• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Topic: Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

    Both Quantum Leap Silk and RA seem to cover similar territory. Silk seems to have fewer instruments, but looks like it might be more in depth in terms of articulations and whatnot. Does anyone here have any firsthand experiences with both? I would be very interested in hearing about the difference. I think I may pick one of them up, and right now I am inclined to go with RA due to the price and the larger selection of instruments, but is Silk superior enough to justify the extra $200?

  2. #2

    Re: Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

    While it has fewer instruments, Silk is much better sounding. I would buy Silk.
    Composer, Logic Certified Trainer, Level 2,
    author of "Going Pro with Logic Pro 9."

    www.jayasher.com

  3. #3

    Re: Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

    i was wondering the same thing. so silk is all new/better recordings? more articulations per instrument? hard to get the specifics from their site.

  4. #4

    Re: Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

    RA is currently £49 (between $60 and $5, depending what time of day you read this) in the Time and Space sale, which means you could get that and then Silk.

    THe format isn't awfully clear though. They claim to have it in Giga, or AKAI, whereas I thought it was only released in the Kompakt Player version. I'd contact them if you do think of buying it.
    David

  5. #5

    Re: Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

    yeah, that looks to be "rare", which i assume is the predecessor to ra. no idea if its the same samples, but i can't imagine that akai format would have the same flexibility as kontakt or play.

  6. #6

    Re: Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

    The initial Ra release was Kompakt. The newest version is PLAY. I have Ra, not Silk. Ra has many more instruments culled from around the globe. Silk concentratews on instruments from Persia, India and China, and has more sample data then Ra. Silk is also almost $200 more expensive then Ra. Ra does not contain any samples from a former product.

    http://www.sonicstate.com/news/2009/...osses-borders/

    Above is a link from Sonic State of Nick Phoenix demonstrating Silk at Winter NAMM.

  7. #7

    Re: Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

    Quote Originally Posted by scientist View Post
    yeah, that looks to be "rare", which i assume is the predecessor to ra. no idea if its the same samples, but i can't imagine that akai format would have the same flexibility as kontakt or play.
    Sorry, you're quite right. I'd forgotten all about Rare Instruments 1, and the covers look so similar that I just thought it was RA. No Rare 1 wasn't nearly as expansive as RA.
    David

  8. #8

    Re: Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

    ... is Silk superior enough to justify the extra $200?
    Ra and Silk are in fact complementary libraries. One covers a huge number of instruments (RA) including percussion, brass, all kinds of hard to find ethnic stuff where the other is only Chinese, Persian and Indian woodwind and bowed/plucked strings. SILK has a more limited instrument list but the depth of programming, recording and integrated micro-tuning as well as the 1.000's of recorded phrases that complement the individual highly playable articulations make up for it. The price difference is partially based on the fact that Silk is a new release and RA is an improved version of a product that has been in the market for a while. With the current deal (2for1) you can get Ra for free when you pick up Silk, so the choice seems obvious.
    Best regards,
    Michiel Post


  9. #9
    Senior Member Steve_Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA 15206 USA
    Posts
    1,425

    Re: Difference between QL Silk and QL RA?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pingu View Post
    Sorry, you're quite right. I'd forgotten all about Rare Instruments 1, and the covers look so similar that I just thought it was RA. No Rare 1 wasn't nearly as expansive as RA.
    I bought the GIga version or "Rare" when I found it on sale a while back and I've very happy with it ... especially at the price.
    The samples are very nicely recorded.

Go Back to forum

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •