything fits together tightly to forge an impression of realism. He also hews to the conceptual term of fidelity, seeing in these techniques a way to open fidelity to become "a tool for producing meaning and emotions." I interpret the hyperorchestra as a musical form of rendering in Chion's sense. That seems consistent with your idea of emotional realism, which, as I understand it, likewise involves an evaluation of being true to how something feels rather than being faithful to how it sounds. ("Evaluation" isn't quite the right term here for what's happening, but I'm struggling to come up with an alternate formulation that I like better.)


----------



## jbuhler (May 25, 2020)

RogiervG said:


> @jbuhler: i get what your vision is. and i agree in that it's very much depending on the music being written and the goals.
> i disagree (in part) however, that the term realism is being a fraught term because of the constructions and conventions of the recordings:
> Section libraries allow for more flexibilty and also complex compositions by nature, like traditional orchestration allows, and as such can often times provide a closer reproduction of a real orchestra in sound/timbre/articulative flow/motions than ensembles can give (think articulations, amount of instruments per section, harmonies, etc) in general.
> The constructs and convenstions are following that goal: flexibility, complexity allowed composition in an orchestral context.
> ...


The point is that realism is very much dependent on the conventions of recordings, which already displaces the concept. The conventions of cinematic recording are recognizably different from the conventions of orchestral recording in general. And those differ from the conventions of recording backing orchestral tracks for song recording, etc., etc. Studio recordings differ from hall recordings. The list goes on. The concept of realism divides and becomes blurry and I would say often unhelpful.

Section libraries give you more control, this is true, but that control is not always needed or even desirable, even if the goal is to accurately reproduce a recording of a "real" orchestra. There are times when the sound I seek, what the music needs, is the mixed ensemble sound of strings rather than the sections. And there are times when the details of the individual sections are not at all what the music needs, where they get in the way of the musical conception. Textural effects are occasionally of this type. But I'm not saying ensembles are to be preferred to sections, I'm not saying that at all. I'm merely saying that sections do a certain kind of thing, they allow you to do a certain set of musical tasks. I use them all the time. (I was trained back in the days before VIs and so tend to think of the orchestra through the lens of traditional orchestration.) But sections are also not as good at doing other sorts of things, and there are things that ensemble libraries do better. And the measure of fidelity, especially when it is unmoored from the conventions of recording, is often quite unhelpful in thinking about virtual instruments and getting the most out of them.


----------



## RogiervG (May 25, 2020)

Let's say.. i still disagree and agree at the same time on different parts of the visions/thoughts you presented.

food for thought on my part


----------



## mybadmemory (May 25, 2020)

Another aspect in the Ensembles VS Sections debate is that for many people, section writing can be daunting to the extent of paralysing even. If you already know how to do it, if you're studying or going to study it, or at least know that you want to learn it, proper section writing is of course desirable.

But for many newcomers, or musicians that might just want to write some instrumental or orchestral sounding music, without caring that much about the rules of classical scoring, I'd say actually getting songs done with ensembles is a heck of a lot better than not getting them done with sections.


----------



## StillLife (May 25, 2020)

mybadmemory said:


> Another aspect in the Ensembles VS Sections debate is that for many people, section writing can be daunting to the extent of paralysing even. If you already know how to do it, if you're studying or going to study it, or at least know that you want to learn it, proper section writing is of course desirable.
> 
> But for many newcomers, or musicians that might just want to write some instrumental or orchestral sounding music, without caring that much about the rules of classical scoring, I'd say actually getting songs done with ensembles is a heck of a lot better than not getting them done with sections.


Interesting. I like sections because they remind me of a band. Let the 3 celli play the bass, while the viola's do the main melody; a choir of first and second violins do a counter melody and bass staccato and pizzicato do the 'drums'. And when I want a big fat pad: ensemble patch!
Shouldn't be hard to guess what musical roads I walk the most...


----------



## korgscrew2000 (May 25, 2020)

Olafur Arnalds Chamber Evolutions. Every patch is just


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

ism said:


> Yes Ben’s stuff is really fun.
> 
> Here’s his cello library over StSS non-ur-flautandos:



This has quite a nasal tone. I like more rich, smooth and warm violin sounds personally. An exemplary early 1700's Guarneri instrument made for an orchestra player for example.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

StillLife said:


> I've posted this one earlier (I hope it's not in this same thread, I am bit lazy/busy with work...) and it might complicate things, but here is some Studio Strings Pro with Solo Strings, so that you can listen to that combination (I couldn't find any clips combining these two when I was in the process of deciding what to get). I also have SCS (couldn't resist it at 50% off last year), but when I want a warm, detailed sound (and that's what I want most often from strings), I tend to choose the SStS-Solo Strings combi over SCS.
> It all depends on the sound you are after.
> In the first two minutes, you hear, in order of appearance:
> 1. Solo strings Cello progressive vib
> ...


Thank you for sharing this. It definitely helps me to know that Spitfire Studio Strings are not for me. Too nasal sounding. I am very fussy about sound quality though. It would be good to hear a back to back comparison of the same MIDI files played back with SCS


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

Fry777 said:


> To add to the Studio Strings pro argument, they don't need to be used super dry as Ism was saying. Here's a good example of a more ambient writing with them, with external reverb added (the video is actually a complete review if you want to watch it all) :
> 
> 
> 
> (the video is not mine btw)



In this example, where there are more sections playing together, things are far more rich and warm sounding. It would be nice to hear an A/B comparison with SCS sections of the same kind playing the same files back.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

PaulBrimstone said:


> Well, I was due to fly to Iceland today for vacation, but, you know, pandemic etc. So I'll just have to make do with the Spitfire sale and saying hi to a real Icelander. Welcome, @Ásta Jónsdóttir; your thoughts are very well reasoned, and it sounds like you'll be just fine with SCS and Tundra; both are great with the Ólafur range. Good luck! (And yes, you will probably need a new Mac before long).


Nice Meeting you here Paul. I am sorry that your trip to Iceland has been put on hold!


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

Some interesting discussion and debate today here about composing with ensemble patches vs section patches. It is interesting to see that even seasoned professional library composers are divided on which method is best which makes me believe that both have their time and place depending on the situation you are in and also the nature of the work you are doing.


----------



## BradHoyt (May 25, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> They are the ur-flautandos. Like Christian Henson I use the ensemble flautandos for sketching. It’s nice and consistent and beautiful across the range and reacts very musically to movements of the modwheel. The SCS flautando ensemble patch was the first sample patch that I really fell in love with.


Agreed! On the topic of inspirational ensemble patches, I would recommend that you check out Ben Osterhouse's Sospiro Strings, it's affordable and has three great ensemble options that are very inspirational.

Edit: And I see someone just posted a quick overview of Sospiro strings! Well, this is me just echoing that sentiment.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

BradHoyt said:


> Agreed! On the topic of inspirational ensemble patches, I would recommend that you check out Ben Osterhouse's Sospiro Strings, it's affordable and has three great ensemble options that are very inspirational.
> 
> Edit: And I see someone just posted a quick overview of Sospiro strings! Well, this is me just echoing that sentiment.


These do sound nice. At the peaks of the waveforms, there is a hint of library-ness. Beautiful overall though and a great writing tool for emotional feelings:emoji_wind_blowing_face: Thank you for sharing Brad.


----------



## jbuhler (May 25, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Thank you for sharing this. It definitely helps me to know that Spitfire Studio Strings are not for me. Too nasal sounding and not very rich or warm to my ears. I am very fussy about sound quality though. It would be good to hear a back to back comparison of the same MIDI files played back with SCS


Well, it’s weird because many dislike SCS for its nasal tone. I’m partial to it. SStS seems rather neutral to me. Or cool and reserved.


----------



## artomatic (May 25, 2020)

Has anyone mentioned Afflatus Strings, specifically the Scene d'Amour patch?
It's worth listening to the demos... if that's what you're looking for.
Yes, it's not Spitfire.


----------



## ism (May 25, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> ... definitely helps me to know that Spitfire Studio Strings are not for me. Too nasal sounding and not very rich or warm to my ears. I am very fussy about sound quality though. It would be good to hear a back to back comparison of the same MIDI files played back with SCS



I definitely think that SCS is a better match for you.

But I also think there's an interesting aesthetic dimension here in how, despite this harshness, there is warmth and beauty to be found in this kind of sound.

So for reference, here's SCS - the (ur-)flautandos if I'm not mistaken, and playing lots of parallel 5ths to really give it as much warmth and consonance as you could hope for.



I love this sound. And I definitely prefer it to SStS. And I feel that it's very warm, and rich, like you say.

And yet, SCS is also known for a slightly nasal tone, which you can also hear amidst this warmth (at least if you focus in on the details rather than standing back and listening to it impressionistically)

But the point is - very similar to what I was trying to say about LCO strings - is that there a certain amount of the harshness, or at least rawness, of this underlying "nasaly" quality that I think not only doesn't impede this warmth, but is the source of this warmth.

It's not a sweet, hollywood warmth. But it's a very textural warmth. Which is perhaps why I prefer SCS to CSS (for things that make more sense on SCS/SStS over CSS, obviously, though not for things that make more sense to do on CSS over SCS/SStS).



So where does this warmth come from? I'd argue It's a warmth born not of sweetness, but of texture build on a certain rawness. I like the sunniness of the holwood style of warmth and richness too (and will probably pick up CSS some day), but the hollywood sound feels a continent away. 

The warmth also arises out of the mix. Of course the room in SCS, or the drenching in reverb that I usually do in SStS. But also the embodiment and spatiality of the tree mics, which is where SStS can never match SCS.

Anna Thorvaldsdóttir in an interview somewhere, talks about the textural nature of her compositions in terms of natural metaphors (as titles like "hrim" make clear). And it does make sense that an element of the beauty of this sound might arise from carefully harnessing of underlying metaphors of natural harshness and beauty.

(That said, I also can also imaging that if I were an Icelandic composer, I might really quickly get really, really tired of interview questions like "How has the natural environment influenced your music". I don't think I've ever read an interview with an Icelandic composer who isn't asked "how has the natural environment of Iceland influenced your composition". And having grown up on the edge of (real) tundra myself ... it's really not usually as much fun, nor nearly as musically inspiring as the Spitfire marketing make it look. It's the warmth, and textures and rawness, of human emotion - and definitely nothing to do with (real) tundra (which is real life is mostly just really, really cold) - that underlies the metaphors soundscape sound I hope to write in. )



Regardless, here's a quick noodle on SStS (if you can ignore the sloppy performances, which need a bit of tweaking in places):





If you listen carefully, you can maybe hear that I'm compensating for the lack of the AIR Lyndhurst tree mic with lots and lots of early reflections in the reverb (as well as lots and lots of cathedral late reflections). This gives it it's own quality of richness, which I really do like in its own right. Though it's never going to match what I would call "embodied" warmth and dimension of SCS in AIR.


But the origins of this warmth in the sonority lies also about the orchestration - how lavishly you use 5ths and octaves as opposed to dissonances. How much C string you use on the the viola, and how often you let the open strings ring. All these little things that don't seem to appear in orchestration texts so far as I can see. (Though presumably people who play in an actual orchestras must know all of this. Someone should really write it down somewhere.)


But in both SCS and SStS you can hear always an underlying "nasally" harshness. And yet I feel that there is a real warmth to be found here. Maybe even a certain sweetness. But it's an "earned" sweetness, if that makes any sense. One that is born of the warmth and richness of the raw texture and the emotion of the performance, and not a sunny hollywood studio sweetness (if that makes any sense).


The effect is even more pronounced in Spitfire solo strings. And the experience of working with SsS has really made it clear to me just how critical the phrasing of the vibrato is in achieving not just the overall expressiveness, but specifically this sense of textural warmth and richness, occasionally dipping into this quality of "earned" sweetness.

Here's the same melody noodled into Spitfire solo strings (augmented with some OACE textures):

(These are just experiments in crafting the sonic palette, incidentally, and really not compositions. More colour wheels than paintings).




Again I think there's real warm to be felt here. And even a certain sweetness - but its's a highly textural warmth, and again the sweetness is "earned", somehow, somewhere in the crafting of the arcs across the dynamics and the vibrato. If you were to play this either all vibrato, or all non-vibrato, it would sound very, very harsh, and extremely nasaly.

So there's nasaly and dissonant, and then there's rich and warm, and the interaction between sonic dimensions is, I would argue, itself very rich and complex.


Anway, those look like excellent choices. I'd definitely recommend SCS over SStS, and probably even LCO textures over LCO strings (although I *love* LCO strings) as great choices for what you're looking to do.


Also, your machine looks amply powerful to run all of that. (Perhaps with the caveat that I really don't know anything about PCs, but it were a mac, I'd say you'd be fine). Although if you lavish enough mics on every patch and load every single articulations simultaneously, you can always find a way to max out your system.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> Well, it’s weird because many dislike SCS for its nasal tone. I’m partial to it. SStS seems rather neutral to me. Or cool and reserved.


This is why Spitfire needs to allow people to demo their products  It is hard to tell from others videos what these libraries can sound like. It is likely all in how the person using it has tweaked the sound with the mic perspective selections and balance of the various samples and then the reverb.


----------



## barteredbride (May 25, 2020)

Seriously though, to get back on topic to the post, the greatest realism you can feel in your whole body is to just strap a sub-woofer to your balls.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

ism said:


> I definitely think that SCS is a better match for you.
> 
> But I also think there's an interesting aesthetic dimension here in how, despite this harshness, there is warmth and beauty to be found in this kind of sound.
> 
> ...



Wow!

Once again, this is extremely helpful!

After listening to these examples, I can clearly hear the difference between Chamber Strings and Studio Strings. To my ears, the Chamber strings sound smoother and have a richness and warmth in the lower middle range and it sounds like perhaps it is the resonance and reverberations of the space the strings were recorded in, blending with the direct sound of the instruments more. It almost sounds as if the Chamber Strings have more harmonic overtones in the octaves below the notes being played.

The Studio Strings have this quality that I would call "Girth". The low end is tighter but not as rich, smooth and warm. More focused and overall, the way things come out sounding is that the Studio Strings seem to have more "honk" in that 400Hz - 800Hz area of the frequency spectrum.

To me, the Chamber strings may have more upper mid detail which is what people are calling "nasal" but that"honky" part of the middle range sounds more scooped in the Chamber Strings and the lower octaves of the frequency spectrum below 300Hz sound more full, vibrating with more low end air moving.

The Chamber strings sound like there is this air around the sound the envelops it and acts like glue to bring all the elements together as an ensemble with a more blended sound. In the Studio Strings, I can hear a far more clear separation between the violins, violas, celli and basses.

Funny you should mention Anna. She is good friends with one of my teachers and studied at the same school I am attending. She comes here and does guest lectures sometimes and so does Hildur who also studied composition here. Her father teaches the advanced studies to students who show a lot of talent. Jóhann came here a few times as a guest but I knew him from going around to the record shops as a child. Any time my father took me to 12 Tónar and later, when I would go there with my friends on weekends, he was always there. Such a kind and gentle man. No one really knew him that well because he was so quiet and lived in his own world. Everyone knew that he was a genius lost in the dreams of his brilliant mind.

I will share the specifications of my studio machinery in another post and perhaps a closer look will allow you and others to see if there might be any issue I might face trying to run Chamber Strings or Tundra which are both considerably larger than OACE or Una Corda which seem to be the most CPU hungry libraries I own so far.

Thank you again for all of the efforts you put into helping me and sharing your experience ISM. If I could, I would give you free latté, cappuccino or ibrik refills for the entire week at the coffee shop where I work for all your work helping me take my decision.


----------



## José Herring (May 25, 2020)

barteredbride said:


> Seriously though, to get back on topic to the post, the greatest realism you can feel in your whole body is to just strap a sub-woofer to your balls.


Not sure she has any.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

Well guys, I am all set to buy these libraries on sale:


1. Ólafur Arnalds Composer Toolkit
2. Albion V Tundra
3. LCO Textures
4. Chamber Strings


There is just one catch...

Will my computer be able to handle the larger libraries like Tundra and Chamber Strings? They are huge collections of samples! I do not have any experience with running libraries this large as of yet so I do not know what to expect. I know that the sale is only going to last for a week so I must take a decision. A sale this good will not come again for another year I think.

It would be really great if anyone of you that have experience with Tundra and Chamber Strings could possibly give me a bit of guidance in terms of what to expect. What kind of thresholds am I looking at? Where will my computer crap out and how do I manage these huge libraries so they don't?

What kind of load times should I expect to see?

Right now, the OACE library loads without a problem and I can play back samples without any glitching with my audio buffer size at 128. If I go down one step and lower it to 64, I get popcorn with my strings. 128 and 256 both seem to work fine. I would not want to increase the buffer any more than 256 though. Then there is too much of a delay between when I press down on the keys and when the sounds engage. I suppose with MIDI there is always going to be some latency and there is no way around it. However, I would like to know if I am kidding myself, thinking that Tundra or Chamber Strings will even load and trigger properly or if my computer will just choke to death immediately. These libraries are massive. 107GB!

The most obvious question is... do I have enough power with my current computer to even run libraries like Tundra and Chamber Strings successfully?


*Operating System*
Windows 10

*Processor*
Intel® Core™ i7-8550U
1.8 GHz; Quad-core

*Memory
DDR4*
12 GB

*Internal Storage*
256 GB SSD

*External Storage*
Samsung T5 1TB (NTFS Formatted)
For all sample libraries

*DAW*
Reaper 6.1

*MIDI Controller*
M-Audio Keystation 61 Mk3

*Sustain Pedal*
Yamaha FC3A


----------



## jbuhler (May 25, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Well guys, I am all set to buy these libraries on sale:
> 
> 
> 1. Ólafur Arnalds Composer Toolkit
> ...


The most important thing is to have the samples on an SSD. You are already doing that. You can often reduce the dfd number in Kontakt to reduce the RAM demands but that might require raising your buffer. (I’m running at 512 right now). 12GB is not a huge amount of RAM especially if you want to load more than one mic. You’ll almost certainly need to freeze tracks as you go. Kontakt time machine patches are often CPU heavy and I often dislike how they sound so i tend to avoid them. 

Tundra should be fine. It is an ensemble library and so you won’t use as many tracks. You might have to be judicious with SCS. I never had an issue with it when I used it on my laptop with 16GB. But I was very judicious in loading articulations.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> The most important thing is to have the samples on an SSD. You are already doing that. You can often reduce the dfd number in Kontakt to reduce the RAM demands but that might require raising your buffer. (I’m running at 512 right now). 12GB is not a huge amount of RAM especially if you want to load more than one mic. You’ll almost certainly need to freeze tracks as you go. Kontakt time machine patches are often CPU heavy and I often dislike how they sound so i tend to avoid them.
> 
> Tundra should be fine. It is an ensemble library and so you won’t use as many tracks. You might have to be judicious with SCS. I never had an issue with it when I used it on my laptop with 16GB. But I was very judicious in loading articulations.


Thank you once again for the advice James Buhler!

In Reaper there are two options. I can freeze tracks or I can do a live bounce to disc and turn the MIDI into audio tracks and then keep the MIDI tracks in case I need to go back and edit them later but disable the Kontakt instance loaded on them. I will have to save the sound as a user preset and be very diligent about labeling tracks and color coding the MIDI and related audio the same. Proper workflow in the DAW seems to be hard for many people I know. They always have missing files. Not me. I am very specific about my folder hierarchy and organization. I drive my friends crazy with my criticism of their file management. Is it just me, or do people who use Macs not understand file management?

You bring up a point here that I have been meaning to ask...I notice that in many of Spitfire's libraries, they have patches that often look like duplicates of other patches but they are called "Time Machine". What exactly is a Time Machine sample patch in the world of Spitfire Audio?

I am relieved to hear that you think I will be okay, even with 12GB of RAM. My main drive that I run the samples on is one of the best SSD drives available. I did my research on it right here on the forum and got some great advice from @TomislavEP and some of you other awesome people on high performance drives and formatting. Thank you!

At some point, I may try to add some RAM to my laptop unless it will make it overheat.

My family and I were all Mac based for years and I started on ProTools and Logic however, once I discovered Reaper, I found that it works just as well on Windows and there are many benefits to working on a Windows computer. I know that this is not the popular choice and people will likely look down at me for not staying on a Mac but I have personally found Reaper on Windows to be far superior to any Mac based system I had in the past - ProTools, Logic or Cubase.

When you say to be judicious when loading articulations, what do you mean more specifically @jbuhler ?


----------



## ism (May 25, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Wow!
> 
> Once again, this is extremely helpful!
> 
> ...



Wow, that's must be something like what it was like to start a grunge band in Seattle in the 90s. Or a punk band in London in the 80s. Or a skiffle band in Liverpool in the (early) 60s. Or a string quartet in Vienna in the 1820s.

Glad I could be helpful. I was asking much the same questions a couple of years ago. And a latte in and Icelandic cafe sounds lovely right now. Actually any latte in any cafe anywhere sounds lovely at the moment. Can't say I'm likely to be in your neck of the woods in the foreseeable future though.


I like your metaphors around the sonority. Your "girth" metaphor relates to, but isn't quite identical to, what I tend to think of it as "thickness". If you listen to how the sound of SStS changes as you dial in early reflections, you can really hear the sound "thickening" and they start to bounce around more and more. It can be pleasant, if you like gigantic cathedral reverbs, but simulating early reflections like this is it's always a trade off between clarity and "thickness", and never as good as having a proper AIR tree mic.


Where your metaphor of "girth" differs from my metaphor of "thickness" is that I haven't been thinking of it in terms of the frequency spectrum. So that's something I'll have to give some thought to. 


"Honk" strikes me as a useful metaphor also (and an unexpected one for strings) - or at least I think I know what you mean. And I'd understand "honk" as a quality of SStS that needs to be approached carefully. It can be harsh if overly exposed, but be quite lovely if you use it to intensify a crescendo during a legato passage. Assuming, of course, we're talking about the same thing. Metaphors are slippery things.

But there's a certain kind of composition where these kinds of metaphors for what's going on in the sound really can matter.

So thanks for that, it's quite useful to me also.


And I think that physics predicts that you're probably right about the overtones. Particularly in lower ranges. I think that the hall geometry is probably not going to make much difference to a high harmonic on a violin (the wavelengths are just too small compared to the scale of hall geometry), but I certainly feel it makes an enormous and visceral difference for a cello. The solo cello, for instance, is by far the most sensitive of the solo strings to the mix and reverb and spatial embodiment.

Again given how sensitive they are to the sonority of the space and the mix, the Spitfire solo strings offer a certain clarity in that I'd argue that messing around with them gives insight into what's going on with other libraries recorded in AIR Lyndhurst where the ensemble nature of the sound blurs certain of these effects. (It also make the solo strings the hardest to work with by far).


More experienced people than myself would probably be using more eq and mastering to craft their sound, so it's possible some of the effects you describe in the frequency spectrum might not be so much intrinsic to the library so as artifacts of the signal chain. And therefore amenable to tweaking in the mixing or mastering. There's lots of amazing experience on that sort of thing in this community, so you shouldn't hesitate to start a thread on that if you ever need a deep dive into that dimension of the sound.


Good luck with you composing. Hope you'll share what you create!


----------



## Jacob Fanto (May 25, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Thank you once again for the advice James Buhler!
> 
> In Reaper there are two options. I can freeze tracks or I can do a live bounce to disc and turn the MIDI into audio tracks and then keep the MIDI tracks in case I need to go back and edit them later but disable the Kontakt instance loaded on them. I will have to save the sound as a user preset and be very diligent about labeling tracks and color coding the MIDI and related audio the same. Proper workflow in the DAW seems to be hard for many people I know. They always have missing files. Not me. I am very specific about my folder hierarchy and organization. I drive my friends crazy with my criticism of their file management. Is it just me, or do people who use Macs not understand file management?
> 
> ...


If I’m not mistaken, I believe the Time Machine patches are used to control various note lengths, shorts and spics included. I don’t use them very much, but they’re there and I think they take up a bit more memory than loading a normal patch would. Hopefully someone else can chip in here and give you a more detailed response.

Also, just a note: Tundra should not be a problem with 12GB, but you will need to be a bit conservative with Chamber Strings. Like others have said, freeze tracks if/when you need to. You’ll be fine!


----------



## Ashermusic (May 25, 2020)

RogiervG said:


> @jbuhler:
> 
> 
> @asher: You can do both... and make it sound good, and also close to realistic when needed.



Agreed. For me the problem lies with when people get so fixated on realism they try to bend the samples to their will in a way they are not designed to work well and don’t sound good.

Samples are not real in that sense, they are recorded digital snapshots of real players playing notes out of the context of a good piece of music. So you have to do what you can to make them sound musical and as often then not that means not treating them as real players.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 25, 2020)

ism said:


> Wow, that's must be something like what it was like to start a grunge band in Seattle in the 90s. Or a punk band in London in the 80s. Or a skiffle band in Liverpool in the (early) 60s. Or a string quartet in Vienna in the 1820s.
> 
> Glad I could be helpful. I was asking much the same questions a couple of years ago. And a latte in and Icelandic cafe sounds lovely right now. Actually any latte in any cafe anywhere sounds lovely at the moment. Can't say I'm likely to be in your neck of the woods in the foreseeable future though.
> 
> ...


I am glad to hear that you like my metaphors. I do seem to use them quite a lot. Like others have mentioned, I too enjoy reading your messages. I get the feeling sometimes as though they contain hidden messages that I might pick up on at a later time period if I go back and read them many times. I cannot quite articulate everything you express but I think the best music is like that too. 

I would like to get more into mixing. I have done it already but there is always so much to learn.


----------



## Mornats (May 26, 2020)

@ism, loved that SStS demo you did up there. Any chance you'd be willing to share your reverb settings? I recall you use Valhalla Room for it? I rather like that drenched in cathedral sound.


----------



## barteredbride (May 26, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Well guys, I am all set to buy these libraries on sale:
> 
> 
> 1. Ólafur Arnalds Composer Toolkit
> ...



A really nice choice!

Just out of interest, what made you choose the OA Composer Toolkit over other pianos? I´ve been looking to pick up a felt piano, so would be interested to know as you´ve been doing a lot of research!

By the way, just in case you didn´t know, Spitfire Audio don´t allow you to re-sell your libraries or transfer the license to anyone else in the future.

Just saying in case you didn´t realise!


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 26, 2020)

barteredbride said:


> A really nice choice!
> 
> Just out of interest, what made you choose the OA Composer Toolkit over other pianos? I´ve been looking to pick up a felt piano, so would be interested to know as you´ve been doing a lot of research!
> 
> ...


Hello Bartered Bride,

The piano in the Toolkit sounds lovely. As a softer piano sound, it is my favorite out of all that are currently available. I love the tone of it. I also love some of the patches with effects and I also love the more ambient non-piano content in the toolkit which there is more of than the pianos. Most of the library is ambient textures and some really cool piano/synth hybrid possibilities. It will work well for the style of music I will be working on. From hours and hours of listening to online demos from companies and users, I like the tone of it better than Emotional Piano from Soundiron, better than The Woodchester from Fracture, better than LABS soft piano, better than NOIRE, and better than Stratus. Those are the top felt pianos out there right now. I also own the Una Corda and Emotional Piano as well as Galaxy Vintage D, so I am not completely new to sampled pianos.

