What's new

Spitfire Studio Brass

Parsifal666

I don't even own a DAW, I'm just a troll.
I don't have Spaces. I fiddled with a few reverbs I do have, and haven't yet found a setting that gets into the ballpark of Lyndhurst Hall. Yes, a few of the concert hall reverbs I've tried out sound very nice with the library on its own.
Spaces II is really good! But (this might sound weird) all I've used on SStWW is RC 48 on the bus, and believe it or not the concert hall sounds pretty damn good!

I mean, it's not the freakishly excellent Altiverb or Pro-R, but it definitely works well in a pinch imo.
 

The Darris

Senior Member
I don't have Spaces. I fiddled with a few reverbs I do have, and haven't yet found a setting that gets into the ballpark of Lyndhurst Hall. Yes, a few of the concert hall reverbs I've tried out sound very nice with the library on its own.
I would go with an Algo reverb like the Lexicon PCM (random hall). It's great at creating a warm sounding space similar to AIR. I honestly just load up the main Random Hall patch and set the tail to 2.15 seconds. That is roughly the tail at AIR. It allows me to blend all of my libraries together and from what I can tell, it's worked out well when my mock ups get mixed with the scores recorded at AIR.
 

AlexanderSchiborr

Senior Member
Businesses being passionate about their products isn’t a big deal. Customers being passionate about complaining about their products should be a big deal to the business. I’m surprised with the response from the business.
Agreed here. I remember Aaron who did the Infinite Brass got a lot of feedback and there were quite some issues coming from the buyers and it was remarkable that he within of 3 month released 2 updates to iron out the problems. That is very commendable in my opinion and it shows attitude not only because of the updates but how he openly dealt with the critic. Especially smaller devs are like that and that is I don´t know why but it seems there is something about that ability of recognition and reflexion which I find is at a great practise rather than saying: Oh well, there is chance that you can let sound every library like crap. While there is some truth in that Piets point where not of that nature willingly to let sound his examples bad on purpose. Just my opinion of course.
 
Last edited:

re-peat

Senior Member
I'd rather them just be honest and tell me that no sample library is perfect just by the nature of it being what it is. Or make an attempt to fix it. It's a big turn off.

Paul obviously refuses to accept that there might be anything wrong with these libraries, Rope. Had much the same thing happening years ago when Hollywood Strings was first released and proved to be badly out of tune, particularly the violas. Seven or eight thread-pages it took me and one or two other members to try and convince Jay Asher, who was EW’s online representative at the time, Doug bless him, that the library had serious tuning problems, but he would have none of it. He just wouldn’t. Audio example after audio example I posted, but to no avail. Jay kept replying that it must be a user- or system-error, and that the library itself was most certainly not the root of these intonation issues. How could there possibly be anything wrong, was his main argument, with a library that was engineered by the legend Shawn Murphy and produced by that holiest of trinities Doug, Nick and Thomas J.? How indeed?

This went on for day after tiresome day, until finally, at long last, word came from higher up in the East West Towers, that they acknowledged there was indeed a problem. Which was then solved (not entirely, but more than good enough) in the next update.

But the thing is, and this is the bit that’s still relevant today: to get to that point, you have to fight page after page against forces that simply don’t wanna hear about it. Fellow members start to turn against you, all kinds of assumptions are made about the evil intentions you might have, you’re accused of personal attacks (the same despicable trick that P. Cardon tried earlier in this thread), forum administrators begin to get a bit nervous, developers' egos are hurt so they disappear (I had a couple of feisty run-ins with Mike Barry from Cinesamples as well), the atmosphere sours ... And why? Only because a developer didn’t do his job right, and sold us a stinker.

In the case of the Hollywood Strings, it ended well. Doug and Nick were, thankfully, magnanimous enough to admit having let a flawed product go out of the door and they addressed the issue. Unfortunately, I don’t see any such outcome for the Studio Series. The moment I read that these libraries “had been lovingly nursed into existence with care and attention and a ton of work by a team of really talented people who work hard to make the products as good as they can”, I knew we were screwed.

- - - - - - -

Here is an excerpt of a post I wrote on the subject some years ago. I think it still stands every bit as much today as it did then.

"A point that is discussed far too rarely and which is, in my opinion, a big part of the problem: the quality of sample libraries is often simply not good enough. I know of no other field of commercial endeavour where the buyer has to accept — with meek resignment — that a product, for which good money was payed, might either be unfinished, flawed, through-and-through buggy or in no way capable of the claims it was sold with.

