Spitfire Appassionata - Release Thread
- Thread starter NoamL
- Start date
muk
Senior Member
Not really, though. What I suggest is a library that lets you choose the amount of vibrato that you want through a selection of patches: legato with little vibrato, legato normale vibrato etc.
Agree @ism, the selection of vibrato styles in Berlin is great to have. Something like this, but with just a bit deeper selection and variation of vibrato would be fantastic.
jbuhler
Senior Member
Yeah, I don’t think it’s an especially well named library as even full tilt, it strikes me as rather well behaved and restrained. I mean at the higher dynamic layers the vibrato is there but it doesn’t hit you over the head with it. Still, it’s a lovely sounding library and the first library I reach for my lyrical stuff. I happen to like the choices SF made for it, and the way it passes from dynamic/vibrato layer to dynamic/vibrato layer. But it won’t handle everything.
I agree with @muk that the SAS approach with different scenarios for vibrato would be an excellent addition and am hopefully SF works something along those lines out for the strings of the new modular library.
Vik
Vi-k
Interesting... I'm trying to figure out why this would be better than simply switching between vibrato levels with a CC? Using a CC (within the same patch) would let use different levels of vibrato within the same piece (or bar) without using a different patch, different track or similar – but what would be the benefits of having to change to a different patch?
Are you thinking of something like this?
JohnG
Senior Member
Maybe It’s the Name?
Not sure about this focus on vibrato. I suppose it’s the name “Appassionata” that is sticking in some people, as they seem to be expecting Rachmaninov or at least a high degree of espressivo, or just passion, which in turn some seem to equate with molto vibrato. As it happens, Spitfire already have a “Rachmaninov” patch in one of their string libraries (I think Symphonic Strings?).
Appassionata does not necessarily equal molto vibrato. Plenty of baroque music can be played expressively, even passionately, with no vibrato at all.
So, leaving aside the name, which I hazard is just decorative and not really intended as an exhaustive description, this string library is ‘just right’ for many, many situations. I love the sound, I love its subtlety, and I LOVE that the transitions are not over-conspicuous.
Besides, half / most of the time I ask the strings for no vibrato or very little.
Vibrato and Libraries?
And where there is vibrato there are complications:
1. I do like what CSS sounds like but it‘s usually “all or nothing” on the vibrato front, at least as far as it hits my modwheel. “In between” doesn’t feel as natural. Mind you, I do like CSS’ sound for some things, but not everything.
2. Hollywood Strings, when first released, was comparatively demanding on computer resources but it does offer quite a bit of control (relatively) over vibrato. Nowadays I don’t find my computers breaking a sweat to use HS, but at first it was quite the resource hog.
[note: I have received free products from Spitfire and East West]
Not sure about this focus on vibrato. I suppose it’s the name “Appassionata” that is sticking in some people, as they seem to be expecting Rachmaninov or at least a high degree of espressivo, or just passion, which in turn some seem to equate with molto vibrato. As it happens, Spitfire already have a “Rachmaninov” patch in one of their string libraries (I think Symphonic Strings?).
Appassionata does not necessarily equal molto vibrato. Plenty of baroque music can be played expressively, even passionately, with no vibrato at all.
So, leaving aside the name, which I hazard is just decorative and not really intended as an exhaustive description, this string library is ‘just right’ for many, many situations. I love the sound, I love its subtlety, and I LOVE that the transitions are not over-conspicuous.
Besides, half / most of the time I ask the strings for no vibrato or very little.
Vibrato and Libraries?
And where there is vibrato there are complications:
1. I do like what CSS sounds like but it‘s usually “all or nothing” on the vibrato front, at least as far as it hits my modwheel. “In between” doesn’t feel as natural. Mind you, I do like CSS’ sound for some things, but not everything.
2. Hollywood Strings, when first released, was comparatively demanding on computer resources but it does offer quite a bit of control (relatively) over vibrato. Nowadays I don’t find my computers breaking a sweat to use HS, but at first it was quite the resource hog.
