CineSamples - Yes or No?

[AngelCityOutlaw]

I grow tired of EWQLSO and I desire something more "modern" and most of all, that has true legato.

With Symphonic Orchestra, you can do great things, but you have to stitch together a billion different, clunky patches and perform all kinds of other voodoo to do it. It's "legato" is a script that chops off the attack of the next note, but never fear, they have Qlegato patches...which basically are notes with the attack cut off. There are keyswitches, but you can't really use the modwheel with those patches, so who cares. The Play GUI sucks the chrome off a car bumper and finally, I'd rather listen to a Donald Trump sex-tape than the portamento script.

Just a minute of playing around with the legato patches taken from Symphobia and included in Orchestral Essentials yields far more satisfying and realistic results with little to no trickery. That and the samples just sound great to me.

It's clear that I should get something more recent with a better interface and true legato, but what?

The CineSamples bundle of the cores seems like a good idea since it works with the Kontakt Player and appears to have what I'm looking for without breaking the bank. Are the "pro" variants really necessary, though? They just seem to add some extra bells and whistles. The 8Dio stuff sounds great, but it doesn't seem significantly better than what their competitors offer for less money. I mean c'mon Troels, I'm not Scrooge McDuck here.

[Neifion]

I use CineBrass and CineWinds in my current template and I can say that they're second-to-none when it comes to quality and ease-of-use. Especially CineBrass; the smoothness in the dynamics is amazing. The hall has a great sound (MGM Scoring Stage, where Gone With The Wind, Back To The Future, The Force Awakens were recorded) and many great players (such as Amy Tatum, who did the flutes on the Journey soundtrack).

As to whether or not to go "Pro", that depends. To me, CineBrass Pro is essential because it has the solos. I like writing for solo brass, particularly horn and trumpet, so for me it was a no-brainer. You can get by without CineWinds Pro since it's mostly made up of ethnic and secondary orchestral winds (alto flute, bass clarinet, contrabassoon) but I like having a contrabassoon in my template as well as the option to have the aforementioned winds as well.

As for ease-of-use, it's excellent. As much as I love using Spitfire, CineSamples is hands-down the easiest. Pedal down for legato. Pedal up for shorts. Staccato, tenuto, marcato mapped to velocity. Dynamics mapped to mod wheel. Lovely workflow!

[Nabeel Ansari]

I have CineSamples. 

It's okay. Some patches are amazing, like Horns legatos in CineBrass. The Winds are okay, they used to have bad noise issues and it got mostly fixed recently, but still nothing really inspiring. I have no comment on their strings, but I have a different recommendation for strings nonetheless. I think CineBrass is the strongest of the three, I would JUST get that one if you wanted CineSamples.

For full orchestra, I recommend Albion ONE. Fantastic sound, mixability, and good legato patches. It's not split into each instrument section like most libraries but... it really doesn't matter if you're not doing meticulous orchestration. You have Highs, Lows, and Mids, and that's really all you need to paint really pretty pictures. Plus, the fact that it's pre-recorded as sections voiced together only makes it sound more organic when you have legato lines.

For individual sections, as I said before CineBrass is good brass.

For winds, CineWinds is okay and you get the main solos (clarinet, flute, piccolo, bassoon, oboe) which is good for a standard selection. Around VI-Control though, you'll see people talk very highly of Berlin Woodwinds, and their articulation switching system is out of this world.

For strings, I have to recommend Cinematic Strings 2. CS2 is one of those libraries that everyone loves. It's simply designed and you just pop it into your project and it works. Has a great, full-bodied sound too, and with some good reverb it's honestly pretty convincing.

 

I understand bundle pricing and all that is a big factor in a decision; if that's the case and it's important to you, then do get the CineSamples bundle. It's like the difference between a good chicken sandwich and a good cheeseburger; you're gonna have a good time either way.

[Neifion]

Pre-recorded as sections does not make it sound more organic. When you have the flutes, oboes, and clarinets all switching dynamic layers at exactly the same time, it sounds fake. A good mockup artist can cover up that shortcoming by blending with other patches or libraries and meticulous attention to performance, but it's not any more "organic" than with individual sections. Not to mention you lack the flexibility of having the individual instruments/sections do their own thing, which is pretty much essential in any orchestral writing. You can't have a flute line separate from the clarinets, or have the horns separate from the trumpets (or trombones if you're using the mid patch).

Also, since you're keen on legato, be aware that the legato patches in Albion ONE are very limited. For strings and brass, it's all recorded in octaves except for a "Mid" patch that gives you barely two octaves in the middle range to work with.

Honestly though, Spitfire, CineSamples, Berlin, 8DIO; they all sound great if you take the time to learn them. Since pricing is a concern for you, I'd definitely recommend you going for the CineSamples bundle, since Spitfire, Berlin, 8DIO, and VSL are all a lot more expensive. Personally, I use a mix of mostly Spitfire BML, CineSamples, BWW, and Soaring Strings, but I managed it by purchasing them gradually over the years.

 

[djpretzel]

My quick two cents:

• CineBrass is pretty damn good.
• CinePerc is pretty damn good.
• I don't particularly like CineWinds or CineStrings.

[AngelCityOutlaw]

First, I just want to say thanks for the awesome posts. This has thus far been extremely helpful.

10 hours ago, djpretzel said:

My quick two cents:

• CineBrass is pretty damn good.
• CinePerc is pretty damn good.
• I don't particularly like CineWinds or CineStrings.

Your two cents are greatly appreciated, DJP. Can I ask what you don't like about CineWind and Strings?

[djpretzel]

3 minutes ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

First, I just want to say thanks for the awesome posts. This has thus far been extremely helpful.

Your two cents are greatly appreciated, DJP. Can I ask what you don't like about CineWind and Strings?

CineStrings just feels a little meh next to the likes of Spitfire Mural or Sable or even the Albion patches, or (from demos I've heard) Berlin Strings, Hollywood Strings, etc.

With CineWinds, I really dislike the articulation artifacts in legato transitions. To me they stand out too much & end up making the instruments too foreground/close.

[Neifion]

Out of curiosity, what is your budget?

[AngelCityOutlaw]

1 hour ago, Neifion said:

Out of curiosity, what is your budget?

Well, ideally, under 2,500 if possible. 

Which makes the core bundle of Cinesamples make sense since that would come to 2,358.76

[djpretzel]

1 minute ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Well, ideally, under 2,500 if possible. 

Which makes the core bundle of Cinesamples make sense since that would come to 2,358.76

That's a pretty big budget

I'd hodgepodge it. Don't go with one vendor... CineSamples does brass well, so maybe use them for that, but branch out from there.

[Meteo Xavier]

I might suggest you not blow the entire JUST-under-$2,500 on samples alone. No matter what you end up getting, save some of that money for advertising what you do with it to help justify what you spent on the samples, fam.

I'm a bit blown away by that number too. I've been buying VST stuff for 12 years and I don't think it's totaled $2,500 yet. <:O

[AngelCityOutlaw]

1 hour ago, Meteo Xavier said:

I'm a bit blown away by that number too. I've been buying VST stuff for 12 years and I don't think it's totaled $2,500 yet. <:O

I can count on one hand the number of virtual instrument manufacturers that I know for a fact have suppliers in Canada - many of them are download only, so exchange rates often really work against me.

For example: Berlin Winds is a good suggestion, but 460 pounds is 875 Canadian (Just 600 USD) and I would need the full version of kontakt which would be another 525. That puts me over halfway to my max just to get one thing. I haven't found anyone in Canada who sells just the Kontakt VST by itself, but I can get Komplete at some music stores here for 700 - 800. Cinematic Strings 2 costs around 400 in American, but closer to 600 here. 

1 hour ago, Meteo Xavier said:

No matter what you end up getting, save some of that money for advertising what you do with it to help justify what you spent on the samples, fam.

That's actually why I want the better samples. I'm currently working on a game soundtrack, biggest and best paying gig I've had thus far. However, even though the client is satisfied with the results, this game is definitely advertising for me more than before - having been at trade shows and streamed in charity tournaments. The soundtrack is requiring increasing amounts of orchestrations and when someone can play my game and say that the music itself is really good, but walk just down the hall and play that other game where the composer who got a student discount on CineSamples has a mockup where you can hear all the little transitions between notes in the melodies, was recorded at MGM's scoring stage, is really deeply sampled, etc. that stands out even to the layman.

