Hey, I am new to posting messages on this board, but I have been reading it for quite some time. So my question is this: After listening to all of the libraries demos, and reading all topics of conversations, why is Garritan strings seemingly losing so much momentum to VSL and EWQLSO? I really believe that Garritan\'s strings sound so much more real than the other libraries. Granted Thomas can make each of those libraries sound terrific, but why not use some of each? I like Garritan strings, SAM horns/bones and the woodwinds, other horns and percussion from EWQLSO. VSL isn\'t too shabby either. The solo strings from EWQLSO sound weak in relation to the rest of the library (really, just weak overall)....hoping Gary Garritan can solve the solo strings problem in the sampling world soon.
These are just a few of my thoughts. I would really like to hear what everyone else has to say about this though.
I think it\'s just a perception that ANY library loses ground. They don\'t. The conversation here, because it is very in tune with developing products (and heavy with people who produce said products) tends to get very centered on fresh and upcoming content.
In fact, as the tools gain features, libraries gain value.
I agree with you that GOS is a fine library. There are lots of fine libraries. Dan Dean\'s libraries have always been first rate. Miroslav\'s work was excellent, and very musical. All of these pieces fit together like a puzzle that can have 100 correct solutions, especially as new tools and the user\'s creativity at mapping and combining content enter the equation.
I must say that lifeless and synthy-like are very often heared comments when talked about...you know what library I\'m referring to!
VSL sometimes impresses (especially Herb\'s ensemble strings section demos, all of them) but other demos seem to reveal some shortcomings like harshness, particularly in the violin section. Their tricks and tools are more than a bonus. They really do wonders in mocking up all sorts of staccatos.
QLSO strings have a good (big)sound but I wonder if they\'re versatile enough, I sometimes hear the staccatos repeating themselves very quickly in the same demo. Not sure if I\'m making myself clear here.
Sonic Implant delivers an emotional, more intimate string sound but when properly layered manages to sound very much Hollywood. I do have the same doubts as I have for QLSO concerning the repeat-apparent-factor for short notes.
My opinion is based on demos, conversations and discussions, not on real life experience. I hope you still find some value in it.
I have all the libraries except for QLSO. Right now we have two terrific choices for orchestras recorded en toto, vs. sectional libraries. So by getting a complete \"orchestra\" you have a base from which to work, and can then fill in from there.
In regards to GOS, I totally disagree with the notion that it\'s showing its age (a year or so!). As an ensemble, it creates a really beautiful intimate sound. The strings are great across the boards.
VSL is big and \"in your face.\" Because they can record 24/7, they naturally have the largest set of articulations of any library.
SISS is a much smaller, far more intimate sound, and in full ensemble work, can be easily dwarfed by strong brass. So you have to be careful in the mix.
Since I don\'t have QLSO, I can only compare the published articulation tests and listen to the demos. So until I get it, I can\'t make any useful comments.
Overall, as a composer friend once said to me, \"You are your sounds.\" Get as many as you can afford.
Finally, keep in mind that in a professional writing situation, you always use, \"some of each.\" GOS, plus SAM is a great string/brass set and you can fill in the rest of the orchestra with DD Solo Winds and other percussion sets.
I was just making sure I wasn\'t missing anything. I feel out-of-the-loop with most of the people on the forum able to have hands-on demonstrations of major sample libraries prior to release. I think there is way too much emphasis on the *new* libraries (which, don\'t get me wrong, I would love to have in addition to what I currently have) instead of really talking about strengths and weaknesses of each library. I mean, \"Under the Sea\" by Thomas was great, but I think the solo violin was horrid. However, it wouldn\'t keep me from purchasing EWQLSO. Many people talked about it, but it seemed that the first reply to the comment about the solo violin was slammed by others standing up for the new lirbary. (I do not want to rehash those comments in this post either - it was just an example). However, it is great to hear people do still support Gary\'s strings in the heat of new releases. I totally agree it is how the composer uses his/her tools to create the goal of the most-realistic orchestra. I would still like to hear others views on this, though. Thanks for the replies so far! =)
More often than not, people never learn to use the tools they already have. GOS can sound incredible when someone gains the experience to milk the library for what it\'s worth.
However, it seems to me that the new emphasis is on ease of use. Understandable, as most musicians still lack good engineering skills or midi skills. Both of these skills are essential to getting the most out of GOS.
Personally, I don\'t blame the new developers. I, for one, would rather concentrate on new musical ideas instead of midi tools and tweaking. If you took a poll of composers, regardless of the area they work in, most would agree.