I will say that the overview video on Fluffy’s site gives an honest and compelling representation of the character and sound. If you hear both those sustained moments in the Mahler, or the shorter pulse of the Vivaldi, and think how you might sculpt (midi interpret) a note or two a bit differently, as was my reaction before buying, that sums up my experience working through various patches so far. Kudus to them for using known works to help expose the product, btw.
Which is to also say I find the brighter quality to be both immediate and unique - something that has been missing from my string library template. I can’t say enough about how glad I am for that character. The choice of the hall/space used in recording, imho, is half the brilliance (literally). Some will find this to be too wet, and for my taste, the close mics alone capture that resonance and natural decay best, where less is more (the default patches load both close and far, and no mid, and I immediately started muting the far for composing purposes). So, I do find the mics here to be less distinct from each other than I’d like, though I’m only relaying first impressions here, void of thorough testing.
But to me, that space is a feature of how and where this was recorded: any style one might associate with Venice is not merely a product name here, as it is implicit to me that Fluffy set out to be distinguishable from the British hall sound, and the German studio, or an East European character, or other European go to venues, or even the darker coloring in another hemisphere hall mentioned by others - and it succeeds in standing apart on that front. I tend to be more critical of coloring in string libraries (not just the room decay) as I compose small/chamber/stage, than perhaps others are who work in more expansive orchestral strokes. Hence, “yet another string library” had to catch my ear before purchasing.
In terms of core articulations and how I (we) are accustomed to a certain way of working, I felt during auditioning yesterday those moments where the staccatos (and staccatissimos) have to be approached on their terms, if that makes sense. That these have a certain lilt in fast passages, and can be further harnessed via velocity considerations (and TM, though to very mixed results for me), is very stylistic and appealing. And while I suppose they are capable of being used (obliterated) into epic hellish intent, I would recommend other options for those inclined to do so.
The other expressive articulations, like floutandos and arcs are reminiscent of other libraries I use, and yet brighter in character for reasons already mentioned.
The compare/contrast, or blending with other library scenarios is inevitable to me as well, where I am already plotting how I might round out sustains or give more weight to shorts, sparingly. Though not necessarily. Listening to the demo songs beforehand, I had (have) reservations about some of the higher string legato, where scripting compensates for what feels like a slightly less mature development compared to other considerations.
And yet, I actually don’t always want a library to impose its legato on me (old school, I know). There were no surprises to me after buying, where the ample and amply expressive legato is concerned - Venice’s included tools for further shaping how legato styles are triggered a necessity. Out of boxers should take note! As these are all first impressions, it’s still a bit early for me to say how I will ultimately feel after integrating Venice in projects, except I already know that the glassier overall (baroque sheen) is worth whatever effort I put into shaping legato, even if I blend in a workflow like SCS, albeit very discriminately.
I haven’t gotten there yet, and can see how the advanced features themselves are going to be key in creating nuance. To me, so far, that nuance is never simply “out of the box,” no matter which library I use, though I was easily lost and absorbed playing the cello yesterday to great, inspirational affect - which meets a personal threshold for me in terms of a library’s effectiveness for future use. It’s not a perfect library, or a perfectly articulated solution throughout, and it has some inconsistencies I’m detecting (as well as technical glitches I have reported already). Being visually impaired, I wished Fluffy had stayed with the higher contrast against the parchment art throughout, as opposed to the second tier options which use muddy low contrast beiges and browns (and small text) for the advanced tools.
[Edit: not to end on a critical note, I meant to conclude with how my overall impressions are positive.]
Please forgive my review style, as it is what I did for years, and I tend to lapse into that cadence, lol. My personal wallet paid for these humble opinions and first impressions, all typed on an iPad at 4 am.