handz
Senior Member
Very often, yes. But I'd argue that the breadth of articulations in SCS, or SStS would, in retrospect, have be best for myself as a beginner, given the type of music I want to write, and given how much I struggled in getting the right sound.
Libraries like Light and Sound and CSS gives you a fairly basic, and highly consistent palette, which is great if that's what you're looking for. But libraries like SCS and SStS (maybe hollywood string? ), let you hit the ground running and compose in a more painterly fashion from a broader palette.
Traditionally, I think learning to write starts with being restricted to what ever ensemble/ spaces is available to perform your work. Or, more realistically, writing within a simple palette since it's more likely that your student works will never be performed. So it makes sense that a traditional approach is maybe a bit less painterly, and on a somewhat more neutral palette.
But here's another place where modern libraries let us challenge some of the assumptions of how to learn composition.
And modern libraries give you the option of starting with a broader pallet and a more painterly approach. Which is a perfectly reasonably (also, really fun) place to start also.
If you start to compose, limiting yourself from doing what you really want just because your library cant do it is the most frustrating thing ever. I remember the times when writing some passages with runs and fast legatos was almost impossible because there was no library capable of it. And I hated it. Having as most options as possible is a good thing. You always have the option not to use them at once but you still have them.