TL;DR - I'm fighting against outdated tech. With what I currently have, 110% effort in sequencing is only going to give me 70% results of my competition at best.

4 hours ago, djpretzel said:

CineStrings just feels a little meh next to the likes of Spitfire Mural or Sable or even the Albion patches, or (from demos I've heard) Berlin Strings, Hollywood Strings, etc.

With CineWinds, I really dislike the articulation artifacts in legato transitions. To me they stand out too much & end up making the instruments too foreground/close.

It's interesting that you say that, because I saw on CineSamples site Mike Patti was saying that with their most recent update to Cinewinds (I think), they went through all of the samples and de-noised them as well as recorded new ones and added a legato volume knob. Have you used it post any recent (in the last couple years sorta thing) updates?

Anyway, I'm currently thinking about this:

CineBrass
CineWinds
Cinematic Strings 2

I've already got a lot of different percussion from various libraries so I'm not in dire need of anything there. These three would set me back 1600 - 1800 bucks I think. I'd check the exact prices, but CineSamples' site is down at the moment. =/ 

[Neifion]

1 hour ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Anyway, I'm currently thinking about this:

CineBrass
CineWinds
Cinematic Strings 2

That sounds like a solid lineup to me. Despite what pretty much everyone has said about CineWinds, I still stand by my viewpoint that CineWinds is excellent. Here are some examples of their use in my own compositions:

http://kekomusic.net/track/967896/the-thinker-a-theme-of-reflection-fantasy-orchestral?feature_id=163443

http://kekomusic.net/track/723675/the-forgotten-weir-mysterious-dark-forest-theme?feature_id=153947

https://soundcloud.com/kekopro/lingering-whisper#t=1:32

http://kekomusic.net/track/876755/a-world-gone

For strings, as lovely as CS2 sounds, I can't recommend Sable and Mural enough. Yes, they are expensive, but CS2 is quite limited in articulations, no spiccato, doesn't have sordino, and no portamento or bow change legato (only fingered legato). Down the road you might find yourself wanting to use other articulations besides the basic longs and shorts, and you'll end up getting another library anyway. It all depends on what you need. We don't know what you're going to write and which articulations you'll need. If you know that arco, pizz, stacc, spicc, trem, and trills are all you're ever going to need, CS2 is going to cover that. Maybe you'd like to have muted strings, portamento, sul ponticello, sul tasto, flautando, harmonics, col legno. Then CS2 won't be enough.

My suggestion would be to pick up Mural Vol. 1: http://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/instruments/strings/symphonic-strings-volume-1/

It's $599 regular (if you're a student, you can get a 30% discount with no restrictions). It has a gorgeous sound and a good set of basic articulations to get you started. Down the road, you can pick up Vol. 2 and you'll get even more articulations (plus bow change and portamento legato). You can add gradually based on what you can afford and what you need. Or, just stick with Vol. 1 if you never need anything else.

 

[Meteo Xavier]

7 minutes ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

That's actually why I want the better samples. I'm currently working on a game soundtrack, biggest and best paying gig I've had thus far. However, even though the client is satisfied with the results, this game is definitely advertising for me more than before - having been at trade shows and streamed in charity tournaments. The soundtrack is requiring increasing amounts of orchestrations and when someone can play my game and say that the music itself is really good, but walk just down the hall and play that other game where the composer who got a student discount on CineSamples has a mockup where you can hear all the little transitions between notes in the melodies, was recorded at MGM's scoring stage, is really deeply sampled, etc. that stands out even to the layman.

Forgive me, I find this confusing. Who are you competing against and where is this taking place? I'm asking because from the look of it, you're trying to spend the whole wad on a hypothetical situation.

Not trying to derail the topic, but $2,400 is a LOT of money (aforementioned exchange rates be damned) to make sure gamers don't go to "the other guy", which is what I assume is the crux motivation here based on how you say it. If your client's satisfied, and the music's good, what else do you really have to do?

Cinesamples:

YES - if you personally like Cinesamples better than PLAY for its sound quality and ease of workflow.

NO - if you're trying to compete with other composers for gamers' attention.

If that "other" game happens to have Jeremy Soule and whatever AAAAA symphony studio he's got working for him, or some crazy chiptune soundtrack, then much of the point of getting that super-expensive set was moot to start with. Sure you'll still have it for future work and kick ass with it, but was it really necessary? Could that have been done with $700?

Seguing into the last part of my point here, I remember a guy on KVR told me back many years ago that you should never spend a lot of money for sound equipment for a single job unless you expect to make eight times that cost back in the job. I don't know how far that koan goes around or if 8x is unnecessarily high, but it makes sense to me at least. Best paying is a good promise, but until it's all said, done and paid, a promise is all it is and we all, by now, know anything could happen in the interim.

Again, my primary concern is the high budget itself. $250? Meh, go ahead, that's not too heavy to lose. $1,000? Pretty big, be careful on it. $2,400? Wow. That's a lot for one promise, dude. Food for thought.

[Neifion]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding here as well, but it sounds to me like he simply wants better samples to make better-sounding music. It's a big game, could be played by a lot of people, so he wants it to sound the best with what he can afford.

I spent a lot of money on libraries because I wanted them. I never went into a purchase thinking that I'd ever make any money back from using them. If that's the OP's intent, then I'd say that is not a good way of going about it.

[AngelCityOutlaw]

1 hour ago, Meteo Xavier said:

Forgive me, I find this confusing. Who are you competing against and where is this taking place? I'm asking because from the look of it, you're trying to spend the whole wad on a hypothetical situation.

Not trying to derail the topic, but $2,400 is a LOT of money (aforementioned exchange rates be damned) to make sure gamers don't go to "the other guy", which is what I assume is the crux motivation here based on how you say it. If your client's satisfied, and the music's good, what else do you really have to do?

This is actually not the first one I've done and I know it's not going to be the last.

It might seem the way you're reading it based on the previous wording, but that's not exactly it. The "competition" are also musicians I respect and in many cases know personally, but to be completely blunt: As inspiring as it may sound to just stick with what's working, If you're serious about this kind of thing, you want to be able to make stuff that is to the standard or try to even aim higher. Standards change over time and the other big issues is that I'm not satisfied with it myself. Something that was great as a library back when or what might've been the standard 15 years ago, often isn't anymore and with some of the stuff I have right now, aspects of it have been rendered obsolete by advances in computing power that makes more modern libraries possible.

If the guy down the hall's music is sampled rather than live like mine, even if I feel I can write a better piece than he can (because I've been writing for much longer), he's got something far more real sounding with a whole lot less effort. Not only that, but without the true legato and other things I keep referencing, it is impossible to achieve something he was able to just by playing it in and with proper utilization of a modwheel and sustain pedal with comparatively minimal tweaking afterwards. Why spend hours upon hours with something that even still will only get you over halfway there at best when something newer is more intuitive? The latter is far more inspiring. I want that.

If this kind of thing is within my grasp, I would be doing my music a disservice by not upgrading. Paid gig or not.

 

 

[AngelCityOutlaw]

1 hour ago, Neifion said:

That sounds like a solid lineup to me. Despite what....

Sorry for the double post, I somehow missed this post while typing my reply to Meteo.

Alright, good points. So much thinking and consideration to do lol! Again, thanks everyone for the exceptional advice here.

[Nabeel Ansari]

On 5/19/2016 at 6:00 PM, Neifion said:

Pre-recorded as sections does not make it sound more organic. When you have the flutes, oboes, and clarinets all switching dynamic layers at exactly the same time, it sounds fake. A good mockup artist can cover up that shortcoming by blending with other patches or libraries and meticulous attention to performance, but it's not any more "organic" than with individual sections. Not to mention you lack the flexibility of having the individual instruments/sections do their own thing, which is pretty much essential in any orchestral writing. You can't have a flute line separate from the clarinets, or have the horns separate from the trumpets (or trombones if you're using the mid patch).

