Heard this type of opinion a lot, personally I disagree. But I want to hear more about this perspective - can you (and everyone) please elaborate what feels "thin" or what doesn't sound good in EWHS?CS2 makes HS sound thin. They blend nicely together though.
For example, EWHS is just wet enough (compared to dry libraries like VSL) that it doesn't really require special mixing to position the instruments. So I guess that stereo image is not what makes it feel thin for people, right?
But if it's just a matter of EQ and reverb tastes, it's easy enough to tweak EQ and add reverb as desired. Or is this where people disagree?
I think a lot of these libraries have pleasing stereo imaging and can be mixed to a desired timbre. So considering all this, the main differentiating factors in a strings library boil down to what's baked into the samples: the quality and breadth of articulations, the quality of editing and scripting, the performance nuances in the samples, and the potential to get realistic, expressive performance for a wide range of emotions. That's where EWHS has done really well in my opinion. I don't have experience with CSS or CS2 to compare those aspects though.