10 Jun
2011
10 Jun
'11
12:23 a.m.
Hi,
Since working on Petri-Foo I keep returning to the idea that perhaps
it would be better to add a sampler-waveform to Yoshimi or another
soft-synth. Too bad I'm not that great a coder.
Anyway, the idea seems so obvious now. Are there any good reasons for why not?
Just an idea I wanted to put out.
James.
10 Jun
10 Jun
12:30 a.m.
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 23:22:58 +0100
James Morris <jwm.art.net(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
Since working on Petri-Foo I keep returning to the idea that perhaps
it would be better to add a sampler-waveform to Yoshimi or another
soft-synth. Too bad I'm not that great a coder.
Anyway, the idea seems so obvious now. Are there any good reasons for why not?
Just an idea I wanted to put out.
James.
Personally, I'd hate that. I'm very firmly in the school of 'Do just one
thing,
but do it well.'
There is no shortage of samplers, and Jack is your friend :)
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
12:37 a.m.
On 9 June 2011 23:30, Folderol <folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 23:22:58 +0100
James Morris <jwm.art.net(a)gmail.com> wrote:
But are the two really so different? They both do exactly the same
thing except one does it with synthesised waveforms and the other does
it with sampled waveforms. From thinking about the fact that most soft
synths use wave-tables, it can't be that difficult to put a sample in
there? Aside from synthesised waveform and sampled waveform, I think
(but don't quote me on this :-) that it is perhaps only certain
conventions which distinguish the two.
James.
Hi,
Since working on Petri-Foo I keep returning to the idea that perhaps
it would be better to add a sampler-waveform to Yoshimi or another
soft-synth. Too bad I'm not that great a coder.
Anyway, the idea seems so obvious now. Are there any good reasons for why not?
Just an idea I wanted to put out.
James.
Personally, I'd hate that. I'm very firmly in the school of 'Do just one
thing,
but do it well.' 
12:22 p.m.
Excerpts from James Morris's message of 2011-06-10 00:37:15 +0200:
On 9 June 2011 23:30, Folderol
<folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote:
I too think that there's not that much difference between a wavetable
synth and a sampler. I guess you could distinguish them if you like, use
things like typical sample length, user control over samples and so on,
but this rather artificial.
I think samplers and synths have a lot in common, typically midi in,
audio out, note logic, filters and more. There's no good reason not to
marry those two things.
Philipp
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 23:22:58 +0100
James Morris <jwm.art.net(a)gmail.com> wrote:
But are the two really so different? They both do exactly the same
thing except one does it with synthesised waveforms and the other does
it with sampled waveforms. From thinking about the fact that most soft
synths use wave-tables, it can't be that difficult to put a sample in
there? Aside from synthesised waveform and sampled waveform, I think
(but don't quote me on this :-) that it is perhaps only certain
conventions which distinguish the two.
James. Hi,
Since working on Petri-Foo I keep returning to the idea that perhaps
it would be better to add a sampler-waveform to Yoshimi or another
soft-synth. Too bad I'm not that great a coder.
Anyway, the idea seems so obvious now. Are there any good reasons for why not?
Just an idea I wanted to put out.
James.
Personally, I'd hate that. I'm very firmly in the school of 'Do just one
thing,
but do it well.'
9:21 p.m.
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 12:22:07 +0200
Philipp Überbacher <hollunder(a)lavabit.com> wrote:
Excerpts from James Morris's message of 2011-06-10
00:37:15 +0200:
Yoshimi is not a wavetable synth (although PadSynth leans in that direction).
It mathematically calculates instantaneous values on -the-fly.
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
On 9 June 2011 23:30, Folderol
<folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote:
I too think that there's not that much difference between a wavetable
synth and a sampler. I guess you could distinguish them if you like, use
things like typical sample length, user control over samples and so on,
but this rather artificial.
I think samplers and synths have a lot in common, typically midi in,
audio out, note logic, filters and more. There's no good reason not to
marry those two things.
Philipp On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 23:22:58 +0100
James Morris <jwm.art.net(a)gmail.com> wrote:
But are the two really so different? They both do exactly the same
thing except one does it with synthesised waveforms and the other does
it with sampled waveforms. From thinking about the fact that most soft
synths use wave-tables, it can't be that difficult to put a sample in
there? Aside from synthesised waveform and sampled waveform, I think
(but don't quote me on this :-) that it is perhaps only certain
conventions which distinguish the two.
James. Hi,
Since working on Petri-Foo I keep returning to the idea that perhaps
it would be better to add a sampler-waveform to Yoshimi or another
soft-synth. Too bad I'm not that great a coder.
Anyway, the idea seems so obvious now. Are there any good reasons for why not?
Just an idea I wanted to put out.
James.
Personally, I'd hate that. I'm very firmly in the school of 'Do just one
thing,
but do it well.' 
1:51 a.m.
On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 23:30 +0100, Folderol wrote:
'Do just one thing, but do it well.'
Yesno.
