You know as I read over all of these discussions on this forum, one consistent thought comes to mind...Software samplers still have a long way to go before they can rival the stability of hardware samplers. Just take a look at the last month of forum discussions (or the last year). It\'s amazing how many problems people are having with GigaSampler/GigaStudio and software-based samplers in general.
With a software sampler there are just too many variables in the equation to provide a \"universal\" sampler that will function correctly on ALL/ANY PC configurations. At least with a hardware-based sampler, the manufacturer is able to eliminate this variability, because they have control over the motherboard and other components used in the sampler. Just imagine how much easier it would be for everyone to debug GigaStudio if we all had the EXACT same computer system!! I know that\'s a really outrageous thought, but the reality is that everyone on this forum has something different about their system than does the next guy. And, as long as these differences exist, so with the instability and countless other problems that plague software-based samplers.
Now please don\'t get me wrong, I think that GigaStudio and other software samplers are a outstanding use the available technology. And they give the user greater flexibility than the hardware sampler. But, I really don\'t think there will ever come a time when software-based samplers will be as stable and as reliable as their hardware counterparts. Simply because software samplers can never be written towards a fixed hardware configuration.
Sure, hardware samplers can\'t begin to touch the sample capacity of GigaStudio, but if the success of my currect project lies solely in the stability of my sampler...there\'s no question about it, I\'m reaching for my hardware samplers.
I\'d really like to hear the opinion of other GigaSampler/GigaStudio users on this subject.
Well, I do agree with you in some points, but I really don\'t think that the difference between people\'s PCs is a problem that can\'t be solved. Most people I know that use Cakewalk don\'t have problem at all. I myself use it from version 1.2 to 9.03. In earlier versions there were some problem, but from 8.0 on I don\'t remember having a crash or anything - until I started to use GigaStudio160 with it....
Well, I still believe that GigaStudio will be more stable in the future.
About the sample capacity, you\'re right. I\'m using the 800MB Steinway B Piano and I don\'t want to use any other piano now. I also have many other samples you see on Nemesys\' website. In my ear, none of them are beatable - except for the GigaPiano. It sounds strange to me.
Another thing is that GSt makes sampling easier. In the old days I have to sample sounds with buttons and a small LCD, and in the end I only loaded other people\'s samples. With GSt, I can sample anything I want easily.
In the beginning I too had a hard time making it work. Yet now I can finish a project with it with only one or two crashes - without losing anything I need. I\'ll have to save the file, close the project and restart the PC when I see some part of the screen suddenly crashes (meaning something\'s starting to go wrong in the memory). It IS quite annoying, but I can live with it, and what is more, I can finish a project with it, plus some sounds I could never be using with hardware sampler and the much easier and more flexible way of routing channels with an excellent GSIF compatible soundcard (Mixtreme).
Apart from the above, I agree with you.
[This message has been edited by Deep White (edited 07-17-2000).]
Don\'t forget the nature of user forums boomer. They exist to help users with problems.
If you check most user forums including hardware samplers, most people are not there to speak of how great the product is. The majority of people already know this, hence the reason for them buying the product.
People come to forums to seek answers for their specific problems. The problems you see
on user forums are usally not indicative of most users.
In regards to stability, thousands of users in the film and music industry are satisfied with the reliability of gigasamper/gigastudio.
To take a cross section of any forum would not be indicative of the satisfaction level of the average user.
** Deep White: Yes, I agree totally about the tiny LCD displays on hardware samplers. It gives me a headache just thinking about trying to edit a sample using those displays. For sample editing and sample capacity, I most strongly agree that software samplers have a HUGE advantage!!
** Papa Chalk: You too have a good point. And maybe I shouldn\'t have mentioned this forum in my discussion. But, I do agree that any user-forum probably does not best represent the \"average\" satisfaction of the entire user-base. My main point was to emphasize that it is very difficult to develop a \"universal\" software-based sampler that will have the same stability and performance from one system to the next. There are just too many variables in the picture. Whereas a hardware sampler provides a fixed configuration that the software is developed around.
But again, I do appreciate the feedback. It is a very interesting topic, and I am curious what the future holds for both software and hardware sampling technologies.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>
But again, I do appreciate the feedback. It is a very interesting topic, and I am curious what the future holds for both software and hardware sampling technologies.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am a user of both.
Although I prefer my Yammi sampler above the software samplers of today\'s market, I must point out that the hardware sampling market
has been on it\'s a** for way to many years.
Big names like Akai and Emu have been exploiding there monopoly position with very high prices and minor technical improvements.
To give an example, just a couple of years ago Akai was one of the first manufactures that introduced new samplers which can be expanded with standard Simms.
Before that (the stone-age) you paid about 800 dollar for a 16 MB expansion Akai memory..
And that is not all,
even now hw samplers have horrible slow, ****ty interfaces with
dragging SCSI speeds that are just way behind
the capabilities of an avarage PC.
(Yamaha samplers in particular).
These facts say it all for me.
And that is why I definitly support the upcoming software samplers,
despite their incompatibility problems with different PC\'s and stuff, they seem
to do a pretty damn good job when you have everything running in order.
And furthermore, they are becoming an huge competition for the hwsampler market.
I think this will improve both prices and technology on both sides.
I believe that the instability in GS is an indication of the enourmous power of the software itself. For it to need so much computer resource in order for us, the users, to achieve an almost perfect representation of a particular, or set of instruments that, arguably, is unmatched by hardware based samplers, \"speaks\" for itself.
Of course, the instabilty may be caused by factors that were mentioned since this forum was intruduced. Still, I haven\'t had any major problems with my GS. I\'m quite satisfied with it. And, with the power of computer processing always on the rise, so will the strength of software samplers.
Boomer you seem to have underestimated the true power of software synthesis/sampling. The old model of plugging instruments into sequencers is fading. For myself the sequencer is becoming the instrument. Fading are the boundaries between instrument creation and musical composition. Previously, with my hardware sampler, I would have to poke around for hours with a silly little screen to try and customise the sounds inside for the track I was composing. Now, with software, this process is transparent; on the surface. Instrument creation is as easy and as accessible as sequencing a score. This, for me, is the real revolution of software synthesis/sampling