Sample instrument creation & workflow, tools?

[Taika-Kim]

OK, I´ve almost always been working on either synths only, or very simple multisampled instruments I´ve been building with Shortcircuit.

But over the years I have also built a load of acoustic instruments, and now would like to create multisampled instruments based on them.

But I don´t want to waste time trying out everything out there, I´d like to start with a reliable workflow from the start.

I'´ve been thinking about the combination of Sample Robot and CC Constructor, is this the way people go usually?

I´d like to stay flexible and not get set on one option only, and also spread my instruments to people in various formats. How does Constructor compare to Kontakt´s editor (I´m not familiar with Kontakt actually)?

So to spare a bit, would it make sense to skip buying Constructor, and just use Translator to move between samplers? Or, is there any benefit to buying Translator over Constructor?

Also, I guess Sample Robot is the only tool to help with the sampling? I tried it, but am not entirely comfortable sampling acoustic instruments with it, it´s hard to see the big picture of various samples in different velocities, etc.

How do people usually work with the multisampling part? Like now I was sampling a 4 octave kantele string-by-string, now I have a wave file for each string, with a lot of plucked sounds for example. Next I will batch Izotope RX them to clear the noise & accidents.

I have yet to see a sampler that autoslices reliably. Like with the kantele, right before the attack phase there is a nearly silent part that affects the sound a lot, auto-slicing usually misses this kind of details. So I think I will have to slice and save the samples by hand, which is a bit of a chore... Especially annoying is that Bitwig can´t save wave files, so I´ll have to use Reaper, which is less comfortable to use.

So then I would have my samples with the naming scheme, and then I guess it´s just a matter of creating the patches in Constructor, and exporting to formats I desire.

I try to find a "Fordist" approach to this, that would minimize the amount of wasted time, and allow me to do every step of the process in one run...

Are there any good reads or tutorials about this somewhere, I didn´t come up with much when I Googled?

[thecontrolcentre]

I record and edit in Soundforge, then build Instrument Racks in Live using a rack of Simplers or Sampler. There can be up to 4 velocity layers per sound. Everything is edited by hand.

[Michael L]

Sam Gossner of Versilian Studios has a business advising people how to do this efficiently.

[Taika-Kim]

Hmm, I think I'm not interested in the lessons, but I wasn´t aware of that free soundpack they have on the site. And the full orchestral setup seems great too. Thanks

[Samulis]

Most people multi-track in the DAW of their choice, then bring it into Reaper and do the cutting there. Simon Dalzell over at Ivy Audio has some fantastic video overviews of his workflow, and using Kontakt on youtube-
https://www.youtube.com/user/IvyAudio/videos

In my opinion it's best to do all processing, tuning, etc. in the session. It's a smart idea to back up all the data (so make a copy before editing), then proceed to denoise, then cut, then adjust tuning, etc. Many people outsource cutting to dedicated 3rd parties such as Soundemote with exceptionally large instruments. Batch processing is ok, but I consider it as a "last-minute fix" technique, as things like denoising sometimes leave artifacts near the beginning of a take or may add delay at the start, and are thus left to the master session.

The quick-and-dirty mapping tool a lot of people use is Maize Sampler. That being said, it's pretty dead-end (i.e. it can only do so much and once you get that far, you kinda just have to switch to a better tool such as Kontakt). I built a nice automatic SFZ-mapping utility that is very good at doing the long tedious part of sfz creation- I have noticed, however, that not many people are familiar with sfz and not many have it on their computers, while VSTi is hugely popular and has many blogs associated with new freeware releases. Kontakt is a great format, but again, not a big user base unfortunately, unless you're making really fantastic stuff with true legato, multi-mic, and a pointless arpeggiator built in and selling it for lots of money.

Sample naming should be straightforward and readable. All sample names are made up of arguments (e.g. "cello" "mf" "v4" "rr3") separated by underscores ("_"). Each argument describes a bit of metadata about the sample, specifically:
1. Instrument
2. Articulation
3. Mic Position (if applicable)
4. Dynamic Level (if applicable)
5. Round Robin/Multisample # (if applicable)

True Legato instruments will also feature an "Interval" argument, or argument set. Various other arguments may be used for special cases (such as sub-articulations or in some cases, keyswitch indicators or other bits).

Note that different samplers take automated parameters differently, and thus a good mass file renaming tool is essential. I use one called Oscar's Renamer, but I am sure there are much better/faster ones out there. Kontakt, for example, in my knowledge uses raw value bits for the most part (e.g. dynamic level is given as actual lovel hivel values, 43_67 for example). The SFZ automapper on the other hand is designed to handle the lovel-hivel generation for you, so a simple "v1" or any range of velocity indicating arguments will apply.

