@William said:

I like the fact that the notes in samples are actually played rather than synthesized, but the problem ultimately is that there is never enough of them, whether one is trying to find the ideal expression needed by a composition, or having each note played be an alternate sample. And this is even with the hundreds of thousands being recorded by the VSL.

I agree. At the moment I am rushing through a demo and having to compromise on the sound due to the time that it takes to piece together lots of little samples to make something work. In fact I'm not even using the VSL Timpani because of this. While it sounds great when it all works, I need to be able to play one note and (for example) the roll to continue until I take my finger off it, crescendo via a crossfade (modwheel) to a different velocity roll etc. With my "old" samples I can do this live, however I have not yet found a way to do this with VSL. However, surely this is a case where with some sort of synthisis (Performance Tool...!) crossfading to 3 second, 4 second (etc.) rolls could be done by whatever timestretching is done in (pause for spitting) Synful.

I think that some sort of hybrid will possibly be the next phase of sampling, although I certainly agree that the ultimate quality is based on the original sounds sampled.

Why am I typing when I should be working? [:O]ops:

DG

William:

I'm excited about this new technology/techniques, as it brings to our environment audio which once could only be done at professional studio's ($$$) and the hiring of orchestras (more $$$).

Now that there are options of samples & synths, you can achieve fantastic results from home/small studio at an affordable budget...

This gives 'The Little Guys' more possibilities for work and other achievements.

Unless you have thousands of dollars hiring an orchestra, then these libraries are certainly worth it (including synths).

For those that work, less expenses means more money in your pocket, so why not take advantage of Synths as well (If it achieves the results you're after) ?

Regards, Max.

For me, the main difference between a (good) sample and (even the best) sythesized sound is easy to define: The sample will always have this certain "built in" musicality --- an artistic consciousness that the player(s) and the producer condensed from the myriad of possibilities into this very recording. You would have to know the Do's and Dont's of _each_ instrument as thoroughly as the highly specialized players from the sampling-sessions to achieve a similar result from a synthesized source. It may look enticing, but in the end you're spoilt for choice.

/Dietz (with his private opinion)

Hey Dietz, have you ever tried a VL1? [:)]

It can't do what VSL can do. Most of the sounds it comes with - and it's very difficult to program - are way off. I can't think of any ensemble sounds it produces that are at all usable. Forget about the strings (some of them are nice, but they sound like something different). It only has one- or two-note polyphony.

But the sounds that do work, such as the muted trumpet, clarinet, harmonica, "chiffy" jazz flute...those sounds really do have the same effect as the real instrument when you use a wind or breath controller, and I have to say it's more expressive than playing samples. All the note-to-note transitions, subtle tonal nuances, etc. are there.

If you play the jazz flute really quietly, for example, you get fingers-on-pad sounds. Then as you gradually play harder, the instrument responds just like a flute, until you overblow and get the "chiff." All that isn't on/off/next layer please, the transitions are continuous. Each note sounds different. You can play notes in the same breath/bow, suddenly change timbre by blowing harder and softer, and so on. It knows if you suddenly blow hard or if you gradually breathe in.

In other words, it does everything a real instrument does. Of course you can easily produce uncharacteristic parts, but you really don't have to understand a tuba or flute in great depth to play tube- or flute-ish parts.

Obviously I'm not saying it's a replacement for VSL, because it's strictly a solo instrument and it does totally different things. But eleven years after its introduction, it's still beyond awesome. People are staggered by how real it sounds when I play it.

Hey Nick,

I was actually a huge admirer of the VL-1 when I was researching phymod stuff... I never got my hands on one, and I'd be pretty much stumped when it comes to getting all those specialized sound out of it, but I love the idea behind the technology. Also, probably the most realistic clarinet I've ever heard was done on a VL-1. So, I am a fan. The only problem is configuring all those subtle controllers in a way that would work reasonably well from score... not easy. Also, there's polyphony... I do wish someone could manage to bring phymod back to life, with some sort of interpretive front-end to help performance. I mean, all those little extended techniques I love so much can actually be produced on a phymod instrument, because you're actually duplicating the physical conditions required to produce them on the real thing! It is a very exciting technology... too bad it croaked! (Has anybody played around with Logic Pro's new phymod instrument?)

