Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Spitfire Audio “This is London Calling” - BBC Symphony Orchestra

staypuft said:
Thanks. It´s up to Spitfire so I don´t think I will. Look how long HZS´ been out and what was added except for the articulation system. Nothing else? One of the best features of Kontakt is to be able to edit samples and save a new version...I don´t depend on devs to fix stuff. Quick and painless.

The BBCSO demo you heard is the result of me resampling hundreds of shorts RR and aligning them manually...out of the box is unusable for the action//thriller type of score I´m hired for. I was sold on the idea of having a single entity as my workhorse and concluded that I can´t work fast enough with BBCSO. There´s only a handful of guys these days who have the budget to hire a full ens on every project and I´m not one of them...can´t get cues approved unless mockups are polished to a high degree of precision.
Click to expand...
I think this kind of complaining is useful to hear. And I can understand that this library won't work well for you. It is too bad we can't resell libraries we won't use. I actually haven't bought BBCSO yet, partially because I was concerned about the new player and partially because, as a hobbyist, I am cheap. I don't mind waiting for a wishlist sale in another year.

Hopefully they will add an ADSR to the player in the future. I think they are concentrating on getting it to work for those for whom it still isn't working correctly. I'm interested to see how OT's new player works out on all these Windows computers. I'm expecting some issues.
 
staypuft said:
I believe the Strezov brass bundle is on sale right now...Rogue trumpet is one of my most treasured secrets! :D
Click to expand...

How does it handle softer lines? Would a realistic p or pp not be possible? I was interested in buying it but noticed it said this on their site:

faux dynamics (lo-pass plus mod wheel filter) allow you to give the illusions of dynamics within the context of a musical piece.
Click to expand...


But I guess for that the price it’s still amazing value.
 
ridgero said:
Found that on youtube



So cool
Click to expand...


  • I love Tim Shoebridge - he does some amazing YT videos.
  • I love the Moog Matriarch.
  • I love the BBCSO library.
  • I’m just not sure he’s programmed the library in the best way. Did he split the parts up and use the legato patches? Sounds like just block chords played in on a non-legato patch. Also doesn’t sound like much CC data has been used. I could be wrong though (only listening on iPhone!).
 
Having played the Debussy Suite Bergamasque myself on piano, I found the sound unconvincing in the demo a few pages back. There where issues of clarity in some of the lines for me and the balance was off a lot of the time - hopelessly so in places to the extent that the music was jarring and to its detriment. I don't know if this is a problem of limitations for BBCSO in terms of florid work and fluid dynamic levels or just poor programming for the demo (well the mixing/balancing should have been a lot better at least imv). Anybody got any answers to that as I'm asking for my own information and not causing trouble folks...:thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Just so I understand - what situation would you use ADSR for? beyond the shaping that you can do for example with Expression and the Dynamics control?

Not sure I understand the Debussy ref above either - something about mixing and balancing..?
 
paulthomson said:
Just so I understand - what situation would you use ADSR for? beyond the shaping that you can do for example with Expression and the Dynamics control?

Not sure I understand the Debussy ref above either - something about mixing and balancing..?
Click to expand...

Listening to the Menuet, the lines are unclear and the dynamics are too far apart and that's in the first minute or so - at least that is how it sounds to my ears. I am genuinely interested in whether or not this is simply music that's too much for the product or if it could have been programmed and balanced better (I'm pretty certain it can be btw). I'm still on the fence about BBCSO and am willing to be swayed but hearing work like the Debussy arrangement is not going do it for me, hence asking the guys who have it. And I'd be very interested to also hear from the guys who can score to a high standard and are using it in particularly complicated arrangements or compositions.
 
Last edited:
staypuft said:
The BBCSO demo you heard is the result of me resampling hundreds of shorts RR and aligning them manually...
Click to expand...
:eek:

I wish I had this patience and skill.
As a hobbyist, I cannot think spending so much (unproductive) time.

My approach is to get the best from what I already have and not jump on the train every a fancy product shows up.
I think I’ll have to invest more time in Kontakt to know how to fix stuff myself (SStB, 8dio, etc.)
 
paulthomson said:
Just so I understand - what situation would you use ADSR for? beyond the shaping that you can do for example with Expression and the Dynamics control?

Not sure I understand the Debussy ref above either - something about mixing and balancing..?
Click to expand...
It might be worth talking to some more advanced users about the ways that they would like to tweak patches and seeing how those can become a part of the intentional programming of the Spitfire player. I.e. in your Kontakt releases on non-legato patches, I love the ability to jump behind the wrench and play with things as simple as the attack speed on longs or what have you to turn it into an easily playable pad patch.

Being really intentional and simple with the presentation and usage of libraries in the new player is great for the largest subset of users, but kind of robs the advanced users of previously accessible tweakability, stuff that we sometimes rely on.

Here's the thing: I get that you guys are trying to do more complex things nowadays, and control over the programming is a key part of that. I don't think most people understand how complicated the programming in just legato patches is becoming nowadays. Like the way that releases scale and legatos adapt based on the speed of playing, or even the timed release tails on marcato and tenuto articulations and all that fun stuff isn't compatible with blunt ADSR controls. Global ADSR controls can cause that stuff to break down REALLY quickly. Heck, you can create those issues in lots of Kontakt instruments that let you get behind the wrench by nudging a few things around. Turns things into a mess because it fights the intentional programming. (This isn't exclusive to Spitfire libs. The more advanced programming gets, the less we can just "tweak" fundamental things without breaking everything)

I guess what some people are asking here more than anything is an ability to "scale" some of this programming in a proper way. Manual legato speed (I really miss this one from previous Spitfire libs), release tail volume, attack speed on appropriate articulations, etc.

Then there's the big issue of tweaking the start time on individual samples. Jumping behind the wrench to change a sample start point wasn't too much fuss. Heck, the COG system in your Kontakt player, though a bit funky to use, was at least a nice option.

Obviously you can't let us dig into the nitty-gritty/debug layers of the engine without exposing a mess of custom backend (Kontakt has spent years and years and years developing their editor to be at least semi-usable by laypersons), but more tweaks on the front would be lovely lovely lovely.
 
Last edited:
Paul Cardon said:
It might be worth talking to some more advanced users about the ways that they would like to tweak patches and seeing how those can become a part of the intentional programming of the Spitfire player. I.e. in your Kontakt releases on non-legato patches, I love the ability to jump behind the wrench and play with things as simple as the attack speed on longs or what have you to turn it into an easily playable pad patch.

Being really intentional and simple with the presentation and usage of libraries in the new player is great for the largest subset of users, but kind of robs the advanced users of previously accessible tweakability, stuff that we sometimes rely on.

Here's the thing: I get that you guys are trying to do more complex things nowadays, and control over the programming is a key part of that. I don't think most people understand how complicated the programming in just legato patches is becoming nowadays. Like the way that releases scale and legatos adapt based on the speed of playing, or even the timed release tails on marcato and tenuto articulations and all that fun stuff isn't compatible with blunt ADSR controls. Global ADSR controls can cause that stuff to break down REALLY quickly. Heck, you can create those issues in lots of Kontakt instruments that let you get behind the wrench by nudging a few things around. Turns things into a mess because it fights the intentional programming. (This isn't exclusive to Spitfire libs. The more advanced programming gets, the less we can just "tweak" fundamental things without breaking everything)

I guess what some people are asking here more than anything is an ability to "scale" some of this programming in a proper way. Manual legato speed (I really miss this one from previous Spitfire libs), release tail volume, attack speed on appropriate articulations, etc.

Then there's the big issue of tweaking the start time on individual samples. Jumping behind the wrench to change a sample start point wasn't too much fuss. Heck, the COG system in your Kontakt player, though a bit funky to use, was at least a nice option.

Obviously you can't let us dig into the nitty-gritty/debug layers of the engine without exposing a mess of custom backend (Kontakt has spent years and years and years developing their editor to be at least semi-usable by laypersons), but more tweaks on the front would be lovely lovely lovely.
Click to expand...

I’m a layperson. I realize a lot of users feel the need to get under the hood, but I’m one who likes it just load a patch and get sh$t done. This is why I totally gel with stuff like the SF Player and EW Play, but that’s just me. I say leave it as-is.
 
Wolfie2112 said:
I’m a layperson. I realize a lot of users feel the need to get under the hood, but I’m one who likes it just load a patch and get sh$t done. This is why I totally gel with stuff like the SF Player and EW Play, but that’s just me. I say leave it as-is.
Click to expand...
If they are able to find a way to expose and program functionality in addition to the current default ease of use, why not? It's not a matter of having your cake and eating it too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom