That being said, once you spend some extra time after recording, I absolutely love how Cinematic Strings scripted the legato, as it sounds gorgeous and very fluid. Luckily, Cinematic Strings let us have the Classic Legato patches with one legato transition sample with little to no transition time! I value performance and playability highly and quick/no latency is one of the things I look for in libraries. The legato script under the hood is geniusas you can choose adaptive legato (where it adapts to your playing), but it sometimes feels a little bit too sluggish to play almost like there’s a few ms added latency. This is however a conscious choice from Cinematic Strings as it increases realism under the hood. I am typically a composer who enjoys virtual instruments that just work straight out of the box and are very easy to load up and play to record my musical ideas.Ĭinematic Studio Strings, while it has a fantastic GUI, gorgeous realistic sound and is very easy to load up and start playing right out of the box, lacks a little bit in quickness in both the legato and shorts articulations. I would like a more fluid transition where the violins smoothly fade out like they do in many other libraries, like the Spitfire full ensemble libraries. When I’m playing around the area of the lowest notes of the violins, there is a discrepancy in sound because if you play the F or F# below the lowest G, the entire left sound field disappears because the violins can’t play there. Really nice.Ĭinematic Strings have mapped the Full and Lite Ensemble patches a little bit lazily. It really feels like the string players are digging into their strings when I’m smashing my keys hard, and gently touching the strings when I’m playing softly. You can choose, mix and route the sample sources you want through the different mic positions, which is quite standard these days. In CSS, you can hear the proximity of the bow on the strings through the close mics. Like any good real orchestral recording, the close mics do a lot to add definition. You have more control over vibrato as well.īoth libraries have their strengths and weaknesses so it comes down to what do you prefer and for what purpose? As I said in the beginning it’s hard to really compare the two because they differ quite a bit and have different goals they set out to achieve.Bravo, you crazy guy, Daniel. Why you so good?! You get both key switch and single patches, ensembles and individual sections. These actual sound like a chamber sized string section however. I also love the tone of these and the detail in the samples. SCS isn’t without its fair share of issues such as inconsistent programming but the positives outweigh the negatives. Will be a great library if they do fix those issues. I believe Audio Imperia is aware of these issues and hopefully will be fixed in a future update.
The legatos need work and there are big spikes in CPU on the shorts. You do have ensembles as well as individual sections. No Vibrato control or key-switch patches either. You do have control with the shorts however. There isn’t the control with sample start times with the sustains and legatos (they are fixed) like you would have in their other libraries. The samples are a little more wet than other Audio Imperia string libraries. The samples are much quieter though so you may need to boost them. Even still, Dulce sounds bigger than a chamber sized string section whereas SCS sounds more like a chamber sized.ĭulce- Love the tone. I probably wouldn’t even compare the two other than they are Chamber sized. I have both Dulce and SCS and they differ considerably.