Cinematic Strings 2.0 a Kontakt 5 based library working with both the free Kontakt 5 Player and the full version of Kontakt 5 is without a doubt one of the most impressive string libraries on the market today. For a complete overview of Cinematic Strings 2.0 please read Peter’s excellent article here: http://soniccontrol.tv/2012/05/03/cinematic-strings-2-0/

One of the most difficult things that I’ve found to do with any string library is slow, expressive melodic writing. And, in hearing MIDI mock-up after mock-up from composers all around the world, I can hear that it’s a problem for many. The problem stems from lack of ability to use a particular library due to complexity of the library to a library just having the wrong sound for melodic expressive playing. So right out of the box I wanted to see if Cinematic Strings 2.0 could easily handle the slower more intimate pieces.

The Setup
To start, setting CS2.0 up in my template hosted in Vienna Ensemble 5 Pro took minutes, not days, thanks to the cleverly designed patch list. It was a pure delight to see this 20 gig library wrapped up in five patches taking up only 5 MIDI tracks in my DAW. Having used other libraries where just the 1st violins alone take up ten or more MIDI channels I was ecstatic. Deleting older patches that I no longer needed after installing the library, CS2.0 actually made my template smaller track wise—a first! I quickly saw that this library was probably going to become the go-to library due to its ease of use, setup and sound quality. I won’t have to go digging through 20 violin patches with cryptic geek names that don’t even fit properly on the screen. With CS 2.0 if I want violins, I just have to find the violin track.

The Music: Largo

Largo(all mics) vibrato

Rather than go into a blow by blow of how Largo was created, I’d rather give you a brief summation of the things that I found while creating the piece that make CS2.0 a seriously great strings library.

The simplicity and ease of use of the library shouldn’t be taken for CS2.0 being a “lite” or featureless string library. This is a full fledged serious contender that has a lot to offer on the same level as all the major string libraries. This library being a favorite of more than a few top tier professionals I know, and with the list price of $499, even the budget-minded composer has access to a set of top quality strings samples—that statement isn’t just marketing hype, it’s the absolute truth.

I fell in the love with the sound of CS2.0. The sound of the strings suited Largo well. Not just the recording quality, but the expressiveness of the samples. Each sample had a life-like musical quality that instantly reminded me of real string players. The hall sounds beautiful, giving the strings that expressive musical ethereal quality that reminded me of very fine orchestral recordings. CS2.0 was going to be able to pull off the level of musicality that I would demand for a piece like Largo. So I wanted to see if CS2.0 would respond musically in a way that a live ensemble would.

Thinking Like a Musician
CS2.0 gives you the option of the notes fingered in a high position on the instruments or a lower position. From the front panel of any patch, toggling back and forth between high and low I could hear that the high position would work well for my piece. The high position achieves that expressive tight sound where all sections blend well together for a cohesive full strings sound. The lower position also sounds wonderful and would have its use in achieving that wide strings sound, but for such an intimate piece as Largo I needed a tighter more intimate sound that the high position really provides.

Since I was using the high position I was able to achieve something that I can rarely achieve with samples. I was able to bring the violas up in unison with the 1st violins [Note: See Professional Orchestration 2A for examples] to reinforce the melody. The high position yielded a similar enough quality between the violins and violas that they blended seamlessly rather than being two distinctly different sounds.

Next I needed more control over the vibrato of each section. Turning the vibrato control on in the advanced menu and assigning it to any continuous controller gives you control over vibrato intensity. This is one of those features that is crucial to expressive playing. I couldn’t have been happier with the results, as the piece then gained a level of expressiveness without having to over do it with the dynamic crossfades (cc1). So with CS2.0, I was able to achieve swells of expression within a dynamic layer without adjusting cc1. Vibrato control is another expressive layer adding life and realism to your sampled mock up.

(One trick is to assign vibrato control to the same fader as dynamic control (cc1). Then as you ride the fader to louder velocities, so does the vibrato intensity increase. It’s a useful trick when in a hurry, but separating the vibrato control on to its own fader or knob gives you more control, so I placed vibrato control on a knob sending cc14.)

Connection of notes is a major concern in any sampled mockup. Great care has to be taken into making sure that notes in a phrase, line or melody connect up in the most musical manner. Without this musical connection it becomes a dead give away even to the lay person that you’re using machines–the kiss of death on a job, destroying the illusion that you actually had real players (or that they actually had money for the real thing).

Again in this area CS2.0 does a stellar job. The speed of the legato transition is control via velocity. This control brings yet another level of musicality to your virtual strings productions. You do have to be a little careful. Velocity also triggers a staccato sample that sounds simultaneously with the sustain notes. If the notes don’t overlap triggering the legato transition, then the stacc sample is triggered when playing a velocity over 60 and is quite noticeable. This stacc overlay can be turned off in the advanced menu but, I found it very useful for adding a little attack to certain notes even in slow expressive writing by leaving the overlay on.

The Mics

Though CS2.0 comes as a mutli mic position library, the library defaults to a prearranged mix without loading the individual mic positions. This saves a lot of ram. With the Kontakt buffers set to 60 I was easily able to write, mix and program Largo using CS2.0 with just under 2.5gigs loaded into the buffers. Though I have 24gigs in my system, I was pushing the limit with what I already had. So,

CS2.0 fit painlessly into an already full template.

when I completed the writing and programming of Largo, I cleared some unused patches of my template and loaded all the mic positions. Having close mic control gave me a more clear and upfront strings sound that I needed for Largo. But in all honesty, I’ve played both the mix mic versions and the mutli individual mic versions of Largo for people and nobody has complained about the sound of either one. I’m confident that in a pinch the mix mics would do just fine in a final production.

The mixed mics though require nearly 8 gigs of ram. If you’re running it on a standard hard drive like I am, you’ll even need to bump up the default buffer to avoid drop outs during denser arrangements. Thus for maximum efficiency of use of the mutli mics I would recommend getting a good SSD for CS2.0.

A Couple of Things to Watch For
A weakness, if you want to call it that, is that CS2.0 extreme upper dynamic layer seems to be boosted in loudness. So care has to be taken when the slider is up that the entire strings sound doesn’t go dynamically beyond what a full orchestral tutti would be, sometimes even clipping the output buss of my DAW. I handled this by keeping the dynamic fader (cc1) lower than the full amount limiting the upper dynamic range.

Another weakness is that some of the samples do tend to get a little noisy. I noticed this at first, but by the time I added tiny amounts of reverb and then added a little bit a tape saturation, the noise level became totally unnoticeable. Kind of added to the realism of being recorded in a hall, but then again I’ve never been too keen on totally silent noiseless samples. If I can’t hear a bit of noise, I get to feeling like I’m working with samples rather than having the real thing which kills the creative mojo.

All humor aside, CS 2.0 is a great, great library. Developer Alex Wallbank’s vision of an easy to use powerful library capable of handling the most demanding professional jobs is fully realized in CS2.0. With the quality of this library, I stopped calling Largo a “mock up” and came to realize that using samples isn’t just a replacement for the real thing but a creative medium all its own. One should demand the same level of exactness and musicality from your virtual orchestra as you would demand from a real one. Only then can one do convincing work with samples. Whether you need to deliver a finished musical work or you need to give a virtual representation of real orchestral strings,

CS2.0 can deliver.

And the happy news is this: You get a great sound right out of the box without having to work hard to make it happen.

String Ensemble Size
Let’s start from an orchestration perspective, ensemble size:

12 1st Violins
8 2nd Violins
7 Violas
7 Cellos
6 Basses

This size fits into what’s typically called the “standard” orchestra string section, but it’s recorded in such a way that it has the sound of a much bigger ensemble.

Patch Load Design
Don’t mistake simple for simplistic. CS2.0’s elegant patch load design often hides what’s going on under the hood, which is why it’s so easy to use!

For example, you’re not overwhelmed with articulation choices. Instead, you load five patches one per track: V1, V2, Violas, Ces, and Basses. Once you’ve loaded these five patches, you just loaded your string section – on five tracks!

Under the Matrix tab, you see that each patch has eight bowings, each selectable by keyswitch. Keyswitches are consistently placed for each string section, even the basses, which (as in a traditional score), are positioned an octave higher than they sound.

The benefit is learn once.

Be aware than when you load a patch, you’re loading all eight bowings which is about 1.2GB for Violins 1 and slightly less for the other patches. So if you’re not using a particular bowing, you can literally turn it off, and that purges the samples for that bowing.

Overall, patches take up around 400-500mb per patch if you only load up the Mix mic position.

The included bowings, in order, are: arco, tremolo, half step trill, whole step trill, run mode, staccato, marcato, and pizzicato. Here I have one minor critique. I would have ordered the bowings in their most frequent use, which would be arco, staccato, marcato, pizz, then the remainder of the bowings. Happily, part of the design is that you can re-order the list with a couple of clicks.

Arco - already set to legato (monophonic). To turn legato OFF, click the legato button at page bottom. The arco contains a staccato overlay which is triggered by velocity when playing velocity above 60.

