It strikes me that GigaStudio is in danger of sending Sampling back to the stone age.
Judging by the destinct silence about some of the features in GigaStudio I\'m guessing that most developers are just using GigaStudio as if it were some over blown Mellotron. It seems a paradox that although GigaStudio has made its parameters more accessible than looking through the old Akai letterbox to get at stuff... so developers would appear to have less interest in these parameters.
Where\'s the discussion about GigaStudio\'s limitations?
Yesterday I tried to create a 2 layered instrument, using Midi Control 16 to fade between them. I decided I\'d like to simultaneously filter between them using Midi Control 16 at the same time. I wasn\'t able to. Surely this is a limitation which you guys have come across or were you sleeping! I\'ve got a mute bell and an open bell... I want to cross fade not just volume but get the open bell to well up from the depths of a lowpass filter. (I don\'t want to use Midi Controls 1,2,&4 as they are the only control options I have for LFO\'s.) This is pretty basic stuff isn\'t it?
Has it also missed you that the new ADSR midi controls are not working correctly? Have you guys even touched them? What about calls for extra filters... tube would be great. And no midi control of LFO rates! Could we use LFO on pan? And what about basic stuff like Monophonic mode, Portamento...?
Oh and the pitch wheel\'s maximum setting is only 12 and it doesn\'t interpolate properly even at that.
Where were you guys, `the devlopers`, when all these limitations were overlooked.... were you busy making beautiful recordings of beautiful instruments and just throwing them at GigaStudio as if it was a Mellotron.
I\'m not complaining that you\'re not using GigaStudio to the full but I am worried that without more voices talking about the current dire under-development of GigaStudio it will just turn into some clunky old 160 voice tape player.
I\'m fed up with waiting YEARS for Nemesys to add even the most cursorary feature enhancements which, on any hardware synth, would have immediately been employed by sample developers. Maybe the reason why Nemesys isn\'t developing their product is because they don\'t think anyone would make use of any new features..... maybe they\'re right!
I guess the passive attitude from the audience stems from a variety of reasons. First, programming instruments is a lot of creative work, and imaginative, original thinking seems to be rare stuff these days. Second, tweaking on an everlasting work in progress such as Gigastudio is an objectively difficult task. Third, the feedback from Nemesys has always been poor, and this has probably led many to be discouraged. But you\'re right, however, to say that the possibilities offered by this software, either theoretical or real, are unlikely to be realized if not previously explored. In fact, and on a positive side, despite nobody seems to have noticed it, the nasty bug of propagation of vibrato/tremolo to all loaded instruments has been finally solved.
[This message has been edited by Giorgio Tommasini (edited 06-06-2001).]
To be fair - as a sampler gigastudio has invented t2 major things: the very long samples and the dimensions - which I would find hard to live without now...
But, I agree that Gigastudio could improve a lot as a \"traditional\" sampler and be more attractive to non-classical users. Still - NemeSys is also a business, they have to earn money in the future as well and unless they wan\'t to get into a new field (seq.)they must created non-free upgrades.
I wouldn\'t be surprised to see a lot of improvements in GigaStudio 3.0...
PS: how do you guys insert smilies inside the post?
[This message has been edited by SCARBEE (edited 06-04-2001).]
I agree with Thomas about the fact that Nemesys has brought sampling/sample playback a long way simply by removing the ram limit. How many of us would like to go back to samplers with ram limited sampling and no dimension control?
I think it\'s really valuable to give Nemesys our feedback on what we think their priorities should be vis-a-vis enabling Giga as a sound \'creation\' device.
When we do, we have to keep an eye on the \'practical\' side of advancing the abilities of Gigastudio. Things like:
1. There\'s always going to be a PRACTICAL limitation to improvements based on the current Intel model\'s abilities. There\'s no point in spending time and money in getting Giga to do real time variphrasing, fruity looping,Z-plane filtering and physical modelling, if the PC to run it on won\'t exist for 4 years. Nemesys will go broke waiting for everyone to be able to afford the platform. Right now - TODAY -There are enough people posting their tribulations to this forum to suggest that the current Giga model is already pushing the limits of what affordable PCs can deliver in terms of hard disk throughput and CPU speed.
2. Nemesys need to make a buck to support R&D. That means getting a viable version out in the market as soon as possible, even if everyone\'s preferred options aren\'t yet on board.
3. How many people want great sample libraries which emulate real instruments and how many want true synthesis options as well? How big is the sound design/synthesis market in reality? When synths started to offer PCM waveforms as the basis of their patches, I figured that was the end of synths - but they were incredibly popular. I think it just goes to show that a lot of \'synthesists\' out there were really only searching for a good pallet of realistic sounds in the first place, and had been sidetracked into the world of sound creation on their way there. That said, even straight samples can be an incredible source of new sounds given the right processing facilities.
4. How does Nemesys gauge what we think are the priorities to be adopted for feature expansion on the GigaX platform? They probably base most of their direction on Joe and Jim\'s initial flashes, as well as having a small retinue of respected staff, users and reviewers who\'s opinions they trust. Things like these anonymous forums would probably be a ways down the list in terms of cred. That doesn\'t mean we shouldn\'t strongly voice our opinions.
I don\'t know if anyone has done this, but why don\'t we start two new wishlist threads.
The first could be aimed at building up a list of every enhancement we can think of which is vaguely sensible.
Once this thread plateaus (in terms of contributions slowing down), we then start the second thread, in which we all take that fixed list of features which we ended up with from the first thread and then prioritise it in terms of what we personally want out of a future Giga. There would be nothing stopping the altruistic from ignoring their own selfish preferences and listing what they think the general populous is after in a softsampler/synth =)
This could be helped along by Joe supplying the contents of the Nemesys wish list database, but I wouldn\'t if I was him
[This message has been edited by Chadwick (edited 06-04-2001).]