Because it's the forum, not because it's you? Or because people have the unmitigated gall to disagree with certain statements? Me in particular, as I will reiterate myself, some more again.noiseboyuk wrote:Dammit, I’m back yet again. Because this is KVR.
Which advice isn't good? Is it not good because the general appearance of the whole of KVR is not up to this other forum? I perfectly well understand what those words would represent, I just find it rather a POSE and all built on fallacy. Is it "very, very poor advice" because you like EWQL as a whole and someone else does not? We can't know, because you prefer this broad 'generally' and this other jive.noiseboyuk wrote: My point, if this wasn’t abundantly clear after saying it twice, is that the general advice that the OP got here would have been very different if they had asked in forums whose membership is more focused on orchestral music. This isn’t even the sample section of KVR, so it’s not surprising to me that the quality of the general advice isn’t so great.
And where was this "fallacy" committed? I'll show you a real fallacy from that sentence: argumentum ad populum*.noiseboyuk wrote:it is most definitely a fallacy to think that orchestral VI users in general consider [VSL] better than all others in general as a blanket statement.
I didn't do that. You did. I couldn't care less about what some implied, broad, generalized and not actual group thinks. I argued this: that for an interface for scoring orchestra, or anything where you get into deeper articulated instruments (that would be implicit enough but here's me really spelling everything out), the Vienna Instrument, VI Pro 2 preferably, is far superior to PLAY. Then I criticized the EWQL business model as I went into the lack of documentation (and the crap documentation that I should thank whoever botched that so badly which moved me completely off buying "EWQL Hollywood Strings Gold" for).
I would never say 'a broad group of people think this so this appeal to the authority of this august imaginary body reinforces my statement'. That's you.
Again with imagined general-not-actual bunch of people who are supposed to support your opinion.noiseboyuk wrote: You’d likely meet more people in the real world saying that of Spitifre Audio. I wouldn’t agree with them there either, but just introducing that wider perspective. My experience is that half a dozen big companies all make some fantastic products and nearly always a few that are less good, and then tons of small developers are also well worth seeking out. It’s not as simple as X is the best.
There is no real world there. Straw people aren't lending real support, or giving anything real to posit against.
And: Who cares.
I never advised anyone in my life that 'all VSL libraries, by dint of being VSL, are beyond all doubt the absolute best for any/everything there can be.'.
* and: Here is another actual fallacy: STRAW MAN. Two known, obvious fallacies in the one sentence.
I wouldn't recommend Spitfire per se for one very good reason (which if you disagree can't possibly be good, yeah?):
The room is baked into everything. I would advise thusly: If you love that room as they do, go for it. But if you want a viable orchestral mix, in for a penny, in for a pound. That room isn't going to work for me as I have a sound in mind, a sound established and it's not this big brown sound with all of this noise floor baked in. I've used it but very carefully without the tree, only close.
So, I wouldn't advise an expenditure towards a whole orch bundle; EWQL or VSL. I'm not a politician and my bread and butter has absolutely nothing to do with keeping my mouth shut about EWQL shit that I hate. YMMV.noiseboyuk wrote: My only interest has been to be even-handed and answer the specific question in the OP, looking for a complete bundle on a budget.