Staccato - You can choose between staccato (longer) and staccatisimo (shorter) bowings, and under the hood, (the Advanced tab), you’re given sliders to control length. The sliders are also available for pizzicato.

Marcato - This is a sustained marcato so that when you strike the keyboard, you get an accented note but the pitch sustains.

Playing Position – This is another tool that keeps the track count down. I don’t know which string position these reflect, but you have a choice of Low vs High. The Low means all the pitches available are recorded in the lower string positions. This provides a very rich sound. High means all the pitches are recorded in the higher string positions which creates more intensity the higher you write.

Vibrato Control
Yes, there is vibrato control!

This can either be handled by velocity (playing above 60 increases vibrato) or with CC2 breath controller, which you can also draw in. I prefer to draw it in as too much vibrato creates an unnatural string sound in vertical harmony.

Velocity Crossfade – On the mod wheel. Volume is controlled by CC11.

Patch Loading Summary
On the surface, it appears as if you’re only getting eight bowings per patch. But that’s not true. By the time you factor in Low/High Positions, Vibrato, Staccato/Staccatisimo, Legato/non-Legato, and note length options under the Advanced tab, you have many more. Additionally, you have close, stage and room mics, each of which has the same number of bowing choices per patch.

Hall Reverb
To the right you see a knob for hall reverb. Per Mr. Wallbank, this is the standard algorhythmic reverb that comes with Kontakt which he felt had a nice neutral sound for quick work. Mr. Wallbank tried to match the sound and feel of the hall as much as possible with it and suggested turning the dial to around 4.5dB. While it’s a good sounding reverb, I chose to turn it off so I can pick from others in my collection that can be used on the whole mix.

Mic Mixer
The mic mixer enables you to adjust the volume per mic, which is handy when blending with other libraries. Your choices are close, stage and room.

My Tests
Cinematic Strings 2.0 is now the third string library to imply it has the Hollywood sound. I put that to the test by writing a short 1 minute piece, slow tempo, with voicings similar to that of Jerry Goldsmith.

I test this way because you can get away with murder in a demo that’s got the chugga-chugga thing happening in the middle register, cellos-basses in octaves in the lower register doing a different rhythmic line, and then writing a long languid violin line in the upper register. Add percussion and some brass, a dash of EQ and 2 tablespoons of reverb, and voila! A cue is born! Adjust tempo to taste.

But when you start adding vertical harmony, that’s where the story is written, at least as I see it.

My piece is written in Dorian mode, and I voiced the low strings (Basses, Cellos and Violas) in triads starting with the open voicing of Root-Fifth-Third. To stress the string samples, I wrote long sustains. I set the strings in Low position which increased the depth and warmth of the section. I turned off all reverb and applied no EQ. So this is as out-of-the-box as you can get!

Once the volume levels were set to achieve a sectional sound, and velocity was edited to be less than 60 (to insure light vibrato), what I found was that I had achieved, with no significant effort or time outlay of my own, a finished sound, which is also what Daniel James said in his YouTube video about Cinematic Strings.

Now an inner line. Well, no chugga-chugga. Instead I used ba-du ba-du ba-du ba-du by placing Vienna Instruments Harp 1 in the middle register playing an alternating eighth note pattern.

I put Vienna Flute 1 on the melody, then at the end of the phrase, I shifted the melody to Violins 1 and 2 playing in unison.

I felt that the Vienna Flute and Harp worked well with CS2.0 because all three have what I would describe as a similar “round” sound. So they blend well.

To spatially position, I used Spat with reverb off (sorry, Jose!) to position the Flute and Harp. I positioned the harp to the far left where it’s often positioned in a scoring session. And since I was just working with one (1) flute, I positioned in the center, but pushed back behind the strings.

Using Spat took me all of 2 minutes to spatially position the two instruments.

Next I added reverb.

Here I tried several but came away liking the Medium Vocal Hall from Ircam’s Verb which I set at 40% wet/dry.

At this point, I had achieved a great sound. It took me longer because I was learning the library at the same time. But once I finish with the MIDI editing and adding a touch of EQ, I have a commercially salable work.

And I must say, hearing that R-5-3 voicing sounded a lot like the strings as I remember them sounding at Warner or Sony/MGM. So for this piece, and my experience, yes, this is the Hollywood Sound.

Mr. Tchaikovsky
OK. I admit it. I’m the only reviewer who thinks about Tchaikovsky when doing string library reviews. And that’s because I’d like to write beyond chugga-chugga! But in this case, I tested CS2.0 with a passage in the upper register employing 6 vertical chord tones.

Violins 1 - Melody
Violins 2 - 2-part (double stops)

Cellos - Melody
Violas - 2-part (double stops)

The following popular string libraries are not divisi: CS2, HS Gold, LASS Lite and Miroslav. This means that to play more than 5 pitches in a vertical harmony stack, you have to either ignore string scoring principles and do what you want, or use double stops for the inner harmony. When you approach this passage with double stops, this means that you don’t need divisi, you can use V2 or Violas ensembles with two insertions each.

Since the pitches played by V2 and Violas can be performed as double stops, this yields triad over triad in octaves – which is a big sound). So to produce this with CS2.0:

Violins 1 – Legato On
Violins 2a – Legato OFF (individual track)
Violins 2b – Legato OFF (individual track)

Cellos – Legato On
Violas a – Legato OFF (individual track)
Violas b – Legato OFF (individual track)

Here, as with any library with controllable vibrato, the vibrato has to be at a minimum in medium to heavy vertical harmony, otherwise the cumulative effect is an unnatural “buzzy” sound in the strings.

CS2.0 pulled this passage off, admirably. I didn’t hear any synthiness with CS2.0 as some have reported. Not always, but often synthiness is due to not writing sample strings as you would for live.

Inner Octaves

The tempo is Andante Sostenuto, or a slow walk. This little baby is a stress tester. Violins 1 and Violas are in octaves and are sustained. Violas are on their bottom open C. Enter the Cellos then the Basses leading to diminished chords with the bottom pitch separated by nearly two octaves. Though from the 1800s, this is still a very contemporary sound.

CS2.0 executes it beautifully – right out of the box with a professional sound.

Critiques
As some have observed with personal comments, there is some noise in the samples. With the basses, for long sustains, I think the loops should be rechecked, and I found that with several other libraries, not just CS2.0!

I would like to see the online Quick Start Guide copied into a Pages document and released as a PDF. CS2.0 is easy to learn and use, but you do need the Quick Start Guide to learn your way around and it’s just more convenient learning it from a document you can print out vs. going back and forth online.

I would like to see CS2.0 add one more group by creating unison violins (V1 + V2) as this has been for decades one of the top combinations for dramatic film scoring. This can be programmed as it was for the ensemble patches in LASS and MV2.0. So no new recordings are required.

I also think that it would be worthwhile to consider adding, as a future update, some ensemble patches for all strings arco, staccato and pizz at minimum. Again, no new trips to the recording studio required.

Some seem to be bothered that the spiccato bowing is missing. I’m not. First of all, since spiccato is achieved by bouncing the bow off the strings, you do have a tempo limitation to it. Additionally, no matter how well spiccato is performed the composer still needs to bring some piano chops to the keyboard by pulling the fingers off the keys, not dissimilar in how you approach pizzicato.

Spiccato didn’t become “happening” until Mendelssohn. So we have several hundred years of practice without it. But if you feel you must have spiccato, and you don’t have a library that has spiccato, then consider Symphobia 1.

The Company Demos
I point you to this one demo to start. I admire what the developer, Alex Wallbank, did. He told the whole world flat out that he added EQ and a separate reverb.

This is honesty!

However, Mr. Wallbank went a step further. He explained how he applied EQ to get the results he did and then he put up what the settings were!

Can you think of any company demo where it was explained how the demo was actually produced, down to the EQ settings?

The never ending question on the forums is: How’d ya do that?

And the never ending answer is: silence, otherwise known in marketing circles as, “no speaka da English.” (Note: this is a universal sentence so please supply your own accent.)

But now the answer is published for Cinematic Strings.

Conclusion
As several of us have found writing about Cinematic Strings 2.0, you get great sounding results without an engineer, or having to become one. You get a polished dramatic sound that covers the wide genre of the Hollywood sound. The developer has told you how to EQ it to achieve his same results. It’s simple to learn and restful to use. Like every string library on the market, it has its quirks, but nothing detracts from the final end result of what you can achieve.

You can buy it as a download and the price is very, very reasonable. And if your currency is the Euro or British Pound Sterling, since CS2.0 is priced in USD, it’s a steal.

For all the rest of us, it’s a killer value.

Go for it!

Disclaimer: Alexander Publishing is not a dealer for CS2.0. Alexander Publishing is a dealer for Spat and Project SAM.

For a great introduction to SPAT I refer you to Peter Alexander’s excellent reviews posted on Sonic Control.TV.

My review is coming from a slightly different place than Peter’s in that here I’m giving you a full application based on a big band arrangement I did with samples, mixing different libraries together to create the desired end in mind, which is what we all have to do when doing MIDI mock-ups and mixing libraries together to create our own ensemble.

