What's new

Audiobro Modern Scoring Brass (MSB)

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.
 
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...
 
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?
 
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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
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.
 
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

  • Little Fanfare MIDI.mid.zip
    3.4 KB · Views: 10
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.
 
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?
 
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
 
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.

So for me, personally, I'm just as interested in MSB comparisons with HB as I am in reading the CSB vs MSB ones.
Ask and ye shall receive!


Edit: Changed dead SoundCloud links to Dropbox.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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
 
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.....
 
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??


Messed with it a bit, so not a simple drop and bounce. Still coming to terms with the dynamic scaling of MSB. CSB growls a bit more a bit sooner, even with the dynamics curve of MSB set more aggressively.

MSB #2 VSS2/Spaces II - Panning seems to have been reversed at spots there.
Not quite sure I'm hearing it, are there specific areas it sounds reverse panned?

Edit: Foiled by the acronyms; you're referring to the first MSB Diddy #2 example I posted? In which case, yes, the panning was changed from a semi-circle seating arrangement to a standard orchestral in-situ position. In hindsight I should have done this with the first example too, but I didn't.

Edit 2: Changed dead SoundCloud links to Dropbox.
 
Last edited:
Oh watch out that those horn and trombone octaves are legato! The part that goes Bb3 Ab Bb2 F Bb2 Eb. Sounds like the notes are overlapping in yours.
 
Oh watch out that those horn and trombone octaves are legato! The part that goes Bb3 Ab Bb2 F Bb2 Eb. Sounds like the notes are overlapping in yours.

Ah, you’re right! I forget to fix that for the auto-divisi every time. I am so used to monophonic legato behavior.

Edit: replaced the file with a correct legato version in the above post.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom