T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
939.1 | Advice from an ignoramous | PLDVAX::JANZEN | Tom LMO2/O23 2965421 | Wed Sep 09 1987 13:21 | 30 |
| < Note 939.0 by AKOV75::EATOND "Finally, a piano." >
> 1) There's a lot of talk about the Nyquist theory. I've read the
>formula, but how do I apply it in practice? For one thing, how in the world
>do I detect what the overtone frequencies of my sampled sound really are, in
>order to apply the formula? Or am I only interested in the fundamental
>frequencies?
Since you're asking the wrong questions, you can just ignore it.
Overtones count, too, BTW.
> 2) Is the practice of looping simply a matter of trial and error?
>Any tricks to it?
I don't know what real implementations are on current machines, but the
wave should be crossing the same instantaneous pressure in the same direction
at the sample start and end points.
> 3) On my machine, there is an envelope generator. How does one use
>this on sampled sounds?
By amplitude-modulating the sample with the eg.
>
> Perhaps another approach to this topic might be to create an example
>(an egg sample? - no, no). I've wanted to try sampling my voice doing some
>oohs or ahs for background in my recordings. These, obviously will need to
>apply looping to be of any musical use to me. How do I go about setting it
>up, sampling it, and then editing that sample?
Beware of sampled voice. It's hollow played lower than the sampled
pitch and munchkiny played higher. I have an SPX90 which can be played like
a cruddy mono sampler, and an SK1. Voice should be sampled around the pitch it
will be used.
You can be sure this is oll korrect since I have no experience of the matter
and don't know anything about it.
Tom
|
939.2 | sample samples | PLDVAX::JANZEN | Tom LMO2/O23 2965421 | Wed Sep 09 1987 13:24 | 15 |
| Some of my favorite SK1 samples:
a toy triangle, looped; hold down the lowest f, f#,g#,a# for a long time,
you get big bells chiming.
Blow into the mike (the SK1 needs a separate mike to sound half-way OK
(oll korrect). Play wind clusters, changing pitch to get a change in wind.
duck call .
lip pops.
acoustic pianos 88-note clusters.
Tom
|
939.3 | | CANYON::MOELLER | | Wed Sep 09 1987 13:40 | 33 |
| >For one thing, how in the world
>do I detect what the overtone frequencies of my sampled sound really are, in
>order to apply the formula?
What? you don't have a builtin frequency sensor ? Tom's right, the
overtones are extremely important for realism.. so it's the top
end that determines sampling rate. If you have a sweepable parametric
EQ or a graphic EQ, start high and drop the fader/sweep until the
sound dulls out, then bring that back up. Look at the frequency
you settled at, multiply by 2, and there's your desired sample rate.
>2) Is the practice of looping simply a matter of trial and error?
>Any tricks to it?
SOME samplers do the hard work for you. SOME samplers have software
that will find the zero-crossing points and give a click-free loop.
Some OTHER samplers are a pain in the ass. That's why there's such
a number of 3rd party firms offering loaded diskettes. IF your
sampler isn't one of the 'good guys', you should A) get a Mac and
visual editing S/W, or B) buy a library somewhere (or copy one from
store you bought it from) or C) spend endless hours tryin' ta find
the perfect loop.
>3) On my machine, there is an envelope generator. How does one use
>this on sampled sounds?
The envelope generator is your friend. The EG will restore waveform
characteristics such as the release shape, in the analog domain,
allowing you to store LOTS more samples in memory. The sample might
just be the initial attack and enough for a short loop.. everything
else (shaping the waveform) can be done with AHDSR parameters.
karl moeller
|
939.4 | Where did that come from? | AKOV75::EATOND | Finally, a piano. | Wed Sep 09 1987 13:47 | 5 |
| RE < Note 939.1 by PLDVAX::JANZEN "Tom LMO2/O23 2965421" >
Thanks for the advice about voices. I'll ignore the rest.
Dan
|
939.5 | ARGH! | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Wed Sep 09 1987 13:49 | 50 |
| All of the following is pertinent to the Mirage and probably to
others...
Nyquist Theorem - says you can't sample a sound with frequencies
any higher than .5 the rate. Yes you can, but they sound like dog-do.
Higher frequencies will show up as low frequencies, often with no
harmonic relationship to the source. This is why a steep input filter
is needed.
Looping - Trial and error works, but is maddening as you are constantly
moving both Loop Start and Loop End points in search of that Holiest
of Sampling Gods, the vaulted "Zero Crossing".
Think of a wave...
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
-- .---- .---- .----.---- .----.---- .----.---- .----.---- .------0Point
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . .. .. .. .. .
A B C
In order to get a smooth loop, both the start and end must be at
a 0 crossing, like A&B. If you were to try to loop from A to C
you would get a tick, or worse.
On the Mirage, the sampling frequency must be a multiple of the
frequency of the note you are sampling. Unfortunately, most samplers
don't have an infinite variety of rates. So, you are often forced
to retune your source in order to match it to an available rate.
On the Mirage A220 must be sharp 25 cents in order to come close.
This may not hold for all samplers, but the mirage can only loop
between page boundaries. Consequently, in order to get a true sound
out, you don't necessarily put a true sound in.
There are 2 kinds of loops. Short and long. Short loops are only
one page long (256 samples) and produce very static tones. In order
for these to work, special attention must be payed to the sampling
rate and the frequencie of the source. Zero crossings MUST fall
on subsequent page boundaries. Long loops cover many pages. The
loop end point can be moved off the page boundary in order to find
0 crossings. All loops must start on page boundaries.
I recently started some heavy sampling on the Mirage and have been
documenting the process and putting together all kinds of tables,
graphs, etc. I had originally planned to start a note but you beat
me to it. I'll be posting stuff here.
Edd
|
939.6 | What about kindly Uncle Jack (Tramiel)? | ACORN::BAILEY | Steph Bailey | Wed Sep 09 1987 13:52 | 12 |
| > ... A) get a Mac and visual editing S/W ...
Mac Schmac. Get an ST and visual editing software (write your own?).
Just kidding.
There are programs to do frequency analysis of samples. Pick a
range, and it will do a DFT over the range and give you a graph
of amplitude versus frequency. I have a home grown one which does
that for me (when it is not crashing).
Steph
|
939.7 | Ah-hah! Why didn't I think of that? | AKOV75::EATOND | Finally, a piano. | Wed Sep 09 1987 14:01 | 27 |
| RE < Note 939.3 by CANYON::MOELLER >
> What? you don't have a builtin frequency sensor ?
Since I didn't see any graphic facial expressions, can I assume that
a lot of sampling instruments include this?
I like that idea of using an EQ and gradually dropping out the high
end. That makes a lot of sense. Of theten or twenty articles I've
read so far on applying the Nyquist limit to sampling, nobody really
mentioned detecting what the highest overtones were. Do most people
just inherantly know how to identify parts of the frequency spectrum?
> SOME samplers do the hard work for you. SOME samplers have software
> that will find the zero-crossing points and give a click-free loop.
The MKS-100 does, by default, auto-looping. But there have been times
where it will choose a point to loop that makes it sound like someone
threw in the sound of a car horn at the end of the attack. It is
at this point, I have assumed, that I'd want to go in and select a
more appropriate loop-point.
Thanks,
Dan
|
939.8 | Short loop | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Wed Sep 09 1987 14:10 | 5 |
| That car horn sound is probably caused by a short loop. Even though
it's found a zero crossing, it's only looping on part of the entire
waveform. You're right, find another loop point...
Edd
|
939.9 | Everyone's answering all at the same time! | AKOV75::EATOND | Finally, a piano. | Wed Sep 09 1987 14:25 | 21 |
| RE < Note 939.5 by JAWS::COTE "Note stuck? Try Kawai..." >
Pardon my ignorance, but all this talk of page boundaries and
such confuses me. I don't remember the manual with my MKS speaking of such
things. Is that something described at length in a Mirage's documentation or
is that more of a generic concept as memory relates to any micro-processor?
Does the Mirage reveal to you where page breaks are or is that something you
aquire an intuitive feel for when you've been getting a lot of experience in
sampling?
You mention the need of an input filter. On a machine that doesn't
appear to house one, would a normal graphic or parametric EQ work?
> On the Mirage, the sampling frequency must be a multiple of the
> frequency of the note you are sampling.
Can you give an example?
Thanks,
Dan
|
939.11 | joke goes awry | CANYON::MOELLER | | Wed Sep 09 1987 15:07 | 7 |
| > What? you don't have a builtin frequency sensor ?
.. this was joke .. like, an organic sensor in your ears, see ?
I'm just allergic to little winky faces. sorry.
km
|
939.12 | sampling,,,, OUCH! | BARNUM::RENE | fantastic plastic lobster telephone | Wed Sep 09 1987 17:07 | 18 |
| re: Edd Cote's replies..
Edd, have you actualy DONE any USEABLE samples on your mirage?
With hours and hours of painful persistance I have not even been
able to come close to obtaining a sample that I would consider
using/storing on disk. I do not have any kind of visual editor
and get completely confused on the present settings of parameters
with the single hex display. Also, in my opinion, in order for the
mirage (8 bit) to sound realistic you really need to MULTI sample.
This means doing up to 8 wavesamples (such as the accoustic piano).
This may sound negative, but I LOVE the mirage but would not
consider anything(right now) except for factory disks, or third
party disks.
Good Luck
Frank
|
939.13 | It's not science. It's magic... | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Wed Sep 09 1987 17:23 | 25 |
| Yep, I've done quite a few - mostly pure academia (sampling one
of my synths to see how close I can get).
I've only saved 2, but that's a function of forgetting to buy blank
floppies rather than the quality of the samples. I've got a nice
'flutey' type sample I stole from the MKS-30 and a 'live' sample
of my Gibson bass guitar with the tape-wound strings. (Stevie K
will pronounce this a 'garbage' sample. I'll take that as a plus);^)
...anyhow the sample NAILED the sound of my bass.
I do my sampling by using the headphone PFL jack on the board, running
this to the anti-aliasing filter.
Frank, do you have the Mirage Advanced Sampling Guide? If not, Union
music sells them for $20. Worth every penny just for the tables.
Hint (probably usable for all samplers) - If your using a short
loop and you get the "car horn" Dan mentioned, listen to the pitch
of the 'horn' relative to the beginning of the sample. If it's right
on pitch, great. If not, retune your source in the direction of
the 'horn'. Try to match it and see what your results are.
Alot of sampling is trial and error and error and error...
Edd
|
939.14 | More... | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Wed Sep 09 1987 17:36 | 15 |
| Oh yeah, I don't have any VES either. I posted the hex->decimal
conversion chart right next to the mirage though.
Are you using the MASOS disks???? When I first tried, I was just
writing on top of the last sound in memory, and getting all the
filter, EG and other parameters for the old sound applied to the
new one. Are you setting parameter 77 (user-multisampling) to "on"?
If not, you're always getting the default values...
I multisampled the bass using 2 samples. For the lower I played
"A" on the low E string. For the upper I played "A" on the A string.
I wanted to use 4 samples (one for each string), but that would
have made them too short.
Edd
|
939.15 | Sample sample... | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Thu Sep 10 1987 09:35 | 37 |
| > Can you give an example? Dan Eaton...
Let's try to sample an A at 220 hz. What instrument doesn't matter
a whole lot for this example...
In order to get a reasonable analog of the source, a sound must
be sampled at least twice, at the peak of the waveform and at the
bottom. In order for a good loop, you'll have to have your zero
crossing on page boundaries.
With 256 samples per page, the highest number of waves you'll be
able to accurately sample will be 128.
220*128=28,160 - The optimum sample rate for A220. The Mirage does
not support this rate however, the closest rate it does support
is 28,571. In order to get a good sample, the pitch of the source
must be increased in order to coincide with the available rate.
The following is how I figure it out...
A*128=28,160 (too flat)
Bb*128=29,824 (1 semitone higher)
29,834 - 28,160 = 1674 hz difference or approximately 16.74 hz for
each cent between them. (Logs be damned, at 220 hz this is close
enough.)
28,571 (closest available rate) - 28,160 = 411 hz delta between
source A and available rate.
411/16.74 = 24.551971 cents difference. This is the amount the A
will have to be sharpened by in order to get it to line up with
256 samples/page.
See? Nuthin to it...
Edd
|
939.16 | | BARNUM::RHODES | | Thu Sep 10 1987 09:58 | 5 |
| Karl. Do you have to go thru all of this to sample on the EMAX or is
-.1 pertainant to a Mirage only?
Todd.
|
939.17 | It's getting a lot clearer | AKOV76::EATOND | Finally, a piano. | Thu Sep 10 1987 10:11 | 7 |
| I think I see what you're saying, Edd.
Go out and get a lot of factory samples!
|
939.18 | Clear as mud | AKOV76::EATOND | Finally, a piano. | Thu Sep 10 1987 10:35 | 45 |
| RE < Note 939.15 by JAWS::COTE "Note stuck? Try Kawai..." >
First of all, you never explained pages and page boundaries. This
doesn't have anything to do with Washington Senators now, does it?
> In order to get a reasonable analog of the source, a sound must
> be sampled at least twice, at the peak of the waveform and at the
> bottom. In order for a good loop, you'll have to have your zero
> crossing on page boundaries.
I can understand this part.
> With 256 samples per page, the highest number of waves you'll be
> able to accurately sample will be 128.
I have no idea where the 128 comes from, except that it's half the
256. Are you saying that you need to have two cycles of the wave-form,
therefore, since you can't fit 2*220 on a page, you have to take half the
value? I'm lost.
> 220*128=28,160 - The optimum sample rate for A220. The Mirage does
> not support this rate however, the closest rate it does support
> is 28,571. In order to get a good sample, the pitch of the source
> must be increased in order to coincide with the available rate.
> The following is how I figure it out...
Do you have a chart of values that the Mirage supports? Is this where
the number 28,571 comes from?
Why did you subtract 29,834 - 28,160, especially when Bb was 29,824? Or
was that a typo?
Do you think you could write this out in a generic equation?
Did you get all this stuff from the 'Advanced Sampling Guide'? Was
there none of it in the owner's manual? I wonder, if that is so, how I can find
out the corresponding info for the MKS-100. You mentioned the value of the
Advanced Sampling Guide Book for the tables alone. It would seem that if this
kind of stuff has enabled you to improve your sampling, one such book would be
imperative for each sampler.
How much of the success of your samples do attribute to the use of this
information and how much do you attribute to simple luck?
Dan
|
939.19 | Math from a marketeer??? (gasp!) | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Thu Sep 10 1987 11:17 | 103 |
|
> First of all, you never explained pages and page boundaries. This
>doesn't have anything to do with Washington Senators now, does it?
Sorry. The Mirage has 65,536 bytes of memory, broken up into 256 ($FF)
units called pages. Each page is further broken down into 256 ($FF) units
called samples.
> In order to get a reasonable analog of the source, a sound must
> be sampled at least twice, at the peak of the waveform and at the
> bottom. In order for a good loop, you'll have to have your zero
> crossing on page boundaries.
> I can understand this part.
> With 256 samples per page, the highest number of waves you'll be
> able to accurately sample will be 128.
> I have no idea where the 128 comes from, except that it's half the
>256. Are you saying that you need to have two cycles of the wave-form,
>therefore, since you can't fit 2*220 on a page, you have to take half the
>value? I'm lost.
Not quite. In order to determine the frequency of the note, the bare
minimum number of samples *per wave* is 2. Anything less than 2 and
you get low frequency aliasing noise. This is where Nyquist fits in.
> 220*128=28,160 - The optimum sample rate for A220. The Mirage does
> not support this rate however, the closest rate it does support
> is 28,571. In order to get a good sample, the pitch of the source
> must be increased in order to coincide with the available rate.
> The following is how I figure it out...
> Do you have a chart of values that the Mirage supports? Is this where
>the number 28,571 comes from?
Yep, I got a chart.
> Why did you subtract 29,834 - 28,160, especially when Bb was 29,824? Or
>was that a typo?
Typo. 29,834 is the correct value.
> Do you think you could write this out in a generic equation?
Argh...
Let n = a note.
Let n+1 = n raised a semitone. (If n=A, then n+1=Bb)
Let F= The frequency in Hz of n.