I do understand that libraries cannot be re-sold.

Now I just cross my figners and pray that my laptop will be able to handle these new libraries. Once I have these, I am going to focus on my work. I won't buy more libraries for a very long time. There is so much that I can do with these ones and so much to explore. I do believe that for my music, this is more than enough to provide a few albums worth inspirations.

I am not addicted to disposable technologies. I take my times to do proper research and do the best I can to have what is necessary and nothing more. My goal is to make music, not play with libraries so that goal is what informs every one of my purchases. I do believe that these libraries are tools for getting my work acomplished and finished.

I believe these four libraries will provide me with a lot of mileage. Originally I was only going to buy the Oli Toolkit and LCO Textures. Then after some research, I came to the understanding that I may want a diverse set of string sounds for composing. I have some birthday gift money from my grandmother and she was very generous this year so this will make it possible for me to enter another realm as a composer and musician.

Even if I decide to remove the strings and replace them with my own violin and ambient guitar and bass tracks later, having the string samples for writing, sketching and inspiration is amazing. Also having strings that sound right, just in case I decide to use them in the end was important. I believe that with Tundra and SCS, I have the most diverse set of strings that I will need for what I am doing.

I am very grateful to be able to do this. All of the help I have been given on the forum here, in taking my decision means so much to me.


----------



## Levon (May 26, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Wow!
> 
> Once again, this is extremely helpful!
> 
> ...


Worth watching this comparison video:



I was surprised how much I liked the Studio Strings in these examples.


----------



## doctoremmet (May 26, 2020)

The DoctorEmmet team is happy to report that they have contributed to Paul and Christian’s retirement funds by purchasing....

(drumroll)

Spitfire Solo Strings.

The team has immediately embarked on a musical journey and is tracking solo cello on top of beds of Waverunner Audio’s Alder Cello, Aaron Venture Infinite Brass and Westwood Instruments Untamed strings. Thank you for inspiring the team to make the purchase. Proceed!


----------



## barteredbride (May 26, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Hello Bartered Bride,
> 
> The piano in the Toolkit sounds lovely. As a softer piano sound, it is my favorite out of all that are currently available. I love the tone of it. I also love some of the patches with effects and I also love the more ambient non-piano content in the toolkit which there is more of than the pianos. Most of the library is ambient textures and some really cool piano/synth hybrid possibilities. It will work well for the style of music I will be working on. From hours and hours of listening to online demos from companies and users, I like the tone of it better than Emotional Piano from Soundiron, better than The Woodchester from Fracture, better than LABS soft piano, better than NOIRE, and better than Stratus. Those are the top felt pianos out there right now. I also own the Una Corda and Emotional Piano as well as Galaxy Vintage D, so I am not completely new to sampled pianos.
> 
> ...


Wise words in everything you say ! 

Especially: my goal is to make music, not play with libraries. 

I´m sure everything will work out fantastic.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 26, 2020)

doctoremmet said:


> The DoctorEmmet team is happy to report that they have contributed to Paul and Christian’s retirement funds by purchasing....
> 
> (drumroll)
> 
> ...


Congratulations Doctor!


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 26, 2020)

barteredbride said:


> Wise words in everything you say !
> 
> Especially: my goal is to make music, not play with libraries.
> 
> I´m sure everything will work out fantastic.


Thank you!


----------



## doctoremmet (May 26, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Congratulations Doctor!


I’m sorry I have a hard time keeping up with million-billion Spitfire threads here... just checking... did Team Iceland get her libraries yet? We demand an update


----------



## rocking.xmas.man (May 26, 2020)

ism said:


> I think the "ur-" prefix literally translates as "original" (or maybe "primordial"? I think it's ancient ...I want to say Babylonian? Sumarian? ... or something?). And I think SCS might have been first library to sample flautando - I think it Christian talks about it somewhere - os in one sense it's quite a literal meaning, SCS was (I think) the origional flautando.


the ur-flautando is the one found in Albion ii loegria. That library dates back to 2012, Sable followed partially 2013.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 26, 2020)

Góðan daginn,

I did a stress test on my system [12GB RAM] to see how it performs right now. I do understand purging samples out and only having what is being used in the actual performance loaded.


*Virtual Memory Settings*

I also adjusted my virtual memory which apprently can affect how Kontakt and the libraries perform.

For both my internal SSD drive and my sample libraries T5 external SSD, I set the virtual memory to my own custom sizes:

Initial size - 24GB
Maximum size - 32GB



*Testing*

The most CPU intensive library I have is definitely OACE.

1. Evolution sample "Sul Tasto Episodic Trems" loaded (no purging)

2. All 4 microphone perspective samples turned on/loaded in the GUI

3. I set Reaper to play back all 61 notes this sample is mapped to, all at the exact same time and holding all 61 notes for a full minute. (Yes...I turned Kontakt volume down really low)



*Results*

CPU hit 35% at the very peaks, over the course of 60 seconds while evolution samples held for all 61 notes, each one having all 4 mic perspectives playing.

I am not sure if there is a more stressful test I can perform in Kontakt at the moment but this is a good indication that I think my system should work satisfactory with SCS and Tundra for now.

Let me know if you have any questions, concerns or opinions on this method I have taken


----------



## ism (May 26, 2020)

Mornats said:


> @ism, loved that SStS demo you did up there. Any chance you'd be willing to share your reverb settings? I recall you use Valhalla Room for it? I rather like that drenched in cathedral sound.



Thanks, and happy to share the settings , but I believe it‘s just a Valhalla Room factory cathedral setting. Probably Ulm Munster. The only thing I might have done is dial up or down the early reflections to balance the ‘girth’ vs. clarity. I can check the exact settings if you you like, but I really don’t have a particularily sophisticated process here.


----------



## Mornats (May 27, 2020)

ism said:


> Thanks, and happy to share the settings , but I believe it‘s just a Valhalla Room factory cathedral setting. Probably Ulm Munster. The only thing I might have done is dial up or down the early reflections to balance the ‘girth’ vs. clarity. I can check the exact settings if you you like, but I really don’t have a particularily sophisticated process here.


Thanks, nice and simple  I'll give that a whirl. Do you reduce the send volume to the reverb track to taste or leave it full on?


----------



## renegade (May 27, 2020)

+1 for Cornucopia Strings by Streznov. Great, lush sound, outstanding for sketching. The "Tutti sfz" patch is great for fast lines, even runs. An often underrated library IMO


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 27, 2020)

Regarding Strings,

I decided to purchase Albion V Tundra first and test it out to hear exactly what Tundra's strings are like in their totality and where that leaves me.

I knew I wanted Tundra for quite some time. I got it first to see if perhaps the strings might do everything that I will require for my music and style. If not, then tomorrow I will buy Chamber Strings, as I know that it has all of the articulations and more than what I will need. 

I just thought it would be smart to at least try out Tundra before purchasing another string library. I know that Chamber Strings is a very different library, style and sized string ensemble but my practical mind told me that I have nothing to lose by buying and trying one library at a time.

I will calculate where Tundra places me in the realm of strings and then take a decision about whether or not I will truly need the Chamber Strings. Tundra is downloading right now 

Thank you to all here in the thread and elsewhere who have contributed to helping me take my decision. I appreciate every shared word of thought, experience and perspective from you. Let me see where I end up by the 31st!


----------



## el-bo (May 27, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> I just thought it would be smart to at least try out Tundra before purchasing another string library. I know that Chamber Strings is a very different library, style and sized string ensemble but my practical mind told me that I have nothing to lose by buying and trying one library at a time.



The strings in Tundra are beautiful! And even if you don't find them flexible enough to be your 'Everything!', they have a flavour that'll keep you coming back for another taste.

Seemingly (Having read read hundreds of posts) it is one of a small group of libraries that receives almost universal praise. Hardly anybody seems to regret purchasing it.


----------



## Wunderhorn (May 28, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Regarding Strings,
> 
> I decided to purchase Albion V Tundra first and test it out to hear exactly what Tundra's strings are like in their totality and where that leaves me.



Tundra in itself is a piece of art. You might not be able to do everything with those strings - nothing fast. But working within its boundaries is a whole special universe that will open up if you let it.
I think the Chamber Strings would be an excellent solution to add further flexibility.


----------



## musicisum (May 28, 2020)

Hi Àsta Jónnsdótir, could you please share one of your pieces? You don't seem to have had the opportunity to compose anything at all with sample libraries. But since the Spitfire sales, you keep posting all day long on the forum with very positive comments (at some points without having bought them yet). Makes me curious to listen to your music!


----------



## MartinH. (May 28, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> *Testing*
> 
> The most CPU intensive library I have is definitely OACE.
> 
> ...




Interesting test setup. But isn't there a feature about voice-dropping where Kontakt will terminate playing samples before hitting certain limits? Maybe someone more experienced with those features can chime in on that, I'm not actually sure how it works. Just that I've had at least one situation where issues seemed to get fixed by lowering sample release times so that less reverb tail samples are overlapping in playback and the number of playing voices went down. 61 notes times 4 mics would be at least 244 voices by my calculation (twice that if the evolution patches layer 2 samples per note and mic), but I think with all these libraries that are heavy on sampled reverb you can quickly exceed that number of playing voices by using several instruments/sections playing short notes. Just a simple pattern like this on Metropolis Ark 1 high strings spiccato or spiccato octaves peaks around 40+ voices played because of round robin samples and reverb tails being played on different positions of the sample. And that is with only 2 mic positions enabled: 






I think accross all your different sections you may or may not see considerably more voices playing in a regular orchestral usecase, compared to your all-notes-at-once test.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 28, 2020)

MartinH. said:


> Interesting test setup. But isn't there a feature about voice-dropping where Kontakt will terminate playing samples before hitting certain limits? Maybe someone more experienced with those features can chime in on that, I'm not actually sure how it works. Just that I've had at least one situation where issues seemed to get fixed by lowering sample release times so that less reverb tail samples are overlapping in playback and the number of playing voices went down. 61 notes times 4 mics would be at least 244 voices by my calculation (twice that if the evolution patches layer 2 samples per note and mic), but I think with all these libraries that are heavy on sampled reverb you can quickly exceed that number of playing voices by using several instruments/sections playing short notes. Just a simple pattern like this on Metropolis Ark 1 high strings spiccato or spiccato octaves peaks around 40+ voices played because of round robin samples and reverb tails being played on different positions of the sample. And that is with only 2 mic positions enabled:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hi Martin,

Thank you for sharing this with me. Perhaps I will try to test again and add more instances of the the sample to find out how many voices it can handle? Is there a place where you can turn off the voice-dropping feature?


----------



## AndyP (May 28, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Some interesting discussion and debate today here about composing with ensemble patches vs section patches. It is interesting to see that even seasoned professional library composers are divided on which method is best which makes me believe that both have their time and place depending on the situation you are in and also the nature of the work you are doing.


This discussion is almost a philosophical question. 
I use both, ensembles and sections. It all depends on the purpose.

For fast ostinatos I like to start with an ensemble, and if I don't like it I go to the sections.
I rarely use ensemble sustains, unless I can control them both dynamically with modwheel and keypressure at the same time. That depends a lot on the library.

Symphobia 1 has very strong string sustains that you can layer with the Symbhobia 1 (or 2 ...not sure atm) string quartet and they sound fantastic in combination. Not too bold and you can emphasize single notes in a nuanced way and then the quartet delivers very nice details.

This works as well with the SStS, but they don't have any ensemble patches free. You have to build them either as a multi or you use the patches of Cory Pelizzari, who kindly did all the preliminary work.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 28, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> . I know that this is not the popular choice and people will likely look down at me for not staying on a Mac



Anyone who looks down on someone else because of thei application and platform choice is a chowderhead. Use what works for you, by all means.


----------



## RogiervG (May 28, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> Anyone who looks down on someone else because of thei application and platform choice is a chowderhead. Use what works for you, by all means.



^^this 100%


----------



## Mornats (May 28, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> Anyone who looks down on someone else because of thei application and platform choice is a chowderhead. Use what works for you, by all means.


I absolutely agree. The platform used has zero bearing on the quality of music being produced.


----------



## Pando (May 28, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> I did a stress test on my system [12GB RAM] to see how it performs right now.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...



Your operating system uses your disk space as virtual memory when you run out of RAM. It dramatically slows down your system, how much is depending on the speed of the SSD where the paging file is located.

Why not just get more RAM? 32GB is a huge improvement over 12GB, especially when loading large templates. RAM is quite affordable right now and it makes a big difference.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 28, 2020)

Pando said:


> Your operating system uses your disk space as virtual memory when you run out of RAM. It dramatically slows down your system, how much is depending on the speed of the SSD where the paging file is located.
> 
> Why not just get more RAM? 32GB is a huge improvement over 12GB, especially when loading large templates. RAM is quite affordable right now and it makes a big difference.



in my view, upping the amount of RAM may be he single best use of money invested in improving a computer.


----------



## Pando (May 28, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> in my view, upping the amount of RAM may be he single best use of money invested in improving a computer.



Exactly. When a computer runs out of RAM, it uses more and more CPU and disk resources for "virtual" memory, which in turn decreases the available polyphony. If you keep loading samples after that point, there is an exponential demand increase on your system. The point of diminished returns is reached rather quickly when your computer is using most of its resources swapping pages in and out of virtual memory. It will slow to a crawl, but it won't crash, which is the reason for virtual memory.

