Overpriced Spitfire products

[AngelCityOutlaw]

so what you are saying is "i agree spitfire products are overpriced because this east west product is overpriced"?

I said before that most sample libraries are over-priced. This is but one example.

That Kepler product is also absolutely overpriced. It's ostensibly useless musically and there are products similarly priced that are far more musically-capable. I already mentioned that, but you must have missed that.

But to suggest that something like the BBC Orchestra was only sampled because it sells, but suggest that it isn't musical, is just not right. Sure, it sells. But it's also an insanely usable and detailed library.

The BBC one? Maybe, maybe not. I haven't seen much of it. However, I do know that at least some of their products Albion One and Kepler come to mind, are not "insanely detailed" or very capable.

But I think if you were to receive the bill they have to pay just to make these libraries, it would blow your mind. How much does it cost to pay 90-100 (or more) professional musicians to sit there and play for 2-4 weeks in a world-class full-size recording facility? I don't know. But it's certainly not cheap

It's truly a miracle that we have the technology at all to take the sound of an orchestra, which costs 10s of thousands to record IRL, and put it in a computer for any musician to use.

It's also true that this is an emotional, philosophical sort of argument that has no utility in determining market value of consumer products in a market with a lot of competition within itself.

Presumably, one would buy a sample library to make mockups of music that instrument would actually play. Less-capable libraries in the price-range of those who are more-capable can fairly be said to be over-priced.

If someone offered to sell you their 20-year-old Toyota with a transmission that only could shift into Neutral and 2nd gear for an asking price of $600, would you be like "Sure! A BMW costs WAAAAY more and it's a miracle that cars exist at all!"

Or, would you tell that person that the price they're asking for their debilitated car is too much, considering you can buy used-cars for $600 that will have a fully-functional transmission?

[AngelCityOutlaw]

Look at something like Celtic ERA. Amazing library. But we're talking about 7 total players (one of them was Eduardo himself) playing 23 instruments, most of which don't require the deeper sampling that many orchestral instruments require, and only using a small studio with a much smaller recording setup. Again, amazing library (I own it), but you can't exactly compare that to something like Hollywood Orchestra or the Spitfire orchestras in terms of detail and value. Apples and Oranges.

Brent

Do you own Ra as well?

I didn't compare Eduardo to Hollywood Orchestra. I compared him to Ra. Not apples to oranges at all.

However, on that note, one could compare Chris Hein's libraries against East West's Orchestral libraries, though.

[koolkeys]

But to suggest that something like the BBC Orchestra was only sampled because it sells, but suggest that it isn't musical, is just not right. Sure, it sells. But it's also an insanely usable and detailed library.

The BBC one? Maybe, maybe not. I have seen much of it. However, I do know that at least some of their products Albion One and Kepler come to mind, are not "insanely detailed" or very capable.

Well those libraries have a different focus, but still required plenty of cost. Same cost of players, venue, etc. And they are actually pretty popular libraries, particularly the Albion ones (a lot of library developers have created similar libraries for a reason, people want things like it).

But I think if you were to receive the bill they have to pay just to make these libraries, it would blow your mind. How much does it cost to pay 90-100 (or more) professional musicians to sit there and play for 2-4 weeks in a world-class full-size recording facility? I don't know. But it's certainly not cheap

It's truly a miracle that we have the technology at all to take the sound of an orchestra, which costs 10s of thousands to record IRL, and put it in a computer for any musician to use.

It's also true that this is an emotional, philosophical sort of argument that has no utility in determining market value of consumer products in a market with a lot of competition within itself.

Well, it kind of does. The initial market value is set by Spitfire or whoever else the developer is. They know their costs, and they price accordingly. For THEM, as a business, to keep going, they know what they have spent, what they need to make, and their decision is at least partially based on those things. But ultimately, if a company can't recoup their investments, it doesn't matter what the market thinks something is worth. Those types of libraries will not be made any longer. So those things most certainly do have an effect on perceived value because the developers use their own costs and projected sales figures to determine the initial cost. The public then tweaks that value over time as they buy, competition adjusts prices, etc.

Presumably, one would buy a sample library to make mockups of music that instrument would actually play. Less-capable libraries in the price-range of those who are more-capable can fairly be said to be over-priced.

I think those lines are severely blurred when dealing with the virtual. There aren't exactly any rules. As long as it sounds like the composer wants, it doesn't matter. Less-capable libraries might not have the depth of larger libraries, but they might save time, or in libraries like Albion or Symphobia (both of which have been used on motion pictures, AAA video games, etc.), they allow people to write quick and put together great sounding ensembles without any fuss. So that's worth something too, right?

