October 26, 2014, 10:41:58 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email
News: Arturia's webmaster is glad to offer you these brand new forums ! Have fun using it and feel free to email any encountered problem at webmaster@arturia.com.

Arturia Forums



Author Topic: Brass! True or false?  (Read 25996 times)

Sweep

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 243
  • Karma: 7
Brass! True or false?
« Reply #15 on: January 03, 2006, 02:01:20 pm »
While I was writing my last post you've posted again.

This shouldn't need saying, but there is no `inner circle.' Instruments require people who spend the time and effort required to learn to play them. You seem to have a problem with that when it comes to softsynths, for some reason.

jaxtone

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: 0
Sweep
« Reply #16 on: January 03, 2006, 02:23:34 pm »
I started up with a music production kit in the late -80´s. Built on sequensers and hardware synths. I programmed those machines a lot but felt that this was very much to walk around the target of what I really wanted to do. Today I must admit I mostly work with sampled instruments cause I have found that this is just as close to the real thing you can come. And it might be true if I say my expectations were that Arturia Brass almost 20 years later were more up to date...

About the inner circle it was more of a sarcastic joke on Tony´s protectionism than a serious accusation.

J
Listen!

Tony Ostinato

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Karma: 0
Brass! True or false?
« Reply #17 on: January 03, 2006, 03:09:40 pm »
So you cant play real brass and youre a samplerhead, i was right. You have no modeler chops, also right.

The funny thig is that Yamaha had the same problem with you guys when the introduced the VL1, it had a keyboard and immediately keyboardists said the EXACT same thing "it sounds like a kazoo"

in reality it was just them being stupid, so in a smart move yamaha REMOVED the keyboard and since then the vl70m has been one of their most succesful synths.


but rather than even make a beginners effort at comprehension you resort to infantile insults in order to defend your fantasy that theres no instrument you cant master in an hour.


you said "but do you really mean that Arturias products are only for you guys? It sounds like it and you say so but I wonder if Arturia really want it to be that way? Are you sure and have checked with their sale team first? "

which really proves you to be a moron, which youd know if you read anything i linked to.


yamaha used Cal tech/ Stanford to do physics modeling for the vl series including VL70m

arturia used IRCAM to likewise do physics modeling for brass

they are both exactly the same type of acoustic physics modelers
 
they are the only 2 available.

arturia includes demos played by a windsynth

arturia clearly states its a model, every moron knows an accurate trumpet model wont be played on the first day by a noob

and only a complete and utter noob could think garritan and brass are competing products

SAMPLERS AND MODELERS ARE NOT FOR THE SAME PURPOSES.


your problem is you want brass to be another sample bank and god thats boring, we already have like a dozen or so of those, but not only that you want physics modeling BANNED because YOU CANT PLAY IT.

im quite certain if anyone from arturia is reading this that theyd agree im the only one who "gets it", and i bet they appreciate it because ANY COMPANY CAN TOSS TOGETHER A SAMPLE BANK YOU CAN PLAY FROM YOUR MIDI KEYBOARD WITH A LITTLE VIBRATO ON THE MOD WHEEL AND FILTER ON THE FILTER WHEEL BUT IT TAKES HUGE INSTITUTIONS YEARS OF WORK TO CREATE REALISTICALLY PLAYABLE MODELS.

and realistically playable doesnt mean a guitar player will learn it in an hour. thats what SAMPLERS ARE FOR and only MORONS would get them MIXED UP.

before responding with more gradeschoolisms i recommend you read this:

http://www.patchmanmusic.com/WindControllerFAQ.html

and especially this which is contained:

So what's so special about the Yamaha VL70-m?
What's the difference between samplers and physical modeling type synthesis?
Samples can easily always sound better than a synthesized sound in a single dimension. But sounds have another dimension for most of us wind controller players- that is, they need to respond and be played and adapt to the musical demand. Samples are merely a snippet of a real recording so I would expect them to sound as good as any CD recording of that instrument playing. Essentially, that's all samples are anyway. The problem is when you try to manipulate the sample and play it expressively or differently than how it was originally recorded. You run into insurmountable problems once you try to do expressive things that are not already recorded into the samples. A sampler's filters and layers only go so far. I've tried to find ways around it with just about every sampler made. But when you start to get down to trying expressive things that really matter with samples you end up hitting the wall of limitations- at least given our current technology.

For example, let's say you want to crescendo a simple flute sound from ppp to fff. Ok, you need some samples of a flute at several different levels. A soft flute sounds far different than a loud flute that is blown hard. So you sample them. You create 50 layers of flute samples. You can even crossfade them so that different samples come in and out as you blow. But along that slope you either have to hard switch between the samples or crossfade between them. If you hard switch between them, that sounds completely unnatural as you hear the switch. If you crossfade them you will have to be hearing more than one sample in some proportion at the boundaries and that sounds unnatural. You would need to match the pitch exactly so you don't get chorusing- but samplers aren't generally phase locked so you will get some weird out of phase composite sound or actual cancellation of sound. Real flutes don't do that either so that sounds unnatural. On the VL since it is a true synthesizer with no samples, with the proper patch, you simply blow harder and the overtones are created and added as on a real flute.

Then we have the issue of slurring with samples which no sampler can really do right. That's a mess with samplers. At some point you need to switch samples within the slur. Currently samplers cannot do a realtime crossfade between adjacent samples. So you either overlap them slightly which is unnatural, or you hard switch between them which is unnatural, or you change the sample playback rate which is too smooth and causes a "chipmunk" effect which is unnatural. If you can't play a simple slurred melody on a sampler, I'd say that's a pretty big problem with samplers. On a VL, you can slur easily and the timbre changes properly and smoothly. The VL even reacts to how you are playing. It reacts to the previous notes that were played and how you tongue, and the slope of your breath etc... People need to realize this. The physically modeled synth is a dynamically responsive instrument like a real acoustic instrument.

There are other significant problems with samplers. After thinking about it for years, I decided that the only way to even POSSIBLY do it right with today's mainstream technology is with physical modeling. So I decided to commit nearly a year of my life to trying to make the VL's physical modeling sounds as close to real as possible. I realize that the VL Voices are not 100% perfect copies of real instruments, but I think they are far better, more realistic, and more natural to play than any sampler could be capable of. Personally, I'd go as far as to say that the timbre on the many of the TURBO VL sounds is also as good as a sampler and approaches the sound of the real thing.

You could offer me the biggest Gigasampler setup with every Gigasampler CD ROM ever created and I'd still choose my TURBO VL70-m for playing with my wind controller. Once you play a VL and get used to it, playing samples will feel very unsatisfying no matter how good the samples are. Once you are used to the responsive interaction you get from the VL, you will easily sense the "lack of control" feeling you get when playing samples. Playing samples feels like you are triggering a sound. Playing a physically modeled sound feels like you are interacting directly with the sound. The Yamaha VL line of synthesizers employs Physical Modeling to create their sound. This type of synthesis is vastly different from anything else. Physical modeling synthesizers can actually respond to HOW you are playing just like an acoustic instrument. You can play middle C three different ways and it will sound three different ways depending on if you are coming from an adjacent note or a note a large interval away, or if you slurred into it or tongued into it or if you were bending into it, etc...

I'm amazed to discover new characteristics of these instruments every time I play them. Try playing a VL tenor sax very softly and listen how the sound almost magically goes from breath noise to a defined pitch, or play very staccato and listen how the horn resonates, or play very fast and listen to how the instrument might squeak or skips octaves. You really need to play an instrument for a decent amount of time to understand all of its complexity. It's an amazing feeling the first time you play a VL tenor sax and skip down an octave- the sound doesn't just jump the octave but it instead resonates to the lower harmonic. Or a VL Tin Whistle can actually jump an octave as you blow harder just like on the real thing.

Another example: It is possible to do true lip shakes on VL brass patches. Not only that but the VL knows to shake a major second from high "Bb" to high "C" but it knows to shake a minor third from high "G" to high "Bb". It can follow the true harmonic series of a real trumpet. Along these lines. I've experimented with actually controlling the embouchure with the bite pressure on my EVI to simulate the way a bugle or trumpet player can skip harmonics with the lips. It works, but it's hard to control it this way. All that's needed is for someone to build a trumpet controller with an embouchure sensor and we've got a "virtual trumpet". On trumpet patches it is even possible to split notes between the mode breaks!



and heres some more on acoustic physical modeling:

http://enlightenedsystems.com/vl/vl.htm


patchman make soundbanks for modelers AND ALSO SAMPLERS for brass and wind players.

nobody understands them more, not even you, and they clearly understand the differences and benefits of each.

i mean before you further ignorantly criticize arturia be aware that they are THE ONLY PLUGIN COMPANY brave enough to be making a acoustics physical modeling plugin.

There are DOZENS of companies doing ROMPLERS, ISNT THAT ENOUGH??

jaxtone

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: 0
Tony Ostinato
« Reply #18 on: January 03, 2006, 03:52:56 pm »
Wow!

So you ask me to leave this place and call me a moroon... interesting way to meet my personally points of view. I am not impressed of the level on your replies but actually understand what things you miss most in life.

Humour and a hug. So here they are... first the humour and then the hug!

PS. If you can prove that your self promotion of your excellent knowledge can make the Arturian saxophone kazoo sound like a real instrument then I will reconsider my thoughts of Brass. If you also can support with a  time schedule and effort of energy to reach a natural sound I will be convinced. Not before that!
Listen!

Tony Ostinato

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Karma: 0
Brass! True or false?
« Reply #19 on: January 03, 2006, 04:23:50 pm »
I certainly agree that for you brass isnt the thing, ive made that sooo clear.

but please understand i want, badly, for arturia to continue down this brave road because its what I and the many others like me in those links desire and dont already have.

they arent hurting you in the process, nobody is making you use modelers

they arent stopping the other companies from making romplers, obviously

truth is that todays computers can barely scratch the surface in modeling, and modeling can theortically go as deep as you can in physics, perhaps to infinity.

arturias sax model isnt even as good as yamahas, but their trumpet is better. still that isnt the point, as primitive as these models are in timbre, which obviuosly samplers have a nice shortcut to attaining, they are more realistically responsive to human control than samplers can be.

so what will hppen when computers get faster is that they will be able to run deeper and deeper models, they will be able to include tongue modeling (which the sax really needs) and lung modeling and throat modeling and a better lip model.

acoustic models will suffer in timbre for a few more years, but eventually they will overcome that, id bet things are seriously better by brass 3 to the point where everyone will cease using samplers for brass just like theyve ceased using samplers for synths and now use modeled synths like the ones from...gasp..arturia.


but again your problem , as i said in my first reply, was that you thought brass was another sampler and you had no knowledge, and seemingly no interest in the difference and despite me trying to push you over to the right side of the store, where they stock the samplers, you seem intent upon tearing down this side.

i suppose when you go to macdonalds you order a whopper.

jaxtone

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: 0
Tony Ostinato
« Reply #20 on: January 03, 2006, 04:51:00 pm »
No! I dont crash mentally because of the ubermenschen style you deliver in this conversation... but it actually seems a little bit childish that a full grown up adult treat another based on so much hate... You could at least include some finesse in your personal assaults.

Although I can read between the lines that theres isnt only anger included in your replies there is also an essence of fear included in these sometimes very rude and angry responds. Why is that...  a wild guess might be frustration over that life isnt simple... especially when not everyone think the same way as yourself.

What you define as the right way... is totally unintresting until the questions is responded and proven from you!

If you can prove that your self promotion of your excellent knowledge can make the Arturian saxophone kazoo sound like a real instrument then I will reconsider my thoughts of Brass. If you also can support with a time schedule and effort of energy to reach a natural sound I will be convinced. Not before that!

PS. How the heck did you get McDonalds involved in Arturias Brass?[/b]
Listen!

Sweep

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 243
  • Karma: 7
Brass! True or false?
« Reply #21 on: January 03, 2006, 05:08:18 pm »
Jaxtone, at least Tony is concerned about the essential issue, playing music and learning to master an instrument. To me that's infinitely preferable to your offer of hugs (I think I'll decline that one) and your vague attempts at psychoanalysis.

