Discussion in 'SAMPLE Talk' started by Kony, Nov 20, 2018.
Interesting, I hadn't heard about this. Can I ask where you heard it?
It was actually in an email from them - I think it was right around when CSB came out - and I asked about the upcoming CSW. They said they were recorded at the same time, now over 3 years (!) ago, and that CSW should come this year.
I emailed Alex today, asking about CSB and how much HD space the woodwinds library might take. I'm sure he wouldn't mind me copying the relevant part of his reply:
'Not sure about woodwinds as it's still in product, but it will likely be our biggest library yet. We're aiming for a late 2019 release, (fingers crossed)'
Interesting....bigger than the strings and brass libraries....now I'm even less patient.
Imagine if he starts one day releasing expansions where you get Horn 2, 3, 4 etc etc (but that would be spoiled for us to ask for).
But imagine, with the quality stuff he produces, to expand these libraries in this way!
Although it's good to know I suppose..
I'd really like if he made CSS divisi strings. I think it would be a big seller, especially if it could have polyphonic legato.
Oh man, I need CSW so badly. My wind samples are my weakest instrument right now, and I don't feel like investing further when I know CSW is somewhat "around the corner". What to do. What to do.
Agreed. I'd also love to eventually see a chamber string collection. I find that there are times that CSS is too big (for certain passages) and CSSS, even on the ensemble patch, is too small.
In my experience you use 1 flute or 3 for that very reason. With 2 flutes there's always beating but with 3 flutes you have a choir.
One thing that I do when I need a 'tweener' size string section is to mix LESS CSS with CSSS - it's not perfect but it feels smaller - chamberish.
Any examples using just the Tree 2 mic ?
I feel this post...
I'm not trying to burst your bubble but I would like to offer my opinion on this request.
Part of why the Cinematic Studio Series is not only popular but also very successful is due to it's simplicity of functionality. This was proven with their original Cinematic Strings 1 and 2 which is still a very well received and usable library from a professional perspective. When you look at all the other libraries that have adopted the "divisi" concept, we've seen fail (not always) but because those features are a frustrating aspect of the library to use. LASS, arguably, is the only string library that got it right but even then, the complexity of that library makes it one that is frustrating to use, more many. I don't know any composers in my circle that use LASS on anything these days because of how much work it takes to set up in a template, balance, test for functionality, etc. The results, even in the hands of a very capable mock up artist, are comparable to the results of Cinematic Studio Strings. The Berlin series fails at this concept too, not only in lack of balanced articulations from instrument to instrument but also between the single instruments and their respective sections. You can't simply copy and paste from one single instrument to the next because they didn't record the same dynamic ranges with them.
My argument is simply this, why change a formula that works very well at the core purpose of the libraries Alex makes? The long awaited Brass library has been insanely successful based on it's online reception. It offered more than we anticipated, at least for me, and it was very competitively priced. It also met loads of end user expectations from what I can tell. I've not found a rolling consensus on anything so negative to thwart sales on it other than it *not* having specific brass instruments. Just my take on this. I'd prefer, as a user of CSS, that he stick to his creative approach to this series because it's not only easy to use but sounds freaking great.
I understand the case you are making here and agree that the simplicity of CSS is a huge selling point, but to the prior poster's point, Afflatus Strings has proven that divisi strings (with polyphonic legato) can be made brain-dead simple to use and still sound very, very good.
I can't imagine doing a project without LASS strings. CSS are fine but I simply can't deal with the delay in playing the patches. I don't find setting LASS up difficult, or any more difficult than any other library. Hate the interface though, I'll give you that!
But maybe I'm not doing things as complex as others.
Amen. CSS is my favorite of any sample library I've ever used. I'm just hoping he makes another follow up library of divisi strings to go with it. I imagine that's something you'd want too, right?
Why not use the classic legato patches, which are the same thing but have no delay?
Yes, totally agree about Afflatus but it is a very stylized library where they could hyper focus on doing one thing really well concerning their divisi/poly-legato. If you want to do that to a full scale string library with all the main articulations, etc, it becomes drastically more complicated.
Chris, I'm curious about how you'd typically handle mocking up a string part on CSS if the score calls for divisi. Say the cellos split into three legato parts for a bar, would you just use the CSS cellos three times, or maybe switch to SCS or Afflatus?
I wasn't trying to imply that LASS doesn't serve a purpose anymore. I was simply making the point that in my experiences, the composers I've worked for and with avoid using it on productions because of the complexity of using it. It takes quite a bit of work to set it up, especially if you want to use auto-divisi. That's time consuming when you're on a tight deadline. Load and play libraries that sound great are in demand by working composers. Sure, there are still older libraries with amazing features like LASS that can still hold their own against the competition but the point is that something so simple can hold it's own too which is why I don't really want to see Alex go down that path. He's found a great business model and should stick to it for now. If he can find a way to innovate without jeopardizing the simplicity he's created with this series, then I will certainly be an early adopter and take back some of the claims I've made here. In fact, I hope that happens.
Separate names with a comma.