J.

@Nick Batzdorf said:

Hey Dietz, have you ever tried a VL1? [:)]
[...]

Yes, and I even programmed for it's little brother, the VL-70. Incredible technology. But I'm sure that you are completely aware of the fact that you actually have to develop new skills for each and every setting of this synth to _really_ master it - just as it were a new instrument of its own.

This is what I tried to communicate with my reply above: Good samples have this mastery "built in", so to speak.

... so many instruments, so little time ... [+o(]

All the best,

/Dietz

@Nick Batzdorf said:

But the sounds that do work, such as the muted trumpet, clarinet, harmonica, "chiffy" jazz flute...those sounds really do have the same effect as the real instrument when you use a wind or breath controller, and I have to say it's more expressive than playing samples. All the note-to-note transitions, subtle tonal nuances, etc. are there.

Not to hijack the thread, but what is a breath controller? I have read bits and pieces about it (regarding the DX7) but have no clear picture in my head of how one should be used and for what purpose. Someone, please enlighten me [*-)]

DG

@DG said:

Not to hijack the thread, but what is a breath controller? I have read bits and pieces about it (regarding the DX7) but have no clear picture in my head of how one should be used and for what purpose. Someone, please enlighten me [*-)]

DG

Recently there was a quite comprehensive thread about it. Just search this forum.

@paynterr said:

Well, I have to say that I am very impressed with what I've heard from synful and am considering using it instead of VSL performance/pro. Why? Not because I think it sounds quite as good yet... but because it is *SO* much easier to compose using.

That's a good point. I use various sample libraries in addition to VSL; the differences in sound are a matter of taste or preference ....but it's a lot more fun to get results quickly. And I think we all know that VSL, for all its beauty and realism, is not the fastest and most accessible of libraries. For things I want -or need- to do quickly, I don't always use VSL.

If someone could design an interface which would make choosing the appropriate VSL patches more intuitive, or even translating a written score into the right sounds....now that would be interesting.

Nigel

@DG said:

Not to hijack the thread, but what is a breath controller? I have read bits and pieces about it (regarding the DX7) but have no clear picture in my head of how one should be used and for what purpose. Someone, please enlighten me [*-)]

DG

Recently there was a quite comprehensive thread about it. Just search this forum.

Ah I've found it, thanks; I was searching for breath controll-ER rather than breath control [:O]ops: I'll investigate this when I have more time, as it sounds very interesting.

DG

"The sample will always have this certain "built in" musicality --- an artistic consciousness that the player(s) and the producer condensed from the myriad of possibilities into this very recording." - Dietz

This is exactly what I was talking about originally. Not only that, but you hear in a sample that artistic consciousness AND years of study and practice brought to a point of extreme focus and concentration of sound.

I remember a poor sample library I once got, of some saxophones, which was basically riffs but they decided to do some single note samples also. So these guys got out their horns, and blew some scales. Completely unmusical honks one right after another. This was useless as samples unless you wanted to record a flock of geese flying overhead, but it COULD be used in the so-called "atomized" waveform-destroying synthetic approach, because far more is done by the machinery of the synthesizer and far less is done by the musician who recorded the original tones - if there even WAS a musician.

However, with samples, you must obtain the very best musician, and he must be recorded flawlessly, and this quality must be maintained all throughout the process because that original sound is what you are going after. That is what I am trying to obtain when I score for a section of violins using samples - an actual group of extremely good violin players doing what they do and CAPTURED as they do it.

One other thing - Nick, post that clarinet right here playing a fluid, legato line. I know all about how the VSL legato clarinet sounds and would enjoy hearing the comparison.

I'm trying the Synful Orchestra ... not bad but basic : no pizzicato, no con sordino, no true legato, [...] only sustain ... staccato notes are a short sustain.