The Yamaha TG33, one of my synth that seems to be half broken, has a
joystick to mix several internal synth. Non of those synth is very good,
but by mixing those synth via vector control, it's able to generate
amazing sounds.
Using already available Linux soft synth with a similar vector control
could be amazing too.
Btw. Dave Smith still seems to have CEM microchips, IMO no soft synth is
able to reach the sound of those monsters and btw. the synth of the TG33
also don't reach this sound, but the vector control compensate this
lack. I guess Yamaha did steal this idea from Dave Smith, since the
Sequential vector synth is older than the TG 33.
Be that as it may, 2 * Yoshimi + 2 * Fluidsynth + a vector control,
certainly would generate much better sounds, than the TG 33 does and the
TG 33 is an asked synth.
2 Cents,
Ralf
PS: Yes, I need a replacement for the half broken TG 33.
3:52 a.m.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:22 PM, James Morris <jwm.art.net(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Since working on Petri-Foo I keep returning to the
idea that perhaps
it would be better to add a sampler-waveform to Yoshimi or another
soft-synth. Too bad I'm not that great a coder.
Anyway, the idea seems so obvious now. Are there any good reasons
for why not?
I never used Specimen, but, from what I can gather, Specimen was more
of a sample player with envelopes and LFOs than a sophisticated
sampler. So, you might be able to get similar functionality by adding
waveform functionality to a soft-synth. Note that this isn't meant to
be a negative statement about Specimen.
I'd like to propose a different idea. How about creating an LV2
plugin that focuses on sampler waveforms? Over time, real sampler
functionality (loop points, velocity splits and layers, keyboard
splits and layers, controller regions, mute groups, crossfading, etc.)
could be added to the plugin. Other functionality that's common to
synths and samplers (filters, envelopes, LFOs, etc.) could either be
added to the plugin, or the dry output of your plugin could be sent to
other plugins in an app like Ingen, allowing your sampler to be passed
through as many filters, effects, etc. as there are plugins supported
by whatever LV2 host is being used.
Just an idea. :)
--
Devin Anderson
devin (at) charityfinders (dot) com
CharityFinders - http://www.charityfinders.com/
synthclone - http://synthclone.googlecode.com/
4:27 a.m.
On 10 June 2011 02:52, Devin Anderson <devin(a)charityfinders.com> wrote:
other plugins in an app like Ingen, allowing your
sampler to be passed
through as many filters, effects, etc. as there are plugins supported
by whatever LV2 host is being used.
I've never figured out where to start with Ingen... My concept of a
modular synth was based on the old ms20+ms50, with some turtlebeach
wavefront software thrown in for good measure (which formed the basis
for wav composer not toilet, and now petri-foo). I've never figured
out how to get from this to the strangeness that Ingen and AMS (and
you can include PD etc in this too) use. To me at least, it's all too
abstracted, a bit too stripped down and taken apart - or there could
just be something quite simple I'm missing - I haven't had the time to
investigate these complex things further.
James.
12:15 p.m.
Excerpts from James Morris's message of 2011-06-10 04:26:58 +0200:
On 10 June 2011 02:52, Devin Anderson
<devin(a)charityfinders.com> wrote:
I know what you mean, modularity is powerful, but it comes at a cost,
especially in the user interface area. This includes for me that it's
often hard to figure out what a module does and how to use it, simply
how it all fits together to make a working thing. I personally found
buzz/aldrin/neil a bit better in that respect.
Philipp
other plugins in an app like Ingen, allowing your
sampler to be passed
through as many filters, effects, etc. as there are plugins supported
by whatever LV2 host is being used.
I've never figured out where to start with Ingen... My concept of a
modular synth was based on the old ms20+ms50, with some turtlebeach
wavefront software thrown in for good measure (which formed the basis
for wav composer not toilet, and now petri-foo). I've never figured
out how to get from this to the strangeness that Ingen and AMS (and
you can include PD etc in this too) use. To me at least, it's all too
abstracted, a bit too stripped down and taken apart - or there could
just be something quite simple I'm missing - I haven't had the time to
investigate these complex things further.
James. 
12 Jun
12 Jun
1:45 p.m.
2011/6/10 James Morris <jwm.art.net(a)gmail.com>om>:
Since working on Petri-Foo I keep returning to the
idea that perhaps
it would be better to add a sampler-waveform to Yoshimi or another
soft-synth. Too bad I'm not that great a coder.
Anyway, the idea seems so obvious now. Are there any good reasons for why not?
Hi James,
I very like petri-foo like it is ... sample player with envelopes and LFOs.
I think synths are different beast then samplers and it is not good
idea to mix them.
Software sampler as I understand them are sample players with some
advanced creative tools (looping, LFO or MIDI controled parameters)
The power of samplers is that you can work with samples from real
world and change them in many way to unreal sounds and back again.
You can't do the same with synths.
petri-foo has unique set of creative tools. I don't like the idea make
it just part of other project.
best regards
mira
4942
days inactive
4945
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
9 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Devin Anderson -
Folderol -
James Morris -
Jaromír Mikeš -
Philipp Überbacher -
Ralf Mardorf