Oddly, you accuse him of wanting everyone to think as he does, when his post in fact does totally the opposite and points out that you'd be better with a different product, and there are different products available for different needs.

Ironically, I didn't have much interest in Brass until I read this topic. I'm now curious enough to download a demo when there's one available.

And I'd certainly like to see Arturia continue with this kind of research, if only for the time when their experience with player control techniques feeds back into their synth design. A softsynth that has brass type control with non-acoustic synth sound generation really would be something.

BTW I think Tony's MacDonald's reference referred to the desire for something instant, the fast-food equivalent of making music, the antithesis of spending time and effort creating something subtle and satisfying.

jaxtone

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: 0
Sweep
« Reply #22 on: January 03, 2006, 06:13:54 pm »
Gasp!

So you dont like hugs... hmmm... and you believe that trolly guys are the only ones in this forum that tries to master their instruments... interesting.

But honestly let me hear something produced with Brass that sounds good instead of talk so much technical nonse... No one in here have ever said that Arturia shall stop developing their products... that is an accusation taken from your fantasies.

Give me a link to something produced with Brass that not sounds like a Kazoo! Is this hard to understand... a simple request for some real proof and no more Mary Jane theories about how it might or can sound in your imaginations.

Its easy to convince me by real facts since I only use my ears  when judging if a sound is close to the real thing.
Listen!

omissis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
  • Karma: 1
Brass! True or false?
« Reply #23 on: January 03, 2006, 08:27:25 pm »
Jaxtone and all
First I want to say that I won't buy Brass, since it'simply not my c.o.t. so the dongle problems don't touch me ( for the moment at least :wink: ).
Secondly I have to agree with Tony about the issues on the software emulation of an acoustic instrument.
1.The sound: many people in and outta here claim the sax model isn't close, we can agree with those people but I feel like trusting Arturia they will improve the model, as they did with TAE: the most important thing is to interact with the guys as I do about the CS-80V: any hint can be precious ( but you have to be strongly skilled in acoustics )

2. The playability: well, Jaxtone, Brass is a model, which means it is a living copy of an instrument, and to play it correctly you have to manage the technique, to play keyboard isn't enough for a brass model, you have to deal with dozens of parameters. The thing could be easier if you play the real thing, ironically ! You have to consider that to play Brass you have to study yourself how the brass instruments work, pressing a key won't help, it's not a synthesizer and you can't play like a synth or a sampler because simply it isn't that kind of things.If you can't handle it properly you will deal with kazoos forever :wink:
Max

a CS-80Vist

jaxtone

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: 0
Max
« Reply #24 on: January 03, 2006, 08:51:16 pm »
To tell you the truth... I dont even own a keyboard cause I usually use my music programs inner settings for modulation, volume, velocity, ambience etc... to deliver reasonabel transcriptions for my band when orchestrating my original songs as well as re-arrangements of old standards.

Though I play with guys that spent at least 30 years on a professional career as musicians to reach the top level of their instruments it would have been tragical to focus on Brass to acchieve sounds that only might reach the real thing. In the end its more important for me to compose and arrange music than to be master of one single software module.

J
Listen!

Tony Ostinato

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Karma: 0
Brass! True or false?
« Reply #25 on: January 03, 2006, 09:39:57 pm »
Ah, indeed, but just like learning to use samplers was an investment in time that has paid off in years of advancing samplers so too does an investment in modeling pay off as each year modelers become more advanced.


special thanks to sweep and omissis.

omissis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
  • Karma: 1
Brass! True or false?
« Reply #26 on: January 03, 2006, 10:14:20 pm »
Tony

I always had mixed feelings about PM instruments, especially those emulating winds and bowed strings, because the resulting instruments were hard to manage effectively to good representations too many parameters while for a cello player just the bow inclination contributes to reach ifferent nuances etc., my thought was that it could be easier to me to learn the instrument by scratch rather than loose myself in the mid of a params forest...don't get me wrong I'm not against PM but they have to be way much more improved on the expression and playability side, it seems to me that Brass is put on the right way but it's just the beginning of the road .
Similar speech could be made for VAs since to me they still reproduce a "perfect world" of electric paths leaving many influencing variables out, anyway if the guys will get the full power from actual and future cpus and will once for all close the doors to the obsloete MIDI interface, maybe we will see some real goodies....

