What's new

A sample library wiki?

d.healey

Music Monkey
About the audio files, I think good AND bad demos are important to understand how easy/hard is to use a lib,).
No-one writes a bad demo ;) this is far too subjective to be of any use and should be avoided.

I don't think audio should be posted on a public (unbiased) wiki. Our ears are biased and we are full of in-built prejudices. If you love Spitfire then you will most likely think a demo for a Spitfire library is "good" compared to someone who hates Spitfire who will naturally think the demo is "bad". A wiki should be a place for facts not opinions.
 

angeruroth

Member
No-one writes a bad demo ;) this is far too subjective to be of any use and should be avoided.

I don't think audio should be posted on a public (unbiased) wiki. Our ears are biased and we are full of in-built prejudices. If you love Spitfire then you will most likely think a demo for a Spitfire library is "good" compared to someone who hates Spitfire who will naturally think the demo is "bad". A wiki should be a place for facts not opinions.
Don't know why anyone would love or hate any developer (a lib yes, we all do) but you are right, it should be about facts. That should mitigate any prejudice and make it plain helpful to everyone.
 

MarcusD

Active Member
+1 should be 100% factual language. No promotional material and or bised content that could be manipulated for personal gains. For example, reviews videos.

Which begs the question: If you were to include any video content or content taken from a 3rd party platform, it can be used to that platform (or individuals) advantage to generate meterics, data and potential conversions for their own gains.

Maybe it'd be a good idea to host any audio examples, MIDI, videos etc... directly from the website. Obviously this would require a server and cost some money. But it removes any leaverage for individuals to take advantage of such things. I'm sure if a bunch of people payed £2 or £1 a month contribution towards server costs it would cover things.

Just a thought...

EDIT: could call it Vikapidia haha
 
OP
Mason

Mason

Active Member
I agree with the facts based approach! I think keeping it as neutral as possible will make it into everyone’s resource page to find libraries and have a great overview of every piano, brass, choir library in the world. Think of it as Wikipedia pages on movies, music albums etc.

A link to the developers website and YouTube channel will make it easy to find demos and walkthroughs, but for resource purposes more than marketing.

When I suggested something about the library’s reception I was also thinking about how Wikipedia pages on movies usually say how the movie has been received on IMDB etc. So perhaps it could say something like “recieved 4 of 5 stars” on “sample library review” with a link to the review, as a fact?
 

MarcusD

Active Member
A link to the developers website and YouTube channel will make it easy to find demos and walkthroughs, but for resource purposes more than marketing.
Yes. Exactly that. Only the factual stuff from the developers. None "outsider" promotional content and certainly no tutorials / overviews from anybody that has nothing to do with the companies. Keep it very much straight-from-the-horses-mouth and to the point.
 

WhiteNoiz

';...;'
Maybe make it a bit more streamlined? Seems a bit random as it is. Not sure where to start. It probably needs a By Year category too. Put some training wheels on it in order to figure out the format. It's pretty overwhelming when looking at the blank page, haha.

Issues I immediately notice: Dev names. Someone could, for example, input "Spitfire" and another might input "Spitfire Audio" or "SpitfireAudio". Don't know how easy it would be to crosscheck, rename or re-organise after you get the raw data. Instruments text doesn't show up [in HS I input Violins I (16 / 9-7), Violins II (14 / 8-6), Violas (10 / 6-4), Celli (10 / 6-4), Basses (7 / 4-3)]. Library type seems to have bad reference. Also, some libraries are strings only or ensembles or full sections (EWQLSO technically has the strings separate when installed but I don't think you can buy it separately, though you can figure that out). Maybe ensemble/pack libraries should be somehow separated (like Albion, Symphobia, etc., not sure how). What about numerous entries? Auto-fill would help. Links to manuals maybe. Guidelines on what to input in text fields (wasn't sure what to put in instruments). Maybe add a general text description. Not sure if I can add things myself; don't know how to work it.

And back-ups... In case it gets messed up or vandalised or spammed or whatever. Anyway, let's see where it leads. It can only be as good as what and how much people actually contribute.
 
Last edited:

TigerTheFrog

Proud Amateur
In addition to setting up rules, I think a lot of work should be put into its design and user interface before it's started. Personally, I think it should be a Wordpress site, as that allows the most opportunity for improving the user interface in the future, as people come up with new ideas.

Also, there is the issue of hosting. Uploading music costs money as this thing grows, particularly if we want to have higher quality than the kind found on other sites. For this reason, we might to host original video, and not just link to YouTube. So a plan for how people could chip in to make this possible should be there from the beginning.

Or a decision could be made, that no, there won't be anything hosted on the site but words and links. But I think it's worth discussing.
 

MarcusD

Active Member
Just thought - When putting any images or logos up of developer brands. It would be worth asking the developer first if it's ok to-do-so. Simply because some artwork is outsourced and the developer may not own the right to an image or work (still remains the artists), unless they paid for ownership.

Just a thought. No one wants to inadvertently be treading on toes, although there's no ill intent behind what's being done. Only takes 1 artist to angrily helicopter boulders of shit over everyone's hard work, like a hippo.
 
Last edited:

WhiteNoiz

';...;'
I'd go a bit further and suggest it has a complete edit history like Wikipedia.
The basic version posted here before has a revisions/versions button with edits. I added HS and Zimmer Strings to get a feel for it. Trying some edits.

Just a thought. No one wants to inadvertently be treading on toes, although there's no ill intent behind what's being done. Only takes 1 artist to angrily helicopter boulders of shit over everyone's hard work, like a hippo.
Fair use? If you want to copy it, you can copy it from the original anyway.

Or a decision could be made, that no, there won't be anything hosted on the site but words and links. But I think it's worth discussing.
Maybe start with something like Google Drive and decide later based on traffic. Links seem fine though, depends how deep you want to make it. I thought about linking to the old Nick Phoenix tutorials from 2011 or whatever for HS, for example (although technically they've removed them, you can still find them).
 

Dex

Member
Yes. Exactly that. Only the factual stuff from the developers. None "outsider" promotional content and certainly no tutorials / overviews from anybody that has nothing to do with the companies. Keep it very much straight-from-the-horses-mouth and to the point.
I wouldn’t mind links to tutorials/walkthroughs that focus on the naked sound and the basic workflow.
 

creativeforge

Barefoot Heart Music
Good idea but a MIDI file should be the minimum requirement because everyone can use that no-matter what software they're working in.

The wiki should be publicly editable (I don't think KVR's database is). Could VI-Control host it @creativeforge ?
We'd have to run this through @Mike Greene , as it would entails extra expenses and oversight. Though with the potential pool of professional knowledge involved it could become a beastly resource. But hungry too... :) @MatFluor already whipped something up that seems solidly heading in the right direction.
 

DSmolken

Senior Member
Yeah, definitely heading solidly in the right direction. I think that building the best list of orchestral virtual instruments in the world isn't really all that hard, because there's basically nothing out there right now. So, having something of value out there and improving it later sounds like it really would benefit a lot of people.

Even the current rudimentary form, if it was just populated with stuff from all the big developers (which is many hours of work given the huge numbers of entries, but maybe start with 2019 releases and work backwards), would be a huge step forward.
 

dflood

Active Member
If you're interested - here the absolute barebone, unstyled minimal thing. Quickly hacked together.

With a little Design it could be something xD

Feel free to check it out: http://178.128.198.122
Great start, Matt,

I have often wished that something like this existed. The KVR site is good, but not all that complete, and it is littered with plugins and other non sample based products.

Most of the initial work in getting something like this off the ground is in designing the data input fields so that they are complete enough to capture the scope of products out there but perhaps not so detailed that they defy grouping or comparison. Nested categorizations can help, going from the general to highly specific. This is usually accomplished by trial and error with several test iterations and revisions of the data structure being necessary as the number of records grows.

Not sure how to manage this, but it’s probably best to play around with a data schema first for a while until we have one that is not consistently broken by the next library we try to characterize. Some of the oddball libraries and collections might prove the hardest to characterize under a single entry, and it might be useful to try to capture these first. The other thing to think about is the eventual filtering criteria, and to try to ensure this data is captured at the outset. For example, We might want to include DRM requirements, because some people don’t much care for dongles.

Anyway, this is a great idea, and I for one am willing to contribute!
 

WhiteNoiz

';...;'
(..) Anyway, this is a great idea, and I for one am willing to contribute!
I also added Chamber Strings and it hit me that it would be nice to also add the rooms... Added the ilok requirement to HS before. These will probably have to be grouped. Also, Spitfire Sample Player will need to be added, as well as OT (eventually) and UVI (these would fall under 'Other' now). Still messing around (added images too).

General table seems to not be linked with the separate entries: http://178.128.198.122/doku.php?id=overview:families:strings#overview_of_all_string_libraries (Homepage also doesn't show up on its own, although you get a field for it when submitting)

When I initially submit it changes the price to $9 for some reason. Had to manually edit some stuff after the fact.

Some editing stuff needs a bit of familirisation (for example, url tags seem to not work, it just defaults to its own format).
 

dflood

Active Member
Yes - currently my V1 is based on a simple Dokuwiki, quick and painless to set up (with forms). There are some possibilities with that as well - I rather like a "flat file" versus database. But hey - it's V1!
Database vs Wiki is definitely something to sort out from the outset. Many wiki-like applications are actually built with a database back end, as is Wordpress, but they do not necessarily behave like traditional databases in terms of filtering, sorting, summarizing etc. The database part just stores each page, and various binary elements. I think ideally, a VI Library Database would be best built as a real database where all the tables have been normalized. It can take a lot more work in the beginning but the end result would enable much more powerful queries. The UI could look and behave exactly like a wiki or whatever, as the table structure is usually not exposed to the users.

This is not a deal breaker, it would just make the application more powerful. Having said that, I have no idea how to go about it. The last database application I built was with dBase II. Maybe someone among us has such abilities?
 
OP
Mason

Mason

Active Member
Even if I launched the idea, one that it seems like a few others have had in mind as well, please know I don’t have the need to be the one to decide how it should work. I don’t have the technical knowledge to do so anyway. But I wonder, is it possible to create something that works exactly like Wikipedia? Assuming we can’t use Wikipedia for sample libraries (?).

I was imagining something like this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King_(soundtrack)

Perhaps that’s what you are discussing and I just don’t know what you’re talking about with all the technical stuff ;)
 

d.healey

Music Monkey
But I wonder, is it possible to create something that works exactly like Wikipedia?
Yes that's possible.

Assuming we can’t use Wikipedia for sample libraries (?).
I was imagining something like this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King_(soundtrack)
Wikipedia is a general purpose encyclopedia, you can go and write about sample libraries there if you like, but it's probably better to have a dedicated encyclopedia just for sample libraries.
 
Top Bottom