so, i set up some thousand dollar string plugins beside some free ones...

i'll admit the thousand dollar plugins would be more applicable if i was writing film scores, but i'm not. i'm trying to construct a small chamber orchestra. given the price of these things, it's actually remarkable how inflexible they are.

the thing is that i understand i'm working against the purpose of the software. the idea is that if you buy the fancy sample set then you won't have to sit around and multitrack individual instruments anymore.

but, then how do you route each instrument through separate effects processes? generally, how do you be neurotic about over-producing everything?

i'm being a little self-deprecating, but i'm making a valid point. these are the details that composers and arrangers live their lives for. that hint of distortion on the trumpet, that reverb on the flute....oh!...

the free plugins are simply better able to give me what i want, and at a quarter of the ram usage, too.

there's probably some sample libraries for solo instruments, jazz bands, chamber music, etc. but i don't need them right now.

i stumbled upon this library of prepared instruments, though - inspired by john cage. it's not useful for anything i have lined up right now (maybe one thing) but it sounds like fun...

see, the thing is that it's a good idea...

but if they want to make this useful for musicians, they should separate the libraries into individual vst instruments, one for each real instrument. that's how people write and arrange and mix.

that way, if my mix has 2 violins, a viola and a cello (a standard chamber orchestra - and this is not my current mix, fwiw) then i can set each up to it's own channel and mix it individually with it's own character.

but, sure - give me every possible cello sound imaginable. let me fuck with the mic. let me determine how big the room is. and etc. these are good ideas.

it's the way the thing is formatted that isn't so hot.