Unity 3, Sample Libraries, and GigaSampler Envy

[jon2u]

My first topic! http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/tongue.gif Unity 3 from Bitheadz is around the corner. It sounds like a contender to Halion and ESX24. Will it measure up to GigaSampler? I'm a Digital Performer user who wants GigaSampler for the Mac. Since that will never happen, it leaves us Halion, ESX24 (for Logic), SampleTank and now Unity 3. The general impression seems to be that Gigasampler has the best sound because of its feature set. I am always asking myself questions about the software sampler/soft synth revolution that appears to be in progress. I'd love to hear your opinions. (Some of this may sound as if I'm speaking to the manufacturers.) 1. Is there anything about the software samplers themselves that actually change the sound quality of the sample libraries? I don't want to tweak with filters. Just want to play right out of the box. People say that Halion imported GigaSampler libraries don't sound quite as good as in Gigasampler itself. Does this mean that Unity 3 won't have a Gigasampler sound as well? Do I have to buy that PC? 2. If hard drive streaming is improved in Halion and Unity 3, will they be on a par with GigaSampler? (latency, kernels, and polyphony not being issues) 3. Bitheadz has a set of existing sample libraries. One of them is the Miroslav Mini orchestral library for Unity DS-1. The Miroslave Mini is also available as a Gigasampler format CD. Which do you think would sound better on Unity 3? The original DS-1 CD taylored to Unity? Or importing the GigaSampler CD into Unity 3? Tough question which I posted to Bitheadz. 4. To the sample lib mfgs. If I switch software samplers every now and then, and if I purchase a sample library from you, will you will offer some reasonably priced option to upgrade or purchase a different format of the same product? All we're asking for is fairness. 5. Should the software sampler and library mfgs provide one or two raw samples of their product so that users can hear samples out of the box? People seem to buy sample libraries and then comment that they are not close to the demo. The raw samples would help. Also tell us when a library CD is different than a demo. Demos are sometimes the same—for example with the Advanced Orchestra or Miroslav demos you're not certain if your Mini version has all of the sounds on the demo. 6. Are there any future plans for "lite" versions of the big hitters regarding orchestral libraries? 7. Can prices be lowered for high-end sample libraries? I know you deserve these prices on high-end products but high prices limit your market. There is likely a large college market waiting to be tapped for music curriculum that can use sequencers, software samplers and sample CDs. I would think that every college music department would have a computer lab (read many computers) that could be used for orchestration, composition, theory, electronic music, recording engineer programs, ear training. Come on, hurry up and lower those prices, give us "lite" versions, and hit those markets. I am available (to teach college) at a high salary. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif I believe that today's student composers would be empowered to know that they could realize their compositions and orchestrations on computer/sampling workstations. Students don't often get real orchestras, or even woodwind or string quartets, to perform their music. I wish I had today's technology when I was a student. Other markets? Take it one level down to high school. Do you think you could interest a high school class to write, perform and record the music they like on a cpu/sampling workstation? You bet. These are markets—and maybe with the right teachers the answer to all of society's problems. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/tongue.gif 8. When will we have samplers and sample libraries that load as ready-to-play instruments? My tweaking days are over. I just want to play and write music, fast. Can't all of the layering, key mappings and velocities be "built-in" and invisible to the user? None of us wants to agonize over tweaking attacks and things that we read are necessary to get "MIDI mock-ups" to be more realistic. Why can't the samples (with layering and key velocities) be pre-built and more realistic to begin with? Perhaps along the lines of how current synths model their sounds? (I know I'm being simplistic here. Just hoping.) 9. Final question. (Yea!) What are these UVIs? Universal instruments? Samples, or sound modules? Will these compete with the soft samplers? And, how do they sound? I apologize to everyone for this long post, but I have been holding this in for a long time. Now, I won't explode. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif If some of you are going to MacWorld SF or NAMM, please let us know how the sampler wars are faring. Thanks all. I hope my happy faces are positioned correctly. John

[imusic]

Hi John gigasampler is indeed the best softsampler you can get for money. The reason for that is simply you have to buy a computer to run it smoothly. It means there is a dedicated hardware for a software package (the same like a hardware sampler). I for myself have great success with a LOGIC with EXS24 setup, I am absolutely happy with it, no latency and great sound (booth on protools hardware and asio-, soundmanager hardware). The sound has just something to do with your converters of your soundhardware, ... It's also clear that native soundformats are better than converted ones!!! Well, a sample is just as good as you use it, all the demos are made by pros, who really known how to deal with the stuff. Do not expect you will write great music just because you bought a fancy soundlibrary-you really have to invest in your skills and how to deal with your library. Hope that helps, keep on rockin in 2002 ag

[jon2u]

ag, Thanks for your reply. Your comments do help and give me a little more understanding. (Even though I read a lot, you learn the most from people actually using the stuff.) By the way, I did see a demo of the upcoming Logic 5 with ESX24 and other components. It certainly is hot and the integration is a big selling point. From your comments, I am beginning to suspect that "Giga/CPU as it's own hardware sampler" is a big part of the answer. How does Hans Zimmer get his incredible results? It's a given that you need incredible talent in composing and orchestration. But is the "realism" of the sound due to using multiple GigaStudio workstations (and the London Symphony samples)? I would guess that each Giga "instrument" has a multitude of layered or key velocity samples that functions as perhaps one powerful "orchestral" instrument. Perhaps the cellos are one Giga/cpu instrument with many samples of layers and articulations. Then an orchestra of many Giga/cpu instruments is comparable to a whole rack of Emu samplers. Both solutions get incredible results. But wouldn't it be nice to think that we could use a good software sampler and native CD sample libraries, either on its own cpu, or on the sequencer cpu with less polyphony, and get results that are pretty good? And if native samples are better sounding then I would hope that the companies begin porting the GigaSampler libraries to the other native formats rather than just labeling them as import-capable. Regardless, I'm just starting and it will take me a while to get to a nice hardware/software composing studio. So I'll begin with one of the Mac samplers and a couple of sample libraries and build from there. Thanks again iMusic. Great name for an internet site. John PS. I should have posted this thread on the Giga vs. Halion thread, but I wanted to open up the conversation to samplers in general. Don't know how to transfer it so I'll leave it.