- This topic has 8 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I had an idea for some time now, to have a program that can control synths and record samples from the same synth, with all the defined variations as sample packs. Ctrlr can control all parameters of a synth, automating those parameters (chosen ones that affect the sound in a way you define) and recording the audio output as samples, then packing them in some format (soundfont i think) that corporates those changes. This way you have on-disk sample packs with programs you can take and load anywhere. I was just thinking if this makes any sense and anyone would be interested in this.
I had this idea for some years now (i think i came up with this when i was still in college) but disk capacity then was much smaller, but nowadays with RAM and disks beeing cheap this might actually be useful, i think.
Any thoughts/ideas on this ?
If I really can be honestly – I can’t see the big benefit for me so that I would change my current workflow of sampling (IF I do it.. I do in my DAW/host anyway).
Another thought: Because I like to use (and can imagine many others do aswell) multible Ctrlr plugins within a host project – I’m asking myself: when Ctrlr would become a multi tool (with sampler) if the CPU/RAM/whatever usage will increase? Even if each single Ctrlr plugin "just" would need 2% of my CPU… 15 Ctrlrs still would need together 30% of my CPU – this would be too much for my purposes – particulary when I don’t need the sampler function.Further thoughts: Much more I would love if the current focus of Ctrlr v5 development is more localised in the "source idea" of Ctrlr to achieve a 100% working "hardware/software-interation-bridge". Certainly I don’t know the point of time when you maybe like to implement this sampler but it would be nice to finish the basic idea before starting a completely new one (not alone because new implemented functions always causing new problems/bugs)… in the current Ctrlr version there are still some features which are not implemented (e.g. receive/translate Sysex dumps), not finished programmed features and main bugs (e.g. MIDI input breaks).
Then if the basic idea (a hardware/software bridge) of Ctrlr is ready programmed – it would be great to arrange first a bigger beta-test (with more users) to get Ctrlr 100% bugfree and that it runs on every system without any problems. Then we could gain a rock solid base for further ideas (maybe a Ctrlr v5.1?).Of course this is just my individual opinion – the decision is yours and I’m curious about further thoughts…
” title=”Smile” />i expect the CPU usage to only go down, not up. And i can’t say that this is something i want to do before achieving a "TotalIntegration" point when Ctrlr will understand the hardware, that’s a priority. This is just a loose idea i had around for some time.
Yeah ok, you just have to know that I’m a bit paranoid when thinking about implementing new features again.
” title=”Wink” /> Actually Ctrlr already offers (almost) everything you need for hardware integration (at least for me).
Because of new features (often they caused new bugs – but this behaviour is common) there wasn’t a Ctrlr version until now which works for me and which I like to use in a project (Maschine/Mac) – that’s why I’m really curious about the upcoming release…I think it’s a pretty brilliant idea. Currently, the best way I know how to make a multi-sample instrument(patch) from a hardware synth is a real chore. A program designed to do this in an automated way would be something new, potentially VERY useful, and potentially very advantageous to those who cant afford extra voices(hardware). If you’re idea came to fruition, think about the potential it could bring out of any monosynth! I like this idea, for a many reasons. If this program could also recreate the same parametr maps/controls for the multi-sample instrument then I think it’d be a winner.
Cpu usage would go down, however disk read/write speed/usage would be taxed. I’ve want an SSD….
Correct me when I’m wrong, but I can’t find the passage in which atom was writing about "multi sampling" – would this be possible (of course it will, but could it be done easy with just one click)? Appart from "multi sampling": Where is the big advantage to do this in Ctrlr and not in your DAW? For me a DAW is already a perfect "sampler", you can zoom in/out very precise, you can copy/paste/cut different parts of the sample (and find the "zero flat point") very easy, you can mix effects to your sample, you can reverse the sample, …. anything I can imagine is already possible – honestly, do I miss the benefit if Ctrlr would be possible to do sampling aswell? Please give an example.
Another thought: In the last years I absolutely prefer analogue synths. Though I really love my audio interface, everytime when I’m doing A/D conversions I’m a bit afraid about the digital character it gets. To be added that different samplers have different soundqualities. Whats about the soundquality of Ctrlr? If this sampler function will be implemented: Will Ctrlr be able to keep up with the audio quality of other professional samplers? Or depends the recording quality just 100% on the quality of your A/D converter and the format you choose? Maybe the audio differences of samplers just depend on how they PLAY the sample (not record!)?
well you can’t really make sample recording "better" then what you sound card can do, you can do it better when playing them back (there was a test online comparing most of todays samplers, the best that came out was Reason and FLstudio). But Ctrlr would not be the playback for those samples, just the creator of a given sample pack, like i wrote this would be packed in some format that other DAW’s/Plugins/SAmplers would understand and use (SF2, SFZ, if needed AIFF/WAV failes with some meta information).
There’s an application for pc only called extreme sample converter, which supposedly does this. I’ve never used it for making sample packs from MIDI synths but I bought it to convert akai sample programs and multis to various formats (nki and xrns for kontakt and renoise respectively). It is an awesome utility. You can build sample programs and multis with it from scratch, assign keygroupings, velocity groups etc etc..
I’m not suggesting you not take something like this on, atom, but I do suggest you look at ESC before taking a stab at this… I haven’t had much luck (at all) with getting in touch with the developers to find out when the next rev might be available but maybe you could have better luck if you’d be interested in "picking his brain"
Monstrum Media | Music, Sound & Software Design, Chicago / San Francisco listen
- The forum ‘Programming’ is closed to new topics and replies.