I know I'm pretty new to sample work, but when I hire a live orchestra I hire:
18 Vln 1
16 vln 2
and 10 -12 basses.
Thats not to say that you can't bump up or down the numbers of strings a little tiny bit, but what's up with these sample libraries?
I just checked out Kirk Hunter's library--24 unison vlns? Then split 10 1st and 10 2nds? If I wanted to write for Vln unis. I'd be 10 players short. If I added one patch of 10 1st vlns, I doubt if they would blend that well in unison. If I wanted to write for 1st and 2nd vlns I'd have to think too hard to figure out a combination that was close. Just using the 24 unison patch for this would give me 48 vlns. And, that's too close to that 101 strings records my parents gave me for christmas when I started listening to "classical" music.
Why not 18 1st vlns, 16 (separately recorded) 2nd vlns and 8 vlns for div. parts. Com' on. I guess the 10 player sections could be used for div. parts. That's not too bad.
To say the least I'm getting a bit frustrated. Even my beloved QLSO Gold has only 11 2nd vlns. I don't think this patch was meant to be used as 2nd vlns, but It's as close as it gets with only 5 players short. Though a bit heavy for div., I do love the more intimate sound of that patch.
And, I heard a while back that VSL doesn't even have a separate 2nd VLN patch. Is this true?
Can somebody please explain to me why? Is it that much harder and more expensive to hire the extra guys for the day. I know some orchestras around the country are cutting back on their string numbers to save money. But, even for sample work 10 1st and 10 2nds is just weird. Too little for full orchestra. Too big for chamber orchestra. Maybe we can use it for pit orchestra work? Maybe I can mix it in on record dates or something...Nah.