What's new

Sample Talk Thread: OT Benjamin Wallfisch Strings

I agree with you here, your entire post in fact. But -

I take many of these just-downloaded-it-and-here's-my-first-quick-test demos with a grain of salt. When I go to the OT website and listen to the fully fleshed out demos made by excellent composers who have already been using these libraries for some time, things sound quite wonderful. I also think that the approximately 40 minute walkthrough really highlighted a lot of details of the library (the license said Sascha up in the RH corner - I assume he was the player of the walk through, and I KNOW he knows what he's doing).

I think that both the first-quick-test demo AND the official pro-sounding demos are both useful. There are many more people who are hobbyists then there are people at the level of the those who put together these demos for the sample library companies. So the first-quick-test demos give those people a feel for what they are likely to achieve, while the pro-sounding official demos give the pros a feel for what they can achieve as well.
 
Now that we've arrived at the point we have these highly developed products, we obviously are getting to a point where we will have diminishing returns. REALLY excellent work has been realized with sample libraries for a number of years. Also, I do think we're at a point where these mature products might only achieve the highest level they could achieve when they're in the hands of a user capable of coaxing every last ounce out of them.

I've got some very rudimentary violin playing skill. You could have me play, say, a violin that costs $1,000, and then The Messiah Antonio Stradivari that costs $20 million (highest price ever paid for a Strad), and it's doubtful that you'd hear much difference. Again, with me playing it. It most likely would be a different story with an extremely talented violinist. I think the same would hold true to these very deep sample libraries.

Also, I know we have some very talented people on this forum, but I take many of these just-downloaded-it-and-here's-my-first-quick-test demos with a grain of salt. When I go to the OT website and listen to the fully fleshed out demos made by excellent composers who have already been using these libraries for some time, things sound quite wonderful. I also think that the approximately 40 minute walkthrough really highlighted a lot of details of the library (the license said Sascha up in the RH corner - I assume he was the player of the walk through, and I KNOW he knows what he's doing).

Finally, I think there's an odd kind of dynamic that permeates these threads discussing newly released libraries that are still in the introductory price time period. It often looks to me like people are actively either trying to talk themselves INTO buying the library, or talk themselves OUT OF buying a library. On either side of that divide, I think folks have a propensity to lay things on a little thick, bolstering their arguments and trying to make themselves feel good about their decision to buy or not to buy. It would be nice to get an evaluation from a totally neutral, totally unbiased place, but I'm not holding my breath.

Something else that would be a lot of fun to hear (but I don't ever expect to hear) would be the thoughts and opinions of other major sample library developers when new, major libraries from competitors are released. I would imagine they would buy a copy, just to see what the competition is up to. There must be times when a new release puts fear into other developers, and causes them to rethink their plans and future goals. For instance, now that CH has been cut loose from SA, I wonder what products he's choosing to use on his film score projects. Does he now have libraries from his former competitors loaded up on his machine?
I would say library development is now in a stage of nuance. There are real benefits to that nuance if it suits your music’s needs, but the nuance can also appear completely beside the point if a library leans into a nuance your music does not much use, and it’s complicated by the seeming obsessive need for the forum to rank libraries according to some universal scale rather than to consider use cases: best, but best for what?

Nuance is also expensive, because it requires more detail of a certain kind but will usually also be more tailored, more niche, so the cost of development will likely need to be recovered with fewer copies sold.

As I look at BWS I see a library that offers a quite distinctive string sound, though I’m still somewhat uncertain about the library’s aims. It advertises itself in terms of “realism” but I don’t find it really delivers on that promise. It’s more cinematic in bearing than “real,” and the bow direction and non-looped sustains aren’t really deployed in a way that makes them convenient to tap for immediate realistic effect. They do however add a lot of subtle color that is almost textural in effect. So there’s great nuance to be extracted from the library, and that nuance can of course be turned to a profound musicality that when effectively rendered we will take for “real,” the realism being an effect of the musicality rather than the cause…

But all of that still raises the question of whether the nuance of a library, where its sweet spots are, is worth the price for a particular individual. Will my music benefit from the nuance offered by BWS? On that I can say with respect to the divisi I’ve tested most assuredly.

Yet then the question becomes: is the benefit worth the cost? Or maybe a better way to frame that would be: of the various libraries I could get right now, would the nuance BWS has on offer contribute enough to make it worth getting now rather than some other library or indeed just sticking with the options I have? And that’s a much more uncertain question.

And in some ways the more nuanced a library is, the harder it is to answer what precisely it adds, since it often adds subtle gradation, more shades of green, say, where another library may offer only basic green and forest green. And indeed even though it offers more greens, it might not even offer anything as different from the basic as forest green. For the nuance to be valuable to you, you really need to have a use for subtle varieties of green.
 
That's impression I get as well... Each of their 'artist products' had keynotes where they discuss originally being approached by the composer to develop a library to fit their needs....

And totally agree... Sample libraries used to be way more expensive, not to mention that Spitfire still sells libraries with noticeably higher price tags. I personally think BWS is very reasonably (and realistically) priced...

I don't think comparing prices to what they used to be is very wise.

A lot of products in technology/software spaces end up becoming cheaper once they are no longer in their infancy, and more competitors come into the market.

For example, how much competition did Hollywood Strings have when it came out? Virtually none/a handful at best.

799 euros is relatively expensive in this market for a string library that isn't even THAT comprehensive in features and articulations. At that price I think it's very much for people who find a real niche value in the non looped sustains and the two different bowing directions. For me, I haven't heard any demos that highlight how much of a difference these two features make to the end result/what is possible with sampled strings.

I mean sure, value is subjective (one man's junk is a nother man's treasure etc), but I can absolutely see why a lot of people would class this library as expensive.
 
I don't think comparing prices to what they used to be is very wise.

A lot of products in technology/software spaces end up becoming cheaper once they are no longer in their infancy, and more competitors come into the market.

For example, how much competition did Hollywood Strings have when it came out? Virtually none/a handful at best.

799 euros is relatively expensive in this market for a string library that isn't even THAT comprehensive in features and articulations. At that price I think it's very much for people who find a real niche value in the non looped sustains and the two different bowing directions. For me, I haven't heard any demos that highlight how much of a difference these two features make to the end result/what is possible with sampled strings.

I mean sure, value is subjective (one man's junk is a nother man's treasure etc), but I can absolutely see why a lot of people would class this library as expensive.
You may not, but I do. It gives me perceptive in context to products I've purchased over the years that I continue to like or have outgrown. You've also overlooked that I mention that other developers currently sell higher priced string libraries. Price and value are relative, and different people have different metrics.

Then your needs or wants for a string library are different. For someone making music as a hobby, yes it's an expensive library. For someone who works as, or does parallel work as an orchestrator, being able to compare how bowing directions will affect the emotional arc of a performance before prepping a score sheet or recording, it may be useful and reasonably priced. For someone needing to deliver 'finished' sounding mockups to a director before they can approve it for recording, it may also be useful and reasonably priced.

Before OT released BWS, their 1st teaser clearly described it as a library designed "for professional film scoring". On that note, I personally think it isn't "wise" to view a product designed for 'professional' use, with a very specific purpose in mind, and a mic array tailored to mixing in atmos, as a library designed to be generally appealing to the average person making music as a hobby. Their teaser couldn't have been clearer about that.
 
You may not, but I do. It gives me perceptive in context to products I've purchased over the years that I continue to like or have outgrown.

I don't think it does (or at least it isn't offering any current perspective on things). I think a new libraries price should only be compared with current prices of things to gauge its relative value.

Yes you can compare it to what you bought ages ago etc (in relation to whether you need or want t), but the price of the new product should be compared with what else is comparable and on the market at the same time. Not what they were going for decades ago.

I don't look at an overpriced PC that is being sold for £1000, when comparable products are £700 but go to myself "Yeh, but i bought a Pentium 3 machine back in 1999 for £1500 so the £1000 is still good value". It isn't good value if there is a comparable product which can be had cheaper.

It just isn't how i would look at things price wise at all.

I'd weigh up the pros and cons/what it offers and doesn't offer in relation to other products available at the time and see if the price is fair/reasonable or not. I would never compare it to historical prices of the same sort of thing.
 
I don't think it does (or at least it isn't offering any current perspective on things). I think a new libraries price should only be compared with current prices of things to gauge its relative value.

Yes you can compare it to what you bought ages ago etc (in relation to whether you need or want t), but the price of the new product should be compared with what else is comparable and on the market at the same time. Not what they were going for decades ago.

I don't look at an overpriced PC that is being sold for £1000, when comparable products are £700 but go to myself "Yeh, but i bought a Pentium 3 machine back in 1999 for £1500 so the £1000 is still good value". It isn't good value if there is a comparable product which can be had cheaper.

It just isn't how i would look at things price wise at all.

I'd weigh up the pros and cons/what it offers and doesn't offer in relation to other products available at the time and see if the price is fair/reasonable or not. I would never compare it to historical prices of the same sort of thing.
*Again* You've avoided the fact that, within the same sentence of my initial post you replied to, I mention that there are more expensive CURRENT products on the market. "Old" prices were not my only example.

You've also avoided the fact that the bulk of my last reply revolved around the value of BWS based on how the features relate to who the product is targeted to; "professional" film composers; as was evidenced by the 1st teaser video OT made, released before it was ever announced that Benjamin Wallfisch was involved in the project.

Regardless of avoiding most of what my last post said, every aspect of your response has a logical fallacy attached to it.

"Decades ago" is a logical fallacy (and straw man). For the 3rd time, there are plenty of products currently available with significantly higher price tags.

Comparing a Pentium 3 to a modern computer is a straw man argument where you've greatly exaggerated my original point by using a product from 25 years ago as an example of me actually stating, for the 4th time, that there are more expensive products currently available from other developers, not just products from the past.
 
*Again* You've avoided the fact that, within the same sentence of my initial post you replied to, I mention that there are more expensive CURRENT products on the market. "Old" prices were not my only example.

You've also avoided the fact that the bulk of my last reply revolved around the value of BWS based on how the features relate to who the product is targeted to; "professional" film composers; as was evidenced by the 1st teaser video OT made, released before it was ever announced that Benjamin Wallfisch was involved in the project.

Regardless of avoiding most of what my last post said, every aspect of your response has a logical fallacy attached to it.

"Decades ago" is a logical fallacy (and straw man). For the 3rd time, there are plenty of products currently available with significantly higher price tags.

Comparing a Pentium 3 to a modern computer is a straw man argument where you've greatly exaggerated my original point by using a product from 25 years ago as an example of me actually stating, for the 4th time, that there are more expensive products currently available from other developers, not just products from the past.

I was responding to your point about comparing it to how much libraries used to cost though. Like I said, I think that is an unwise comparison.

There are no logical fallacies. I just simply disagree with your point of view.
 
Some of those prices include VAT, some do not. Just sayin’ :)

(OT do not)
They’re in the ballpark Henrik. So now we’re comparing apples with apples. I have no idea what the entire point of the discussion even is or why it is worth having, but at least we can leave the stupid Pentium III reasoning behind us.

I also propose creating a new forum: Price Talk, for all corrective business advice to developers that need it. That way Sample Talk can be about, well, samples.
 
I also propose creating a new forum: Price Talk, for all corrective business advice to developers that need it. That way Sample Talk can be about, well, samples.
Another variant of this might be a No Moan Zone. Where we can talk about actually making music.

I mean, discussion price and purchasing decisions and why didn't this developer do things more to my liking are all are perfectly legitimate topics.

It's just that there'a a point this relentless focus becomes counter-productive in how it drowns out conversations on what actually can be done instead of what can't. (And also very, very dull).
 
Another variant of this might be a No Moan Zone. Where we can talk about actually making music.

I mean, discussion price and purchasing decisions and why didn't this developer do things more to my liking are all are perfectly legitimate topics.

It's just that there'a a point this relentless focus becomes counter-productive in how it drowns out conversations on what actually can be done instead of what can't. (And also very, very dull).
As usual, my counter-whine was a bit.... whiny (so ineffective!). So thanks for being the voice of reason, actually getting the deeper meaning behind my posts across.
 
I saw the price comparison and wasn’t sure if it was clear for everybody that you can’t directly compare those numbers, as some include VAT while others do not. Out of principle I had to reply :)
That's cool. I was merely aiming for ballpark figures, not a direct comparison. Spitfire’s and VSL’s prices have VAT included, OT’s and Strezov’s do not. Not that it matters much. Anyway, last thing I’ll say about prices.
 
I also propose creating a new forum: Price Talk, for all corrective business advice to developers that need it. That way Sample Talk can be about, well, samples.
This could be followed up by a Sample Talk for Professionals and a Sample Talk for Hobbyists, and a Sample Talk for the Rich and Sample Talk for the Poor.

Then we wouldn’t have to waste time reading opinions that don’t apply to us.

Or we could just be tolerant of different people voicing their opinions about any and all aspects of a library, not just those opinions that appeal to us.
 
This could be followed up by a Sample Talk for Professionals and a Sample Talk for Hobbyists, and a Sample Talk for the Rich and Sample Talk for the Poor.

Then we wouldn’t have to waste time reading opinions that don’t apply to us.

Or we could just be tolerant of different people voicing their opinions about any and all aspects of a library, not just those opinions that appeal to us.
I am not looking for that though, as much as you want to imply that I am. Happy to read any and all opinions. But when a sample talk thread gets derailed by a lot of talk about pricing, it eventually distracts from the sample talk. That’s why VI-C tries to thematically separate certain topics.

If you want to make the argument that I do not want to read arguments I don’t like, that’s fine with me. But hey, I am not trying to shut anyone up here. Merely stating, you know, an opinion. ;)
 
I am not looking for that though, as much as you want to imply that I am. Happy to read any and all opinions. But when a sample talk thread gets derailed by a lot of talk about pricing, it eventually distracts from the sample talk. That’s why VI-C tries to thematically separate certain topics.

If you want to make the argument that I do not want to read arguments I don’t like, that’s fine with me. But hey, I am not trying to shut anyone up here. Merely stating, you know, an opinion. ;)
Nah, dude. Not saying you think that. Just used your suggestion as a springboard. That’s the risk with starting a post with a reply; it’s naturally sometimes assumed to be a takedown of the person quoted. My bad, I could have expressed it better.

My point was just that we have so many different types of people with different circumstances on this board all adding their thoughts on the same subjects that it’s a wonder we aren’t all constantly fighting. But somehow the discussions are pretty civil and informative, and cover a range of aspects of a library.

The only annoying part is when people try to shut down parts of those conversations but I also understand why people try to do that even if I don’t always agree.
 
Someone reported this thread for getting into a pricing "whinefest," then promptly wrote a few posts of their own continuing on the same topic.

From a moderator standpoint, that is truly maddening. If you think a derailing tangent needs to stop, then STOP PARTICIPATING IN IT! Or at minimum, take a breath before posting. Or hitting the Report button. Truly, there's no rush. (Speaking for myself, I'll sometimes wait *gasp* a whole day before posting!)

Otherwise, let the other people proceed in peace. (For the record, I have no issues with the pricing tangent. Seems like an interesting topic.)
 
We’ve got that. It’s called something with Composition and Technique. I don’t remember the exact name but there aren’t many posts in it daily :)
I think there's a still a distinction though, that the Composition and Technique sub-forum tends to be more about conventional music theory and technique, rather that the kind of issues and opportunities arising when composition specifically for a specific library.

This could be followed up by a Sample Talk for Professionals and a Sample Talk for Hobbyists, and a Sample Talk for the Rich and Sample Talk for the Poor.

Then we wouldn’t have to waste time reading opinions that don’t apply to us.

Or we could just be tolerant of different people voicing their opinions about any and all aspects of a library, not just those opinions that appeal to us.
I guess the way I'd frame it is that there all have two very different hats the we all need to wear, to greater or lesser extends at different moment in the process of learning how to make actual music with samples.

One is a critical consumer hat. Before we purchase something we're acutely looking for flaws, misleading marketing, promises of better value from competitors, and a million other things besides.

There other a more critical composer hat. My theory here being that if we explicitly put on this hat - and just at explicitly put away our hyper-critical consumer hat that is incensed by every product flaw, and derailed with buyers resources when all out dreams don't instantly come true with a library - then instead we can focus on being composers, intent on discovering what *is* possible with whatever library be already happen to have.

And further, I think there are a lot of conversations on vi-c that would be nurtured and expended by a space that nurtured only that latter hat, and disallowed conversations to be derailed and overwhelmed by not just whining about price and buyers remorse, but the danger of the collapse of our composer-hat state of mind when solving problems and searching for possibilities as composers, as we slip back into a consumer-hat form of problem solving which, by it's nature, looks for products to solve problems for money, or by complaining to customer support.


Both hats are valid. The former is necessary to make and evaluate purchasing decisions. But there's a time when the consumer hat is helpful only in undermining the composers hat. And that's the had we need to actually make music.
 
Someone reported this thread for getting into a pricing "whinefest," then promptly wrote a few posts of their own continuing on the same topic.
Aren’t you hanging the person out to dry by giving this info? It’s not like it’s hard to see who it’s got to be.

Besides I had the impression that reporting something was a private matter between the person reporting and the moderators.
 
Top Bottom