And for some bizarre reason, we — the paying customers — are expected to accept all that. And we’re also expected to have the polite and considerate patience to wait and wait and wait for months, sometimes years, in the hope that corrective updates might materialize. (We even have to accept that these updates never materialize at all.)
Moreover, if we dare say something about this, and happen to have the audacity to use words which betray a fraction too much emotion, disappointment, frustration or irritation, we’re branded rude, ungrateful and boorish whiners.

Why is that? Why has this totally absurd, unjust — and, I suspect, in some cases borderline illegal — state of affairs become the accepted norm?
And why are ‘respect’ and ‘professionalism’ deemed prerequisites when users talk to, or about, developers, but why do these same paying users have to tolerate to be treated without a hint of respect and professionalism by developers who sell them substandard, flawed or unfinished product?

(...) If I buy just about anything other than music software and that carries the tag ‘professional’, I can rest assured that a professional product, fully answering to the definition with which it was sold, is indeed what I will have purchased. If however I buy a so-called ‘professional’ sample library, entire sections might be badly out of tune, articulations might be missing, instruments might suffer from being poorly recorded, samples might be edited sloppily, the programming might be all off, certain functions might work erraticaly or not work at all, the library might be frustratingly incomplete, the package might still be in alpha- or beta-shape and in dire need of urgent updates and revisions, …

And we’re supposed to find all this perfectly normal and acceptable? And remain gentlemanlike and courteous towards the developer at all times? And if we don’t, and we vent our dissatisfaction instead, we’re accused of childish ranting, inordinate negativity, or suspected of having some sinister agenda towards the developer? (...)"

- - - - - - -

My respect for sample library developers is at an all time low at the moment. It really is. (As always, a few isolated emporiums excepted.) But what I find at least as depressing is the attitude of the majority of buyers. And it's particularly worrying that it seems to have become worse with the new generation of buyers. That docile, unthinking, spineless, uncritical, awe-struck willingness to accept whatever Mr. Big Shot Developer and Mr. Famous Engineer sells them, never questioning whether it is actually up to sample or not. Heck, most of them aren't even capable to hear the difference. And the hysterical indignation with which they condemn anyone who dares to be critical of a product of their revered developers ...

At the end of the day, you almost wanna say: well, it must be a fair world after all, these people — all these rabbits sitting round the Spitfire lantern in brainless sedation — get exactly what they deserve. The Studio Series is indeed the perfect product for them. What was I thinking, saying there is something wrong with it?

_
 
Last edited:

SimonCharlesHanna

Senior Member
Paul obviously refuses to accept that there might be anything wrong with these libraries, Rope. Had much the same thing happening years ago when Hollywood Strings was first released and proved to be badly out of tune, particularly the violas. Seven or eight thread-pages it took me and one or two other members to try and convince Jay Asher, who was EW’s online representative at the time, Doug bless him, that the library had serious tuning problems, but he would have none of it. He just wouldn’t. Audio example after audio example I posted, but to no avail. Jay kept replying that it must be a user- or system-error, and that the library itself was most certainly not the root of these intonation issues. How could there possibly be anything wrong, was his main argument, with a library that was engineered by the legend Shawn Murphy and produced by that holiest of trinities Doug, Nick and Thomas J.? How indeed?

This went on for day after tiresome day, until finally, at long last, word came from higher up in the East West Towers, that they acknowledged there was indeed a problem. Which was then solved (not entirely, but more than good enough) in the next update.

But the thing is, and this is the bit that’s still relevant today: to get to that point, you have to fight page after page against forces that simply don’t wanna hear about it. Fellow members start to turn against you, all kinds of assumptions are made about the evil intentions you might have, you’re accused of personal attacks (the same despicable trick that P. Cardon tried earlier in this thread), forum administrators begin to get a bit nervous, developers' egos are hurt so they disappear (I had a couple of feisty run-ins with Mike Barry from Cinesamples as well), the atmosphere sours ... And why? Only because a developer didn’t do his job right, and sold us a stinker.

In the case of the Hollywood Strings, it ended well. Doug and Nick were, thankfully, magnanimous enough to admit having let a flawed product go out of the door and they addressed the issue. Unfortunately, I don’t see any such outcome for the Studio Series. The moment I read that these libraries “had been lovingly nursed into existence with care and attention and a ton of work by a team of really talented people who work hard to make the products as good as they can”, I knew we were screwed.

- - - - - - -

Here is an excerpt of a post I wrote on the subject some years ago. I think it still stands every bit as much today as it did then.

"A point that is discussed far too rarely and which is, in my opinion, a big part of the problem: the quality of sample libraries is often simply not good enough. I know of no other field of commercial endeavour where the buyer has to accept — with meek resignment — that a product, for which good money was payed, might either be unfinished, flawed, through-and-through buggy or in no way capable of the claims it was sold with.

And for some bizarre reason, we — the paying customers — are expected to accept all that. And we’re also expected to have the polite and considerate patience to wait and wait and wait for months, sometimes years, in the hope that corrective updates might materialize. (We even have to accept that these updates never materialize at all.)
Moreover, if we dare say something about this, and happen to have the audacity to use words which betray a fraction too much emotion, disappointment, frustration or irritation, we’re branded rude, ungrateful and boorish whiners.

Why is that? Why has this totally absurd, unjust — and, I suspect, in some cases borderline illegal — state of affairs become the accepted norm?
And why are ‘respect’ and ‘professionalism’ deemed prerequisites when users talk to, or about, developers, but why do these same paying users have to tolerate to be treated without a hint of respect and professionalism by developers who sell them substandard, flawed or unfinished product?

(...) If I buy just about anything other than music software and that carries the tag ‘professional’, I can rest assured that a professional product, fully answering to the definition with which it was sold, is indeed what I will have purchased. If however I buy a so-called ‘professional’ sample library, entire sections might be badly out of tune, articulations might be missing, instruments might suffer from being poorly recorded, samples might be edited sloppily, the programming might be all off, certain functions might work erraticaly or not work at all, the library might be frustratingly incomplete, the package might still be in alpha- or beta-shape and in dire need of urgent updates and revisions, …

And we’re supposed to find all this perfectly normal and acceptable? And remain gentlemanlike and courteous towards the developer at all times? And if we don’t, and we vent our dissatisfaction instead, we’re accused of childish ranting, inordinate negativity, or suspected of having some sinister agenda towards the developer? (...)"

- - - - - - -

My respect for sample library developers is at an all time low at the moment. It really is. (As always, a few isolated emporiums excepted.) But what I find at least as depressing is the attitude of the majority of buyers. And it's particularly worrying that it seems to have become worse with the new generation of buyers. That docile, unthinking, spineless, uncritical, awe-struck willingness to accept whatever Mr. Big Shot Developer and Mr. Famous Engineer sells them, never questioning whether it is actually up to sample or not. Heck, most of them aren't even capable to hear the difference. And the hysterical indignation with which they condemn anyone who dares to be critical of a product of their revered developers ...

At the end of the day, you almost wanna say: well, it must be a fair world after all, these people — all these rabbits sitting round the Spitfire lantern in brainless sedation — get exactly what they deserve. The Studio Series is indeed the perfect product for them. What was I thinking, saying there is something wrong with it?

_
fight the powah
 

Parsifal666

I don't even own a DAW, I'm just a troll.
Paul obviously refuses to accept that there might be anything wrong with these libraries, Rope. Had much the same thing happening years ago when Hollywood Strings was first released and proved to be badly out of tune, particularly the violas. Seven or eight thread-pages it took me and one or two other members to try and convince Jay Asher, who was EW’s online representative at the time, Doug bless him, that the library had serious tuning problems, but he would have none of it. He just wouldn’t. Audio example after audio example I posted, but to no avail. Jay kept replying that it must be a user- or system-error, and that the library itself was most certainly not the root of these intonation issues. How could there possibly be anything wrong, was his main argument, with a library that was engineered by the legend Shawn Murphy and produced by that holiest of trinities Doug, Nick and Thomas J.? How indeed?

This went on for day after tiresome day, until finally, at long last, word came from higher up in the East West Towers, that they acknowledged there was indeed a problem. Which was then solved (not entirely, but more than good enough) in the next update.

But the thing is, and this is the bit that’s still relevant today: to get to that point, you have to fight page after page against forces that simply don’t wanna hear about it. Fellow members start to turn against you, all kinds of assumptions are made about the evil intentions you might have, you’re accused of personal attacks (the same despicable trick that P. Cardon tried earlier in this thread), forum administrators begin to get a bit nervous, developers' egos are hurt so they disappear (I had a couple of feisty run-ins with Mike Barry from Cinesamples as well), the atmosphere sours ... And why? Only because a developer didn’t do his job right, and sold us a stinker.

In the case of the Hollywood Strings, it ended well. Doug and Nick were, thankfully, magnanimous enough to admit having let a flawed product go out of the door and they addressed the issue. Unfortunately, I don’t see any such outcome for the Studio Series. The moment I read that these libraries “had been lovingly nursed into existence with care and attention and a ton of work by a team of really talented people who work hard to make the products as good as they can”, I knew we were screwed.

- - - - - - -

Here is an excerpt of a post I wrote on the subject some years ago. I think it still stands every bit as much today as it did then.

"A point that is discussed far too rarely and which is, in my opinion, a big part of the problem: the quality of sample libraries is often simply not good enough. I know of no other field of commercial endeavour where the buyer has to accept — with meek resignment — that a product, for which good money was payed, might either be unfinished, flawed, through-and-through buggy or in no way capable of the claims it was sold with.

And for some bizarre reason, we — the paying customers — are expected to accept all that. And we’re also expected to have the polite and considerate patience to wait and wait and wait for months, sometimes years, in the hope that corrective updates might materialize. (We even have to accept that these updates never materialize at all.)
Moreover, if we dare say something about this, and happen to have the audacity to use words which betray a fraction too much emotion, disappointment, frustration or irritation, we’re branded rude, ungrateful and boorish whiners.

Why is that? Why has this totally absurd, unjust — and, I suspect, in some cases borderline illegal — state of affairs become the accepted norm?
And why are ‘respect’ and ‘professionalism’ deemed prerequisites when users talk to, or about, developers, but why do these same paying users have to tolerate to be treated without a hint of respect and professionalism by developers who sell them substandard, flawed or unfinished product?

(...) If I buy just about anything other than music software and that carries the tag ‘professional’, I can rest assured that a professional product, fully answering to the definition with which it was sold, is indeed what I will have purchased. If however I buy a so-called ‘professional’ sample library, entire sections might be badly out of tune, articulations might be missing, instruments might suffer from being poorly recorded, samples might be edited sloppily, the programming might be all off, certain functions might work erraticaly or not work at all, the library might be frustratingly incomplete, the package might still be in alpha- or beta-shape and in dire need of urgent updates and revisions, …

And we’re supposed to find all this perfectly normal and acceptable? And remain gentlemanlike and courteous towards the developer at all times? And if we don’t, and we vent our dissatisfaction instead, we’re accused of childish ranting, inordinate negativity, or suspected of having some sinister agenda towards the developer? (...)"

- - - - - - -

My respect for sample library developers is at an all time low at the moment. It really is. (As always, a few isolated emporiums excepted.) But what I find at least as depressing is the attitude of the majority of buyers. And it's particularly worrying that it seems to have become worse with the new generation of buyers. That docile, unthinking, spineless, uncritical, awe-struck willingness to accept whatever Mr. Big Shot Developer and Mr. Famous Engineer sells them, never questioning whether it is actually up to sample or not. Heck, most of them aren't even capable to hear the difference. And the hysterical indignation with which they condemn anyone who dares to be critical of a product of their revered developers ...

At the end of the day, you almost wanna say: well, it must be a fair world after all, these people — all these rabbits sitting round the Spitfire lantern in brainless sedation — get exactly what they deserve. The Studio Series is indeed the perfect product for them. What was I thinking, saying there is something wrong with it?

_
There are very interesting points here, but (putting aside for a second the words regarding the developers) does any of this seem dismissive and condescending to the buyers? I have a hard time believing a good portion of this forum are blind SA sycophants...otherwise I'd never come here.

But hey, if that's what you think then more power to you (it doesn't exactly hurt my feelings). I remain grateful for your audio examples.
 

Alex Fraser

Senior Member
At the end of the day, you almost wanna say: well, it must be a fair world after all, these people — all these rabbits sitting round the Spitfire lantern in brainless sedation — get exactly what they deserve. The Studio Series is indeed the perfect product for them. What was I thinking, saying there is something wrong with it?
Your point on making sure developers create products that are fit for purpose is well made, Piet.
But I have to ask - have you considered that different customers have different expectations for the libraries that they purchase?

Your work obviously demands instruments that sound good in exposed lines, with good transitions etc. And that's OK. Should *I* decide to purchase the Studio Series - I'll be putting it into commercial R&B productions, underscore for short films (where the music is half buried by dialogue) and a personal pet project which is basically an "A-Team" Mike Post tribute(!)

None of these uses will demand the level of finesse that more classical or filmic genres require.
More to the point, the music I'd make using the libraries would pay the bills, feed my kids...and I'd get a return on my investment. I won't feel short changed in the slightest, even if some of the instruments have issues. And at the current wish list price, that's something I can easily live with.

