If you're still on the fence about the library, I can't honestly say I'd recommend it unless you already have the other major players and either just want more sounds in your toolkit OR want a bunch of pretty usable and good solo instruments.
If you love to dig in and get really specific with your MIDI library, this one has a lot of buttons and features to play with.
If you are just looking for a bunch of new patches to layer or use as solo instruments - this library might be a good choice. With so many solo instruments to pick from, if you have the money to spend, it's probably worth picking up.
If you work on short deadlines - this is not the library for you. It takes so much time to get something good out of it that if you need to work quickly it simply isn't feasible with this library, and this is with quite a bit of practice now.
If you are on a budget rig - this is not the library for you. It's a resource hog, and when I say that I really mean it. It's quite slow and laggy for me on an I5 6600k overclocked to 4.0 GHz. Laggy to the point that moving a knob or fader in the MSB interface often seizes up kontakt for a couple seconds before figuring out what I did. Maybe this is just an issue for me, but it seems to not get much better despite reading through their performance tips and going to the forums. Saving a project with any MSB instruments open also takes several times longer than a large template with any of the other libraries I've used. It's not a dealbreaker for me but certainly adds to the general frustration of the library. Your mileage may vary, as always with performance of programs.
Since I bought it-pretty much at release-and have done a bunch of experimenting and working with it, I don't think any aspects of it stand out as better than any other major libraries to me (the legato is not as good as the CS stuff, it doesn't sound as good or realistic as BB or Cinebrass tone-wise, the shorts are very limited in dynamic range and overall the attacks feel very choppy and boxed-in dynamically).
A lot of people will tell you "it's dry, you just need to really work on it", but in my experience, it's simultaneously got common issues of a dry library, being that it needs some good reverb and general signal processing to get something good out it, but also feels resistant to any of that sort of processing and not very flexible on mixing. It's as if they recorded the instruments in a very live room and then tried to process it down until it was dry, causing reverb not to play so nicely but still removing the more natural sound of a room. The three different mic positions don't seem particularly useful, you won't get much better than the stock mix and changing the mix doesn't seem to have much impact on the end result as it does with other libraries' mixes. The library gets really muddy out-of-the-box, and some samples are strangely drier-sounding than others? That one's a real mystery to me, but it almost sounds like the shorts were recorded in a different space than the sustains or something. This causes a very disjointed feeling when shorts and sustains are next to eachother. This is an issue with all libraries I think, but this one seems to have it worse.
Generally, the library doesn't blend well with itself, as it gets really synthy sounding if you have more than a few instruments playing at the same time. The horns have a very artificial sheen to them, the trombones don't seem to sound all that much like trombones, the tubas and bass trombones are pretty good on their own but probably not worth the soon to be $800 price tag, the cimbassi are not much to write home about in comparison to other players but are pretty good as well, the euphoniums and trumpets I think are quite good especially as solo instruments. That's where this library really shines-is as a collection of different solo players to be layered on top of other ensembles or used alone.