×
What's new
By:

Orchestral Tools : Berlin Symphonic Strings

Ihnoc said:
Just to highlight a little of my experience regarding RAM usage here (I will attest I haven't focussed on CPU cost), comparing two loaded microphone positions in SINE vs Kontakt for Special Bows 1, 2 and First Chairs, my findings have been:
  • Memory footprint of the DAW (Cubase) is smaller using SINE
  • Memory footprint of the DAW is smaller when no microphone positions are loaded using SINE
  • Loading an articulation twice in an instance results in a negligible impact (by a massive margin) on Memory and on project size (which affects save times) in SINE
The reason for this has nothing to do with samples and using sample purging will not remove the effect. Kontakt hosts a large amount of 'Object Memory' when using Orchestral Tools collections, at least by comparison to other libraries. Also consider that when saving a project, you are effectively saving a multi in Kontakt into that project - if you're using Kontakt alone, try saving all your instances as multis and you'll find the save size is similar.

Case in point, with no microphone positions loaded, I still see my template (which is basically all Orchestral Tools Kontakt libraries) eat up at least 8-10GB in object memory. The user can reduce this by breaking in to the Zones in Kontakt for what they don't use. Single patches are also more friendly to object memory, but increase the size of project saves. I've gone down from 480MB to 320MB moving back to multi-patches alone.

To sum up, besides the interface improvements (such as setting every articulation in a multi-patch to use CC as dynamics, which is so frigging time consuming), this is why these collections are exciting in being in a sample player that only needs to load patch data (which is in the region of ~100KB). The application is leaner on bloat to host and save, so you have more resources to have many positions, more instruments etc. This is all entirely separate to mic-merging.

I will attest I'm also disappointed that this isn't fixed for BSS as to me it is a stand out feature for SINE (benefits above exist in other recent sample players too), coupled with this being advertised as a feature, little to no communication and continued releases in spite of it - this has certainly reduced my brand perception, though these are still my favourite sounding instruments.

Besides that, despite all the benefits, things like errant crashes in SINE or save data corrupting to the point that projects just don't open mean I am warry to adopt it fully. My transition would be gradual even if they all dropped tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Wow! It’s like you’re demonstrating, theoretically. Pretty easy & must say, very very helpful for people, particularly for those who wanna dive in the way of Sine.
Seriously thanks a lot. I am even copying & pasting this post in Notes, for any help.
 
I think it's a bit easy to demonstrate some issues on Sine and yes we would all like them to be fixed,

But don't forget Sine is still more than userble and the mic merge quirk is only affecting BSS,
 
Ihnoc said:
Kontakt hosts a large amount of 'Object Memory'
Click to expand...
I see what you're saying. Although Object Memory seems to be a fraction of sample memory, increasing from a couple / few hundred MB to a portion of a GB even while sample memory increases and increases by multiple GB.

Ihnoc said:
Also consider that when saving a project, you are effectively saving a multi in Kontakt into that project - if you're using Kontakt alone, try saving all your instances as multis and you'll find the save size is similar.
Click to expand...

I don't usually mind about project file sizes except insofar as it affects save (and load?) times. Good reason to start using multis more often. Thanks!

Ihnoc said:
this is why these collections are exciting in being in a sample player that only needs to load patch data
Click to expand...

It is a nice change. I still enjoy using Kontakt.
 
Soundbed said:
I don't usually mind about project file sizes except insofar as it affects save (and load?) times. Good reason to start using multis more often. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Yep just to be 100% clear, in case I mislead anyone, my findings are thus: adding to Kontakt a single Trumpet multi-patch with 12 articulations versus having 12 single articulation patches in Kontakt for the same articulations results in:
  • Higher object memory and smaller project size when using the multi-patch
  • Lower object memory and larger project size when using 12 single articulations
There are other differences:
  • The legato in a multi-patch versus the legato single patch are not the same. For one they do not null, and I found I heard greater differences in Berlin Strings than Berlin Woodwinds or Berlin Brass
  • One must control the mic-mix in every single patch. Double edged sword as you can now have a mix per patch
  • Highly usable patches like Trills Orchestrator and Zampano vibrato (which is a gem) only exist as single patches
I certainly have some gripes with SINE:
  • No numbers written on the poly articulations for velocity or CC positions
  • Can't lock poly articulations (so you can lose all the pixel perfect edits you just did in the dark because numbers aren't displayed...)
  • No trills orchestrator (which is a lovely workflow)
  • No con sordino emulation (but if you own Berlin Strings/Special Bows, have a dig under the hood for the filters that are applied, then duplicate the entire set of articulations and send to a different output with said filter)
  • Crashes for no reason, seemly after loading an externally saved patch or moving articulations around (or because it is Thursday)
But the benefits of not having to wait a minute on every save of a tutti, 3 minutes to load the project and endless minutes for Cubase to unload all the RAM on closing are worth it, assuming it is stable.

I tried Berlin Symphonic Strings a bit at release and found Berlin Strings fitted me more (and was more detailed). This all coming from a hobbyist making transcriptions and covers, running off of Samsung 850 SSDs with 96GB RAM which was cheap enough to make a template on a single machine viable... Mileage for people actually spending their time making music may vary!
 