Virtual memory is only useful for short term memory demands that otherwise would result in "out-of-memory" errors. It works perfectly fine for business applications, but anything timing-critical should not rely on virtual memory.


----------



## StillLife (May 28, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> Anyone who looks down on someone else because of thei application and platform choice


...should be looked down upon themselves.


----------



## Pando (May 28, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Thank you for sharing this. It definitely helps me to know that Spitfire Studio Strings are not for me. Too nasal sounding. I am very fussy about sound quality though. It would be good to hear a back to back comparison of the same MIDI files played back with SCS



I've found that Studio Strings are wonderful for layering into SSS. It gives it the organic, live quality that is otherwise missing in any single string sample set. This nasal sounding tone actually enhances and thickens a typical string sound from an ensemble library when used properly and mixed sparingly.

You'll get the best results when using combinations, not just a single library, and perform them separately, not just use MIDI in unison, or it will sound like a synth. It really helps if they are recorded in the same hall however, such as Spitfire Symphonic Strings + Spitfire Solo Strings, which is a wonderful combination.


----------



## Levon (May 28, 2020)

Pando said:


> I've found that Studio Strings are wonderful for layering into SSS. It gives it the organic, live quality that is otherwise missing in any single string sample set. This nasal sounding tone actually enhances and thickens a typical string sound from an ensemble library when used properly and mixed sparingly.
> 
> You'll get the best results when using combinations, not just a single library, and perform them separately, not just use MIDI in unison, or it will sound like a synth. It really helps if they are recorded in the same hall however, such as Spitfire Symphonic Strings + Spitfire Solo Strings, which is a wonderful combination.


Do you have BBC SO? I'm wondering how they would layer with SSO.


----------



## Pando (May 28, 2020)

Levon said:


> Do you have BBC SO? I'm wondering how they would layer with SSO.


No, I don't, just the Discover, which I've tried a few times, but having used the full SSO the Discover rather limited dynamically. I guess anything can be layered when done carefully, as long as the main set is maintained in the mix for proper balance and ambience. After all, an orchestra is just a big layer cake.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 28, 2020)

Wunderhorn said:


> Tundra in itself is a piece of art. You might not be able to do everything with those strings - nothing fast. But working within its boundaries is a whole special universe that will open up if you let it.
> I think the Chamber Strings would be an excellent solution to add further flexibility.



Hi Wunderhorn, 

I agree with you based upon listening to many walk throughs and demonstrations as well as the good word of many here on VI-Control.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 28, 2020)

musicisum said:


> Hi Àsta Jónnsdótir, could you please share one of your pieces? You don't seem to have had the opportunity to compose anything at all with sample libraries. But since the Spitfire sales, you keep posting all day long on the forum with very positive comments (at some points without having bought them yet). Makes me curious to listen to your music!


Hi Musicisum,

What is your favorite chord progression?


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 28, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> in my view, upping the amount of RAM may be he single best use of money invested in improving a computer.


Hello Asher,

I was trying to figure out where I can see how much total RAM my laptop can be upgraded with but I could not find that information anywhere in Windows 10 system menus. Do you know where I can learn about this regarding my hardware? For sure, I will upgrade the RAM if Tundra bottlenecks in my testing today.


----------



## Levon (May 28, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Hello Asher,
> 
> I was trying to figure out where I can see how much total RAM my laptop can be upgraded with but I could not find that information anywhere in Windows 10 system menus. Do you know where I can learn about this regarding my hardware? For sure, I will upgrade the RAM if Tundra bottlenecks in my testing today.


Try going here: https://www.crucial.com/ and running their memory scanner tool


----------



## Pando (May 28, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Hello Asher,
> 
> I was trying to figure out where I can see how much total RAM my laptop can be upgraded with but I could not find that information anywhere in Windows 10 system menus. Do you know where I can learn about this regarding my hardware? For sure, I will upgrade the RAM if Tundra bottlenecks in my testing today.



This really depends on your laptop make/model. Windows doesn't give you that info, it's dependent on hardware. In some cases you must replace out existing RAM as well if all slots are full. Post (or PM) the model and I can check for you.


----------



## BassClef (May 28, 2020)

Ashermusic said:


> Anyone who looks down on someone else because of thei application and platform choice is a chowderhead. Use what works for you, by all means.



Agreed Jay, but you are dating yourself with the "chowderhead" name... a mispronunciation of jolterhead, a derivative of the 16th-century insult jolt head.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 29, 2020)

Levon said:


> Try going here: https://www.crucial.com/ and running their memory scanner tool


Thank you Levon!

I ran the scan and got the results of my computer's capabilities in less than a second. I am sorry to repeat myself so many times but this community is really great. It lives up to small print in the logo.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 29, 2020)

TUNDRA is UNBELIEVABLE!

I finished the download and began playing with it. 30+ hours disappeared and I honestly fell asleep on top of the Keystation controller. :emoji_earth_asia::emoji_sun_with_face::emoji_sunny::emoji_partly_sunny::emoji_last_quarter_moon::emoji_last_quarter_moon_with_face::emoji_new_moon_with_face::emoji_new_moon::emoji_waxing_crescent_moon::emoji_waxing_gibbous_moon::emoji_partly_sunny::emoji_sunny::emoji_sun_with_face:


I could not stop playing with the samples.


The non orchestra sounds are definitely the most exciting and command my attention. I cannot believe how complex, otherworldly and overwhelming some of these sounds and textures are. They sound way more complex, organic, mysterious and inviting than anything I have heard from Omnisphere in the time I have spent going through its presets over at my friend's studio.

In the orchestra sounds, I really love the Harmonic articulations as well as the Super Sul Tasto and Flautando. Some of the wild articulations are nice to blend together with the more safe ones for further texture.

I really love the tone and sound of the strings. The low strings have that quality that is so rich and deep that moves me emotionally. I love the feeling of them. I want to record some long sustain string sounds with Tundra's samples and covert to audio, then add my own fade ins and fade out curves to them and make my own WAVES style articulations, then load them into a sampler and map them for playing. The long samples in Tundra are just not playable. They do not respond how orchestra players perform.

One thing I don't like is that the long sustained string sounds, while nice sounding, they just don't play like how an orchestra sounds. When you play a string instrument, usually you change bowing direction when you move to a new note. Using the longer samples in Tundra, when you make the orchestra move from one note to the next, you do not get the sound of the bows changing direction with each player's bow direction change offset in time. This has the same effect that a synth string patch does where either there is a gap in between the changing of notes, but when there is a gap and every single instrument in the orchestra has the same amount of a gap in between the last note and the next note, it just sounds like you cut and pasted samples together. You don't get any of the sound of movement that happens in real life where string players change bowing directions when they enter a new note or chord together.

When you change bowing direction when you go from the note you are playing to another note, the volume of the instrument also attenuates for a moment. The samples do not have that natural dynamic volume attenuation with bowing direction changes and the noises that it makes when you change bowing direction, moving from one note to the next.

When string players execute the bowing of a new note, they are never in synchronization with each other. There is always overlap and a lot of fluctuation between all of the players in how their bow changes are timed. With this library, there is no way to accurately create bowing changes on long legato notes while the orchestra players move through legato note changes together. This is the only negative comment I have about the Tundra library. The sound of the string samples blows me away. The play-ability leaves me wanting more and feeling as if I am fighting with them to make it sound as a real orchestra plays. I have played in a real orchestra for all of my life since I was four years old so this could be why I am not satisfied with how the samples respond when changing notes. The way notes start is fine but the transition from one note to the next behaves like a toy keyboard string sound. You almost have to purposely leave a gap in between notes or else it sounds so silly the way the whole section of players all change notes together perfectly. This limitation needs a lot of work.

When sample companies figure out how to create libraries where you get realistic note and bow direction changes/transitions with all the random timing differences between the players in a violin or viola or cello section, and when the entire ensemble change notes together, then they will have something truly great with orchestra samples!

When you change bowing directions, there is a noise that string instruments make. Why are these noises not baked into the library? Surely if we can have pedal and stool creaking noises that trigger in a piano sample library like Una Corda, Noire and others, we can have bowing direction change noises and volume dips during bow direction changes that trigger in a string sample? These things could be tied to the damper pedal so that when you move the damper pedal, it triggers offset bow change noises and volume dips within the voices in a sample?

Spitfire need to make string samples where, when you change notes, it triggers each voice within each sample to playback the noise of a bow changing direction but timed so those bow direction change noises are offset from each other and the starting of the next note from each voice within a sample are also offset from each other.


----------



## Mornats (May 29, 2020)

I think we were all waiting for your Tundra download to finish so we could hear your thoughts on it. Glad you're loving the sound (despite the downsides you mentioned). I've just spent the last hour playing with my solo strings and layered them on top of the flautandos from Tundra and wow, they just add that nice bit of bite and focus to them.


----------



## ism (May 29, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> TUNDRA is UNBELIEVABLE!



This is what I've been saying all along!


And great review - it really brings back that "not in Kansas anymore" feeling of just not quite knowing what hit me when I first opening up Tundra and started to play. 


Of course, even the very best libraries can never, even remotely, match the brilliance of a real orchestra. But there are a few tricks on dealing with some of the issues you've encountered. 


The first thing I would do with any non-legato long patch in Tundra (or any SF string lib) - is go into the wrench icon, and set the "release" slider up to its maximum value. The release samples are very, very nice on their own, so I would do this anyway just to hear more of them. But unless you're playing very fast melodies, the more prominent releases this gives you will have the additional merit of adding a smoothing, or blurring to your transitions. While I guess this technically involves loosing some of the precision and detail, in a library like Tundra this is generally not a problem.


Actually, the first thing I would do with any Tundra patch is crank up the volume in Kontakt so that there's more space to craft the dynamics via the mod wheel, and still be audible. (Tundra volumes are incredibly low default. Which I guess it "realistic", but it's nice to be able to hear the sample also). And in general, any excuse to keep the mod wheel constantly moving is a good thing. Christian's quips somewhere, something to the effect that playing samples without moving the mod wheel is like conducting a corpse. 


But back to the realism of the transition. Another trick is in your orchestration. In your voice leading, when the non-legato transitions are bother you, you can try adding more anticipations and suspensions. And this can serve to mask the absence of legatos. It's not perfect, but by the time you've got a full composition and everything is in it's full context, you might be surprised at what you can get away with. 


Similarly, after you've written a sketch using one of the long patches and have your string part more or less in place, you can then break them up onto 3 or 4 or 5 separate tracks. As mentioned above, playing each section with identical mod wheel dynamics can be synthy, so in a finished piece, so just giving each of the sections some contours of their own in cc1 dynamics does a lot for the realism, even with legatos. Adding dynamics carefully at the note transitions can also help mask the absence of legato transitions. Although of course you need to take care to be idiomatic in your dynamics at the same time.


Another trick is to then take a single line and swap it with a legato patch. The legatos in Tundra are not nearly as sophisticated or as extensive as you'll get in SCS, but they're still quite lovely in their own way. Even making a single of your sections legato can make a big difference in the overall realism. 


Of course, since Tundra has legato patches for only three articulations, if you replace a line with a legato patch, you're probably loosing some of the character of that patch that you're replacing. So you have various options and trade off to consider in either layer in the legatos, or perhaps just adding an additional legato track to sparingly take over a line when it really needs legato. 



Beyond that - well SCS legatos are obviously much, much more detailed and versatile. And the SCS sections are so small in comparison that you might almost consider them "Tundra first chairs". So you might try quietly layering in an SCS legato patch. (I've tried this with SStS, but as it isn't recorded in the same space, I've struggled to get to blend unobtrusively. This is one of those moment where I really think I just need to get SCS as well). 


And this:



Mornats said:


> I've just spent the last hour playing with my solo strings and layered them on top of the flautandos from Tundra and wow, they just add that nice bit of bite and focus to them.




is something I've never though to try - but I'm defiantly going to.

This also speaks to how I use Tundra. The difficulty of writing a composition using only Tundra is that alone, it's all so big and ambient. Personally, I would always something to paint some fine brush strokes on top of the gloriously impressionistic colours of Tundra's long articulations. I often use SSW, or Orchestral Swarm. But SCS would be great for this also. I've never actually tried to layering in solo strings to give the Tundra patches themselves extra definition. But that's a thought now.


As for re-bowings on repeated notes - well, upping the release time as I mentioned above can help just bu blurring the transition. And you can experiment with crafting the cc1 dynamics especially carefully. I can usually make repeated notes sound more or less ok, but it is a sometimes frustrating limitation of the library. 


Obviously this entirely depends on what you're writing, and not all of these tricks are going to work for everything, all the time. But the amazing thing about sample libraries isn't that they're ever remotely as realistic as having a real orchestra in your studio. It's that they work at all. Sometimes you have to write around these limitation. And sometimes you need libraries with more sophisticated legato. 

With Tundra especially, but sample libraries in general, it's sometimes amazing what you can get away with in a finished composition. And I'd argue that sometimes the trick is to think about it in terms of what I call "emotional realism" over "technical realism". This is debated fiercely on these pages (and there are much better musicians and composers on these pages who disagree with me, so take this with a pinch of salt). 

But sometimes I think that the trick isn't to focus on fooling yourself as a musician engaged in the craft of simulating an orchestra with technology into thinking you have something that sounds like a technically realistic imitation of a real orchestra. But rather in focusing on writing something "emotional realist". Something that "fools" a listener - including yourself when you take of you technical hat and allow yourself to just listen to your own work as music - simply into thinking they're that it's "real" music you're listening.


Perhaps the biggest problem I've had with Tundra is forcing myself to stop just playing and revelling in the sound, and actually write some music. It's just too easy to get lost in it. 


Have fun! Look forward to more reviews.


----------



## jbuhler (May 29, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> TUNDRA is UNBELIEVABLE!
> 
> I finished the download and began playing with it. 30+ hours disappeared and I honestly fell asleep on top of the Keystation controller. :emoji_earth_asia::emoji_sun_with_face::emoji_sunny::emoji_partly_sunny::emoji_last_quarter_moon::emoji_last_quarter_moon_with_face::emoji_new_moon_with_face::emoji_new_moon::emoji_waxing_crescent_moon::emoji_waxing_gibbous_moon::emoji_partly_sunny::emoji_sunny::emoji_sun_with_face:
> 
> ...


You will get that bow change sound if you get SCS and use the bow change legato. The legato in Tundra as I recall is fingered and in any case it is an ensemble sound. Lining up longs should also give you new bows at the start of the sample but it won’t generally sound like a bow change. Even in SCS the library does not distinguish between up bows and down bows. I don’t recall any of the spitfire libraries distinguishing up bows and down bows. someone will correct me if I’m wrong.

ETA: I should add that SF libraries don’t have a unison legato so repeated notes in legato patches are a special problem.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 29, 2020)

ism said:


> This is what I've been saying all along!
> 
> 
> And great review - it really brings back that "not in Kansas anymore" feeling of just not quite knowing what hit me when I first opening up Tundra and started to play.
> ...


Fantastic suggestions! Thank you so much  I will try all of these things and put them to good use.

I do not know about other threads that dive into string library use but this thread I started is turning into a gold mine master class in how to maximize the potential of a string sample library.

It has become clear from what you and @jbuhler are saying that SCS will be necessary for me.

Tundra string samples are like a big huge soft and wide paint brush. The kind that you paint the walls of a house with. SCS is more like painting with watercolors and finer brushes that allow you to paint the leaves on trees, the ripples in the water.

I think what you are saying about using SCS to draw in the details over Tundra strings as an emotional base layer could be quite wonderful and I plan to try it out.

I am having a huge amount of fun with Tundra. I could see myself using just Tundra as the foundation inspiration to fill out many compositions that start with a melody or a guitar chord melody or piano motif.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 29, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> You will get that bow change sound if you get SCS and use the bow change legato. The legato in Tundra as I recall is fingered and in any case it is an ensemble sound. Lining up longs should also give you new bows at the start of the sample but it won’t generally sound like a bow change. Even in SCS the library does not distinguish between up bows and down bows. I don’t recall any of the spitfire libraries distinguishing up bows and down bows. someone will correct me if I’m wrong.
> 
> ETA: I should add that SF libraries don’t have a unison legato so repeated notes in legato patches are a special problem.


It is great to know that SCS will provide some bow change sounds in a legato patch. Tundra Legato is ensemble and does not account for change in bow direction which gives it away as a sample library, haha!

The longest bow I can do on my violin is about 10 seconds. The Tundra legato samples can be held infinitely without any re-bowing sounds built into the samples. This was a mistake in my opinion. The evolution samples in OACE have re-bowing noises built into them which is one of the things that makes OACE superior to Tundra in the strings department.

Hopefully someone comments on the up bows & down bows and if Spitfire built both directions into the samples' round robins in SCS.

I am going to buy SCS now! Tremendously excited to find out how far outstretched into human expressiveness I can go.

Thank you for all your help


----------



## jbuhler (May 29, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> It is great to know that SCS will provide some bow change sounds in a legato patch. Tundra Legato is ensemble and does not account for change in bow direction which gives it away as a sample library, haha!


Well, not really, or not necessarily so, if you use it in the right way, but it being an ensemble library does give it certain limitations but also certain advantages. It's a question of finding how to make the library work for your music—and this is true for all VIs. It's true for live musicians too, if in a different way.

My guess is that if you continue down this path of seeking this kind of realism from VIs you will find yourself very frustrated. Because no library is going to give you the range of different bow changes you'd easily get from a single session with human players. Few libraries will have more than two or three round robins on their legatos. Many only have one. That means you'll hear that exact same bow change quite a lot. And you'll hear that same legato transition, and so forth and so on. So you have to come to terms with that. That doesn't mean compromise necessarily, but I do think it is helpful to think about the libraries in terms of their sweet spots, as @ism often preaches. (It's also one reason you can never have too many string libraries, and why it makes sense to have so many flautandos/sul tastos to choose from.)


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 29, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> Well, not really, or not necessarily so, if you use it in the right way, but it being an ensemble library does give it certain limitations but also certain advantages. It's a question of finding how to make the library work for your music—and this is true for all VIs. It's true for live musicians too, if in a different way.
> 
> My guess is that if you continue down this path of seeking this kind of realism from VIs you will find yourself very frustrated. Because no library is going to give you the range of different bow changes you'd easily get from a single session with human players. Few libraries will have more than two or three round robins on their legatos. Many only have one. That means you'll hear that exact same bow change quite a lot. And you'll hear that same legato transition, and so forth and so on. So you have to come to terms with that. That doesn't mean compromise necessarily, but I do think it is helpful to think about the libraries in terms of their sweet spots, as @ism often preaches. (It's also one reason you can never have too many string libraries, and why it makes sense to have so many flautandos/sul tastos to choose from.)


Good advice for me. I will take it! Thank you.

I have some time to put in for sure. I was thinking that perhaps these libraries will inform how I approach playing my actual violin and viola as I work with them. Since hearing Tundra, I want to explore how I play my instrument with this new perspective.

I am also excited to experiment and find out if it will work to try to blend the sample libraries with recordings of myself really playing my violin and viola. Perhaps if I record 4 takes of each part on violin and viola and pan the four takes into separate locations within the stereo field that I will have a more natural blend to work alongside the library samples.

I suppose it will also be about using some EQ to shape my own live strings recordings with the Spitfire sample library recordings so they match and blend. I only own one microphone for recording my violin. It is a very fragile microphone which I have had to get repaired already once and that was very expensive but the sound is very warm and removes the scratchy sounds the violin makes naturally. The microphone is the BBC/Coles 4038 ribbon microphone. My friend who plays the harp said that she made a recording at one of Iceland's most famous studios and they used it on her harp and when she listened to herself on the recording it was like this microphone makes her sound better than how she hears her instrument with her own ears live in the room. She said that somehow this microphone just takes the sound that is near it and turns it into something much better and more musical. That is when I had to try one for my violin and I did get the opportunity. It is the only microphone that makes my violin sound nice and removes all of the string noise that you naturally hear from the violin. Those noises that come from the sound of the horse hair rubbing on the strings with heavy rosin is very harsh and hurts your ears with most microphones, especially condenser microphones. I think condenser microphones sound too strident and harsh for string recording personally.

I will look for the sweet spots with libraries as well, as you suggested and adapt to their limitations. I am loving the kind of deeply rich bottom end that I can get from the Tundra Low Strings. This is a sound I desperately love in some of my favorite composer's work and now I am so excited to be able to make this sound myself with just my two hands! That is so liberating and empowering for me to have!! It is a sound that I could never make before. Not with my violin or viola or even my guitar or bass guitar. The textural bottom really affects me.


----------



## jbuhler (May 29, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Good advice for me. I will take it! Thank you.
> 
> I have some time to put in for sure. I was thinking that perhaps these libraries will inform how I approach playing my actual violin and viola as I work with them. Since hearing Tundra, I want to explore how I play my instrument with this new perspective.
> 
> ...


Just adding a single layer of your own playing to the samples will give you all sorts of potential new sounds and can help bring life to samples, and your ideas for more complex layering sound like they could be richer still. I'd love to hear them once you've had a chance to experiment!


----------



## el-bo (May 29, 2020)

ism said:


> But sometimes I think that the trick isn't to focus on fooling yourself as a musician engaged in the craft of simulating an orchestra with technology into thinking you have something that sounds like a technically realistic imitation of a real orchestra. But rather in focusing on writing something "emotional realist". Something that "fools" a listener - including yourself when you take of you technical hat and allow yourself to just listen to your own work as music - simply into thinking they're that it's "real" music you're listening.



Seen you write this over-and-over (A long-time forum lurker), in various ways. It never gets old. Neither do your other musings on the emotional aspects of music composition/listening 👍


----------



## el-bo (May 29, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> TUNDRA is UNBELIEVABLE!



Have fun!


----------



## Mornats (May 30, 2020)

I can't remember where I mentioned layering Spitfire Solo Strings over Tundra - maybe it was somewhere in this thread. Anyway, I did a short example of it with a bit of Orchestral Swarm thrown in for some woods and low string texture.


----------



## doctoremmet (May 30, 2020)

Pando said:


> This really depends on your laptop make/model. Windows doesn't give you that info, it's dependent on hardware. In some cases you must replace out existing RAM as well if all slots are full. Post (or PM) the model and I can check for you.


Check make and model of your actual hardware. For instance, in my Asus Zenbook the RAM maxed out to 24 Gb due to the fact that one RAM slot had 8 Gb soldered in!


----------



## gordon williams (May 30, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Hello,
> 
> I am overwhelmed by all the excellent responses. Thank you! I needed some time to think about everything that everyone wrote about. Overflowing informations. I appreciate all of the generous feedback. For me, it is an education. I am not new to sample libraries but I have never used sample libraries or a professional level scoring template in Logic or any other DAW to develop an orchestral score. Not yet. I may have an opportunity for it in my third of fourth year of my graduate program. For now, I dip my toes in the water while continuing to learn to transcribe and compose on paper and with music notation software apps.


A note of warning. Someone mentioned NI Symphony Series String ensemble in the comments. It would be wise to avoid it in my opinion. It does have a decent sound to the library but sadly too many Bugs, which havnt been fully addressed yet, even though its been on sale for a number of years. Purchased it myself and wish i had known about them myself. Good Luck.


----------



## GtrString (May 30, 2020)

I think many libraries will be good, but to reach the high demands of the OP, I also think you will need excellent monitoring. A library can be as great as any, but if you listen through laptop speakers, you cant recognize it.

I also think that every library will dissapoint in one way or another, after all, this is convenience technology, so a certain restraint is required in terms of fullfillment of expectations.

Spitfire, Berlin, Cinesamples, ProjectSam, Vienna, Cinematic Studios are all good, as well as smaller companies, if you monitor well, know your programming/ mixing and give samples the lattitude they need, to be able to service you with something convenient and affordable.


----------



## el-bo (May 30, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Thank you Levon!
> 
> I ran the scan and got the results of *my computer's capabilities* in less than a second. I am sorry to repeat myself so many times but this community is really great. It lives up to small print in the logo.



Fortunately, music-production is one of the digital art-forms that can be created on lesser-spec'd equipment. Due to various workflow options that exist in most DAW, it's possible to create very large projects, as long as you're not working to crazy deadlines. Essentially, as long as you have the resources to make record one instrument track, then you have enough resources to make a thousand

I think you mentioned that you use Logic. The recently-added ability to unload plugins from memory, without removing them from the project, when added to track-freezing, and bounce-in-place, means you won't ever need to run out of Ram or CPU. As long as you have the discipline to keep things well organised (Hiding tracks etc.), it's all good.

If you are starting out with 12G memory, you're gonna be losing 3-4G of that to the general running of the OS. There are various utilities you can find that will keep resource-usage statistics in view i.e Menubar, so you know when it's time to start freeing stuff up.

This is not just for memory's sake, but if you are recording your music in live, as opposed to entering in score or piano-roll, these workflows will allow you to keep the sample buffer size low enough to stay responsive.

Bit of a balancing act, but all part of the fun. And it does make me smile that due to these workflow improvements, my eight-year-old Macbook Pro has been getting more capable by the year


----------



## Ashermusic (May 30, 2020)

el-bo said:


> Seen you write this over-and-over (A long-time forum lurker), in various ways. It never gets old. Neither do your other musings on the emotional aspects of music composition/listening 👍



+1


----------



## doctoremmet (May 30, 2020)

gordon williams said:


> A note of warning. Someone mentioned NI Symphony Series String ensemble in the comments. It would be wise to avoid it in my opinion. It does have a decent sound to the library but sadly too many Bugs, which havnt been fully addressed yet, even though its been on sale for a number of years. Purchased it myself and wish i had known about them myself. Good Luck.


Yes, maybe also check last weeks video on Youtube where @Cory Pelizzari basically warns us to avoid this library... thx for the headsup


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 30, 2020)

Mornats said:


> I can't remember where I mentioned layering Spitfire Solo Strings over Tundra - maybe it was somewhere in this thread. Anyway, I did a short example of it with a bit of Orchestral Swarm thrown in for some woods and low string texture.



Hi Mornats,

Nice mood composition. This is a good example of blending samples. The woodwinds do a nice job of gluing, overlapping, masking and hiding the things about the strings that are missing the more detailed human nuances. I recognize the bottom end of the Tundra strings here! Love that sound, especially when it swells in as it does here in this piece. Really nice selection of sound samples to work with in this creation! Thank you very much for sharing.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 30, 2020)

gordon williams said:


> A note of warning. Someone mentioned NI Symphony Series String ensemble in the comments. It would be wise to avoid it in my opinion. It does have a decent sound to the library but sadly too many Bugs, which havnt been fully addressed yet, even though its been on sale for a number of years. Purchased it myself and wish i had known about them myself. Good Luck.


Hi Gordon,

Thank you for the warning. I appreciate that. I spend a lot of time researching before I buy anything. Especially music making equipment. I have made the mistake in the past of buying "latest greatest" and learned my lesson the hard way.