Let R= Sampling Rate
So try this...
(F(n+1)*128)-(F(n)*128)
----------------------- = C (Hz per cent)
100
R-(F(n)*128)
------------ = Offset (in cents) to n
C
Let's try it...
Bb= 233 hz, (n+1)
A=220 (n)
(233*128)-(220*128) 29,834 - 28,160 1674
------------------- = --------------- = ---- = 16.74
100 100 100
28,571 - 28,160
--------------- = 24.551971 cents offset to A-220
16.74
See?? ;^) (I dunno who's loonier. You for asking or me for trying to
explain.)
> Did you get all this stuff from the 'Advanced Sampling Guide'? Was
>there none of it in the owner's manual? I wonder, if that is so, how I can find
>out the corresponding info for the MKS-100. You mentioned the value of the
>Advanced Sampling Guide Book for the tables alone. It would seem that if this
>kind of stuff has enabled you to improve your sampling, one such book would be
>imperative for each sampler.
The rates came from the ASG. The math is mine. The owner's manual is trash.
> How much of the success of your samples do attribute to the use of this
>information and how much do you attribute to simple luck?
Without the ASG, getting a good Mirage sample was 100% luck. With it, I'd
guess at 70/30 (Science/Luck).
> Dan
Edd
|
939.20 | It gets worse. Trust me. | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Thu Sep 10 1987 11:39 | 12 |
| Oh yeah, and this doesn't yet take into consideration the .5 octave
offset (A to E) that you have to set up because the Mirage does
'unity playback' on E (for the lower half).
If you don't program this offset, no matter what pitch goes in,
you get it back by playing the E key.
Don't confuse this offset with the one discussed in the previous
note. They're different....
Edd
|
939.21 | Some things clearer, some things not... | AKOV76::EATOND | Finally, a piano. | Thu Sep 10 1987 12:05 | 23 |
| RE < Note 939.19 by JAWS::COTE "Note stuck? Try Kawai..." >
Do all sampling instruments have an architechture with 'pages' and page
boundaries as you described? Is this differ acording to resolution? (i.e.,
Mirage is 8 bit companded, MKS-100 is 12-bit linear) Would one have to get
precise numbers from the manufacturer, or can I guestimate?
>Not quite. In order to determine the frequency of the note, the bare
>minimum number of samples *per wave* is 2. Anything less than 2 and
>you get low frequency aliasing noise. This is where Nyquist fits in.
I think this is basically what I meant, I just said it in a reverse kind
of way. But now another question comes up. We said before that the Nyquist
theorem deals with the highest frequency of the overtone series. Does that
mean that this example of sampling a note at A220 is irrelevant, unless 1) it
has no overtones, or 2) I'm confusing two completely different lines of
sampling terminology?
Thanks for the equations. It appears to me the next step I have is
to determine the specifics for my own machine's architecture. Once I have
that I can adapt your math to the MKS.
Dan
|
939.22 | Sine, sine, everywhere a sine... | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Thu Sep 10 1987 12:16 | 12 |
| Isn't sampling fun?????
I've no idea about other samplers architectures.
The example I provided was for a theoretical sine wave, with no
overtones. It doesn't take into consideration any of the overtones,
harmonics, etc, which make up the spectrum of an instrument. But
the principles still apply, and it's a place to start.
I can post the numbers for the Mirage if anyone wants 'em...
Edd
|
939.23 | Confused Observer | AQUA::ROST | You used me for an ashtray heart | Thu Sep 10 1987 12:33 | 19 |
|
Edd, I have been reading some of this and a lot of doesn't make
sense.
Are you telling me that in order to get a sample you actually have
to *detune* the pitch you are sampling in order to get perfect
waveforms?
That is, if you want to have exactly 360 x N degrees of wave rather
than 360 x N + Y where Y is a remainder angle?
How do you then reproduce the pitch *in tune* when you play it back?
No wonder Ensoniq and Roland are pushing commercially-made
samples....it seems that for users to get a good library of samples
on their own is pretty difficult.
Brian_who_can't_even_figure_out_the_SK-1
|
939.24 | You have a chart; use it! | ANGORA::JANZEN | Tom LMO2/O23 2965421 | Thu Sep 10 1987 12:47 | 3 |
| Hey Cote, 256(10) /= FF(16).
256(10)=100(16)
Tom
|
939.25 | I don't need this... | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Thu Sep 10 1987 13:02 | 40 |
|
I take all morning trying to explain this to the best of my
knowledge only to get jumped on...Perhaps Mr. Janzen will
enlighten us to the finer points of sampling? After all,
we're talking an SK-1 owner... Please tell us how to make
lip pops, Janzen...
Put up or...
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Meanwhile...
> Edd, I have been reading some of this and a lot of doesn't make
> sense.
Welcome to the club.... ;^)
> Are you telling me that in order to get a sample you actually have
> to *detune* the pitch you are sampling in order to get perfect
> waveforms?
> That is, if you want to have exactly 360 x N degrees of wave rather
> than 360 x N + Y where Y is a remainder angle?
Yep, that's exactly it. Y would cause you to have "Zero-crossing" problems,
since it would be X% through the wavecycle...
> How do you then reproduce the pitch *in tune* when you play it back?
Remember, you're not doing either of 2 things. You're not sampling
the note "A" or using a sampling rate that produces "A". All you're
doing is trying to stuff *complete* wavecycles into a given area
of memory. Transposition is done on playback by reading the sample
out at the speed which will cause 220 hz.
Edd
|
939.26 | caustic cote cackles creatively | JON::ROSS | synapses unite ! | Thu Sep 10 1987 13:47 | 12 |
| ass I see it....
You are TRYING to get some multiple of waves to 'fit' into your sample
interval. That way you maximize storage, simplify looping, and Im
not sure what else, BUT it has NOTHING to do with sampling theory.
It has to do with limitations of memory in current samplers.
Thank you.
ron
|
939.27 | And furthermore... | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Thu Sep 10 1987 13:51 | 6 |
| Oh and by the way, the 256 is the number of discrete values from
$00 to $FF. I do use the chart. May I send you a copy?
I can prove myself a fool, I don't need you to do it.
Edd
|
939.28 | Where was I? | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Thu Sep 10 1987 14:02 | 21 |
| Re: Rost....
One way to look at it is to imagine to different rates, the input
rate and the output rate. You detune to match the input rate. Then
on playback, it's output at a different speed. That's how 220.25
gets back down to 220...
Re: Walkin' Won
Right. Because the input has been quantized to discrete values
you often can't pick the 'perfect' spot to loop from/to. You
have to pick something close. The idea is to get the 'close
enough' point (0-Xing) on a page boundary. Maybe other samplers
let you move the loop start point at individual sample resolution.
The Mirage doesn't. Only the loop end point allows this fine
of an adjustment.
Maybe by reversing the waveform, inserting a loop end marker
and then re-reversing???
Edd
|
939.29 | And who said the MKS was inferior! | AKOV76::EATOND | Finally, a piano. | Thu Sep 10 1987 15:36 | 9 |
| RE < Note 939.28 by JAWS::COTE "Note stuck? Try Kawai..." >
> Maybe other samplers
> let you move the loop start point at individual sample resolution.
Hey, that sounds familiar! The MKS has loop start *and* end points!
Maybe there's hope for me and mine yet!
Dan
|
939.30 | Bad day in Malvern maybe? | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Thu Sep 10 1987 15:51 | 9 |
| The Mirage also lets you move both the loop start and end points.
The start point however, can only be moved by pages (256 sample)
increments. If it's not a ZC yer outta luck...
The end point can be moved by pages OR samples...
Can't figure why they did that....
Edd
|
939.31 | $$$ costs vs. hidden costs | CANYON::MOELLER | | Thu Sep 10 1987 18:48 | 32 |
| >Karl. Do you have to go thru all of this to sample on the EMAX or is
>-.1 pertainant to a Mirage only?
>Todd.
You MUST be joking.
The Emax, in common with the Emulator II(+), has two methods of
automating the loop process, Crossfade Looping(tm) and AutoLoop(tm).
There are no 'page boundaries' or funny hex readouts.. the sample
is moved thru quickly and coarsely by a slider control, or down
to the individual sample using a 10-key numeric keypad.
Although I admire the price of the Mirage, esp. the stereo Mirage,
quite a good buy, the hoops for loops that Edd's been describing
might accurately be described as a HIDDEN cost for the Mirage.
Regarding 'cycles' and 'waves' in sampling.. the length of a waveform
cycle becomes smaller as the frequency increases. This creates an
interesting situation when trying to single-phase loop (a single
cycle) a high sound: the smallest loop length the E-II can arrive
at manually is 64 samples.. the Emax can loop smaller yet. Generally,
higher pitched sounds are harder to loop within a single period.
they should be looped somewhat closer to the attack than lower freq.
sounds.
How do you know the exact length of a single period? Determine the
freq. of the sample in Hz., divide into 1 second, or use the
AutoLoop(tm) function.
karl
|
939.32 | The Musicians Approach ! | MINDER::KENT | | Fri Sep 11 1987 04:31 | 35 |
|
For those of you who have been shocked frightened and stunned into
never considering sampling by -1 to -26. Let me add some light releif.
Sampling on an s700 is a doddle (English for Easy Peasy (or is that
English too?)). All you do is stick a cord with the sound source
in the "line in" socket, press a button called "New Sample". this
allows you to set 3 parameters. The trigger input sensitivity, to
help you there is a graphic LED display of the sound source a bit
like on a cassette deck. You set the Note number to sample at, this
can also be retuned later. And the sampling rate (I always go for
the highest unless I am sampling a phrase of a given time). Then
you press New Sample again and the machine stores the sample as
you play it.
Once stored you play back the sample. with a bit of experience you
can usually tell whether the sample will work or not. The machine
has an autoloop feature which you can overide if you get the
aforementioned "honk". You overide the loop point by moving the
sample part parts are 1 - 32767 (magic number?). You can move
either the start or end in 1 or 100 part sections.
Let me say the Akai sample library is naff therefore I have always
produced my own samples. I sample from records, blowing down mike
stands, my son's activity centre makes some great percussion sounds
with the ratchets and rattles. I even have a Korg Compact Sample
Disk from which I have taken a number of samples.
Don't be put off by the technology. This is not the best sampling
machine available by any means. But it's great fun.
Paul.
|
939.33 | The Fischer Price model, I presume? | MARVIN::MACHIN | | Fri Sep 11 1987 05:28 | 14 |
| I think I understand what you're saying, Paul, but I need a little
more clarification on the 'activity centre'. Most of the activity
centres I've had demo'd are fine on the bell and the squashy
button bit, but the rattles are rubbish. I thought for a long time
it might be down to poor documentation, but Ive since heard that
other people get on fine with them. Could it be your son has had
specific mods made to his activity centre? And if he has, would
he be willing to divulge them to noters who wish to harness their
own activity centres to the latest in musical tehnology?
(Between you and me, I reckon what the guys in -1 to -26 know about
activity centres you could inscribe on the back of a postage stamp).
Richard.
|
939.34 | Samples made Simple | JAWS::COTE | Note stuck? Try Kawai... | Fri Sep 11 1987 09:31 | 27 |
| What with all this sampling talk being bandied about, I ran home
last night and booted up the Mirage...
...and found a method for determining the amount of detuning necessary
for perfect short loops. Is it any good? Well, let's just say I
was getting *perfect* loops in less than 5 minutes...
First, set the sampling rate/time parameter (73) to the closest
value which corresponds to the note you intend to use as a source.
(This info is in the ASG, pg. 73). Turn multisampling on (parameter
77). Now, take your sample.
When done, turn the loop switch (parameter 65) on, and press the
key. You'll probably hear a distinct change in pitch when it starts
looping. If you don't, you're all done (at least with the looping
part). If the pitch is different, simply tune your source to match
the pitch of the loop! No kiddin', it's that easy. The playback
rate will take care of bringing you back to correct pitch.
Of course, after you get your perfect loop, you then get into the
next phase, modifying the envelope, filter and filter envelope,
LFO, keyboard scaling and other various goodies.
...like falling of a log.
Edd
|
939.35 | Are the newer machines really simpler? | AKOV76::EATOND | Finally, a piano. | Fri Sep 11 1987 09:46 | 48 |
| RE < Note 939.32 by MINDER::KENT >
I don't know, maybe I'm looking for an extremely complicated process
when, in reality, it is quite simple. The MKS-100 has almost the exact same
procedure as you described with your S700. There are four buttons;
1) Record button - When selected, it sets the machine up to record the
sample. It confirms the memory location to which you are about to sample to.
2) Mode button - Allows you to selct note to which sound will be
recorded (i.e. C4, G2, ...) This can be altered in the editing process as well.
Allows you to set Auto-trigger, and sampling clock.
3) Standby Button - Creates a level meter in the display and allows you
to set the trigger level.
4) Start Button - Start sampling.
Come to think of it, having heard non-mirage sampling examples, I
wonder if the reason I don't have a lot of charts and tables available to me
to maximize the sampling process is because I don't need them.
Still, I appreciate hearing the particulars of sampling technology that
Edd has been writing up here. It's obvious that he's done his homework.
Anyway, for those who may be interested, I brought in my manual today
and have printed below the editing parameters available on the S-10/MKS-100.
Recording Key Number
Bank Tune
Loop Tune
Scanning mode
Loop type (one shot, manual, auto)
Start point (1-32767)
End Point (Manual)
Loop length (Manual)
End Point (Auto)
Loop length (Auto)
Key Follow
Pitch Bend (on/off)
Vibrato (on/off)
Envelope Velocity Sensitivity
4-stage envelope rates and levels
Dynamics Sensitivity
Auto Bend Rate
Auto bend Depth
|
939.36 | Ga Ga A Wa Ga a Loop Bom Bom | MINDER::KENT | | Fri Sep 11 1987 11:33 | 15 |
|
Re .33
Actually Steven, my son, is really hacked off beacuse the activity
centre he has, cost us 13 pounds only 4 months ago. Because of the
advance in technology it's been superceded by a model from LEGO.
I hear that "Mommy's Dead Good Toy Shop" has them knocked down to
4.50.
He should have waited for the new model. He's only now getting prepared
for commusic 14. At the current rate he'll be 42.
Paul.
|
939.37 | | JAWS::COTE | AUTOLOOP??? Ha! Wimps... | Fri Sep 11 1987 11:34 | 7 |
| What's the sampling rate on the S-10/MKS-100???
Variable? I didn't see it in the list.
What about input filtering?
Edd
|
939.38 | What's this? Righteous indignation? | AKOV76::EATOND | Wimps? Maybe, but not obsolete! | Fri Sep 11 1987 12:24 | 13 |
| RE Note 939.37
> What's the sampling rate on the S-10/MKS-100???
Selectable: 30KHZ or 15KHZ.
> What about input filtering?
I don't see any input filtering in my manual, but I didn't mention that
there is digital filtering in the Wave Modification section. Two hi-Pass and
two low-pass filters.
Dan
|
939.39 | | SALSA::MOELLER | | Fri Sep 11 1987 13:14 | 18 |
| JAWS::COTE "AUTOLOOP??? Ha! Wimps..." 7 lines 11-SEP-1987 10:34
... let's explore this extremely uninformed PERSONAL_NAME.
If I understand it, anyone with a sampler with decent loop editing
S/W is something less than a man.
My contention is that it takes bigger cojones to spend the money
(and the time to make it) to get a capable unit than to 'economize'
by getting a less capable sampler.
I'd rather spend my music time making MUSIC, not poring over hex
tables.
best. karl
|
939.40 | Da scoop on da loop... | JAWS::COTE | Long Live AutolooP! (Happy?) | Fri Sep 11 1987 13:38 | 10 |
| Oh my! Looky what I done gone and did now, Mr. Wizard...
Actually, it's compensation. Since I can't play keyboards to save
my soul, I compensate by learning lotsa hex codes....
REAL men don't use autolooperdoopers. They reset pointers, *in binary*,
after mapping out wavetables on graph paper.
Edd
|
939.41 | Real commusicians... | MAY20::BAILEY | Steph Bailey | Fri Sep 11 1987 13:43 | 11 |
| I'm afraid Edd is only half right. Not only do you have to do looping
by hand, but you also have to have to do it on a VAX 8800, with
64 Meg of memory. Keeping Ultrix pared to a minimum, that leaves
you with 60 Meg of sample.
And you have to figure out where zero crossings are by running adb
on /dev/mem (the running system).
Lets hear it for megabyte sonorities. (Now that's fat?)
Steph
|
939.42 | Now my drive is full of little paper dots... | JAWS::COTE | 115db, but it's a DRY thud... | Fri Sep 11 1987 13:55 | 5 |
|
These are probably the same folks who save patches in RAM instead
of punching cards full of sys-ex data.
Edd
|
939.43 | I Know They'll Get Cheaper and Cheaper and... | DRUMS::FEHSKENS | | Fri Sep 11 1987 13:59 | 11 |
| Boy, I can't wait to get one too. In the mean time I'll just have
to make due with all those crummy analog sounds in my JX-10 and
MKS-80.
Actually, maybe I can convince myself that the 38 is really a low
functionality sampler - it takes one sample with 20KHz bandwidth
and a duration of 32 minutes, but you can only play it back at one
pitch - the same one it was recorded at...
len.
|
939.44 | Plug it in to 220??? | JAWS::COTE | 115db, but it's a DRY thud... | Fri Sep 11 1987 14:06 | 6 |
| Seems to me you could transpose by holding your hand against the
source reel...
Of course, your samples might truncate early...
Edd
|
939.45 | cojones? | ECADSR::SHERMAN | work-related? ... who, me? | Fri Sep 11 1987 15:33 | 9 |
| re: a few back
Ummm. Pardon my obvious (perhaps naive and innocent) lack of
understanding, but what exactly are cojones? Like, do I have to
wash my mouth out with soap if I mention them in front of my mother?
Would "Would you please pass the cojones?" at the dinner table result
in the same gasps and giggles that would result if I called All-Fruit
a jelly? If I mentioned them in church, would I stop all conversation?
Steve
|
939.46 | this IS COMMUSIC, not ESL_NOTES, right? | SALSA::MOELLER | | Fri Sep 11 1987 16:28 | 6 |
| Being only 40 miles or so from Sonora, Mexico, I tend to forget
that those less fortunate tend to be monolingual.
'Cojones' are the Spanish slang equivalent of 'Mountain Oysters'
k�rlo
|
939.47 | Free Mirage sample.... | JAWS::COTE | 115db, but it's a DRY thud... | Mon Sep 14 1987 09:58 | 18 |
| Mirage owners...
I spent the best part of a rainy Sunday doing a 16 part multisampled
organ. (The how-to details of which I may post in another reply.)
For the source I used a patch I made on the DX21 called "Soft Organ".
It's kinda of a quiet, chapel type organ, kinda like you'd hear
in a funeral home. Basically it sounds damn good, although the 3-4
highest notes gave me a few problems. Chorusing is built in via
detuned oscillators. The original, unmodified sample is in Upper
and Lower program 4 if you want to hear that. Program 3 is a heavily
filtered version.
I'll be glad to give a copy to anyone who sends me a disc, ON ONE
PROVISION. Review it here. I want some feedback.
Send mail if interested.
Edd
|
939.48 | | CTHULU::YERAZUNIS | depleted uranium speaker cabinets? | Mon Sep 14 1987 15:52 | 4 |
| What's the provision?
First born child? :-)
|
939.49 | Looking to dump one??? | JAWS::COTE | 115db, but it's a DRY thud... | Mon Sep 14 1987 16:03 | 6 |
| Uh, thanks, but kids and disc drives don't mix. ("Edd!! Lookit where
I stuffed my marshmallow!!!")
...just some comments will be fine, tank you.
Edd
|
939.50 | From theory to practice | AKOV75::EATOND | What'll they come up with next? | Wed Sep 16 1987 15:31 | 18 |
| Tell me what y'all think about this one.
I sampled a toy cymbal the other day in the hopes of adding a particular
sound to the percussion portion of a song.
First of all, I noticed that I had to really crank the mike and the
recording level to get it to show any kind of reasonable input level on the
sampler's meter. This, of course, caused it to pick up additional 'atmospheric'
noise from the mike.
Then, when playing back the auto-looped sample, I noticed a sound not
heretofore heard from the sampler, coming a bit after the decay of the cymbal.
It was something like a sine wave sweeping from a very high frequency on down
until it faded away.
Was that aliasing?
An inquiring mind wants to know.
|
939.51 | I had these problems when I was 11 :^) | JAWS::COTE | It's A Glamour Profession! | Wed Sep 16 1987 16:10 | 24 |
| RE: levels....
Cymbals are a bitch, all high frequencies. Len made me a tape of
his Zildjians that is almost gratyingly loud, yet the meters on
my tape deck hardly budge. Perhaps a noise gate between the sampler
and the source will help. Dunno, don't own one...
As to the other noise at the tail of the sample, I get something
very similar on the Mirage, but without hearing yours I'd be hard
pressed to say it's the same. Anyhow, all the symptoms sound exactly
alike. Assuming that it's the same problem, I'd say it was the result
of your output filter EG. It's open for the duration of the sample
and slowly closes as the sample releases. Try tweaking the filter
release rate. Works like a charm for me... Do you have some sort
of generic parameters your machine is set to when you sample, or
do you boot up your zither sample and then sample over it in memory?
If so, you're probably getting all the filter, EG, etc., settings
for the zither on your new sample.
Aliasing often sounds like a 'buzzing' noise in your sample.
Edd
|
939.52 | I wish I could think of this stuff faster... | JAWS::COTE | It's A Glamour Profession! | Wed Sep 16 1987 16:14 | 6 |
| Aliasing would cause a noise moving *downward* in pitch only if
there was some component in the source moving *upward*....
Do you have such a beast?
Edd
|
939.53 | I think we're on the same waveform - er - wavelength | AKOV75::EATOND | What'll they come up with next? | Wed Sep 16 1987 16:22 | 12 |
| re < Note 939.51 by JAWS::COTE >
Yes, the envelope is wide open by default. I believe I tried to
adjust the envelope so as to cut off the 'siren'. Unfortunately, it also
had a detrimental effect to the sound of the cymbal itself; cut it off too
soon.
Oh, well...
Thanks,
Dan
|
939.54 | Lucky Filters? | JAWS::COTE | It's A Glamour Profession! | Wed Sep 16 1987 16:46 | 13 |
| Does the MKS-100 have a filter EG????
When you say "the envelope is wide open by default" I assume you
meant the *filter* is wide open. VERY rarely does any sound need
a wide open filter. (Admittedly, something like cymbals might be
the exception to the rule.)
The Filter EG on the Mirage allows you to dynamically control the
filter; wide open on the attack transient, down 50% on the sustain,
close down at a rate of n for the release. Note that this is indep-
endent of the familiar amplitude envelope.
Edd
|
939.55 | squish squish | BARNUM::RHODES | | Thu Sep 17 1987 10:00 | 8 |
| For cymbal recording, I would recommend the use of a compressor. I've
noticed that on most vinyl recordings the cymbals are compressed a bit.
The mic also makes an incredible difference. Anyone try one of the PZM's
on cymbals? What do they sound like in the higher range of the audio spectrum?
Todd.
|
939.56 | It still sounds good, though! | AKOV75::EATOND | What'll they come up with next? | Thu Sep 17 1987 10:06 | 37 |
| RE < Note 939.54 by JAWS::COTE >
I delayed answering this until I had manual in hand...
I searched the manual regarding the envelope generator and it gave no
explanation as to what component it was modulating. My guess, from using it a
bit, is that it is either simply for amplitude, or for amplitude *and* filter.
I have yet to really experiment with its four filter parameters (LP1, HP1, LP2,
and HP2) to be able to say what effect envelope has on them.
Just as an aside, it has become very frustrating to me that Roland says
so very little in their documentation regarding parameters. The section on EG
in the book simply talk about rates and levels; absolutely NO MENTION as to
what the rates and levels are modifying! The manual with my JX8P is even worse.
Each parameter has a one or two sentence blurb about its editing parameters and
that's it! If it weren't for a great article in Keyboard magazine about
programming the JX8P and the JX10, I'd be totally in the dark about some of the
great programming options on this instrument!
Meanwhile, back at the ranch...
When I said "the envelope is wide open by default", I meant that the
levels and rates are set at their highest values. so the envelope would, by
default, look like this:
_________________ .
| | as opposed to . .
| | something like this: . .
| | . .
. .
. .
Oh, in case it's not clear in this explanation, only one EG on the
machine.
Dan
|
939.57 | Try one-shoot mode. | PILOU::MULELID | Nicely out of tune. | Thu Sep 17 1987 11:34 | 12 |
| Dan,
Could it be that you get a "short loop" in your sample, like
somebody mentioned before. I think I had something like that
when I tried to do a sample on my S-10. Suggest you try the
one shot mode on your MKS-100 and see if you still have it
then. The "one shoot" mode only scans through the sample once,
with no looping. At least that way you see if the problem is
in the loop.
Svein
|
939.58 | I had that base already covered | AKOV88::EATOND | What'll they come up with next? | Thu Sep 17 1987 12:20 | 6 |
| RE < Note 939.57 by PILOU::MULELID >
I was using one-shot mode. That's why I was so surprised to hear it.
Thanks anyway.
Dan
|
939.59 | | SALSA::MOELLER | | Thu Sep 17 1987 14:17 | 34 |
| This is in reply to some of the short loop problems Edd discussed
earlier, as well as a clarification of what Emulator/Emax 'Autoloop'
is..
from 'The Art of Looping' Music Technology Sept 87
"..A common problem with VERY short loops is that they end up playing
a different pitch from the rest of the sound. this annoying shift
is caused by a rather technical brawl between the sampling rate
and the pitch of the instrument being sampled.
For example you have used a sample rate of 44kHz to sample a flute
playing an A440 note. Performing a little math shows that one cycle
of this sound will be 100 'samples' (however many bits wide that
may be) long. If the loop is a little shorter or alittle longer,
the cycle length is altered, and the resultant pitch is different
fro the rest of the sample. To get the loop 'in tune', you will
need a loop length of 100, 200 or 300 (and so on) sample words.
This sounds great, but who wants to use an oscilloscope and calculator?
Let the machine do the work..
One technique for eliminating pitch shifts is called 'magnitude
differencing' and appears in the Emax and Emulator II. this technique
looks for matching portions of the waveform around the start and
end points, and then adjusts the end point so that its position
in the cycle corresponds to the start point's position. This renders
a loop length that IS AN INTEGER MULTIPLE of the CYCLE LENGTH (emphasis
mine- km) so that the loop is IN TUNE, and also minimizes loop clicks
by keeping the waveform running in the same direction when it jumps
fro the end point to the start point. "
used emphatically without permission
karl moeller
|