# Release samples and legato scripting



## Mr. Anxiety (Feb 27, 2009)

Just so I'm 100% clear.

As of now, we don't have the ability to have a legato script working with an instrument that has release samples in it, correct?

Is there any knowledge of K3.5 sorting this out?

Thanks,

Mr. A.


----------



## Big Bob (Feb 27, 2009)

SIPS 2 supports release-sample triggering, but, SIPS 2 uses a 3rd script called the SAS (SIPS Articulation Script). This script is full of new functions including things like TKT, natural variation sequencing, DFD support, and the ability to setup instruments with release groups, etc. However, some users seem a bit dismayed by all of its bells and whistles and a few people are even writing different 'front-ends' to replace the SAS :lol: but I don't know if any of these '3rd-party' scripts will support RT or not.

Perhaps some others will chime in here to add their opinions of SIPS 2 pro or con. Me, I just wrote the thing, what would I know :roll: 

Maranatha,

Bob


----------



## Fernando Warez (Feb 27, 2009)

Mr. Anxiety @ Fri Feb 27 said:


> Just so I'm 100% clear.
> 
> As of now, we don't have the ability to have a legato script working with an instrument that has release samples in it, correct?
> 
> ...



Unisono-Portamento does this in K3 as far as i can tell.

I think SISP2 does it too but only at the end of a phrase.

edited: Ooops! Bob bit me to it!


----------



## Big Bob (Feb 27, 2009)

> I think SISP2 does it too but only at the end of a phrase.



Oh yes, I probably should have mentioned that :oops: 

Whether to trigger RTs for the 'inside' transitions seems to be an age old debate. Of course the main reason you might want to trigger the release samples for inside notes is to accomodate 'reverby' libraries such as the EW series. I should mention however, that various schemes involving optional triggering at reduced volume levels, etc were attempted during the development of SIPS2 but the results were not very good. I finally had to abandon it. Of course my position has always been not to record reverb with samples and when you add the reverb after the legato transitions have been synthesized, you don't need to trigger RTs for anything but the last note of the phrase. In that case, you are simply using the RT to provide a more realistic note termination.

However, lest I stir up another hornet's nest :lol: , let me just say that if you want to trigger release samples in the middle of a legato phrase, SIPS2 won't do it so you will need to use a different script. I don't know how well the unisono script works for such a situation because I have never actually used it.

Maranatha,

Bob


----------



## Fernando Warez (Feb 27, 2009)

> I should mention however, that various schemes involving optional triggering at reduced volume levels, etc were attempted during the development of SIPS2 but the results were not very good. I finally had to abandon it.



Yes, i assume, with a lib like SO, the result must be pretty bad since you end up hearing both tuned and un-tuned samples at the same time. It that what why you abandoned it, Bob?

Cheers!


----------



## Big Bob (Feb 27, 2009)

> Yes, i assume, with a lib like SO, the result must be pretty bad since you end up hearing both tuned and un-tuned samples at the same time. It that what why you abandoned it, Bob?



No I actually made sure that the release samples had the same pitch warp as the main samples. It was really a very complex and sophisticated algorithm with lots of adjustable parameters. It was abandoned simply because it didn't do what its proponents thought it would do. I of course was dubious about it from the beginning but I really tried to set aside my bias and gave it 'its day in court'. It just didn't work out. I'm afraid the moral of the story is what I had been saying all along, that if you want to crossfade samples, don't add any reverb until you are done messing with the dry sound. 8)


----------



## Fernando Warez (Feb 27, 2009)

Big Bob @ Fri Feb 27 said:


> > Yes, i assume, with a lib like SO, the result must be pretty bad since you end up hearing both tuned and un-tuned samples at the same time. It that what why you abandoned it, Bob?
> 
> 
> 
> No I actually made sure that the release samples had the same pitch warp as the main samples. It was really a very complex and sophisticated algorithm with lots of adjustable parameters. It was abandoned simply because it didn't do what its proponents thought it would do. I of course was dubious about it from the beginning but I really tried to set aside my bias and gave it 'its day in court'. It just didn't work out. I'm afraid the moral of the story is what I had been saying all along, that if you want to crossfade samples, don't add any reverb until you are done messing with the dry sound. 8)



That's interesting! And i agree about your conclusion.

Plus, it's about the music right? If the music good people are not going to noticed if there are release sample in between notes or not. 

How about that Mr. Anxiety? ...You know for someone who alls himself Mr. Amxiety you're not in a hurry to reply? :roll: :wink: 

Have a good night guys. o-[][]-o


----------



## Big Bob (Feb 28, 2009)

Hi Paul,



> Now: if you fired off the trigs and then only warped the *incoming* note - was that still not working? I can understand why warping the RT as well would not be pleasing..



That may sound logical to you but I assure you that not matching the RT pitch to the common pitch of the crossfade sounds horrible :shock: . Just think about it, the sound is something like sticking in a little sonic glue that's detuned from the two things you are joining. If you don't match the RT pitch to the crossfade pitch, you won't have a prayer of making it work :roll: . Of course one way to accomplish the match is to simply not warp the crossfade pitch by turning off the bend function entirely. But then, you lose a major part of why SIPS legato sounds so musical.



> Let say for the sake of arguement that I had recorded in such a beautiful room that I was not prepared to sacrifice that sound, but still wanted some form of legato.



What you should do instead is to record the impulse response of your beautiful room and then go into a very dead room to record the instrument. After you apply synthesized legato (and whatever else you want) you can then use a quality convolution reverb to get the beautiful room back.

Now that's what to do in the future. What to do if you already recorded in a live room? SIPS2 will tack on your beautiful room at the end of each legato phrase but for the 'inside' notes, the only thing you can do is swamp the 'reverb hole' with yet more reverb. If there is a better way, I'm not aware of it.



> In my head, I hear it working with straight mid phrase RTs every note change, and a slight warp etc on the incoming note..



Too bad that you didn't volunteer to be a beta tester at the time all these ideas were being tested. Not that I think the results would have been any different, it's just that you would have heard for yourself that it just doesn't work. :cry: 



> Is there a version of SIPS (1.98?!) that had RTs firing but *didnt* warp them - or only warped the incoming note? Or is that something I could attempt to edit in SIPS2?



I'm not really sure if I still have any of the interim beta versions and if I do, I wouldn't know what other things might be missing relative to the final release. But, if you send me a PM with your email address, I'll look through my stuff and send something to you if I can find it.

Onward and Upward, ~o) 

Bob


----------



## Synesthesia (Feb 28, 2009)

Thanks Bob! PM is on its way.

I absolutely take your word for it re the warp and RTs.

I need to find a solution one way or the other as I do understand the usefulness of true legato, but for this particular project it was absolute that I wanted the genuine sound of the room - IRs, as good as they are, are no match for the real thing..

I am happy to sacrifice true legato on this one, so I just want to find a 'best case' solution. 

Of course, everything is a trade off so it just becomes about your focus! - that is, deciding what is the most important aspect of a project and then working around that.

Thanks!

Paul o/~


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (Feb 28, 2009)

Sorry, Mr. anxiety fell asleep; funny that!

I think Synesthesia chimed in for me about using samples that have a "room" sound that you'd like to keep in your performance or not.

The impulses used in a convolution reverb can be pretty good,but if they are not sounding right for you, then you don't have an option. I guess I'm looking for the option.

When I use use the SIPS script for a legato line on a string section, it makes the line sound way more realistic. But when I take out the release samples, the sound of the strings start sounding like every other library. That's too big of a trade off for The MUSIC. So Fernando Warez, I'm looking for everything I can get, of course!!! The greedy bastard that I am! lol

Thanks,

Mr. A.


----------



## Big Bob (Mar 1, 2009)

> The impulses used in a convolution reverb can be pretty good,but if they are not sounding right for you, then you don't have an option. I guess I'm looking for the option.



What is needed is not just any IR but the IR of the room that the EW samples were recorded in plus the same samples recorded dry (but that's rather improbable since EW wants to sell their samples with the reverb irreversibly embedded). It might make an interesting exercise for someone to try to 'remove' the reverb by obtaining the IR of the room and then using de-convolution to extract the dry samples. But, please don't ask me to engage in such an exercise in futility :lol:



> The impulses used in a convolution reverb can be pretty good,but if they are not sounding right for you, then you don't have an option. I guess I'm looking for the option.



Yes, and I'm looking for the 'Fountain of Youth' (I need it badly :lol: ).


----------



## Synesthesia (Mar 1, 2009)

Just for the record, not looking for an EW specific solution!

I think I have a few ideas how to achieve what I am trying to do, so I'll just potter along and see how I get on.

The problem is, as great as IRs can be, they are not capable of reproducing the incredibly complex things that happen when a room is excited (all the chaotic effects) and also you are at the mercy of the mics and speakers used, and the effectiveness of the 'speaker colour removal' part of the convolution reverb.

Comparing a one shot impulse against a live room with 20 vintage mics in it connected to 20 bespoke mic pres and a very expensive desk is always (for me!) going to be an unmatched battle...

So its just a case of getting as much musical control into the recordings as possible - again with the caveat that while I for example *love* 'The Trumpet' and happily IR that, for this particular project I just had to have all the stuff I mentioned above, to set the actual sound how I wanted it..

But its horses for courses and if nothing else it will get my very rusty programming skills from way back when I was at Uni brushed up a bit!

Thanks anyway,

Paul (o)


----------



## Big Bob (Mar 1, 2009)

> So its just a case of getting as much musical control into the recordings as possible



Yes, and therein lies the tradeoff. Some of us feel that musical control is more important and are willing to settle for a 'nice' room added later. Others insist on a better room sound and are willing to give up some musical control to get it. As I said, to each his own.



> But its horses for courses and if nothing else it will get my very rusty programming skills from way back when I was at Uni brushed up a bit!



Of course I wish you every success for your project, as I'm sure do other fans of reverby libraries. But, just out of curiosity, since EW has introduced their own 'Play' sampler with scripting and all, how are they doing with simulating legato? Do they trigger their release samples for 'inside' legato transitions? If so, does it sound good? 

The way I look at it, EW needs to be committed to their 'reverby' libraries and therefore they are the most likely to solve this problem (if indeed it can be solved). If 'Play' legato sounds as good or better than SIPS legato and uses the RTs, then isn't that a better solution than SIPS for all you EW fans? :roll: 

Oh well, onward and upward.

Maranatha,

Bob


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (Mar 1, 2009)

Yes, good question about PLAY and it's legato script. I'm curious as well.

I've been speaking more globally as well, not just about the EW libraries. My experience with workarounds has proven to me that Synesthesia is right. If the session has been recording beautifully, the ERs and verb tails of the room really make up a good portion of the sonic footprint of the library, and to get that with dry samples and convolution is really really hard; I've tried it many times. The weight isn't there, as well as the complexity. Of course all of this is savory for tastes, but when I need to supply a synthesized orchestral score, these factors come into play for me. I've done just enough scores where I add real strings to my synth score to first hand see the difference, and it's obvious, aside from the performance of real players, the sound has a weight that the samples just don't have IMO. Same with solo WWs. Trying to put them "in the right room" and creating the distance from the listener has proven quite the challenge. 

Anyway, debating this sonic dilemna is not the real thread here, so, in search of the script that maintains the room environment of a well recorded sample library!

It could be hiding right behind the fountain of youth, right Bob?

Thx,

Mr. A.


----------



## Mr. Anxiety (Mar 1, 2009)

This seen with regards to the Play script in EWQLSO Play version:

"the reverb is "off" by default and gets turned on with the Portamento script or Legato script (while the release trails get turned off simultaneously)", from someone who would know about this.

So, it looks like they haven't figured anything out either.

Mr. A.


----------

