What's new

Audiobro Modern Scoring Brass (MSB)

jamwerks

Senior Member
The fact that you have to ask is a good sign.
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!
 

stfciu

Active Member
Here's another CSB comparison, but also combined. A little less successful trying to work with MSB here, I think. I really wish there were a way to change the depth control presets for all instances at once, but that may be beyond what Kontakt can handle. It may also be interesting to run a demo using only VSS2, similarly to MIR. May be an easier, if not more limited, way of achieving a good seating/depth.




Edit: Should have clarified this point, no processing other than level matching with Ozone's Maximizer (unless you count MSB's depth control as processing).
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.
 

Duncan Krummel

New Member
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.
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.
 

axb312

Senior Member
Here's another CSB comparison, but also combined. A little less successful trying to work with MSB here, I think. I really wish there were a way to change the depth control presets for all instances at once, but that may be beyond what Kontakt can handle. It may also be interesting to run a demo using only VSS2, similarly to MIR. May be an easier, if not more limited, way of achieving a good seating/depth.




Edit: Should have clarified this point, no processing other than level matching with Ozone's Maximizer (unless you count MSB's depth control as processing).
CSB Sounds awesome here. MSB a little woodwindy? Also low mids seem to be getting in the way at times...
 

jneebz

Senior Member
Here's another CSB comparison, but also combined. A little less successful trying to work with MSB here, I think. I really wish there were a way to change the depth control presets for all instances at once, but that may be beyond what Kontakt can handle. It may also be interesting to run a demo using only VSS2, similarly to MIR. May be an easier, if not more limited, way of achieving a good seating/depth.




Edit: Should have clarified this point, no processing other than level matching with Ozone's Maximizer (unless you count MSB's depth control as processing).
Just to clarify...you used the same MIDI and CC data in these examples?
 

Duncan Krummel

New Member
Just to clarify...you used the same MIDI and CC data in these examples?
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.
 

jneebz

Senior Member
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.
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?
 

Duncan Krummel

New Member
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?
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.
 

NoamL

Winter <3
Here's another CSB comparison, but also combined. A little less successful trying to work with MSB here, I think. I really wish there were a way to change the depth control presets for all instances at once, but that may be beyond what Kontakt can handle. It may also be interesting to run a demo using only VSS2, similarly to MIR. May be an easier, if not more limited, way of achieving a good seating/depth.




Edit: Should have clarified this point, no processing other than level matching with Ozone's Maximizer (unless you count MSB's depth control as processing).
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.
 

NoamL

Winter <3
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.
 

Attachments

Mucusman

Enthusiastic hobbyist
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.
 

jbuhler

Senior Member
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?
 

Geoff Grace

Senior Member
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 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?

IMO, MSB will require some time and setup to use it to it's potential - It's so flexible that I spent more set-up time implementing it than any other commercial library I've used yet.

(snip)

But once you have it down, it's as fast to work with as any other library, but (IMO) much less frustrating to get it to sound really solid.
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
 

Patrick de Caumette

Senior Member
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?
Personally, it is :
set it once, then it is just as fast to get going with it than with any other comparable libraries.
 

Robert_G

It really is just an expensive hobby for me
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
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
 

Patrick de Caumette

Senior Member
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
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.....
 
Top Bottom