Chris Hein Woodwinds disappointment

[Jerry Growl]

And full circle lol

The problem with mono is that it's only a slice of the 'pizza'. When you' re recording e.g. a Quatro Staggioni like a piano you're always at loss, missing out on interesting bits (sorry for the silly comparison)

But... Mono is easy to mix for old-fashioned recording and panning reasons. Wherever you place something mono in the mix or wherever the listener's ears are about in his/her room, the mono signal always comes out predictably more or less the same. While stereo sources have (interesting) phase issues, which makes them troublesome to shape and place.

Now, to get a mono source 'sit' in the mix you'll need to dress the mono signal up again. It will need some serious stage positioning , an experienced hand in EQ, ER and compression and finally enough adequate (probably multiple layers of) reverb.... in order to reconstruct something that will probably resemble more of a calzone than the original pizza...

 

[Jimmy Hellfire]

Sounds like the Hein.

As an undaunted stirrer of dry sampled witches' brew, I've been eyeing the concoctions of Chris Heinous for a while now.

 

[Parsifal666]

As an undaunted stirrer of dry sampled witches' brew, I've been eyeing the concoctions of Chris Heinous for a while now.

I got tired of being the Hein flag-waver, personally. I use them a lot, but now I use even more another (of the multitudinous) libraries that @re-peat conscientiously loathes: Studio WWs Professional. It could just be my honeymoon with a new library, though. Yet another dry library, to boot.

It seems to me the library that gets the most raves (and is great out of the box) is Berlin Woodwinds, and it's my next WW purchase (mostly for the ensembles).

We get negative topics regularly from newcomers not liking their newly bought dry libraries because of the modicum of work it takes to get the full benefits from the library. Most of these newbies (not pointing out the current poster in particular at all) barely even give their libraries a chance.

As far as mono samples...they can be the most malleable. But I personally recommend beginners to simply grab a wet library, because the automatic sound can be very inspiring to newbie composers and get them started writing more ...something I doubt many members do enough of around here (too many are inordinately concerned with little peccadilloes in their libraries and pick, pick, pick. Mostly so they can continue to shop, shop, shop. All pf which proves my theory.)

Before selling anything and taking a significant loss (on what might amount to an already abused credit card) start reading the manual and spending more time with whatever library you don't like.

When it comes to dry libs, if you don't at least learn how to use reverb to help with your sound then you deserve to lose money selling it.

Again, not pinpointing any specific library or member. It's just the truth...the ole AA saw works here:

(Tommy Lee Jones voice): "it works if you work it, people."

 

[Shredoverdrive]

I'm no bigwig so my opinion's worth what it's worth but I use both VSL and Chris Hein's WW and I see no point in buying anything else. Love the dry samples, love my sketchy reverb home-cooking.

 

[ProfoundSilence]

I honestly don’t know any libraries that put out woodwind libraries with any real enthusiasm.

idk VSL woodwinds were pretty legendary for their time, and same with BWW. That was like THE library for a long time(and in my opinion still is)

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.8)]

The expressive versatility of AM is what often impressed me

Again, as far as I know - this isn't even the OP's complaint - and it very much sounds like whatever realism is achieved by the scripting of that library is completely undermined by physically not sounding like the instruments. So far I haven't seen the OP ask for the playability of AM recorded on MGM sony - the OP seems reasonable about this, and I haven't actually seen him complain about playability(quote him for me if you see where he says this)[/COLOR]​

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.8)]

Of course, and this is where it’s a no win situation. I don’t know any library that satisfies OP’s conditions of dry samples in stereo that satisfy the need for a spacial presence without consequentially sounding wet.

[/COLOR]​

I dont think the goal is to sound like it's recorded in an anechoic chamber - I'm 90% sure even a dryness of what I'm about to link is sufficient for most people. Even real soloists recorded probably around going to make it to the final mix without hitting some form of reverb. These two instruments are unquestionably oboe and bassoon - and I'm barely using any close mic(mainly just the ORTF) from berlin woodwinds.

And in this case, instead of reverb I simply used a mic with some room in it.

and in a previous thread I had shared an example of mostly close mics from SSW with a little tree blended in(instead of reverb)

This is honestly the best way to do it, because no reverb is going to capture how these instruments actually behave in a room.

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/dryishrose-mp3.20246/][/AUDIOPLUS]

and this is one of those times when you really regret not using a metronome, try to add a 3rd instrument to cover it up, and then end up making it worse - but here it is.

