Spitfire Audio Albion 2: Loegria retired and 50% off [2023 - now unretired]

[Guy Rowland]

https://www.spitfireaudio.com/shop/a-z/ ... i-loegria/

The real draw with Loegria seems to be the chamber strings, but I've always thought these are kinda redundant for Chamber Strings / Sable owners? I can probably live without the sackbuts.

[kpc]

Didn’t they do this with Albion I, only to bring it back a month later, rebranded? I’ve tired of Spitfire’s marketing schemes.

[FriFlo]

Yea, there could be a "Albion, too!" after this retirement ... ;-)

[Guy Rowland]

IIRC with Albion 1, they announced the retirement as the same time as the new release. Nothing else here... maybe there will be a new version and its another great marketing wheeze, but to me there's just too much overlap between Loegria and Chamber strings to justify it. Yes Brunel, yes Sackbuts, but really its just the strings that anyone seems to mention. Also where Albion 1 had a lot of obvious problems and warranted a complete do-over, the strings in 2 were and are very popular, albeit slightly superseded anyway. So unless Albion TWO had a quite different line up, it just doesn't make much sense to me.

[FriFlo]

So, will they re-number the other Albions then, or will there just be a gap at 2?

[Guy Rowland]

Albion 2-was-3-but-not-TWO

[Piet De Ridder]

Actually, the Loegria Strings are quite different from Sable. Loegria is a half a string band recorded as an ensemble (split in highs and lows) whereas Sable is also a small group but recorded in sections and, forgive me for being anal, but there is a distinct difference in timbre. What Loegria is quite good at, for example, and which is something I keep finding difficult with Sable, are those velvet-y string beds that don't immediately sound like wall-to-wall-carpeting the way many bigger (sampled) string ensembles tend to do.

Looking back on my years of using the three Albions, Loegria comes out definitely and firmly on top as the most used one, despite having Sable as well. And it is the only one of the three that has remained on my main Samples HD, meaning that I will still reach for it quite frequently. The other two were moved, a long time ago, to HD's which I only hook up to my system when there's a very specific reason to do so.

The only problem I have with Loegria's strings is that they're a bit out of tune here and there.
_

[Quasar]

Didn’t they do this with Albion I, only to bring it back a month later, rebranded? I’ve tired of Spitfire’s marketing schemes.

Yes they did, and were I a gambler I would bet the baby's milk money that Loegria will be similarly rebranded. I also dislike their marketing schemes, as they come across as coy and manipulative. But the game they played with I/ONE is what enabled me to afford to get into the Spitfire universe, so I can't complain.

I adore Loegria, and would buy it at 50% off in a NY minute if I didn't already have it. The sackbuts are great, pastoral in an almost William Blake-like way.

[ComposerGuy]

Looking back on my years of using the three Albions, Loegria comes out definitely and firmly on top as the most used one, despite having Sable as well.
_

I would have to agree 100% with this.

[The Saxer]

I don't have a problem if they develop their libraries or change their formats... like Sable to Chamber... and I don't really have a problem if they take money when they add new content. Nobody is forced to follow. But: until today I couldn't find any benefit of Albion ONE over Albion 1.

[Guy Rowland]

But: until today I couldn't find any benefit of Albion ONE over Albion 1.

Do you mean you have both but never use ONE?

I've now read a lot of people saying effectively this and truly it my candidate for the least explicable comment on any sample library I can remember. The strings between the two are chalk and cheese to me. With 1 I've only ever heard a synth, even on the official demos. The levels of noise in the samples begger belief. I got the library for free when they released ONE, played it for a while with my jaw on the floor - not in a good way - and instantly retired it.

ONE couldn't be more different. All the synthiness is gone, and there's a real full-bodied and buttery tone to it which I love. Whereas Cinestrings and Hollywood Strings sound quite similar to each other, ONE sounds totally different, and it suits some parts just perfectly. As someone who's had their fair share of issues with Spitifre products, this one is probably my second favourite after Sable.

I did take another listen to the Albion 2 walkthroughs - very nice and yes a little different to Sable, but not enough for me to spring for it. Given my mildly embarrassing number of other libraries, not enough sonic clear blue water for me personally.

[Tanuj Tiku]

Actually, the Loegria Strings are quite different from Sable. Loegria is a half a string band recorded as an ensemble (split in highs and lows) whereas Sable is also a small group but recorded in sections and, forgive me for being anal, but there is a distinct difference in timbre. What Loegria is quite good at, for example, and which is something I keep finding difficult with Sable, are those velvet-y string beds that don't immediately sound like wall-to-wall-carpeting the way many bigger (sampled) string ensembles tend to do.

Looking back on my years of using the three Albions, Loegria comes out definitely and firmly on top as the most used one, despite having Sable as well. And it is the only one of the three that has remained on my main Samples HD, meaning that I will still reach for it quite frequently. The other two were moved, a long time ago, to HD's which I only hook up to my system when there's a very specific reason to do so.

The only problem I have with Loegria's strings is that they're a bit out of tune here and there.
_

Yes, there is something very nice about those strings and I very much relate to the string bed thing. However, you are right about the tuning and the legatos are OK. I also find the looping of the sustain samples to be problematic, they jut out which makes it difficult at times.

[Killiard]

I barely use it anymore to be honest. I used to use the "Long (half)" and flautando strings patches quite a lot, but once I got Sable/SCS it felt a bit redundant. That and I find it really frustrating not having control over the vibrato and release.

I still occasionally use the Euphonium/horns patch. I actually used to use the sackbutt shorts quite a bit on kids stuff that called for that medieval lighthearted sound. Same for the recorder.

[Geoff Grace]

Last call...

Promo ending Wednesday 17th April at 23:59 BST

Best,

Geoff

[wst3]

I gave in to temptation - shame on me.

Oddly it wasn't so much the demos as the walk-through video, I've watched it several times and each time I figured out something else I might do with the library. It is downloading now, and taking its good old time. I'll have more thoughts later<G>.

[Geoff Grace]

I gave in to temptation - shame on me.

No need for shame. I've struggled with temptation over this product myself. It's hard to feel like you'll be missing out on a special library if you don't buy it NOW.

I think I'm going to pass though. I'm pretty well set for strings, and I have other more pressing purchase needs. One hour left to decide...

Best,

Geoff

[wst3]

Having had a little time to introduce myself I'm feeling a lot less shame. It really is a nice library - not sure I'd call it remarkable, but certainly headed in that direction.

First thing you notice - that Spitfire Sound. This has it in spades. The gorgeous room tone, the nearly human imperfections, that quality that is unique to only a handful of developers. (For me Spitfire, Orchestral Tools, and Project Sam all have their own unique, and individual qualities that just sort of identify them as them.)

Second thing you notice, these are what I'd call odd, or almost odd anyway, instruments. They do not smack of the same old same old. That was, in fact, the part I picked up from the walk-through video that sealed the deal.

Third thing - for me at least - these are very easy to play.

Last thing, and it is but a guess, but I think these will work very nicely with other libraries of individual instruments or sections. That is not true of every ensemble style library. At least it has not been for me.

Depending on your other libraries this may not be a must buy. It added to my collection, but if I had more libraries I might have passed, I very nearly did. So far there is no buyer's remorse, quite the opposite really.

[Luke Johnson]

IIRC with Albion 1, they announced the retirement as the same time as the new release. Nothing else here... maybe there will be a new version and its another great marketing wheeze, but to me there's just too much overlap between Loegria and Chamber strings to justify it. Yes Brunel, yes Sackbuts, but really its just the strings that anyone seems to mention. Also where Albion 1 had a lot of obvious problems and warranted a complete do-over, the strings in 2 were and are very popular, albeit slightly superseded anyway. So unless Albion TWO had a quite different line up, it just doesn't make much sense to me.

Completely agree with you Guy. It's exactly why I didn't bite.

[ComposerGuy]

“What Loegria is quite good at, for example, and which is something I keep finding difficult with Sable, are those velvet-y string beds that don't immediately sound like wall-to-wall-carpeting the way many bigger (sampled) string ensembles tend to do.” -Piet

Well said. This library is a ‘secret sauce’ for me. It has inspired oodles and oodles of underscore I’d be hard pressed to get from elsewhere.

[Guy Rowland]

2023 here - hey, you'll never guess what, but all 3 of the first Albions are back, I think for good. $199 each.

[Lawrence]

As I posted on VI-C-why does a digital product ever need to be “retired”?

[Guy Rowland]

As I posted on VI-C-why does a digital product ever need to be “retired”?

All together now... MARKETING!

[tack]

Well, being charitable, the reason is usually that the vendor doesn't want to continue supporting it and be obligated to release bug fixes (and security patches, which is less of a relevant factor in this industry).

In Spitfire's case, they handwave this away by saying "it's not a bug, it's a feature!" And imply that because the products have been in use for years, any actual bugs are probably your fault, not Spitfire's.

Which is all fair enough I suppose, were the products actually discounted accordingly. But I'm seeing them listed for $249 here, so IMO they aren't.

[Lawrence]

Spitfire feeling obligated to provide bug fixes-what a concept.