Sonatina Symphonic Orchestra additions

[Mattias Westlund]

Here's another thing to check out for anyone interested: two flutes, fresh from the oven and based on the MSLP samples.

Be warned though that the flutes are 470MB in size, i.e. larger than the entire SSO 1.0 library

Both flutes have multiple articulations:

- Sustain vibrato
- Sustain no vibrato
- Staccato
- Trill half tone
- Trill whole tone
- Pickup

All articulations except pickup have two velocity layers (mf/ff), staccatos have 2x RR. I know everyone hates baked reverb () but I added a small amount of ambience just to give the samples some room to breathe.

I was thinking that maybe these two can be layered together for a section sound, though I haven't experimented much with that yet as the tuning of individual patches needs to be fixed before sandwiching them together into section sfz files.

[StevenT2112]

Awesome! Can they be used with Sonatina? Do they use the same reverb?

[bigcat1969]

Those are nice samples. I have my own Kontakt cut of that somewhere, I'll have to compare...
I just thought I edited the front of the LDK1609 Violin and the Salamander Piano samples both of which had huge dead space at the front of each sample, you want me to upload those samples and you can see if they are worth using... I've been accused of cutting too tight, so I tried to go a bit looser, still a lot tighter than the originals.

[Mattias Westlund]

(06-05-2016, 09:53 PM)StevenT2112 Wrote: Awesome! Can they be used with Sonatina? Do they use the same reverb?

Well you can use them with whatever you want I guess

And no, it's not the same reverb. I used the Small Room preset in Sanford Reverb, completely as is.

[Paul Battersby]

(06-02-2016, 01:55 PM)Mattias Westlund Wrote: I have uploaded all the experimental/deprecated/unfinished SSO samples [...]  play around with them, compare them, and then post your findings here.

Here are my thoughts:

I didn't listen to the earliest samples with SSO equivalent articulations because I'm assuming that if the earlier samples were better, you would have used them

Disclaimer, because I grew tired of waiting for my ear infection to clear up first, I'm listening to these samples with temporarily impaired hearing and I know I'm missing aspects of the sounds.

Starting from the bottom and working my way up:

Strings_2014-12-03_Violins_Trill.ZIP

• Sounds good. As a comparison, I played a trill using a the SSO 1st violin staccato patch and it sounded about the same as the trill patch. However, I doubt I would actually use the trill patch because if I want a trill, I'll probably just play one and record myself playing it. I also compared this to someone actually playing a trill on a violin. I thought the sample was comparable to the actual violin granted that it's comparing a section playing a trill to an individual violin playing a trill
  

Strings_2014-12-02_Violins_Tremolo.ZIP

• compared to a real violin playing a tremolo, this sample seems good (again recognizing there is a difference between a single violin and a section playing a tremolo).
  

Strings_2014-12-02_Violins_Espressivo.ZIP
(1st Violins Exp.sfz)

• It has the same quality as the SSO 1st violins sustain samples but the difference between sustain and espressivo is very subtle (at least to my currently plugged up ears). I suspect once volume automation is used to make a violin part sound more "live", the difference between sustain and espressivo might be lost, but maybe after more experience with the 2 difference sounds, I'd feel different.
  

(2nd Violins Exp.sfz)

• same comment as above
  

Strings_2012-11-23_Violas_Staccato.ZIP

• these sound the same as the staccato violas that were previously released (which I've been happily using ever since)
  

•  I assume they are the same except the .sfz file in this .zip file does not point to where the samples are actually stored
  

Strings 2011-04-06 Violins Tremolo

• there is no .sfz file with the samples
  

Strings_2010-02-14_Violins_Sustain_and_Detache.ZIP
(Violins Det RR.sfz)

•  sounds similar to the 1st violin staccato samples but with a slightly faster attack and less reverb
  

(Violins Det VS.sfz)

• the "Violins Det RR.sfz" sounds a little better than this patch because of the round robin
  

(Violins Sus VS.sfz)

• 2 velocity layers mf and ff
  

• the ff samples seem to have a faster attack than the original SSO 1st violins sustain samples.
  

• the original SSO samples seem to have a gradual build to full volume resulting in a more expressive sound, but at ff perhaps the faster attack of this patch is more realistic?
  

Brass_2015-04-21_Trombones_Sustain.ZIP
(Trombones Dim Chord.sfz)

• not something I would ever use (I'd just play the chord myself) and providing chords would greatly inflate the size of the library
  

(Trombones fff A.sfz)
(Trombones fff B.sfz)

• these are both interesting. I think they both add some realism for loud trombone parts, better than using the SSO sustain trombones for loud passages These would make good high velocity layers.
  

(Trombones mf-ff VS.sfz)

• I'm not sure if the mf sound is as good as SSO and there seems to be a muted buzz to the ff sound
  

Brass_2011-11-07_Trumpets_Sustain.ZIP
(trumpets.sfz)

• I like the sound of the trumpets. Seems more like marcato than sustain patches to me. Also, with this trumpet patch, there seems to be a slight delay between pressing the note and hearing the note. It's almost as if there is supposed to be a crescendo to the point where we currently hear the note, but that crescendo is missing.
  

Brass 2011-11-07 Trombones Sustain
(trombones.sfz)

• this has 2 velocity layers mf and ff.
  

• this has a smaller range than the SSO trombones. They both start at E2  but SSO goes to E5 (I doubt I'd ever use that note in a trombone). This patch goes to G4.
  

• I think the ff sounds in this patch are better than the ff sounds in Brass_2015-04-21_Trombones_Sustain.ZIP - Trombones mf-ff VS.sfz
  

Brass 2011-11-07 Horns Sustain
(Horns Sus.sfz)

• 2 velocity layers. I think I prefer these to the existing SSO horns, mainly because I think the 2 velocity layers make these horns more realistic.
  

At least for brass, I think having 2 velocity layers, mf and ff make a big difference. To keep the library small, I think 2 velocity layers would be enough.

[bigcat1969]

Strings 20141203 Violins Trill Major sounded very pleasant and the notes were nice and long.
Strings 20141203 Violins Trill Minor generally sounded fine, but the G3 seemed to have some weird effect like phasing? and the G6 sounded a bit odd as well.
Strings 20141202 Violins Tremolo sounded quite nice. I thought the bottom octave sounded pleasantly rich.
Strings 20141202 1st Violins Exp sounded OK. The G3 has a sharp volume decrease about 2 seconds in and the A#3 a lesser one.
Strings 20141202 2nd Violins Exp sounded good. I actually preferred it over the 1st.
Strings 20141123 Viola Staccato have a solid sound. Its nice to have round robins. The A4 round robins sound maybe a touch too different from each other?
Strings 20110406 Tremolo have some clicking at the start of all the notes in the top octave and some odd noises through some of the other notes.
Strings 201014 Violins Sus VS wasn't a personal favorite. I didn't care for the tone and there seemed to be artifacts especially on the higher notes. The both C7 notes have what sounds like a second note or a pitch starting about a second in.
Strings 20100214 Violins Det VS sounds very nice. The velocity layers work well with the upper layer being rougher and the lower layer nice and smooth.
Strings 20100214 Violins Det RR work well as long as you think of them as up and down strokes. Very Rapid notes sound very good, playing more slowly or long runs all the way up or down not as good.
Strings 20091207 vsn 7-12 leg generally sounds good. There is a lot of vibrato. The C#7 has issues and seems a bit off tune? Nice long samples. Are these 440?
Strings 20091207 vns 12 leg vsw aren't quite as good. The C#7 has that weird second tone again about a second in. The vibrato seems wildly variable throughout the instrument.
Strings 20091207 dets aren't as good as the 2010214 Dets.

I apologize if I'm being too picky.

[kmlandre]

Ok, we all need to work to convince Monsieur Westlund that Kontakt is no great evil so we can leverage his generosity and genius on that platform as well.

Whose with me on compromising our patron's deeply held principles for our own personal gain? ;-)

Kurt "The Big Machiavellowsky" Landre'

[Paul Battersby]

(06-12-2016, 04:14 AM)kmlandre Wrote: Kontakt is no great evil so we can leverage his generosity and genius on that platform as well.

bigcat1969 has a Kontakt version of the SSO library and I suspect will likely create a Kontakt version of whatever comes next, BUT I'd hate to see a Kontakt only version since, for those that don't already have Kontakt, paying $399 for a sample player in order to use a free library doesn't make sense. My understanding is that the library maker has to pay a fee to enable the library to be used in the free Kontakt player.

[Samulis]

(06-12-2016, 02:06 PM)pbattersby Wrote:

(06-12-2016, 04:14 AM)kmlandre Wrote: Kontakt is no great evil so we can leverage his generosity and genius on that platform as well.

bigcat1969 has a Kontakt version of the SSO library and I suspect will likely create a Kontakt version of whatever comes next, BUT I'd hate to see a Kontakt only version since, for those that don't already have Kontakt, paying $399 for a sample player in order to use a free library doesn't make sense. My understanding is that the library maker has to pay a fee to enable the library to be used in the free Kontakt player.

I believe you are correct in your understanding. I've heard rumors that it is very expensive to have the conversion, but those are just rumors. I think Kurt may have been suggesting the possibility of some commercial value in sampling for Mssr. Westlund.

I'd rather we brainwashed our noble leader to use HISE. It's a bit experimental, but feature-packed and currently completely free (and we have direct access to bug the developer).
http://hartinstruments.net/hise/

[Mattias Westlund]

(06-12-2016, 04:14 AM)kmlandre Wrote: Ok, we all need to work to convince Monsieur Westlund that Kontakt is no great evil so we can leverage his generosity and genius on that platform as well.

I don't have anything against Kontakt, I have complained about it in the past but it turned out most of my grievances were just misconceptions (at least according to a number of Kontakt users who politely educated me) so I'm not really anti-Kontakt anymore. It's just that it comes with a $399 price tag, just like pbattersby says, and on top of that I would need buy a new computer to be able to do anything useful with it. So for me personally, a sampler that comes with a $1,000+ entry fee is neither appealing nor realistic -- and in addition to that I would need some good Kontakt lib(s) as well!

So basically, I don't hate it but I'm not particularly interested in it either.

(06-12-2016, 03:17 PM)Samulis Wrote: our noble leader

Ugh, stop that  To be clear, I'm not interested in being a "leader" for the Sonatina project. I don't mind experimenting with samples and sharing anything useful I might be able to concoct. But putting everything together or even overseeing the putting together of a new version... I have neither the time or motivation for that. Like I said, if this is going to happen it needs to become a community project (which will likely require something like GitHub or SVN, but we'll cross that bridge when/if we reach it).