How coherent is Spitfire Symphonic Orchestra between sections?

[Nico Schuele]

AHi all,

Currently, I'm using Steinberg Iconica for its ease of use and I'm thinking about graduating to a better sounding orchestral library (Iconica is great but is somewhat limited.)

I'm looking at the Spitfire Symphonic Orchestra with the Chamber Strings instead of the Symphonic ones.

How coherent are the libs between each other? Typically, when I set a CC1 of say, 80, on the violins in Iconica, I know it will play with a mezzoforte dynamic. The same value of 80 on the horns will also be mezzoforte. Is this the case with SSO?

I like the instant gratification of using Iconica as everything is recorded in the same hall, has the same programming across the board, etc.

Thanks!

EDIT: I'm not stellar at composing, I've been at it for less than a year, but here's an example of a track I've done with Iconica:



As there are no SSO trial, I'm also wondering if I'd achieve a much better sounding result. For the price of the lib, I would not like getting the same result (or worse!)

Click to read more...

 

[Nico Schuele]

No one using SSO? I thought it was way more popular... :-o

 

[markleake]

I find it "coherent" in the way you are asking. Mostly anyway. I think for any library you don't want to just copy the midi across between sections and just leave it. But you can to a fair extent with SSO.

 

[Nico Schuele]

I find it "coherent" in the way you are asking. Mostly anyway. I think for any library you don't want to just copy the midi across between sections and just leave it. But you can to a fair extent with SSO.

Thanks! It's not for copy-pasting purpose but more of a "moving by 23 up on CC1 on violins will have the same effect on horns".

 

[MarcelM]

the thing is you don't only use cc1 with a lot of libraries. you gotta adjust cc11 (expression) aswell, and thats the case for SSO. guess it also has vibrato control also etc.

i also doubt that there is a library which is perfectly balanced in its sections, but someone may correct me here.

 

[Nico Schuele]

the thing is you don't only use cc1 with a lot of libraries. you gotta adjust cc11 (expression) aswell, and thats the case for SSO. guess it also has vibrato control also etc.

i also doubt that there is a library which is perfectly balanced in its sections, but someone may correct me here.

True. CC1 was an example. Iconica also uses CC11 and the usual CC suspects. As for the balancing, I'd say Iconica, if not perfect, is indeed well balanced. Check out the example I posted: I haven't touched the gain, panning or volume faders, they are all at 0.

 

[The Darris]

Spitfire's Symphonic range could have originally use more love in the dynamic range. As far as I'm aware, they stick pretty close to the same CC value ranges for their dynamics but, the libraries are all very inconsistent across the sections and ranges in terms of dynamic capabilities. Some patches have 4 dynamic layers while others only have 2 or 3. There isn't a real logic to it that's clearly published by them. You simply have to work with it to figure it out. Of their entire basic orchestral palette, Chamber Strings is still the best. It was done right at the beginning of their BML days while they were just coming down from their more raw sounding libraries they had produced like Albion 1 legacy and Albion 2/3. After Chamber Strings, they really went a slightly different direction in terms of sound in my opinion. They lost that grit and raw character I had grown to love for a more sterile sound with the SSO series (originally a massive collection known as the BML line).

Orchestral Tools helped produce Iconica and they've always tried to produce a very consistent collection across their range in terms of Dynamics and Articulations. However, this approach doesn't always work well because all instruments don't have the same dynamic range. Pianissimo of a Flute is much quieter than Piannissimo in a Trumpet when playing a comparable note range. So keep that in mind when programming your parts. You might be triggering the same dynamics per the CC values but, if Iconica is similar to the Berlin Series and OT's method of sampling, they've balanced the samples to be as close to the true dynamic balance between the sections. Spitfire's Symphonic Orchestra is not. They have not properly balanced their libraries to how they are in reality.

Best,

Chris

 

[Nico Schuele]

Spitfire's Symphonic range could have originally use more love in the dynamic range. As far as I'm aware, they stick pretty close to the same CC value ranges for their dynamics but, the libraries are all very inconsistent across the sections and ranges in terms of dynamic capabilities. Some patches have 4 dynamic layers while others only have 2 or 3. There isn't a real logic to it that's clearly published by them. You simply have to work with it to figure it out. Of their entire basic orchestral palette, Chamber Strings is still the best. It was done right at the beginning of their BML days while they were just coming down from their more raw sounding libraries they had produced like Albion 1 legacy and Albion 2/3. After Chamber Strings, they really went a slightly different direction in terms of sound in my opinion. They lost that grit and raw character I had grown to love for a more sterile sound with the SSO series (originally a massive collection known as the BML line).

Orchestral Tools helped produce Iconica and they've always tried to produce a very consistent collection across their range in terms of Dynamics and Articulations. However, this approach doesn't always work well because all instruments don't have the same dynamic range. Pianissimo of a Flute is much quieter than Piannissimo in a Trumpet when playing a comparable note range. So keep that in mind when programming your parts. You might be triggering the same dynamics per the CC values but, if Iconica is similar to the Berlin Series and OT's method of sampling, they've balanced the samples to be as close to the true dynamic balance between the sections. Spitfire's Symphonic Orchestra is not. They have not properly balanced their libraries to how they are in reality.

Best,

Chris

Thanks a lot for the in-depth explanation, Chris. This is typically what I wanted to know before a $1k investment. As of now, I'm not familiar enough with the orchestra to be able to do this balancing on my own, that's why I'm looking at the instant gratification of having libs that do it for me. Back to learning and practicing some more before considering SSO, then

 

[MarcelM]

Thanks a lot for the in-depth explanation, Chris. This is typically what I wanted to know before a $1k investment. As of now, I'm not familiar enough with the orchestra to be able to do this balancing on my own, that's why I'm looking at the instant gratification of having libs that do it for me. Back to learning and practicing some more before considering SSO, then

the Berlin series might be worth a look, but its even more expensive than SSO. the cinematic series (with the upcoming brass) will be balanced probably aswell.

what do you don't like about iconica that makes you buy another library if I may ask?

 

[TimCox]

Berlin Brass and Woodwinds are very accurately balanced, can confirm

 

[driscollmusick]

I would say the dynamics line up pretty well, but as others have noted, certain articulations have more limited dynamic ranges than others. And you always have to play with balance. I use both the Symphonic and Chamber strings in my orchestral template, with the Chamber used for the special color of divisi passages. One of my absolute favorite things about Spitfire, though, is being able to use UACC instead of keyswitches, especially since they are universal across instruments within a family and even libraries.

This is a set of Grieg orchestrations made entirely with Spitfire orchestra series...


This one has a lot of Symphony and Chamber (divisi) mixed

 

[Nico Schuele]

the Berlin series might be worth a look, but its even more expensive than SSO. the cinematic series (with the upcoming brass) will be balanced probably aswell.

what do you don't like about iconica that makes you buy another library if I may ask?

I truly like Iconica. After spending a ton of money on many libraries, it's the first one that really clicked with me. But it has its downsides. First, it lacks a good chunk of articulations and techniques (no con sordino, for example). Writing a string run with it just doesn't work. Also, if you listen to the demos on Steinberg's website, they do sound good but they don't have this quality that you hear in everyday production music such as those from Spitfire or Berlin. It may totally come from my lack of mixing knowledge but I'd think that commercial demos would typically showcase the best result possible with a library. It may sound stupid but I was thinking that porting my cues over to SSO would already sound much better. For example, I have 8DIO Century Strings and the strings quality is day and night compared to Iconica.

As for the Berlin series, not only do they cost both arms and legs, they are also very resources intensive and their Capsule engine is not quite up to par for doing things like Cubase expression maps (if my experience with Metropolis Ark accounts for anything.) I have all the Albions, Spitfire Solo Strings and HZ Percussion and there's nothing I couldn't do with them in terms of building my templates and expression maps.

 

[Nico Schuele]

I would say the dynamics line up pretty well, but as others have noted, certain articulations have more limited dynamic ranges than others. And you always have to play with balance. I use both the Symphonic and Chamber strings in my orchestral template, with the Chamber used for the special color of divisi passages. One of my absolute favorite things about Spitfire, though, is being able to use UACC instead of keyswitches, especially since they are universal across instruments within a family and even libraries.

This is a set of Grieg orchestrations made entirely with Spitfire orchestra series...


This one has a lot of Symphony and Chamber (divisi) mixed

I listened to two pieces from your playlist and it really sounds great! Can't imagine the amount of programming that went into this. As for your take on SSO, the "you always have to play with balance" comment is what I'm looking for not having to deal with just yet. I'm not advanced enough for that.

 

[MarcelM]

I truly like Iconica. After spending a ton of money on many libraries, it's the first one that really clicked with me. But it has its downsides. First, it lacks a good chunk of articulations and techniques (no con sordino, for example). Writing a string run with it just doesn't work. Also, if you listen to the demos on Steinberg's website, they do sound good but they don't have this quality that you hear in everyday production music such as those from Spitfire or Berlin. It may totally come from my lack of mixing knowledge but I'd think that commercial demos would typically showcase the best result possible with a library. It may sound stupid but I was thinking that porting my cues over to SSO would already sound much better. For example, I have 8DIO Century Strings and the strings quality is day and night compared to Iconica.

As for the Berlin series, not only do they cost both arms and legs, they are also very resources intensive and their Capsule engine is not quite up to par for doing things like Cubase expression maps (if my experience with Metropolis Ark accounts for anything.) I have all the Albions, Spitfire Solo Strings and HZ Percussion and there's nothing I couldn't do with them in terms of building my templates and expression maps.

iam not so sure if its only the library. actually its the composer who uses it. take Andy blaney for example who does a lot of spitfire demos. do other demos sound as good as the ones from Andy? some might, most don't.

a good orchestration will produce a good mix, and iam still learning myself to do this. if Andy blaney, Thomas bergersen and me would all do the same mockup with iconica for example, iam sure my mockup would be by far the worst.

I mean listen to mojo madness from Thomas bergersen. its like 10 years old or even older? he didn't have any spitfire stuff etc and still it sounds bloody fantastic and can compete with todays mockups.

I guess you know what I want to say.

 

[driscollmusick]

I listened to two pieces from your playlist and it really sounds great! Can't imagine the amount of programming that went into this. As for your take on SSO, the "you always have to play with balance" comment is what I'm looking for not having to deal with just yet. I'm not advanced enough for that.

Thanks, but to get the best sound, you're always going to have to balance things (just like they do when a real orchestra is recorded professionally). No way to get around that. And really, that's very little work compared to the amount of effort you often have to put in to marry up sound libraries from different manufacturers.

 

[Nico Schuele]

I guess you know what I want to say.

I totally do! I'm in the process of learning proper orchestrating techniques (hello Mike Verta and Guy Michelmore!) and at the same time, I'm overwhelmed with things such as mixing, balancing, reverbs, etc As for Thomas Bergersen... ...the dude could make a kazoo sound epic and score the next Marvel movie using only that, so let's compare the comparable :-D

 

[Nico Schuele]

Thanks, but to get the best sound, you're always going to have to balance things (just like they do when a real orchestra is recorded professionally). No way to get around that. And really, that's very little work compared to the amount of effort you often have to put in to marry up sound libraries from different manufacturers.

...I just tried mixing Century Strings with Cinebrass, Claire Woodwinds and NI Symphonic Series Percussion... ...and I gave up, took my MIDI and went back to Iconica.

 

[driscollmusick]

...I just tried mixing Century Strings with Cinebrass, Claire Woodwinds and NI Symphonic Series Percussion... ...and I gave up, took my MIDI and went back to Iconica.

If it's important to you, keep at it. Unless there's something wrong with your ears (probably not) you'll get better over time with learning and practice. Honestly, if you're looking to spend some $$, it might make more sense to buy some decent monitors, depending on what you're mixing on.

 

[Nico Schuele]

If it's important to you, keep at it. Unless there's something wrong with your ears (probably not) you'll get better over time with learning and practice. Honestly, if you're looking to spend some $$, it might make more sense to buy some decent monitors, depending on what you're mixing on.

Headphones. ATH-M50x and BD 990 Pro with the Morphit curve correction plugin + CanOpener for crossfeed simulation. My current setup doesn't allow for monitors... then, I bounce, test the mix in my car, on earbuds, take notes and go back to Cubase to adjust :-p

 

[The Darris]

Thanks a lot for the in-depth explanation, Chris. This is typically what I wanted to know before a $1k investment. As of now, I'm not familiar enough with the orchestra to be able to do this balancing on my own, that's why I'm looking at the instant gratification of having libs that do it for me. Back to learning and practicing some more before considering SSO, then

If you'd like some more information on just SSO. I reviewed the entire collection when they released the packaged library last year. It was a podcast so it was just audio but I did a companion DAWcast to demonstrate how I wrote my SSO demo for the review and talk a bit about its strengths and weaknesses. I've found that this library, plus their Percussion Redux library, aren't enough to do the job, at least for me. I'm far from the best mock-up artist but I guess you can be the judge of that and take my opinions as you'd like. Here's the video.

​