[note: I have received free products from Spitfire and East West]
jbuhler
Senior Member
I think SAS gets its very smooth transition between dynamic layers and vibrato in part because it is baked in. Crossfading vibrato comes with its own set of issues and would greatly complicate getting right what this library now does so well. So I'm willing to take the limitation. I imagine that SF could set up various other vibrato scenarios without too much trouble. But I'm not sure they can make vibrato an independent variable (as it would need to be to dial it in on a CC) and maintain the quality of the sound they are getting, which seems predicated on having a set design for how the patch is going to work with dynamics and vibrato. Yes, other libraries can do this kind of CC with vibrato on a crossfade, but there is a fuzziness to that crossfade that is not there with SAS.Interesting... I'm trying to figure out why this would be better than simply switching between vibrato levels with a CC? Using a CC (within the same patch) would let use different levels of vibrato within the same piece (or bar) without using a different patch, different track or similar – but what would be the benefits of having to change to a different patch?
Are you thinking of something like this?
muk
Senior Member
What James wrote. Crossfading between vibrato levels never sounds quite convincing to my ears. Either you get the fuzziness that James described. Or you can phase-align the samples foe a smooth crossfade. But that sucks all liveliness out of the recordings somehow.
Hence my idea to get several intensities to choose from. We were then not stuck with either the developers choice of vibrato intensity, or compromised crossfading. Rather we could choose the intensity for each new note. This would greatly increase the variability in our mockups - an orchestra does not play with one fixed vibrato intensity either. It varies for each phrase, or even each note. That's something that we can not do with samples currently. At the most we have no vibrato, normal vibrato, and molto vib. Would be great to have at least little vibrato amd progressive vib as well.
By the way I have no qualms with Appassionata's vibrato. As far as the common approach goes, it's well executed here I find. I'd just like to have more options for vibrato generally.
Hence my idea to get several intensities to choose from. We were then not stuck with either the developers choice of vibrato intensity, or compromised crossfading. Rather we could choose the intensity for each new note. This would greatly increase the variability in our mockups - an orchestra does not play with one fixed vibrato intensity either. It varies for each phrase, or even each note. That's something that we can not do with samples currently. At the most we have no vibrato, normal vibrato, and molto vib. Would be great to have at least little vibrato amd progressive vib as well.
By the way I have no qualms with Appassionata's vibrato. As far as the common approach goes, it's well executed here I find. I'd just like to have more options for vibrato generally.
MelodicAdagio
Member
Tchaikovsky's 5th and 6th Symphonies are amazing. I don't think Appassionata could fully duplicate the Romantic sound in the soft, expressive dynamics, but it would be interesting to see how close a mock up of some sections could come. I do like Appassionata and find it generally very expressive.
Vik
Vi-k
For the records, I'm not suggesting cross-fade instead of cross-switch, or that the vibrato shouldn't be 'baked in'
And sure – there are other ways to create passion than using vibrato. Adding 'movement'/con moto, for instance. The reason I bring in vibrato is that I've noticed that there are almost no libraries out there which combined the pp℗ range with enough vibrato; the amount of vibrato needed in order to be able to mock up the various examples I've mentioned (Wagner, Tchaikovsky and others).
I still haven't dropped the idea of buying SF Appassionata – I just need to know what to expect. And that's not because someone wrote earlier in this thread that "Low dynamics are kind of static and lifeless" – I got the same impression from the demos. I'd love to be proven wrong with some pointers to audio examples (or audio examples)!
And sure – there are other ways to create passion than using vibrato. Adding 'movement'/con moto, for instance. The reason I bring in vibrato is that I've noticed that there are almost no libraries out there which combined the pp℗ range with enough vibrato; the amount of vibrato needed in order to be able to mock up the various examples I've mentioned (Wagner, Tchaikovsky and others).
