I translated some Akai samples into Giga format earlier this afternoon for the first time with Rubber Chicken software. The translations were perfect in every sense. The loops were translated perfectly as well. There was absolutely nothing that needed to be tweaked. The translating process with Rubber Chicken Translator software was very quick and simple.
What about the problem with duplicating reduntent waves .
If you have the same waves but with different program paramenters
giga will copy them twice.
One way to tell is to compare the meg size in the source cd to the converted cd or folder on the hard drive .
Just wondering if the rubber chick has that same prob?
I have tried CDxtract and Translator....after using them to translate libraries like symphony of voices, diffetrent strings/orchestral CDs..i end up buying CDxtract. They both do a good job at converting akais, but i found the basic parameters like attack and sustain to be MUCH more accurate with CDxtrat...what i mean by accurate is the CDxtract conversion sounds the closest to the original akai version.
I own an Akai S3000XL and just bought an S5000 so it was easy to hear what these libraries are suppose to sound like originally.
To Kenn159: I\'m not sure what you mean, because the waves don\'t contain any program parameters, so no samples get replicated, at least not that way.
What I think you mean is that the S-Convertor translates every Akai Program to a separate .gig file. Since several Programs can point to the same Samples, there\'s usually a lot of sample replication that occurs.
Translator is able to convert whole Volumes into one .gig file, eliminating any possibility of replication. S-Convertor does not do this, neither does CDxtract.
To vudoo: I respect your opinion, but after going through about 100 of the most popular commercial Akai CD\'s, reviewing them on both Translator and CDxtract, I wouldn\'t agree, coming to a conclusion based on overviewing all the research. Symphony of Voices ion\'t a really good example, as their is not tons of programming on it, and I checked this one out this morning, and I don\'t hear much difference between the originals or either translation. And of course Translator can import these in a MUCH more effcient manner (see above).
The amplitude envelope is easy; in fact, I would say both Translator and CDxtract have the timings just as the Akai does them. What isn\'t done well in CDxtract is the Filter Envelopes; the timings that are done with S-3000 stuff which take advantage of the 4-stages the Akai offers (which have to be pared down to the ADSR of Giga), and also with the multitude of modulation variations that both the S-1000 and S-3000 offer - since Giga doesn\'t handle these things very well, it\'s difficult to map these accurately.
There\'s also the consideration of negative envelopes and the values of those as well, since Giga tends to want 100% or none of it Neverhless, with the previous issues and this one, I would say that Translator has a more complete set of algorithms that handle this stuff. Any user also can send us any Akai file that doesn\'t do well and we\'ll address it immediately.
I hope this doesn\'t come off defensive or biased, but I think we\'ve done our homework on this one. But I\'m glad everyone has the opportunity to broadcast their opinion, no matter what it is.
To Malo: Read the above for our opinion on AKai CD\'s; regarding Emu stuff, the following should be said that Translator does with Emu EOS uniquely: it supports linked presets, it more accurately translates the EOS envelopes, which are time-dependant on the levels, in some cases the tunings are done more properly, and does a better job dealing with different variations of the lowpass-high pass filter settings.
Chicken Systems Customer Support
Home of \"Translator\"
It\'s funny that you don\'t \" hear \" the differences in the import between the origonal Akai and Translator. I hear a BIG difference. As i mention, most patches\' ( Symphony of Voices ) attack/sustain/Release are quite different through Translator ( less with CDxtract ). As you play the patches ( done Translator )..it kind of SLOWLY swell in and the releases last twice or three times as much as the same patches played through the Akai.
You also mention that the SOV is not a good example because it does not contain \" much \" elaborated programming \"...well, then i would think this is one MORE reason why the convert should be more precise.
As far as the filter envelop is concern. I think, both CDxtrack and translator, does an ok job. Both souded different from the original in their own ways but this is basically due to the nature of the filter envelops architecture in giga. To me , filters are like the sound signature of most synth/samplers..they all sound very different and Giga is definitely VERY weak in this area...of coures, all this is my personal opinions.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Malo: Hi, Kip!
Do you (or any others) have any experiences with Translator vs CDxtract. I have some Emu IV and Akai CDs I need to convert into Giga Format. Any suggestions as to which one will be better?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I\'ve seen CDXtract screw up an AKAI conversion big time...but only once.
Hey./..but then again...I\'ve only converted 1 akai cd.
Envelopes were totally wacked.
Other than that it\'s ok...not the most stable
program I\'ve ever seen, but they\'re still working on it.