What's new

Spitfire Orchestral Swarm vs Heavyocity Intimate Textures

Which one do you prefer? Spitfire Orchestral Swarm or Heavyocity Intimate Strings

  • Spitfire Orchestral Swarm

  • Heavyocity Intimate Strings


Results are only viewable after voting.

midiman

Active Member
I am interested in getting a few opinions regarding which of these two is your favorite. Please avoid the typical "It depends on what you need it for" counter question. I am interested in hearing your personal favorites from your perceptive and the reasons for it. Preferably for people who own both, or people who chose one over the other.

Thanks a lot for you input!
 

sostenuto

Big NKS Fan !
Not aware of HO_Intimate Strings. Have Gravity Packs and NOVO Packs and SF_Orch Swarm.
Aware of NOVO_Modern Strings, Intimate Textures, new Synthetic Strings. What is HO_Intimate Strings?
 
Last edited:

Bill the Lesser

Active Member
JUST IGNORE THIS POST I got my names mixed up. My apologies to the OP. It's about Swarm versus Intimate Textures, rather than Swarm versus Intimate Strings.

Intimate Textures is progammable in real via a single Kontakt control window. With Orchestral Swarm one takes the more typical approach of loading in patches in multiple Kontakt tracks, or at least I do.

Intimate Textures is of course strings only, Swarm gives you strings and horns (but it's not a general case orchestra).

Intimate Textures is basically three user selectable string sections which can be violin, cello, bass or any combination of those, each with several patches like sul tasto, drops, etc. It's controlled by a very, very tricked-out modwheel thing that incorporates filters, variable reverb, etc in a programmable way. Both VIs have rhythmic elements, Swarm is a little more random and somewhat arhythmic and uses a normal modwheel scheme.

Swarm sounds much more orchestral than Intimate Textures. Intimate Textures tends to sound a bit synthy, Swarm always sounds analog.

Bottom line, they're not really comparable or even very complimentary. They do different things with very different sounds. I used Swarm as a Creepy-crawly Drama Toolkit in a nature documentary, Intimate Textures would have been less than useful there. I do like Intimate Textures, however, and I occasionally practice with it since I think it could eventually be useful.
 
Last edited:

sostenuto

Big NKS Fan !
Intimate Strings is progammable in real via a single Kontakt control window. With Orchestral Swarm one takes the more typical approach of loading in patches in multiple Kontakt tracks, or at least I do.

Intimate Strings is of course strings only, Swarm gives you strings and horns (but it's not a general case orchestra). *******
I do like Intimate Strings, however, and I occasionally practice with it since I think it could eventually be useful.
Bill, can you point me to this HO product pls. THX
 

Bill the Lesser

Active Member
Oh am I ever embarrassed. I though the question was about Intimate TEXTURES, but it was really about Intimate Strings. I don't know Jack about Intimate Strings.

Just ignore my posts, it's the best thing.
 

MillsMixx

Production Director/Sound Designer
The woodwinds are great in swarm which the other one doesn't have. It's good to hear instruments other than just strings. I really like the low woodwinds 'Bassoon Pop' type articulations and some of the Pizzicato styled artics that add some unique definition.
 

ism

Senior Member
I'm assuming you mean HO Intimate Textures (as there doesn't seem to exist a product call Intimate strings).

For me the big difference - and why I went with swarm - is that it's a proper orchestral library (with particular textural properties), while HO in general make sound design properties that, recently, also have orchestral properties. This is what Spitfire has really nailed with the Olafur chamber evo, swarm and half a dozen other libraries like no one else - all the fun and weirdness and texturality of sound design while still being properly orchestral articulations. (OT's Time Macro being the first competitor to properly join this particular party in my estimation).

I like the HO Intimate Textures demos, but they're all too hybrid for this to essential for me.

That said, this first section of this piece alone has convinced me that I also want Intimate Textures:

Agitato Sordino Legatos - "Prelude"

Its a very subtle and beautiful use of IT, but still sounds orchestral rather than hybridy or sound designy.
 

Mornats

Senior Member
I have both and have to say that the context they're used in very much dictates which one I'll turn to. I've used Orchestral Swarm to accent Albion One and V to good effect and I've used the swarm aspects of OS along with the more traditional orchestral parts to create a piece more rooted in the orchestral sound.

Intimate Textures is something I use in more hybrid-sounding pieces, often in lieu of using a synth part as I find it can bring synth-type sounds that are still standing with one foot somewhere near the orchestra. I recently bought eDNA Earth which is filling this role nicely now but there's a scratchy-sounding element of Intimate Textures that adds a cutting sound that I sometimes want. It tends to go better when I use Massive, Absynth and hybrid sound design libraries. And of course, if I want to move away from the Air Studios sound altogether then IT trumps eDNA or OS.
 
OP
midiman

midiman

Active Member
Thanks everyone for the great input and opinions. And so sorry I got the name of the Heavyocity library wrong - It is of course HO Intimate Textures and not HO Intimate Strings.
 
Top Bottom