 

[pderbidge]

Now, to get a mono source 'sit' in the mix you'll need to dress the mono signal up again. It will need some serious stage positioning , an experienced hand in EQ, ER and compression and finally enough adequate (probably multiple layers of) reverb.... in order to reconstruct something that will probably resemble more of a calzone than the original pizza...

It might still be a pizza, perhaps a new and improved version of the Pizza depending on your skills. I would argue that these skills are necessary to today's serious composers unless you have unlimited access to your own personal mix engineer and even if you do, these skills will still improve ones compositions. These skills are less necessary if you are still composing on paper with access to live players but for anyone doing music on a computer then eq, reverb, compression, phase alignment etc.. these all become the basic building blocks to gluing your instruments together.

 

[pderbidge]

This is honestly the best way to do it, because no reverb is going to capture how these instruments actually behave in a room.

I agree to a point, however the plugins today are getting better and better. There was, and still are, many mix engineers who swear by outboard gear as irreplaceable when yet there are newcomers everyday who do it all "in the box" and no one seems to notice.

I do agree with you that in the recording stage there is a balance between getting it "too dry" and capturing the ambience of the room so that natural sound (which is really the instrument plus the room) we are used to hearing is still there in the tone of the instrument. Nevertheless from what I hear from Chris Hein and Audiobro seems to have that balance, IMHO. Others will feel differently and that's ok. It's all personal preference really. In the end I've heard great music made with both dry and wet samples.

 

[dasbin]

Thanks everyone for chiming in.

Some of the posts here caused me to want to dig a little deeper and see if there's anything I can do to improve my experience with CHW a little more, seeing as there seems to be no other real options for what I'm looking for save VSL, which I agree are a bit thin. Berlin WW is just too wet for my taste and usage.

One thing I learned from playing around is that the Body convolutions work a lot better when mixed in much lower than the stock settings. I've been choosing longer IR's (typically the 0.6-1.1s ones) but turning them down to -12 or so. That sounds more like being recorded in a real dry room without sounding too artificial, and the mono-ness starts to bug me less as well.

The one thing I can't seem to fix at all -- and the one thing that no one has addressed in this thread so far -- is just all the missing detail in the recorded samples. I don't know what it is but, for example, the Flute 1 instrument seems to have no content at all above 8Khz or so. Yes, there is an "Air" slider, but it doesn't do what I expect air to sound like on a flute... it is much lower in frequency and doesn't sound like detail coming back into the recording. I like to hear a little bit of spit and air and reed (on reeds) across the the instrument and it seems to be very lacking in every single instrument. And EQ is of no help, even with really big boosts in the air band - there is just NOTHING useful up there in most of these recordings. It sounds like either poor mics or poor mic positions were used, or some poor post-processing that just bandpassed the instrument.

I think I can live with it in the context of a larger ensemble, especially in classical music, because the typical listening distances in such cases mean air-absorption makes that kind of sound normal, and it can also help blend into a large ensemble without anything popping out. But for small and dry pieces, or for use in experimental chamber-pop pieces (a big chunk of what I write) it sounds very lacking in detail. Which is unfortunate given the dry solo nature of the library, which seems like it would otherwise be great for that use-case. VSL seems to kick the snot of CH in top-end detail.

 

[MA-Simon]

Personally the mono-ness is why i stopped getting the tarilonte libraries.

They are a fantastic idea and are well produced, love the thematic settings etc.

But I most likely would want to use single instruments and feature them prominently because of their uniqueness. That is just not possible to do satisfactory because they will sound flat compared to all the other backing stuff. So I found I have to either dumb down all other instruments, only use them as background pads ore just for thematic sparkles.

 

[pderbidge]

The one thing I can't seem to fix at all -- and the one thing that no one has addressed in this thread so far -- is just all the missing detail in the recorded samples. I don't know what it is but, for example, the Flute 1 instrument seems to have no content at all above 8Khz or so. Yes, there is an "Air" slider, but it doesn't do what I expect air to sound like on a flute... it is much lower in frequency and doesn't sound like detail coming back into the recording. I like to hear a little bit of spit and air and reed (on reeds) across the the instrument and it seems to be very lacking in every single instrument. And EQ is of no help, even with really big boosts in the air band - there is just NOTHING useful up there in most of these recordings. It sounds like either poor mics or poor mic positions were used, or some poor post-processing that just bandpassed the instrument.

I think I can live with it in the context of a larger ensemble, especially in classical music, because the typical listening distances in such cases mean air-absorption makes that kind of sound normal. But for small and dry pieces, or for use in experimental pop pieces (a big chunk of what I write) it sounds very lacking in detail.

Without being an owner of the library I can only speculate on what you are hearing in regards to "detail" but I think this might be a case where what you are really looking for is a solo instrument. For example, in my Lass 2 string library I have "first chair" patches and while I've gotten good results out of the FC cello as a solo instrument, the violin just doens't work for me, however in the context that it was intended to be (a first chair instrument and not a solo) it works very well. Therefore, I've had to turn to solo focused libraries to get that extra detail and expressiveness that I want out of a solo string instrument.
VSL is still a good choice though (once again another library I don't own yet but on my wish list) because despite it being very dry it's seems to be the one series that people who normally don't like dry libraries give this one a good review on expressiveness and play ability.
Beyond VSL, I think you should be looking at 8dio Claire series, Fluffy Audio, and Embertone, to name a few. You might find those are more of what you want since their focus is solo playing and uber expressiveness.
Unfortunately sample libraries are only so many snapshots of a performance and there are still mountains of snapshots needed to cover all of our musicall wants which is why I believe the future will belong to instrument modeling or a hybrid of some sort.

 

[Ashermusic]

Fully agree with both those points. (I wrote something similar here and, some years ago, did a more lengthy review of this library for TSB in which I arrived at much the same conclusion.) CH has some great ideas about how to get the most out of samples in Kontakt, but unfortunately, there is just not a lot that you can get out of his samples, not even with the cleverest Kontakt-tricks.
(This is also the reason why, in my view, his solo strings never qualified as a serious contender, despite their sophisticated Kontakt-shell: at source trapped in mono and hence that small, boxy sound, no matter what kind of reverb you add to it.)

Anyway, Pars will soon enough bring balance to this thread by telling us all how amazing the CH Woodwinds are.

(VSL's woodwinds aren't mono, by the way.)

_

I was given them to review and since my policy is not to give negative reviews but just to decline to review when I don't like a library as it is so subjective, that is what I did.

 

[chocobitz825]

idk VSL woodwinds were pretty legendary for their time, and same with BWW. That was like THE library for a long time(and in my opinion still is)

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.8)]

Again, as far as I know - this isn't even the OP's complaint - and it very much sounds like whatever realism is achieved by the scripting of that library is completely undermined by physically not sounding like the instruments. So far I haven't seen the OP ask for the playability of AM recorded on MGM sony - the OP seems reasonable about this, and I haven't actually seen him complain about playability(quote him for me if you see where he says this)[/COLOR]​

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.8)][/COLOR]​

I dont think the goal is to sound like it's recorded in an anechoic chamber - I'm 90% sure even a dryness of what I'm about to link is sufficient for most people. Even real soloists recorded probably around going to make it to the final mix without hitting some form of reverb. These two instruments are unquestionably oboe and bassoon - and I'm barely using any close mic(mainly just the ORTF) from berlin woodwinds.

And in this case, instead of reverb I simply used a mic with some room in it.

and in a previous thread I had shared an example of mostly close mics from SSW with a little tree blended in(instead of reverb)

This is honestly the best way to do it, because no reverb is going to capture how these instruments actually behave in a room.

[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/dryishrose-mp3.20246/][/AUDIOPLUS]

and this is one of those times when you really regret not using a metronome, try to add a 3rd instrument to cover it up, and then end up making it worse - but here it is.

I appreciate your thorough rebuttal but I think you misrepresent why I brought up SWAM in the first place. of all the issues brought up, I could not recall another library that has solo flutes that are not too wet by default, or one that was done in stereo, or one that has what the OP later requests

I like to hear a little bit of spit and air and reed (on reeds) across the the instrument and it seems to be very lacking in every single instrument.

]

this was my takeaway for an instrument sounding like the instrument its supposed to be when you strip away the IRs and have to deal with the detail left in the samples. I dont have VSL, so I cant speak to that, but I have OT Berlin woodwinds and expansions and they're super wet. Spitfire woodwind sounds fine, but also still pretty wet. 8Dio Claire, fine, but maybe too wet. with all of them when they're striped down to close mics and no IR, they're either still too wet, or their crossfades sound terrible. None of those libraries address what I also find more important in a woodwind library, and thats performances that dont sound too clean and sterile. So many libraries with woodwinds sound just too pretty. Unoffensive playing that never pushes too hard and tries not to get the players pushing too much air into the sample. The only time I ever find that airyness is in ambience based recordings that want to sound imperfect on purpose.

As a former Flute, Clarinet and Oboe player, whats always caught me about SWAM's woodwinds (and pretty much only them) is that it simulates the air and spit better than any other library I've heard. It's possible to overblow the instrument whenever you want them too, and not just when the sample library can successfully crossfade dynamic layers fast enough. You can do a totally clean sound, or the entire thing with a breathy airy performance. The options needed to for a non-sterile versatile sound in a real solo player is surprisingly there in SWAM. My point wasn't about playability it was about detail. Now it doesnt solve the stereo issue, and fitting it in a room is another issue, but when you break it down to its core, you can get enough "natural" playing sounds to potentially fool the ear better than I've heard from other sampled libraries (again VSL and Heins excluded as I dont own those two).

Maybe not the best balance for OP's needs, but just a consideration for a dry player that can actually sound pretty natural and as dirty or clean as necessary to be more convincing.

 

[re-peat]

but I have OT Berlin woodwinds and expansions and they're super wet.

That's not true at all, Chocobitz. The original Core library may be nowhere near as dry as VSL, but it's far — very far — from 'super wet' and if you give the Close mic prominence over the others, the results are what I would call medium dry at most. And MUCHO MUCHO MUCHO drier still are the Expansions which were recorded in the Teldex Solo Booth. In order to hear that, you have to turn down the 'Wet' knob of course (which adds a Teldex IR-based reverberation to the instrument).

Here's https://users.telenet.be/re-peat/BerlinFlutes.mp3 (a little example) of, first, the ExpB Flute (with the 'Wet' knob all the way down) followed by the Flute from the Core library (mostly Close Mic, with a tiny bit of Room).

I also really don't understand your enthusiasm for the SWAM Flute, I must say, especially with you being a former flute player and all. Doesn't sound anywhere close to a flute, if you ask me. Really quite useless for conventional flute-simulating purposes. The attack is all wrong, the mid and low registers are virtually unrecognizable as 'flute' — the lower you go, the closer it sounds to something Godley & Creme might have invented —, the high register isn't much better, and the dynamics are totally unconvincing as well. And its weird vibrato will surely kill off the last trace of whatever believability you might have achieved with it.

_

 

[chocobitz825]

That's not true at all, Chocobitz. The original Core library may be nowhere near as dry as VSL, but it's far — very far — from 'super wet' and if you give the Close mic prominence over the others, the results are what I would call medium dry at most. And MUCHO MUCHO MUCHO drier still are the Expansions which were recorded in the Teldex Solo Booth. In order to hear that, you have to turn down the 'Wet' knob of course (which adds a Teldex IR-based reverberation to the instrument).

Here's https://users.telenet.be/re-peat/BerlinFlutes.mp3 (a little example) of, first, the ExpB Flute (with the 'Wet' knob all the way down) followed by the Flute from the Core library (mostly Close Mic, with a tiny bit of Room).

I also really don't understand your enthusiasm for the SWAM Flute, I must say, especially with you being a former flute player and all. Doesn't sound anywhere close to a flute, if you ask me. Really quite useless for conventional flute-simulating purposes. The attack is all wrong, the mid and low registers are virtually unrecognizable as 'flute' — the lower you go, the closer it sounds to something Godley & Creme might have invented —, the high register isn't much better, and the dynamics are totally unconvincing as well. And its weird vibrato will surely kill off the last trace of whatever believability you might have achieved with it.

_

This is why there are so many libraries, no doubt. We all use our ears and pick out different things that speak to us. I don't know what is too dry or too wet for the OP, and to me personally, I generally like Berlin's sound for most things. However, when you strip them down, particularly the solos, the transitions, and the releases are just not right to my ear. If you cant mask them a bit with reverb, they stand out as off, and also a bit harsh.

I don't claim that SWAM is perfection, and oddly enough their default settings are always the worst, but after picking the right combination of instrument tone type, style, and then automating the other parameters, it can be very good and convincing. It will never sound that way when playing it real-time because you have to do a lot of CC work after to get the tiny details and changes to make it sound right, but having that ability works to its favor I think. I'd also recommend using its vibrato sparingly. Better if you have a breath controller. That's the better way to get a Woodwinds vibrato is to use your breath to simulate the same in and out breath players use.

