Spitfire Audio - Free Glass Piano Plugin

[GovernorSilver]

https://labs.spitfireaudio.com/glass-piano

 

"Recorded at his home in New York City, this is legendary composer Philip Glass's beloved piano"

[Stokely]

I'll definitely be picking this up.  I have many of the Labs instruments, the BBC discover orchestra (also free if you request it) and one of the Originals (epic strings).

[Tusker]

I'll be picking this up also, because you can never have too many pianos. Thank you Paulo! 👍 👍 🙏

 

I love the Spitfire Audio sounds but also that they seem to bring their enthusiasm to the work. With the youtube instructional videos and the free piano book instruments, Christian and Paul are bringing musicians together and encouraging them to explore. It all seems pretty cool to me. (fanboy alert 😉)

 

https://www.pianobook.co.uk

 

 

[David Emm]

Its not a full-bodied piano plug in the usual sense. The clearest piano has a static decay, whereas the other options are bathed in reverb. They'll make excellent pads or layers for same. The last two sound a bit reversed or maybe looped at the sustain stage.

 

I enjoy adding to my Pianos folder, especially high-quality weirdos like these. Its like looking at Glass's piano through a keyhole. You only get a small slice of it, but what's there has a nice round quality. Spitfire is good at adding delicate fringes like this to their main orchestral catalog. I'm with Stokely about their Originals, too. I bought their Cimbalom and its extremely lush.     

[GovernorSilver]

Haven't done much A/B comparison of baby grands vs. full grands but I would expect some difference in sound for sure, compared to plugins built on full-grand piano samples, even if this one has Glass's mojo.  They're called baby grand pianos for a reason.

 

Didn't realize Spitfire's LABS plugins are all free:

 

https://labs.spitfireaudio.com/#type=&search=&new=true

 

I'm not a crazy sample library collector but I'm going to take a look at these other free plugins too.

 

 

[Reezekeys]

I grabbed the Glass piano, also the Wurly. I shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth, but they wound up being a few gigs' worth of space on my SSD better used for other things, I'm afraid. I say that as someone who already has acoustic piano and wurly samples I'm happy with, so I didn't really need these, but curiosity moved me to check them out. I'll also say that I'm not looking for "effected", "emotional", "suitable for film scoring" etc. pianos... I like 'em stock. I have plenty of effects plugins to mangle my sounds.

 

The best free "stock" sampled piano I've come across was the Soniccouture Hammersmith "Free." I say "was" because unfortunately it's no longer available.

[GovernorSilver]

[wanted to delete]

[GovernorSilver]

3 hours ago, Reezekeys said:

I'll also say that I'm not looking for "effected", "emotional", "suitable for film scoring" etc. pianos... I like 'em stock. I have plenty of effects plugins to mangle my sounds.

 

 

 

At first, I wondered if you couldn't just turn off the FX or set wet-dry mix to 100% dry.

 

That was before I attempted to start Live 11 and got caught in the reindexing thing that happens to Mac users after a major OS update - just updated my iMac to Catalina.

 

Couple of hours later, I was finally able to start Live 11 and run the Glass Piano plugin in it.  I see what you mean now.  It's got 6 presets.  I can make the "Glass Grand" ones sound dry.  But the first and last one seem to be based on pre-processed samples or something - reverb or whatever it is can't be dialed out.

 

You're free to do what you want with your copy.  I'm keeping mine.