If someone offered to sell you their 20-year-old Toyota with a transmission that only could shift into Neutral and 2nd gear for an asking price of $600, would you be like "Sure! A BMW costs WAAAAY more and it's a miracle that cars exist at all!"

Or, would you tell that person that the price they're asking for their debilitated car is too much, considering you can buy used-cars for $600 that will have a fully-functional transmission?

[/quote]I figured we would for sure get through this thread without a car comparison........just not the same thing. C'mon now.....

[koolkeys]

Look at something like Celtic ERA. Amazing library. But we're talking about 7 total players (one of them was Eduardo himself) playing 23 instruments, most of which don't require the deeper sampling that many orchestral instruments require, and only using a small studio with a much smaller recording setup. Again, amazing library (I own it), but you can't exactly compare that to something like Hollywood Orchestra or the Spitfire orchestras in terms of detail and value. Apples and Oranges.

Brent

Do you own Ra as well?

I didn't compare Eduardo to Hollywood Orchestra. I compared him to Ra. Not apples to oranges at all.

However, on that note, one could compare Chris Hein's libraries against East West's Orchestral libraries, though.

I subscribe to Composer Cloud X, so technically, yes I have it. I don't write much music that uses what it offers though, so I don't really pay attention to it.

But again, the retail price of RA is kept high because they are selling value in the subscription. I doubt anyone actually pays full price for that library, or maybe not even sale price these days. And as I said already, "regular" price is simply the original price. I can't speak to the value of RA though, as stated above. Not my thing. Obviously, you could argue "value" based on what it took to create the library, but I'm guessing it's mostly just filler these days for CC.

It's hard to use EastWest as a comparison though because they certainly have a different model than most do.

Brent

[AngelCityOutlaw]

I figured we would for sure get through this thread without a car comparison........just not the same thing. C'mon now.....

No, it's completely relevant.

If you wouldn't accept this when buying a car, then I don't see why you should accept it buying virtual instruments.

I don't know man, maybe it's just me, but I personally think these companies asking 1000s for their stuff should be held to an actual standard of musical quality. That we should have high expectations. Financially, I learned this the hard way.

But, If you guys want to throw away hundreds or thousands of dollars on libraries that might "sound" nice but struggle to play "hot cross buns" when better options exist for as low as $150, that's your business I guess. I just don't understand it.

[Harry_HH]

I think Vurt hit the nail on the head. Expensive is not the same as overpriced.

Obviously, the OP is not specifically talking about "expensive", and in his case, is making the argument that the library isn't worth what is being charged.
...
Brent

Of course.
I'm talking about the quality/price. Or the be more precise, value/price, where the value is a subjective experience.
That's why I have underlined, that it looks, that the Spitfire products are not for me. They may work for someone else.

I have benchmarked Spitfire to about 100 libraries from 30+ developers, and my experience of the Spitfire is negative, for the reason I have listed in the OP #1.

[koolkeys]

I figured we would for sure get through this thread without a car comparison........just not the same thing. C'mon now.....

No, it's completely relevant.

If you wouldn't accept this when buying a car, then I don't see why you should accept it buying virtual instruments.

Please let me know when the first virtual car is released that get me a similar result of the real thing......sorry, the comparison is irrelevant.

I don't know man, maybe it's just me, but I personally think these companies asking 1000s for their stuff should be held to an actual standard of musical quality. That we should have high expectations. Financially, I learned this the hard way.

Who sets that standard? The hundreds or thousands of composers that are making great, musical compositions with these same libraries? Or somebody who thinks they are overpriced because they won't write music for them out of the box? Not suggesting that is what you want, but I'm just curious who sets that standard, because plenty of people are making beautiful music with these libraries. And making a lot of money doing it as well.

But, If you guys want to throw away hundreds or thousands of dollars on libraries that might "sound" nice but struggle to play "hot cross buns" when better options exist for as low as $150, that's your business I guess. I just don't understand it.

Well, of course it's a fallacy that you use terms like "throw away" as if that's what everyone is doing. And suggesting that better options exist for $150 is largely assuming everyone wants to a)write music the way you want to, and b)that there really is a $150 library available for every need. You can't possibly suggest that because some libraries are out there for $150 (many of which are fantastic), that the more expensive libraries aren't needed.

The more costly stuff can absolutely be musical. It's a tool. If you need to play 'hot cross buns', maybe your needs don't require the dynamics and level of articulation sampling that comes with the larger libraries. But for those who do need those things, the price to pay for the larger libraries is a steal. Many of them can do things that no cheaper library can touch. You just have to learn the library and dig into what is offered.

If you really want to use the car analogy, it's like telling a Nascar driver to win the Daytona 500 with a Ford Fiesta. Sure, the Fiesta will get you around the track, but you certainly wouldn't use it for that.

Your needs might be different from others, but that doesn't quantify your argument that people are throwing money away, or that you can do all the same things for super cheap. In some cases, you just can't.

Brent

[AngelCityOutlaw]

Please let me know when the first virtual car is released that get me a similar result of the real thing......sorry, the comparison is irrelevant.

Right. It's not my problem that you apparently can't grasp the basic financial concept of "best value-for-money"

Who sets that standard? The hundreds or thousands of composers that are making great, musical compositions with these same libraries? Or somebody who thinks they are overpriced because they won't write music for them out of the box? Not suggesting that is what you want, but I'm just curious who sets that standard, because plenty of people are making beautiful music with these libraries. And making a lot of money doing it as well.

The standard is set by the fact that a library meant to play music should be able to decently emulate the kind of music written over hundreds of years for the ensemble it samples.

Well, of course it's a fallacy that you use terms like "throw away" as if that's what everyone is doing. And suggesting that better options exist for $150 is largely assuming everyone wants to a)write music the way you want to, and b)that there really is a $150 library available for every need. You can't possibly suggest that because some libraries are out there for $150 (many of which are fantastic), that the more expensive libraries aren't needed.

No offense man, but like — you really have this remarkable skill of missing the very implications of your own observations.

If someone out there is producing libraries that are only a few hundred dollars and they're capable of convincingly playing a wider range of orchestral repertoire than the thousand dollar ones, then the question becomes: Why are the others still so expensive? It shows a lack of innovation.

The more costly stuff can absolutely be musical

I didn't say it couldn't be. I said that much of it isn't.

If you need to play 'hot cross buns', maybe your needs don't require the dynamics and level of articulation sampling that comes with the larger libraries. But for those who do need those things, the price to pay for the larger libraries is a steal. Many of them can do things that no cheaper library can touch. You just have to learn the library and dig into what is offered.

How much experience do you have in writing for real players, or with any of the software in my previous post? I'm guessing none.

If you did, you'd realize that if you want to play something as simple as "hot cross buns" and come out sounding like a cohesive, realistic performance, most of these expensive libraries simply can't do it. Not all of them, no — but a large amount of them can't.

Never mind playing Mozart or even "The Legend of Zelda"

Inb4 "But maybe not everyone wants to write music like that"

This is just coping and elevating mediocre things to the standard of veritably-good things.

Almost any orchestral library today can be used to write "trailer" or modern film score music. But only a few can play actual orchestral music.

The existence of the libraries that can do both, and for less money than the ones that can't, proves this is a fault of the sample library industry and its development priorities —not simply differing consumer needs or technological limitations.

[cthonophonic]

Though it's maybe separate from the value-for-money question, I have heard gripes that some Spitfire libraries are bloated in size by samples with unnecessarily long run-out times. A composer friend was initially sort of nervous about getting one of their HZ percussion libraries because it was advertised as recorded at 192kHz, and he was wondering whether it would tax his system too much. But after getting it, he realized that the samples were in fact delivered at 48kHz, which he figured was fine, as they were apparently of very high quality anyway. But he still couldn't make sense of how the library was so big just based on the number of mic positions, round robins, etc., so he did some sleuthing and realized that each sample lasted like 5-10 seconds beyond the point where the sound had fully decayed beneath the noise floor, so ~half the data in the library was just straight-up room tone.

I have no idea whether all this was a product of misleading marketing or just HZ's artistic pique/sampling preferences, but it stuck in my mind as kind of ridiculous.

[koolkeys]

Please let me know when the first virtual car is released that get me a similar result of the real thing......sorry, the comparison is irrelevant.

Right. It's not my problem that you apparently can't grasp the basic financial concept of "best value-for-money"

No, I get the concept. But cars and sample libraries aren't even on the same planet of product type. You've apparently not actually read what I said.

Who sets that standard? The hundreds or thousands of composers that are making great, musical compositions with these same libraries? Or somebody who thinks they are overpriced because they won't write music for them out of the box? Not suggesting that is what you want, but I'm just curious who sets that standard, because plenty of people are making beautiful music with these libraries. And making a lot of money doing it as well.

The standard is set by the fact that a library meant to play music should be able to decently emulate the kind of music written over hundreds of years for the ensemble it samples.

And because you personally think the larger libraries can't do that (even though thousands of people prove you can) means that they are overpriced? It's actually a fact that most libraries from companies like Spitfire and EastWest CAN decently emulate the music and instruments they are trying to emulate. Except there really is no ACTUAL standard on this. Your standard definition is arbitrary.

If someone out there is producing libraries that are only a few hundred dollars and they're capable of convincingly playing a wider range of orchestral repertoire than the thousand dollar ones, then the question becomes: Why are the others still so expensive? It shows a lack of innovation.

Most orchestral libraries are only a few hundred dollars, many less than that. New and detailed libraries like BBC do come in more expensive, but there is a reason for that.

And again, I come back to how you decide which libraries are capable of being more "convincing" in playing a "wider range" of music? Because while you can point out a few libraries that are definitely overpriced, and some lower cost libraries that can do amazing things, there is absolutely more flexibility in some larger and more costly libraries. That's actually what you pay for in most cases. I'm not suggesting that there aren't lower cost libraries that do amazing jobs at being convincing. But you're painting with a pretty broad stroke. And in a thread about the overpriced nature of Spitfire libraries, you'd have a hard time making the argument that expensive Spitfire libraries are outdone by a bunch of cheaper ones.

In most cases, the lower cost libraries just don't have the level of detail, or there were less players, a lower cost hall, etc. Not in all cases, but in most. Those things do matter to many people. Many people I know will buy a library BECAUSE of the hall it was recorded in, and the various microphone positions offered in the library, but those most-desired locations don't come cheap, and most lower cost libraries don't offer that.

It's really all down to what you need, and the sound you prefer, and the library that gets the job done for you. There is no real "standard". Here on KVR, the "standard" is severely different from what you will find on many composer forums, or VI-Control, or wherever.

If you need to play 'hot cross buns', maybe your needs don't require the dynamics and level of articulation sampling that comes with the larger libraries. But for those who do need those things, the price to pay for the larger libraries is a steal. Many of them can do things that no cheaper library can touch. You just have to learn the library and dig into what is offered.

How much experience do you have in writing for real players, or with any of the software in my previous post? I'm guessing none.

If you did, you'd realize that if you want to play something as simple as "hot cross buns" and come out sounding like a cohesive, realistic performance, most of these expensive libraries simply can't do it. Not all of them, no — but a large amount of them can't.

Never mind playing Mozart or even "The Legend of Zelda"

Inb4 "But maybe not everyone wants to write music like that"

This is just coping and elevating mediocre things to the standard of veritably-good things.

Well, I've written music, both for real and "fake" people, for about 30 years. Not sure why it matters though.

Have I used the items mentioned in your last post? I own Elysion, and I own Note Performer 3, which I use with Finale and Dorico. I've been a fan of Wallander Instruments (creator of NP3, of course) ever since their first version of WIVI was released. The quality is amazing, absolutely. And you won't find me saying that they can't be convincing. My point was not that they can't.

My point was that saying something is overpriced just because something cheaper can get similar results is just missing the point, and missing the fact that while there can be similar results, you can also push some libraries further that cost more. YOU or anyone else here can't possibly define what is useful or sufficient for orchestral work. This should go without saying.

And as a quick note, Note Performer 3 isn't actually a library, and you can only use it within a notation program. It isn't designed to be used the way other libraries do, and not everyone creates final recordings through a notation program. I would venture a guess that very few actually do.

Almost any orchestral library today can be used to write "trailer" or modern film score music. But only a few can play actual orchestral music.

Not every library is designed for that, but many are. But your statement really applies to libraries in all ranges. It just depends on what level of realism you personally want in your scores.

The existence of the libraries that can do both, and for less money than the ones that can't, proves this is a fault of the sample library industry and its development priorities —not simply differing consumer needs or technological limitations.

Can you tell me a sample library for $150 that can convincingly do both orchestral and modern film work AND do more than, say, Hollywood Orchestra? Or the Spitfire Symphonic Series? Or BBC? Or whatever? Because classical music and modern film score music aren't even the same sound, and there aren't many libraries that can ride that line well anyways.