It's unfair to dismiss any group of customers as brainless. We all require different things in any given library and it's up to the individual to weigh up the potential use vs cost for any product. It appears your standards are higher than most - and that's cool! Someone needs to push the envelope. But please remember that everyone buys libraries for a different purpose and the use cases presented on this forum are only part of the story.

All said with respect.
A
 

jbuhler

Senior Member
I would go with an Algo reverb like the Lexicon PCM (random hall). It's great at creating a warm sounding space similar to AIR. I honestly just load up the main Random Hall patch and set the tail to 2.15 seconds. That is roughly the tail at AIR. It allows me to blend all of my libraries together and from what I can tell, it's worked out well when my mock ups get mixed with the scores recorded at AIR.
Thanks for the recommendation!
 

Parsifal666

I don't even own a DAW, I'm just a troll.
Sooo, I got a smaller commission last night and an advance and (wait for it)….

bought Studio Brass Professional. ;)

How do ya like me now lol!

Downloading now...hey, when money's not a problem getting libraries like this are great fun and can be quite inspiring. I already accept that it might not be even close to the quality of Hollywood Brass and the Hein overall, but I have enough moolah incoming to indulge my interest in this series.

I wouldn't try this approach at home, folks, especially if you're working on selling your second child (the first one is long gone by now) to get this library.
 

jbuhler

Senior Member
Spaces II is really good! But (this might sound weird) all I've used on SStWW is RC 48 on the bus, and believe it or not the concert hall sounds pretty damn good!
It doesn’t sound weird at all. I’ve had good luck with placing the instruments in various halls. So far the halls I tried just don’t sound much like the big hall in Air.
 

Parsifal666

I don't even own a DAW, I'm just a troll.
I absolutely love re-peats way with words. I'm tempted to create a really disappointing woodwind library just so I can enjoy the response (gigasampler only).

"all these rabbits sitting round the Spitfire lantern in brainless sedation" is gold.

I still may buy this library :)
I must admit there is a high entertainment factor (especially for me once I assured myself re-peat is mostly just trying to help and in my case he certainly did).

It doesn’t sound weird at all. I’ve had good luck with placing the instruments in various halls. So far the halls I tried just don’t sound much like the big hall in Air.
I've gotten good hall sound from both Valhalla Vintage and Room 'verbs as well (and I was surprised with that I'll tell you! Hard to beat the prices imo).
 
Last edited:

jbuhler

Senior Member
I've gotten good hall sound from both Valhalla Vintage and Room 'verbs as well (and I was surprised with that I'll tell you! Hard to beat the prices imo).
I’m most curious to hear your reaction to Studio Brass. For me it’s seeming a very good complement to SSB, the Arks, etc. It has some real roughness—the sustains of both tubas in the high range, the high horn 2, trumpet 2’s occasional struggles with playing major sevenths—but that’s not always a bad thing if you have other libraries available. In any case I wonder how it might complement your other brass libraries.
 

Parsifal666

I don't even own a DAW, I'm just a troll.
I’m most curious to hear your reaction to Studio Brass. For me it’s seeming a very good complement to SSB, the Arks, etc. It has some real roughness—the sustains of both tubas in the high range, the high horn 2, trumpet 2’s occasional struggles with playing major sevenths—but that’s not always a bad thing if you have other libraries available. In any case I wonder how it might complement your other brass libraries.
I'm quite curious myself lol! It will be fun to place SStB next to the Arks in particular for me. The SStB ensembles in particular (I so love the woodwinds in Arks 1 and 2).
 

dzilizzi

I know nothing
Well all those discussions wouldn’t happen if there were updates & fixes after the release of products.

I’m quite surprised at how seldom the sample companies fix their own products.

The business race seems not to consider fixes & user support as paramount. This, to me, is the main mistake and the source of countless gripes & frustration.

I’m not speaking for everyone, some (small) companies have regular updates, a perspective everyone should consider when buying a library.

Users, please raise tickets for bugs & glitches.
Companies, please patch your products.
And everyone will be happier in the long run.
Well, I just got some upgrades for SSW and SSB when I was downloading my new stuff. So it does happen. :)
 

paulthomson

New Member
Hey all -

Fascinating discussion - really - I'm noting everything I'm reading and sifting through the slight exaggerations to find useful nuggets to work with.

I thought you might be interested - in the past 12 months we've released 22 Kontakt product updates and 9 Spitfire plugin updates. 307 reported issues have been resolved in the same time.

We do take a pride in making good stuff. Now I must go back to my lovely rabbit hutch and turn the lamps up a bit. Where is my syringe?

P x
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom