Sonokinetic Woodwinds Ensemble - 24 hour sale at 80% off

[Guy Rowland]

https://www.sonokinetic.net/products/cl ... ensembles/

59 and 79 euros for the standard and extended editions, reduced from 299 and 399 - a lot more articulations in the latter.

Does anyone here have any experience of this one?

[Linos]

Sonokinetic's sound signature is just gorgeous, and their programming looks clever. Impressive for their first non-phrase based orchestral library. I just don't know where I would use such ensemble woodwinds. I haven't written anything yet that uses woodwinds a 3 in unison over a longer stretch. And if I'd ever do I am pretty sure that I could get good results by layering solo instruments, or a solo and an a2 patch. It looks niche to me. But it seems capable to sound amazing (the demos, oddly, are quite disparate to my ears. Sometimes it sounds really good, and then suddenly there are some rough spots in the same demo), and at the current price it is a steal.

[Lawrence]

Pretty darn reasonable. I have Cinesamples Woodwind runs which has some tutti stuff, but this seems a step beyond, and parts of it do sound very good indeed.

Is it just me or does the programming of keyswitches look fussy? I feel like I'd be scratching my head to remember what everything does each time.

[Thomas Mavian]

Since I'm on a sort of "woodwind hunt" I bought the extended version after viewing the overview video. Still downloading... I find the keyswitch implementation to be quite refreshing, and you can setup 3 "direct" switches to your own liking. The runs seems really well implemented.

Can't wait to try them out.

[byzantium]

Let us know how you get on Thomas.

A great price, but mmm I really wonder would I use them..... being 4 ensembles only... and also wonder whether the room/space would fit with others... I have the ridiculously cheap VSL SE woodwinds and I really like them, plus Hollywoodwinds for runs. And Cinewinds Pro. Oh - and Symphobia 1,2,3 of late. And geez, what a useful exercise it has been to write this down... if only for me!

[Thomas Mavian]

Haha! Well, I have actually managed to hang on to the "old" Wallander Instruments WIVI Woodwinds Library, until now. I was in need of solo instruments that can be a bit more exposed than WIVI. Don't get me wrong, WIVI is great (and light on RAM and CPU) but it is a bit "thin" regarding the sound.

When this came along, at this price I simply couldn't resist. My first sampled ensemble woodwinds library actually.

[progress_report]Download done, extracting...[/progress_report]

[bigcat1969]

Any thoughts about sound that issue from my keyboard should be taken with a grain of salt, but I adored the sound of this ensemble. Cool distinctive instruments.

[Thomas Mavian]

Well, I like it, a lot! Ditching the 24-bit samples saves about 40+ GB so that was a no-brainer. The key switching takes a bit getting used to but it is actually quite clever, everything is very adaptable I feel, you can set it up as you wish.
The runs are great. The sound is very good. The default "tutti" mic output is perhaps a bit too wet for my taste but using a combination of the other 3 (the fourth is a nice to have but wetter still) will do just fine.

Really digging the (very) tight staccatissimo on all the instruments, nice!

Shortcomings? The GUI suffer a bit from the Spitfire "make-every-control-as-tiny-as-possible" disease, all faders are real tiny. And you have absolutely no idea what value you're dialing in. When trying to match the levels on the different mics on different instruments it's on the border of furiously-frustrating-annoying. Developers please, if you DON'T want the user to use a fader, just don't show it!

But I really like how it sounds and I'm glad I bought it, would buy it again in a second (but then I would only download the 16-bit instruments!).

If you have any specific questions just fire away and I'll try to answer them.

[Linos]

By the way, on ViC Sonokinetic wrote that they are going to release a 'multi-sampled' strings library in 2019. I am pretty well set with sample libraries, and there isn't much anymore in sample land to get me excited. But this? I'm thrilled.

[Guy Rowland]

In the video in the OP at 1'42 I hear that distinctive Ambient Legato Stage Collapse (ALSC) that I'm appallingly sensitive too. To me its the aural equivalent of a cameramen shooting off to see the back of the set. Think I'm gonna pass...

