15 Jun
2004
15 Jun
'04
10:13 a.m.
Hi all!
Besides widgte-level gui standards another topic for
general usability is terminology. Naming of concepts
like sessions, banks, presets, patches and so on.
I expect quite some resistance about renaming stuff
in existing apps, but a guideline would still be a
good thing for future developments and minimizing
confusion.
So I would like to hear of personal preferences
and known differences in naming on existing apps.
Of special interest to me is naming and structure of
the different organizational levels of samplers.
And a specific questions: what is thought to be the
best approach to allow both having multiple samples
with greatly varying setups of filters/amps/etc
(drumkits) and multiple samples for chromatic
instruments with smooth changes of filter/amp/etc
settings?
Thanks in advance for any input!
---
Thorsten Wilms
15 Jun
15 Jun
1:31 p.m.
Hallo,
Thorsten Wilms hat gesagt: // Thorsten Wilms wrote:
Besides widgte-level gui standards another topic for
general usability is terminology. Naming of concepts
like sessions, banks, presets, patches and so on.
Puh, that will be a hard one, as audio applications tend to be very
different, not only in terminology. Pd doesn't know "sessions" or
"bank", Ardour doesn't now "messages" or "bang"s, AMS
doesn't know
about "tracks", all because those things aren't used by them. One
could try to make the naming in similar apps the same, like in Ardour
and MuSE, but they already are most of the time.
Of special interest to me is naming and structure of
the different organizational levels of samplers.
I have to ask: what is a sampler to you?
And a specific questions: what is thought to be the
best approach to allow both having multiple samples
with greatly varying setups of filters/amps/etc
(drumkits) and multiple samples for chromatic
instruments with smooth changes of filter/amp/etc
settings?
I sincerly don't understand what you are talking about here. ;(
Maybe you could explain with an example? But maybe we just think
different when thinking of samplers...
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
2:26 p.m.
On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 05:22:38PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Well, sure it's not always possible to draw a line.
For me a true sampler follows the tradition of fairlight and akai,
with a mostly fixed sound architecture and the sole use of
samples as first step of sound generation.
But even with systems that go beyond that, there are still
comparable organizational matters. Assigning samples to
note and velocity ranges, combining that with the setup
of the following synthesis structure ...
For a drumkit I need different setups of amp and filter
settings/envelopes for each drumsound.
But having to adjust amp and filter settings/envelopes
for each range of a multisampled piano in isolation would
be bad.
So for an app or device that is specialized in sampling,
there should be a structure that supports both, with
out resulting in the complexities of a truly modular
system.
So far I think of the following:
- Sample: just the naked sample
- Multisamples: a selection of samples, each assigned to
velocity and/or note ranges.
- Patch: a Sample or Multisample and the setup of the
sound architecture (filter, amp ...).
- Multipatch: a selection of Patches, each assigned to
velocity and/or note ranges.
So a Multipatch would be the way to go for a drumkit.
But there's overlapping in having ranges for both
Multisamples and Multipatches.
Besides clumsy naming I guess Akai and others must
have come up with their own solutions. But I couldn't
find information about that. Guess I have to search
for userguides, if people here don't know about
examples.
---
Thorsten Wilms
Puh, that will be a hard one, as audio applications tend to be very
different, not only in terminology. Pd doesn't know "sessions" or
"bank", Ardour doesn't now "messages" or "bang"s, AMS
doesn't know
about "tracks", all because those things aren't used by them. One
could try to make the naming in similar apps the same, like in Ardour
and MuSE, but they already are most of the time.
OK, but looking at softsynths (at least non-modular ones) it
would be to bad to have program, patch, preset used for
the same thing.
If the naming between Ardour and MuSe is partly the same,
that could well be the base for a guideline.
Of special
interest to me is naming and structure of
the different organizational levels of samplers.
I have to ask: what is a sampler to you? And a specific
questions: what is thought to be the
best approach to allow both having multiple samples
with greatly varying setups of filters/amps/etc
(drumkits) and multiple samples for chromatic
instruments with smooth changes of filter/amp/etc
settings?
I sincerly don't understand what you are talking about here. ;(
Maybe you could explain with an example? But maybe we just think
different when thinking of samplers...
4:02 p.m.
Hallo,
Thorsten Wilms hat gesagt: // Thorsten Wilms wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 05:22:38PM +0200, Frank
Barknecht wrote:
Ah, okay. It seems you look at it from a hardware model. As I never
used electronic sound hardware this is often hard to follow for me.
(ALthough now my standard rant on software designed after hardware
could follow... ;)
I have to ask: what is a sampler to you?
Well, sure it's not always possible to draw a line.
For me a true sampler follows the tradition of fairlight and akai,
with a mostly fixed sound architecture and the sole use of
samples as first step of sound generation. But even with systems that go beyond that, there are
still
comparable organizational matters. Assigning samples to
note and velocity ranges, combining that with the setup
of the following synthesis structure ...
Okay, to me a sampler is much more general: It's something which plays
back recorded sounds. Note and velocityi, filters and all this don't
belong to the sampler in my model - they are just one way to use a
sampler there, whereas there could be hundreds of others, the most
widely known of it probably are DJ-scratching and sample arranging in
Ardour.
But I think I do understand you now. You're more talking about a
keyboard-synthesizer-like instrument (maybe without keys).
I can't say much about these kinds of instruments, so I'll better stop
now.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
4:40 p.m.
On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 07:53:54PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Ah, okay. It seems you look at it from a hardware model. As I never
used electronic sound hardware this is often hard to follow for me.
(ALthough now my standard rant on software designed after hardware
could follow... ;)
Glad you left that out, since I could write it myself ;)
The model was developed on specialized hardware, but for me
the hardware model is not the point, but solely the benefits
of a fixed architecture: easy to understand, fast to handle.
I'm all for the flexibility of modular systems, but often enough
I want rather common sounds, that can be achieved with fixed
systems much faster, without the danger of getting lost in
buidling up complicated structures.
Okay, to me a sampler is much more general: It's
something which plays
back recorded sounds. Note and velocityi, filters and all this don't
belong to the sampler in my model - they are just one way to use a
sampler there, whereas there could be hundreds of others, the most
widely known of it probably are DJ-scratching and sample arranging in
Ardour.
Clearly the modular system definition of sampler, and it's more
to the point.
---
Thorsten Wilms
7261
days inactive
7261
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Frank Barknecht -
Thorsten Wilms