What's new

What's not to like about Spitfire Chamber Strings?

Yes, the pro-version is tempting too, since it is 'only' 150 more tomorrow. I just don't understand what the stereomixes do. I thought all the articulations were recorded 'in situ', also in the core lib? Then what do stereomixes add? I don't think I will use the extra mics that much, but maybe those mixes are useful to me?

They save you resources, that's all. Someone, like Jake Jackson, made a mix with all the available mics, and that mix was bounced as new samples - so you can load that mix, and only get hit wit the RAM footprint of a single mic position. Think of it as another mic perspective, but one that's a mix of all the the other mics.
 
Yes, the pro-version is tempting too, since it is 'only' 150 more tomorrow. I just don't understand what the stereomixes do. I thought all the articulations were recorded 'in situ', also in the core lib? Then what do stereomixes add? I don't think I will use the extra mics that much, but maybe those mixes are useful to me?
Stereo mixes are just Jake Jackson mixes from the other mics, but with a reduced RAM footprint. I often use them as a starting point instead of the core CTA.
ETA: Or what @thesteelydane said.
 
I love the demos, but I have to admit that for commercial composition which is the only thing I use samples for, I find that sound of chamber strings to be the least desired sound. I don't really understand why developers have gravitated towards it as their main libraries like Berlin and CSS have.

Do you find much use for these smaller ensembles in film/tv/game/trailer/library music? Or maybe I'm looking at it in the wrong way. Maybe in using liver players if I can only afford a chamber ensemble, I should do mockups with a chamber ensemble so as to make a more accurate representation of the final sound.
 
Has been a very tempting option for some time. Not SCS, but $120. seems good value.
March 21, SF Apex changes the perspective. :unsure:
To share my own testimony,i have followed chamber strings since 'sable' times....at first no so excited(was an unfinished product back then)...but grew and expanded since then and now it is a colossal,magnificent library(sure it has its flows).
Also Managed to go full on GAS and bought almost every string library out there(except orchestral tools maybe)

8dio's century and all Adagio-agitato-anthology,studio strings
NI Symphony Series,
Hollywood strings,
Cinematic studio strings and cinematic strings 1&2,
LASS,
Spitfire studio strings
Cinestrings

all have their pros and cons,but
along with lass and cinematic studio strings SCS is a real WORKHORSE....i.mean you can go intimate or big,lush or harsh,can have any articulation you maybe can think of...sky (and ambience) is the limit.
 
The deal is kinda tempting I gotta say...I may be needing it for some classical Pachebel's Canon kinda stuff, would it be suitable for that lush baroque sound?
 
I think this could be more of an ear-fatigue but the more I've played with it, the more I could not tolerate its exaggerated vibrato nor the nasal quality of the small sections. But that's just me. If you like the sound already then I think there is no much to dislike about this library.
Out of curiousity, did you mess with the vibrato controls? There’s not a LOT of control but there is some (is it three levels, down to off?)
 
If anyone is so kind, I would like to know two things concerning the legatos in SCS.

1) Note range: I recently bought Studio Strings, and the violins' legato only go up to the high C. The sustains go a bit higher. Is this the same with SCS?

2) Dynamic range: The legatos in Studio Strings go just about, say, 70/80% of the dynamics of the sustains, the fortissimo levels are missing. Is this, again, the same with SCS?
 
If anyone is so kind, I would like to know two things concerning the legatos in SCS.

1) Note range: I recently bought Studio Strings, and the violins' legato only go up to the high C. The sustains go a bit higher. Is this the same with SCS?

2) Dynamic range: The legatos in Studio Strings go just about, say, 70/80% of the dynamics of the sustains, the fortissimo levels are missing. Is this, again, the same with SCS?

The legato violins go from low G to high D...about 3.5 octaves. My Cinestrings goes the full 4 octaves, but they may have generated those extra high samples, and not actually recorded.
 
