Spitfire Albion Colossus

[Guy Rowland]

Albion moves to their own player for Colossus - and they finally have a fader literally called HYPE, which is very on the nose.

The raison d'etre here seems to be the ability to fade between chamber and symphonic sized, on the scale control. Hype adds saturation, depth or distortion while depth is the single fader for perspective from close to ambient. Instruments are:

Low Strings
High Strings
Brass
French Horns
Woodwinds
Flutes
Piccolos
Percussion
Acoustic Drum Kit
Electric Guitars
Drum Machines
Synthesisers

Articulations are a little limited but usually include legatos and hairpins.

The first look video is unbearable, but this walkthrough seems better:



Intro price is £299 here. I'm offered 40 quid off for owning Albion One.

https://www.spitfireaudio.com/albion-colossus

[wst3]

Here in the US my loyalty discou design nt and intro pricing bring it down to $289. On the one hand that is a pretty decent discount. On the next hand I think the design is pretty clever, two different sizes of the same orchestra could be really cool, and really useful. On the third hand, Homay's walkthrough was pretty good, but I just don't think I need it. Would it be a nice to have? Of course. But I think I shall pass, I have too many libraries already. Heck I think I have too many Spitfire libraries.

If I did not have other options I would probably jump on it. Like I said, I find the idea of two versions of the same orchestra in the same hall to be really cool, really interesting, and potentially really useful.

[Guy Rowland]

Much the same here, Bill.

[Muziksculp]

I would rather see Spitfire Audio focus on their AR-1 Orchestral releases.

Surely a pass for me on this Albion release.

[Muziksculp]

OH, and I forgot to add, they also need to fix a lot of the bugs in their existing libraries, i.e. AR-2 Strings, Solo Strings, ...etc. also improve their Player.

[Guy Rowland]

OH, and I forgot to add, they also need to fix a lot of the bugs in their existing libraries, i.e. AR-2 Strings, Solo Strings, ...etc. also improve their Player.

Yeah, all good reasons why Spitifre doesn’t get too much interest here (Piet says here elsewhere about the terrible experience he had with their early bespoke library which cost a fortune).

[Scoredog]

Here in the US my loyalty discou design nt and intro pricing bring it down to $289. On the one hand that is a pretty decent discount. On the next hand I think the design is pretty clever, two different sizes of the same orchestra could be really cool, and really useful. On the third hand, Homay's walkthrough was pretty good, but I just don't think I need it. Would it be a nice to have? Of course. But I think I shall pass, I have too many libraries already. Heck I think I have too many Spitfire libraries.

If I did not have other options I would probably jump on it. Like I said, I find the idea of two versions of the same orchestra in the same hall to be really cool, really interesting, and potentially really useful.

I believe while they were recorded in the same building but it was in two different rooms. That said I like the depth the knobs add to the library, not sure I have anything that can do that. I also at this time have no need for something that does that but I like the general sound.

[Piet De Ridder]

(...) Piet says here elsewhere about the terrible experience he had with their early bespoke library which cost a fortune (...)

It’s true that I did express a few frustrations, misgivings and disappointments regarding the Bespokes, but I can’t recall ever referring to the purchase as having been ‘a terrible experience’, Guy. On the whole, I’m very pleased with those libraries, despite their many imperfections, and the Bespoke Chamber Strings in particular is, of all the stringslibraries which I have bought over the years, still the one which, together with Sable, I use most often, to this day.

I can name quite a few purchases, from various developers, which I don’t hesitate to calll ‘ terrible experiences’, but the Bespokes aren’t among them.

It’s not a very meaningful comparison anyway, I believe. The Bespokes were not a commercial product and Spitfire at that time — they were just starting out — was also a totally different company than the big corporate-ish affair it would turn into later. The creation and selective selling of the Bespoke series served two purposes, as I see it: (1) it allowed Spitfire to learn their craft, and (2) it brought in the funds to allow them to continue their work and grow as a company.

Do I wish that the Bespokes received a few extra rounds of care and attention before being abandoned? Sure I do. But I also understand that, once Spitfire got their first taste of the acclaim and success which their maiden batch of commercial libraries brought them, other tasks and challenges must have been considered a much wiser and creatively satisfying investment of their time, resources and efforts.

If I have something negative to say about Spitifre today, and there are a couple of grievances, it would never be because of the flaws and state-of-unfinishedness that impairs the Bespokes. The Bespokes — both as a product and as a buyer’s experience — are, in fact, in my opinion completely irrelevant in any evaluation of Spitfire (and their catalog of product) as we know it today.

I still have a lot of affection for Spitfire, you know, but that is entirely kept alive by the memory of my dealings with them during those early years: the Bespokes, the BML series, the phenomenal and impossible-to-overpraise musical work of Andy Blaney with these early libraries, and also some very friendly, intelligent and heart-warming private conversations with Paul. (I never clicked with Christian, I must admit.)

The Spitfire of today, on the other hand, leaves me completely indifferent. With, perhaps, a slight tilt towards the annoyed and disappointed.

__

[Guy Rowland]

Apologies, Piet - my memory had you recounting an experience with their support regarding the bespoke series that would have had me reaching for a rocket launcher had I spent that amount of money on them.

[Guy Rowland]

I've been thinking on Colossus' paradigm of chamber to symphonic. I can't think of another product designed to do this. As such its a potential trigger for "oh I should have that, I can't do that now". But when you think about it, it's a bit odd.

1. Why do it in the first place? It's not aping anything that ever happens in the real world, it's just a sonic trick. Admittedly it's a sonic trick that might have a pleasing effect. But then....

2. It's just two totally different recordings in different spaces. Admittedly they have been recorded and designed in the same building to match one another, and will share articulations. But in the rare occurrence of me ever wanting to have that as an effect - small to big - I can do the obvious thing and fade between a small and a big section on two sonically similar libraries recorded with different section sizes. It's not that I can't do it, I just can't do it in a single fader.

I think the main real-world selling point of Colossus is actually the bass. There's a reason why they start with the low strings, they sound... well, colossal. Symphobia had its famous low strings and synth bass patch 15 years ago to produce a similar effect, but this is up a level. Of course everything we hear in the hype fader is a trick that's not that hard to replicate, but it's that instant gratification of WHOA. The WHOA is almost certainly overkill in a mix anyway, but the audio monosodium glutamate is alluring.

I'm not saying that's all there is to the library, it has a pleasing softer delicate side. But conceptually it feels like a library that exists to try to entice people to buy it in a crowded market, the result of board meetings where the whiteboard is headed "what can we do that hasn't already been done to death"? Their answer isn't something genuinely original, but it's a unique bag of tricks designed to make punters feel it's something they don't have when in fact many already do with a little bit of effort.

All that said, it sounds good, it's fair value and if you don't have much it'll very much earn its place.

[Piet De Ridder]

Apologies, Piet - my memory had you recounting an experience with their support regarding the bespoke series that would have had me reaching for a rocket launcher had I spent that amount of money on them.

No problem, Guy. You’re right in remembering that the Bespokes suffer from a few shortcomings which no one in his/her right mind should be prepared to accept in product of that price. Abstractly looking at the product and its price, that is. But again, that is, in my view, not the correct perspective at all from which to look at this purchase. People who bought the Bespokes didn’t just buy the libraries, they were also, and some of them maybe even before all else, willing to support a very young and promising company that got some terrific and exciting (if still rough and imperfect) results with their first efforts.

Today, the single most annoying thing about the Bespokes, to me anyway, is that they’re locked libraries. Especially frustrating because one of the libraries’ most distracting imperfections — clicks at beginnings and endings of samples — could be quickly and easily corrected if one were able to adjust the samples’ starts and endings in Kontakt’s editor.

And one other concern is the registration/activation in Native Access. Experienced some serious troubles and activation difficulties when NI’s Service Centre was replaced by Native Access. Luckily, a very nice and persevering NI support guy managed to solve the issue at that time. But I’m not at all sure if the Bespokes (a non-commercial and odd product, moreover named in a way — ‘Chamber Strings’ and ‘Symphonic Strings’ — that causes confusion with later Spitfire products) will remain recognized by NI’s authorisation systems in the future. It’s precisely for that reason that I haven’t dared to upgrade to Native Access 2 yet.

__

[Guy Rowland]

Today, the single most annoying thing about the Bespokes, to me anyway, is that they’re locked libraries. Especially frustrating because one of the libraries’ most distracting imperfections — clicks at beginnings and endings of samples — could be quickly and easily corrected if one were able to adjust the samples’ starts and endings in Kontakt’s editor.

Oh THAT was it!

There are so few of you who have spent so much, I am genuinely appalled that they treat you this way. You should be treated by them as royalty. And as you say, with a closed library and licensing issues the future looks decidedly rickety.

You're a kind and forgiving man, Piet!

[wst3]

I believe while they were recorded in the same building but it was in two different rooms. That said I like the depth the knobs add to the library, not sure I have anything that can do that. I also at this time have no need for something that does that but I like the general sound.

My bad - really need to learn to read AND comprehend!!

I still think it is a cool idea, and I am still going to pass.

Recently I upgraded my copy of their studio strings from basic to pro. So far it has been a good experience. I don't know if the brass and winds upgrades are as good, but this one was certainly worth the price - admittedly the discounted price<G>.

[thesteelydane]

I can't think of another product designed to do this.

I can, because I suspect I know where they got the idea from...

[lofi]

I can't think of another product designed to do this.

I can, because I suspect I know where they got the idea from...

Me too.
Crazy they just stole the idea without giving you credit. I mean the least thing they’ve could have done is some sort of collab.
/Anders

[My name is Nobody]

I can't think of another product designed to do this.

I can, because I suspect I know where they got the idea from...

Which of your current products does that, if I may ask?

[thesteelydane]

I can't think of another product designed to do this.

I can, because I suspect I know where they got the idea from...

Which of your current products does that, if I may ask?

Bunker Strings Vol. 1 and 2. Not from chamber to symphonic, but seamlessly changing ensemble size from 3 to 9 players to control both volume and texture density is the whole idea behind it. I showed the prototype and the thinking behind it to Christian about 4 years ago (literally on his YouTube channel), and he was the one that suggested I could sell it, so I developed the full version and started Bunker Samples. About a year later Spitfire came out with the first Aperture library, which is the exact same idea. Around that time a Spitfire employee also told me in private that when I released Bunker Strings he had been tasked with writing a report on it and me, so it's not hard to put two and two together.

I have mostly been quiet about it, primarily because Christian has been very kind in his support for me over the years, I'm immensely grateful for what he has done for me and I consider him a friend - I can't stress this enough. It's just frustrating when Spitfire release something with a concept they clearly lifted from a small dev and everybody goes "oh, what a unique idea" while hardly anyone noticed it when I released it. I don't own the idea, and of course I don't mind other people doing it (loads of devs are doing something similar now) but just imagine what a little "inspired by Bunker Samples..." would have done for my sales...or indeed a collab or a heads up before they released the first Aperture.

[Guy Rowland]

I'll confess the connection had passed me by and sorry to hear. Unfortunately it's the kind of idea that's not patentable, and I'm sure their lawyers would never have let them use an "inspired by" credit even had they wanted to. A formal collaboration would have been a nice way to go.

[My name is Nobody]

I can't think of another product designed to do this.

I can, because I suspect I know where they got the idea from...

Which of your current products does that, if I may ask?

Bunker Strings Vol. 1 and 2. Not from chamber to symphonic, but seamlessly changing ensemble size from 3 to 9 players to control both volume and texture density is the whole idea behind it. I showed the prototype and the thinking behind it to Christian about 4 years ago (literally on his YouTube channel), and he was the one that suggested I could sell it, so I developed the full version and started Bunker Samples. About a year later Spitfire came out with the first Aperture library, which is the exact same idea. Around that time a Spitfire employee also told me in private that when I released Bunker Strings he had been tasked with writing a report on it and me, so it's not hard to put two and two together.

I have mostly been quiet about it, primarily because Christian has been very kind in his support for me over the years, I'm immensely grateful for what he has done for me and I consider him a friend - I can't stress this enough. It's just frustrating when Spitfire release something with a concept they clearly lifted from a small dev and everybody goes "oh, what a unique idea" while hardly anyone noticed it when I released it. I don't own the idea, and of course I don't mind other people doing it (loads of devs are doing something similar now) but just imagine what a little "inspired by Bunker Samples..." would have done for my sales...or indeed a collab or a heads up before they released the first Aperture.

This is indeed clear where it originated.
I am not in the legal business side of this, but couldn’t you go the reverse marketing route?
As in, as Guy suggested, their lawyers will not allow source naming on their end, you do it yourself.
Tag along their social media channels and create a friendly video how you are glad that a major dev has used an original idea that came from you, idk…from vietnam to london…or something….

If this is an unintelligible suggestion please forgive me for it ;-)

[thesteelydane]

This is indeed clear where it originated.
I am not in the legal business side of this, but couldn’t you go the reverse marketing route?
As in, as Guy suggested, their lawyers will not allow source naming on their end, you do it yourself.
Tag along their social media channels and create a friendly video how you are glad that a major dev has used an original idea that came from you, idk…from vietnam to london…or something….

If this is an unintelligible suggestion please forgive me for it ;-)

Thanks for your suggestion. I don't know, I have mostly let it go and don't really want to pick a fight with Spitfire. It only stings when I explain the concept to someone and they go "oh, so it's like that Spitfire Aperture thing?"....

Anyway, Bunker Strings will finally get reviewed in the Sound on Sound coming out tomorrow, so hopefully that will be good for sales.

[wst3]

I do understand the frustration, and I am sorry it happened to you.

Other than a polite email to Christian asking him if there is a connection I don't see any great solutions.

Yeah, that is completely demoralizing...

[Scoredog]

This has always been the way with sample libraries and of course many other things. Giga studio was the first 3rd party plugin that could use a computer, they are gone. Garriton was the first to do RR's (well he did two) he is gone. VSL the first to do Legato, they are still here. Audio Bro was the first company to do Polyphonic Legato, now there are others. Edison did not create the lightbulb, he just found the best way to market it. This is the nature of progression and if one is going to live a non bitter life (not saying you are bitter) it is best to move on and continue creating instead of getting dragged down by people you are not happy with.

Buyers btw are generally mercenaries, they go to the best product they think will do the job, customer loyalty can happen but it is probably not near what most developers think it should be.

[thesteelydane]

This has always been the way with sample libraries and of course many other things. Giga studio was the first 3rd party plugin that could use a computer, they are gone. Garriton was the first to do RR's (well he did two) he is gone. VSL the first to do Legato, they are still here. Audio Bro was the first company to do Polyphonic Legato, now there are others. Edison did not create the lightbulb, he just found the best way to market it. This is the nature of progression and if one is going to live a non bitter life (not saying you are bitter) it is best to move on and continue creating instead of getting dragged down by people you are not happy with.

Buyers btw are generally mercenaries, they go to the best product they think will do the job, customer loyalty can happen but it is probably not near what most developers think it should be.

Oh I'm not bitter, I moved on a long time ago and I'm very busy with new ideas. My only issue is, as you point out, that we all know VSL where the first to do real legato, and that Audiobro took it a step further with LASS. Their inventions put their companies on the map, I was hoping my idea would do the same (on a smaller scale of course, because it IS quirky), but now everyone thinks Spitfire did it first. It's not that I'm vain, I'd just like my company to be better known for coming up with something that was actually so useful that a big developer took the idea and ran with it - because you know, being better known would be good for my livelihood. I'd like a slice of the cake I came up with, because clearly the cake is delicious. I really don't care that others are doing the same, after all, I showed to the whole world how it came about on Christians channel. Who know, maybe in time...

I also know that the quirky articulations I chose limited the appeal of the product and thereby the underlying idea, but I just see no point in trying to compete with the big boys on bread and butter stuff, mostly because I don't find it creatively rewarding to do something that's already been done and I want to leave realism in sampling to others - it just doesn't excite me, even if that's where the money is.

Anyway, now a few more people know, and I got a review in Sound on Sound today, so I'm happy!