With eg. four different levels of vibrato (+non-vib), including for the pp(p)-range, CC1-25 could represent no vib, 25-50 could represent little vibrato and so on. No x-fading involved. VSL, CSS and others offer vibrato x-fade, but I'm not discussing x-fade vs x-swicth – I just think that with so many libraries doing this the same way, it's a market out there for a library which acknowledges that there's sometimes a need for the combination of a generous amount of vibrato and really quiet playing – a tremendously beautiful sound.
I still haven't dropped the idea of buying SF Appassionata – I just need to know what to expect. And that's not because someone wrote earlier in this thread that "Low dynamics are kind of static and lifeless" – I got the same impression from the demos. I'd love to be proven wrong with some pointers to audio examples (or audio examples)!
StMichaels
Active Member
Wow that is a beautiful piece. Thank you for sharing and yes those strings sound beautiful.......and the Brass
Henrik B. Jensen
Senior Member
This is the LSO.
CSS and some others do retain a fair bit of vibrato at lower dynamics, but it often still doesn't sound right to me, even when you want that sound, because of the programming of those libraries. As Karma noted, it's not just the amount of vibrato, but how that vibrato is arrived at after the start of a note or the playing of an interval. Oftentimes these "lush" libraries sound quite strange to me, as if you've put a tremolo or chorus effect on soft strings, because that vibrato is quite unrelenting and doesn't feel naturally "placed" within the performance. It's a dated sound, like rompler strings. Unfortunately I don't think crossfades are a solution either, it has to be down to proper performances and clever programming.
I'm happy to err on the side of something like Appassionata, which may at times leave one wanting a tad more weepy expression, but which is utterly authentic in its execution and musicality and does what I want 85% of the time.
I'm happy to err on the side of something like Appassionata, which may at times leave one wanting a tad more weepy expression, but which is utterly authentic in its execution and musicality and does what I want 85% of the time.
Vik
Vi-k
Thanks for that info!
So – you are offering the best of both worlds then, by having crossfades between the layers but a way to bypass the sound of crossfades by making sure that the un-crossfaded are available too (and can be achieved, x-switch-style, by typing in the values for the true dynamic samples.
I agree that it could have been more molto.
I read that as 'Vik, don't buy Appassionata now, because AR-M will offer something you will be more happy with."
Regarding future libraries and the dilemma between a library that offers Tchaikovksian amounts of vibrato also at the quietest levels vs the more mainstream approach which SAS has (less vibrato in the quieter layers), why not offer both?
I like the section sizes in SAS, the mic options and the various mic-mixes... and more.
In several ways, such a library would be perfect if came with a version which is like the current one (but with more molto-vib at mf) – but also included a version based on the three most intense levels, but where the two quietest ones were replaced by layers that contained intense amount of vibrato. Not necessarily molto vib, but enough vib to mock up the kind of recordings I have referred to.
That problem would have been sold if CSS included a way to type in the exact value for the each of the 'pure' layers, since this effectively gives us vibrato cross-switch in vibrato crossfade libraries.
Last edited:
muk
Senior Member
That's just one, very specific usecase though. While this might be perfect for you, why not sample various vibrato levels at all dynamics? That way you can use molto vibrato at the quietest dynamics, or little vibrato at fortissimo. And everything in between. Whatever your music needs at any given moment. It covers your wish too, but is much more flexible overall. I think that would be a great concept for a library.
This example starts off at the lowest dynamic for the first phrase and builds from there. Should give you an idea of vibrato levels.I still haven't dropped the idea of buying SF Appassionata – I just need to know what to expect. And that's not because someone wrote earlier in this thread that "Low dynamics are kind of static and lifeless" – I got the same impression from the demos. I'd love to be proven wrong with some pointers to audio examples (or audio examples)!
Spitfire Appassionata - Release Thread
...... So the burning question: Is Appassionata going to be a series of orchestral libraries including Brass and Woodwinds, or is this just a random library up for sale.
vi-control.net
Here's a quick noodling in of the first few bars (followed by isolated Vc, then isolated Va + Vl II)
View attachment noodle - q26 - Tchaikovski V ii - 2022-08-03, 11.05 PM.mp3