I think it would be too involved to get into all that this program is capable of, including all the parameter settings. That’s why my focus for this review is on what I use SPAT for. In subsequent reviews I’ll get into into other uses for SPAT focusing on surround sound capabilities. So again, this review comes from the trenches, with audio examples, of SPAT used for a real life music cue that I had to deliver just recently.

The exciting part is for such a technically involved program, great effort has been made by Flux and IRCAM to make this program rather user friendly.

But First…
But first, a little history from the viewpoint of José J. Herring. Not at all historically accurate, but for sure exciting!

I first became aware of IRCAM during my conservatory days. I had come across a CD performed by Ensemble InterContemporain lead by one of my favorite conductors Pierre Boulez. IRCAM ((Institut de Recherche et Coordination Acoustique/Musique) is a leading force of music research and contemporary music of which many notable contemporary composers musicians and music technology professionals come together to further the art of music.

The particular recording I was in to at the time (circa 1990) had utilized an acoustic live chamber ensemble performing along side computers in real time recorded live. The music was referred to as “hybrid” music.

Sound familiar?

The entire CD was an acoustic phenomenon the likes of which I’d never heard before or since. Whatever they were doing, I thought, they do rather well and at the time was so cutting edge that I literally thought that this was the future of music. And to a large part the merger of live instruments and electronic computer based music, became the future of what I live with everyday.

Given my history with IRCAM through the Ensemble InterContemporain, I was really happy to get my hands on what I feel is a piece of golden technology, SPAT. I found that best way to get familiar with SPAT is to use it towards some creative purpose.

For this review I’m focusing on project studio music production. At the risk of exposing myself, there will be three examples of a big band piece I was hired to write utilizing clarinet recorded live, sax, brass, and rhythm section all using sample libraries. The first two examples highlight the problems I had with the production, while the final example illustrates how SPAT helped solved them.

The First Example: No SPAT
Booming Big Band (No Spat)

The above example is the cue where I used the old “pan and send” method to try and create acoustic space. No SPAT! Just me!

To restate the professionally obvious, as many of us working with samples know, we need to mix together several libraries. The problems inherent in that approach are many:

1. Samples recorded in different rooms;
2. With different amount of ambiance;
3. In different locations, etc.

In trying to compensate for that you have to do a lot of mixing and employ unusual techniques which I call MIDIstration– a counter intuitive mix of sample programming and engineering techniques made to get things to sound as close to real as possible. The results were less than stellar as you can hear.

The Second Example: With SPAT Attempt #1
The next example uses SPAT for the first time. But before that a brief explanation of some of the more used parameters in SPAT.

SPAT is of course and room simulation plugin. SPAT is short for Spatializer. There are three main pages: Source, Reverb and Setup all accessible through buttons in the upper left.

Going down from there you have a section called Perceptual Factors. In that section you can adjust Source Presence which effects the presence of the audio file most notably volume.

Source warmth adjusts the bass level of audio while Source Brilliance adjusts the high frequency level.

Just below those sliders you have Room Presence. This is the reverb send level. Running Reverb blends the early reflections into the source signal so that the reverb becomes more a part of the sound. Envelope controls the perception of the sound coming from around the listener (mostly effective in surround applications from what I’ve seen so far).

Below the main graphic display on the source page you have a section called “Radiation” which adjusts the way that the source signal radiates in the space. Through a set of sliders you can control Distance which is the distance in meters from the listening position of your source.

Azimuth is the angle between 2 or more audio sources (stereo width).

Yaw is the angle of the source with respect to the axis ( meaning, “in English” that you can turn your virtual player all the way around so that he’s facing another direction entirely).

Elevation is height of source.

For Pitch, think in 3D and the angle of a nose of an airplane.

The Aperture is especially important as with this you can narrow the signal source thus allowing you to more accurately place your virtual players in a space.

All this feeds into a reverb plugin that I found quite useful. You can turn it off. That is a definite option. But since the reverb sounds good and is integral to setting up a proper space, I kept it on to good effect. Then by applying another reverb either as a send or on the same channel I was able to create a reverb very reminiscent of my favorite Lexicon reverbs.

There’s so much more and it would be beyond the scope of one article to explain it all. But don’t be turned off by the complexity of SPAT. A lot of good work can be done by just dragging icons in the graphic part of the interface and once you understand all the technical words SPAT is actually quite simple. The best way to do it is to use your ears and imagine a real space and to place your source where you want. SPAT gives you that control.

Now time for SPAT in actual use!

I opened up SPAT on an insert mono track of my clarinet performance which I recorded in the well known Jose J. Herring Centre For The Recording Arts, otherwise known as my living room.

So the final version involved a live player performing with a sample ensemble. I could have also done this with a vocalist. So immediately you can see the very practical applications with SPAT opening up.

On a mono track, though, I couldn’t locate the instrument. I could get good back to front distance, and using the “Aperture” slider I could narrow the field, but I couldn’t get a convincing left to right image.

I wanted the clarinet in the left speaker and I couldn’t place it there.

After realizing that to place an instrument left to right I needed at least two signal sources, I bussed my mono clarinet recording over to a stereo buss and inserted SPAT on the stereo track. SPAT then gave me two signals to work with. Looking at the visual display I realized that a lot of placement options are available visually by dragging the source icons in SPAT.

Ok! Easy.

I dragged the icons labeled 1 and 2 to the left of the field thus adjusting the Azimuth, or stereo field, narrowing it. I adjusted my distance. Adjusted the Aperture (signal width of the source. Think camera lens–makes it more narrow or more wide.) As the original recording was done in my living room with the mic 1 foot away, I wanted to place the clarinet more in the ensemble, but in front of it. SPAT did this no problem. Then I adjusted the send level of the source signal to the reverb using the Room Presence slider.

Verb is a great sounding reverb. Reminiscent of really high quality Lexicon reverbs. I was really happy with how the reverb opened up the sound and also, equally happy with the early reflections and the body of the reverb.

The tail came off a little digital sounding, but with a few adjustments I was able to smooth out the tail quite a bit.

Adjusting the “Room Presence” slider I was able to get a really good balance. I had my clarinet in the space I wanted which wasn’t my living room but a realistically mocked up stage.

Next, I noticed that my drums were all over the stereo field.

I use EZ Drummer which is recorded in Stereo and takes up much if not all of the stereo field. I noticed that my kick was in the middle, toms all over the stereo field and my cymbals were again all over the place. I needed to somehow narrow that field.

I put another instance of SPAT on the drums, narrowed the Azimuth, tightened the aperture. Again adjusting the reverb send (Room Presence), I was able to get my drums in a good space. Much of the same work was done on the acoustic bass and sax section. But there is still work to be done. Not quite there. SPAT didn’t magically fix my mix! Damn!

Here’s the example after my first SPAT session.

Booming Big Band (Spat)

So quite bummed, I worried about why this magical plugin that I knew was good didn’t fix the problems with my mix. Yes, I could hear SPAT working, but it still wasn’t good. In some ways better I thought and in other ways worse. I pondered this dilemma for about half a day, then I remembered this little maxim I always keep in mind with reverb:

If the mix isn’t sounding right before you apply reverb then applying reverb will only make it worse. The better the reverb the more it highlights other problems.

But, what could the other problems be? After all I did my best MIDIstration possible given the libraries I was using.

Then it hit me like a ton of bricks.

Real instruments, orchestration and their use derived from the assumption that instruments would be placed at the same time in the same space.

The Rimsky-Korsakov manual on orchestration goes into great detail over the balance and resonance of instruments and instrument groups based on the fundamental principle that your orchestra is playing on a stage situated in a certain way. Traditional samples recorded in different spaces and live clarinet recorded in a different space required me to do the “usual” unusual things—MIDIstration.

Because my cymbals were clobbering my mix, I had put the horns in weird octaves to be heard. Because, my saxes were close mic’ed and my trumpets were ambient I had doubled articulations to get more “punch” from the trumpets.

All typical things we do to get over spacial and resonant shortcomings in samples.

Ah, but I had used SPAT, and it had realistically mocked up a proper space for me. So now these MIDIstrations were becoming more obvious orchestration flaws. The little timing discrepancies to avoid the “accordion” effect of everything coming in at the same time were now just off.

The Third Example: With SPAT Attempt #2
So the next day, I opened up the mix again. I said to myself, “If I had real instruments in a real space what would I do?”

I adjusted the orchestration accordingly. Working with the SPAT graphic display, which by now had become by best friend, I fine tuned the Distance and the Azimuth on my instances of SPAT and the arrangement came to life.

Shimmy Shake (Spat Mix3)

This example was done on a two speaker system. SPAT allows you to control up to 8 Speakers giving you up to 7.1 surround sound spacial realization for your mixes if you work in surround. Given the impressive way it handled 2 speaker setups I’m eager to someday try it on a full surround mix.

Wrap Up
In closing I should mention a few things. First, SPAT is way more CPU efficient than I thought it would be. I used up to 6 instances without a problem. The ram usage is minimal. Worked within a 32bit environment without any problems ram wise.

As with any mix tool, a little bit goes a long way and my initial attempts over used the SPAT parameters. One weakness is that if you want to adjust things using real measurements in meters the meter gauge doesn’t appear to be that accurate as I tested it, so it’s best, like always, better to use your ears to match spaces in a virtual mockup.

Its real strength is that in spite of the big words SPAT is easy to use, does its job better than I had hoped and has a great reverb section. Giving my samples a “real” consistent space allowed me to use more of my orchestration chops rather than my MIDIstration chops. For these reasons, though its pricey for many, I think SPAT is worth its bytes in gold.

However, there’s a second solution, released in February 2010, which combined with VSL’s sales efforts with MIR, makes VSL the Proctor & Gamble of spatial placement by offering multiple solutions for a common problem. This second solution, which can appeal to composers running multi-hundred tracks, along with recording engineers, film mixers, sound designers, and post-production folks, is the 64Bit Vienna Suite with the FORTI/SERTI package designed by Ernest Cholakis of Numerical Sounds in Toronto.

To do spatial placement outside of MIR, three components of the Vienna Suite are needed:

1. Power Pan;
2. Convolution Reverb;
3. FORTI/SERTI Tilt Filters.

Power Pan positions the sound stage left to stage right. See Ernest’s Power Pan positionings for woodwinds here as an example.

Inserted into the Vienna Convolution Reverb, the Tilt Filter positions the sound, stage front to stage back. It’s no more complicated than that. In the A/B audio comparisons for this article, you’ll hear an immediate difference in spatial placement once the Tilt filter is inserted and applied.

Note: In this article I’m explaining what FORTI/SERTI is and how it works.

What IS FORTI/SERTI?
Admittedly, FORTI/SERTI is a bit of an intimidating product name suggesting a device or technology developed for the U.S. Air Force Space Command.

Happily, no.

FORTI, is an acronym for Full Orchestral Timbral and Reverb Impulses, while SERTI is an acronym for Small Ensemble Timbral and Reverb Impulses. You can purchase one or the other, or both. But for the price and what you get, buying both is the best value. And they’re available as downloads. The screen capture below shows what comes with the product (click graphic for larger picture).

Rather than giving you an IR that combines both the tail and the early reflections, FORTI/SERTI separates these so that you can mix and match to get the right balance.

Tails are described as room types: Epic, Dramatic, Medium Symphonic, Large Symphonic Halls, Large Sound Stages, Small Room, Salon, Medium Sound Stage, Small and Large Recording Studio, Recital, Theatre and Club. And you have multiple selections of each type.

Then there are the Early Reflections.

SERTI early reflections range in length from 10–99 ms, with first reflections ranging from 8–42 ms, while FORTI ER’s range in length from 36-99 ms, with first reflections also ranging from 8-42 ms.

Also included are: FilmEQ Timbral Impulses, High Pass Timbral Impulses, Tilt Filters A&B, Bass Isolation timbral impulses, Harmonic Emphasis timbral impulses, and finally, low frequency removal. Depending on the need of the samples or the mix, you’ll often find yourself pulling from more than the Tails, ERs and Tilt Filters to shape the overall ensemble sound, and consequently, that of the final mix, because you have the tools to do so in a very efficient manner using the Vienna Suite.

Thus, though a separate purchase to the Vienna Suite, with FORTI/SERTI, you’re getting a 64bit-native total mixing and post production solution package that works as a plug-in within the Vienna Convolution reverb.

Since the focus for this article is spatial placement, our focus is on how the Tilt filters work. To do that, please download the FORTI/SERTI PDF Table below.

FORTI-SERTI Table

There are two types of Tilt filters, dark and bright. According to Mr. Cholakis, the Dark Tilt filters push the sound closer to stage back. The Bright Tilt filters push the sound closer to stage front.

So once the sound is first positioned stage left to right with Power Pan, and it’s stereo width set, you then use the FORTI/SERTI Tilt filters to position stage front to back.

When you buy FORTI/SERTI, you get seven different starting points, C2 through C8 where C4 is middle C. From an orchestration perspective, the effective range is from the bottom pitch of the cello to double high C.

You pick a starting Tilt filter based on the lowest note of the instrument. In the attached PDF, I’ve worked out all the starting positions for you including percussion.

Note: You don’t have to put a Tilt filter on each instrument. If several are using the same exact settings, you can group them to use just that one set. Obviously, the “how” of this depends on your virtual mixing board program.

For consistency, as with SPAT, I tested with a flute.

For the flute (from any company), you start with C4 Tilt Filter (middle C) since that’s the flute’s lowest pitch nearest C4. But depending on the sampled flute, you may find the next octave higher works better for spatial placement. You can only know by experimentation. Within each Tilt filter are a range of distances. According to Mr. Cholakis, for Bright, the higher the number, the closer to stage front, while for Dark, the higher the number, the closer to stage back.

Assuming you’re doing an orchestral setup, the starting procedures are:

1. Insert the Strings first since spatial placement of other orchestral instruments will be based on the string’s positioning.

2. Insert the rest of the instruments and using Power Pan, position stage left to stage right.

3. Insert a TILT filter based on the particular instrument’s lowest pitch into the Vienna Convolution to position stage front to back.

LOGIC FLUTE
As a starting demonstration, using a C scale, here are 5 mini-examples I created using the EXS24 flute that comes with Logic. The reverb is an early reflection from FORTE set by Mr. Cholakis. The format is a wave file.

Explained Mr. Cholakis, “Most sampled orchestral instruments are close
mic’ed so the samples contain some wind noise component that is too
present/breathy or up close. The TILT filters help reduce this wind
noise – one cannot hear this (wind noise) when listening to a live
orchestra play because your in a hall and often 40-50 feet away from
the player.”

Note: All of the examples below were checked for accuracy by Mr. Cholakis before posting.

Logic Flute NO TILT (compare back to this)
Flute-no-til.t

Logic Flute C4 Dark 1
Flute-C4Dark1

Logic Flute C4 Bright 1
Flute-C4Bright1

Logic Flute C4 Dark 8
Flute-C4Dark8

Logic Flute C4 Bright 12
Flute-C4Bright12

My Observations So Far
Matched with VSL’s Vienna Suite, FORTI/SERTI is a powerful problem/solution package. Everything here is first class, a veritable Harry Potterish set of magical audio transformations. Meaning no disrespect, the only thing FORTI/SERTI lacks is an online seminar from Hogwart’s School of Witchcraft and Wizardry Audio Plug-ins Department!

The PDF I created for this article shows that FORTI/SERTI isn’t hard to learn! One piece of paper, and in you’re in a direction.

But there is one thing other thing this bundle needs and that’s a series of positioning settings that takes into account other libraries suggesting how to spatially place them together.

Next, a few “spells” from Mr. Cholakis’ own Hogwart’s Audio Transformation Cookbook are needed to fully demonstrate the transformative power on audio the Vienna Suite-FORTI/SERTI team actually serves up.

But first you have to get the spatial positioning happening.

I emphasize this since the bulk of buyers will be composers and songwriters, not necessarily engineers. And what’s needed for the bulk of these buyers is connect-the-dots instruction.

This is particularly important for FORTI/SERTI since excluding six hall IRs, you cannot download a full trial version of it, nor the Tilt filters, nor the other specialty IRs that come with it at this time.

That said, what FORTI/SERTI lacks in instructional content, it more than makes up for with the excellent accessibility of Mr. Cholakis directly who published his personal email address on the accompanying FORTI/SERTI PDF guide.

Now that’s customer service!

So when you have questions you can write Mr. Cholakis and get answers, often the same day, and usually within one business day. There are very few developers where you can call and talk to the developer directly, and Mr. Cholakis is one of them.

In fairness, I do need to point out that many of the early Vienna Suite reviews written by engineers did criticize Vienna for the lack of a good manual. However, what balances out the lack of documentation here is the excellent availability of the Vienna team on the VSL forum to provide answers for Vienna Suite questions.

Thus, customers aren’t left to learning either the Vienna Suite or FORTI/SERTI by the hope of just “cosmically getting it” somehow.

And now, a different application with FORTI/SERTI within the Vienna Suite.

Since the Vienna Suite now comes with Hybrid Reverb you have choice! Hybrid Reverb combines natural convolution impulses (early reflections of up to 1 sec.) with algorithmic reverb tails. So now with Vienna Suite and FORTI/SERTI, you can spatially position with Power Pan and the FORTI/SERTI Tilt filters, then select either convolution reverb or the Hybrid Reverb, while still enjoying full access to the remaining “ingredients” that come with FORTI/SERTI.

Thus, if you want to mix using a more algorithmic reverb, you can. If you want to mix with an all convolution reverb approach, you can. You can do both with the Vienna Suite.

As you begin discovering how the components can work together, you begin to see that the Vienna Suite-FORTI/SERTI combo is a significant mixing/mastering solution.

Not Just For Orchestral
Don’t think that FORTI/SERTI is just for orchestral. The Tilt filters can just as easily be applied to positioning a rock band on stage! Then you also have the Bass Isolation timbral impulses, Harmonic Emphasis timbral impulses, and low frequency removal which can be applied in many different ways.

Pricing
Price wise, the total FORTI/SERTI package is about $379USD depending on the daily exchange rate between the Euro and the Dollar, plus the Vienna Suite and Vienna key. So the entire package, the Vienna Suite + FORTI/SERTI combo, is about $999USD, which is about $100 or so less than Vienna’s MIR Pro.

Additionally, you don’t need to have Vienna Ensemble PRO to use it, though depending on your system, you may find it helpful to have. But no matter how many tracks a composer’s template is running, the Vienna Suite + FORTI/SERTI is a highly viable consideration.

Conclusion
This is our first look, really a glance at FORTI/SERTI. Next, we’ll take a journey with Mr. Cholakis and learn how to do an actual orchestral setup using various libraries recorded in different places and spaces.

Disclaimer: Alexander Publishing is not a dealer for VSL products.

I’m starting from the practical position of those owning libraries where the strings are pre-panned and are spatially placing instruments to work within that scenario.

Hollywood Strings Gold and LASS (1.5)
The first thing I did was to use my “ever” secret weapon, the Vienna Suite’s Power Pan, and view the spatial placement of both HS and LASS, both of which I found
to be positioned similarly. With SPAT you need to know this because SPAT’s default setting is panned to center.

Therefore, if you’re going to use SPAT for any orchestral mixing purpose, you have to discover the panning by section for each fixed position library first, and then set SPAT up for that for that individual position.

LASS Violins 1

LASS Violins 2

LASS Violas

LASS Cellos

LASS Basses

LASS ‘n SPAT
Below is a picture of LASS and SPAT. Here’s what you’re seeing. First, to repeat, SPAT’s default position is panned to center. In the screen capture below, looking to the right, you see the Input and the Output. The Input is reflecting the LASS Source signal showing how it’s panned to the left (the yellow 1).

The Output on the right reflects SPAT’s default position.

So using Azimuth (stage left or right), you position Yellow 1 for the left channel output, and then with Yellow 2 for the right channel output.

Repeat the process for each string section.

Repositioning a Fixed Place String Section
I tried several tests with this, and my conclusion is that in the beginning, it’s best to work with the fixed strings as they are, and then use SPAT to place the rest of the orchestra around them. Or, if you have a solid knowledge of the other string seating positions, you can experiment with different setups.

What About Miroslav and the Vienna Strings?
As is well known, both libraries have to be positioned since they’re recorded inthe center position. Since Daryl Griffith works mostly with the Vienna Strings, I asked how he positioned them. His very reasonable answer was that using Nuendo, he positioned them using Pan.

He also expressed the observation that when placing a string section with SPAT, it could sound smaller. I experimented with this and found that you can indeed shrink the sound by pushing the strings away from the Conductor. In other words, with SPAT, the further away from the conductor you move, the smaller the sound. You’re not “widening” the string section by giving it more space. There are sliders under Perceptual Factors that do give you play room in this area.

However, you can still use SPAT to position either library in whatever string seating arrangement you want, as you can Hollywood Strings and LASS.

Placing the Vienna Flute
Placing the Vienna Instruments, Sample Modeling, Mojo Horns, Ministry of Rock, Gypsy, and so on, is very easy. You just have to develop a little “mouse” technique with SPAT and you’re good to go.

Needless to say, insert the Vienna Flute 1 in a track and then insert SPAT. You have to click to get the grid with the Conductor’s head and the speakers, and then using the mouse, enlarge your working space. Below is a screen capture of Flute 1 in the “in your face” position.

Using the mouse, I dragged it deeper into the back of the stage and set it a little left of center where Flute 1 would sit in the orchestra. As I moved Flute 1 back, SPAT proportionately lowered its volume. Slick feature.

To Verb or Not to Verb, THAT is the SPAT Question
Given what a composer working in film, TV and media must have for an orchestral template, and the time restraints they have to work in, my view after only 20 hours of usage and experimenting is that you need to disengage the SPAT reverb for a big ensemble template and strictly use SPAT for spatial placement.

This is why I think it’s really crucial when getting SPAT to buy the complete IRCAM Tools, where you get the full version of Verb, which you can easily put on a send! And! Verb is a beautiful sounding reverb in its own right.

Setting Up Your Own Scoring Stage With SPAT
This is really the end result of what you can accomplish. But to really accomplish it, you need some scores and recordings.

The first thing some need to understand is that in a live recording session, there is no such thing as a film score orchestra seating plan. You set up the full orchestra on a scoring stage with the same consideration as a live concert. In a live concert, seating placement is also spatial placement.

Let’s look at the screen capture below from YouTube of Michael Tilson Thomas conducting Ein Heldenleben with the London Symphony Orchestra. Here I’ve captured the brass seating positions along with the harps and percussion. Looking left to right, you have eight French Horns, and to the right, are the trumpets. Strauss wrote this for five trumpets. Behind the trumpets next to the timpani are the trombones and two tubas (tenor and bass tuba as noted on the original score). Though not pictured here, woodwinds are positioned in front of the French Horns, left to right starting with the flutes, of which the score calls for four plus three bassoons and a contrabassoon!

So there is the spatial placement by seating arrangement. And depending on which brass and woodwind libraries you have, you can use SPAT to create a similar setup.

But!

Depending on micing and other considerations, where did the recording engineer place them in the mix?

Because so many reading these reviews want to be film composers, I suggest you get MTT’s Keeping Score: Mahler, which while recorded on stage, is recorded in a manner similar to a Hollywood film scoring session complete with spot mics. Here you can get the score and with headphones, listen to the orchestral placement and mark the score as you go.

Using the same recording and score, you can now begin testing to create your own scoring stage setup.

The work on many of these SACD’s is done by recording engineer Andreas Neubronner. Follow this link to RME to learn more about the recording of Mahler Symphony #8 which was done using RME hardware and Sequoia recording software.

Now, if Mahler isn’t to your liking, get a John Williams score and matching CD and follow the same procedure.

My teaching point here is that there are many seating arrangements depending on the ensemble size. What you can capture with SPAT is stage positioning, dynamic relationships, coloring (bright to dark), and presence. And then comes the reverb to shape and design your room.

For The Working Composer
With SPAT you have more than a tool of spatial positioning. You have a tool enabling you to create your own scoring stage.

Because SPAT is a plugin, it can work with all the libraries in one way or another. Additionally, because you can turn the reverb off in SPAT, you have the whole range of reverbs and convolution reverbs open to you.

One thing I feel I need to point out. This is a professional tool. It’s designed for music, post, and other film needs. It’s not a mass market product that’s going to move a million units or more. So it is expensive.

But if you’re operating in a seriously competitive arena, consider SPAT, because it’s a serious problem/solution tool.

Download the Demo
Rather than take my word for it, download the demo from Flux and see for yourself. Click the link and download IRCAM Tools Free Trial. An iLok key is required.

Alexander Publishing is a dealer for SPAT.

One of the most difficult problems in mixing orchestral mock-ups, knowing how to spatially place instruments quickly and easily, has now been simplified with Ircam SPAT, a 32Bit downloadable audio plug-in that works with any library. Says the Ircam web site about SPAT, “SPAT is the most advanced and sophisticated tool for room acoustics simulation and localisation.”

In short, you can place instruments (live or sampled), vocalists, foley, et al, and design the space you want them heard in. Or, you can turn off the reverb portion and use your favorite reverb.

To do this, there are two broad parts to SPAT.

The first part is an easy to learn tool that enables you place a sound anywhere stage left to right, and closer/farther away from the conductor. This aspect of SPAT enables you to spatially position libraries recorded in different rooms and different mic positions in such way that they line up to work more like a single section, or a whole orchestra.

The second part is a reduced version of Ircam’s Verb, which is an algorithmic room acoustics and reverberation processor, which, as I mentioned, you can turn off. It’s not necessary to use this aspect of SPAT, but if you do, you must follow this thinking about SPAT as explained to me by Piet de Ridder, a fellow composer/user of SPAT who has the habit of achieving excellent mixes of his work:

The key to (understanding) SPAT is, I believe, not to approach it as you would any other reverb software. SPAT works entirely differently: it doesn’t treat reverberation as something separate which you ‘add’ to a dry sound, but it always considers the combination ‘source signal’ plus ‘room response’ as one single phenomenon. It is, in my opinion, really essential that one is fully aware of this when starting to work with SPAT. SPAT is not another piece of reverb software (and it shouldn’t be approached as such), it’s a very complex simulator of what happens to sound in a certain user-definable space.

You can setup SPAT for stereo all the way up to 7.1 surround sound, and even three channel theater (LCR) viewing. In fact, once installed SPAT reads your system and does a preliminary speaker setup for you.

Installation
Installation only takes a few minutes. You’ll need an iLok key and to have your reg deposited to your iLok account. Once completed, download SPAT and follow the install instructions. It really just takes a few minutes.

Since it’s 32Bit, Logic users should remember to first reset Logic for 32Bit and then open Logic. Once Logic sees it in 32Bit you can go back and reset Logic again for 64Bit. For the post-community, no probs in ProTools.

