What's new

Spitfire Audio Abbey Road One: Orchestral Foundations

Oh I'd not worry about that too much. Sure, these particular "scoring selections" are well-suited to that style, especially if you consciously do dopey parodies like I did, but the modular library will just be an orchestra with certain players in a certain space and anything beyond that is down to the writing and mixing.
I'm thinking of some bits I've done up with AROOF. Wasn't consciously going in any particular direction, but when I played something for a friend, they said that it sounded like it could have come out of one of the Indiana Jones films. And I often feel that, especially with the trumpets. It's that Williams trumpet sound. And those stupidly wonderful flute mordents. So delicious, but I can't wash them out of my ears!

There is plenty of classical recording that's happened at Abbey Road, even more than AIR maybe, so in my view there's no reason why this aesthetic has to be equated to the 90's cinematic sound or whatever, in spite of how it is understandably marketed.
This has been my presumption and I trust it will be true. And I do look forward to AR-1 modular, so don't get me wrong. nevertheless I do find the more I work with AROOF, the more I appreciate Air. It's not that I dislike the sound of Abbey Road, but Air feels like home. Abbey Road feels like high key lighting, Air more chiaroscuro. Well that metaphor is probably bogus, but hopefully captures something of the difference.
 
Are there any AROOF with SAS demos ?
I halfheartedly tried SAS out with AROOF Hi string osti's. Can't say I even remember any mic settings.

Two different beasts on the string side for sure. I did get some nice results using AROOF perc and winds along with BBCSO winds with CSS for #scorerelief2022. (SAS was not on my radar right then)

Maybe not impossible to blend strings with some close mic setups, judicious EQ and common 'verb, but the work it might have took was not in me right then.
 
According to Paul Thomson, it should be possible to adapt SAS to their other Libraries using mic combinations.

So, my guess is it won't be that difficult to integrate SAS into AROOF using more of the ambient mics in the right combo, and amounts.
 

Hi @Michaelt ,

Thanks for posting this SAS with AROOF example.

Did you use a mix of multiple mics of SAS with multiple AROOF mics ?

Since there are many mic options in both libraries to combine, and experiment with.

SAS sounds good in this short clip with AROOF. I think SAS can be successfully used with AROOF to provide the missing Legato Strings, especially the Mid-High Strings, with a bit of careful mic selection to get a suitable strings character that fits nicely with AROOF.

Cheers,
Muziksculp
 
Yes. It's just the same exact mic blend on each, and in my template Appassionata is attenuated in volume a bit to better match the AR levels.

This is SAS violins and violas with AR low strings (octave legato and piz), horns, celli/horns, suspended cymbals, and the new oboes a2/clarinets a2 unison.
 
Since the Star Wars scores were, in many ways, my introduction to classical music, the sound of this library causes an almost involuntary reaction. I'm not a composer by any stretch - most of what I get out of my libraries is the simple pleasure of hearing amazing sounds that I actually have some control over (I'm not a keyboardist, just a noodler), even more-so when it's the sound of an amazingly lifelike orchestra.

My dilemma with ARO is this: I've seen a number of people say that it's Spitfire's take on Big Bang Orchestra - which seems fairly accurate - the only problem being, I already took the plunge on Big Bang Orchestra, piecemeal at first, then "completing the bundle" when I realized the price via Best Service was very similar to what I would have paid by waiting for sales on the individual pieces. Needless to say, BBO is a much larger investment than ARO (I was flush at the time, and it was an aspirational purchase - I honestly don't see myself going further up-market than this, based on my skills and interests), but BBO also has a lot more content than ARO (I already have legato for all sections/ensembles, plus many things I don't see SF adding to the Foundations/Selections line).

But, as nice as BBO sounds and as amazing as the Synchron player is, BBO doesn't have That Sound, and there's a part of me that will always want it. I can't really justify having both (in addition to the small selection of other orchestral libraries I have), but selling off BBO and taking a hit on the sale - even though having the option to sell is one of the attractions of VSL libraries - for something with much less content and some odd limitations (the limited range of some of the Selections, etc) just to get That Sound also seems a little bit crazy. Again, I don't see myself in the market for the AR Modular line - I really can't see any way that I'd be able to justify it.

But....That Sound.
 