When individual sections are put together in a mix, it sounds even less organic. It's the sound of flutes playing alone, plus oboes playing alone, plus clarinets playing alone, etc. Ensemble playing isn't additive. It's not a bunch of vacuums with walls removed and everyone does their own thing.

There's no synergy. There's no intrinsic balance between the musicians. Of course, ensemble patches also have flaws, like you said, different sections having the x-fades at exactly the same time has a not great effect.

I'm not glorifying ensembles over individuals, I'm just stating facts here. Yes, you can't get individual sections with ensembles; but orchestrating for individual sections is very time-consuming and a lot of meticulous effort. Professional composers know this and compromise to what gets the job done in a timely manner with the best sound unless they're doing their magnum opus soundtracks where they have time to get all of that proper writing together. I used to think proper sectional arranging was the only way to go when I was younger; now I pretty much exclusively mix Metropolis Ark, Albion ONE, and CS2 (as well as some Embertone solos). I work pretty fast now. My music isn't super well "performed", but it sounds dazzling enough to a layperson for marketing purposes. On an actual gig, I'll spend the time expanding the orchestration and doing everything manual.

Angel is of course welcome to dive into a FULL set of orchestral samples with breadth and depth, and that's why I also gave recommendations for those.

@AngelCityOutlaw Your CineBrass + CS2 combo is great. If you have money, like Neifion said, Mural is much better strings (big orchestra strings) and Sable (small chamber, intimate strings). CineWinds being improved recently, I think it'll also be a good part of that lineup, though if you have the budget, Berlin Woodwinds is probably a better investment.

[Neifion]

9 hours ago, Neblix said:

When individual sections are put together in a mix, it sounds even less organic.

No it doesn't. Plain and simple. As long as the room noise is minimal, individual sections sound exactly like they're in the same room together. "Intrinsic balance" between musicians can simply be achieved by balancing the sections yourself. It's just like the myth that using samples from different developers can't sound as cohesive as samples from the same developer. It's complete nonsense.

In any case, I think an "organic" sound tends to come from good writing, orchestration, and most importantly, performance over anything else.

9 hours ago, Neblix said:

Yes, you can't get individual sections with ensembles; but orchestrating for individual sections is very time-consuming and a lot of meticulous effort.

Of course orchestrating for individual sections is more time consuming, but someone who is experienced at it with a great workflow can do it quickly. It just takes practice.

9 hours ago, Neblix said:

Professional composers know this and compromise to what gets the job done in a timely manner with the best sound unless they're doing their magnum opus soundtracks where they have time to get all of that proper writing together.

I am a professional composer, I write out and perform every section individually, and I always get the job done in a timely manner. Also, look at the scores of John Williams, James Horner, James Newtwon Howard, Jerry Goldsmith, Thoman Newman, etc. and you won't see "Strings High", "Strings Low", etc. next to the staffs, you'll see "1st Violins, 2nd Violins, Violas...", etc. Even video game composers who write for orchestra, like Austin Wintory, Nobou Uematsu, Yoko Shimamura, and Jeremy Soule, write for individual sections. Whether they consider their soundtracks their "magnum opuses" or not. Yes, I'm sure many orchestral composers sketch things out with ensembles first and then have their assistants or orchestrators expand to individual sections, but I'm also pretty sure the aforementioned composers in particular write the individual sections themselves. And many of the professional composers I know on VI-Control do the same, because they prefer to write that way. Because let's face it; you can't write the same level of detail with ensembles as you can with individual sections. Journey, Skyrim, Ori and the Blind Forest; none of those could have been written with ensembles. The contrapuntal writing that is so key to the beautiful harmonic complexity of those soundtracks is only possible because the individual sections can take on all those separate but interwoven lines.

Look, I'm not saying everyone who writes for orchestra has to use individual sections. But seeing as the OP came from an old library with individual sections (EWQLSO) and was looking into a set of new libraries with individual sections (CineSamples CORE), then it seems clear that he may want to write for individual sections.

 

[Nabeel Ansari]

1 hour ago, Neifion said:

I am a professional composer, I write out and perform every section individually, and I always get the job done in a timely manner. Also, look at the scores of John Williams, James Horner, James Newtwon Howard, Jerry Goldsmith, Thoman Newman, etc. and you won't see "Strings High", "Strings Low", etc. next to the staffs, you'll see "1st Violins, 2nd Violins, Violas...", etc. Even video game composers who write for orchestra, like Austin Wintory, Nobou Uematsu, Yoko Shimamura, and Jeremy Soule, write for individual sections. Whether they consider their soundtracks their "magnum opuses" or not. Yes, I'm sure many orchestral composers sketch things out with ensembles first and then have their assistants or orchestrators expand to individual sections, but I'm also pretty sure the aforementioned composers in particular write the individual sections themselves. And many of the professional composers I know on VI-Control do the same, because they prefer to write that way. Because let's face it; you can't write the same level of detail with ensembles as you can with individual sections. Journey, Skyrim, Ori and the Blind Forest; none of those could have been written with ensembles. The contrapuntal writing that is so key to the beautiful harmonic complexity of those soundtracks is only possible because the individual sections can take on all those separate but interwoven lines.

Look, I'm not saying everyone who writes for orchestra has to use individual sections. But seeing as the OP came from an old library with individual sections (EWQLSO) and was looking into a set of new libraries with individual sections (CineSamples CORE), then it seems clear that he may want to write for individual sections.

You seem to have gone way off on a tangent here. 

[Neifion]

11 minutes ago, Neblix said:

You seem to have gone way off on a tangent here. 

This is a topic to help the OP select some new orchestral libraries. You suggested an ensemble library and made a point about it sounding more organic. I disagreed and explained why. Then you disagreed and explained your case further.

If anyone went on a tangent, it was yourself. You broke off and started talking about what professional composers do to save time, what you used to think when you were younger, how your music sounds good to a layperson, etc. I am guilty of responding to the tangent, admittedly. Even so, I was trying to make a point that you can do more detailed and intricate writing with individual sections versus ensembles, and I think that is an important consideration when deciding between libraries.

[Nabeel Ansari]

4 hours ago, Neifion said:

If anyone went on a tangent, it was yourself. You broke off and started talking about what professional composers do to save time, what you used to think when you were younger, how your music sounds good to a layperson, etc. I am guilty of responding to the tangent, admittedly.

Oh boy.

Anyways, the points are as follows:

1) Ensemble libraries are useful to have around, and worth investing in, for speed purposes. Anecdotes from exceptionally skilled/trained composers who've done this a long time don't apply to everyone's skillset. Not everyone is classically trained, or even knows how to write counterpoint or has studied orchestration. Plenty of professionals aren't either. When I say professional I don't mean "high profile grandmaster orchestrator", I mean people who make money off of writing music. There's a lot of them. Like, a lot. A great many of them are not Austin Wintory, or Williams, or Newman, or Uematsu. It's silly to base a career workflow on what extremely talented and trained/practiced people do unless you also have the skills they do. Not everyone writes music on sheets, for example. The point about what you see on sheets is irrelevant; sheets are written for PERFORMERS. Of COURSE they have individual sections laid out, otherwise it can't be performed. That's not what this is about.

I tend not to assume everyone is already well-versed in orchestration and counterpoint techniques, especially not in a video game remixing hobbyist community. I structure my replies in threads to address everyone, not just OP.

2) Like Neifion said, the best results of using ensemble patches are with mixing in sections.

3) What's more "organic" from a physics standpoint really doesn't matter even though I disagree with Neifion, because like he said, performance and composition kind of trump this. Nothing with x-fades ever sound good anyway. Legato scripting is a ruse itself and won't stop being one until we move into more signal-based VI models. You can nitpick on what makes something less organic until you realize that pretty much all the current modern options sound pretty good regardless of their relative standing, and we're probably starting to reach a saturation point with orchestral sample library quality. Need to advance the platform/engines before we can move forward; so long as we're stuck on crossfades as the crux of all of our tone and dynamics morphing, we can't really get much better. Maybe more playable/intuitive to use, though.

Quote

Look, I'm not saying everyone who writes for orchestra has to use individual sections. But seeing as the OP came from an old library with individual sections (EWQLSO) and was looking into a set of new libraries with individual sections (CineSamples CORE), then it seems clear that he may want to write for individual sections.

This is not actually a good assumption, because like I said, it doesn't work for everyone. My first orchestral set was CineBrass, CineWinds, and CS2. I tried the section writing thing. I was clearly interested in sectional writing. Didn't work for me. I'm not classically trained, and don't pretend to be to my own detriment. I stopped caring about the potential of the technique I was trying to do and just started doing what works for me musically for speed/creative output. Yes, I am missing out on intricate detail and artistry, but I don't really care, because it takes me too much time and patience, and I can't sustain that workflow, and then I stop altogether. That's worse than writing music that's not as ideal as it could be. I thought it would be worth sharing that with someone before they blow $1000 on something when $500 on something else could be more beneficial for them if they didn't know what the options are. That's not a tangent, that's giving context. Yeah, I'm not a freaking multi-million dollar composer, but I've been doing this a long time and I work in sample libraries. I'd think my opinion is at least worth considering, if even just one person ends up also finding out that mixed section + ensemble libs helps them work better. Maybe I'm overextending much.

 

tl;dr I calls it as I sees it.

[AngelCityOutlaw]

This is my fault for not explaining earlier, but I do prefer having individual sections, myself. I'm a big fan of that "classic Hollywood" sort of sound, I guess you could say and having individual sections may be more conducive to that? Just thinking about counterpoint and the like? Even with East West, I do like having 1st Violins, 2nd..etc.

Anyway, out of all the threads I've ever created on here, this one may actually be the most informative and helpful. I definitely know that what I get is going to be some combination of the libraries suggested here - just going to keep reading about them, watching video demos and see if I can find anyone where I live who has some of them and see if they'd let me try it out. 

[Nabeel Ansari]

On 5/22/2016 at 7:58 PM, AngelCityOutlaw said:

This is my fault for not explaining earlier, but I do prefer having individual sections, myself. I'm a big fan of that "classic Hollywood" sort of sound, I guess you could say and having individual sections may be more conducive to that? Just thinking about counterpoint and the like? Even with East West, I do like having 1st Violins, 2nd..etc.

Pretty much. Counterpoint creates a perception of thickness and movement, which is crucial to a big emotional sound. Sometimes I'll write some 4 or 5 part strings in a single Albion string ensemble patch and then port each individual line over to one string section in CS2. The end result is a workflow where I can play string chords and stuff on my keyboard to figure out what I like and tweak all the voice leading in one piano roll and then separate everything at the end to get the legato scripting and dynamic x-fades in there and the obligatory "realistic" ensemble setup.

I hate just starting with legato patches because it's monophonic, really hard to draft harmonies without editing 4 or 5 MIDI channels every time I want to see a different chord or voicing or something.

I know CS2 has a Full Ens patch; Albion has a better sound to me, so it's easier to be lazy by keeping it in Albion and not putting in the work to transfer it to CS2. xP

On 5/21/2016 at 11:57 PM, Meteo Xavier said:

I'm a bit blown away by that number too. I've been buying VST stuff for 12 years and I don't think it's totaled $2,500 yet. <:O

It's not ridiculous, I've spent much more than that on music stuff. It's about cost-benefit. Granted, now I've kind of saturated my line-up, so I'm buying fewer and fewer things these days.

[timaeus222]

8 hours ago, Neblix said:

Pretty much. Counterpoint creates a perception of thickness and movement, which is crucial to a big emotional sound. Sometimes I'll write some 4 or 5 part strings in a single Albion string ensemble patch and then port each individual line over to one string section in CS2. The end result is a workflow where I can play string chords and stuff on my keyboard to figure out what I like and tweak all the voice leading in one piano roll and then separate everything at the end to get the legato scripting and dynamic x-fades in there and the obligatory "realistic" ensemble setup.

I hate just starting with legato patches because it's monophonic, really hard to draft harmonies without editing 4 or 5 MIDI channels every time I want to see a different chord or voicing or something.

Pretty much exactly what I do, except I use different orchestral libraries.