|
Post by Hollow Sun on Jul 21, 2008 14:05:10 GMT
This stuff is so fantastic that it´s a pity to see so few Program Presets. Considering the number of existing Program Presets based on the internal ROM samples I can image about 1000 or way more Program Presets based on all the HS samples. Someone should do it. Unfortunately I don´t know a good Fusion Program creator I do but he's up to his eyes in other work at the moment. If you want to have go and release those variations you can imagine, then feel free. The only slight problem (and a reason I've shied away from it) is that people may have the source samples in different locations. For example, there's 'Hollow Sun 1', 'Hollow Sun 2', 'Hollow Sun 3', 'Hollow Sun 4' and 'Hollow Sun 5' in separate banks and there's 'Hollow Sun 1-5' in one bank and some may not have all the baks installed. But feel free to play around with 'em Klaus as you think appropriate. No problem here. Same for any 'FreePack' variations you may dream up. Steve
|
|
|
Post by kpr on Jul 21, 2008 17:03:25 GMT
Sure, I´ll think about this chance although I must admit that it was true when I mentioned that I don´t know someone who could make Programs. It´s because I´m involved not only in my own Fusion future plans but also doing sample libraries and Presets for other formats as well as for several manufacturers. So my time schedule is already quite filled with a lot of time consuming jobs. Considering that I did a CD last October for Milo´s Craving and now we´re working on the follow up CD, I finished the final recordings last weekend for my other music project Helio.Gen where we now going to make the mixdown, and this is not all, I´m writing books too and two are in the pipeline at this moment. Not to mention that I need a short break sometimes and leave to Portugal end of August once again for a couple of weeks to recharge my internal batteries
|
|
ray
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by ray on Jul 23, 2008 15:43:19 GMT
Because it's not a ROM-based sound, you can edit the raw multisamples' velocity range and save your own versions. Select Wurli 200 in SAMPLER and in the RANGE tab... Set Zones 3, 7, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31, 35, 39, 43, 47, 51 and 55's VELOCITY HIGH value to 127. Set Zones 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 and 56's VELOCITY LOW value to 127 as well. What you effectively done is remove the 'barking' hard sample. Save that edited multi-sample to a new location (so as not to overwrite the original) and use the new multi-sample in the Wurly 200 program. That may give you more of the mellower Wurli sound you're after. Steve - this got me alot closer to what I was after! The difference in timbre between the middle velocity samples and the hard sample is night and day... I use a 6HD, and with the synth action, it was originally a real struggle/chance to trigger the middle velocity samples consistently. I must admit, I almost never hear that "barking" hard sound quite like that on my real Wurly, because I don't think I ever dare to hit it that hard. That must be reed-breaking velocity. I also found it helped to flatten the EQ settings in the Program, and also turned off the Room Reverb. As you said, some of these commercial glamour/cosmetics for the Showfloor audience was adding to that "unrealistic" tone I originally found. I'm gonna have to try fiddling with it some more as time permits. I have my Fusion sitting next to my Wurly 200A at the moment, so perhaps I should try and mould the program to match, and post the results sometime. But you're right, these samples can sound much closer than what I originally believed, and in response to the original post - the Hollow Sun samples we already have are great, and I think the existing Programs are only small examples of the tonal possibilities available.
|
|
ray
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by ray on Jul 23, 2008 15:52:07 GMT
Just noticed this bit on the Nostalgia webpage: www.hollowsun.com/donations/wurli203/index.htmlNow, as far as I'm aware, the 203 is pretty much identical to the 200 internally. But I'm curious if these are the samples that ended up in the Fusion, or are they the more stripped down ones? I recall seeing more than one sample per octave... did you resample the 200A later?
|
|
|
Post by Hollow Sun on Jul 23, 2008 17:24:56 GMT
Steve - this got me alot closer to what I was after! The difference in timbre between the middle velocity samples and the hard sample is night and day I am glad you like the change. I must admit, I almost never hear that "barking" hard sound quite like that on my real Wurly, because I don't think I ever dare to hit it that hard. That must be reed-breaking velocity. It is - I lost quite a few reeds that way when I had a 200. Steve
|
|
|
Post by Hollow Sun on Jul 23, 2008 17:30:13 GMT
Just noticed this bit on the Nostalgia webpage: www.hollowsun.com/donations/wurli203/index.htmlNow, as far as I'm aware, the 203 is pretty much identical to the 200 internally. But I'm curious if these are the samples that ended up in the Fusion, or are they the more stripped down ones? I recall seeing more than one sample per octave... did you resample the 200A later? The 200 samples mentioned there are very basic - some I took ages ago and had just one sample per octave. It wasn't too bad as it happens - ok in a mix for a flavour of Wurli. The one in Fusion IS, in fact, a 203. Internally identical, it came with an amp/speaker, that's all. I don't think they sold many. The samples were recorded via the line out. I called it '200' in Fusion so as not to cause confusion - everyone knows what a 200 is ... and the 203 is only a variation in the 200 range. Steve
|
|
ray
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by ray on Jul 24, 2008 0:43:24 GMT
Thanks for the clarification. Yes, I'm hipped to the fact that a 203 is identical to a 200 except for the cabinet/speakers, which in the case of a line output, makes zero difference. I agree that it makes far more sense to label it as a 200. I just wanted to clarify whether you might have another set of Wurly samples sitting around
|
|
|
Post by Chief Big Smoke on Jul 24, 2008 15:21:25 GMT
Out of curiousity, how much do you think that the organization of the vintage sounds on the Fusion contributes to the perception of the quality of the sounds? I've made a couple of trips to Guitar Center over the last week to do some side-by-side comparison of the Electro 2, the Motif (ES and XS series), the Fantom, the Juno G and a couple of Korgs. Of course, the Fusions are long gone, but I've got a 6HD (Sweetwater Edition) at home. Also, I understand that, as far as the Electro 2 goes, the Fusion is not supposed to be an 'emulator' of these other vintage boards, but figure it to be relavent to this post.
This may be a few years too late, but in my opinion, there is something to be said for having all of the EPs and Clavs lined up in banks that can be scrolled through one after the other (e.g., the Motif and Fantom banks). Maybe that is too simple of an explanation, but I'm just trying to figure out the thought process that has been expressed in a number of reviews of the Fusion, customers and magazines alike...
I know that the Fusion banks can be re-arranged, but I guess this goes more to the "in-store appeal" of the Program aspect of the Fusion (independent of the overusage of the REVERB bus on almost every EP program on the Fusion...and on a total side note, the ORGAN ROTARY insert that, in my opinion, hurts most of the organs on the Fusion which are better-served using just the ROTARY insert...I digress).
My point is that, I think that I think the Fusion stacks up nicely against any other board I've heard with the Electro 2 and the Yamaha stock sounds having, at best, a slight edge...really.
As far as manipulating these sounds on the Fusion...it seems that it is as easy as changing the bus and inserts (for my taste), and maybe an turn of a knob or two for EQ (I haven't made the adjustment that Ray and Steve have been discussing, but I've thought the same thing about the "bark"...thanks for bringing it up, guys).
With respect to my earlier post in this thread, maybe people (myself included) are always looking for more sounds for our Fusion, especially EPs and Clavs that are not as easily "created" by the typical user (i.e., one that doesn't have the actual instrument to create their own multisample). Considering one of the selling points of the Fusion is the ability to add sounds so easily (and cheaply, in most cases), it is natural for owners to continue to want to expand their soundset (even to the point of obsession).