[Reezekeys]

It's not just the effects. The dry samples are there, they just don't compare with similar paid VIs (imo) – but what can you say, since they're free? I'm actually hesitating posting my honest opinion, because I know well-meaning programmers spent their time and talents coming up with these, and they're giving them away for nothing. I also have to remind myself that not everybody plays the kind of music I do, or likes the sounds I like. If these plugins work for someone and they're happy using them, end of discussion; they just don't work for me. But to get to your question: It's not just the efx; imo the plain un-effected samples are lacking somewhat. It sounds like both the Glass Piano and the Wurly have only two velocity layers; that's a pretty low number for a computer-based disk streaming virtual instrument these days. There's also some pretty audible sample stretching going on with the wurly, and the soft samples at D and Eb below middle C stick out with a much different tone; sounds like a harmonic. And unless I'm wrong, there's no way to apply tremolo to the wurly – sure, there might be a way to add a separate efx VI to do that, but tremolo is such a common aspect of a wurly's sound you'd think it would be included. If I'm wrong about any of this I'd be happy to be corrected. And again, kudos to the programmers; I'm sure there are plenty of cases where these plugins do the job perfectly and the price is definitely right!

[GovernorSilver]

1 hour ago, Reezekeys said:

It's not just the effects. The dry samples are there, they just don't compare with similar paid VIs (imo) – but what can you say, since they're free? I'm actually hesitating posting my honest opinion, because I know well-meaning programmers spent their time and talents coming up with these, and they're giving them away for nothing. I also have to remind myself that not everybody plays the kind of music I do, or likes the sounds I like. If these plugins work for someone and they're happy using them, end of discussion; they just don't work for me. But to get to your question: It's not just the efx; imo the plain un-effected samples are lacking somewhat. It sounds like both the Glass Piano and the Wurly have only two velocity layers; that's a pretty low number for a computer-based disk streaming virtual instrument these days. There's also some pretty audible sample stretching going on with the wurly, and the soft samples at D and Eb below middle C stick out with a much different tone; sounds like a harmonic. And unless I'm wrong, there's no way to apply tremolo to the wurly – sure, there might be a way to add a separate efx VI to do that, but tremolo is such a common aspect of a wurly's sound you'd think it would be included. If I'm wrong about any of this I'd be happy to be corrected. And again, kudos to the programmers; I'm sure there are plenty of cases where these plugins do the job perfectly and the price is definitely right!

 

I asked you if you could turn the effects off, not what you think of the quality of samples.   in the above paragraph you seem to think I asked you for that... but I did not.  It's like asking a New York pizza lover what he thinks of Chicago deep dish - some questions have such an obvious answer to me that I'd never bother to ask.

 

Sorry, I don't know of a less blunt way to correct you on this point.

 

 

 

 

[Reezekeys]

1 hour ago, GovernorSilver said:

 

At first, I wondered if you couldn't just turn off the FX or set wet-dry mix to 100% dry.

 

That was before I attempted to start Live 11 and got caught in the reindexing thing that happens to Mac users after a major OS update - just updated my iMac to Catalina.

 

Couple of hours later, I was finally able to start Live 11 and run the Glass Piano plugin in it.  I see what you mean now.  It's got 6 presets.  I can make the "Glass Grand" ones sound dry.  But the first and last one seem to be based on pre-processed samples or something - reverb or whatever it is can't be dialed out.

 

You're free to do what you want with your copy.  I'm keeping mine.

You can alter some parameters with that big knob. The presets I've seen for the Wurly and Glass Piano have between two and three selectable parameters that can be assigned to the knob (one at a time) - sometimes it's the reverb amount, but even turning the knob fully CCW on the more effected presets (i.e the presets other than "Glass Grand" or "Wurli DI" ) doesn't make the sound 100% dry. On some presets you can also change the reverb (at the top of the window). While you can't save and recall presets within the plug, I can do it in my host (Plogue Bidule).

 

Acoustic piano is my main instrument and I'm sorry to say that for what I do, the plain "Glass Piano" doesn't hold up next to my usual NI pianos - aside from it being only two velocity layers, it sounds like there's a wool blanket between the strings and the mics used to sample - it sounds quite muffled to me. Of course that may be intentional - for certain other situations or genres of music it may do the job perfectly.

[GovernorSilver]

Yeah, the Glass Grand ones were the only presets I was able to tweak to a dry sounding state.

