bayswater wrote:
It would get very tricky. You'd need different samples for different amounts of movement and many mulitsamples, because the sound of a hat closing and opening is not very consistent.
It seems to me like it's one of those cases where creating and playing a sampled instrument to this degree gets more complicated and difficult than buying and playing the real thing.
I suppose you could just have however many samples of partially open hats e.g. say, ten (at however many velocities, again, lets say 10). Let's say the pedal position of 0 is open, and 127 is closed. So if the hat is less than 120 closed, then it would just play all ten samples for that particular velocity of hit- the position of the pedal after the hit would just crossfade between the 10 samples. I think that would kind of work. Yea, it would be tricky to implement, but not as bad as all that.
As for your second statement, we can make a grateful differentiation between the complications and difficulty of "CREATING" fake drums to that of just buying and playing. And as far as real vs fake goes, at that price it isn't either/or. Real drums are the staple, and this rig is a fancy way to get work done portably and quietly.
It's no secret that standard electronic drums mostly suck. Or if you want to inch toward ones that suck less, they are thousands of dollars. I saw Prairie Prince playing a cheap electronic drum set with Todd Rundgren, and he was spending having his energy re-tightening things that had fallen apart. The sound was appropriate for this pretty electronic show.
Aerodrums is arguably a bit unconventional-- and we can all agree it would require a bit of a learning curve. And I don't knock the learning curve. Richard proves that it is a legit instrument with that snare demo. And holy smokes for the bread, it seems like a fascinating option.
M1 MBP; OS 12, FF800, DP 11.3, Kontakt 7, Reaktor 6, PC3K7, K2661S, iPad6, Godin XTSA, Two Ibanez 5 string basses (1 fretted, 1 fretless), FM3, SY-1000, etc.
http://www.jonstubbsmusic.com