forkol
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 182
- Joined: 2008/04/12 01:06:19
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 13:28:16
(permalink)
Anderton
bladetragic
@forkol
Well stated. The stair/elevator analogy was spot on.
I disagree. It's not that there's the choice of either you use a particular elevator or you use the stairs. You can use the VST elevator instead of either one.
No, in this case, now you want me to pay to install and use my own elevator, or just be content using the stairs, when other buildings the same height on the same block have a operable elevator that I can use without extra cost. Again, and I don't know how many times I have to say it, but Sharke pointed it out exactly: VST/VSTi does not address integration/workflow. I have Geist, and although it's useful, you still can't do an operation like, auto split beat at transients, and load into Geist from a audio clip. Why did Sonar develop/use ARA? Look at the integration between Melodyne and DrumReplacer using ARA. That's the same kind of integration that would be very useful with a Sonar Sampler.
|
sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13933
- Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 14:07:03
(permalink)
forkolI have Geist, and although it's useful, you still can't do an operation like, auto split beat at transients, and load into Geist from a audio clip.
I'm not sure what you mean by this but I think you'll find that Geist excels at these very things - you can auto slice a beat either by transients or by beat division (and you can adjust the sensitivity of transient detection or even just place slice points manually). When you click "OK" on the slice operations then it will load your slices onto pads, layering them if necessary, and will also replicate the original beat in its pattern sequencer, applying any necessary timing offsets to each step. You can get audio into Geist either by loading a sample, or by using its inbuilt sampler into which you can route audio from anywhere in Sonar by using the splitter plugin.
JamesWindows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
|
azslow3
Max Output Level: -42.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3297
- Joined: 2012/06/22 19:27:51
- Location: Germany
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 15:21:21
(permalink)
forkol
Why did Sonar develop/use ARA? Look at the integration between Melodyne and DrumReplacer using ARA. That's the same kind of integration that would be very useful with a Sonar Sampler.
ARA is relatively simple concept, useful for particular purpose like MElodyne. I can try to explain (how I understand it, may be I am wrong then correct please): On a track we have an waveform. It can be real "WAV file" or it can be some "production" from this file, processed by FXes. The key point here is that we have it PRE-RECORDED. In other words, since we have the original waveform, we can produce "waves" for any time for which this waveform exists, not only for "now" time. To simplify things, lets assume we "freeze" all effects, so we have complete fixed waveform for the whole period (and lets call that period a REGION). A DAW has access to any place in that waveform since the DAW defines all rules how it works with waveforms in files. But VST is limited by VST API which is a set of "functions". It happens that there is NO function in VST to ask DAW "please give me the waveform from time X to time Y". Only DAW can ask "please process this part of waveform" ("this part" is your "buffer size" samples in size), there is no other direction foreseen. What happened in case effect need more then one buffer to produce the result, when it need "future" information? That is what "mastering" plug-ins do: they accumulate MANY buffers BEFORE then return result for the first one! The effect is DELAY, the subject to compensate with "Plug-in Delay Compensation". It does not come from the "slowness" of some plug-in or computer (there are people which think so), the plug-in still has to process each sample within the time of that sample, otherwise there will be "audio dropout". Mastering plug-ins allow to "delay" up to 1 second. But what if some "plug-in" want the WHOLE REGION before it can return the result for the first sample in that region? In VST mode, Melodyne are forcing user to "play" the whole region first, so it can internally "record" the whole region. Then, when you start to play again, Melodyne can use the WHOLE REGION right at the beginning, it has it internally. DAW HAS access to the WHOLE REGION, Melodyne WANT have access to the WHOLE REGION. Why not define a "function" in DAW so Melodyne can request that region? And here we are - that "function" is ARA. ----- And now if you can explain how you see ARA can help some sampler, and/or which other function will be nice to have in SONAR so a sampler can be "integrated" better, I will apologies, take all my previous words back and agree that this mega thread deserve the title it has. Note that if you want put some Sonar clip into sampler, you can just "drag and drop" it, you do not need ARA for that.
Sonar 8LE -> Platinum infinity, REAPER, Windows 10 pro GA-EP35-DS3L, E7500, 4GB, GTX 1050 Ti, 2x500GB RME Babyface Pro (M-Audio Audiophile Firewire/410, VS-20), Kawai CN43, TD-11, Roland A500S, Akai MPK Mini, Keystation Pro, etc. www.azslow.com - Control Surface Integration Platform for SONAR, ReaCWP, AOSC and other accessibility tools
|
forkol
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 182
- Joined: 2008/04/12 01:06:19
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 15:40:06
(permalink)
sharke
forkolI have Geist, and although it's useful, you still can't do an operation like, auto split beat at transients, and load into Geist from a audio clip.