What's the difference between "berlin strings and berlin symphonic strings"? They both recorded at
Teldex Scoring Stage. And which one should I buy first?
 
zeng said:
What's the difference between "berlin strings and berlin symphonic strings"? They both recorded at
Teldex Scoring Stage. And which one should I buy first?
Click to expand...
Sorry to be that guy, but I guess I'll be that guy : this information is clearly stated on Orchestral Tools website, and has been discussed dozens of times on the forum.
 
Emmanuel Rousseau said:
Sorry to be that guy, but I guess I'll be that guy : this information is clearly stated on Orchestral Tools website, and has been discussed dozens of times on the forum.
Click to expand...
Thank you that kind of guy...But I wonder people who have both to share their experiences soundwise. They sound similar to me on demos at OT website. It is not hard to write a word if you have both...
 
zeng said:
What's the difference between "berlin strings and berlin symphonic strings"? They both recorded at
Teldex Scoring Stage. And which one should I buy first?
Click to expand...
Sound wise think of them as SCS and SSS.

I just got BSS so take this with a grain of salt, on a quick test I didn't think BS/BSS blended well, not as well as SCS/SSS blend.
It wasn't bad, but when you blend libs you want to get more then the sum of the parts, something new.

I think SCS has enough "less" room then SSS which makes them blend well.
BS sounds the way it does because it has the right amount of room, but that "enough" gets blended with BSS multo room, not sure it works.

Again, it was a quick test after downloading BSS so I might change my view when I'll play with BS+BSS more.
 
Berlin Symphonic Strings is a much larger Section of Players than Berlin Strings.

Note that Berlin Strings offers a lot more articulations compared to Berlin Symphonic Strings.
 
spent a little time this morning porting a CSS mockup to Berlin Symphonic Strings (with some Berlin Strings layered). https://vi-control.net/community/th...th-spitfire-appassionata.103152/#post-4972481

Overall a really nice sound this library... didn't have to work quite as hard at getting the mix together as with CSS. CSS has perhaps just a little more character in the sound (and the sections are not as large as BSS). Berlin Strings helped with detail and also brought out more portamento / transition sounds. BSS does not have the option of more exaggerated movement between notes as BS. The mix still favors BSS though, without those instruments 5-6 db louder.
 
Casiquire said:
I only own BS, but i think it's a better starting point. Way more comprehensive
Click to expand...
That cuts both ways. BS is also fussier, and much harder to use. I find BSS, by contrast, a very friendly library, and it plays well with others. I've found that to be less the case with BS—though I'm just starting to use BS with Sine. We'll see if it's less fussy in Sine. It is true that BS is a far more comprehensive library, and the smaller section sizes also makes it more flexible as well.
 
jbuhler said:
That cuts both ways. BS is also fussier, and much harder to use. I find BSS, by contrast, a very friendly library, and it plays well with others. I've found that to be less the case with BS—though I'm just starting to use BS with Sine. We'll see if it's less fussy in Sine. It is true that BS is a far more comprehensive library, and the smaller section sizes also makes it more flexible as well.
Click to expand...
I haven't dug too deep into it yet, but it doesn't seem particularly fussy to me. What makes you say that?
 
Casiquire said:
I haven't dug too deep into it yet, but it doesn't seem particularly fussy to me. What makes you say that?
Click to expand...
Experience with the Capsule version where everything took about twice as long to do compared to any of my other string libraries. I would often like the results of BS marginally better but it was just so slow working with it, the legato was a bit unpredictable and so hard to control, its RAM requirements were very high, it was difficult to get the patches set up correctly in the first place, because you only had twelve slots and there are way more articulations available than that, and because the number of articulations is very high it's a lot to keep track of, especially when you are starting out, and there is quite a lot of difference how each articulation is set up in terms of where the dynamic layers change and such. All those articulations are also what allows you to do so much with it, so it's also a positive, but I wouldn't call it friendly.

So far on Sine it's a bit friendlier, but you still can't set everything up easily in a single patch without using midi channels and the complications that arise from that, and the legatos remain a bit unpredictable, even if it is a bit clearer what's happening than in Capsule. BSS has legato issues too, but I find the latter much easier to predict and so can work around them without too much trouble. And there are fewer patches to manage (which is of course also a deficiency). Hopefully with use BS on Sine will also become similarly manageable.
 
jbuhler said:
Experience with the Capsule version where everything took about twice as long to do compared to any of my other string libraries. I would often like the results of BS marginally better but it was just so slow working with it, the legato was a bit unpredictable and so hard to control, its RAM requirements were very high, it was difficult to get the patches set up correctly in the first place, because you only had twelve slots and there are way more articulations available than that, and because the number of articulations is very high it's a lot to keep track of, especially when you are starting out, and there is quite a lot of difference how each articulation is set up in terms of where the dynamic layers change and such. All those articulations are also what allows you to do so much with it, so it's also a positive, but I wouldn't call it friendly.

So far on Sine it's a bit friendlier, but you still can't set everything up easily in a single patch without using midi channels and the complications that arise from that, and the legatos remain a bit unpredictable, even if it is a bit clearer what's happening than in Capsule. BSS has legato issues too, but I find the latter much easier to predict and so can work around them without too much trouble. And there are fewer patches to manage (which is of course also a deficiency). Hopefully with use BS on Sine will also become similarly manageable.
Click to expand...
I see, thanks for your thoughts. We'll see how i get along with it. I find every string library fussy so the bar is not very high as far as usability for me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom