Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Sample Talk Thread: OT Benjamin Wallfisch Strings

A

ALittleNightMusic

Professional Amateur
A more liberating area to discuss this new release from OT and Benjamin Wallfisch. And to share demos and comparisons.

What do folks think? It is certainly pricey - but given how Spitfire is pricing Abbey Road Orchestra strings and how much VSL Duality Strings Full is, maybe this is the new baseline for "next generation" libraries?

Huge file size - given the limited articulations, it seems that those non-looped sustains are really quite long! And recorded at least 2x/4x with the up bow and down bow. We better start getting our larger HDDs ready for the libraries of the future - only going to get bigger.

Nice to see another divisi library on the market - only a handful have been done until now. But this one is super limited in the articulations sadly.
Click to read more...
 
For those (like myself) who want the basic details at a glance:

Intro price ends Jan 2nd, 2024.
599,00 € (reg 799,00 €)
--
Link to: Product page, video walkthrough

A symphony sized string sample library
-5 dynamic layers (for most artics. Pizz & Trem have 4 dyn, Trills has 3dyn).
-18 mic positions (including 'Immersive’ for atmos).
-501 GB on disk (Keep in mind you can choose to download fewer mic positions).
-Section Sizes: 14 / 12 / 10 / 10 / 6 (with divisi for each).
-Long samples don't use looping.

Articulations (Divisi has Leg/Sus Only)
Leg/Sus (down bow & up bow as separate legatos)
Marcato (4 x rr)
Staccato (3 x rr)
Spiccato (6 x rr)
Pizzicato (3 x rr)
Tremolo
Trills


Screenshot 2023-12-14 at 12.56.03 PM.png


Also, there's a string FX library.

Screenshot 2023-12-14 at 1.01.20 PM.png
60 GB on disk.
 
Last edited:
Divisi only for the longs kills it for me. I think they really missed a trick there. With something like MSS (full divisi articulation sets) you effectively get 3 string libs, one large with divisi and 2 separate (and different) smaller.

I still hope OT does a proper Teldex-hosted chamber strings lib someday (with a giant articulation set and 5 dynamic layers everywhere).
 
richhickey said:
Divisi only for the longs kills it for me. I think they really missed a trick there. With something like MSS (full divisi articulation sets) you effectively get 3 string libs, one large with divisi and 2 separate (and different) smaller.

I still hope OT does a proper Teldex-hosted chamber strings lib someday (with a giant articulation set and 5 dynamic layers everywhere).
Click to expand...
Agreed. I was a bit miffed at this, especially at this price point. If they couldn't have done a full matching articulation set for the divisi, they should have at least included some shorts there.
 
This feels like JXL because it’s in collaboration with a composer, different section sizes, many dynamic layers, and a gazillion mics but fewer articulations.

Certainly seems a bit too pricey considering the very limited articulation count and what makes it different from other OT string libraries. The divisi parts having only sustains is a massive letdown. What made JXL and Berlin Symphonic Strings nice is they still have a handful of articulations.

At least it’s not like Abbey Road Orchestra where it’s $449 just for Violin 1 alone.

Gonna be a pass for me. I don’t feel skilled enough to properly utilize between up bow and down bow and I certainly don’t know what I’d do with gazillion mics. Berlin Strings bundle also drained me last BF and I don’t hear much things from this that the bundle can’t do or come close to doing. I might have bitten into this if it was priced more as an extension of Berlin Strings but a base price of 800 euros? That’s excessive. Even 600 euros intro price is nuts. I don’t think it earns its price like Berlin Strings which at least is super comprehensive.
 
The articulations are very basic, even more so than BSS. The extremely limited divisi means that it can't be used for smaller section size work outside of sustains and legato. So it's really no competition to BS main strings at all, except maybe using the divisi as a legato supplement to BS if it turns out the legato is a marked improvement or you decide it better suits the music; in any event it offers two alternative legatos to what's in BS mains (since there is a divisi A and B).

In comparison to ARO strings, it also seems more limited, though it does have the divisi sustains/legato as well as the up and down bows. It's also somewhat less expensive (how much less expensive is hard to say until SF comes up with the final bundle pricing on the ARO strings). But really everything then is riding on the quality of the legato and whether the non-looping samples makes for a qualitative change. (From watching the YouTube premier video, I can't say that the non-looping samples makes a huge difference, even the up bow and down bow. Certainly there is a new range of nuance compared to most current libraries, but it remains at the level of fine nuance, and I continue to think that there are just so many lower hanging fruit (like a better range of shorts).

On the other hand, I do rather like the Stringscapes and plan to pick up at least those. (No hurry for me, though, since I have a EDU discount that won't expire with the intro period pricing.)

richhickey said:
I still hope OT does a proper Teldex-hosted chamber strings lib someday (with a giant articulation set and 5 dynamic layers everywhere).
Click to expand...
The main Berlin library is pretty much a large chamber orchestra, since it has an 8, 6, 5, 5, 4 seating.
 
I really enjoyed Benjamin Wallfisch's demo, specifically the writing. He has such a flexible harmonic language.

The library itself didn't wow me. CSS would be a better choice for BW's demo, although you'd need to do some careful CC11 to handle his lines that go in and out of divisi.

The consistency & timing of legato is still the 1st thing I listen for and this library is around the level of MSS/BSS - lost in the pack of $300+ string libraries released in the past five years that claim to be workhorses but haven't replaced CSS for me or for some people I work with...

Next thing is the tone, the feeling of investment from musicians, and this library feels above average there but yet not as great as Pacific or CSS for my ears.

The distinction between up and down bow is quite subtle in these demos as well. I wonder if they coulda/shoulda pushed the emotive quality of the samples at the expense of consistency. So that those down and up bow samples are really dramatic, over-obvious in and out BREATHS. That's something where Performance Samples shines. It's kinda like that rule of "You have to sing at 120% for the record to sound like 100%"?
 
Last edited:
I must say that they've nailed their target though - for languorous sustains and legatos they've achieved something very special, expressive, uniquely realistic and cinematic.
 
The unique selling point of this library is the unlooped sustains and the independent up and down bow samples. But I cannot personally say that the demos sound significantly better or more realistic or close to a real recording than other libraries on the market. They sound good of course, but I feel this was a solution looking for a problem. And maybe for Ben, it is a real problem - but not sure that's the case for 95% of the rest of us.

And the trend of more playable libraries (with things like performance legatos or variable marcatos) seems to remain missing from OT's approach to their libraries. Key switch everything. No intelligent scripting advances. I wonder why?
 
NoamL said:
I really enjoyed Benjamin Wallfisch's demo, specifically the writing. He has such a flexible harmonic language.

The library itself didn't wow me. CSS would be a better choice for BW's demo, although you'd need to do some careful CC11 to handle his lines that go in and out of divisi.

The consistency & timing of legato is still the 1st thing I listen for and this library is around the level of MSS/BSS - lost in the pack of $300+ string libraries released in the past five years that claim to be workhorses but haven't replaced CSS for me or for some people I work with...

Next thing is the tone, the feeling of investment from musicians, and this library feels above average there but yet not as great as Pacific or CSS for my ears.

The distinction between up and down bow is quite subtle in these demos as well. I wonder if they coulda/shoulda pushed the emotive quality of the samples at the expense of consistency. So that those down and up bow samples are really dramatic, over-obvious in and out BREATHS. That's something where Performance Samples shines. It's kinda like that rule of "You have to sing at 120% for the record to sound like 100%"?
Click to expand...
Yeah, agreed. Also "non-looping" longs isn't enough of a selling point for me, since that's never really been a problem in the past. It seems a bit like a problem they've manufactured to then solve to further differentiate what's just another string library.

Stringscapes seems like it might have a place in my template, but the main library doesn't offer much that would be of much use to me given how many other string libraries I have already.
 
jbuhler said:
In comparison to ARO strings, it also seems more limited, though it does have the divisi sustains/legato as well as the up and down bows.
Click to expand...
Significantly more limited it appears in certain areas. Far fewer articulations, no variable note attacks, no vibrato control, no additional legato styles like detache or agile / fast legato (at least the demos stay away from that it seems). Of course, divisi and up and down bows are unique - but it is an interesting difference in the choices Spitfire and OT have made for their new libraries.
 
They boast of non looping longs but when has looping longs ever been a problem?

The divisi part feels half assed too. Yeah it’s 7 violins a piece for violin 1 and 14 if violin 1 tutti but you realize Berlin Strings violin 1 has 8 people and way more articulations and Symphonic Strings has 18 violin 1 so nothing is stopping me from just using Berlin Strings for divisi if Symphonic Strings is my main sound.

This might have been a lot better if they focused solely on up bow and down bow instead of half assed on multiple fronts. I don’t know much libraries that make the distinction so this could have been a nice option for the toolbox if you want a specific note to be this bow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom