• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Topic: Brass Articulation Idea...

  1. #1

    Brass Articulation Idea...

    I posted this in the GOS forum, and I thought I\'d put it here as well:

    A crazy idea I had for brass articulations, (I doubt this\'ll work) is that first: The developer would record just about all possible articulations as far as length of notes and attack as WELL as style. Next: Have the composer play the brass line on the keyboard with the style he has in mind for the brass player on the keyboard. What I mean is, if he wants to play a light happy staccato line, the player would play stylistically on the piano, light, staccato and happy. If he wants powerful staccato, he\'d obviously hit it harder with the same short length. Of course this DREAM software could not recognize and play back the exact articulation in realtime while the composer is playing the keyboard, but when he is FINISHED, the software would analyze the length of notes, velocity, and speed of playing. (pertaining to runs and such) and choose the proper articulations from the extensive brass library accordingly. I know this is WAAYY out there, but this was a theory I had in mind which may NOT be too far fetched in the future of the sampling world. Of course it would not be perfect, but it\'d sure save time.

  2. #2

    Re: Brass Articulation Idea...

    Sounds like Plutonium Sampler meets Audio Render Farm :-)

    I think if you do the math on possible discrete articulations of a brass instrument or any instrument - that is really limitless/continuous possibilities - you will find that the problem is constrained by the same things designers face today, namely:

    - What articulation best represents the instrument?
    - How much time am I willing to spend on \"slicing and dicing\" samples?
    - How do I insure smooth transistion/consistency between discrete samples?

    If I am intepreting all the posts correctly about economics of sound design - we are probably approaching a theoretical limit of how big people are willing to make libraries given the potential returns they offer.

    I offer the following two ideas to the pot:

    1. Create software that accurately interprets and prepares samples \"on the fly\". That is a performer records a note and out comes a sample ready for manipulation - pretty sophisticated DSP and paramater tuning required - and a good consistent player - it is kind of like speech reco. This would solve the \"slicing and dicing\" problem. You could even extend this to have the software recognize the pitch of the note and amplitude and do trial and error mapping into GIG or whatever format instrument. Still pretty algorithmic stuff which the Wizard addresses today. But think about playing a note and having it mapped to a Giga instrument - pretty cooooll! That would make the process and potential experimentation jump up in leaps and bounds.

    2. Some kind of forecasting algorithm like neural nets that can read in a slew of sample data and using assigned parameters of velocity, duration, etc. will output an interpolation of the wave. Still very difficult given all the \"color\" that shows up in the attack where non-linear stuff creates all kinds of wonderful variants. At least this solution starts to move you away from one sample for every discrete instance. I believe there is a synth out there now that is using neural nets for sound creation. Don\'t know how good it is for imitative stuff.

    The physical modeling went down this more algorithmic type path. I have not found a person who hasn\'t been able to ID the \"stiffer\" sounds of PM yet - some find it even annoying given its purity. Making the technology slower to be adapted.

    Just my 2 cents.


  3. #3

    Re: Brass Articulation Idea...

    The physical modeling went down this more algorithmic type path. I have not found a person who hasn\'t been able to ID the \"stiffer\" sounds of PM yet - some find it even annoying given its purity. Making the technology slower to be adapted.
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">Scott, what do you mean by that? Stiffer? I am a fan of PM myself, and I\'ve always felt it was slow to be adopted for the same reasons that most users never programmed much on the DX7-it wasn\'t intuitive and quick to learn, so they lost interest...

    Personally, I find it much more expressive in a real-time, live environment for string and wind sounds, even with just a breath controller and standard keyboard. (Exception being Tassman, with it\'s limited controller context.)


  4. #4

    Re: Brass Articulation Idea...

    I use the VL70m. It is great for controlling elements of the sounds. However, most people I demo it to (musicians and passive listeners) find something a bit off about the sound - maybe because in many ways it is so exact - the parts that are not exact standout more - like resonance and sustain. I have demo\'ed with midi files with Tom Scott controlling the VL-70m and using the internal demo sequences to insure it is just not my playing :-)

    As a player I love the growl, breathiness, breath controller to modulate attack, etc. I have a blast playing it for fun.

    However, at the end of the day, when I ask folks about the experience of listening to the physical modeling they are left kind of feeling \"so what\", not the greatest of lead instrument imitations. When I compare to some of the Gigasamples, people immediately pick up on the resonance and decay of the instruments sampled. However, they also note the inherent limitation of samples as a lead instrument as well.

    I am very open to the possibility you have a different experience and your listeners have a very different outlook on it. Would love to hear about examples where the technology is grabbing hold for you - maybe I can learn about better application of the toys I\'ve got.


Go Back to forum

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts