• Register
  • Help

View Poll Results: The future of sampling?

12. You may not vote on this poll
  • Physical Modeling of/and Actual Sample Data

    9 75.00%
  • Terrabytes of Articulations (loads of actual sample data)

    0 0%
  • Other (please feel free to make a prediction)

    3 25.00%
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Topic: The Future of Sampling...

  1. #1

    The Future of Sampling...

    I posted this on the main forum, but wanted to get your opinions:

    I brought this up during the chat yesterday, but wanted to get a wider opinion...

    Where do you guys see the future of sampling heading? (or where would you like to see it heading...?)

    The mixture of physical modeling and actual sample data, to "fake" the numerous articulations and nuances that could never practically be recorded?

    Or collections that make VSL look like a Casio GM set in size? Mountains upon mountains of samples as storage becomes easier, cheaper and quicker?

    Or something else, something we haven't seen yet?

    Please leave a comment as to why you voted the way you did, as I'm interested to hear why you believe its going that way (or at least know your personal preference as to which you prefer...)
    Alan Lastufka | www.BelaDMedia.com
    Producer/Artistic Design | Content Producer

    20 Things

  2. #2

    Smile Re: The Future of Sampling...

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Lastufka
    The mixture of physical modeling and actual sample data, to "fake" the numerous articulations and nuances that could never practically be recorded
    Physical modeling of actual sample data AND terabytes of articulations. The more combinations there are, the more options you have...

    :-) Chin@blue

  3. #3

    Re: The Future of Sampling...

    A few observations...

    1 - As computer technology improves and algorithms are developed, physical modeling will probably replace sampling across the board. We only use sampling today because physical modeling is just not completely there yet.

    2 - We aren't there yet, so sampling will still be required for some years still. The question is how much samping do we need combined with physical modeling or other programmatic techniques?

    3 - There are already too many big huge orchestra libraries with a buzzillion samples the require a 250GB Hard drive just to get started. Why compete? Do something different (GPO is currently breaking the mold in this regard).

    4 - The main problem I see with the huge libraries such as VSL is that in addition to requiring immense storage, to actually use them you have to wade through piles and piles of samples and articulations..and if you really want to get an intimate piece of music..you would need to use a lot of different articulations in one piece of music, etc..to get the variation there. I am simply overwhelmed by the thought of A) paying for VSL and B) spending the time to sift through all the samples in it.

    5 - As all these different library makers compete with each other..they make the problem even worse by making libraries bigger and bigger and bigger. Talk about information overload.

    6 - The current GPO approach is to program the variation rather than provide different samples. However, this is still not physical modeling per say..its merely using whatever technology is currently available from Kontakt to provide performance oriented tweakability to a smaller set of samples. In some cases, some people have said that the realism still doesn't match what is currently acheived with a massive lib like VSL. However, in many other cases, GPO achieves it just fine with a tiny fraction of the sample count.

    7 - In addition some might argue that GPO provides a more direct performance link to the person doing the sequencing. Rather than searching endlessly for just the right sample to use to express the peformance the composer wants (or simply giving up and taking the 10th thing they try and making it sound good that way), the composer can "perform" the expression they want...the way they want it and acheive a lot of variation...which in many ways is more intimate and personalized...perhaps a form of realism...

    8 - Is it perfect yet? Hardly. This is new stuff. It will get better. First it will get better as stuff like GPO figures out clever ways to use Kontakt/midi to pull more variation out of a small number of samples. Later it will get even better as physical modeling is used to replace sampling altogether. The end game will not be a huge sample library with smarter and smarter ways to find the samples you want. It will be physical modeling where people simply perform and the desired sound occurs very convincingly. I think its better for GPO to continue to forge new territory in that direction.

    9 - In the short term, a product like GPO may need to incorporate just a few more articulations and samples to make up for the current lack of physical modeling technology or lack of quality in the midi spec in order to provide more realism. However, I stress "few". I hope the emphasis will be on trying to make it work via performance oriented programming...regardless of whether a few more samples are being used or more intelligent modeling.

    10 - I sincerely think GPO is the one product setting a new standard and I hope that Gary will continue to develope his product in this direction. As I said before, there are practical concerns about making GPO work RIGHT NOW with current technology...so perhaps a few more samples may be needed to acheive realism..in the near term. Ideally, they would still be accompanied by smarter and smarter performance-oriented programming which makes it possible for the composer to simply "perform" and not have to think at all about which articulation sample they are loading in...etc..
    "Music is a manifestation of the human spirit similar to a language. If we do not want such things to remain dead treasures, we must do our utmost to make the greatest number of people understand their secrets" -- Zoltan Kodaly

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Orcas Island

    Re: The Future of Sampling...


    I agree with your assessment that pure physical modeling may someday replace sampling. It will be a while before there's a full replacement and in the interim I believe you will see a marriage of samping combined with physical modeling. Things will be done mostly in the frequency domain. Built-in intelligence will also play a role.

    The market is certainly crowded with large libraries and more are on the way. This means lower prices for the user. Witness Kirk Hunter's impressive 350 gigabyte orchestral library that will be $995.

    Libraries may someday grow beyond our ability to control them with existing music technology. The keyboard only has a very limited amount of real-time keyboard controllers and the MIDI spec hasn't changed in the past decade.

    The GPO approach has been welcomed by the musical community. But his is only a start and, as you point out, it will get better. We are researching and developing new and innovative solutions in order to provide the tools for musicians to make great music.

    Gary Garritan

Go Back to forum


Posting Permissions

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