Out of curiousity, did you mess with the vibrato controls? There’s not a LOT of control but there is some (is it three levels, down to off?)
I keep the slider just above the middle which is the soft vibrato. Below is off and moving up is more intense..so yeah it's 3 levels I think if that what you mean. But even the soft vibrato is so pronounced to my ears (as if all players are playing vibrato in sync which is unrealistic). I think this is again due to the nasal quality of the small section size which is even amplified with the big hall size...A combination that my ears didn't like with time.
 
Thanks, I just spent a lot of time on it is all!

This piece had so many divisi parts that I opted for SCS in the end. The unison moments could have probably benefited from SSS too, however at the time my template was maxing out my RAM enough anyway...

It’s SCS with Solo Strings layered, so no Albion, Symphonic Strings, etc. I’d probably reach for SSS when I need something that is naturally bigger. I actually used SSS recently for a snippet of a John Powell mock-up as it was more fitting.

Great to know! As I don’t own SSS, I wonder if layering SCS 3 times would give a pleasant result? Been waiting so long for a SSS sale :)
 
It has all the typical qualities of Spitfire libraries and all the drawbacks.

Generally I'm a fan of SCS - the sound and character are just unparelleled - but the things I sometimes struggle with are:

1) It really is very very ambient, and it's something you kind of have to live with. You can never really eliminate the rich reverb tail - not even with the close mics.

2) It's not a library that allows combining many different articulations to a fluid, cohesive performance without extensive editing and fumbling around. The note attacks and decays, their general responsiveness, and volume/dynamics I would describe as a bit unwieldy and sluggish, if you're trying to do more nimble, agile, or intricate stuff. The articulations are seemingly meant to stand on their own and often don't really behave as if they were meant to "play together". Sculpting a performance in which you, let's say, alternate between firm, resolute bowings, short notes and softer arcs requires quite a lot of massaging.

3) It's a minor thing really, but the library includes an extensive wealth of articulations, which are spread over several NKIs by a seemingly erratic logic, so organizing the patches you really need is a bit of a mess.

To your third point I agree. I wish spitfire would take notes from some other developers and just put all of their articulations into one patch. Their core ‘workhorse’ patches make a lot of sense but they always lack like 2-3 more articulations I use on a consistent basis. Would make creating articulations maps in logic less of a pain if they just combined everything. I know next to nothing about scripting so I’m sure there’s some method to their madness.
 
I realize this thread is old, but I'm new to the forum and discovered this by Googling. I'm wondering if the VI cognoscenti have an opinion on whether it makes sense to buy SCS if one already owns all of SSO (which of course includes SSS) … especially given the sale that is going on this week. SCS worth it on top of SSS?
 
I realize this thread is old, but I'm new to the forum and discovered this by Googling. I'm wondering if the VI cognoscenti have an opinion on whether it makes sense to buy SCS if one already owns all of SSO (which of course includes SSS) … especially given the sale that is going on this week. SCS worth it on top of SSS?
Do you really need it? Ask yourself what you will get out of it, and more important, what you are missing now, that you feel you need it? If you write for Chamber music, then yes get it. If you want it as a supplement to SSO...I wouldn't. I know people who use it as divisi but it's not really a divisi section.
 
I realize this thread is old, but I'm new to the forum and discovered this by Googling. I'm wondering if the VI cognoscenti have an opinion on whether it makes sense to buy SCS if one already owns all of SSO (which of course includes SSS) … especially given the sale that is going on this week. SCS worth it on top of SSS?
SCS can be used quite well as an alternative to SSS, giving a more detailed sound to the strings. It can also bring detail to SSS layering with it, and you can layer with SCS with itself to give it a bigger sound. SSS and SCS are reasonably consistent with each other so you can frequently use the same midi with only minor tweaks. SCS also works as divisi for SSS. I find it works quite well for that, and works better than some libraries I have designed for divisi. Of course YMMV, and the main issue is whether you like the sound of SCS. In general, I find SCS much easier to work with than SSS, though that may be because I learned SCS first.
 
Thanks, jaketanner and jbuhler, for both of your helpful replies.

jaketanner: yep, these are the right questions to ask! I probably want/need Solo Strings more than SCS, but I do very much like SCS's sound.

jbuhler: Given the similarity of SSS and SCS, I'm curious how working with SCS differs from SSS. Are the sets of articulations different, and/or not accessed in similar ways across the libraries? If they are, why would working with one be easier or harder than the other, esp. if they are largely MIDI-compatible?
 
Thanks, jaketanner and jbuhler, for both of your helpful replies.

jaketanner: yep, these are the right questions to ask! I probably want/need Solo Strings more than SCS, but I do very much like SCS's sound.

jbuhler: Given the similarity of SSS and SCS, I'm curious how working with SCS differs from SSS. Are the sets of articulations different, and/or not accessed in similar ways across the libraries? If they are, why would working with one be easier or harder than the other, esp. if they are largely MIDI-compatible?
SCS has quite a lot more articulations—SSS and SCS share most core articulations, but SCS has additional ones and more legato types. SCS is a much smaller ensemble and so both more detailed and more agile. But it's also not as smooth or as weighty (though SCS can be surprisingly weighty for its size—one of the peculiarities of sampling), and it has some intonational issues (evident because of the small size of the sections), which drive some crazy. Personally, I find because SCS has so many articulations and legatos, you can almost always find a quick workaround if you encounter something that is too much of an issue (and in context, I don't ordinarily find they are much of an issue unless you are repeatedly going to a bad sample in an exposed passage). Others complain about the tone of SCS, which is a bit nasally, but which I like. I always find SSS a bit ponderous but also lacking in bite compared to SCS. I usually start with SCS and add SSS for weight if I feel I need it. If you want the divisi effect, I find it works best if you layer SSS and SCS in tutti passages and then go to SCS for the divisi. That way I find it sounds less like you have changed orchestras... But here as with everything so much depends on the music you write, and what works for my music may not work for yours...

In terms of working with SCS and SSS, the differences come with things like getting the legato right, the transitions between dynamic layers, the agility of the samples, how consistent the timing of the samples is, how the vibrato sounds, the way the samples take automation, especially CC1, the release samples, etc. I find it takes me far less time to get SCS to where I want it than SSS. Often I never get SSS fully to where I'd like it to be, and so have increasingly started to use HZS instead.
 
SCS has quite a lot more articulations—SSS and SCS share most core articulations, but SCS has additional ones and more legato types. SCS is a much smaller ensemble and so both more detailed and more agile. But it's also not as smooth or as weighty (though SCS can be surprisingly weighty for its size—one of the peculiarities of sampling), and it has some intonational issues (evident because of the small size of the sections), which drive some crazy. Personally, I find because SCS has so many articulations and legatos, you can almost always find a quick workaround if you encounter something that is too much of an issue (and in context, I don't ordinarily find they are much of an issue unless you are repeatedly going to a bad sample in an exposed passage). Others complain about the tone of SCS, which is a bit nasally, but which I like. I always find SSS a bit ponderous but also lacking in bite compared to SCS. I usually start with SCS and add SSS for weight if I feel I need it. If you want the divisi effect, I find it works best if you layer SSS and SCS in tutti passages and then go to SCS for the divisi. That way I find it sounds less like you have changed orchestras... But here as with everything so much depends on the music you write, and what works for my music may not work for yours...

In terms of working with SCS and SSS, the differences come with things like getting the legato right, the transitions between dynamic layers, the agility of the samples, how consistent the timing of the samples is, how the vibrato sounds, the way the samples take automation, especially CC1, the release samples, etc. I find it takes me far less time to get SCS to where I want it than SSS. Often I never get SSS fully to where I'd like it to be, and so have increasingly started to use HZS instead.
Super helpful. Thank you!
 
Hi. Anyone know how to adjust the attack? I see the release controller but I don't see the adjust.
Thanks in advance!
 
Hi. Anyone know how to adjust the attack? I see the release controller but I don't see the adjust.
Thanks in advance!
don't think you can. If you need more attack, you can layer in a spiccato and assign it to velocity so that it's not triggered when you don't want, OR just put it on a separate track.
 
Top Bottom