 

If I cared deeply for sample stretching - yes I know what that is - velocity layers, etc. I would pay up for Synthology Ivory 2, or whatever equivalent Native Instruments has or whatever.    But, I don't.

 

 

[Reezekeys]

Exactly. They're free. I hope lots of folks grab them and I'm sure there will be some very musical examples of their use. I'm pretty sure I'm not their target market - just a bread & butter jazz/r&b player doing gigs with bands, not composing, producing, or doing studio work at the moment. I think I'm gonna keep my big mouth shut from now on when it comes to these things!

[GovernorSilver]

Critiquing Spitfire's Hans Zimmer piano plugin, which is $400, has a choice of 16 mic positions, recorded into a Neve 88R desk... all that fancy stuff....on  velocity layers, sample stretching, etc. would have made more sense.  

 

I don't see anything in the ad for Glass Piano suggesting it should be used by a professional pianist on a big time studio date.

[Reezekeys]

If they want to give me a copy to evaluate, I'll be more than happy to nitpick it! 🙂 

 

452.7 GB UNCOMPRESSED .WAV - almost half a terabyte for one piano? I'm sure there are more than enough velocity layers! I heard an audio example - beautiful!

 

I have not dived into their offerings but looking at their website, it seems like most of the products are not exactly "bread and butter" sounds for aging jazzers like me. Looks to be more in the symphonic vein. I wouldn't be surprised if these were the libraries of choice for composers doing TV or movie mockups or even full soundtracks. I have no doubt they're very high quality.

[GovernorSilver]

I am most def not in the target market for the Hans Zimmer plugin.  

[Tusker]

I agree that much of the time, "players" as Reeze described them, are not the target market for Spitfire libraries. When I am being a "player", I expect to be playing a sound with both hands or at least one hand for at least one section of a song (like one of the segments in an AABA). So "realistic" effects like Leslie on/off or filter cutoff or velocity sensitivity on a piano are important to keep the sounds dynamic and musical.

 

In the orchestral library world, a particular sound may appear in and out the soundstage for a much smaller period of time. While the sound is audible, it is expected to have character and blend well. Musicality and dynamics come from timbre switching in addition to playing. When I am being an "orchestrator" I am looking for tiny jigsaw puzzle pieces assemble the picture, while as a player I am looking for a few larger pieces to make up my sound. 

 

The "atmospheric" piano is a familiar trope, but still in vogue in soundtracks and production music. I wouldn't want to do a live gig with one of them at the center of the rig. Atmospheric pianos can be likened to  the mellotrons of old. Unresponsive to play but used strategically, they can put a song over the top.

 

The orchestral library world is so big, it seems a musician can operate at four different levels depending on one's goals. All are valid. The cost of an orchestral library rig is often a little less than a player's rig and a whole lot less than many pianos. The four levels seem to be:

 

- Pick up freebies and use them as garnish occasionally

- Pick up highly focused libraries (e.g. epic strings) with a limited articulation set but which provide the authentic sound

- Get a reasonably well rounded "workhorse" symphonic library with all the instruments and articulations to arrange orchestrally

- Go the whole hog with large tower computers, Vienna Ensemble Pro, and a large orchestral template with multiple libraries and 100s of tracks.

 

It parallels a migration from player to arranger/composer. After picking up the epic strings, brass, percussion etc. and enjoying them, I recently expanded to BBC Symphonic Library Pro as a workhorse library, and Eric Whitacre Choir and Aperture as garnish. So not quite the whole hog yet but I am on my way. The pandemic has reduced my desire to gig. I love to compose and arrange. The tools are there to do that. So far so good!! 👍👍

[Reezekeys]

The topic of these "atmospheric" sample libraries and orchestral libraries in general is a very interesting one and something I've personally not explored much at all since I'm still trying to figure out how to blow over a E7 #9. This might deserve its own thread, but lately I've been checking out some youtubes with Guy Michelmore, Anne-Kathrin Dern, and Beato. Lots of interesting stuff although I sometimes find they focus more on the "how" and "what" than the "why" – which I might find more illuminating. It's also quite the challenge to come up with new content when your income depends on it, so good on them for whatever they produce.

 

The only point I'd make is that in the end, while one might excuse a particular plugin's perceived lacking in certain qualities because "well, it's free", you're still going to be judged by the final musical product you create with it - and whatever you paid for it is not going to figure into that judgment. Either something works or not. That $400 Hanz Zimmer half-a-terabyte piano may not work for me playing a solo Monk piece.

 

Since I'm old, I can remember where we were, in terms of samples in general and sample libraries in particular. My sample-playing days started with an Ensoniq Mirage and a piano that fit into 256K of ram!

 

Anyway - I should have probably not opined the way I did on these Spitfire free plugins. Back to that E7 #9 now.

[GovernorSilver]

I recently watched an Anne-Kathrin Dern video in which she went over her rig.  That was where I learned that dual computer use is normal for composers who rely on big sample libraries.

 

Glass Piano is a good tool for my intended use - drive it with Max For Live MIDI devices, record the results, keep the ones I like and discard the rest.  

 

Anybody who downloads this and gets fired from  a gig (studio gig, soundtrack gig, whatever)  for attempting to use it as substitute for Synthology Ivory 2, Garritan CFX, Vienna Imperial, or other "pro player class" plugin, on a serious project.... deserves to be fired. 😂    

 

I use my Casio CT-S1 for practicing piano stuff.  I'm not a professional pianist, just a student, so it's perfectly fine for my needs.  Hey, it's better than using a Moog Matriarch as a MIDI controller hooked up to a sound module - yeah, I did try that before I got the Casio.

 

 

 

[Tusker]

5 hours ago, Reezekeys said:

The topic of these "atmospheric" sample libraries and orchestral libraries in general is a very interesting one and something I've personally not explored much at all since I'm still trying to figure out how to blow over a E7 #9. This might deserve its own thread, but lately I've been checking out some youtubes with Guy Michelmore, Anne-Kathrin Dern, and Beato. Lots of interesting stuff although I sometimes find they focus more on the "how" and "what" than the "why" – which I might find more illuminating. It's also quite the challenge to come up with new content when your income depends on it, so good on them for whatever they produce.

I hope Paolo would mind if we went a little afield. You may not see much point to these two videos Reeze. But you asked, the "why" question, and it's different for everyone. Some of us just want a box of colors to paint with. Others, like Terence Blanchard, steered his art music onto new artistic vehicles by composing soundtracks. Still others, like Christian Henson didn't pursue art, but built a "library music" business. These two videos are not to sell you on libraries per se. In fact I am pretty certain TB didn't use much in the way of orchestral samples to mockup blakk klansman. But your question goes beyond mere tools to a "why" of orchestrating and arranging music, instead of perfecting the player's craft. Hopefully, these videos will stimulate interest. Warmly, Jerry

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Reezekeys]

Jerry, thanks for these youtubes. I just watched them both, and found them very interesting. I'm afraid they're both describing a world far from mine. IMO, writing music is a muscle that needs to be exercised to stay healthy and for whatever reasons, writing original music hasn't been something I've had the itch to do. The "why" I mentioned in my previous post was a more mundane question that was referring to the thought process of a composer deciding how to arrange or orchestrate their music using these libraries. They all do a good job of showing examples of what they did, and the tools they use to do it with, but don't always describe why they decided to do it a certain way vs. other possible ways. I'm only describing the very limited number of videos I've seen so far; I'm sure there are some that go into the subject of orchestration in greater detail, I just need to look for them.

 

The irony is that today, any shlub with a PC or tablet not only has the opportunity to view and learn from all this incredible expertise, but also easily download tools allowing them to realize productions impossible a few years ago - some of these tools being very low cost (or even free). All this is literally at one's fingertips. I'm guessing that, for this particular segment of the music industry, it still takes that elusive component we call "talent" (and maybe a little luck, too)! 🙂 

[nadroj]

I have a few of the Spirfire sounds downloaded, including this one. They're fun to experiment with, and are excellent for ambient pieces. Plus, they're free. No complaints at all from me.

[Tusker]

44 minutes ago, Reezekeys said:

The "why" I mentioned in my previous post was a more mundane question that was referring to the thought process of a composer deciding how to arrange or orchestrate their music using these libraries.

I see. First of all I couldn't agree more. We all need to stick to our knitting if we want to have an impact.

 

As to how people use these libraries, what I am learning is that you can simplify it to two approaches. One is the sweetener school. We do the music we do and add orchestral timbres as sweeteners (kinda like Paul McCartney on Live and Let Die or Bill Evans with Klaus Ogerman).

 

The YouTubers  names you mentioned are typically from the other school. The music schools are graduating thousands of musical artisans for this age of media. These guys will have orchestration books on their shelves by Adler and Rimsky Korsakov and Walter Piston. They can sketch out species counterpoint and SATB before I can count to five. Even if they use a glass piano on a track they might have first conceived it as a Harp or a Glock, because the symphonic orchestra is the instrument they dream with. The libraries are mockup for eventual performance by acoustic orchestras or, if the budget is not there, it remains a mockup, or with a little haggling, a couple of acoustic instruments are hired to make things more organic. There is a lot of forgettable but functional music, that is entirely "in the box" however. 🙏

[Doerfler]

Woody demo's SpitFire audio free plug ins. He must have seen this thread. 

 

 

[Tusker]

On 2/5/2022 at 3:37 PM, Doerfler said:

Woody demo's SpitFire audio free plug ins. He must have seen this thread. 

 

👍 So do you think he might also do similar quick demos of Orchestral Tools's SINE Factory  (with two free pianos, string ensemble, pipe organ etc.) after seeing it mentioned IN THIS THREAD? 😉 😄

[Doerfler]

he is saving to have a house built so free is his current best price point. He just might, Jerry. I'll send him a PM 

[GovernorSilver]

I don't mind the thread going afield.   My contribution to that is this Jonny Greenwood interview that I found, focusing on his soundtrack compositions and arrangements.  Interesting comment about getting so used to computers and  sample libraries that one might try to replicate those sounds rather than being more open to working with how real acoustic instruments behave.  Also interesting thoughts on getting "old" instruments to make new sounds, which he got from Penderecki or Ligeti.

 

I was also amused at the admission that he pretended to play keys during those very first practice sessions with Radiohead, and gradually turned up the keys as he got a better handle on the music.

[Reezekeys]

On 2/5/2022 at 11:50 AM, Tusker said:

As to how people use these libraries, what I am learning is that you can simplify it to two approaches. One is the sweetener school. We do the music we do and add orchestral timbres as sweeteners (kinda like Paul McCartney on Live and Let Die or Bill Evans with Klaus Ogerman).

Yes, I'm definitely a "sweetener" person. Never got formal training in arranging or orchestrating except for a brief moment when I was at City College of New York, and wrote an original piece for the big band. I spent two weeks writing out parts by hand (this was 1978!) and when the band played it, the piece was over in 1  1/2 minutes!

 

On 2/5/2022 at 11:50 AM, Tusker said:

 

The YouTubers  names you mentioned are typically from the other school. The music schools are graduating thousands of musical artisans for this age of media. These guys will have orchestration books on their shelves by Adler and Rimsky Korsakov and Walter Piston. They can sketch out species counterpoint and SATB before I can count to five. Even if they use a glass piano on a track they might have first conceived it as a Harp or a Glock, because the symphonic orchestra is the instrument they dream with. The libraries are mockup for eventual performance by acoustic orchestras or, if the budget is not there, it remains a mockup, or with a little haggling, a couple of acoustic instruments are hired to make things more organic. There is a lot of forgettable but functional music, that is entirely "in the box" however. 🙏