Basically, I might have a sample:
Trumpet3_Sus_Main_C4_v1_rr2.wav
in this case-
[instrument]_[articulation]_[micPos]_[Notename]_[velLevel]_[rrNumber].[extension]

So it could also be
Tpt3_Sus_Mid_60_0_50_1.wav
// here velLevel is split up and provided as a Lovel_Hivel, as might be used in Kontakt- note that this is not comfortably human-readable!

or
TrumpetPl3_Sustain_MainMic_C3_forte_RR1.wav
// note in this case that some samplers rely on C4=60=middle C ("International") while many others rely on "Japanese-style" C3=60=middle C. You may even encounter some that use C5=60 like FL Studio.

It's essentially your choice with regards to what is the most efficient and logical way to list out the information, provided the input parameters of your final tool and your personal taste. If you're mapping by hand, like in Maize, then human readability is a major concern.

This is the sort of industry where it is very very good to make friends with other developers. Often times partnerships and collaborations, or even just chatting about techniques, can help you out a lot.

[Taika-Kim]

Thanks for the thoughtful entry!

Yes I´ve been thinking about the naming I should adopt, my previous sampled instruments were so simple, it was not a concern. But like yesterday I made around 800mb of kantele samples, and I don´t want to rely on hand mapping in the future, there´s going to be at least hundreds of samples.

I love SFZ, I love open formats and technology. But the only free editor that´s available... Quite horrible, and doing the definition files by had in a text editor is really not much better if there´s a lot of samples. Also I love Alchemy and it used SFZ, but sadly Apple ate it, and I'm running on Windows and Linux

Yes I´m going kind of crazy at time with the middle C thing. So I have been thinking to adopt a method of using just the MIDI note number. Actually a hz value would be the least ambiguous, but I suspect nothing supports auto-reading that. Then again, in Kontakt, the automatic import could be customised? I still don´t have it so I´ve been just taking a look at the manual.

Actually I was taking a closer look at Redux yesterday, and for me since I did a lot of stuff in Renoise previously, the learning curve is shallow, and it has some pretty smart ideas. Round robin, note off samples, I think that's good enough for me now. I don´t think I have the need for switches for articulations right now, so that would do... And it reads SFZ.

Yes I get the feeling that everything up until the cuts is best done in a multitrack, I like to see things, like compare velocities by eye. Altough hmm I think the fundamental frequency might be playing tricks there, and louder by db might not always equal softer played originally...

I hope there would be some magic bullet for making cutting easy, but I guess I just have to swallow it

For now I´ve always denoised always whole takes before cutting, because at least RX2 always does strange stuff if the sound is closely cut.

Hmm Maize looks useful maybe. Has anybody used both that and Constructor from Chicken Systems, I think the latter sounds better equipped?

[Samulis]

I'll assume you're talking about my sfz creator if you're talking about dictionary/definition files, to which my rebuttal is, it takes all of 2-4 minutes to set up a full dictionary file (and in most cases you won't need to EVER make a new one, as the provided ones are quite comprehensive), and then you have it to execute an infinite number of times. I have built working 1000+ sample instruments with the creator in under 10 minutes- the larger the instrument, the more worthwhile it is to use. Let's remember that before the creator, typical sfz creation revolved around manual entry of opcodes in a text editor, sample by sample. There are a few very primitive GUI-based mappers, but none of them (that I know of) feature automatic mapping, at least not near the creator.

I don't know of any samplers that allow input of a Hz value. This is actually a somewhat problematic approach, as frequencies change over time and unless you pre-tune each sample out, a degree of liberty must be given to the program to round to the nearest tone (e.g. if your A is actually averaged at 442, it would have to know that is still A, or even more, to automatically adjust, which is simply too much back-end programming to be worth it).

As I said before, Maize is a bit dead-end, but for independent, and even semi-professional work, it's perfect- it's completely visual, exports straight into VSTi and AU that run on nearly any computer, and supports most basic sample library operations: patches, banks, dynamic levels, round robin methods, a basic LFO, and some cheesy but functional reverb. If you pick some DAW-specific sampler, or sampler that costs money to buy, know well that you will be limiting your potential audience severely IF you plan on turning it into a hobby or business. Thus, only samplers that are either free or utilities that export a redistributable VSTi/AU ready to run are worth developing for in these cases (with an exception being Kontakt, although that has its own user base attitudes). IF on the other hand, you are developing for personal use and not planning to make a hobby or business of sampling, then the built-in DAW-specific sampler or commercial samplers will be plenty fine.

Typically when recording, I am of the camp where you press the record button and just go through the process. Pick a starting note, record the RR's and VL's of it, then do the next, etc. Sometimes the process changes for intonation or musical reasons- experimentation is your friend here, start small and just experiment. I typically do an experimental instrument before I do the final thing- just some super rough light samples, try different interval schemes, and so on. It is good to later organize the cut samples in a multi-track array so you can use wildcards to automate export of RR's in Reaper (again, Simon goes over all of this in his videos).

A few other freeware samplers to think about-
Grace (maybe too limited for your needs as I don't think it has RR last I checked, but it has the potential to grow)
HISE (awesome, but somewhat complex for the uninitiated- has virtually zero userbase and is still in BETA, but VERY powerful)

I've heard the Chicken Systems things are glitchy and that it is very hard to contact the developers, not to mention they still use physical software distribution in 2016... I really don't know anyone who uses them regularly on a professional or even semi-professional basis. If you want a good converter, maybe check out Extreme Sample Converter- I've tried it out a few times, and it actually looks fairly comprehensive.

I also know there is a really nice new system in development by a few people for a complete cutting to export process (a la magic bullet), but I do not know when it will be available, probably a few years. There are a few tools which promise 'magic bullet' results, but honestly, manual cutting cannot be replaced entirely without a loss of realism- automation does not know how an attack should sound or when it should actually release, or what is noise and what is a sample, and therefore, when automation is used, it must always be carefully checked and samples adjusted.

Cutting requires a delicate ear to figure out the most consistent yet realistic points to cut in and out of each sample; bad cutting is easy to hear and very hard to cover up or fix- the short sample that ends before the decay ends, leaving a harsh and unenjoyable gated sound, or the wind instrument that had the attacks cut off just slightly to much, making it sound less like an orchestral musician and more like a synth. Samples must be checked for mistakes, clicks, background noises, etc.- these things even the finest algorithms cannot do without removing some of the life and beauty of the samples. Denoise or tune a set of samples too much and there is nothing left but flat synthy noises filled with denoising artifacts.

[Taika-Kim]

I was referring to sfZed I think, it´s some years since I did a few SFZs, the process was less than pleasant.

I´ve just had very good communication with the Chicken Systems people, they have sent me like five emails today on short notice... Wait, physcial distribution? I think I will anyway check the demo, Constructor should have a pretty intelligent automapping, I think will at least check the demo, even if that results in an evening lost time

That´s good thinking about the formats... I might create some small set for sale later, but mostly the things will be for my own use.

Hmm, I'm always into cutting edge stuff, I will check out that HISE thing Complexity is not a problem.

[Michael L]

There are now many free Maize-based vst plugins. However, they have been very crash-prone in 64-bit OSX. A Maize bugfix was just released but some plugins may never be updated. Is there any way to convert maize or .mse files to sfz?

[Samulis]

There are now many free Maize-based vst plugins. However, they have been very crash-prone in 64-bit OSX. A Maize bugfix was just released but some plugins may never be updated. Is there any way to convert maize or .mse files to sfz?

I don't know of any direct way to convert between the two, since mse uses a proprietary format. However, do note that the mse format is just the sample content, mapping instructions, and UI instructions. The actual part that might crash is the actual audio units part or the VSTi .dll part.

If you export a new audio units instrument from Maize (or just use a recent audio units release), you can go inside the audio unit .component and, through a little menu surfing, find the .mse file. Delete that .mse and copy in the .mse from the instrument you are experiencing difficulty with. If you want to be fancy, although this is actually not necessary, you can dig around and change the name of the component and some file contents to make it be the same as the old instrument. It's a bit of a hack, but it works.

It's even easier on Windows with VSTi- just delete the existing .mse inside the .instruments folder for the working instrument and replace it with the .mse of the new instrument. If you have an instrument with the default Maize UI or a custom UI that includes an instrument changing option, you can actually put multiple Maize instruments together in one single Maize VSTi or Audio Units by putting multiple .mse in the .instruments folder or inside the Audio Units content.

[Michael L]

That is a really great tip, Sam. I examined the folder and understand what you mean. It solves several problems at once. Thanks so much!

[brainzistor]

SFZ Designer
http://mildon.me/sfzdesigner
which should be a visual mapping tool for SFZ.
I didn't work with it, so I can't tell anything about it, I just know that it exists