of course English (with big E) is my second language.
But of course your comment is valid, I don\'t know what I was thinking when I wrote unpatient and not once but twice! We can always say that this is just stylistic technique. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]
Anyway, thanks for your correction. I\'ve edited my messages.
Btw. Thomas thanks for stay on guard for me. [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]
With the risk of sounding grumpy here, I wonder why a sample library should be THAT important to you. No doubt, EWQLSO will be GREAT, but are you unable to compose without that or any other forthcoming library? No library will make you a better composer. Some libraries make it easier to work faster and sound more realistic than has been the case before, but it won\'t make a bad composer sound good. To do that, you need a library built of phrases like Symphonic Colours or whatever the name of that phrase library was. THEN you can sound good, even without being able to really compose for an orchestra.
I can understand the interest in forthcoming libraries and hearing what they sound like, but no library should make the difference between composing and not composing. There is no magic solution as I see it.
Um, yup that did sound a bit grumpy [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]
The thing is, that it some ways, it will make us better composers. With the libraries of yesteryear, you compose differently: one tends to double all the time to try desperately to mask nasty phrasing. Also one tends to avoid the repetition paterns so common in recorded music but so lame in samples. Try and write a glorious fanfare for brass with even the best pre VSL/QLSO libraries!
So, everyone is excited about these libraries because it will enable composition (not just sound or realism) on a new level.
Showing this excitement is all good, so quit the grumpiness!! [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]