I'm not sure what you mean by this but I think you'll find that Geist excels at these very things - you can auto slice a beat either by transients or by beat division (and you can adjust the sensitivity of transient detection or even just place slice points manually). When you click "OK" on the slice operations then it will load your slices onto pads, layering them if necessary, and will also replicate the original beat in its pattern sequencer, applying any necessary timing offsets to each step.
You can get audio into Geist either by loading a sample, or by using its inbuilt sampler into which you can route audio from anywhere in Sonar by using the splitter plugin.
Sharke, Let me clarify: In quite a few DAW's, you can highlight on an audio clip, with transients already set, right click which pulls up a menu and say "Split on transients and load into sampler", and it does it automatically, already mapped and ready to play. I am very aware that you can load a sample into Geist or use Spitter then set the transients and split there, but that's more work to set up, it's not automated. Also, I prefer to work in DAW rather than a Geist VST audio window, mainly because Geist does not have as large of a VST window as I would like (but Geist 2 is now re-sizable, but I have yet to upgrade). Also, would be nice to have the MIDI dumped directly into Piano Roll View, rather than have to extract it back out of Geist.
|
forkol
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 182
- Joined: 2008/04/12 01:06:19
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 16:01:13
(permalink)
azslow3
[Clipped for brevity...]
And now if you can explain how you see ARA can help some sampler, and/or which other function will be nice to have in SONAR so a sampler can be "integrated" better, I will apologies, take all my previous words back and agree that this mega thread deserve the title it has.
Note that if you want put some Sonar clip into sampler, you can just "drag and drop" it, you do not need ARA for that.
Okay, maybe it's not ARA that's needed. The integration that I would like to see would be a souped-up Loop Construction View with integrated Audiosnap. You could use Audiosnap to set the transients, then when you were ready, you could have a menu that would 'Split transients and map to new Sampler track' and it would create an Instrument Track (or Sampler track) with a Sampler built in and Midi already mapped to play the mapped beats. I would think you need some way for Sampler to access the audio clip. I don't think there's a way to do that using a VST/VSTi. This would be an integrated tool that had direct access to the audio clip, so it would have to be integrated into Sonar. As in Geist, you can possibly drag and drop, don't know if I have ever tried that and see if it works directly. But as I mentioned before, sometimes it's better to work in DAW space than VST/VSTi space.
|
ampfixer
Max Output Level: -20 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5508
- Joined: 2010/12/12 20:11:50
- Location: Ontario
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 19:20:33
(permalink)
@forkol IS there something that actually does what you describe or is this a wish list?
Regards, John I want to make it clear that I am an Eedjit. I have no direct, or indirect, knowledge of business, the music industry, forum threads or the meaning of life. I know about amps. WIN 10 Pro X64, I7-3770k 16 gigs, ASUS Z77 pro, AMD 7950 3 gig, Steinberg UR44, A-Pro 500, Sonar Platinum, KRK Rokit 6
|
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5321
- Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 19:34:10
(permalink)
Um, unless I missed something, that is what Geist does. It can be done even in standalone mode for composition purposes. As a VSTi, drag/drop to/from the SONAR browser has naming issues (defaults to "clip1" IIRC so must manually rename clips doing that).
ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
|
DayDay72
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 93
- Joined: 2010/11/19 16:48:01
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 20:16:45
(permalink)
wow.
Beatscape in 64 (jbridge latest version) - Sometimes, I have to 'panic' it, then it works just fine
Vsampler in 64 (Jbridge latest version) - very stable - a very capable, in depth sampler
even the old school dr-008 in 64 (jbridge version) - drum sound designing and sample trigger
All working Stable @6 projects in...
The only problem I have with both Rapture and Dimension are the fact that my hi-hats don't hold properly and it is too much effort to bounce to a sfz editor, only to have to bounce it back and re-load/save/re-name all over again.
Been with Cake since Pro audio 5 (Almost 20 years), and I wish that there was an 'in house' sampler/chopper (whatever else you call it).
but with my trusty jbridge, I'm good!!
|
BobF
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8124
- Joined: 2003/11/05 18:43:11
- Location: Missouri - USA
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 20:41:59
(permalink)
I've heard a lot of good things about jbridge. And I happen to have VSampler ...
Thanks for the tip and reminder.
Bob -- Angels are crying because truth has died ...Illegitimi non carborundum --Studio One Pro / i7-6700@3.80GHZ, 32GB Win 10 Pro x64 Roland FA06, LX61+, Fishman Tripleplay, FaderPort, US-16x08 + ARC2.5/Event PS8s Waves Gold/IKM Max/Nomad Factory IS3/K11U
|
forkol
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 182
- Joined: 2008/04/12 01:06:19
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/27 22:36:37
(permalink)
ampfixer
@forkol IS there something that actually does what you describe or is this a wish list?
Yes, there are DAW's that actually have this as a feature, it's generally called "Auto Slice to sampler" or "Slice to MIDI". Live, Logic, FL Studio, and Studio One 3 support it. Cubase and Protools it is not automatic, but you still have Groove Agent One or Structure to drop the samples into manually.
|
JoseC.
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 471
- Joined: 2003/11/10 14:46:11
- Location: León, Spain
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 05:37:39
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby telecharge 2016/10/28 10:09:17
It seems that this thread has split in opposite directions. Geist is actually more than a sampler, is a sampler sequencer a la MPC. It actually samples itself (more than Kontakt can boast), and has a multitrack sequencer that also outputs MIDI to the external world. It is a great tool, but it would not make much sense for Cakewalk to provide something alike within Sonar, IMHO, since many features would overlap with Sonar's own sequencing and loop handling. I vote again for a simple sampler, an improved Dropzone.
What would be great would be some improved loop slicing. I was thinking that something like "Slice to Matrix" that would automatically send MIDI to Matrix View like a step sequencer pattern and inserted a new Dropzone with the mapped slices would be awesome.
|
kzmaier
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 461
- Joined: 2010/10/18 08:20:01
- Location: Rochester, NY
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 10:58:29
(permalink)
Also a Dropzone fan, meets my needs. Although improvements are always welcome!!
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 12:37:41
(permalink)
forkol
Anderton
bladetragic
@forkol
Well stated. The stair/elevator analogy was spot on.
I disagree. It's not that there's the choice of either you use a particular elevator or you use the stairs. You can use the VST elevator instead of either one.
No, in this case, now you want me to pay to install and use my own elevator, or just be content using the stairs, when other buildings the same height on the same block have a operable elevator that I can use without extra cost. This is why analogies are worthless. The reason why other programs have particular functionalities at "no extra cost" is because they're not spending money on functionality that SONAR includes at no extra cost. You could just as easily go into the forums for other programs and ask why they force users to spend money on vocal alignment, linear-phase mastering tools, console emulation, tape emulation, multitrack REX file players, etc. After all, SONAR has them at no extra cost...so shouldn't they have those features at no extra cost? How much should companies be willing to raise their price point to satisfy every possible group of users? Again, and I don't know how many times I have to say it, but Sharke pointed it out exactly: VST/VSTi does not address integration/workflow. I have Geist, and although it's useful, you still can't do an operation like, auto split beat at transients Well, you can do that in SONAR. AudioSnap, the Step Sequencer, loop creation/editing, creating "faux" REX files, and the Matrix view are all integrated into SONAR. So are the existing samplers and REX playback devices (e.g., dragging the MIDI files behind the REX audio or drum patterns into SONAR, and drop-and-drag audio). By definition, ReWired applications are integrated into SONAR. And even with outboard samplers, you can usually do drag and drop. It would be helpful to have examples of specific workflow elements you think SONAR needs. Workflow is a very squishy and subjective term. If SONAR is to incorporate particular workflows in upcoming updates, Cakewalk needs to know what those are. What specific workflow would an integrated sampler do that can't be done with a VST?
|
azslow3
Max Output Level: -42.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3297
- Joined: 2012/06/22 19:27:51
- Location: Germany
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 13:10:47
(permalink)
Anderton
Well, you can do that in SONAR. AudioSnap,
...
It would be helpful to have examples of specific workflow elements you think SONAR needs. Workflow is a very squishy and subjective term. If SONAR is to incorporate particular workflows in upcoming updates, Cakewalk needs to know what those are. What specific workflow would an integrated sampler do that can't be done with a VST?
May be some people think I am just "against sampler integration" in this thread. I am really not. I have just asked the same question, but there was no answers (I mean what concrete enhancements people want to see to better support samplers, may be external). Playing a bit with TX16 and following some proposals in this thread: * I have enabled AudioSnap, detected transients and pressed "split". So I see N clips. * I have d&d them all into TX16, and they was mapped to keys, but... each of these clips is really a copy of the whole original clip, non destructively resized. Clips "current" boundaries was lost during d&d, so each key in TX16 plays the whole clip. Bouncing all clips at once produce one big clip again. Bouncing each clip separately before d&d produce the result I want, but a bit boring... Do I miss something?
Sonar 8LE -> Platinum infinity, REAPER, Windows 10 pro GA-EP35-DS3L, E7500, 4GB, GTX 1050 Ti, 2x500GB RME Babyface Pro (M-Audio Audiophile Firewire/410, VS-20), Kawai CN43, TD-11, Roland A500S, Akai MPK Mini, Keystation Pro, etc. www.azslow.com - Control Surface Integration Platform for SONAR, ReaCWP, AOSC and other accessibility tools
|
ampfixer
Max Output Level: -20 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5508
- Joined: 2010/12/12 20:11:50
- Location: Ontario
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 14:41:36
(permalink)
A very long thread indeed.
Cakewalk has stated that everyone one will get the benefit of core program improvements. Extra features are supposed to become purchased add-ons. We haven't seen this yet but I'm inclined to think that a sampler would be a perfect add-on for stand alone sales. Then they could charge for it but would have to compete with Kontakt, Geist or whatever sampler you want to use. I wonder if people would pony up the cash for that. I also wonder if Cakewalk really wants to go into competition with companies that have been devoted to sampling for years.
I really can't see how the company could justify the risk or expense at this time. The Mac program is way more important and Sonar still needs some work on core functions. I also noted that there are DAWs available that do the sample stuff right now. Why would people wait for months or years when they can go out and buy a solution today?
Anyone care to answer those questions?
Regards, John I want to make it clear that I am an Eedjit. I have no direct, or indirect, knowledge of business, the music industry, forum threads or the meaning of life. I know about amps. WIN 10 Pro X64, I7-3770k 16 gigs, ASUS Z77 pro, AMD 7950 3 gig, Steinberg UR44, A-Pro 500, Sonar Platinum, KRK Rokit 6
|
forkol
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 182
- Joined: 2008/04/12 01:06:19
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 15:20:46
(permalink)
Anderton
How much should companies be willing to raise their price point to satisfy every possible group of users?
Enough not to have to satisfy every group, but enough so that you are serving your customer base and can make a reasonable profit? If Cakewalk can do that and not provide a sampler, then so be it, I'm fine with that. But as this thread points out, it's something of interest. And looking forward to the MAC release, I think it's critical to have in order to effectively compete against the big guys over on that side of the fence. But, that's just my opinion, may not be worth much. forkolAgain, and I don't know how many times I have to say it, but Sharke pointed it out exactly: VST/VSTi does not address integration/workflow. I have Geist, and although it's useful, you still can't do an operation like, auto split beat at transients AndertonWell, you can do that in SONAR. AudioSnap, the Step Sequencer, loop creation/editing, creating "faux" REX files, and the Matrix view are all integrated into SONAR. So are the existing samplers and REX playback devices (e.g., dragging the MIDI files behind the REX audio or drum patterns into SONAR, and drop-and-drag audio). By definition, ReWired applications are integrated into SONAR. And even with outboard samplers, you can usually do drag and drop.
You cut off the last part of my quote, which was critical. It was:
I have Geist, and although it's useful, you still can't do an operation like, auto split beat at transients, and load into Geist from a audio clip.
Azslow3 pointed out the problem, you have to trim down every sample to get rid of the unwanted part of the clip. I'd like it so it's automated to slice and move to sampler. Anderton
It would be helpful to have examples of specific workflow elements you think SONAR needs. Workflow is a very squishy and subjective term. If SONAR is to incorporate particular workflows in upcoming updates, Cakewalk needs to know what those are. What specific workflow would an integrated sampler do that can't be done with a VST?