Brent

[koolkeys]

Look at something like Celtic ERA. Amazing library. But we're talking about 7 total players (one of them was Eduardo himself) playing 23 instruments, most of which don't require the deeper sampling that many orchestral instruments require, and only using a small studio with a much smaller recording setup. Again, amazing library (I own it), but you can't exactly compare that to something like Hollywood Orchestra or the Spitfire orchestras in terms of detail and value. Apples and Oranges.

Brent

Do you own Ra as well?

I didn't compare Eduardo to Hollywood Orchestra. I compared him to Ra. Not apples to oranges at all.

However, on that note, one could compare Chris Hein's libraries against East West's Orchestral libraries, though.

Circling back to this one, even though I already replied. My response there, and the reference to apples and oranges, was because I was replying to two separate posts that I thought were both in the same post.

But I'll say this, most of Eduardo's libraries that came out when RA was released weren't as good as his "newer" libraries. I remember reviewing and interviewing Eduardo about his first or second library that he ever released, and while good for the time, it wasn't too much different in detail or flexibility to what RA offers.

And I'll emphasize again that EastWest is playing a different game than most because of their subscription service. I already admitted that they keep their "regular" prices high to emphasize more value for their subscription. They don't NEED to do that, but it is what it is. I'm not suggesting in any way that RA is worth $400 today, considering what else is available.

As for Chris Hein, I love his stuff (and own quite a bit, if not most of his libraries). Probably some of the most flexible interfaces out there, and he does an amazing job. I beta tested his early guitar libraries and met him a couple of times at NAMM, and he's top class all the way. But his full orchestra goes for $300 more than Hollywood Orchestra Diamond, if you consider "retail" prices. And the Chris Hein stuff lacks extra mic positions that are sometimes very useful for blending and getting the right sound. So that's probably not the best example of an affordable library beat expensive ones, lol.

Brent

[rasmusklump]

If these libraries were not overpriced, they'd not have sales every second week.

The price you pay on sale is what it's actually worth. Having a higher regular price makes it look like you're always getting this awesome deal. There's also the fact that no one buys anything now unless it's on sale; I've had devs tell me they never sell anything unless it's on a sale. Most people can't afford or aren't willing to pay regular price

East west's 20-year-old, barebones, ethnic music library (which I own) is a regular 399 USD...after all this time



Eduardo Tarilonte's Era libraries, which are better in every possible way, have way more instruments and articulations, are easily some of the best and most-playable and realistic sample libraries I've ever owned, are a regular 259. I can't say that I've ever seen them on sale.



I can't imagine an argument that one could make to say that Ra isn't "overpriced"

so what you are saying is "i agree spitfire products are overpriced because this east west product is overpriced"?

and you want people who said "spitfire products arent overpriced" to make an argument to support that statement, but base the argument on an east west product?

which one of us is high?

Reading comprehension isn't one of your strengths, no ?

[vurt]

so what you are saying is "i agree spitfire products are overpriced because this east west product is overpriced"?

I said before that most sample libraries are over-priced. This is but one example.

That Kepler product is also absolutely overpriced. It's ostensibly useless musically and there are products similarly priced that are far more musically-capable. I already mentioned that, but you must have missed that.

yup. didnt see your previous post. so personally was still commenting on the spitfire in the op.

[vurt]

If these libraries were not overpriced, they'd not have sales every second week.

The price you pay on sale is what it's actually worth. Having a higher regular price makes it look like you're always getting this awesome deal. There's also the fact that no one buys anything now unless it's on sale; I've had devs tell me they never sell anything unless it's on a sale. Most people can't afford or aren't willing to pay regular price

East west's 20-year-old, barebones, ethnic music library (which I own) is a regular 399 USD...after all this time



Eduardo Tarilonte's Era libraries, which are better in every possible way, have way more instruments and articulations, are easily some of the best and most-playable and realistic sample libraries I've ever owned, are a regular 259. I can't say that I've ever seen them on sale.



I can't imagine an argument that one could make to say that Ra isn't "overpriced"

so what you are saying is "i agree spitfire products are overpriced because this east west product is overpriced"?

and you want people who said "spitfire products arent overpriced" to make an argument to support that statement, but base the argument on an east west product?

which one of us is high?

Reading comprehension isn't one of your strengths, no ?

well i missed his previous post, so it just seemed odd to bring eastwest in as an example of a high priced spitfire product.

[Smapti]

If people are buying Spitfire libraries (which they most certainly are) then by definition they aren't overpriced. A musical product is only overpriced if the price is so high that it's not selling. People seem to think the word "overpriced" means "more than I personally want to spend," which is a weird definition. If you think the price is too high then you aren't the target market (soundtrack composers, mainly).