What's new

Spitfire Strings Comparison (Spitfire Studio Strings)

Monkberry

Member
I don't have Chamber Strings, but I do have Studio Strings.

I think it's got tons of potential, but you almost definitely will want the Professional version; same for the brass. The one mic you get in the basic, Tree 1, doesn't really provide the sound I'm after. It has a little more room in it than I'd like for most purposes, and if you're buying these libraries for the flexibility they offer, you'll probably feel the same way. I know some people were skeptical about needing more mic positions in Air 1 than in the Hall, but they really are all different and useful, going by the Herrmann Toolkit.

I can't wait to upgrade and get the Outriggers. The additional instruments in the brass and the divisi functionality with the strings are obviously enticing, too.
Thanks for your input Miket. I just watched a video with Studio Strings Pro and it does sound great. Certainly much drier than Chamber Strings Pro. I can see having both these libraries but I also have the Cinematic Studio String Series as well as the CSS Solo library so I definitely want something drier and with less baked in vibrato.
 

miket

Senior Member
The non-vibrato in Studio Strings is very nice, but I'm not sure if the vibrato slider is a true crossfade, or just an on/off. I know that's a big deal for some people.
 
One of the best comparisons I've heard. Not sure why I had low expectations for the studio strings, but I actually really like the tone-will have to add that to my list. I've had my eye on the solo strings for a while now, but after this video I'm second guessing myself.
 

jbuhler

Senior Member
One of the best comparisons I've heard. Not sure why I had low expectations for the studio strings, but I actually really like the tone-will have to add that to my list. I've had my eye on the solo strings for a while now, but after this video I'm second guessing myself.
I think the solo strings are lovely giving spot solos in a larger ensemble where the vibrato both makes contextual sense and movements across the nonvib/bib boundary can be masked by the other players. The vibrato can also be better controlled than in these examples, but the vibrato is the biggest hurdle to using these instruments effectively.
 

Monkberry

Member
After watching Cory Pelizzari's video on Spitfire Studio Strings I've decided on purchasing the Pro version and putting Chamber Strings Pro on the back burner. I love the overall sound Studio Strings on all instruments. I so appreciate this website and all who contribute so generously!!
 

Denkii

Active Member
Coming from CSS and CSSS, I'm looking at SCS and SStS at the moment. After watching this comparison and Cory's overview of SStS I really fell in love with SStS, even though everyone seems to be raving about SCS.
 

Sarah Mancuso

Esselfortium
SCS and SStS are both pretty great in my experience. One big advantage SCS has is lots of legato articulations (con sord, sul g, tremolo, flautando, sul pont, some of which also have portamento) as well as faster legatos for runs and such, whereas SStS only has legato for the standard artic, with fingered and portamento modes.
 

Wolfie2112

Senior Member
Coming from CSS and CSSS, I'm looking at SCS and SStS at the moment. After watching this comparison and Cory's overview of SStS I really fell in love with SStS, even though everyone seems to be raving about SCS.
I bought SStS core as a direct result of watching Cory's video. I own a few string libraries, and I really like this one, it has a very nice sound....and also sounds great with a bit of your favourite reverb. I wouldn't use it as my main string library, but it certainly has is place.
 

Sean

I don't know what I'm talking about
Coming from CSS and CSSS, I'm looking at SCS and SStS at the moment. After watching this comparison and Cory's overview of SStS I really fell in love with SStS, even though everyone seems to be raving about SCS.
I own both CSS and SStS. I think SStS complements CSS nicely but CSS is still my go-to. I would say it's more versatile.
 
Top Bottom