William, I'll see what I can do later this week.

Dietz, I agree - you do have to play it. But I also think that people make a bigger deal out of that than is necessary, because it's not all that difficult to coordinate blowing and playing a note on the keyboard. On the other hand, I've been doing that for a long time - I started recorder when I was four years old - so maybe some people do find it harder than I think.

Someone asked about breath controllers. They're pressure-sensitive transducers. You blow into them and get another MIDI controller. They require a breath controller input, as found on Kurzweil KXXX synths, drumKATs, or Anatek Wind Converter boxes.

@Nick Batzdorf said:

Someone asked about breath controllers. They're pressure-sensitive transducers. You blow into them and get another MIDI controller. They require a breath controller input, as found on Kurzweil KXXX synths, drumKATs, or Anatek Wind Converter boxes.

I have 3 "assignable" inputs, but these may not work. I'll report when I have more time.

DG

@Nick Batzdorf said:

[...] I started recorder when I was four years old - so maybe some people do find it harder than I think. [...]

Ok, so this gives you a clear competitive egde - I started playing recorder when I was 6 years old ;-] ...

... I wasn't talking about managing the coordination between the breath-controller and the keyboard. To my opinion, you will have to learn the specific articulations for every "patch" of the synth - as soon as you plan to sound "authentic" intruments.

/Dietz

Yeah, it takes a little practice with each sound, because they all respond differently (unlike VSL, you can't just change patches and use the same MIDI). I haven't found that terribly difficult, but it's definitely a factor.

And you're right that it's necessary to think like the instrument you're emulating. In practice, I find that more a matter of what not to play than what to play. Tuba isn't as agile as bassoon, in other words. [[:)]]

The exception is sax (not classical sax, of course, but jazz/rock/etc.). Those characteristic articulations and subtle bends, etc. are tricky. I don't have that down very well, so it usually sounds silly. On the other hand, I haven't spent a lot of time listening to saxes with that in mind, so it's my fault. [[:)]]

@jbm said:

Really [paynterr]? You find this more "fake" than the Synful stuff? For me, the problem with the Synful pieces is in the staccato notes -- they really sound like truncated long notes, to me...

But I suppose it makes sense, considering the exaggerated use of ostinati -- the samples are literally repeated, in close proximity, a number of times. Maybe that's not what you're talking about... I don't know. Can you be more specific? To me, these instruments sound pretty real, but then, this is only my composing mock-up. So it's very hard for me to hear it objectively...

J.

Don't get me wrong, I liked the piece, but a well recorded sample lib like VSL could sound more fake, more easily than, say, this new synful tool. Why? Well, because synful creates what is essentially a unique sound with a each play of the key, it is a lot easier to get rid of the machine gun effect.
Although I agree that the quality of VSL is far superior, it cannot match the stitching together of notes that synful manages, therefore the quality can quickly give way to the expressiveness (or something like that) so that synful sounds more real.
I must admit, I love the idea of being able to have a single track per instrument/player in the orchestra and just letting them get on with playing the music I've written, me directing them roughly in the direction of how loud to play etc. but generally leaving the 'performance' up to them. ANd I'd like to see this work for ensembles too. Why not make ensembles from individual instruments, making them as large or small as you want. Follow the real-world analogies. You want 8 horns, then use 8 instruments. YOu want 50 string players, then there you go. It also means that when you split the orchestra, you don't have the problems you have at the moment. ANd since it is a case of cut-and-paste when it comes to giving them something to play (using a few random settings on each track to ensure they are slightly different to each other).
Compare this with the ever-increasing sample library size of VSL. This is probably out of place on VSL, but since I've already given them by 3.5k sterling...
Interestingly enough, I've never written as little music since getting VSL. THis is partly a function of using Halion and converting the samples, partly a function of Halion being buggy, but mainly a function of just having too much there in my face, too much choice. I think VSL was probably a mistake for me.
I am an IT Architect by profession and I hate to have to program my music too. That's my day job, not my hobby and that is what it feels like what with having to have multiple tracks just for the same legato instrument, not to mention multiple other tracks for other articulations, all loading into memory. For me, the complexity of VSL and the sheer choices I am given (not to mention having to run performance tool out of the DAW) is just too much hassle and actually puts me off using it.
There has to be a better way and I believe this is it... after all, some of these instruments are not that complicated to model, especially if you can do what convolusion reverbs do, that is sample the characteristics of the instrument rather than the actual notes.
Just my thoughts at the end of the year...
Happy new year to all here... and give a little thought and money to the SE Asia crisis if you can.


