CSS (Cinematic Studio Strings) is Hard -or- Which String Libraries Are Good for Writing?

[markleake]

I often start writing a piece by playing around with different string libraries. I will try ideas, various articulations, move between the libraries, or move between different instruments within the libraries. Sometimes I'll copy lines between them. All this to get inspired and to get ideas down easily.

Doing that today, what stood out to me was how hard CSS (Cinematic Studio Strings) is to write with, compared to other libraries. I tried some lines that I thought were pretty straight forward, a mix of medium legato and shorter notes. But even playing it in at moderate speed I just couldn't get CSS to behave - there were notes that didn't sound, emphasis on wrong notes, big inconsistencies with volumes, etc. Playing with CC, velocity, and switching legato types didn't get me anything much better. I tried a number of other string libraries, and all of them handled the lines much better. I really tried to make CSS work, but after a few mins it became obvious it would be very time consuming, so I moved on.

Maybe I'm being too hard on CSS? I know it's well liked around here. I have used it a fair bit now over the years and have enjoyed it. But I find it is very limiting sometimes. It's more like it wants to write what it likes, what works for it, and will become finicky when I try and write what I want. I find myself moving away from CSS because of that; it just doesn't seem to work well for me anymore as a general library.

So I thought I'd ask the question here... which string librarie(s) do you gravitate to as your everyday library? What do you find is the easiest to write with, for strings and other parts? If you do write with CSS, how do you find it, and how do you get around the difficulties with it? Have you moved on to using something else?

Click to read more...

 

[Futchibon]

BBCSO Core is great bang for the buck, $240 fairly often, and is great for quickly writing both strings and other sections. The strings legato can do shorts as well if you play the keys accordingly, very handy.

Afflatus has the best polyphonic legato/tone combo I've used, it's hard to go back to monophonic once you've used it. It seems to go 50% off a couple of times a year.

 

[markleake]

BBCSO Core is great bang for the buck, $240 fairly often, and is great for quickly writing both strings and other sections. The strings legato can do shorts as well if you play the keys accordingly, very handy.

Afflatus has the best polyphonic legato/tone combo I've used, it's hard to go back to monophonic once you've used it. It seems to go 50% off a couple of times a year.

Which do you tend to write with more? I should clarify I'm not looking for suggestions on libs to buy (yeah I know, a shocking thing to say here on VI-C! And now no one will respond to the thread... d'oh!). I'm trying to find out what approaches and libraries people use for string writing.

On the topic of polyphony... personally I tend to not really care much about it when I am writing something. Yes, sometimes it can produce something good, and quickly. And it is nice for playing around. But I find it only works for a certain style when trying to put a track down. Normally I want more control, I wouldn't use these polyphony patches for writing in each string section.

How do you use the polophonic legato to write? Do you sketch something with it, then redo it all with other libraries, splitting out the lines? Or do you find the versatiliy of legato/shorts like BBCSO more useful?

 

[russmyers93]

I was quite a latecomer to CSS, its now my go to once I have the idea. For writing and experimenting with ideas I use Spitfire (SSS/SCS/Tundra), the flautando patches are perfect for this!

 

[Jackal_King]

I had a similar feeling with CSS when I got it back in December. Definitely a bit of a learning curve with trying to get the velocity and portamento just right the way I want it. I write mostly slower melodic music so I haven't done much on keyswitching that CSS has set up (still learning the ins and outs of keyswitching). It's a good sounding library but not my first go-to library to load up for new sketching/arrangement ideas for now. One thing that helped me was going back to some of the walkthrough videos to get a better understanding on using CSS.

 

[muziksculp]

@markleake .

I find the CSS Full Ensemble to be a reasonably good option for sketching strings ideas.

Have you tried using it ? or are you using the individual sections to sketch ?

 

[markleake]

I was quite a latecomer to CSS, its now my go to once I have the idea. For writing and experimenting with ideas I use Spitfire (SSS/SCS/Tundra), the flautando patches are perfect for this!

Yes, I use Spitfire a lot also for writing. The performance legatos especially.
And if I'm just sketching something out, some of the Albions also, yes.

 

[markleake]

I had a similar feeling with CSS when I got it back in December. Definitely a bit of a learning curve with trying to get the velocity and portamento just right the way I want it. I write mostly slower melodic music so I haven't done much on keyswitching that CSS has set up (still learning the ins and outs of keyswitching). It's a good sounding library but not my first go-to library to load up for new sketching/arrangement ideas for now. One thing that helped me was going back to some of the walkthrough videos to get a better understanding on using CSS.

Yes, good idea to go back to the source to get more ideas. That's the thing though, I've been using CSS for years. I don't write a huge amount and I'm far from the most experienced, but it's not like I'm new to it. I think over time I've just grown less patient with it and realised it's quite hard to write with for anything other than slow lines.

 

[markleake]

@markleake .

I find the CSS Full Ensemble to be a reasonably good option for sketching strings ideas.

Have you tried using it ? or are you using the individual sections to sketch ?

Yes, I use the ensemble patch sometimes for sketching ideas also. It works well for that, for certain things anyway. What I'm referring to really is when I need to translate it into something more than just the sketch. Or something that has melody lines that are anything with moderate or faster note changes. I find the library becomes difficult to work with (unless I just stick with using shorts/marcato, but that's often not what I want, and doing lots of articulation switching at this stage is not what I want to be doing).

 

[mrwhites]

I often start writing a piece by playing around with different string libraries. I will try ideas, various articulations, move between the libraries, or move between different instruments within the libraries. Sometimes I'll copy lines between them. All this to get inspired and to get ideas down easily.

Doing that today, what stood out to me was how hard CSS is to write with, compared to other libraries. I tried some lines that I thought were pretty straight forward, a mix of medium legato and shorter notes. But even playing it in at moderate speed I just couldn't get CSS to behave - there were notes that didn't sound, emphasis on wrong notes, big inconsistencies with volumes, etc. Playing with CC, velocity, and switching legato types didn't get me anything much better. I tried a number of other string libraries, and all of them handled the lines much better. I really tried to make CSS work, but after a few mins it became obvious it would be very time consuming, so I moved on.

Maybe I'm being too hard on CSS? I know it's well liked around here. I have used it a fair bit now over the years and have enjoyed it. But I find it is very limiting sometimes. It's more like it wants to write what it likes, what works for it, and will become finicky when I try and write what I want. I find myself moving away from CSS because of that; it just doesn't seem to work well for me anymore as a general library.

So I thought I'd ask the question here... which string librarie(s) do you gravitate to as your everyday library? What do you find is the easiest to write with, for strings and other parts? If you do write with CSS, how do you find it, and how do you get around the difficulties with it? Have you moved on to using something else?

Try Audiobro MSS. The intuition strings patch it exactly for that and works very well.

Modern Scoring Strings - Audiobro

Modern Scoring Strings is our newest and most recently recorded 60 piece “a2” divisi (2 parts divisi per section) flagship string library.

www.audiobro.com

 

[markleake]

Try Audiobro MSS. The intuition strings patch it exactly for that and works very well.

Modern Scoring Strings - Audiobro

Modern Scoring Strings is our newest and most recently recorded 60 piece “a2” divisi (2 parts divisi per section) flagship string library.

www.audiobro.com

Thanks, that feature looks quite useful. I'll go see if there's a video on it to find out more, when I have time. I'm not looking to buy new string libraries though, I have more than enough!

 

[Paul@Sydney]

Is it the legato timings that you are struggling with? Several solutions available, from just using a single legato speed in a track, to having a kontakt script, or I've coded a JSFX plugin for Reaper that handles the variable legato timings, as a lookahead function.

 

[muziksculp]

I have more than enough!

What did you just write ?

Sorry Mate, but You are breaking one of the most important VI-Control Protocols.

You can never have enough Strings Libraries !

Repeat this sentence 100 to 200 times daily for one week, to make sure you don't forget this.

 

[José Herring]

Often I will just write with ensemble patches. Then switch to a more detailed string library.

I find that you have to separate out the writing from the programming. It's tough to play a line on a keyboard and make it magically sound the way you want, but you can get good at program. So input the midi with any patch, even piano, then break the midi out into your string library. Then program that library.