When something comes out onto the market that I really want, I always wait until it has been out for at least a year before making my purchase. This way the company has either worked out all of the bugs by having enough of the product out in the field, or else you will find many reports online of people complaining in forums about things, a year later or more. For me, this is immediate disqualification no matter how much I want to have it.



*Trapped On A Ship With The Antelope Audio Pirates*

I bought an Antelope Audio Interface for my DAW. This was my first audio interface. I saw a Youtube video promoting it when it first came out and they had all the perfect lifestyle marketing and they got me. It was "you are a traveling worldly artist making important strides and on the move" kind of thing.

The Zen Studio product. Full of promises and it sure sounded wonderful while it lasted.

That was a huge mistake. This company are a group of Bulgarian pirates, stealing people's money and taking them hostage (not literally) for ransom money.

Five months after buying it, loving the clarity of the sound of it's converters, Antelope Audio releases the Zen Studio+ (plus, MKII). I had no problem with this as the updated product, though coming to market only a year and a half after the first version was released, was only a new collection of Antelope bundled software with an additional DSP chip built into the interface for the new effects software to run on. Their version of the UAD thing. I use all third party plugins so I did not care.

Here is where it gets interesting....

Antelope Audio created these Zen interfaces so that they absolutely do not work unless you have a live internet connection!!! Their excuse is that they wanted the hardware to be connected to the internet at all times so that they could do real time firmware updates to all of their hardware to "maintain them" out in the field. They even used an acronym stolen from IBM computers for the technology to try to make it sound like something legitimate that you would really want. They called it FPGA. Anyone with a brain in their head knows that having your DAW connected to a live internet connection while you are working on music projects is like suicide.

As soon as your internet connection was turned off, the Antelope Zen Studio Audio Interface would throw up a pop up window requesting an internet connection and you could not get the dialogue box to go away or even minimize it unless you brought back a live internet connection.

Well....I found out that they did this on purpose because they wanted to have control over all of the units out in the field so they could de-commission them themselves to force customers into buying the "new version". Two days after bricking thousands of these units, Antelope Audio had a promotional offer up on their website where you could send them your generation 1 Zen Studio and upgrade it for the new one! The price difference was only $199 off.

So to recap...the company bricks your hardware with bad firmware, renders your $3000 investment into a paper weight and then offers you the latest model for a $199 discount? How does this work again???



*Verification Of Crimes Committed Against Musicians*

This was all verified and clarified in great detail to me in writing and directly over the telephone by the head technician at the company Antelope Audio contracted out in Europe to do their "repair work" for them. In no less than one week, the company commented this: "our entire warehouse is now filled with these units, we suspect foul play but cannot make any official comment to Antelope customers as we are still under contract with Antelope Audio"

Two months later in the United States, the largest Antelope retailer, Sweetwater Sound sent all of their Antelope stock back to Antelope Audio in Bulgaria and ended their relationship with Antelope Audio, no longer a dealer for their product in the US. The same happened in other countries with their largest pro audio dealers as well.

A day after the Zen Studio+ was released, Antelope sent me their special gift package - the famous firmware "update" that bricked my hardware and it would no longer recognize any kind of connection to a computer.

I spent three months trying to get the issue resolved with Antelope customer support people in Bulgaria over the phone. The company headquarters is located in Bulgaria. Apparently, this is a great place to hide out if you are a criminal.

It soon became very apparent that these support people were lying to me and that they had bricked my hardware on purpose and had no intention of helping me. They did tell me this repeatedly: "the best solution for you is to go for the upgrade to the Zen Studio+ because the firmware for it works great"

My Antelope Zen Studio cost me $3000 USD because of importing it to Iceland. It sat in the European contracted repair shop for a year! Yes...an entire year.

So to recap again. I buy a $3000 audio interface from Antelope Audio. After 5 months, they brick it with bad firmware to try to strong arm me into buying another audio interface from them. Then they tell me to send it to their European repair shop which I had to pay for myself! No RMA form and this device is still apparently under warranty. Then Antelope hold my audio interface hostage for an entire year, promising me every week that they are going to take care of it and get it back to me right away.

A year later, I get an email from the head technician (William) at the repair shop. He says:

"We have a whole warehouse full of bricked Antelope interfaces. Antelope Audio refused to give us any documentation or any of their test procedures or equipment. We honestly have no way of even looking at these units because Antelope refuses to share their technology with us and we can't access these units via computer to test them and find out what's wrong. Our company has decided to end our contract with Antelope now because they're essentially paying us to warehouse thousands of bricked interfaces and keep quiet while acting as their official repair shop. Would you like me to send your unit back to you?"

I asked him what other people were doing with their units and he told me that most people had since moved on to something that works made by a reputable company (Mostly RME) and told him to keep their Antelope equipment and please recycle it. I asked William to do the same with mine and I went and bought an RME.

Some reading this, may already know this story. Antelope were once called Aardvark and did something similar and then disappeared for a decade. Then they secretly came back as Antelope Audio. The head of the company is a man by the name of Igor Levin. I will assume that he is largely responsible for all of the criminal activity and stealing money from people and that the call center support people are just reading from a script and not paid enough to offer anything but answering the phone and reading from a script.

This taught me a lot. Not just about buying music equipment but in general, it taught me that a product that is advertised as something to the public is not what it is advertised as until you have it in your hands and are using it and it delivers. Only then is it what it says it is. Even a new pair of name brand shoes, a new car, or a new hair dryer or skin treatment. Every product in this world is just false advertising until you have used it yourself successfully for three years or more.

For me personally, I am not interested in buying products on impulse. I am doing months of research. I never buy anything that does not have a proven track record and positive history with a good number of users and I look for people of repute using things too. I do not care how good a product is supposed to be or what it promises. I am nobody's fool and I thank anyone for giving me a heads up on pseudo-samples.


----------



## Mornats (May 30, 2020)

Thanks Asta, I find that Orchestral Swarm is amazing for layering underneath other libraries and I'm really finding the strength of those solo strings now.


----------



## ptram (May 30, 2020)

I apologize if this has already been said, but if you like the LABS Strings you will probably like chamber strings libraries, and not so much full orchestra strings libraries. Chamber strings also usually tend to sound more expressive, thanks to their 'nearly soloist' nature.

I don't know if all strings libraries include a full range patch including all the separate instruments. Spitfire and VSL usually do it.

Paolo


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 30, 2020)

ptram said:


> I apologize if this has already been said, but if you like the LABS Strings you will probably like chamber strings libraries, and not so much full orchestra strings libraries. Chamber strings also usually tend to sound more expressive, thanks to their 'nearly soloist' nature.
> 
> I don't know if all strings libraries include a full range patch including all the separate instruments. Spitfire and VSL usually do it.
> 
> Paolo


Indeed Paolo 

I actually purchased Spitfire Chamber Strings last night, on the recommendation of some really amazing and helpful people here on the forum.


----------



## BradHoyt (May 30, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Indeed Paolo
> 
> I actually purchased Spitfire Chamber Strings last night, on the recommendation of some really amazing and helpful people here on the forum.



Hi Ásta,

I caught up with your decision making process and I’m glad you’re happy with Tundra! I just wanted to add one thing - You have a big advantage over most others here: You are a violinist! - If you are unhappy with legato trasitions, record over the part with one or two actual violin tracks an then mix that into the SCS (or Tundra) tracks. Your legato transitions will be better than what can only be achieved with only samples.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 30, 2020)

BradHoyt said:


> Hi Ásta,
> 
> I caught up with your decision making process and I’m glad you’re happy with Tundra! I just wanted to add one thing - You have a big advantage over most others here: You are a violinist! - If you are unhappy with legato trasitions, record over the part with one or two actual violin tracks an then mix that into the SCS (or Tundra) tracks. Your legato transitions will be better than what can only be achieved with only samples.


Hi Brad!


I'm honored to hear that you were following my progress. As I said to my roommate two days ago after about two minutes of playing with Tundra for the very first time:

"This is like Christmas...just listen to that!!" (presses down on keys with AMAZING Steam Band patch loaded)

You are very correct about using real violin and I never planned on doing anything other than recording violin and viola parts myself. I have a really great BBC/Coles ribbon mic for this as well.

I was making my own personal review comments of the strings in Tundra and their limitations. I never expected them to be able to move through melodic passages and execute them as a real orchestra does but I also never expected the low strings to sound so moving and warm and rich. They take my breath away.

My plan is to write using some libraries and then fill in details with my real instruments. For the other instruments that I play as well. I play guitar, trombone, bass guitar, glockenspiel, vibraphone, xylophone, drums, hand drum, percussions, kalimba, piano, harmonium as well so I have some flexibility with adding in detail using the real instruments.

I love these sample libraries for sitting down in my room here and composing. I find it inspiring when I have a really really good sound under my fingertips just by pressing down. It puts me into a different frame of mind and something very different seems to come out of me when I play samples than when I play one of my instruments. The other thing is that most of my instruments are kept at my parents house and so I do not have access to them all the time. 

Right now with the world pandemic happening, the samples have made this time a little easier as it gives me a new discipline and skill to develop and learn. It adds to my experience as a musician and hopefully will contribute to helping me get into the advanced composition class next year if I can show enough promise in my compositions I make when I present myself to the adjudicators who make the final choice for the advanced studies composition class list.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 30, 2020)

el-bo said:


> Fortunately, music-production is one of the digital art-forms that can be created on lesser-spec'd equipment. Due to various workflow options that exist in most DAW, it's possible to create very large projects, as long as you're not working to crazy deadlines. Essentially, as long as you have the resources to make record one instrument track, then you have enough resources to make a thousand
> 
> I think you mentioned that you use Logic. The recently-added ability to unload plugins from memory, without removing them from the project, when added to track-freezing, and bounce-in-place, means you won't ever need to run out of Ram or CPU. As long as you have the discipline to keep things well organised (Hiding tracks etc.), it's all good.
> 
> ...


Hello el-bo (I like the pun)

Thank you for your message. Indeed, I am extremely organized, especially with my computer and the file management hierarchy of running a DAW most efficiently. I only keep the one project that I am currently working on, on my computer's hard drive. All of my other projects and files are stored on an external drive and I have a mirrored backup drive of that one.

I upgraded my computer, an i7 Quad core processor machine with 32GB of RAM myself today. My computer has an internal RAM of 4GB for the operating system and two slots for extra. I purchased two 16GB cards of DDR4 3200 which is the most I can add. All the libraries and multiple instances open seem to be working perfectly now. Perahps now, it will be the time I need to learn how to build a template session for strings, using my favorite Tundra articulations and Spitfire Chamber Strings sections combined 

@GtrString

I use Reaper exclusively with an RME UFX II audio interface. I learned on a power mac computer with a ProTools system and Logic also but for me, Reaper is far superior and the mix buss in Reaper sounds much wider with more separation between tracks in a mix. I have done comparison tests using the same audio files imported into each DAW, mixing down inside each with the exact same balances to the decimal point. Importing all the master mix files into one session on the same system for accurate comparison listening. None of the files null with phase reversed therefore, DAWs do have different audio qualities that have varied greatly over the years. Samplitude/Sequoia sounds the very best to my ears but I do not like Samplitude's UI. Very buggy.

"Live Bounce To Disk" in Reaper also produces a far higher sound quality final mix file than any of the rendering options, whether real time bounce or offline rendering in ProTools or Logic. Reaper also has more dynamic range than ProTools or Logic which also greatly improves the sound quality of a final mix when you bounce down to your final stereo file. I used to be Mac based but much prefer Windows 10 over anything Apple have done recently. I have a set of Yamaha HS5 monitors that I use sometimes, but I do have a roommate here so it is mostly when she is not home. I also have a pair of Sennheiser HD280 and HD600 headphones that I use for monitoring what I am working on.

I have my laptop's built in sound system turned off in Windows 10 System Settings menu


----------



## Rex282 (May 31, 2020)

Thanks for starting this discussion Asta it made me more serious on checking out Tundra....then getting it!!I needed some more textures since the other bases are pretty well covered.


----------



## GtrString (May 31, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> @GtrString
> I have a set of Yamaha HS5 monitors that I use sometimes, but I do have a roommate here so it is mostly when she is not home. I also have a pair of Sennheiser HD280 and HD600 headphones that I use for monitoring what I am working on.



Yes, the HD600 should be able to reproduce most of what is in the software you buy, and regardless of daw and computer preferences, I am sure you will produce for a sound you like no matter what premise the tools give you to begin with.

Congrats also on a successful purchase. It really is like christmas when you find something inspiring to play with.

I also hope you can forget the tech, and just play music.


----------



## el-bo (May 31, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Hello el-bo (I like the pun)
> 
> Thank you for your message. Indeed, I am extremely organized, especially with my computer and the file management hierarchy of running a DAW most efficiently. I only keep the one project that I am currently working on, on my computer's hard drive. All of my other projects and files are stored on an external drive and I have a mirrored backup drive of that one.
> 
> I upgraded my computer, an i7 Quad core processor machine with 32GB of RAM myself today. My computer has an internal RAM of 4GB for the operating system and two slots for extra. I purchased two 16GB cards of DDR4 3200 which is the most I can add. All the libraries and multiple instances open seem to be working perfectly now. Perahps now, it will be the time I need to learn how to build a template session for strings, using my favorite Tundra articulations and Spitfire Chamber Strings sections combined



Great! Should give you a bit more space to play in before having to freeze, render etc.

Now I seem to be on the other side of my own computer woes, I'll probably start making a few templates, including for Tundra. Probably going to be building mine directly into Logic, though, rather than using Kontakt multis.

Anyway, enjoy it.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 31, 2020)

el-bo said:


> Great! Should give you a bit more space to play in before having to freeze, render etc.
> 
> Now I seem to be on the other side of my own computer woes, I'll probably start making a few templates, including for Tundra. Probably going to be building mine directly into Logic, though, rather than using Kontakt multis.
> 
> Anyway, enjoy it.


Is there an advantage in terms of CPU usage by building your template on individual tracks as opposed to within Kontakt?


----------



## el-bo (May 31, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Is there an advantage in terms of CPU usage by building your template on individual tracks as opposed to within Kontakt?



For my ageing laptop, it would seem to make sense. Logic is now able to dynamically load/unload plugin resources, without having to actually unload the plugins themselves. So, theoretically, I could build a template with 100's of tracks, and only turn them on as needed. And once resources are starting to run dry, I can just freeze, bounce-in-place etc., then free up all the memory and CPU to keep fighting on.

Also, having to route multiple audio outputs from Kontakt, and use various midi channels seems like a couple of layers-of-abstraction too far, for my ageing brain 

Not saying this is ideal, but i think it's the best for my current situation.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 31, 2020)

el-bo said:


> For my ageing laptop, it would seem to make sense. Logic is now able to dynamically load/unload plugin resources, without having to actually unload the plugins themselves. So, theoretically, I could build a template with 100's of tracks, and only turn them on as needed. And once resources are starting to run dry, I can just freeze, bounce-in-place etc., then free up all the memory and CPU to keep fighting on.
> 
> Also, having to route multiple audio outputs from Kontakt, and use various midi channels seems like a couple of layers-of-abstraction too far, for my ageing brain
> 
> Not saying this is ideal, but i think it's the best for my current situation.


That is a very cool feature for Logic. It is good to keep things simple for workflow 

Thank you for the response!


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 31, 2020)

Spitfire Chamber Strings var besta fjárfestingin sem ég mun líklega gera í tónlistarhugbúnaði!!

Fiðla Flautandos líður mér eins og ég sé út um gluggann minn, niður á allan heiminn undir fótum mér.


----------



## Rex282 (May 31, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Spitfire Chamber Strings var besta fjárfestingin sem ég mun líklega gera í tónlistarhugbúnaði!!
> 
> Fiðla Flautandos líður mér eins og ég sé út um gluggann minn, niður á allan heiminn undir fótum mér.




Ásta þú ert að gera mig öfundsjúkan !! Ég hef ekki fengið ssd gir loft.ðinguna mína ennþá svo ég hef ekki getað notið SCS ennþá. Ég er sammála því að Spitfires flautando hljómar eins og loft.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 31, 2020)

Rex282 said:


> Ásta þú ert að gera mig öfundsjúkan !! Ég hef ekki fengið ssd gir loft.ðinguna mína ennþá svo ég hef ekki getað notið SCS ennþá. Ég er sammála því að Spitfires flautando hljómar eins og loft.


Einmitt! Spitfire Chamber Strings er svo hvetjandi að það gæti jafnvel gert hárið að vaxa aftur!


----------



## Rex282 (May 31, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Einmitt! Spitfire Chamber Strings er svo hvetjandi að það gæti jafnvel gert hárið að vaxa aftur!


hahaha það gerir það þá er ég að kaupa ALLT


----------



## StillLife (Jun 1, 2020)

Rex282 said:


> hahaha það gerir það þá er ég að kaupa ALLT


This.


----------



## Rex282 (Jun 1, 2020)

StillLife said:


> This.


haha I know not only is Asta knowledgeable about music and VI 's and computers she can SEE us!!!(though I'm not technically bald I just have really short hair!!!)


----------



## StillLife (Jun 1, 2020)

Rex282 said:


> haha I know not only is Asta knowledgeable about music and VI 's and computers she can SEE us!!!(though I'm not technically bald I just have really short hair!!!)


I fear I (still) have no idea what you are talking about...


----------



## Rex282 (Jun 1, 2020)

StillLife said:


> I fear I (still) have no idea what you are talking about...


Asta said
"Exactly! Spitfire Chamber Strings is so inspiring that it could even make your hair grow again!"


----------



## Mornats (Jun 1, 2020)

Rex282 said:


> Asta said
> "Exactly! Spitfire Chamber Strings is so inspiring that it could even make your hair grow again!"



Well, if they'd mentioned that in their marketing I'd have bought it!


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Rex282 said:


> haha I know not only is Asta knowledgeable about music and VI 's and computers she can SEE us!!!(though I'm not technically bald I just have really short hair!!!)


Huldufólk


----------



## StillLife (Jun 1, 2020)

Mornats said:


> Well, if they'd mentioned that in their marketing I'd have bought it!


Would be a game-changer indeed.


----------



## Mornats (Jun 1, 2020)

StillLife said:


> Would be a game-changer indeed.



A new chapter.


----------



## Ray Toler (Jun 1, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Is there an advantage in terms of CPU usage by building your template on individual tracks as opposed to within Kontakt?



In most multi-core setups these days, it's more efficient to use multiple instances of a VI instead of a single instance with multi-outs. This may be DAW dependent, but I haven't done research beyond my own primary environment (Digital Performer). For DP, eight instances of Kontakt, Omnisphere, whatever is far more efficient than a single instance with eight patches loaded.

This is because DP doesn't capture the plugins and distribute processing to different threads. I don't think Reaper does, but I don't know that for certain.


----------



## Saxer (Jun 1, 2020)

Ray Toler said:


> In most multi-core setups these days, it's more efficient to use multiple instances of a VI instead of a single instance with multi-outs.


Especially in Logic multiple instances work better than multis.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Mornats said:


> A new chapter.


----------



## Rex282 (Jun 1, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


>


Is that your backyard Asta


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Rex282 said:


> Is that your backyard Asta


This magic place outside Seyðisfjörður is near my school. We sat here for lunch pre social distancing


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Ray Toler said:


> In most multi-core setups these days, it's more efficient to use multiple instances of a VI instead of a single instance with multi-outs. This may be DAW dependent, but I haven't done research beyond my own primary environment (Digital Performer). For DP, eight instances of Kontakt, Omnisphere, whatever is far more efficient than a single instance with eight patches loaded.
> 
> This is because DP doesn't capture the plugins and distribute processing to different threads. I don't think Reaper does, but I don't know that for certain.


Thank you Ray. I am going to try working with each instance on a separate track for now. With strings, I need to practice and master working the mod wheel for dynamics while I play in parts with my other hand. This is a technique which I have seen Homay and Christian doing in many Spitfire Audio walk through videos however, I have not come to feel in control of this yet. The mod wheel is very crude and moves very quickly. I think it could be easier with a fader control that had more resistance to it. 

I have had some unbelievable help today with really good suggestions and tricks on how to draw in the automation so I am excited to try things out. I have a lot to learn and a long way to go. Once I am feeling at home with this new chapter of my music development with sample libraries (Thank you COVID-19) I will try to compose something. I want to feel comfortable with the technique of playing the MIDI keyboard and playing dynamics on the mod wheel, both at the same time.

Thank you again Ray. I hope you got all the libraries you wanted in the sale!


----------



## Jacob Fanto (Jun 1, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> I need to practice and master working the mod wheel for dynamics while I play in parts with my other hand. This is a technique which I have seen Homay and Christian doing in many Spitfire Audio walk through videos however, I have not quite got the hang of it yet.


Are you referring to the dual slider movement on the little device they have above the keyboard? That's controlling both volume and expression separately in most instances I've seen from those videos. It's different when just using the MIDI keyboard's mod wheel, as it's an individual slider, and shouldn't be difficult at all to manage when just playing single-handed parts.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Jacob Fanto said:


> Are you referring to the dual slider movement on the little device they have above the keyboard? That's controlling both volume and expression separately in most instances I've seen from those videos. It's different when just using the MIDI keyboard's mod wheel, as it's an individual slider, and shouldn't be difficult at all to manage when just playing single-handed parts.


Hello Jacob,

Yes. Homay and Christian are using the Palette Gear slider controller for writing in the dynamics and expression. 

I have the Mod wheel on my Keystation controller for doing dynamic and expression control.

Do you assign the mod wheel on your controller to control both dynamics (volume) and expression at the same time? Or do you draw them in separately after you have recorded the midi note data?


----------



## Ray Toler (Jun 1, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Hello Jacob,
> 
> Yes. Homay and Christian are using the Palette Gear slider controller for writing in the dynamics and expression.
> 
> ...



You may find that investing in a small fader bank or a new controller with sliders/faders will be worth the expense. After 30 years of synth playing, I'm very comfortable with the mod wheel, but never could get the satisfactory results with it while playing in orchestral parts.

My master controller is a Kurzweil K2600XS, and I created a control profile on it just for Spitfire libraries. I have the first three faders set to the CC values for Expression (11), Dynamics (1), and Vibrato (22), and the remaining faders set to the first few microphones in the BBCSO. I rarely use the faders for mic mixing, though, so I'm thinking about setting those to other parameters like reverb, release, or tightness.

I don't think you'll get best results from mapping both Dynamics and Expression to the Mod wheel. You've probably already noticed that the Spitfire crew often have the Dynamics fader trailing just a little behind the Expression fader. It's definitely a "feel" thing and, like you, I'm not satisfied with my performances in this regard yet. It will take a while before the muscle memory kicks in. I have noticed improvement, though.


----------



## Pando (Jun 1, 2020)

For what it's worth, I usually only use the mod wheel (CC1) for dynamics with Spitfire. I use the expression control only when I need to further reduce the volume (when the CC1 won't go down that much), or I find myself battling with an orchestra that's out of balance timbrally. In Spitfire libraries (SSO especially), the CC1 appears to control the instruments' actual timbre properly (p-f) in most cases.

If I use the expression control, chances are it no longer sounds realistic - a screaming fff trombone with a volume that's barely audible (with the exp turned way down), or an oboe playing in p that's overpowering them all. And I keep hearing this in many mockups, which immediately stands out.

If I have a tip, it's this: do your dynamics as if you conducted a real orchestra in a hall. If a section needs to have less volume, play them softer (with mod wheel). Don't use the track fader or exp slider (same thing) to adjust, they don't exist in a concert hall.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Pando said:


> For what it's worth, I usually only use the mod wheel (CC1) for dynamics with Spitfire. I use the expression control only when I need to further reduce the volume (when the CC1 won't go down that much), or I find myself battling with an orchestra that's out of balance timbrally. In Spitfire libraries (SSO especially), the CC1 appears to control the instruments' actual timbre properly (p-f) in most cases.
> 
> If I use the expression control, chances are it no longer sounds realistic - a screaming fff trombone with a volume that's barely audible (with the exp turned way down), or an oboe playing in p that's overpowering them all. And I keep hearing this in many mockups, which immediately stands out.
> 
> If I have a tip, it's this: do your dynamics as if you conducted a real orchestra in a hall. If a section needs to have less volume, play them softer (with mod wheel). Don't use the track fader or exp slider (same thing) to adjust, they don't exist in a concert hall.


Thank you Pando

Good point that you are making about trying to do the best to simulate the playing dynamics of a real performance for sure.

CC1 controls "Dynamics" on Spitfire interfaces and "Dynamics" is the same thing as Velocity, yes?

To my understanding CC1 would be controlling the dynamic layers or velocity layers, as you move it up and down, it would be cross fading between the different samples of the different velocity layers which change timbral quality as you wrote. Lower velocity/dynamic layers produce a softer and darker timbre while higher velocity/dynamic layers create a harder and brighter timbre.

Is this correct?


----------



## Pando (Jun 1, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> So CC1 controls "Dynamics" on Spitfire interfaces and "Dynamics" is the same thing as Velocity yes?
> 
> So CC1 would be controlling the dynamic layers or velocity layers, as you move it up and down, it would be cross fading between the different samples of the different velocity layers which change timbral quality as you wrote. Lower velocity/dynamic layers produce a softer and darker timbre while higher velocity/dynamic layers create a harder and brighter timbre.
> 
> Is this correct?



No, they are not the same thing. They are both used to control dynamics, but that's where the similarity ends. CC1 can be applied continuously as the note is playing, velocity can only be applied at the beginning of the note (like on a piano).

Different libraries implement these differently, but in Spitfire CC1 is usually active for long notes, and shorter patches have velocity affect an attack, such as on a spiccato or staccato patch. You will notice that for longs, velocity usually doesn't have any effect. It's the other way around for Spiccato, CC1 has no effect.

However, both may be programmed for more complex patches, such as Performance Legato, where velocity affects the attack and CC1 affects the rest of the note. It really depends on a patch. With strings, think of velocity as how forcefully you hit the bow on strings in the beginning, and CC1 controls the speed/tone of the bow as it moves the rest of the way.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Pando said:


> No, they are not the same thing. They are both used to control dynamics, but that's where the similarity ends. CC1 can be applied continuously as the note is playing, velocity can only be applied at the beginning of the note (like on a piano).
> 
> Different libraries implement these differently, but in Spitfire CC1 is usually active for long notes, and shorter patches have velocity affect an attack, such as on a spiccato or staccato patch. You will notice that for longs, velocity usually doesn't have any effect. It's the other way around for Spiccato, CC1 has no effect.
> 
> However, both may be programmed for more complex patches, such as Performance Legato, where velocity affects the attack and CC1 affects the rest of the note. It really depends on a patch. With strings, think of velocity as how forcefully you hit the bow on strings in the beginning, and CC1 controls the speed/tone of the bow as it moves the rest of the way.


:emoji_bulb:
Definitely a lightbulb moment here Pando

Thank you


----------



## Pando (Jun 1, 2020)

Best thing is to experiment. Load a patch and play on the keyboard. Use velocity - how hard you hit the key, and move the mod wheel. If you play piano (and sounds like you do), it doesn't take very long to get some beautiful tones out of it. Move the wheel as you hit the key, make an accent with it, and don't rely on the attack programmed into the patch. You'll minimize the monotonous nature of repeated samples, which is a dead giveaway of a mockup.