Again, not great for everyone, maybe not even precisely what the OP wanted, but for solo woodwinds, I still have yet to find more versatile solos. Perhaps they exist in CH or VSL, but to each their own I guess.

 

[dasbin]

Here's https://users.telenet.be/re-peat/BerlinFlutes.mp3 (a little example) of, first, the ExpB Flute (with the 'Wet' knob all the way down) followed by the Flute from the Core library (mostly Close Mic, with a tiny bit of Room).

That Berlin WW ExpB sounds *exactly* how I want a dry flute to sound. I didn't realize the expansions we so dry! Very well-recorded. There's still a tiny amount of early reflections in there to breathe, as opposed to the Chris Hein samples which sound like they are literally in an anechoic chamber (and poorly recorded with far less detail).

Now I have some digging around to do to see just how much money I need to drop on a bunch of Expansions...
I guess the good news is you don't need the main library.

Too bad the Strings and Brass Expansions weren't also recorded in the dry booth!

 

[Parsifal666]

That Berlin WW ExpB sounds *exactly* how I want a dry flute to sound. I didn't realize the expansions we so dry! Very well-recorded. There's still a tiny amount of early reflections in there to breathe, as opposed to the Chris Hein samples which sound like they are literally in an anechoic chamber (and poorly recorded with far less detail).

Now I have some digging around to do to see just how much money I need to drop on a bunch of Expansions...
I guess the good news is you don't need the main library.

Too bad the Strings and Brass Expansions weren't also recorded in the dry booth!

Re-peat might want to think about selling woodwind sample libraries lol.

 

[ProfoundSilence]

Re-peat might want to think about selling woodwind sample libraries lol.

Just be glad you didn't hear is SM trumpet demo with spat.

 

[Mark Schmieder]

I have not tried hard enough yet with Chris Hein Woodwinds, but my initial audition met with some of the same observations as reported by dasbin at the top of this page. But I haven't really given them a fair shake yet. I will be doing so this weekend when I make final decisions about woodwind ensemble parts vs. VSL and Spitfire, for my Doctor Who album. Likely Spitfire will win just because it's British.

I don't use ensemble woodwinds much though; I usually prefer solo woodwinds, unlike with brass where I might go half-and-half on ensembles vs. solo instruments. And it is the ensembles where so far I am finding it quicker for me to get really pleasing results with Spitfire strings and brass vs. either VSL or Chris Hein. But compared to most on this forum, I am no whiz at this (as compared to someone like Beat Kaufmann, for instance).

 

[devonmyles]

And full circle lol

Or, maybe circular?

 

[ism]

We get negative topics regularly from newcomers not liking their newly bought dry libraries because of the modicum of work it takes to get the full benefits from the library. Most of these newbies (not pointing out the current poster in particular at all) barely even give their libraries a chance.

As far as mono samples...they can be the most malleable. But I personally recommend beginners to simply grab a wet library, because the automatic sound can be very inspiring to newbie composers and get them started writing more ...something I doubt many members do enough of around here (too many are inordinately concerned with little peccadilloes in their libraries and pick, pick, pick. Mostly so they can continue to shop, shop, shop. All pf which proves my theory.)

Your absolutely right (and I’m certainly guilty of this).

But it’s also worthwhile to not conflate the beginner’s impatience for instant gratification with a more subtle effect.

The Hein cello vs the spitfire solo cello are to me emblematic, and both maligned, often unfairly.

In terms of fine control of the expressiveness, Hein is orders of magnitude ahead. Simulated vibrato, phase alignment. You get such superb control over expressiveness, and can craft very smooth phrasings.

But in term of the sound, Spitfire is orders of magnitude ahead.

By which I don’t just mean how nice the tone is, but there’s a fundamental musicality that lives in and arises from the sheer sonority of the spitfire cello, which suffice to say is not a musicality born of creamy smoothness in the expressiveness, but it’s a very powerful musicality, that captures something of the power and momentum of the cello, that the Hein simple can’t match.

For conversely, in the sheer smoothness of the expression of the Hein, there’s a kind of expressiveness wherein lives another form of equally fundamental musicality - a musicality of grace and elegance, might be one way to put it.

Try to squeeze the wrong kind of musicality out of the wrong instrument, and no amount of reading the manual or studying reverb settings is going to make you anything but miserable.

And somewhere in this lies an explanation of why some people like SM so much, but I don’t yet fully grasp it.