As noted above. Further, it would need to put the slices in a Midi or Instrument track as part of the audio split and map. I don't think you can do that with a VST directly, you would need to either setup to record MIDI output. But, I'm not super versed in with what the VST2/VST3 interface can do, so maybe it's possible.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 15:22:36
(permalink)
azslow3
Playing a bit with TX16 and following some proposals in this thread:
* I have enabled AudioSnap, detected transients and pressed "split". So I see N clips. Next, turn off AudioSnap, select all the split clips, and choose Clips > Apply Trimming. Now when you drag them, the clip boundaries will be retained.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 15:29:16
(permalink)
Okay, what if I proposed to Cakewalk an integrated, sampling-based instrument something like the following:
1. You drag in an Acidized Groove clip.
2. The instrument automatically slices it at the transients defined by the Groove Clip.
3. You could drag any slice to any of 16 pads (if it was just a standard WAV file, you could split at transients using AudioSnap, then drag them in like Alexey mentioned with the TX16W...not quite as "automatic," but it would work).
4. You could assign those pads to a 4 x 4 MPC-style pad hardware controller if you wanted, or trigger them at the instrument if you didn't have a suitable controller.
As extras, it would be cool if could stack multiples samples on each pad, change pad pitch/level/pan, and have separate audio outputs for each pad (not that difficult, a lot of samplers and drum machines let you have individual outputs for each sound).
It would be even cooler if you could have a step sequencer built into the instrument itself, or click on something that opens up SONAR's step sequencer if you wanted to take things further...
Seems to me this would do what a lot of what people want.
|
telecharge
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1180
- Joined: 2014/03/31 18:01:17
- Location: Enfuego, Monterey
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 16:39:07
(permalink)
ampfixer
Anyone care to answer those questions?
I'm only seeing the one question at the end, and I can only speak for myself. I'm not sitting on my hands and waiting for Cakewalk to sort me out. I have a number of samplers -- both paid and free. I have not asked for, nor do I expect, anything for free. I don't think the OP has either, but I'm not going to reread the thread. Integrated does not equal free, in my book. Of course, I would welcome a sampler as a Platinum perk or however Cakewalk wants to roll it out. It will be interesting to see how the paid add-ons manifest. Anderton
Okay, what if I proposed to Cakewalk an integrated, sampling-based instrument something like the following:
Looks good to me. Thank you for putting the list together.
|
forkol
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 182
- Joined: 2008/04/12 01:06:19
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 17:04:02
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Anderton 2016/10/28 18:00:44
ampfixer
Cakewalk has stated that everyone one will get the benefit of core program improvements. Extra features are supposed to become purchased add-ons. We haven't seen this yet but I'm inclined to think that a sampler would be a perfect add-on for stand alone sales. Then they could charge for it but would have to compete with Kontakt, Geist or whatever sampler you want to use. I wonder if people would pony up the cash for that. I also wonder if Cakewalk really wants to go into competition with companies that have been devoted to sampling for years.
I don't think they have to really develop to the level of Kontakt or Geist. Have a look at Live's Simpler/Sampler, Studio One 3's Presence XT/Impulse, and Logic's EXS24 for reference. As others have mentioned, Beatscape was close, and they still have Cyclone and DropZone code. It's probably old and unusable code, but they resurrected Z3ta and Rapture, and I would conjecture that developing a basic sampler would not be too much more difficult than a re-code of Z3ta or Rapture was. As for pay, it depends. If the sampler could be integrated and do the things I would like to do, sure I would pay for it. Just as I have paid for Zeta2, Rapture, P5, Rapture Pro, various ProChannel modules, training, books, loops and samples all from Cakewalk. As a matter of fact, it's about the only way Cakewalk will get more money from me now that I am lifetime sub. ampfixer
I really can't see how the company could justify the risk or expense at this time. The Mac program is way more important and Sonar still needs some work on core functions. I also noted that there are DAWs available that do the sample stuff right now. Why would people wait for months or years when they can go out and buy a solution today?
I think the greater risk is porting Sonar to Mac. It's going to be a very tough marketplace, but I feel they have to do it, but I also feel it's hard to justify going up against Logic with its price point and feature set. And you could make the same argument about MAC-based DAW's that you make about providing a sampler. They can buy Logic today, why wait for Sonar? And the cost of failure is much higher with a Mac port than a basic sampler. Also, I own a license to Live, and I bought it for only one thing: Audio warping. I also own Bitwig and may pickup Studio One 3 and have a look. I have Sonar because I've used it since its Pro Audio days, and I also do other music styles like cinematic. So, nobody's waiting. However, this forum discussion is about if people think Sonar needs a sampler. Some of us think so. Some think not. Either way, I'm going to continue making music with whatever tools fit my needs.
