KVR Audio

Marctwo · Post by **Marctwo** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:15 pm

pljones wrote:You need to be specific rather than say nothing. If you say "standard sfz" you're saying nothing at all. Either say "sfz 1" or "sfz 2".

No, I don't need to be specific in such cases because it doesn't matter. I think everyone else knows what I mean by 'standard sfz' and I actually suspect that you do too but saw a nit to pick and couldn't resist.

davidv@plogue · Post by **davidv@plogue** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:23 pm

pljones wrote:You need to be specific rather than say nothing. If you say "standard sfz" you're saying nothing at all. Either say "sfz 1" or "sfz 2".

We unofficially say
SFZ Level 1 (the original 1.0 RGCAudio/Cakewalk specification)
SFZ Level 2 (as used in Cakewalk Dimension Pro and in Simon Cann's book)
SFZ Level 2 with ARIA Extensions (thats the gaps we filled to allow things that other samplers could do)
and
SFZ Level 3, which I hope will include some ARIA Extensions and others that are required by other vendors.

When you open an SFZ file in sforzando it actually tells you this. So if you want your sample library to work with as much players as possible, make sure "SFZ Level 1" is shown in the INFO tab.

Marctwo · Post by **Marctwo** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:38 pm

I was thinking about this when looking at the LinuxSampler supported spec. I think any sfz 2 compatible player should be sfz 1 compatible too. And I'd like to see the same backward compatibility with any future specs. It'd be a bit of a pain if you had to have different players for different versions.

davidv@plogue · Post by **davidv@plogue** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:42 pm

Marctwo wrote: I think any sfz 2 compatible player should be sfz 1 compatible too.

SFZ 2.0 cannot live without 80%+ of SFZ 1.0 opcodes. Its trivial to implement full 1.0 when you are aiming 2.0

Of course and the same should be true for 3.0 -> 2.0 -> 1.0.

Marctwo · Post by **Marctwo** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:45 pm

But if you don't implement full 1.0 then you have to keep rewriting your old files or use specific 1.0 players for them.

Marctwo · Post by **Marctwo** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:53 pm

Ah, sorry David, you were agreeing with me.

dnekm · Post by **dnekm** » Fri May 01, 2015 12:31 am

I am probably going to be completely wrong about this, but.....

I look at SFZ as a container for the WAV samples, much like sf2.

The beauty lies not so much in what you can tell that container to do but in the various instruments that can load it.

Think about it.... All of the different instruments/players that can load SFZ files, yet all are different instruments, with different ways of doing things. There is no real way for op-codes regarding simple envelope settings much less filters....

What SFZ provides more than anything else is an open format as opposed to a closed, proprietary one. The WAV files are always there, to be used in instruments that can NOT load SFZ.

Sure, it would be great to have some standard, where every instrument that supported it would load the op-codes and translate that to the controls of each instrument - but that will most likely never happen.

But, what do I know?

pljones · Post by **pljones** » Fri May 01, 2015 6:23 am

Marctwo wrote:
pljones wrote:You need to be specific rather than say nothing. If you say "standard sfz" you're saying nothing at all. Either say "sfz 1" or "sfz 2".
No, I don't need to be specific in such cases because it doesn't matter. I think everyone else knows what I mean by 'standard sfz' and I actually suspect that you do too but saw a nit to pick and couldn't resist.

My question related to a specific point you were making. Your use of "standard sfz" made that point unclear -- and possibly either insubstantial or inaccurate, so I asked you to clarify. I do, indeed, think I might have some idea what you think you were trying to say. But trying to compare apples and oranges (which it seems you were) will, generally, end up with a lack of clarity at best.

Marctwo · Post by **Marctwo** » Fri May 01, 2015 6:36 am

Chad@PA wrote:Hey everyone,

I just moved April 1st and missed most of this thread when it first started. Just catching up on everything now.

I am very interested in promoting and further developing resources for the SFZ format.

It'd be great to get a site online that had all of the opcodes with useful examples and implementations. This would help the format gain interest especially for those curious on what the format can offer.

Hmm... Chad Beckwith? As in sfzformat.com?

That'd be an ideal place to host the kind of sfz resources that have been mentioned...

kinwie · Post by **kinwie** » Fri May 01, 2015 7:54 am

Thanks to David@Plogue for the on_loccN=/on_hiccN= opcodes support in sforzando.
Just figure it out recently and It's extremely cool to use live

Now I can use sforzando in my guitar FX-chain (ElevenRack+ProTools) to playback backup rhythm while doing solo in live band performance via my guitar Midi pedal controller!

Thanks a ton, Plogue!

dnekm · Post by **dnekm** » Fri May 01, 2015 10:56 pm

Sorry for rambling, but I think this is where the strength of SFZ lies....

http://westgatesounds.net/AnomalyVSTi/multisamples.html

dnekm · Post by **dnekm** » Fri May 01, 2015 11:20 pm

My point being....

Rather than attempt to turn SFZ into another Kontakt type scripting thing (if I understand correctly), why not embrace it for what it is? An open format to distribute both single sampled and multi sampled WAV files.

Look, each instrument is going to have not only different controls but different ways of implementing those controls. So full support of SFZ in a slew of instruments across the board is never going to happen.

The best, and probably most unlooked for, feature of SFZ is the end of redundant installs of sound sources.

And the ability to share those sources over many instruments.

I am sure that many other instruments could be added to the list I have worked out. Those are just the ones I own....

Anyway, sorry to barge in. Back to your discussion....

Chad@PA · Post by **Chad@PA** » Mon May 04, 2015 4:58 pm

davidv@plogue wrote:
pljones wrote:You need to be specific rather than say nothing. If you say "standard sfz" you're saying nothing at all. Either say "sfz 1" or "sfz 2".
We unofficially say
SFZ Level 1 (the original 1.0 RGCAudio/Cakewalk specification)
SFZ Level 2 (as used in Cakewalk Dimension Pro and in Simon Cann's book)
SFZ Level 2 with ARIA Extensions (thats the gaps we filled to allow things that other samplers could do)
and
SFZ Level 3, which I hope will include some ARIA Extensions and others that are required by other vendors.

When you open an SFZ file in sforzando it actually tells you this. So if you want your sample library to work with as much players as possible, make sure "SFZ Level 1" is shown in the INFO tab.

Seems great.

Has anyone been in contact with CamelAudio? I would love to know if Apple has any interest.

Marctwo wrote:As in sfzformat.com?

That'd be an ideal place to host the kind of sfz resources that have been mentioned...

Yes, I'm looking into installing Media Wiki on there right now. Then everyone who is interested can start submissions of content for it. We need one place on the web that has all of the opcodes with well written working examples. A ton of work...

kinwie wrote:Thanks to David@Plogue for the on_loccN=/on_hiccN= opcodes support in sforzando.
Just figure it out recently and It's extremely cool to use live

Now I can use sforzando in my guitar FX-chain (ElevenRack+ProTools) to playback backup rhythm while doing solo in live band performance via my guitar Midi pedal controller!

Thanks a ton, Plogue!

This is a great example. Use cases like this are some of the major reasons that I first became obsessed with the sfz format. The input controls for determining how a sample can be triggered is just so cool, and can be put to great use for creating exclusive groups, voicings, and creative performance uses.

Marctwo · Post by **Marctwo** » Tue May 05, 2015 3:19 pm

All hail Chad - keeper of the scrolls.

Keep an eye on the site guys.
http://www.sfzformat.com

DSmolken · Post by **DSmolken** » Tue May 05, 2015 3:45 pm

Cool. I can document some of the newer opcodes I've been using, like hooking up detune controls to MIDI CC, since I have working examples.

The Future of the SFZ Format