Yeah, you attacked me too. Sorry, but you donāt get to judge whatās relevant and whatās not. And what you consider ānoiseā may not be noise at all to others. Last I checked, you were NOT the moderator. I think my post was relevant, I did not judge anyone, unlike what you accused me of, just offered a suggestion. For the record, Iāve been āthankedā way more than you, which means that other people here do find my posts useful.
When the OP asks a question, are you answering the question?
No? Then your commentary was irrelevant.
Easy peasy.
I couldnāt care less about the number of times a useless piece of functionality on this website has been used. Iāve been a member of the Cubase website nearly 2 years longer than you - should that count for anything? Personally, I donāt think so. But if you want to look at quantifiable metrics then that one is probably more applicable than how many times you or I have been thanked.
This is my last post on this side topic. If youād like to debate it further, create your own thread so that I can hijack it with useless and content free trolling. Thanks.
Does anyone else have any experience with the VSTs referenced in the article?
No, hereās YOUR litmus test of relevance. One that Iām sure you do not apply to your own posts.
And BTW, answers do not necessarily fall into a yes/no category.
I couldnāt care less about the number of times a useless piece of functionality on this website has been used. Iāve been a member of the Cubase website nearly 2 years longer than you - should that count for anything?
Actually that isnāt even true. I changed email address, and since Steinberg kept sending me mail to the old one, I had to change user name, in order to use the new one. Iāve been here longer than you and Iām pretty sure Iāve used Cubase for a lot longer than you, since I adopted it when it was known as Cubit.
Personally, I donāt think so.
Again, personally is the key. Itās not an absolute value or a fact, itās just YOUR OPINION. What youāre saying is that I shouldnāt be entitled to mine because itās different than yours.
For me, the test of whether any internet statement is insulting, trollish, childish, etc, is to imagine if the statement would have still been made face-to-face. A significant number of internet statements fail this test, and badly.
I have always used my actual name, too, except for the periods here at cubase.net where Iāve used ātwilightsongā but everyone still knew who I was. I donāt judge people that use pseudonyms, they can be fun, but it DOES give them just one extra layer of anonymity behind which they can be rude to people
Well, some of you like this sort of jousting more than others, os less than others. Personally, I donāt really mind to be in the audience . There are plenty of more serious topics to check outā¦
I use lots of freebies, if they fulfill a certain need.
Now if someone else thinks I am wasting my time checking them out, then they are wasting their time thinking about me! Simple.
And how do you know if a plug-in is good or not if you donāt try it out?
I am away from the studio currently so I cannot look some of my faves up, one or two I go back to regularly, M30 Reverb, Whirlpool (delay)ā¦ I will have to make a list next week, time permitting.
Some of the entries in the annual KVR challenge are excellent.
Bookmarked foolomon - Iāll check them out. How did you manage to cause some controversy? It was almost like the old days with Paul Woodlock etc. Bring it on
Iāve only downloaded Swatches and think itās pretty neat. Philter would have a ball with it, in my opinion, because the presets are geared toward the techno genre.
I also checked out the KVR Audio Developer Challenger results for 2012. There were some that looked interesting but I only downloaded the Strings VST that was so highly lauded there.
I was completely unimpressed. The stock nkiās in Kontakt are much better sounding - not surprised really since they are sample based, but that can cause difficulties in their expressiveness - and I can only imagine what a dedicated string library like EWOL sounds like.
Simply put, SSP is about 10 times larger than the earlier release. And you can hear that the sound is MUCH more accurate and defined. Mind you that this is a small chamber strings group and not a symphonic string section, so it has to be used accordingly.
Also a crucial difference is that the original product only gives you one section of āgenericā strings, which means no divisi, no violins, violas, cellos, basses, just a unified āstring patch.ā Might work for background āpop stringsā, but itās not very credible when the strings are exposed or they play more complex lines. Furthermore, SSP comes with a lot more articulations, round robin layers, expression layers etc. Finally, it comes with a lot more automated patterns (including the option to program your own), although Iāve never been a fan of those (IMHO they still sound mechanical), so to me the latter is a moot point. But then again, some people believe itās actually SSPās best feature. As usual, your mileage varies.
SSP is still NOT competitive with the best strings libraries on the market, but, to be fair, itās not as expensive and itās not meant to be used to recreate classical music on a computer.
P.S. How is your question on-topic? For someone who blasted me (and most likely reported me) for allegedly going off-topic, your post comes off as mighty hypocritical (neither SS or SSP are free VSTās.) But hey, I answered your question anyway, and wouldnāt even have made a fuss out of it, if you didnāt attack me before. Peace.
You are correct - it isnāt on-topic. I asked the question because NI has a $25 e-voucher on its web page with the free VST so I was thinking of expanding my library. Since the OP was really about expanding my library (though not worded as such) I made the internal connection without it being obvious to the readers. My apologies.
Also, I didnāt report you. I donāt think Iāve reported anyone on this site ever.