|
trgtdron
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31
- Joined: 2015/11/17 16:18:44
- Location: Ranger GA
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 17:07:55
(permalink)
Hmmm seems that there are several "samplers" already built into SP, how many do you need?
|
AT
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10654
- Joined: 2004/01/09 10:42:46
- Location: TeXaS
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 17:27:16
(permalink)
Anderton
Okay, what if I proposed to Cakewalk an integrated, sampling-based instrument something like the following:
1. You drag in an Acidized Groove clip.
2. The instrument automatically slices it at the transients defined by the Groove Clip.
3. You could drag any slice to any of 16 pads (if it was just a standard WAV file, you could split at transients using AudioSnap, then drag them in like Alexey mentioned with the TX16W...not quite as "automatic," but it would work).
4. You could assign those pads to a 4 x 4 MPC-style pad hardware controller if you wanted, or trigger them at the instrument if you didn't have a suitable controller.
As extras, it would be cool if could stack multiples samples on each pad, change pad pitch/level/pan, and have separate audio outputs for each pad (not that difficult, a lot of samplers and drum machines let you have individual outputs for each sound).
It would be even cooler if you could have a step sequencer built into the instrument itself, or click on something that opens up SONAR's step sequencer if you wanted to take things further...
Seems to me this would do what a lot of what people want.
That would be cool, and make the MCP pad touch virtual, too.
https://soundcloud.com/a-pleasure-dome
http://www.bnoir-film.com/ there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
|
azslow3
Max Output Level: -42.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3297
- Joined: 2012/06/22 19:27:51
- Location: Germany
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 18:11:10
(permalink)
Anderton
azslow3
Playing a bit with TX16 and following some proposals in this thread:
* I have enabled AudioSnap, detected transients and pressed "split". So I see N clips.
Next, turn off AudioSnap, select all the split clips, and choose Clips > Apply Trimming. Now when you drag them, the clip boundaries will be retained.
Thanks! I somehow was always using bouncing... 
Sonar 8LE -> Platinum infinity, REAPER, Windows 10 pro GA-EP35-DS3L, E7500, 4GB, GTX 1050 Ti, 2x500GB RME Babyface Pro (M-Audio Audiophile Firewire/410, VS-20), Kawai CN43, TD-11, Roland A500S, Akai MPK Mini, Keystation Pro, etc. www.azslow.com - Control Surface Integration Platform for SONAR, ReaCWP, AOSC and other accessibility tools
|
bladetragic
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 503
- Joined: 2009/09/12 04:49:24
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 19:58:28
(permalink)
Anderton
forkol
Anderton
bladetragic
@forkol
Well stated. The stair/elevator analogy was spot on.
I disagree. It's not that there's the choice of either you use a particular elevator or you use the stairs. You can use the VST elevator instead of either one.
No, in this case, now you want me to pay to install and use my own elevator, or just be content using the stairs, when other buildings the same height on the same block have a operable elevator that I can use without extra cost.
This is why analogies are worthless. The reason why other programs have particular functionalities at "no extra cost" is because they're not spending money on functionality that SONAR includes at no extra cost. You could just as easily go into the forums for other programs and ask why they force users to spend money on vocal alignment, linear-phase mastering tools, console emulation, tape emulation, multitrack REX file players, etc. After all, SONAR has them at no extra cost...so shouldn't they have those features at no extra cost? How much should companies be willing to raise their price point to satisfy every possible group of users?
Ironically, going by the train of thought that many seem to have in this thread, Cakewalk should have never bothered to develop and include those tools either b/c there are already third party options available. They should've spent their development time and resources on other things instead.
|
DayDay72
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 93
- Joined: 2010/11/19 16:48:01
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 20:16:34
(permalink)
Anderton
Okay, what if I proposed to Cakewalk an integrated, sampling-based instrument something like the following:
1. You drag in an Acidized Groove clip.
2. The instrument automatically slices it at the transients defined by the Groove Clip.
3. You could drag any slice to any of 16 pads (if it was just a standard WAV file, you could split at transients using AudioSnap, then drag them in like Alexey mentioned with the TX16W...not quite as "automatic," but it would work).
4. You could assign those pads to a 4 x 4 MPC-style pad hardware controller if you wanted, or trigger them at the instrument if you didn't have a suitable controller.
