Audiobro Modern Scoring Brass (MSB)

Discussion in 'SAMPLE Talk' started by zolhof, Nov 20, 2018.

  1. Robert_G

    Robert_G It really is just an expensive hobby for me

    287
    187
    Feb 6, 2019
    Not entirely true as pretty much anyone with CSB has CSS so they bought it at 279 making MSB almost double
     
  2. jamwerks

    jamwerks Senior Member

    4,121
    943
    Mar 21, 2010
    Thanks for putting up that example. Not sure he his was asking because he couldn't tell the two apart.

    Brass instruments sound very interesting when doubled. Mahler and others used 8 horns mainly for 4 part writing with 2 per part. We all know and love the sound of 2 or 3 unison trumpets. You still hear the 3 individuals. At 5 or more you can't really distinguish the individuals, and for brass that's not always pleasing, although big horn ensembles sound interesting.

    Even way down low doubled brass sounds interesting. Tuba+Contrabassoon was common in the Romantic period, but Stavinsky had double tubas at times in "The Rite of Spring".

    Cimbassi are really tenor instruments, like the standard tenor trombone. The Bass trombone is really a tenor with a bigger bell, thus the low pedal tones sound better. Pedal tones on a tenor don't sound very interesting imo.

    The real bass instrument of the trombone family is the Contrebass Trombone, having about the range of the Tuba. Even the very low tuba notes don't translate that well, but work starting around about the E. And sound quite interesting doubled by not its same timbre, but a Contrabassoon, or a Ctrb Bone. And notes that low (on any instrument) need the octave above to really "bloom" thus the Tuba + Ctrb Bone + Euphonium 8va patch.

    Anyway, MSB seems to be the best going so far. It'll be interesting to see what Junkie & OT come up with!
     
    jbuhler likes this.
  3. stfciu

    stfciu Active Member

    170
    115
    Aug 13, 2017
    My feeling the MSB lacks some upper dynamics (bite) compared to CSB in the example. Was that on purpose?

    Anyway the new videos make this library much more promising.
     
  4. Duncan Krummel

    Duncan Krummel New Member

    36
    171
    Aug 23, 2018
    Allston, MA
    I think this at least partly has to do with an increased dynamic range on MSB, and the addition of the sizzle control, which really adds to the bite. I could probably match that bite to CSB a bit more by having the sizzle control linked to the dynamics, but I just set it per instrument in this example. As a whole, though, CSB is generally louder and roomier than MSB by default.
     
    stfciu likes this.
  5. axb312

    axb312 Senior Member

    835
    371
    Jun 26, 2016
    CSB Sounds awesome here. MSB a little woodwindy? Also low mids seem to be getting in the way at times...
     
  6. jneebz

    jneebz Senior Member

    897
    442
    Sep 28, 2013
    Portland OR, USA
    Just to clarify...you used the same MIDI and CC data in these examples?
     
  7. Duncan Krummel

    Duncan Krummel New Member

    36
    171
    Aug 23, 2018
    Allston, MA
    Moved the CC data around for MSB, in some cases redrew it entirely. Used the sforzando crescendos for MSB, so the midi data here was completely overwritten to allow that. I think one aspect that could help here is working more directly with the attack settings and depth control presets. I wish there were a good description of each preset’s sound, but to my knowledge there isn’t any out there.

    I should also add the reason I started with CSB is that I’m finding MSB a little more difficult to work with initially. No doubt this is largely in part due to the learning curve and that I’m coming from a workflow built around the Cinematic Studio Series, but I think the level of control required here to get a great result isn’t as playable as CSB. Setting up TouchOSC profiles or using a program similar might be the ultimate answer to this.
     
    NoamL likes this.
  8. jneebz

    jneebz Senior Member

    897
    442
    Sep 28, 2013
    Portland OR, USA
    OK thanks. Yeah I can see by the audio waveform alone that MSB didn't achieve the same dynamic level, and for some reason has that phase-y sound I've heard in earlier user demos. The general placement of the instruments is whacky in the MSB demo. In my studio, the stereo field is heavy to the left...or maybe everything is reversed. Any idea why that is happening?
     
  9. Duncan Krummel

    Duncan Krummel New Member

    36
    171
    Aug 23, 2018
    Allston, MA
    Can’t offer an extremely scientific explanation, but I find the depth control to pan more aggressively than I’d expect. Or, perhaps it’s that the width of each instrument is narrower than I’d have expected so panning places the instruments more aggressively across a stereo space. Another reason I’m hoping to experiment with VSS2 next chance I get. Using that may offer a more intuitive approach to creating an in-situ arrangement, especially since that offers both a convenient space to see all instruments at once, and offers template overlays of standard orchestral arrangements.
     
    jneebz likes this.
  10. Eptesicus

    Eptesicus Senior Member

    518
    366
    Jan 8, 2017
    UK
    True, even so, the content is a HUGE amount greater in MSB.
     
  11. NoamL

    NoamL Winter <3

    2,437
    4,986
    Jul 6, 2015
    Los Angeles
    Keeping in mind that both could use some more MIDI processing, my immediate thought is that MSB succeeds better than CSB at sounding like an ensemble of 8-11 different musicians but it lacks dynamics in comparison to CSB and the trumpet shorts really don't feel as musical.

    I'm increasingly of divided mind about MSB, there are demos that sound much better than CSB at particular writing tasks or particular instruments, and then there are other things it seems to do worse.

    BTW Nathan makes a good point about MSB being more dry and flexible out of the box but you can remix ANY library, even one that already sounds mastered.
     
    jbuhler and chillbot like this.
  12. NoamL

    NoamL Winter <3

    2,437
    4,986
    Jul 6, 2015
    Los Angeles
    I'm gonna repost my CSB demo one more time ;) just want to see if anyone with MSB wants to take a crack at it??



    As someone pointed out earlier, it's not a super realistic orchestration as the trumpets could not play for that long. But the point is to demo the dynamic crossfades in long and short articulations and the total dynamic range.

    MIDI attached below.
     

    Attached Files:

  13. Mucusman

    Mucusman Enthusiastic hobbyist

    180
    209
    Feb 28, 2016
    Colorado
    On behalf of everyone who, like me, is still on the fence, thank you to all who are posting examples and answering questions. They are very helpful.

    It'll either be CSB or MSB for me, but I simply can't afford both. Audiobro got me to wait until now to hold off on purchasing CSB with their pre-emptive announcement. I'm seeing and hearing pros and cons for each library. I can't ignore that CSB appears to be more straightforward and easier to use, and since time is valuable, this is a huge plus. Spending lots of time getting seriously "under the hood" with MSB is probably something I just wouldn't do, knowing me.

    I'm still paying close attention to everyone's contributions and questions. Thanks for helping being part of the answer for what will best work for me.
     
    nawzadhaji and Geoff Grace like this.
  14. jbuhler

    jbuhler Senior Member

    1,634
    2,308
    Jun 19, 2016
    US
    My concern with MSB is not the sound or even the learning curve, but the practicalities of using it once you've learned it. Once you know the ins and outs, can you work with it as quickly as another library or do you constantly have to fiddle with lots of parameters to get a good performance. I was reassured to some extent by the two closer look videos, but some comments from users suggest that the library might require more regular intervention. Those of you who have it, what's your sense?
     
    pderbidge and whiskers like this.
  15. Geoff Grace

    Geoff Grace Senior Member

    948
    1,108
    Apr 15, 2009
    I know that a number of us are in that boat, so I can understand the desire to compare the two libraries. That said, it seems to me that the more direct competitor for Modern Scoring Brass is the venerable Hollywood Brass. For example, how many times have we read something similar from Hollywood Orchestra library users to Nathan's comments below?

    So for me, personally, I'm just as interested in MSB comparisons with HB as I am in reading the CSB vs MSB ones.

    Thanks again for everyone's input.

    Best,

    Geoff
     
    AllanH and jbuhler like this.
  16. Duncan Krummel

    Duncan Krummel New Member

    36
    171
    Aug 23, 2018
    Allston, MA
    Once more with VSS2 and a bit of Spaces II So. Cal Brass. I think I like the placing of instruments here better than the depth control, at least right now.



    Ask and ye shall receive!


     
    Go To 11, AllanH, jbuhler and 6 others like this.
  17. Personally, it is :
    set it once, then it is just as fast to get going with it than with any other comparable libraries.
     
    jbuhler and Nathan Furst like this.
  18. Robert_G

    Robert_G It really is just an expensive hobby for me

    287
    187
    Feb 6, 2019
    HW brass sounds really nice but like pretty much all EW libraries....its the lack of KS patches or master patches that turn me off.

    MSB and CSB are both more attractive for these reasons.

    Heck....even NI symphony series does a better job than EW when it comes to master patches
     
    Geoff Grace likes this.
  19. I also own HB:
    There is no way the two compare or are in the same league.
    HB doesn't have the line shaping abilities or flexibility of MSB
    MSB is a real next generation.
    HB was great when it came out and still offer some very nice instruments.....
     
  20. axb312

    axb312 Senior Member

    835
    371
    Jun 26, 2016
    MSB #2 VSS2/Spaces II - Panning seems to have been reversed at spots there.
     
    jneebz likes this.

Share This Page