[Linos]

Good catch. Now that you mention it I hear it clearly. Though not ideal it wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me. Should be less prominent with a bit of additional reverb, and with a bit of taking care during the programming.

[SirKen]

In the video in the OP at 1'42 I hear that distinctive Ambient Legato Stage Collapse (ALSC) that I'm appallingly sensitive too. To me its the aural equivalent of a cameramen shooting off to see the back of the set. Think I'm gonna pass...

I just tried that exact same passage on my computer just now. There was no stage collapse on my end. I am wondering if the 1.1 update has fixed it already.

This is with 16 bit samples. Did not install 24 bit samples due to space.

[Thomas Mavian]

That particular ALSC can happen if you repeatedly activate and deactivate the different articulations. I first got upset when the bassoons stopped short after trilling and when the clarinets stopped after a crescendo. It seems to me that there is something funky (in a bad way) going on when activating/deactivating articulations. Reloading all samples solves the problem.

Also, when you have setup an instrument with the articulations you'd like to have, save the project and open it again it works flawlessly.

[Guy Rowland]

Ah, this is v useful info - thanks you two. Decisions decisions...

[Scoredog]

I heard that too but I think it was just how it is being triggered...when they start playing with the different positions you can hear it has some versatility.

[wst3]

I really like the sound a lot, but I'm not sure how often I'd really need an ensemble of flutes playing in unison, or clarinets, or oboes or bassoons - ok, maybe bassoons<G>!

For $100 it is difficult to ignore, but I will probably do so, at my own peril, as I've spent more than enough on me this holiday season!

[bryla]

I really love the sound of these! However I've just played with them for 10 minutes and already written this on VI where I think SK will see it:

I too am getting a lot of run articulations that either end if an abnormal loud tail or a way too quiet staccato note. Especially the flutes.

I am also experiencing a lot of noise – flutes again – even with the valve noise all the way down.

Also if I release the key after a run but before the tail has died, the sounds stops abruptly (bassoons)

Release tails on flute marcatos way too loud and inconsistent marcato length between vib and non vib.

[playz123]

Okay, so ditching 24 bit samples and running with the 16 bit ones, does save space...obviously... but curious as to why people are going with the 16 bit ones, and not the 24 bit samples. This has been debated a few times, but is the consensus that there's not much difference in sound so just use 16 bit? I'm sure I hear a differences sometimes and usually choose the 24 bit ones, but maybe others will disagree. I can certainly tell the difference between a 24 bit master and a 16 bit one where dithering has been used to reduce the number of bits.

[Thomas Mavian]

Well, space of course. Put the instruments in context and I doubt I would hear much difference and if I did I don't think I'd care enough to use 24-bits anyway.

That said, I'd never use sub-par cables for any of my hardware synths though

[Luciano Storti]

It’s been a while since I read up on this, but the way I understand this is that 16 vs 24 bit is important in regards to headroom during the recording process to keep the ratio between noise and main signal at bay. Here 24 bits have an advantage over 16 bits as there is more headroom. However, once the recording is complete and the samples are in the sampler, there should not be a discernible difference between the two, provided the recorded samples aren’t of the super quiet kind (if you own Tundra, that might be an interesting comparison). And provided the quantization didn’t introduce audible noise.

I’ve stopped using 24bit samples for my needs unless as mentioned above, it’s a rather quiet library. Anyway, all of this is me paraphrasing, so here’s an article from SOS going into much more detail (scroll down to the “Headroom” section).

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques ... -solutions

Maybe Bill could chime in? I’m sure he could explain this quite exhaustively.

[Guy Rowland]

Luke, everything you say sounds exactly right, the only additional stuff to add is that it helps if a developer normalise samples before conversion - if they were hugely quiet yiu’d lose a few bits of quality otherwise - and I think there’s some possible gain in 24 but if you’re doing some extreme mangling with the sound. I’m firmly in the 16 bit crowd for sample use, such an easy win for resource use.