What's new

Spitfire Audio London Contemporary Orchestra Textures – Available now

muziksculp

Senior Member
I'm still undecided about this library, kind of on the edge about it. Maybe showing more variety of sounds in the demos will help.

By the way, my favorite SA EVO library is the Olafur Arnalds Chamber Evolutions. Also like the EVO 2 and EVO 3 Libraries. Maybe adding some long tail reverb to these EVOs will give me the Hangar type sound of this library. :geek:
 

whiskers

Perpetual student
So, those who already used LCOT how do you classify the variety of the sounds? Im afraid its just half a dozen with "Now with eyes closed", "Now with eyes open" variations. How do you classify the sound pool?
That seems like a very vague question, can you expound on how you mean?
 

ccarreira

Member
That seems like a very vague question, can you expound on how you mean?
I already have more EVOS and Felt Pianos and harps and glass pads, the Eric Choir, etc, what brings me this library besides a new special and unique reverb? This is pad zone, and many presets sound to me like some Korg Wavestation presets, of course Spitifire have a more gorgeous sound with a much bigger resolution, but this is old fashion pads made with acoustic sources, its is not a bad thing, but I will like more information before i buy.
 

jbuhler

Senior Member
By the way, my favorite SA EVO library is the Olafur Arnalds Chamber Evolutions. Also like the EVO 2 and EVO 3 Libraries. Maybe adding some long tail reverb to these EVOs will give me the Hangar type sound of this library. :geek:
Just got this and downloaded, and played first patch as is. I had the same intensely pleasurable experience I had when I first sat down with OACE. I don't yet know if this will last as it did with OACE. But initial impression is very yummy.
 

muziksculp

Senior Member
Just got this and downloaded, and played first patch as is. I had the same intensely pleasurable experience I had when I first sat down with OACE. I don't yet know if this will last as it did with OACE. But initial impression is very yummy.
@jbuhler Thanks for the feedback. Have fun, and if possible let us know what you think after you spent some more time discovering this library.
 

Sopranos

Senior Member
@jbuhler - here's a extremely rough demo of my first time really sitting down with it. This is just a single evo grid selection, so 1 track. I'll add more later today and/or tomorrow. Interesting contrast between the upper and lower ranges, I think. Does have a very ethereal/eerie sound.

Forgive my multiple key and style changes, was just experimenting, not going for a certain theme.

Sounds very Omnisphere-ish.
 

jbuhler

Senior Member
Hmmmmmm …….. heavily committed to Omni for long time. Starting to hesitate spending ~ $200.
for something Omni2.5 can do with reasonable chops.
Do you think it sounds Omnisphere-ish? I mean, you’re the only one who can say whether it sounds duplicative for your uses.
 

whiskers

Perpetual student
Yes, a very tasty spice, meant to be mixed with other libraries, synths, sounds, ..etc. At least that's my impression so far.
exactly my thoughts. At least for the most part.

@jbuhler - here is my first attempt at mixing with other tracks, as well as using multiple instances of LCO textures. This [draft] track has 3 instances of LCO textures (2 curated, one custom), an NI piano with the reverb bumped up to try and match the LCO II lib, and a guitar from @TheUnfinished 's Cyberia Omnisphere library (left mostly unaltered).

 
Last edited:

whiskers

Perpetual student
For my uses ….. I will need to purchase and explore /decide. Reacting to couple other posts making this inference /comparison.
in my uninformed opinion, yes, they can be similar, and they mix pretty well. It definitely feels a bit more organic than omnisphere, and I like the EVO grid, but it's up to you if that's worth the 200$.

If i have one nitpick with the library so far, it's that I wish it was more dynamic. But I still have much to explore.
 

jbuhler

Senior Member
If i have one nitpick with the library so far, it's that I wish it was more dynamic. But I still have much to explore.
Working through the instrument myself. Some of the evolutions can build up quite a lot of dynamics, but they take a good time getting there, and yes the focus of the dynamic range seems to be from pp to mf, occasionally f. There's more potential to create melodic material than I thought there would be. That's not the point of the library, of course, but you can get some measure of tonal movement, and because the tail moves (and disappears) with the note it doesn't build up like it would in a long reverb.

I tried pairing Textures with various patches from BDT without adding anything to BDT except the built-in reverb and the initial experiments are encouraging there. It doesn't seem like you have to dial back the hangar reverb or dial up the reverb on BDT to get them to sit together.

Actually, even the official demos don't show a lot of variety. I'm sure this is a great library when used with other libraries, synths, ..etc. but when used alone it lacks the variety.
It depends on what you mean by "variety." The library is definitely (and not surprisingly) dominated by evolving longs (and the reverb is part of the sustain). The dynamics are focused on the soft side, I think, because like most of the Evos, the emphasis in this library falls on the detail and intimacy (it's interesting to consider the cultural work of the reverb tail in this context of a library that seems to nevertheless bank on such detail and intimacy, and the hangar reverb becomes part of the materiality of the sound). I think there is quite a lot of variety within those parameters, but those parameters may be so determining for you that the variety nevertheless seems slight. And I do think there is a question of how much variety of mood—which is maybe the real challenge—can be got from these kinds of libraries, which demand a stasis of tone if the note is going to be allowed to make its timbral transformation.
 
Top Bottom