Sample Modeling's Soprano Sax now ready -- new platform

[mhschmieder]

http://www.samplemodeling.com/en/news.php

[David Polich]

Apparently Sample Modeling is developing a new proprietary platform of
their own for future instruments, as Garritan did with the Aria Player and East West did with the "(much-maligned and buggy) Play engine.

The soprano sax from Sample Modeling ("Ms. Sax S") hasn't been released yet.
They are still testing the new platform. They don't mention this in the "news"
section of their website - you have to log on to their forum to get the
details.

Whatever these guys do, I'll buy it. Hands down the best virtual instruments
I've ever used.

[mhschmieder]

Dave, I'm glad to hear it's a new platform and not the buggy Yellow Tools platform!

[dave pine]

there's something magical about their stuff for sure.

[adriano]

Dave, I'm glad to hear it's a new platform and not the buggy Yellow Tools platform!

Hi mhschmieder,
I found some talk on other forums about Yellow Tools having problems with their platform on previous versions (2.x.x)?
I just want to say that I am not experiencing any issues with Independence Pro 3.0.
At first I thought, I waisted money, because the registration process, it's not straight forward, it really stinks, but once I got passed that and put it to use, I've found that a lot of the sounds are very usable and the new version, it's quite stable.

Adriano

[mhschmieder]

I don't consider it proper to cut/paste content from another forum directly, so here's a link to the VI Control forum discussion of the soprano sax, which includes strategic talk by the developers concerning where Sample Modeling is heading:

http://vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5f939b2e12

Note that there is some possibility the existing sax libraries will be ported to SWAM, and that the strings will probably be implemented on that platform, but the brass (present and future offerings) will remain Kontakt based (it also sounds like the sax libraries, if ported, would remain available on Kontakt as well, except for the soprano, which would require 192 kHz sampling rate which is the original reason they first started looking at alternatives).

[Shooshie]

I don't consider it proper to cut/paste content from another forum directly, so here's a link to the VI Control forum discussion of the soprano sax, which includes strategic talk by the developers concerning where Sample Modeling is heading:

http://vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5f939b2e12

Note that there is some possibility the existing sax libraries will be ported to SWAM, and that the strings will probably be implemented on that platform, but the brass (present and future offerings) will remain Kontakt based (it also sounds like the sax libraries, if ported, would remain available on Kontakt as well, except for the soprano, which would require 192 kHz sampling rate which is the original reason they first started looking at alternatives).

I have not downloaded the demo to see how it works, but I heard the demo track in the thread on the forum to which you linked us, and I'm surprised that so many people gush over this, and not over the Wallander instruments saxes. The reason I say this is because it sounds like they've modeled a particular style of sax sound, which happens to be one that isn't very useful to me. I heard the same criticism levied at Wallander, though I've found that I can reprogram WIVI to get just about any sax sound I want. Is that also possible with the Lucato/Tommasini sax? The sound I hear is of a heavily EQ'd sax fairly typical of certain players who carefully craft their sound with electronic effects rather than at the level of the reed and airstream. Nor does it sound very real as played, though that would change for the better with a MIDI wind controller. (was performed in the example with keyboard and expression pedal) So, I guess what I'm wondering (but don't want to have to download and experiment to find out -- call me lazy!) is whether these instruments allow for radical reprogramming, like WIVI.

Shooshie

[David Polich]

Shooshie, the answer is no, you can't get a multitude of sax sounds
out of a single Sample Modeling sax (other than by using different EQ
and effects processing, of course).

Here's the thing - Wallander is optimized for breath controllers. It
isn't really a VI for keyboard players. The Sample Modeling stuff,
while it does feature full breath controller implementation, is
really optimized for keyboard players. Controller 11 (via foot pedal)
is really paramount in playing the Sample Modeling instruments.
"Expression" really does sum it up - without heavy use of the foot
pedal senidng controller 11, the Sample Modeling instruments don't
really work well at all.

Wallander is a different type of VI. The Sample Modeling stuff is
stellar, at least as far as my own experience goes. I have every one of
their releases except the new soprano sax. I haven't found any other
solo trumpets, trombones, or saxes that come anywhere close.

Ironically, the demos on the Sample Modeling website aren't very
well-done, with the exception of the Trumpet demo. The guys who did
the demos obviously played the instruments like they were minimoogs.
Somebody needs to do some better demos for the SM instruments, especially the saxes. 'Cause I can guarantee you, the instruments are MUCH better than
the demos suggest.

[Shooshie]

Here's the thing - Wallander is optimized for breath controllers. It
isn't really a VI for keyboard players.

Au contraire! I think you're absolutely off-target there, David, which I have to say is rare for you. Apparently you have not been following the development of Wallander's WIVI. It is the most customizable, first-rate VI on the market. And it is designed for keyboard players, but very much enhanced by Breath Control and/or Expression pedals. Essentially you can assign ANY continuous controller number to ANY parameter, which makes things automatable OR playable (live) to a degree previously unheard of.

