196,182 users have contributed to 43,014 threads and 258,396 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 0 new thread(s), 8 new post(s) and 168 new user(s).
Thanks for taking the time to do the comparisons. Maybe I missed it, did you say what verb you used for LASS? Is it the same as the VSL versions?
For those who think that HS is locked into a particular sound and not as flexible, it would be interesting to hear how it sounds with the close mics and whatever verb was used on the others. Does it still have that "hollywood" sound (whether that's a good thing or not) or does it take on different character with different reverbs?
The comparison cues are really interesting. I have a question for Erik - are you using the same articulation types for HS and VSL? I've always felt VSL to be a little bit more agile in terms of fast things, but there are faster articulations available in HS than may be represented in the comparisons... also, am I wrong or have the files been replaced with newer and perhaps more ambient versions?
As has been said, thanks very much for taking the time to do this!
This particular piece is mostly suited to the VSL Chamber Strings sound.
Any comparisons of sample libraries are nonsensical anyway because you could give a piece of music to 1000 users all using the same library and it would come out sounding different every time. What really counts is what you originally write yourself and then how you want to make it sound in your own way - not how it sounds the way others do it.
A sample library is NOT a real orchestra and one of the advantages forgotten about sample libraries is the choices it gives you regarding sound. Conversely, you could have the same piece of music played by many real orchestras and it would sound different every time.
A sample library is NOT a real orchestra and one of the advantages forgotten about sample libraries is the choices it gives you regarding sound. Conversely, you could have the same piece of music played by many real orchestras and it would sound different every time.
If what you like so much is, "the sound" then you aren't too particular if you hold EW over VSL.
If all you want is to 'make Hollywood sounds' then EW is easier if you are lucky enough to have it work. If not, VSL is the way to go because the sounds are more useful, there's no need to create a room artificially, and VSL has a far, far superior support team. EW thinks of support as "bagggage from a dumbass", even when theirproducts blow up, which one of mine did at day one and 4 others followed.
I can't imagine needing EW products to work in the middle of a big production. VSL, on the other hand, never fails, EW is infiorior, because of all these limitations.
Have any papparrazi taken pics of Doug or Nick lately? They probably need it to get through the next stage of development...
Shawn
If all you want is to 'make Hollywood sounds' then EW is easier if you are lucky enough to have it work.
Shawn
Hollywood sounds don't mean anything and straight off the bat that's the whole point of sales language. You've all fallen for sales techniques. There is no Hollywood sound. That's the whole point. The classical Hollywood string sound is made up of orchestration. If you can't orchestrate to show off that style and string writing,how on earth is a sample library going to do that for anyone.
Bernard Herrmann wrote numerous Hollywood film scores. That would not be regarded as the Hollywood sound. There is no Hollywood sound. Thomas Newman writies great string parts. Is that the Hollywood sound? Max Steiner's score to Key Largo?
@devastat said:
Hey Paul, what about Hollywood Brass then that's coming out tomorrow, I am really interested to know what do think about that - no Hollywood sound?
I haven't heard it but it's a load of fucking sales nonsense. Hollywood Brass? It's bollocks although it may sound great. Hey, what do I know.[:^)]
If the name of the product is really that annoying, then ignore it. It's just a sample library, judge it on how good it is, not whether you like the name or not.
I don't agree. I think they sound better than EWQLSO to be sure but they still sound like samples. And as a very long time EW enthusiast, I'm not buying this now although I won't rule out later on. I have Dimension Brass and CineBrass which are fine for my needs.
I still like Dimension Brass' way of tackling divisi, something neither CB nor HB has approached with the same elegance (although Mike from CS says CB PRO will have a nice divisi).
Yeah, Dimension Brass are awesome and together with the other solo and ensemble VSL brass create a hugely powerful library. For example - with the Cube you have - 6 trumpets, 3 trumpets, solo trumpets (many variations including totally redundant vibrato-/non-vibrato/progressive vibrato legato, sustain, staccato, etc. which effectively form completely separate instruments), cornet, bass trumpet, and then added on to that the Dimension trumpets with each player alone or any combination - it is unbelievable the amount of sound and power that depth of sampling gives. And that's just trumpets. The same thing is true of horns and trombones, and ad on tuba, contrabass tuba, cimbasso, Euphonium, Wagner horn - you name it - it is a fabulous profusion of sounds. So that is why I still am enthusiastic about the Vienna brass beyond all the others.
@mike connelly said:
If the name of the product is really that annoying, then ignore it. It's just a sample library, judge it on how good it is, not whether you like the name or not.
I have something called Special Brass and Epic Horns. For some reason neither of those descrpitive names bother me in the same way that "Hollywood" brass does. If you were to say hollywood brass to somone in England who had no idea or interest in sample libraries, they would think you were talking about prostitutes wandering around the Hollywood area of Los Angeles. Or if indeed they were into making noises with sample libraries, they may be stupid enough to think that this will somehow make them into wonderous orchestrators and writers of hollywood genre music overnight at the cost of a few hundred dollars. OK?
On a different note, I watched and listened to the 4 videos, not that I am in anyway interested or sure that anyone else cares about personal conclusions of other so-called musicians around the net, but some of the sounds were good, especially the tuba which to me was quite strong, Some of the portato trombone sounds were very Hermannesque sounding if that's what you want and so on. I don't see how much better any of this sounds compared to what is already available. Also, am I right in concluding these sections are pre-panned? That's not great if that's correct.
Hollywood is a location in california, it's where the library was recorded.
Vienna is the location where the VSL library was recorded.
I don't see why one is any more bothersome than the other.
HB comes with multiple mic positions. The far ones are recorded with the musicians in place so they're pre panned, and the close mics are not pre panned.
The samples are pre-panned (except for close mics) so that you have the instruments in the right positions in the mix when you have your pan set to center. However you can change this and pan everything as you wish. I've had this library for one day now and I love the sound. The dynamic range is mindblowing in these samples.@PaulR said:
Also, am I right in concluding these sections are pre-panned?
@William said:
For those who don't remember, Mike Connelly pointed out that brass universally play legato slurs with absolutely no audible partials - if they are good players.
Not what I said at all. You said that it's impossible for brass instruments to play slurs without hearing the partials in between. I said that while you will sometimes hear partials (depending on the instrument, the range, and the player), it's certainly possible to play slurs without partials. And I posted a recording that proved it.
Honestly, I have to say I'm really surprised that you'd want to bring up a discussion that ended up with egg on your face. Let things like that go, you'll have a less angry life.