As extras, it would be cool if could stack multiples samples on each pad, change pad pitch/level/pan, and have separate audio outputs for each pad (not that difficult, a lot of samplers and drum machines let you have individual outputs for each sound).
It would be even cooler if you could have a step sequencer built into the instrument itself, or click on something that opens up SONAR's step sequencer if you wanted to take things further...
Seems to me this would do what a lot of what people want.
sounds like the old DR-008, only tricked out....add rex functionality and an option to manually slice samples and that could work.
|
forkol
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 182
- Joined: 2008/04/12 01:06:19
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 20:35:01
(permalink)
trgtdron
Hmmm seems that there are several "samplers" already built into SP, how many do you need?
Most of the so-called 'samplers' are either DXi's and/or 32-bit only, and haven't seen any real updates in many years. You could ask the same question for any of the other types of VST/VSTi's provided by Sonar.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 21:25:13
(permalink)
bladetragic
Anderton
forkol
Anderton
bladetragic
@forkol
Well stated. The stair/elevator analogy was spot on.
I disagree. It's not that there's the choice of either you use a particular elevator or you use the stairs. You can use the VST elevator instead of either one.
No, in this case, now you want me to pay to install and use my own elevator, or just be content using the stairs, when other buildings the same height on the same block have a operable elevator that I can use without extra cost.
This is why analogies are worthless. The reason why other programs have particular functionalities at "no extra cost" is because they're not spending money on functionality that SONAR includes at no extra cost. You could just as easily go into the forums for other programs and ask why they force users to spend money on vocal alignment, linear-phase mastering tools, console emulation, tape emulation, multitrack REX file players, etc. After all, SONAR has them at no extra cost...so shouldn't they have those features at no extra cost? How much should companies be willing to raise their price point to satisfy every possible group of users?
Ironically, going by the train of thought that many seem to have in this thread, Cakewalk should have never bothered to develop and include those tools either b/c there are already third party options available. They should've spent their development time and resources on other things instead.
Let me explain how this works. First, it's an incorrect assumption that all third party options are the same, or cost the same amount to develop no matter who develops them. Second, when you have a technology platform like SONAR, Cakewalk often develops technology where ancillary products "fall out" of that technology. Therefore they can be implemented with little cost or risk whereas if they had to create something from the ground up, it would indeed not be worth doing. Third, there obviously is a major difference between being able to get a free sampler that does what most people need so why develop it, compared to a vocal alignment tool that if you didn't get it with the program would have cost $300. Now let's get to the heart of why the premise "They should've spent their development time and resources on other things instead" is flawed. There's more than one DAW. They all try to gain a competitive edge that relates to their target audience. Therefore, their goal is to cultivate what's called unique selling points (USP) that are hopefully compelling to their target audience. At the time Cakewalk included vocal alignment, the least expensive equivalent was $300. Cakewalk did a scaled-down version that did a lot of what the "big boy" did, for a lot less money - a USP that added value to the package (without costing more than the upgrade itself). And of course, you can buy a linear-phase EQ from Waves for $150 but AFAIK it doesn't have mid-side processing. Come to think of it, I can't think of any DAW offhand that has linear-phase EQ with mid-side processing and linear-phase multiband compression. They extend SONAR's capability as a mastering platform. Another USP...especially if someone knows anything about mid-side processing, or has to prepare releases for vinyl. Cakewalk's ProChannel is yet another USP. Other DAWs have channel strips, but I know of no other DAW that lets you create your own channel strip mixer architecture that's fully integrated with the DAW (i.e., not dependent on standard plug-ins). In fact the ProChannel was mentioned as the very first item in the article by the Mac guy who gave four good reasons to get excited to SONAR, and bought a membership. To enhance that USP even further, note that the Tape and Console Emulation are ProChannel modules that are integrated into the program. This means you can use techniques like Quick Grouping to vary all their parameters at once across all channels - almost essential for console emulation - and include them easily in templates. Also, the only other program I know of with a dedicated multi-channel REX file player is Reason (and Dr. Octorex came out after SONAR had that capability anyway, so the point is moot), and I don't think people are going to buy Reason just for that. And I didn't even mention the Drum Replacer. Sure, you can buy one - but it won't integrate as tightly with SONAR because it won't be based on ARA. Another USP. So no - you cannot duplicate what Cakewalk did by buying third-party plug-ins. When it makes sense for Cakewalk to use third party solutions instead of develop them, obviously they do. They didn't create their own pitch correction, amp sim, convolution reverb, or create a full-fledged drum module; they licensed Melodyne, TH3, ReMatrix, and AD2 respectively. I understand that most of the users here don't want to think about the realities of business and since they just want to make music, they see everything through the lens of their personal wants. But the reality is that all DAW manufacturers have to make choices.
|
telecharge
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1180
- Joined: 2014/03/31 18:01:17
- Location: Enfuego, Monterey
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 22:47:40
(permalink)
Anderton
I understand that most of the users here don't want to think about the realities of business and since they just want to make music, they see everything through the lens of their personal wants. But the reality is that all DAW manufacturers have to make choices.