It now includes envelopes for keyboard players, to get as close as possible to the sound you want, and the envelopes are customizable far beyond what most synths and samplers allow. The ability to perform section-work live, and to assign instruments to various parts of the chords as they go divisi, makes it very powerful for keyboardists -- something that MIDI Wind controllers actually have no use for since they are monophonic by design. The interface for WIVI has become incredibly sophisticated; way beyond its origins a few years back. Then there is the acoustics side of it… There's not room here to describe that alone.

Wallander is a different type of VI. The Sample Modeling stuff is
stellar, at least as far as my own experience goes. I have every one of
their releases except the new soprano sax. I haven't found any other
solo trumpets, trombones, or saxes that come anywhere close.

WIVI is different, all right, but only in that it is so customizable that some people might be left shaking their heads and wondering what to do. Fortunately, you can double-click on any attribute and a pop-up will tell you in great detail how that attribute works and how to use it. Anyone who can't make their instruments completely believable in WIVI hasn't spent enough time at them. Of course, then we get into each person's subjective opinion of what's believable and what isn't. But I think that you or I could take a recording of any wind or brass player and probably get at least 95% of his/her sound, if not 100%, depending on our ability to actually play their style.

Then, consider that there are about 170 instruments available in WIVI, including many brass and winds that you rarely hear, and that the majority of them sound at the top of their niches, I'd say that WIVI is the most formidable competitor out there, next to VSL, and even VSL's instruments are pretty one-dimensional compared to WIVI.

Ironically, the demos on the Sample Modeling website aren't very
well-done, with the exception of the Trumpet demo. The guys who did
the demos obviously played the instruments like they were minimoogs.
Somebody needs to do some better demos for the SM instruments, especially the saxes. 'Cause I can guarantee you, the instruments are MUCH better than
the demos suggest.

Same goes for Wallander. I don't understand it. Virtually everything I've done in WIVI sounds better than their demos. But that's the way these things tend to be.

I've basically given up trying to convince people about Wallander and WIVI. If they're lucky enough to buy it and give it a fair shake, they'll convert themselves. Otherwise, it's hard to compete with the marketing of some of these other libraries, including Sample Modeling. Having listened to the saxes since their first one, and to many people's examples of their trumpet, I can agree that Sample Modeling's instruments are very, very good. But they are too narrowly focused. VSL's instruments are incredible, but also narrowly focused (per instrument). When you need instruments that can be made to behave like the real thing with different sounds in different situations, you have only one choice that I'm aware of: WIVI.

My opinion, but I'm sticking with it until someone overwhelms me with some music from another library. Believe me, I'm open to improvement! I just don't find it gets any better even when I'm looking even in the best places. Again, SM's instruments are first-rate, but it seems to me that you must be happy with what you get. As an instrumentalist, I need instruments I can change to suit the personality of each piece. In WIVI, I can even model them after specific players. You can assign vibrato depth to Aftertouch, if you wish, and vibrato speed to a pedal. Put dynamics on another Expression pedal. Add mod wheels or sliders for things like smearing the sound, brightness of timbre, or even to modify the envelope in real time, and you get something very powerful on keyboard.

I know we disagree on this, David, but until you actually give the current WIVI a real try, you're not going to know what you can do with it. Arnie's demo with all the controls locked up doesn't tell you much. I've begged Arnie to open up his demo and let people try all the controls. So far I don't think he's changed it, though I probably wouldn't know if he had, since I own every instrument he's made, and no longer need any demos. I hope someday you get a chance to try the fully-enabled library for real. With your skills at creating sounds, I think you'd be hitting home runs left and right. Once you found the three or four controls that you need the most, you could set up sounds instantly. For that matter, once you have saved a sound, you can open it in any WIVI ensemble, or you can save the ensembles, with or without the room acoustics. Like I said, this thing is deep.

Shooshie

[dave pine]

great, 2 brilliant musicians arguing, love it, hey shooze, i haven't actually got to play wallender, so i can't comment on that, but i use the sample modeling stuff, and play it from a MIDI guitar, the thing about sample modeling is the way it plays, the way it's programmed, a lot of time even mistakes make it sound more real, it really is different than all other vi's i own, and i own a ton of them.

carry on....... ding ding ding .....round 3?

[Shooshie]

Well, tell me. Is there a fully-functioning demo? Or is it stripped down of features that unlock only when you buy it? I'm happy with what I have, and I have no desire for another instrument -- especially one that costs several hundred dollars. But if Sample Modeling wanted an honest review, and if they feel their instrument(s) would stand up next to WIVI, I'd be happy to do a straightforward, honest comparison between them and publish it in one of the journals.

I was sent some saxes a few years back by another company, I won't say who, for review. I was disturbed that they were so bad, but were being marketed as if they were the best saxes you could ever hope for. I politely removed them from my hard drive, deleted all the files, and did NOT write the review. I told the company that I could not write the review that I'd like to give anyone who has put their hard work into a product, so I'd rather not say anything at all, and I thanked them for asking.

I know I wouldn't have to do that to Sample Modeling, because the demo tracks I'm hearing show that it's got a lot going for it. But until I try it and poke around at its innards, I'm not really going to know how it compares to WIVI.

WIVI isn't perfect. Sometimes when an instrument is playing alone I can hear an ever-so-faint tap at the change of notes. But other times the same instrument plays without any such noise. I've searched high and low for the parameter that's causing this, but I have not found it. When it doesn't do it, I just consider myself lucky. In ensemble work you normally don't hear it. If I could get Arnie to track down that one thing, I believe WIVI would be unsurpassable. But intermittent problems are very hard to track down.

But the trouble with saxophones in general is that the instrument is a chameleon. It can sound like a flute, oboe, trumpet, electric guitar with effects, and sometimes even a violin. Not to mention a thousand sounds that have no name, other than "wrong." When I hear samplers and modelers going after the sax, I usually hear something like Kenny G, or Wayne Shorter. Both have highly stylized sounds, and I don't want to imitate them. Kenny's sound cannot be created on a saxophone alone; it depends heavily on EQ and effects to give it its signature. Why would we emulate that in a VI? Why not start with the REAL sound, and allow us to add effects to do the same thing or something different? Some sax samples sound like a grungy blues player. VSL's saxes sound like a Dutch classical player. This is a problem. People think the sound they hear is what a sax sounds like. It's not. There is no "sax sound." Each mouthpiece and reed produce a different characteristic. Each player makes each mouthpiece and reed sound radically different. I'm not talking about the difference between two oboes or clarinets or trumpets. I'm talking "barely recognizable that they came from the same kind of instrument."

This is why I would hope that Sample Modeling would allow us to change that sax sound radically at its source: the formant. There is where the biggest change in character can be effected. Then EQ. If it produces only the sound that I've heard, then we're stuck with some sound on the pathway between a jazz sound and Kenny G., and that just doesn't work for many situations. Thus, my inquiry up above somewhere in this thread.

I just wanted to explain that I'm not doing this to be contrary. Companies have got to know that when they tackle a sax sound, they've got to make it very flexible. Otherwise, it fits only a tiny percentage of what saxes can do. Why would anyone want to sound like Kenny G? Mr. G already sounds like that, and to emulate that is almost a copyright infringement. People who make sax sounds should listen more before they begin working.


Shooshie

[mhurwitz]

Definitely check out Broadway Big Band's soprano sax. It's great-- very coltrane.

MOH

[David Polich]

Shooshie, I'm not saying Wallander isn't great. I did try the original demo
and my experience with that wasn't good. I guess I'm basing my perception on
that, and as you stated, the demo doesn't show off the VI very well.

So I'll retract what I said about Wallander. But I'll still stand by my
statement about the Sample Modeling stuff. The demos are European - so
there ya go. They love Kenny G there. It's a mentality. I would expect that
a demo of their soprano sax would be a Kenny G. sound-alike. But that doesn't mean the instrument has to sound like that. It's easy to confuse what was played with how the instrument sounds.

Your point about the formant thing - you're more detail-oriented about that than I am. I call up the Sample Modeling tenor sax, it sounds just fine
to me. Works in a track, and I don't get the reaction of "nice sample" from
clients. They ask who the sax player was. That's enough for me.

Sorry there really aren't downloadable demos of the SM instruments. I think
they're awesome and they work for me. My search for virtual trumpets, trombone, and saxophones is over. But that doesn't mean Wallander isn't a
great product as well.

[Saxtracksonline]

Fogetaboutit! use a real saxophone player http://www.saxtracksonline.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
and hear the difference.

[David Polich]

Fogetaboutit! use a real saxophone player http://www.saxtracksonline.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
and hear the difference.

Andy, that's some nice playing there. I agree, a real player is always
preferable.

The value of virtual instruments for us keyboard players is that the better
the virtual instrument, the easier it is for us to mock up an arrangement
and the clearer the communication of what we'd like a real player to do.
Typically, I'll mock up guitar arrangements using virtual guitars, then
when I hand the demo to a guitar player, they get the idea immediately, not
only style wise, but amp and tone-wise as well.

Having a good virtual sax for me is invaluable because even if I hear
the sax part in my head, the virtual sax will give me a good idea of
whether my part will really work, or if it sucks. I'd rather do that
ahead of time than waste any player's time (and my money) "figuring it out".