I\'m going to make the plunge into getting a software sampler system and gigasampler seems like the best one. However I\'m confused about which version I really need. I\'m always tempted to get more expensive versions but I\'ve found that bigger is not necessarily better (if you won\'t really use the additional features).
I do all my recording on a VS1680 and don\'t run instruments in midi. I would set up a sound on the software sampler and play the part while I recorded it. I want to be able to have access to acoustic and electric piano, hammond organ, mellotron/chamberlin, and optigan sounds. I\'d like to be able to read Akai format samples but don\'t anticipate creating my own samples.
I have a soundblaster Live soundcard and don\'t want to buy any other if I can avoid it.
Based on this information can I get by with the GS LE version? Thanks
I think no one can answer your question. All the GS products are very good and will probably be fine if you just need a basic sampler. But the SB probably isn\'t adequate, you want a soundcard with GSIF drivers.
Don\'t think GS will be an inexpensive solution, it is demanding on your system, so you may need system upgrades, more RAM, more and faster drives etc etc even before you get into the libraries, which are excellent but not cheap. With GSa you can get away with one hot machine, but with GSt most of us prefer a dedicated hot box.
Just so you know what you\'re in for. It can be worth it tho, there\'s nothing like it.
I just noticed that you won\'t be sequencing and will be recording to the Roland, so presumably your computer can act as a dedicated sampling box if you have an adequate sound card with GSIF. If you post the specs here folks will tell you if it\'s likely adequate. I needed 256 megs on my GSa box before performance was perfect with huge samples (this was a hot SCSI system 2 years ago). My new dedicated box was about $800 without sound card just last month, I haven\'t formally benchmarked it yet, but my seat of the pants tells me that the new ATA100 drives are faster than my 2 year old U2W SCSI, and both have been fine for GS.
[This message has been edited by Sam (edited 09-06-2001).]
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sam:
[The SB probably isn\'t adequate, you want a soundcard with GSIF drivers.]
Sam, Is the issue latency with the SB card or something else?
[If you post the specs here folks will tell you if it\'s likely adequate.]
Hey Folks, The specs on my machine are as follows: An Intel Pentium (III I think) 450mHz machine, 128 meg of RAM, I can dedicate 8 gig of my 12 gig 7200 rpm drive (not SCSI though) to GS use. I have a SoundBlaster Live card.
I\'d like to play a single instrument (piano, organ, or mellotron samples) in real time, recording it as I play - No sequencing. Can I get by with Gigasampler LE and the machine I have or do I need an upgrade (if so what)?
Thanks. I appreciate your input. You as users are able to give me the real story, not just a sales pitch.
My older system is a p3-500 with U2W SCSI. At 128M ram it worked well with GS-LE except for the big Boesendorfer piano (1G compressed, 2G of samples), on which it would occasionally stutter and rarely crash. With 256M it was flawless on everything. A couple of years ago I think SCSI was a good idea (this DAW has been totally solid) but I think the new UATA drives are faster than 2 year old SCSI; your drive is probably fine.
I believe SBlive has no GSif drivers. With GSIF you get no perceptible latency, I don\'t know about the SB but I wouldn\'t expect a real time playable system.
The system should be fine no matter which version you buy.
Note that Gigasampler doesn\'t have hihat style cutoff.
Playing piano with lots of sustain pedal seems to be able to bring any version of Giga to its knees.
Apart from that - expecially as you\'re only running one instrument at a time, it should be great.
NB With Giga the actual number of individual samples which can be loaded is a function of available ram. They detail this at the site. This is because giga caches a small part of the beginning of each sample of each loaded instrument as a buffer. Once you play a key and call on a particular sample, the buffer kicks it contents out nice and fast, then the rest streams from hard disk.
Small amount of ram = simpler or smaller instruments (not in megabytes, but in number of samples)