The PDF manual comes with four-color screen captures (see beloe for download). It’s difficult reading in either Preview or Adobe Reader because the print is so small, and made more difficult to read if you print it out as a black and white document. So while it will definitely eat up the ink in your cartridges, the color print out is really optimum. Another option is to send the manual to your iPad.

Spatial Placement
For this first review, I’m sticking to what I see for many as a top problem/solution benefit of SPAT for composers doing their own MIDI mock-ups and mixes, which is spatial placement. For this review, I tested using SPAT to place the new Miroslav Vitous String Ensembles 2.01 into a seating arrangement of Violins 1, Violas, Cellos, Violins 2 and Basses.

As a starting test, I inserted SPAT into VE Pro 4. The screen capture below shows that VE Pro recognizes the Ircam Tools.

This now gives composers several practical options with VE Pro or optionally, within the sequencer:

1. You can insert an articulation and SPAT on a single track with the reverb on.

2. You can insert an articulation and SPAT on a single track for spatial placement with the reverb off, allowing you to add reverb either as a send or within your sequencing program.

3. You can insert a section’s worth of articulations in a single instance of VE Pro and use SPAT to spatially place an entire section either in VE Pro or in the sequencing program.

Since I now know that VE Pro recognizes Ircam Tools, I could continue my project right here. However, for this article, I’m doing it inside of Logic 9.1.6 just for simplicity and ease of screen capture.

So my next step is to insert Violins 1 into a single track along with SPAT. Below is a screen capture of SPAT in the “daylight” setting. To see the interface click the picture.

In the middle you see the outline of the top of a head direct in front of which are a pair of speakers. For me, I think of the head as being the conductor. Behind the speakers are the numbers 1 and 2 in yellow circles. The number 1 is highlighted in yellow. Coming out of the blueish circle you see Left, Right, Front, and Back. The numbers 1 and 2 mean this is a stereo source and 1 is the left channel while 2 is the right channel. Using either the mouse (by dragging) or controls in SPAT, you can position 1 and 2, here Violins 1, where you want them along with a custom stereo width!

1. You can set clearly separated sections so that each section has its own space.

2. You can slightly overlap sections so that there’s a little “bleeding” from one section to the next.

Below the chart you see the word, RADIATION. Below that you see you see Distance, Azimuth, and Yaw. Here’s my simplified explanation:

Azimuth = Stage Left to Right

Distance = Closer to the conductor or Away from the conductor.

You can set the stereo width manually, or you can do the following:

1. Click Reverb then Setup.

2. Click the vertical rectangle in the StereoPairs column, so that it turns yellow. This connects channels 1 and 2. Below that you’ll see a set of numbers labeled 60. This refers to the distance between the two sound sources. So now you have the option of setting stereo width manually or here.

3. Now use the Azimuth slider to position Violins 1.

4. When I play the keyboard, SPAT confirms that Violins 1 are positioned to the left. Look to the right of the screen capture.

5. Next, use Distance to position Violins closer to or away from the conductor. Again, closer to is more detail, away from is less detail.

What You Can Now Do
Borrowing from Russell Crowe in Gladiator, this is how you can begin making different libraries work, “as one.”

You can also think of creating templates from a much different perspective, that of how a recorded ensemble sounds. You could find an album where you particularly like its sound and spatial placement of the orchestra. With SPAT you could work to emulate the positioning. With Distance, you’re moving closer to or away from the conductor/listener. So if you pick a close mic setting that’s too close, you can push it back. At the same time, if you’ve picked a sample library’s mic setting that’s further behind the conductor, you can bring that closer to the conductor or push it back even further.

Testing With LASS
My next experiment was in testing a library recorded “in place” to see how SPAT worked with it. Here I used LASS 1.5 Violins 1 Leg L.

Even though LASS is recorded “in place” I was still able to use SPAT to reposition it. Here my main test was moving it closer to and farther away from the conductor keeping to its pre-recorded pan positioning. So yes, SPAT works with libraries already pre-recorded in an orchestral seating position, which is also good news for engineers, too! So this can help position two different libraries recorded in two different places so that they work as a single section.

Next I had a real “aha” moment with SPAT. LASS has had a reputation as being “edgy” and not as warm as people would like owing to its detuning. Look back at the first screen shot to the left side and you’ll see a section labeled Perceptual Factors. Underneath that is a fader called Source Warmth. Bringing up that fader really warmed LASS by removing some of its edginess.

Reverb On and Off
That you can turn SPAT’S reverb on and off to me is a good thing because to manage system resources better, using SPAT on dozens on tracks with the reverb on would really slow down even the heartiest CPU in a system loaded with RAM.

Also, there are those who prefer working with hardware units from Briscasti, Lexicon, or TC Works and prefer that approach to sound shaping.

That said, as a composer/mixer, I did a quick test of SPAT’S reverb with both Miroslav and LASS. Though not an engineer by any stretch of the word, I have gone through the task of testing individual libraries with different reverbs to see how they bring out a library’s sound. Some reverbs definitely flatter and work better with some libraries than others.

Testing SPAT’s default verb with MV SE 2.0, really brought out the MV strings quite a bit. To my ears, SPAT brought out the lushness and gave MV more airiness and “breathing” room aurally.

I then tested two of LASS’s IRs created by Ernest Cholakis using Logic’s Space Designer, one for the Early Reflections and one for the Tail. Then I disengaged them and turned SPAT’s default reverb back on to compare.

Ernest Cholakis doesn’t just create cool IRs, he creates transformations of sound. By using SPAT to warm up LASS and then adding in Ernest’s IRs, I think you might be hard pressed in recognizing this library as LASS. BTW, I mean this as a total compliment.

What this means to the composer who must mix is that you can create your own signature orchestral sound with SPAT that complements your signature scoring sound.

Let us put aside academic fal-de-rah. Because of the new technology, we composers are not just entrepreneurs, we are also a new wave of orchestral recording artists, and therefore must approach our careers accordingly.

Reflections
It’s now the morning after. I’ve got my coffee. It’s a beautiful bright sunny breezy day out there.

So sitting alone with my thoughts, though I’ve barely scratched the surface of SPAT, how do I really feel about it and is it worth the bucks?

The first thing I have to consider, and I think you have to consider, is that SPAT isn’t freeware. So it ain’t cheap! This is a very serious sonic transformation tool on its own. Had I had this review/tutorial to start me off, I would have been productive at this level within 45-minutes.

So the good news is that you don’t have to be master mixer to get a lot out of SPAT. You just need good solid easy to understand instruction to get you going and maximize your time.

Second, it works with Vienna Ensemble Pro. This needs more experimentation for spatially placing an entire section and using SPAT’s reverb in a manner economical for your CPU.

Third, it works with every library, synth sounds, vocalists, foley, the whole magilla.

Fourth, it can be combined with any convolution or reverb, hardware or virtual.

Fifth, at day’s end, it’s an audio plugin that just works with every library. I insert it in the appropriate track or VE Pro instance, and it works.

I like that.

Admittedly, turning off SPAT’s verb does defeat part of the program’s purpose, but that is also another strength adding to its flexibility and not making me feel locked in to a system. This for me is another incentive to buy.

Given its MAP pricing, I would absolutely consider spending the extra $200 and getting the Ircam Tools Bundle where you get SPAT, the full version of Verb, and Trax. To put this into a buying context, getting the Ircam Tools bundle is like getting an Adobe bundle. But given the power of the full version of Verb alone, even if you never touch Trax, the extra two bills is worth the price.

That said, SPAT is not for every writer, especially if you’re primarily working with just one library where everything is pre-panned for you.

But if you’re like me, and you’re using multiple libraries where you have to spatially place instruments, then SPAT’s worth considering because of the speed with which you can get things done and the results thereof. If, for example, you’ve had difficulty fitting Sample Modeling brass into a mix, you won’t with SPAT.

Now, one other delicious application: singers and soloists.

Let’s suppose you write backing tracks for a singer, or create a work for a soloist, regardless of the style. Once the vocal track is recorded, you can now place the voice and “the virtual orchestra” together so that they blend as one. In fact, it doesn’t have to be a singer. It could be a spoken word presentation like Peter and The Wolf or dialog.

In closing, I’ve read very carefully those posts where composers talk about how they achieved spatial placement in their mixes. Some EQ this, and use a reverb for that, while using Aunt Millie’s pancake mix for something else.

With SPAT, you can just place it!

Conclusion
For this starting review, I’ve only touched on three faders. Even so, just knowing these three can make a tremendous difference in your mixing time and overall sound. And yes, you’ll have to experiment. But with SPAT, what you put into it, yields great dividends. Check it out and see if it’s right for you.

The SPAT Manual
Spat User Manual

Chart From The Hollywood Strings Manual
In the screen capture below (click to enlarge) you see all the pitches available in FP.

Finger Positions from the Hollywood Strings Manual

A few insights for those used to working with live strings. EastWest has labeled the lowest sounding string as String 1 and the highest sounding string as String 4. With live players, the highest string is always Roman Numeral I and the lowest is Roman Numeral IV.

That which are labeled with FP are, with live players, hand positions because the hand has to move down (or up) to play the pitches available within each position. Unless specifically marked by the composer, the string player does not slide their fingers from one note to the next. Rather, each finger is placed per pitch.

The First Position
Compare the pitches in the first position to those in the EastWest graphic.

First Position pitches for the violin. Click graphic for larger view.

Starting with A below middle C, these are the only pitches available in First Position. The two pitches shown before the double line are in the open position.

Notice that B above the treble clef is the highest pitch in First Position.

Looking back at the EastWest graphic, you see pitches well above the B. So what’s up with that! Very simply, to give you the complete range of the violin, EastWest has added the additional pitches.

Fourth Position
The Fourth Position operates in a similar manner.

The Fourth Position on the violin. Click graphic for larger view.

The lowest pitch is a C# and the highest is E above the treble clef. To provide the full range of here, the violin, pitches were added.

Application
Play the full range of the instrument after pressing each keyswitch and you’ll hear that each position is a different sounding color.

Staying with our violin example, it’s very common in coloristic orchestration to write Sul G, Sul D, etc. This means that all the pitches are played on that string which yields a greater intensity. The typical range is an octave starting with the open string and the hand moving closer to the bridge. To take advantage of Sul G, for example, you need Positions 1-4 which you have with Hollywood Strings. Using the Strings Position Booklet (which also shows the fretboard and a keyboard with the pitches available in each position) you can quickly work out which pitches are available in which position.

Los Angeles. On March 9, 2012, in a judgment given by Federal District Court Judge Dolly M. Gee of the U.S. District Court of Central California, Cinesamples LLC, a California corporation was awarded $379,050 in damages and lost profits plus attorney fees against Pablo Vargas Casas, a resident of Chile, on three causes of action: violation of the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act), copyright infringement, and breach of contract.

According to the Court’s civil minutes, in June 2011, Mr. Casas, “used Internet discussion boards to organize a group purchase of a single license for the CineBrass software library.” On June 15, 2011, Mr. Casas purchased for download the CineBrass library for $399 U.S.D. at which point Mr. Vargas agreed to a software licensing agreement.

After downloading the CineBrass program, Mr. Casas altered the software housing the CineBrass sample library, the Native Instruments Kontakt player, which then permitted unlicensed versions of the software to be distributed to multiple users. Mr. Casas then uploaded both the “cracked” Kontakt software and the complete CineBrass library to several illicit file sharing web sites, resulting in approximately 950 potential purchasers and unlicensed users downloading the library.

According to his Linked In profile, Mr. Casas lists as his skills, Scripts Programming Platform native Instruments Kontakt 4 Composer Quiropterología. He attended Universidad Autónoma de Temuco from 2008-2011, and the Universidad de Los Lagos from 1995-1999. Mr. Casas lists himself as the proprietor of iCeSamples.

According to his Facebook profile, Mr. Casas has done work for the Orquesta Barcelona.

Because Mr. Casas did not appear in court to defend himself, Judge Gee awarded Cinesamples with a default judgment based on the list price of the program times the number of downloads. Court minutes did not state which Internet discussion boards Mr. Vargas posted to.

On his web site, Mr. Casas only accepts payments from verified PayPal users.

Copyright © 2011 Alexander University Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Background
This library is developed by Miroslav Vitous, a Prague Conservatory and Berklee alumni, and the former head of the jazz department at New England Conservatory of Music. A renowned jazz bassist, Mr. Vitous is the founding member of the jazz group Weather Report and has played with such musicians as Art Farmer, Freddie Hubbard, Bob Brookmeyer, Stan Getz, Herbie Mann, Miles Davis and Chick Corea.

In the early ’90s, he released his legendary 4-CD sample orchestral library in formats for Akai, E-MU, Gigastudio, and Roland which cost composers US$3500 for the set. Several years ago, the original library was licensed to IK Multimedia and rereleased as the Miroslav Philharmonic.

In the 2009-2010 season, Mr. Vitous released his new String Ensembles 1.0 in Engine format. In January 2012, he released String Ensembles 2.0 in Engine 2.0 format which is a 2DVD 11GB set available through a small group of dealers and shortly his own web site. String Ensembles 2.0 will be followed by both a brass and woodwinds library.

First Listen
When you first listen to most string libraries, many sound loud and in your face. That’s because in the psychology of sales, loud = big and big = better.

That’s not what you get when you first load MV String Ensembles 2.0. That’s because MVSE2.0 fills a sonic gap in currently available string libraries with its softer, more symphonic sound that lends itself well to lyrical, melodic writing – think Alexandre Desplat for Twilight: New Moon, and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows 1 & 2.

Said British composer Rohan Stevenson (Merlin) about SE 2.0:

I must say, these strings are surprisingly pleasing. Particularly the sustained violins are extremely lush and expressive. The different velocity layers have their own individual expressiveness so that the sound is really organic. You really get a sense of the players pulling the bow through the note. The pizzicatos are great too, really great in fact. And the inclusion of sul ponticello is very welcome – not many other libraries have them.

Performing With the Library
The Miroslav Vitous String Ensembles 2.0.1 library is entirely velocity sensitive. It’s designed to be performed, whether playing live or when recording for studio work and MIDI mock-ups.

Understand this and you understand how to approach and use the library.

Play the keyboard lightly, and it sounds soft. Play the harder and it sounds louder. Leaning into the keys produces an even richer, more expressive sound. The result for the end user, as testified in writing to me by several of the demo composers, is that SE2.0 is quick to learn, quick to work with, and is as easy on the brain as it is the CPU since you can just sit, play, and get a great sound. I emphasize this since the other major commercial libraries on the market are usually velocity sensitive on the short articulations only.

Thus, the more expressively you’re able to perform, the more expressive SE2.0 sounds.

The best way to understand this is to start with three key Violin folders containing the patches, which in Engine 2.0 language are called layers. These folders are Full Sections/1st and 2nd Violins, VS Mod Wheel Velocity Zones, and Round Robins.

Full Sections, 1st and 2nd Violins
All of the programs in this folder are velocity sensitive and none of the programs, as in not one, has any mod wheel implementation.

If you want mod wheel implementation for volume or expression, it’s a snap to do in Engine 2.0 with its MIDI Learn feature. Once you’ve assigned the mod wheel, you have the full volume range from no sound to loudest.

The Full Section programs are programmed Violins 1 + Violins 2 giving you a solid 24 violins unison sound. Violins 1 are a 14-person section while Violins 2 are a 10-person section.

In this folder, as in the Violas, Cellos and Basses, are the following type programs: sustain, sustain expressive, sustain legato, sustain legato expressive, sustain swells, various detache, pizz, staccato, tremolo, trill tool, and sul ponticello.

Modwheel Velocity Zones
This folder contains selected programs designed for more traditional film scoring applications. The programs are still velocity sensitive, but with mod wheel crossfades. However, there is a difference between these mod wheels and the ones you can program in the other folder in that Mr. Vitous has restricted the volume range to work in a more symphonic manner conducive to MIDI mock-up work. When you bring the mod wheel down to the very bottom, you still hear a little sound (meaning it doesn’t fade in from zero).

Mr. Vitous’ reasoning for programming the mod wheel patches this way interestingly enough, was explained in an unrelated quote by Hans Zimmer:

If you want things to sound big, make sure you limit your upper dynamic range. All instruments – especially percussion – sound bigger when played relatively softly. You can always turn it up.

Round Robins
Again, all velocity sensitive. However, you’re given several different RR approaches to select from, each yielding a slightly different result.

The Second Library Within
Miroslav Vitous has the only string library that goes beyond giving customers the fundamental string library. With SE2.0, Mr. Vitous has included a rather complete mini-symphobia for strings. By this I mean that Mr. Vitous has included all string programs (though approached totally different from Project SAM’s Symphobia 1 and 2), unison and octave combinations, pads, and even a starting string template yielding roughly a 40-track setup.

These also are all velocity sensitive and for those wanting to use SE2.0 in live performance, give you really beautiful pre-programmed string combinations not found in any other library.

Time Saving All-String Programs – These are the first of the symphobia-like programs in SE2.0 and they’re found in Projects. There are two combinations: Violins – Cellos – Basses (used in West Side Story’s orchestration) and Violas – Cellos – Basses. The VS-CE-BS have five variations while the VL-CE-BS has two. There are two different performance types for each combination found in two separate folders.

String Templates – Again, these are found in Projects. You have pre-set templates for the Violins, Violas, Cellos and Basses. I didn’t count all the programs in each section, but this looks like a 40-track string section template ready to go. Loading the templates is a quick way to get introduced to SE2.0.

More importantly, Projects is where you can create your own MV templates very quickly, either for a full section or individually for Violins 1 +2, Violins 1, Violins 2, Violas, Cellos, and Basses.

As a Logic user, I found that the Vienna Ensemble PRO was ideal for working with either Projects or setting up a separate template just with VE Pro.

String Pads – Miroslav created a really great set of programs that I tested out with the five pieces for MIDI mock-up I wrote for the Writing For Strings Course. These programs are clearly labeled as Pads (sustains). I tested on a Jerry Goldsmith inspired voicing of Root (basses), Fifth (cellos) and Third (Violas), and it was very easy to pull off. The blend was just great. Depending on what you’re writing you’ll find these to be a very useful set of programs.

And again in live performance, will give you great string colors to work with.

The Language of The Bow
As with all the newer libraries, you are the virtual concertmaster. MV SE 2.0 gives you a goodly amount of bowings to choose from. The chart below shows the bowings (aka articulations) available with MV String Ensembles 2.0.

String Ensemble Overview
MV SE2.0 comes with two completely different string sounding ensembles, the Main Library and an experimental set called Blends. The Main Library has a very lush, beautiful sound, while The Blends are less lush and more aggressive. Because they’re a bonus to the original library they have fewer articulations than the Mains. See the chart below.

Panning
Like Vienna, you have to use panning to position the individual sections whereas the combinations are pre-panned for you.

Some will complain about this, but since so many use Vienna Ensemble Pro, using Power Pan you can set the panning in a few seconds. Since there are 5 predominant seating positions for the string section, you can select the one that works best for your piece without being locked in to the standard seating arrangement. And when blending MV SE2.0 with other libraries, it enables you to match and blend them more easily.

Overall, you have a very practical string library that’s player driven. While it lacks some of the more sophisticated features found in LASS like ARC, Stage and Color, its completeness and simplicity in learning more than make up for that. Also, sometime in later 2012 there will be paid updates available for advanced trills and glissandi/portamento.

Recording Aids
Mr. Vitous has also included helpful insights inside the Engine player. The screen capture below, for example, explains how to pick violin programs to avoid phasing.

Legato Implementation
In checking with Mr. Vitous, he now has Legato Interval method patches being programmed for the library which, as I understand it, will be a free update. The newer LI patches, as in the other string libraries that use this method, will be monophonic.

Once the new LIs are released, you won’t have to choose between either methodology. You’ll just pick the one that works best for your performance/recording situation.

Hence, the existing library does not use the LI method.

However!

Mr. Vitous has created what he calls a mapping technology legato for the detaches that can be played single line or polyphonically. Depending on the string section, Mr. Vitous has created detache legato programs (look in a folder labeled Det Legato) that have 2-3 speeds (med, fast, faster) and a special mod wheel program which lets you switch between the programs depending on the tempo of the piece. Below is the Violins Det Legato folder covering 24 Violins, 14 Violins and 10 Violins. The mod wheel program contains all 3 speeds, unfortunately, Mr. Vitous neglected to label the section size for it! Well, a quick email to the registered base will fix that problem until the next major update. Nonetheless, even with a minor labeling glitch, you the player still have a 2-3 speed detache legato performance choice per section (violins, violas, cellos, and basses) for any tempo!

Computer Stuff
MV String Ensembles 2.0 Engine 2.0 player is backwards compatible to Windows XP on the PC, and the G5 (10.4, 10.5 and above) on the Mac. I originally installed the earlier version of Engine on my G5 (pre-Intel) with no problems. I installed the newer Engine 2.0 on a Mac Pro 12-Core with no problems.

Tech support on Best Service Engine is handled by Best Service.

For those like myself on 64bit systems, you can use any Engine 2.0 in your sequencer, but really, for best all around computer performance, better to get the Vienna Ensemble PRO and run all your 32bit apps there. This way, depending on what you’re using, the sequencer is free to read all the RAM in your system, Mac or PC.

Programs load in the blink of the eye.

My Observations
My initial mistake with SE2.0 was approaching it the way I approached Hollywood Strings or LASS, which is exactly the wrong approach. Once you understand that SE2.0 is completely velocity sensitive, your expectations for using it are reset in that the primary level of expression comes from your playing with volume/expression assigned to the mod wheel adding to that expression.

Writes Mr. Vitous in the 2.0.1 update PDF:

However, you must choose your own velocity according to your project. We have experienced that if the velocity of the strings is higher than a standard classical volume, it becomes to adapt fusion sound and it begins to sound synthy.

Consequently, you’ll need to work with your keyboard controller and velocity curves within Engine to get the feel that’s best for you.

My next lesson was in getting velocity levels just right so that the beautiful Prague sound emerged, a darker warmer sound which is unlike any other string library. That’s because the velocity zones are not mathematically placed as in other libraries. Instead they’re placed based on the samples themselves. Here’s the range as reported by Mr. Vitous:

0-80: pp, p, mp
81-104: mp to mf
105-127: mf-f

The more lyrical sound, I’ve found, comes when staying within the 0-80 velocity range.

However, when checking this for technical accuracy, Mr. Vitous didn’t agree! He wrote:

Actually the best vel zone would be from 0 – 110 as the MP changes to MF at 105. Anything above the 112 is dangers as it gets very loud. If you want to play 115 on the keyboard you have to hit really hard so hard that you could not play any music or voicings. Than they can get the F and FF from the special patches made just for that and adjust the volume to the need.

I then wrote back and asked, “What special patches?”

Writing back, he pointed me to the Det Marcato and Sustain Expressives folder (see below) for all string sections. Here you find specially programmed patches to handle the louder dynamics. Those patches labeled Max 2 Voices mean not to perform more than two pitches in vertical harmony with that program

SE2.0 is a first rate team player when used in combination with other libs. I tried MV SE 2.0 with a multi-part divisi test using LASS where I simply switched an appropriately sized MV ensemble for one in LASS. I was very pleased with the results. Others tested it with Albion and found that SE2.0 blended well with it.

Given the fundamental library plus all of the unison and octave combinations, templates, and all-strings programs, I found MV String Ensembles 2.0 to be a complete production package and time-saving to use.

For those who like editing programs, you have many options within the Engine 2.0 player, and as a registered MV user, you have the option to upgrade to Independence Pro.

Conclusion
Mr. Vitous has produced a beautiful sounding, useful, practical, Swiss-army-knife of a string library for professionals and everyone else that’s great for both live use and studio use and value priced.

Since Mr. Vitous is a bassist himself with symphonic performance experience, the library is enriched by being given so many performance options including variable speed detache legato that can be used polyphonically, specially programmed patches for louder dynamics, a good variety of bowing choices, a bonus experimental library called The Blends, large and small studio string ensembles, and the late Spring/early Summer release of the additional LI programs.

Just to mention a few!

Fortunately, Mr. Vitous has a new web site being worked on that will give plenty of tutorial support by videos and MP3s to show you how to really get the most out of his library.

Because of Mr. Vitous’ relentless pursuit of perfection, as demonstrated with multiple updates since the original January release, and more announced, this 2.0.1 update makes String Ensembles 2.0 even more of a contender than the original 2.0 update.

And as I’ve already written, there will be more updates prior to the release of the new brass and woodwind libraries.

Work cooperatively with Mr. Vitous’ velocity/volume approach and you should achieve a warm beautiful, lyrical sound, whether performing live or recording.

Because of its velocity/volume approach, String Ensembles 2.0 is an excellent next step for those wanting to upgrade to their first independent string library, not only for its sound and ease of use, but also because for now, Engine 2.0 is backwards compatible to Windows XP, enabling you to load a goodly sized string section within the 4GB RAM limitations of that OS.

For those who already have several string libraries, adding SE2.0 to your collection adds to your palette with a stand-out color the others don’t have.

It merits your consideration.

Availability
SE2.0 is available so far in Germany from Best Service and in North America from Alexander Publishing.

MV PDFs
MV String Ensembles 2.0.1 Update

MV Performance Insights

MV Articulation List NAMM 2012

Jesper Kyd commented, “DARKSIDERS II is an awesome game and one of the most fun and creatively satisfying projects I have scored. I had a blast working with the team at Vigil.”

“It’s been an absolute pleasure working with Jesper,” said Jeremy Robins, Audio Director at Vigil Games. “He’s an extremely talented composer and an avid gamer, who not only created an amazing soundtrack for DARKSIDERS II, but intuitively knew how to cater each composition to achieve maximum musical impact for players.”

Darksiders II follows the exploits of DEATH, one of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse, in a weaving tale that runs parallel to the events in the original Darksiders game. This epic journey propels DEATH through various light and dark realms as he tries to redeem his brother WAR, the horseman who was blamed for prematurely starting the Apocalypse in Darksiders.

Darksiders II is scheduled to be available for console and PC on 26th June, 2012.

For more information on DARKSIDERS II visit www.darksiders.com.

For more information on Jesper Kyd visit www.jesperkyd.com.

About Darksiders 2
Awakened by the End of Days, Death, the most feared of the legendary Four Horsemen embarks on a quest to redeem his brother’s name. Become the terrifying force which everything fears but nothing can escape.

The original Darksiders®, released in January 2010, received critical acclaim including the Best Fantasy Game 2010 award from IGN. Darksiders followed the story of WAR, wrongly accused of starting the apocalypse, on a quest to reclaim lost honor and take revenge on those who wronged him.