• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Topic: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum

  1. #1

    QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum


    With current EWQLSO prices, you can get Gold & Gold Pro for $1191 or Platinum for $1495.

    I am interested in purchasing one of those, but can't decide. I think I would really like the choice of mike positions in Platinum to control the amount of natural reverb, but then I would be missing the extra articulations and QLegato from Gold Pro.

    If I do go with Platinum, since its 24-bit, will I be able to use other 16-bit libraries in the same project inside Sonar, mixing down tracks, etc?

    I would appreciate opionions on why you would chose one over the other.

    I am also impressed by the demos for the $250 Kirk Hunter Emerald library. Would that be helpful in addition to the EW libraries or would they not mix well together?

    Thanks for your input,

  2. #2

    Re: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum

    Go with the Gold package, Platinum ain't all that it's cracked up to be, you'd be spending more money and limiting your options. Take the extra cash and get yourself Altiverb instead and you'll be much happier.

    Most Platinum users end up using only 1 mic placement and the 24 bit is not as useful until most sample libraries are 24 bit as well.
    Music Composition for Feature Films, Television and Interactive Entertainment

  3. #3

    Re: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum

    Another consideration is that Platinum really requires multiple computers if you're going to have large (symphonic) projects.

    You're also going to want the XP version if you buy Platinum, so don't expect to forego Gold and Gold XP and be hapy with Platinum alone.

    As for the 24 & 16 bit issue, I'm not sure if they can work side by side in a project unless you work with each sample set separately, converting one group of samples to audio. I think this would be problematic when mixing.

    I have Gold and Gold XP and think it's a great library. I have not heard Platinum live, so I can't comment on the different mic versions, but I agree with Midphase in recommending a good convolution program vs buying extra mic sets for the reverb. In fact, the reverb is a bit of a sticky issue with some as they feel it's too prominant in the samples. Some people recommend turning off the release trails (using Kontakt....not possible in the Kompakt player) and using convolution reverb as it affords more control over the ambiance.


  4. #4

    Re: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum

    go with the gold package, Platinum is a waste imho

  5. #5

    Re: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum

    Quote Originally Posted by wes37
    In fact, the reverb is a bit of a sticky issue with some as they feel it's too prominant in the samples. Some people recommend turning off the release trails (using Kontakt....not possible in the Kompakt player) and using convolution reverb as it affords more control over the ambiance.
    I think that's what makes EWQLSO so usable - you don't have to muck about with reverb. If you're interested in drier samples that you can control more, why not consider VSL?


  6. #6

    Re: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum

    Gold. Platinum is overkill imo. Unless you've got the studio and computers and extra help to use it properly.

    Most of the time I'm combining different libraries and I'm adding synth stuff and additional perc. If I had plat. I think I'd end up using just the stage mics anyway and adding verb to mix it together.


  7. #7

    Re: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum


    Any of you who are steering Weekend away from Platinum actually own it? Not trying to be aggressive, just want to know. Though I score/sequence with F mic positions, when I render the tracks for final mix I like to use all three mics which really adds warmth/depth/presence--lots of flexibility. It's definitely been worth it for me.

    That said, as an initial investment, you can't beat the Gold Pro XP deal they've got right now.


    Damon Sink
    G5 Dual 2 GHz, P4 3.8GHz, Logic Pro 7, Digital Performer, EWQLSO Platinum Pro XP, VSL, Kontakt2, Finale

  8. #8
    Moderator/Developer Brian2112's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Out of my Mind

    Re: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum

    I have Plat and am expecting Plat Pro XP this week. I also have Gold (I got it cheap because I had Platinum and I got it so I could load a bit more stuff since it’s 16 bit and so on, plus I tossed around the idea of upgrading to Gold Pro instead of Plat Pro)

    First off, I am new to orchestral stuff – I am still learning so keep in mind that this is an armature talking (and a rock/jazz drummer at that).

    I mostly use only the stage mics as mentioned when composing/orchestrating. Gold does the job great, sucks less CPU/Ram/DFD, and going Gold Pro would give you all the articulations – so that’s a good option. That being said, in my humble opinion, when I have rendered using the surround mics, I notice that the overall effect sounds to me to be more than just adding the verb of the back of the hall. The strings sound more lush and rich when properly introduced in a mix. And it really does sound a bit more pristine than Gold (imho). It’s just nice to have that option.

    And yea, I use 24 bit samples and 16 bit samples in the same project in Sonar – never an issue. I sketch out what I want to do with GPO then move it to Plat to touch up and render – and often keep a lot of GPO going as well. Some would argue that this is technically incorrect as it destroys the 3d image of the hall, but hey, I use different pianos, and drum kits in the same tune too…that’s the beauty of samples. You do lots of stuff and make it work.

    "So what if some parts of life are a crap shoot? Get out there and shoot the crap." -- Neil Peart
    Hint:1.6180339887498948482 Φ

  9. #9

    Re: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum

    My problem with Gold is it sounds very wet for different types of music. The woodwinds in example are very hard to hear on speakers or monitors and for my take sound very wet and watery, almost like I hear more of the hall than the instrument. The solo strings are too wet for practical use other than for a large orchestra in my humble opinion.

    If that is the sound you want then you should get that.

    I have gold, but many times I wish I had some drier instruments of the close mics.

  10. #10

    Re: QLSO Gold & Gold Pro vs. Platinum

    Thanks for all the comments!

    I am going for Gold / Gold XP as the extra articulations seem to be more important than the extra mike positions, but I wish I could have them as well. But there's no way I could afford the Platinum XP and a new high end PC, its already a stretch as is.

    I love the sound of large hall and so like how wet Gold is, but that is a good point about woodwinds needing a close mike. I think I'm going to get Kontakt for $400 as well, and it includes some VSL samples (hopefully including woodwinds) that would come in handy. And I could also turn down the reverb trails in Gold as suggested.

    No one commented on the new 25 GB Kirk Hunter Emerald library for only $250? Maybe that could help us Gold users get closer miked samples, such as for woodwinds and solo intruments? His demos sound very impressive and the price is certainly affordable. It won't let me post the link, but go to the kirkhunterstudios website to hear them.

Go Back to forum


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts