Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Forum Jump  
Who invented legato sampling?
Last post Tue, Mar 29 2016 by William, 21 replies.
Options
Go to last post
2 Pages12>
Posted on Thu, Mar 10 2016 02:09
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5710

I am interested in knowing who first came up with the idea of dissecting transitional-notes-to-target-notes from start notes,  in order to create legato transitions. This is maybe the most important advance in realism for sampling, but who came up with this idea?    It is a huge stroke of genius!  Was it originated in VSL?   Now everybody does it, but who came up with the idea?  This person should have a statue.  (Or a patent - too late.)

Posted on Thu, Mar 10 2016 02:41
by FredB
Joined on Sat, Apr 01 2006, Montreal, Posts 669

The legato transition technology was not possible when the sample libraries was made for hardware sampler with limited RAM (8, 16, 32MB...). Remember PS Advanced orchestra? Then Gigastudio and computer with more RAM came and opened the possibilities.

As far as I remember, the oldest sample library with legato transitions was the Garritan Strings http://www.soundonsound....02/articles/garritan.asp But I'm not 100% sure, it may be VSL. 

Fred

Master: Imac I7 32Gb Late 2013 - - OsX 10.13.6
Slave: Corei7 6800k 64gb - Win 10
Soft: Logic X 10.4.4 - ProTools 12.x - VE Pro 6 - VI Pro 2 - MIR
Posted on Thu, Mar 10 2016 09:11
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608

I don't ever remember seeing anything before VSL, and as it was only available for Giga and EXS, and needed a special Performance Tool, I'm sure I would have heard about it, had there been anything earlier.

In fact most of the stuff we take for granted was invented by VSL, so thanks guys.  

DG

Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Thu, Mar 10 2016 22:50
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5710

I had the Garritan Strings which did not have actual sampled legato, just a switch for closely connected sustains.   

Posted on Sat, Mar 12 2016 04:50
by plowman
Joined on Sat, Dec 13 2003, Posts 1147

"... just a switch for closely connected sustains."

Mr. Kersten is correct. They took a segment of the string sound and slipped it in between the transitions like a buffer. GOS called them "masking samples." It was not a recording of a performance passing across an interval. 

But I remember Garritan and his wares fondly. Nice man, great support, and considering the price, exceptional products. He was among the first to truly capitalize on hard disk streaming. 

Posted on Wed, Mar 16 2016 02:15
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5710

I would like to know the actual answer to this question nevertheless.  Who came up with this idea?  Is it forever lost to history?

Posted on Wed, Mar 16 2016 07:25
by Paul
Joined on Sat, Aug 03 2002, Vienna, Posts 13437

Hi, 

I´d say, the idea for a realistic legato that actually connected notes just like they were recorded was there for quite some time... but there had to be someone who could actually make it reality, which involves software development for third party samplers (remember the Performance Tool?) and VERY accurate recording and editing sessions, with up to 1000 samples for each legato version for each instrument (and you need to cover quite some legatos, check out the Solo Strings as an example). 

Sometimes it´s not just the idea, it´s also the brains, the team effort and the sheer manpower to make things work....

Best, 
Paul

Paul Kopf
Product Manager - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Thu, Mar 17 2016 01:50
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5710

I realize a lot of work went into it and remember using the performance tool.  I think my question was prompted by the fact that nowadays so many other companies are doing all that work to sample the transitions etc. - so I wondered where the specific idea of separated legato transitions attached to target notes first came from but I guess no one knows. 

Posted on Sun, Mar 20 2016 04:49
by SJSF
Joined on Sat, Sep 18 2010, Posts 499

Who the heck knows when the first legato transition was sampled. But VSL sure as well perfected it! ;)

 

Seriously, VSL's legato (even just the SE basic patches) work more flexibly at slow and fast speeds than any other library out there. I'm a fan of Fanfare trumpets fast legato and some others I've been planning to get for who knows how long now. They are good. But even the entry level stuff outperforms most other libraries IMO.

 

-Sean

Posted on Sun, Mar 20 2016 15:16
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5710

That's true they perfected it.  Those fanfare trumpets have a fantastic legato.  I am also a fan of the 8 horn ensemble which has the most perfect sound for legato horns.  

I think one of the best things about the VSL legato is how you can easily use those transitions from any note that is long enough.  That allows things like crescendo to legato, sforzando to legato, long detache to legato, etc.

Posted on Sat, Mar 26 2016 11:07
by jasensmith
Joined on Tue, Jan 15 2008, Arizona, Posts 1582

I guess we'll never solve this mystery...

It's a good question.  Before William started this thread I had always thought VSL invented legato samples.

Not to change the subject but the mystery of who invented sampled legato is much like the mystery of who came up with the concept of MIDI.

Now, before you say, "Oh that's a no-brainer. Dave Smith did back in 1983."  You should know that this common knowledge "fact" is, in fact, a myth.   Yes. Dave Smith of Sequential Circuts wrote the protocol or language that we know today as MIDI but the concept of MIDI, or linking electronic musical instruments together, had been available years before 1983.  The problem was, instruments were proprietary to the manufacturer who designed them.  So you could hook up a Roland keyboard with other Roland equipment and/or software but you couldn't hook up a Korg to a Roland keyboard and so on.

What Dave Smith did in 1981 was write the language which became MIDI.  It was painstaking work that took hours of tedious coding that consumed the entire year.  Then came the hard part; getting all the major players in the industry to sign on.  That consumed all of 1982 and a good part of 83 right up until NAMM convention when it was announced.  So who came up with the idea of linking electronic instruments together with computers?

The ironic thing about MIDI is that most serious musicians scoffed when it first came out dismissing it as only good for computer geeks making cheesy blipidy bloop video game music a la Asteroids, and Pac Man.  Now, I'm wondering if any of those "serious" musicians are reading this right now while taking a break from their VSL MIDIstrations.  


"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There's no point in being a damn fool about it."
- W.C. Fields
Posted on Sat, Mar 26 2016 12:28
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608

Originally Posted by: jasensmith Go to Quoted Post

Not to change the subject but the mystery of who invented sampled legato is much like the mystery of who came up with the concept of MIDI.

It really is time for an update to the MIDI spec, but I think that we're just so far down the rabbit hole with current offerings that change would be really difficult. Yamaha invented a sort of update with their XP format, but it still used the old limited version. There are various new sorts, but nothing seems to be moving on that front.

DG

Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Sat, Mar 26 2016 21:46
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5710

It is an interesting topic about MIDI.  It is old, but still infinite in its capacity, unlike other protocols. I think most problems with MIDI come from sequencers, not MIDI itself.  To me, sequencers have done the same thing that all technology today - except of course VSL  - is doing, which is to add absolutely everything that could possibly be done, though 99% of that is almost never done and the controls to do it are IN THE WAY. So technology becomes more and more clumsy.  Look at a Xerox machine - used to make simple copies 99% of the time  but now made so infernally overcomplicated they constantly crash or refuse to do a single-sided, black and white copy of one page.  I personally have a workaround for this phenomenon by using an antique sequencer that has none of the five million bells and whistles of the current sequencers but like MIDI is old and infinite. 

Posted on Sun, Mar 27 2016 09:27
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608

Bill, my main issue is the lack of velocity layers. I'm doing some work on a Disklavier a the moment, and I do notice the difference between MIDI and XP format. It may or may not make a real difference to sample work, but as time goes on and sample player software before every more complex, I think that there will be a few MIDI changes that will become necessary.

DG

Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Sun, Mar 27 2016 14:16
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5710

What exactly are you referring to with lack of velocity layers?  You mean differential control of layers within a channel? 

Posted on Sun, Mar 27 2016 15:05
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5710

Anyway I'm sure you're right that changes could be useful.  I simply have noticed how wide ranging and useful MIDI has been compared to other 1980s digital technology because of its design which - at the time - must have seemed absurdly expandable to extremes, which nowadays are not so extreme at all.    An example being the velocity layers of the Vienna Imperial - previously inconceivable detail.   

Posted on Sun, Mar 27 2016 17:04
by FredB
Joined on Sat, Apr 01 2006, Montreal, Posts 669

The next midi protocol (HD MIDI) is coming. When? I can't tell. It's being discussed at the midi manufacturers assossiation.

features proposed for High Definition MIDI:

  • Support for more MIDI Channels and Controllers
  • Greater resolution in data values
  • New messages that were not practical with the MIDI 1.0 protocol
  • The draft proposal allows HD senders to specify a direct pitch, rather than a Note Number. The Direct Pitch field sets the base pitch of the note, overriding the base pitch that would otherwise be selected by the note number, allowing easy implementation of alternate tuning systems.
  • In addition to Note On and Note Off, the draft includes a Note Update message that allows modification of parameters or controllers during the lifetime of a note.

Note Update feature looks particularly interessting for samples/orchestral music. Maybe like a standardized VST note expression feature.

Hope Sample library and sample player manufacturer will jump in when the protocol will be completed.

Fred

Master: Imac I7 32Gb Late 2013 - - OsX 10.13.6
Slave: Corei7 6800k 64gb - Win 10
Soft: Logic X 10.4.4 - ProTools 12.x - VE Pro 6 - VI Pro 2 - MIR
Posted on Sun, Mar 27 2016 22:04
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608

Originally Posted by: William Go to Quoted Post

What exactly are you referring to with lack of velocity layers?  You mean differential control of layers within a channel? 

Sorry, I was typing quickly. What I meant was that with only 128 possible values, it is not enough. The XP format gives 1023, I think. The reason it's not enough, is that the very lowest values are almost never used, and the highest ones aren't either, so in fact the actual normal usable range is really 50-80 steps. Having tested it, even though it sounds fine without, there is something more accurate with the higher resolution.

DG

Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Mon, Mar 28 2016 01:40
by jasensmith
Joined on Tue, Jan 15 2008, Arizona, Posts 1582

Originally Posted by: DG Go to Quoted Post

Originally Posted by: William Go to Quoted Post

What exactly are you referring to with lack of velocity layers?  You mean differential control of layers within a channel? 

Sorry, I was typing quickly. What I meant was that with only 128 possible values, it is not enough. The XP format gives 1023, I think. The reason it's not enough, is that the very lowest values are almost never used, and the highest ones aren't either, so in fact the actual normal usable range is really 50-80 steps. Having tested it, even though it sounds fine without, there is something more accurate with the higher resolution.

DG

I agree. 

128 values seems grosely inadequate in this day and age.  With more values you can achieve more happy middle grounds for parameters such as expression and attack and action on those parameters would be more forgiving.  With 128, you are constantly battling, what I call, the Goldilocks effect; it's either too much or too little and you're constantly having to go back and re-edit or re-record.


"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There's no point in being a damn fool about it."
- W.C. Fields
Posted on Mon, Mar 28 2016 16:31
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5710

"The reason it's not enough, is that the very lowest values are almost never used, and the highest ones aren't either, so in fact the actual normal usable range is really 50-80 steps." - DG

That makes sense and more smoothness would probably be noticeable depending on the music. 

2 Pages12>
You cannot post new threads in this forum.
You cannot reply to threads in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.