But it does take practice. For me, programming is secondary, to fix some of the flubs and to tidy things up a bit. But it's your performance that matters, even when composing on a computer. Treat each instrument like it is playing in an orchestra, play them in manually to each track.

I've said before, if you play your string library like synth, it will sound like a synth.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Pando said:


> No, they are not the same thing. They are both used to control dynamics, but that's where the similarity ends. CC1 can be applied continuously as the note is playing, velocity can only be applied at the beginning of the note (like on a piano).
> 
> Different libraries implement these differently, but in Spitfire CC1 is usually active for long notes, and shorter patches have velocity affect an attack, such as on a spiccato or staccato patch. You will notice that for longs, velocity usually doesn't have any effect. It's the other way around for Spiccato, CC1 has no effect.
> 
> However, both may be programmed for more complex patches, such as Performance Legato, where velocity affects the attack and CC1 affects the rest of the note. It really depends on a patch. With strings, think of velocity as how forcefully you hit the bow on strings in the beginning, and CC1 controls the speed/tone of the bow as it moves the rest of the way.


In my CC commands list in Reaper, I do not see a MIDI CC for "Dynamics"


MIDI CC1 is called "Mod Wheel MSB" 
MIDI CC11 is called "Expression MSB"
MIDI CC7 is called "Volume"


Just some examples but there is no MIDI CC for "Dynamics" Is Dynamics just a Spitfire proprietary parameter that is automatically mapped to the Mod Wheel then?


----------



## Pando (Jun 1, 2020)

Mod Wheel MSB is CC1, which controls the dynamics.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Pando said:


> Mod Wheel MSB is CC1, which controls the dynamics.


Yes.

I think I am confused because CC11 and CC7 are assigned to musical paramters (Expression & Volume)

CC1 is assigned to the Mod Wheel. The Mod Wheel is not a musical parameter, it is a piece of plastic.

Whoever came up with this MIDI system was not thinking logically


----------



## Pando (Jun 1, 2020)

This grew out of synthesizer history, no one ever thought 40 years ago that anyone could play full symphony orchestra with these things.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Pando said:


> This grew out of synthesizer history, no one ever thought 40 years ago that anyone could play full symphony orchestra with these things.


I imagine not!

Perhaps it is time for a new parameter assign system that is appropriate for modern times?

Technology is good when it works intuitively.


----------



## Pando (Jun 1, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> I imagine not!
> 
> Perhaps it is time for a new MIDI system that is appropriate for modern times?



MIDI 2.0 was just released, but it will take quite a long time to get that standardized.

Meanwhile, most keyboards only have Mod Wheel and Pitch Bend. That's what you have to work with, and Spitfire is using the Mod Wheel to control the dynamics. It's just how it is, and I'm glad they did that as it's most compatible with all keyboards.

Expression (CC11) is just volume control, which is confusing, yes, but remember that most keyboards don't have an Expression wheel.

And CC7 is, well, also a volume control, although this is usually implemented as the volume control of the entire instrument, whether it's virtual or physical.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Pando said:


> Move the wheel as you hit the key, make an accent with it, and don't rely on the attack programmed into the patch. You'll minimize the monotonous nature of repeated samples, which is a dead giveaway of a mockup.
> 
> I've said before, if you play your string library like synth, it will sound like a synth.



Great advice here Pando!

Thank you for the warning. I really appreciate the important directions you gave here.


----------



## Pando (Jun 1, 2020)

Another tip, grab some full orchestral scores of well-known classical or movie score pieces and try to recreate them. You can compare your playing/programming to how it should sound like, and you will also start building and can calibrate your own template with it. It's highly recommended when you're starting.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Pando said:


> MIDI 2.0 was just released, but it will take quite a long time to get that standardized.
> 
> Meanwhile, most keyboards only have Mod Wheel and Pitch Bend. That's what you have to work with, and Spitfire is using the Mod Wheel to control the dynamics. It's just how it is, and I'm glad they did that as it's most compatible with all keyboards.
> 
> ...


Yes

As I understand it...

CC1 is like input volume. How hard or soft the musician plays their instrument.

CC7 is like output volume of Kontakt and has no affect on which dynamic layer is being triggered.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 1, 2020)

Pando said:


> Another tip, grab some full orchestral scores of well-known classical or movie score pieces and try to recreate them. You can compare your playing/programming to how it should sound like, and you will also start building and can calibrate your own template with it. It's highly recommended when you're starting.


Yes. This is a good idea. Someone else recommended this to me as well.

Maybe something from Eric Serra

He is my favorite film composer. I love his soundtrack for the film LEON. Classic French Film and one of my parents' favorite. 


Now I just have to figure out what the difference is between "Dynamics" and "Expression" and how to approach each one differently. Right now, the difference between them is out of focus for me.


----------



## Pando (Jun 1, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Now I just have to figure out what the difference is between "Dynamics" and "Expression" and how to approach each one differently. Right now, the difference between them is out of focus for me.



Yep, it's confusing if you think "Expression" as a musical term. But with Spitfire it's really only a volume knob, that's all. Just like CC7. I would use that sparingly, only when needed. It can give you dynamic changes, but the tone of the instrument does not change (as it does in a real instrument).

"Dynamics" is the actual timbre changes (volume AND tone) in an instrument as you play p-f. That's what the Mod Wheel does (CC1). That's what controls the actual recorded layers as they are played back (and velocity on some patches).


----------



## jaketanner (Jun 1, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Yes
> 
> As I understand it...
> 
> ...


This is correct (kinda). more on that in a minute.

Also understand that velocity CAN mean dynamics for some library developers....one that comes to mind is VSL. In VSL language, they do not use the term dynamic, but velocity layers and this is for longs also. But universally, when you play a short articulation, the "velocity" at which you play each note triggers a different DYNAMIC that it was played at.

This is certainly confusing for beginners to grasp...however, dynamics and velocity mean different things for different instruments. Take the piano for instance: (my main instrument)...it's played with velocity, which means how fast or slow you depress a note creates a different timber from the strings, not to be confused with speed...how fast or slow I play that velocity. The act of playing in multiple velocities is the dynamics...as in a dynamic performance. It's pretty impossible to get a FF on a piano without depressing the note quickly, hence why it's a percussive instrument...you are "striking" the keys.

Strings instrument work a bit differently, because they are played in a variety of ways: plucked, bowed, struck (with the bow)...etc, and with a variety of velocities/intensities, so the word "dynamics" seems to fit this better than "velocity"...with me so far? So when a developer samples a violin, they usually do it with 3-5 (on average) velocity intensities: pp-p-mf-f-ff...more or less. However, there are many levels of pp-ff and THAT is what the "dynamic crossfading" is trying to achieve. So mod wheel all the way down=soft, midway=mf, full=ff...the transition between these dynamics is faked, but in reality, the player is creating the crossfading through even more velocities. At each dynamic level there is a tone difference as you mentioned, but the crossfading between these levels does NOT change in the VI world...but in real life does. Hope that makes sense.

Expression (CC11), is merely volume. CC7 is also volume. One is used for fine tuning within a performance (CC11), the other is used as an overall level adjustment (CC7)...like a fader on a mixer, but in MIDI. CC11, is used in conjunction with CC1 to help fill in the shortcomings of the library's dynamics, and to enhance what dynamics alone can't do...think crescendo/decrescendo unless actually recorded as an articulation.

Now, why CC numbers correspond to certain commands...simply to help standardize MIDI. MIDI protocol that all manufacturers and developers should follow for consistency. So your "sustain" pedal (damper), on a MIDI controller is CC64...this is universal, so there is no guess work..same with 11, 7, 1...etc. the DIFFERENCE in some CC#s, is that some correspond to hardware such as CC1...which is "modulation". So that is why the mod wheel, short for modulation wheel, is always programmed for CC1 as default. This can be changed of course, but as a universal standard, that's what it is. Then there are floaters...like CC2, which is technically a breathe controller, but most like to use this as vibrato control...except Spitfire. I think they use CC22? but anyway...LOL

Here is a list that might help: https://nickfever.com/Music/midi-cc-list








Continuous controller


(Often abbreviated CC, while the correct term is "Control Change") A category of MIDI messages which are used to convey performance or patch data for parameters other than those which have their own dedicated message types (note on, note off, aftertouch, polyphonic aftertouch, pitch bend, and...




electronicmusic.fandom.com





So to further complicate things, you can use a dedicated MIDI controller such as a Korg Nano Kontrol...has sliders and buttons that are all fully programmable to be whatever CC# you wish. You can program the buttons to change mic mixes, turn them on/off, or switch articulations...sliders can be used for vibrato, expression..etc. and you can even assign the sliders to be the volume amount of the different mic mixes. How you set this up is a personal preference.

Hope this helps a bit, and sorry if you knew most of this already.


----------



## Ray Toler (Jun 1, 2020)

Ásta, you may find this video helpful:


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 2, 2020)

Pando said:


> Yep, it's confusing if you think "Expression" as a musical term. But with Spitfire it's really only a volume knob, that's all. Just like CC7. I would use that sparingly, only when needed. It can give you dynamic changes, but the tone of the instrument does not change (as it does in a real instrument).
> 
> "Dynamics" is the actual timbre changes (volume AND tone) in an instrument as you play p-f. That's what the Mod Wheel does (CC1). That's what controls the actual recorded layers as they are played back (and velocity on some patches).


Yes. I will start with just the Dynamics and master automating that first. Thank you for your help Pando.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 2, 2020)

jaketanner said:


> This is correct (kinda). more on that in a minute.
> 
> Also understand that velocity CAN mean dynamics for some library developers....one that comes to mind is VSL. In VSL language, they do not use the term dynamic, but velocity layers and this is for longs also. But universally, when you play a short articulation, the "velocity" at which you play each note triggers a different DYNAMIC that it was played at.
> 
> ...


Hi Jake,

Thank you for your very thorough lesson here. 

In summary I take the following from what you said:

Different instruments, even different string articulations will have either straight velocity or dynamics applied to them. Pizzicato would have velocity assigned to it, determining which level of sample plays back. Flautando will have dynamics assigned to it, while a note sustains, allow you to move through different dynamic sample layers. 

Velocity is determined by how hard one hits the keys on the keyboard controller. Dynamics is determined by the position of the mod wheel on a keyboard controller, often times assinged to CC1 by default.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 2, 2020)

Ray Toler said:


> Ásta, you may find this video helpful:



Hi Ray,

This is very helpful and very useful for me right now! Mr. Spitfire is good at explaining these things 

I appreciate you sharing this with me. It's a great resource and VI-Control would do well to put this video into a special tutorial section.

I definitely prefer the sound of the Dynamics control over the Expression control if I could only use one. He does a great job of explaining how to work the controls to create a more realistic impression of phrasing and how the dynamics change according do where a players bow is at the start and end of a musical phrase. 

Thank you!


----------



## LamaRose (Jun 2, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Yes. I will start with just the Dynamics and master automating that first. Thank you for your help Pando.



Has anyone mentioned, or are you aware of breath controllers with head movements? I keep saying, "one of these days..." as I have not tried one, but there are many who swear by this form of control and for good reason.

A popular model: https://www.tecontrol.se/products/usb-midi-breath-bite-controller-2


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (Jun 2, 2020)

LamaRose said:


> Has anyone mentioned, or are you aware of breath controllers with head movements? I keep saying, "one of these days..." as I have not tried one, but there are many who swear by this form of control and for good reason.
> 
> A popular model: https://www.tecontrol.se/products/usb-midi-breath-bite-controller-2


I am picturing myself rocking back and forth in my chair and breathing really heavy. I wonder if that would double as my cardio workout for the day too?


----------



## A minor (Jun 2, 2020)

Really nice thread. Have enjoyed reading it all.

May I add that there is another way (device) possible to control these variables (CC) and that is with an iPad, iPhone or like device using TouchOSC. My experience with it is only using a Mac, but it’s also available for Android devices. The app for iOS is only a few dollars and the desktop software is free. But with it you can create your own combination of sliders for each parameter and what I find most intriguing is creating/using a X-Y slider. An X-Y slider controls two parameters at the same time. You can also set up keyswitchs and more. You can develop a whole screen containing sliders, buttons etc customized for just one program; say Spitfire‘s Chamber Strings and then create another one for just the Emotional Violin, or whatever. I’m not sure there is a limit of how many screen you can have. I saw one mock up that had about six screens). Of course it’s possible that one screen could be generic enough to serve both but you can do what you want (have it your own way).

Here is a link: https://hexler.net/products/touchosc

I am not affiliated with them in any way. I read about them some years ago but only in the last several months have given it a try.

Hope this helps.

I tried somebodies program to create sliders on a Mac magic track pad but I like TouchOSC better. (And it’s cheaper, as long as you already have an iPad or the like. But probably everybody has a smartphone nowadays and that would have enough room for several sliders.)


----------



## jaketanner (Jun 2, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Hi Jake,
> 
> Thank you for your very thorough lesson here.
> 
> ...


Yes...exactly. Now to further complicate things, you can in some libraries, change the dynamics to BE velocity driven in the case of longs. I like having several options because let's say I know that I am going to use mostly f dynamic...I can set this to velocity driven, and use my other hand to control another CC, or use both hands and play a legato ensemble...etc. Many variations, and the more you get into it, the more you can decide which is best for you. here is one...for shorts, where velocity is triggering the dynamic sample, you can temporarily assign the mod wheel to CC11, and control the expression at the same time....mix it as you go.


----------

