Great Disappointments

[Luke]

Now before you go listing your long lost love when you were 17, I mean in the realm of the studio :-)

Anything goes: VIs, DAWs, plugins, hardware, etc.

I'll get started with a VI: OT Glory Days (Kontakt). Some great sounds, alternate instruments, plenty of articulations. Yet that dreaded inconsistency between instrument articulations, and worse, between articulations in the same instrument even. Made working with it a real annoyance and slow affair. After only one use on an arrangement, I tossed it aside, unable to sell it, and it wasn't cheap.

Another VI: Spitfire's Bernard Hermann Composer Toolkit. Turns out I don't like pre-orchestrated combos. The idea of recording instruments combinations in the same hall is great in theory, but in practice it's quite limiting. There were some gems in there for sure (Low strings, Brass combos) but ultimately it came off my drive due to its sheer size compared to the return. This one's definitely on me.

In contrast, Strezov's Cornucopia strings have a "High Strings" and "Low Strings" patch that is extremely useful layered in. The high strings in particular are just detuned enough to fool the ear a bit when used in context.

Hardware: bought a Cobalt 8M synth on a bit of a whim. Pretty good but not something I would designate as a keeper.

[RobS]

probably my greatest disappointment, because it was preceded by great expectations, is the Cinematic Solo Strings library. And, also solo strings, the Cremona quartet, though in this case I wasn't expecting too much...

[Guy Rowland]

Myself.

Followed closely by EW's Goliath, I think the second sample library I ever bought.

[weseb]

Berlin Brass and the old Spitfire Mural strings (not sure what they're called now). Not because either of them are particularly bad libraries, but moreso that they were rather expensive, and I was expecting new workhorse staples, but too many glaring flaws and tedious workflows prevented that. I think I ended up moving on to CSS and CSB shortly thereafter, anyway (which are still best in class for workhorse libraries, as far as I'm concerned).

For hardware, every 88-key mid-range MIDI keyboard I've ever purchased.

[Tanuj Tiku]

I almost always usually find a place for a library that I have purchased. Don’t have any major regrets.

Except, for some reason I don’t use most of the 8Dio stuff I have purchased (it’s not much). I do find some use for Bazanthar and the Cage series but it’s still rare enough.

FWIT, I do use the frame drum from Tonehammer a lot and there is a specific sample in there that I love and have found no replacement for in 15 years.

[Piet De Ridder]

In time I’ve come to learn to accept it for what it is, but the first few months after purchasing it, I was really rather disappointed with the entire Spitfire Studio Series Pro set. Just didn’t recognize the Spitfire I loved anywhere in these libraries (and I still don’t) — I mean: the company that created the Bespoke libraries and the BML series —, I couldn’t find any justification whatsoever for the label ‘Pro’ (and I still can’t; quite the contrary), and I also thought (and still think) that the project was overseen and carried out by people who made some incomprehensibly stupid production choices. Not everything in it is bad, some of it can even be used, but as a whole, it remains ranking very high on my list of memorable let-downs.

- - - - -

Pretty much anything that has the word ‘Synchron’ in its name. Just don’t like the sound.

- - - - -

The UA Ravel is another one I don’t like the sound of. There’s something in there that’s actually quite good, but it also has a percentage of ‘not good at all’ and that tends to contaminate the good stuff as well. Pity. But I got the Ravel in some sale or other, so it came quite cheap.

On the subject of pianos: I still have to encounter the first piano library that impresses me as much as the piano sound from the Kawai NV5S does. None of the virtual pianos I’m familiar with (including the ones I quite like) even begin to suggest that they might qualify for serious comparison with the Kawai instrument. An instrument which proves that it is actually possible to virtualize MUCH more of what a grand piano can be (and in a wonderfully convincing way too) than any sample library I know of. (Of course, there’s a lot more going on inside the Kawai than just sample playback, but nothing, I would think, that a decent computer can’t handle.)

- - - - -

Software like SINE and the Spitfire player. Sure, I can create reasonably good things with what’s available for these two players, many people can, but if the samples were editable, if the mappings could be changed, if the envelopes and velocity responses were fully customizable, if the modulation options were configurable, and if …, and if …, I could do sooooooo much more with the content that is imprisoned in these players.
This type of software (and the trend to lock everything, to minimize editing options and go with vanilla passe-partout solutions instead) is, to me, the single most deplorable development in the history of sampling and virtual instruments.

- - - - -

The declining quality of Apple software in recent years. I get annoyed (or, at the very least: distracted) on an hourly basis by flaws, bugs, inconsistencies, a rising degree of sloppyness and the patronizing idiocy in Apple software — specifically: LogicPro and the recent Mac operating systems — that would simply have been unthinkable/unimaginable in the pre-Cook days.
Of all the things I mentioned here and everything I’ve left unmentioned, this is the worst. By far.

__

[Jaap]

Almost everything I buy is for a project and job I am working on and like Tanuj, it finds usually a place. A lot of stuff is used only a few times, but it served its purpose and hence no regrets.

For a more personal project I bought the BBC SO Pro from Spitfire when it was released. I love the sound, the way it sounded a bit more classical. But eventhough I have worked with their player before in projects (HZ Strings and Whiticare choir) I really could not get it to work nicely. Extreme loading times, very odd dynamics (and very few), a lot sounds with external sounds (turning pages, coughs, chairs). The latter I could live with, but the loading times, crashes, inconsistent dynamics etc made stop using it and regretting I bought it.

[Luke]

probably my greatest disappointment, because it was preceded by great expectations, is the Cinematic Solo Strings library. And, also solo strings, the Cremona quartet, though in this case I wasn't expecting too much...

This seems a common position. I recall Larry feeling similarly (incidentally, I know he bowed out gracefully but I do miss his voice on this board). I don't use Cinematic Studio Solo Strings very often (I suppose SM Solo Strings are covering that itch now that I'm getting slightly more proficient at using them), but when I do load them up, I'm rather surprised by how much I like them. Mind you, I rarely use them for solos. Usually, it's more in a "first chair" type of role, and for that I think they work like a charm with CSS (often my workhorse).

[Tanuj Tiku]

I have in fact had decent success with the CSS solo cello. I have to do a few things but for simple cinematic lines, it’s useful.

[Luke]

Glad to hear that, Tanuj. I have to admit that I rather shy away from using Solo Cello, especially if exposed. So perhaps I need to revisit this particular one and be more courageous!

Edit: when I feel a solo Cello would be the right approach but can't make it work with samples and there's no budget for a real player, I usually thicken up the texture a bit. Vista works well for that.

Incidentally, you might have given me an idea for a thread where we compare a modeled Solo Violin to the same, real thing played by a pro. Perhaps it could be an exercise in how to better use VIs to emulate the real thing, is there value in doing this?

[RobS]

probably my greatest disappointment, because it was preceded by great expectations, is the Cinematic Solo Strings library. And, also solo strings, the Cremona quartet, though in this case I wasn't expecting too much...

This seems a common position. I recall Larry feeling similarly (incidentally, I know he bowed out gracefully but I do miss his voice on this board). I don't use Cinematic Studio Solo Strings very often (I suppose SM Solo Strings are covering that itch now that I'm getting slightly more proficient at using them), but when I do load them up, I'm rather surprised by how much I like them. Mind you, I rarely use them for solos. Usually, it's more in a "first chair" type of role, and for that I think they work like a charm with CSS (often my workhorse).

exactly, they can work as first chairs, but the library is sold as Solo Strings, which to me means quartet solo strings. What I find disappointing is the fact that the close mics are mono, thing that negates their use as a quartet and the fact that the patches are closed, no way to click the damn wrench and, say, shorten the releases...

[Geoff Grace]

This thread is adding to my disappointment that TSB is closing down. I greatly prefer it to the VI-C equivalent.

That said, I’ve been struggling to come up with a contribution on this subject. There was nothing like sample libraries when I started playing*, and today’s libraries are light years beyond what was available in the early days; so when I stop to think about it, I’m wowed by the endless choices I have at my fingertips.

If a library, soft synth, or an effect isn’t working for me, I simply move on to another until I find one that’s a better fit for the piece. As a result, it’s hard to feel thwarted by a title I bought. Sure, I can look back and realize that I haven’t used one or another much; but maybe I’ll find a use for it in the next project.

Best,

Geoff

* Actually, the Chamberlain and the Mellotron had already been invented but had yet to be used in a rock record. I certainly wasn’t aware of their existence until later.

[RobS]

This thread is adding to my disappointment that TSB is closing down. I greatly prefer it to the VI-C equivalent.
...

I've made the resolution to keep posting till the day TSB dies

[Guy Rowland]

I've made the resolution to keep posting till the day TSB dies

I like this!

[Geoff Grace]

I agree. Enjoy it while you’ve got it!

Best,

Geoff

[Ashermusic]

If a library, soft synth, or an effect isn’t working for me, I simply move on to another until I find one that’s a better fit for the piece. As a result, it’s hard to feel thwarted by a title I bought. S

Me.

[RobS]

In time I’ve come to learn to accept it for what it is, but the first few months after purchasing it, I was really rather disappointed with the entire Spitfire Studio Series Pro set. Just didn’t recognize the Spitfire I loved anywhere in these libraries (and I still don’t) — I mean: the company that created the Bespoke libraries and the BML series —, I couldn’t find any justification whatsoever for the label ‘Pro’ (and I still can’t; quite the contrary), and I also thought (and still think) that the project was overseen and carried out by people who made some incomprehensibly stupid production choices. Not everything in it is bad, some of it can even be used, but as a whole, it remains ranking very high on my list of memorable let-downs.


__

I can only speak for the strings Piet, but I find them very usable... of course they don't bloom like the ones you mention, they are strings in a room, bu still the tone is nice, the vibrato is good, good tuning too. I'm preparing an audio simulation of a new opera for the Scala theatre so that the director can have ideas on setting the stage and the Studio Strings were the best fit for the job. Just to say that it depends on the use case, as always...

[Piet De Ridder]

I agree that the Studio Strings isn’t a bad library. Not a great one either, in my opinion, but not bad. Of the three, it’s the one I occasionally use. (Never ever did anything with the brass, and of the woodwinds, I only used a few bassoon staccatos once, in combination with the Sample Modeling bassoon, the latter handling all the longs and medium-longs of a phrase, the Spitfire instrument providing a couple of accented shorts.)

Maybe it’s also worth pointing out that at the time of the release, my judgement (and subsequent disappointment) was still very much influenced by the level Spitfire had reached in their earlier work. (A mistake, I know.) Looking at a library in hindsight doesn’t always lead to same conclusions as when exploring it for the first time soon after its release. If I had to give my opinion on the Studio Strings today, I would be less negative than I was back then. It’s just that, coming from a company from which I already purchased the Bespoke Strings, Sable, and a few BML libraries, the Studio Series felt like the work of a very different, less capable, less committed team. (And that's still what I think today.) I will also never move away from the opinion that the wrong recording venue was chosen for this project and the microphones weren’t positioned as they should have been.

__