I know you suggested that beats oriented "features" are on the way, but between your "heavy on the effects" (and utilities) post above and the quote below, I'm left with the impression that Cakewalk has lost interest in developing instruments. I know Rapture and Z3TA+ got major updates, but Cakewalk's beats oriented instruments have been stagnating for quite some time now. I'd like to know why, but maybe we'll never know. It makes sense if Cakewalk's primary focus is taking away from Avid's dollar share and not competing with the likes of Ableton and FL Studio. Anderton
The recording software market is a declining market. Because it’s not being fueled by a lot of new users, taking away overall market share from other companies is another way to fuel growth. But, it’s not easy to get people to switch.
I can’t give a lot of stats because the material from market research firms is proprietary. But I can give some generalities. Avid has about five times the dollar share of any other DAW company in this industry. So for any company that wants to take dollar share, Avid is the most logical target because that’s where the dollar share is. Everyone else is fighting it out at a much lower level, and there are more similarities than differences in dollar share among those contenders than you might think. The good news for Cakewalk is that in a declining market, SONAR has managed to hold its own.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 23:43:46
(permalink)
telecharge
Anderton
I understand that most of the users here don't want to think about the realities of business and since they just want to make music, they see everything through the lens of their personal wants. But the reality is that all DAW manufacturers have to make choices.
I know you suggested that beats oriented "features" are on the way, but between your "heavy on the effects" (and utilities) post above and the quote below, I'm left with the impression that Cakewalk has lost interest in developing instruments. I know Rapture and Z3TA+ got major updates, but Cakewalk's beats oriented instruments have been stagnating for quite some time now. I'd like to know why, but maybe we'll never know.
It makes sense if Cakewalk's primary focus is taking away from Avid's dollar share and not competing with the likes of Ableton and FL Studio. You'd have to ask Cakewalk what their primary focus is. Please remember I'm giving my insights on the industry as a whole, and how it works. For example I said "So for any company that wants to take dollar share, Avid is the most logical target because that’s where the dollar share is." I didn't say Cakewalk's focus is to take dollar share from Avid. They've never said anything to me that would indicate it is - or isn't - their focus. Think about this, then extrapolate ahead five years...there are companies like Zynaptiq making incredible, but very CPU-hungry, plug-ins that will bring a DAW to its knees. Which provides more of a contribution to the SONAR community - duplicating Zynaptiq's efforts, or inventing plug-in load balancing so there's a host that's actually capable of running lots of these really cool plug-ins? It's very important to remember that SONAR, Pro Tools, Logic, Live, etc, are hosts. Personally, I want these companies to devote their efforts to creating a great host, then letting me decide how I'm going to customize it for my particular needs. Remember that like the "staff view" people and the "beats" people, I have my own desires of what I want a program like SONAR to be - which is to be a great, versatile, stable host. That's a personal preference, but it's just as valid as people who'd rather see more instruments and don't care how many plug-ins SONAR can run. In any event, never rule out anything when it comes to Cakewalk. This forum is littered with a zillion predictions that were so far off the mark they didn't even know where the mark was. To quote Yoda, "Always in motion is the future." Let's just leave it at that 
|
bladetragic
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 503
- Joined: 2009/09/12 04:49:24
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar really needs a sampler.
2016/10/28 23:53:35
(permalink)
Anderton
bladetragic
Ironically, going by the train of thought that many seem to have in this thread, Cakewalk should have never bothered to develop and include those tools either b/c there are already third party options available. They should've spent their development time and resources on other things instead.
Now let's get to the heart of why the premise "They should've spent their development time and resources on other things instead" is flawed.
I think you mistook my comment for my own personal thoughts. I was giving an example of how the logic that some users have can be applied to other areas as well. I don't personally share that same train of thought.
|