|
|
|
Post by Hollow Sun on Jul 24, 2008 22:12:23 GMT
The 'in-store first impression' thing is just s-o-o-o-o difficult to judge and get right. * Lather them in effects so that they sound impressive or have 'em 'raw' and more like they should sound/will be used? * Have all related sounds grouped together (pianos, basses, strings, etc.) or scatter them (almost at random) across the memory banks? If you lather the sounds in effects, the purists who want to hear a 'real' piano or Wurli or Tron (whatever) complain; if you leave the effects off, the newbie/punter is totally underwhelmed especially as the XYZ right next to it sounds so 'big' and whizzy and impressive. If you put all the related programs together, people get bored really quickly of hearing a piano then another piano then another then another and so on until they get to the bass category where they hear endless bass after bass then strings after strings after strings .... and so on; or you scatter them around BUT ... with the 'greatest hits' in the first 10 or 20 and punters go 'wow' at the diversity with just half a dozen button presses. It actually makes sense to have them with less effects coz even the punter's gonna take 'em off when they come to USE the sounds (and reviewers invariably say that XYZ's sounds have too much FX on them!). It actually makes sense to organise them via category as it makes them easier to find when the punter comes to USE and find the sounds But neither make much of an impression on the shop floor. It's a dilemma Steve
|
|
|
Post by Hollow Sun on Jul 24, 2008 23:10:00 GMT
I haven't made the adjustment that Ray and Steve have been discussing, but I've thought the same thing about the "bark"...thanks for bringing it up, guys See... that's another odd one. Most people I know who have heard/played the Wurli (in Fusion, in 'Nostalgia', in my own lib) just LOVE that 'bark' and the impurities it introduces (listen carefully and you can hear a slight pitch bend ... just like 'the real thing') and people have reported that for that alone, it is thoroughly realistic and offers something that other Wurli libraries shy away from ... that mine is 'rawer', more aggressive ... which they like - more 'rock n roll'. But it seems that it's too extreme for others (and this IS the first time I've heard that complaint, honestly). In all the vintage stuff I did for Fusion, I think it's fair (and true) to say that I went for 'signature sounds'. In the case of the Wurli, let's face it, when you think of that sound/instrument, the first thing that springs to mind for most people is 'Supertramp'. When you think of the ARP (or Eminent) string synth, the first thing most people probably think of is JMJ's swirling, phase shifted sound. When you think of Tron choir or strings, you think of that big, expansive Gothic texture floating in a huge surreal cathedral (well - I do anyway!) and of Tron flutes, tripped out psychedelia (man - pass the joss sticks!). And so on. I (like to think I) created the most recognisable versions of those sounds so that when dialed up, even if the user has no real knowledge of the instrument, he immediately has an aural reference point because he just 'knows' that sound from elsewhere (Supertramp, JMJ, prog rock, whatever, records he's heard) and (hopefully) feels immediately comfortable and knows what he's dealing with. Admittedly, we at Sun Towers could have maybe been a bit more adventurous with programming alternatives but (and maybe this is a bit hidden if you've not explored them) there's a lot of variation in the application of the performance controls and S1/S2 in many cases. For example..... Take 'Tape Violins'..... At face value, the classic 3-violin Tron tape frame as used by countless Tron users of old ... arguably (apart from the 'Strawberry Fields' flutes) THE most famous Tron sound. In that program, ASSIGN 1 introduces a sub-octave (it sounds like another tape frame, 'Mixed Strings'), ASSIGN 2 allows you to mess with the envelope time, ASSIGN 3 allows you to make it non-velocity sensitive (like the real thing) and ASSIGN 4 allows you to take the effects off. Furthermore, pressing S1 introduces the 'half speed' modification that some Tron users had done to their instruments. The same is true for a lot of the other programs too where the assignable controls and S1/S2 provide a LOT of variation. Now - and here's the dilemma - make all those variations available as separate programs (octave split Tron, non-velo Tron, half speed Tron, half-speed octave split Tron, various slow Trons and combinations of all of those) .... or just one definitive program where the user can decide (in real-time) how he wants the program to sound with hands on control of those parameters? I/we/Alesis went with the 'definitive' approach - and I stand by that decision ... I think it was the right one for any number of reasons (not least of which is that users can smell a rat when they hear the same set of samples being re-used over and over again in endless, repetitive variations and - curiously - feel somehow cheated!). Welcome to the world of trying to please all the people all the time Steve
|
|
christianrock
Junior Member
Banned at User's own request
Posts: 282
|
Post by christianrock on Jul 25, 2008 13:22:04 GMT
I think you did good, Steve! From what I can tell by hanging out at other forums, Hollow Sun's libraries are always pointed out as being excellent. I have yet to hear anyone that isn't happy with the work you and your team did. And even now, all I'm hearing is, "there's just this one little thing here I wish I had...", which doesn't really take away from the body of the work. You had more of a programmer's approach and put the samples out there with some program patches that basically demonstrate what the samples are. If people want something different they can go in and change them, create new programs, etc. But people nowadays are spoiled by thousands of programs/patches, Roland created something like 75 variations of their piano sample in the new Fantom G, to make sure that nobody would say "I didn't find a piano sound that worked for me", yet I bet there's still someone out there that wanted something different yet doesn't want to learn to change the amount of reverb or add a little bit of high mids or something like that... ...can't wait for my Nebulae
|
|
|
Post by Chief Big Smoke on Jul 25, 2008 15:22:12 GMT
I/we/Alesis went with the 'definitive' approach - and I stand by that decision ... For me, it was the 'right choice,' too. I bought my 6HD having only listened to the stock sounds on a couple of different 8HD boards (one on my own and another with a more formal demo at a local music store in Dallas, Texas). Of course, the stock sounds were only one component of my decision. Having all of the Hollow Sun sounds and a few extra now, I'm even more sure of it. For me, owning a Fusion is kind of like being in on a secret...while all boards have their own limitations, it really is a remarkable workstation. Also, to clear things up, I think the Wurli "bark" is an absolute critical element of the sound. I think, for my limited playing technique and my relative use of that soundset, my taste require it to appear at higher velocities. Therefore, the earlier tips in this thread are useful to me, too. KPR, if you're still reading this thread... Have you considered packing the pre-existing piano, EPs, clavs, etc. in a sample-set? The current packing format has a very broad range of samples. The demos I've listened to on the BITR site sound superb. I'm just curious to know if it is cost-effective for you to rearrange many of your pre-existing vintage board samples into a set of there own (and likely different programs, too).
|
|
|
Post by Hollow Sun on Jul 25, 2008 15:33:23 GMT
For me, owning a Fusion is kind of like being in on a secret... Yeah - s'kinda good innit?! Also, to clear things up, I think the Wurli "bark" is an absolute critical element of the sound. I think, for my limited playing technique and my relative use of that soundset, my taste require it to appear at higher velocities. Therefore, the earlier tips in this thread are useful to me, too. In that case, modify the values listed. E.g. Set Zones 3, 7, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31, 35, 39, 43, 47, 51 and 55's VELOCITY HIGH value to 120. Set Zones 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52 and 56's VELOCITY LOW value to 121. This way, the 'bark' will only be heard at high velocities. Adjust those two figures to taste - a LOT depends on your technique and your global velocity settings. Steve
|
|
ray
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by ray on Jul 28, 2008 16:01:05 GMT
If you lather the sounds in effects, the purists who want to hear a 'real' piano or Wurli or Tron (whatever) complain; if you leave the effects off, the newbie/punter is totally underwhelmed especially as the XYZ right next to it sounds so 'big' and whizzy and impressive. I agree. There is obviously no correct answer to the dilemma, it is one of those things where an executive decision has to be made and it's one or the other. But given the benefit of hindsight, and just my opinion (for what it's worth), I think going for the exact opposite approach of what the Big 3 (Yam-Korg-land) do would have been a good strategy... because it ensures that you win over the niche market (all the people that feel slighted by the "me too" approach of the other boards). But when you go head to head with them, you're fighting for the same audience, and then it gets much harder to compete .... considering marketing and brand bias at play, established reputations (e.g. korg's effects are quite popular, yamaha's pianos, etc.) Obviously, none of the above is relevant if the powers-that-be at Alesis were not happy to have the "niche market" and wanted a slice of the big cake. Niche markets can grow though... case in point: the Nord Electro (sorry for overusing this example) is a ridiculously popular board now and it only features 5 sounds, and something like 3 effects... and no reverb at all. Similarly for most of the Nord products, like the Nord Wave. Very limited feature set, and does away with most things the big 3 would deem necessary. Sorry, I generally hate it when the users post what they think a company should do while they clearly have no idea what's really at hand from the outside. I didn't mean for it to sound like that. I just meant to point out the pro's to the "road less travelled" choice (and I understand there are cons too). In the case of the Wurli, let's face it, when you think of that sound/instrument, the first thing that springs to mind for most people is 'Supertramp'. Perhaps it's a matter of tastes. Or trends. It depends on perspective... one can look at the preference of a mellow Wurly sound and the distaste of the chorused Supertramp sound as a trend. Or, to me, the "Supertramp" sound was a trend and that's passed I'll be honest ... to me, the Supertramp Wurly sound is the equivalent of the Dyno'ed or FM Rhodes sound. It's just a distant relative of the original. And I don't like it I don't think either perspective is more correct or whatever... I just think they're both equally valid "signatures". Admittedly, we at Sun Towers could have maybe been a bit more adventurous with programming alternatives but (and maybe this is a bit hidden if you've not explored them) there's a lot of variation in the application of the performance controls and S1/S2 in many cases. For example..... Take 'Tape Violins'..... At face value, the classic 3-violin Tron tape frame as used by countless Tron users of old ... arguably (apart from the 'Strawberry Fields' flutes) THE most famous Tron sound. In that program, ASSIGN 1 introduces a sub-octave (it sounds like another tape frame, 'Mixed Strings'), ASSIGN 2 allows you to mess with the envelope time, ASSIGN 3 allows you to make it non-velocity sensitive (like the real thing) and ASSIGN 4 allows you to take the effects off. Furthermore, pressing S1 introduces the 'half speed' modification that some Tron users had done to their instruments. Hey, I loved this. And thank you for doing it. What makes me enjoy the Fusion dedicated stuff is things like this, which allows you to play with the sound on-the-fly. That's really the unique aspect that the Fusion stuff brings home for me. So I really think your "definitive" apporach is very cool, and the dialing in/out is very much a big thumbs up for me. But the thing with the Wurly/Rhodes/EPs was that I just couldn't "dial it in" (or dial out the effects) to sound like how I know these keyboards sounded in person, when I just sat down and played. For me, that was my expectation. But going back ... I think we can all appreciate more Programs for the existing sounds, ... from anybody with the talent. And perhaps... just perhaps, we (read, I) are a little greedy and always wanting more I know it!
|
|
christianrock
Junior Member
Banned at User's own request
Posts: 282
|
Post by christianrock on Aug 7, 2008 13:51:17 GMT
Now for both Klaus and Steve: After playing with the EPs we have, I do think we still need a top-quality multi-sampled Rhodes with 88 sampled keys, that will have a sound quality comparable or exceeding the one from Digital Sound Factory. The reason I'm saying this is, in the last two weeks I almost got a friend of mine to buy a Fusion - he needs to replace his Roland XP. He loved the Holy Grail and the KPR pianos, but the Rhodes was a deal-breaker. According to him, none of the available Rhodes sound right in the high registers. Then I checked the "Classic Piano" directory and saw that we only have a few samples for the middle registers, so for course we'll have a lot of alias in the upper registers... The kpr 1973 Mk I is the best Rhodes we have IMHO, but it's got a bit of unwanted noise, and I haven't checked what keys we have multi-sampled, but it also seems a bit "thin" in the upper registers, though it's quite better than the "Classic Piano" in that register. Even if it's just one single 32Mb sampled Rhodes, if it's real high quality, I bet you could charge 20-30 dollars for it (of course you could have different programs with different EQs, velocity, EP+strings, EP+analog, etc). What do you guys think?
|
|