Since the Star Wars scores were, in many ways, my introduction to classical music, the sound of this library causes an almost involuntary reaction. I'm not a composer by any stretch - most of what I get out of my libraries is the simple pleasure of hearing amazing sounds that I actually have some control over (I'm not a keyboardist, just a noodler), even more-so when it's the sound of an amazingly lifelike orchestra.

My dilemma with ARO is this: I've seen a number of people say that it's Spitfire's take on Big Bang Orchestra - which seems fairly accurate - the only problem being, I already took the plunge on Big Bang Orchestra, piecemeal at first, then "completing the bundle" when I realized the price via Best Service was very similar to what I would have paid by waiting for sales on the individual pieces. Needless to say, BBO is a much larger investment than ARO (I was flush at the time, and it was an aspirational purchase - I honestly don't see myself going further up-market than this, based on my skills and interests), but BBO also has a lot more content than ARO (I already have legato for all sections/ensembles, plus many things I don't see SF adding to the Foundations/Selections line).

But, as nice as BBO sounds and as amazing as the Synchron player is, BBO doesn't have That Sound, and there's a part of me that will always want it. I can't really justify having both (in addition to the small selection of other orchestral libraries I have), but selling off BBO and taking a hit on the sale - even though having the option to sell is one of the attractions of VSL libraries - for something with much less content and some odd limitations (the limited range of some of the Selections, etc) just to get That Sound also seems a little bit crazy. Again, I don't see myself in the market for the AR Modular line - I really can't see any way that I'd be able to justify it.

But....That Sound.
Wait till you’re flush again or at least until AROOF is on sale at 40% off. There is indeed great joy in That Sound, and the library won’t disappoint.
 
If it helps, while it does have THAT SOUND (TM) it is a right royal pain in the ass to phrase things with it.
Personally I don’t find that at all. (Not saying you are wrong, just saying it hasn’t been been an issue for how I’ve used the library.) But I don’t always want my music to have That Sound, and I sometimes have to substitute instruments out, especially the trumpets, because of that.
 
AROF blend so well with BBCSO Pro... I recently made a mockup of the "Imperial March" by JW and these two layered libraries do a remarkable job I think. AROF is the star and brings agility and sound definition and BBCSO adds a certain warmth and depth that the first one lacks a little.

Updated version (final version):

 
Last edited:
AROF blend so well with BBCSO Pro... I recently made a mockup of the "Imperial March" by JW and these two layered libraries do a remarkable job I think. AROF is the star and brings agility and sound definition and BBCSO adds a certain warmth and depth that the first one lacks a little.


How did you blend them? Did you duplicate most sounds across both, or used certain instruments from each?
 
AROF blend so well with BBCSO Pro... I recently made a mockup of the "Imperial March" by JW and these two layered libraries do a remarkable job I think. AROF is the star and brings agility and sound definition and BBCSO adds a certain warmth and depth that the first one lacks a little.


That's pretty good! I think the AROOF strings can be made tighter and more aggressive like the original OST. They're a bit blurry in this one.

See below (only AROOF):
 
AROF blend so well with BBCSO Pro... I recently made a mockup of the "Imperial March" by JW and these two layered libraries do a remarkable job I think. AROF is the star and brings agility and sound definition and BBCSO adds a certain warmth and depth that the first one lacks a little.


Did you use a reverb to blend the libraries?
 
How did you blend them? Did you duplicate most sounds across both, or used certain instruments from each?
Almost all articulations are doubled here. BBCSO Pro is set to around -6 to -10 db below AROF, and vice versa when BBCSO is brought forward. BBCSO is mainly there to give a little more depth and warmth to AROF, which may be lacking a little. It also balances the brighter side of AROF, softening and darkening the overall tone a bit in a pleasant way :)
 
That's pretty good! I think the AROOF strings can be made tighter and more aggressive like the original OST. They're a bit blurry in this one.

See below (only AROOF):



See below (only AROOF):

Oh I remember your "Only AROOF Imperial March mockup" very well, it was one of those that convinced me to buy AROOF, you did a very good job here and demonstrated that although still limited, the library is already quite capable on its own when the orchestration of the pieces matches perfectly :)

And yes, I agree with you, the AROOF strings can be a bit tighter (actually they are if we isolate them here), but for this mockup I didn't compensate for the articulations predelays between the two libs (apart from the few rare legato passages), it's here rather BBCSO which comes to blur all that a little... but at the same time, it avoids the somewhat "mechanical" side of the repetitions for a more organic rendering that I preferred in the end...
 
Top Bottom