Could not have put it any better myself. VSL's samples are bar none this best, but if I could get the same 'end results' in half the time, well....

Rob

@jbm said:

Really [paynterr]? You find this more "fake" than the Synful stuff? For me, the problem with the Synful pieces is in the staccato notes -- they really sound like truncated long notes, to me...

But I suppose it makes sense, considering the exaggerated use of ostinati -- the samples are literally repeated, in close proximity, a number of times. Maybe that's not what you're talking about... I don't know. Can you be more specific? To me, these instruments sound pretty real, but then, this is only my composing mock-up. So it's very hard for me to hear it objectively...

J.

Don't get me wrong, I liked the piece, but a well recorded sample lib like VSL could sound more fake, more easily than, say, this new synful tool. Why? Well, because synful creates what is essentially a unique sound with a each play of the key, it is a lot easier to get rid of the machine gun effect.
Although I agree that the quality of VSL is far superior, it cannot match the stitching together of notes that synful manages, therefore the quality can quickly give way to the expressiveness (or something like that) so that synful sounds more real.
I must admit, I love the idea of being able to have a single track per instrument/player in the orchestra and just letting them get on with playing the music I've written, me directing them roughly in the direction of how loud to play etc. but generally leaving the 'performance' up to them. ANd I'd like to see this work for ensembles too. Why not make ensembles from individual instruments, making them as large or small as you want. Follow the real-world analogies. You want 8 horns, then use 8 instruments. YOu want 50 string players, then there you go. It also means that when you split the orchestra, you don't have the problems you have at the moment. ANd since it is a case of cut-and-paste when it comes to giving them something to play (using a few random settings on each track to ensure they are slightly different to each other).
Compare this with the ever-increasing sample library size of VSL. This is probably out of place on VSL, but since I've already given them by 3.5k sterling...
Interestingly enough, I've never written as little music since getting VSL. THis is partly a function of using Halion and converting the samples, partly a function of Halion being buggy, but mainly a function of just having too much there in my face, too much choice. I think VSL was probably a mistake for me.
I am an IT Architect by profession and I hate to have to program my music too. That's my day job, not my hobby and that is what it feels like what with having to have multiple tracks just for the same legato instrument, not to mention multiple other tracks for other articulations, all loading into memory. For me, the complexity of VSL and the sheer choices I am given (not to mention having to run performance tool out of the DAW) is just too much hassle and actually puts me off using it.
There has to be a better way and I believe this is it... after all, some of these instruments are not that complicated to model, especially if you can do what convolusion reverbs do, that is sample the characteristics of the instrument rather than the actual notes.
Just my thoughts at the end of the year...
Happy new year to all here... and give a little thought and money to the SE Asia crisis if you can.


Could not have put it any better myself. VSL's samples are bar none this best, but if I could get the same 'end results' in half the time, well....

Now like any other consumer - I want my cake and eat it too. Give me the ease of working in Synful with the sustain sounds or VSL - sounds easy enough, Herb? [:D]

Rob

No problem, Rob.
Two words: "Symphonic Cube"

best
Herb

@Nick Batzdorf said:

...Tuba isn't as agile as bassoon, in other words. [:)]

Not only is the tuba as agile if not more agile than the bassoon, it has a wider range of notes, a wider dynamic range, is more versatile across musical styles, sounds nicer, looks nicer, feels nicer and quite frankly smells nicer to.

Nuff said!

DaveTubaKIng