Jaxtone

I understand perfectly your thing is composition but then we happen to fall in different places, you like composition through your programs, I like the live performance and in-session-composition....right then Brass could be more focused on my needs  than on yours but this bleongs to the target given to this software which is maybe more of a live performance instrument, anyway don't give up , you can dominate the Brass beast as well, it's just a matter of time.
As on my previous message I can second you about the quality of some sounds but, you know,  without improvements we could still make knives from the stones!!! Have some trust, I'm sure they're actually looking on how to improve the sound :wink:
Max

a CS-80Vist

jaxtone

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: 0
Masochism
« Reply #27 on: January 03, 2006, 10:52:49 pm »
Tony:

Quote
special thanks to sweep and omissis.[code]

Hmmm... is the thank you to these gentlemen for co-operation in killing critisism from me? I still havent heard a single natural sound from you. Come on I am waiting to be convinced...

Max Omissis:

I see what you mean and of course I wont disagree on an option where Arturia update their Brass module. I think most of us hope for a better product... ehrmmm... except from one man in here... ... that seems to enjoy things just because they are complicated. I also understand by listening to Tony that Brass seems to be a bit complicated to learn and are produced mostly to please a few technicians instead of millions of common users. If thats a fact I bow my humble back and praise the Lord that Arturia is such idealists in their future business plans.

Just a small correction on the personal profile of me while producing music.

I am a live artist / composer and the main goal for me when I compose and arrange music is to let this music being performed live on stage with a 8 piece postmodern swing band. Its not a computer project even if many sketches are made in there... There is no space for electrified keyboards in my image of sound. Upright bass, guitar, drums and a grand piano in the rythm section. On top of this classic rythm setup I work with a live brass section including alto, bone, trumpet and tenor.
Listen!

Didz@dron

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
  • Karma: 0
Re: Masochism
« Reply #28 on: January 03, 2006, 11:45:46 pm »
Quote

I am a live artist / composer and the main goal for me when I compose and arrange music is to let this music being performed live on stage with a 8 piece postmodern swing band. Its not a computer project even if many sketches are made in there... There is no space for electrified keyboards in my image of sound. Upright bass, guitar, drums and a grand piano in the rythm section. On top of this classic rythm setup I work with a live brass section including alto, bone, trumpet and tenor.


Various kinds of musicians for different opinions, the best way to make a piece of software get better and better, so let's try to be cooler  :wink:
d(*O*)b

omissis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
  • Karma: 1
Re: Masochism
« Reply #29 on: January 04, 2006, 08:55:58 am »
Quote from: "jaxtone"

 I also understand by listening to Tony that Brass seems to be a bit complicated to learn and are produced mostly to please a few technicians instead of millions of common users. If thats a fact I bow my humble back and praise the Lord that Arturia is such idealists in their future business plans.


Well, Jaxtone, it's not as extreme as you state : you can learn anything just finding the right "how to"...for sure Brass tries to be more playable than other PM instruments but even with future updates I wouldn't renounce to the breath controller, an aftertouch keyboard and a ribbon controller ( see? Why am I so devoted to the Yamaha CS80? Because it was the one and only synthesizer born with the player in mind, no other synth had such intuitive interface and the way it had.... )

Quote from: "jaxtone"
I am a live artist / composer and the main goal for me when I compose and arrange music is to let this music being performed live on stage with a 8 piece postmodern swing band. Its not a computer project even if many sketches are made in there... There is no space for electrified keyboards in my image of sound. Upright bass, guitar, drums and a grand piano in the rythm section. On top of this classic rythm setup I work with a live brass section including alto, bone, trumpet and tenor.


Understood it fully :wink:
Max

a CS-80Vist

 

Carbonate design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.8 | SMF © 2014, Simple Machines