Orchestral Tools / Berlin Woodwinds Bundle for SINE

[Piet De Ridder]

Orchestral Tools have ported all their woodwinds collections over to SINE. The complete Berlin Woodwinds Bundle is being introduced at a price of €799 (€1,507 sold separately) but owners of one or more of the original libraries that make up the bundle are of course entitled to discounts.
The Berlin Woodwinds bundle consists of five collections: Berlin Woodwinds, Soloists 1 and 2, SFX, and Additional Instruments.

From OT: "The flagship Berlin Woodwinds collection was already on SINE, but we’ve updated it anyway. The update offers completely reworked legatos and a couple of small bugfixes, and you’ll find that the legato performance is now really quite exceptional.

The Additional Instruments also got a pretty major update: We’ve added a completely new instrument—the contrabass clarinet. So if you already own the Kontakt version of Additional Instruments, you get the SINE version for free, which includes the new instrument. To mark the occasion, we’re running an intro offer on Additional Instruments—€119 until March 8 (regular price €149).

Woodwinds SFX is a big collection, with a wealth of weird and wonderful sounds and techniques. And it’s now available on SINE, receiving a few nips and tucks in the process. Here too, we’re running an intro offer: €199 until March 8 (regular price €249)."



_

[Muziksculp]

Hi,

Cool releases from OT.

OT mentioned that they have improved the legatos of their Berlin Woodwinds in SINE via an update. Has anyone tested these new Legatos for their quality ? I have the library, but have not installed it yet. So, I can't compare the improvements. I plan to install the Berlin WW this weekend.

Talking about legatos, I'm quite impressed by the quality of the legatos OT has crafted in their Berlin Con Sordino Strings. I think it is one of their best legato, and the overall sound of the sordino strings is top notch. I wish they would improve their Berlin Strings (SINE) library legatos to the same quality they have achieved in the Berlin Con Sorino Strings. via an update.

I'm also entertaining the thought of getting their new Additional Instruments library for the low woodwind instruments. Not interested in the new Woodwinds SFX library though. I know it could be useful, but I think I would rarely use it in my music.

Cheers,
Muziksculp

[Linos]

The Sine ports proceed. I just wish Orchestral Tools would bring Sine up to scratch along the way. Four years after its release, there could be a purge function. Especially since it seems to be such a common wish from users. Also, automating mics is still not possible. For me personally, Sine is unuseable for professional projects for one reason though: it's not possible to lock polymaps. It's an important feature for my personal workflow, and the fact that they constantly get reset because they can not be locked makes that feature bust for me. I wish that feature will be added in future. Until then, I have no interest in any Sine products where I'd rely on that feature.

Also, Orchestral Tools doesn't always seem to have done a great job at updated or ported libraries. The revive Woodwinds sound noticeably worse to me than the original legacy version:

https://vi-control.net/community/thread ... ce.136668/

The only OT woodwind library I own is the oboe from the Soloists 1. It's a nice library, but there's a problem with the legato short and legato long patches in the Sine port. Both cut off abruptly and unnaturally, and both are about the same length. It's a nice and focused library, not too large and not too complex. Two different mics, seven articulations plus legato. It has been released two years ago. And out of the seven articulations, two are not working correctly. There has just been an update to the Woodwinds Soloists 1, and the portatos still don't work.

Things like these I perceive as a lack of dedication to quality control. It makes me not get enough use out of the OT libraries that I own. And it's the reason why I avoid buying more from them.

[Muziksculp]

What I find really odd about the SINE player is it doesn't specify the name of the library loaded on the interface. It makes me wonder how they left out such a basic, and important detail when they designed this player. i.e. If I have two instances of SINE Player, one loaded with Berlin Strings (Sus-Leg articulation), and another instance loaded with Berlin Symphonic Strings (Sus-Leg articulation), both instances show i.e. Celli Sus-Leg, but no reference to which library.

[Linos]

Yes, I see that can be an issue. Should be easy to fix for Orchestral Tools. My beef with them is that they rarely do, even with obvious problems, or features that are commonly wished for. That leads to less than ideal semi-solutions when working with their libraries. At least for my workflow. The woodwinds bundle is a very good example. Some instruments are better in legacy. Other things are improved in revive. So then you have to deal with both at the same time if you want the best possible solutions. It's just so uneconomic. Why create a new version of the library (revive), only to leave out one velocity layer? With all the improvements that revive might bring, that's a pretty important downgrade right from the tin. But also revive led to legacy not being improved on anymore. So if you want the full amount of velocity layers, you have to stick with a library that is end of life.
To me, Orchestral Tools often times offers great sounding samples presented in a package with inconsistencies and compromises.

[scherzo]

Those are all fair criticisms, I think. I had a really miserable time with Sine in its earlier days too, but for me it has now reached the point of being quite usable. Even though I miss some quality of life features like CC control of mics, on balance I now prefer it to Capsule, mainly due to resource use.

In fact, I kinda wish I could use BWW Legacy in Sine. Revive was a perplexing product to me - the original library was fine, didn't need fixing and is superior in almost every way (except the English horn obviously). I think one of the big problems is the decision to record only two dynamic layers for the new instruments, as, in normal usage, this pretty much guarantees that you will spend much of your time hearing a chorusy blend between the loud and the soft layers, which contributes to the diffused sound of the library. (It can sound better than in that video though, I think; less tree and more ORTF brings it more in line with the more upfront Legacy sound.)

I use both Legacy and Revive now that I have them, and it's nice to have options I suppose - but if I could only have one, it would be Legacy all the way. Still one of the best woodwind libraries in my view.

I really like the soloists too. They really nailed the concept and tone with those, and I think it's a good example of how dry recordings can be made to sound very nice and lively. But... yes, the ports certainly have some issues.

I don't have the Additional Instruments expansion - am I missing out?