I've been checking out out some of those Anne-Kathrin Dern u-tubes where she describes the process of getting a film or tv score done. It's very interesting to me and there is obviously an amazing amount of talent there, but I have to say that I don't think I'd be too happy in that world, mostly due to the business side. It's great she gets to exercise her creativity, but she also has to work fast, under tight deadlines, and always making sure the director is happy. All for short snippets of music that might accompany a car chase or a monster creeping up on someone. I'm not minimising this by any means - music for picture is very challenging and I know I would suck hard at doing it! I can only imagine the projects one has to take on climbing the ladder of success in this small part of the music industry. I hope Ms. Dern is paid very well for her work.

 

Anyway, stepping back a little closer to this thread topic (!), imo it's obvious these free Spitfire plugs are a great gift to many musicians and it's extremely generous of the company to put them out. Many of the sounds Woody demos are stellar, but we're listening to them in isolation. Like those huge synth patches we demo in a music store that make us want to buy the keyboard, the trick is knowing how and when to fit them into a finished musical piece. I'm not sure I could use any of them, but I now know to refrain from comparing these kinds of plugs (even the ones you have to pay for!) with the bread & butter VIs I need to play my $50 jazz gigs with! 🙂 

[Tusker]

2 hours ago, GovernorSilver said:

I don't mind the thread going afield.   My contribution to that is this Jonny Greenwood interview that I found, focusing on his soundtrack compositions and arrangements.  Interesting comment about getting so used to computers and  sample libraries that one might try to replicate those sounds rather than being more open to working with how real acoustic instruments behave.  Also interesting thoughts on getting "old" instruments to make new sounds, which he got from Penderecki or Ligeti.

 

I was also amused at the admission that he pretended to play keys during those very first practice sessions with Radiohead, and gradually turned up the keys as he got a better handle on the music.

 

It's a seriously great question. I have to admit I got lost in the Phantom Thread theme right there and in in Mr. Greenwood's beautiful melody, I forgot to read his words. Yes, absolutely the acoustic and the primal will speak more directly to the human spirit. Hilda Guðnadóttir's cello is directly related to her soundtrack Oscar. Thomas Newman has a team of acoustic players who have a long term relationship with him. They jam to his directions, to "find the spirit" of the soundtrack. That's just not there in samples, or if it is there, it's there in tiny quantities and can sound dated very soon, because sample library makers typically cannot present the full range of an instrument. The complexity is too great to control. As the basics are covered, we are seeing some increases in the types of articulations available, though nothing like the real world. Even the physical modeling tools like "Sample Modeling" are quite reductionist. They stay within the "most typical" range of timbre. There are classical and folk musicians who spend 20 years developing intimacy with their instruments. I don't think there is any substitute for that. Or for the human voice.

 

Some electronic musicians become their own luthiers to create their own instrument for intimacy. This seems to work better with analog than digital, though there are strong counter examples like Brian Eno. I believe some aspect of immediacy which is often overlooked is how a sound hangs in space. Vangelis utilized the early Lexicon digital reverbs to create sounds which (to my ears) still sound fresh, though otherworldly.  Part of it is the modulation of the reverb which adds color and texture to an otherwise "flat" analog or digital synth. I am loving this cheap but characterful Seventh Heaven reverb and am looking at HD Cart and similar reverbs to get better in this area. You don't have to go crazy with Blackhole or Valhalla Shimmer. There are people with dozens of reverbs and they seem to help add character to the soundstage. This seems like a solvable problem. At least to this neophyte.

 

I figure it's about making the best music you can with the tools available. On the same journey ... ❤️

[Tusker]

As a way of moving the conversation forward, this particular composer has given up on sample libraries. He relies on SWAM modeled instruments instead, focusing on placing sound in space. It's nowhere near the immediacy of a real acoustic instrument as I mentioned, but I wonder if your feel that it is more musical than samples?