Well, I have to support Herb and the library on this... The repetition samples are one of the outstanding features of this library. And yes, the idea is to always be at the recorded tempo or faster, so that the next note of the repetition sample doesn't arrive before you're done with the current one. To be honest, I've been using my own software (MaxMSP) to make use of the perf-rep samples, so I don't use the Performance Tool for perf-rep instruments...
I disagree that the extra repetitions are redundant, since the whole point of the system is to be dealing with an ORIGINAL PERFORMANCE, whenever possible. It seems to me that's the general philosophy of the VSL: to sample performances, not just pitches. And then, after sampling the performance, to find a way of playing it that allows as much flexibility as possible, while maintaining the integrity of the original performance. This is always a compromise, but with the new technologies that are coming "down the pipe", the compromise is getting to be less and less significant. I sincerely believe that it will be possible, in the not-too-distant future, to extract both the essence of a performance AND the sample data, and use them for the creation of new musical material. There are already forms of resynthesis that are basically ready to perform this feat. But the essential thing here is that it will be the PERFORMANCE that is captured, not just the spectral data.
When I read a while ago, Evan, that you never used sampled trills, but used the perf-leg instruments instead, I knew that you had a philosophy which was basically incompatible with the VSL. Taking trills as an example, and speaking in strict terms of "sample signature", it makes less sense to use the perf-leg instruments for trills, than using the trill samples, since the ear (brain, actually) will more easily identify the repetition of an identical sample at shorter temporal intervals (i.e., a trill using perf-leg instruments), than it will the repetition of a longer sample at larger temporal intervals (i.e., the use of the same trill sample at two different points in a piece). (Obviously, in the case of two identical, consecutive trill samples, the ear will easily spot the repetition.) I don't have any problem with your philosophy on this, and I do appreciate your ethic of using only single notes (not performed samples, like trills and runs), but it does kind of place you at odds with the VSL, generally speaking.
My feeling (and I think this is the "vision" of the VSL) is that the ideal situation would be to "sample" an absolutely exhaustive repertoire of complete pieces for each instrument, then extract the sample data from these recordings. In this way, each sample is not an isolated demonstration of a single note, devoid of a performed context, but is rather a "slice" of the musical expression of the performer, taken in the context of a complete musical work.
I hope that made at least a _little_ sense! [*-)]
J.
