Does this product support compressed audio formats, such as mp3, ogg or wma?
Is it possible to create multiple patches in multiple banks, and have the instrument respond to MSB, LSB and program change messages?
Doc-Z
sample format
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 36 posts since 24 Oct, 2005 from Norway
-
- KVRist
- 456 posts since 15 Oct, 2004 from SF, CA
1.maize sampler only support wav sample, you can convert all your compressed audio files to wav files by some converter first.
2.not support program change yet, but you can use the sample layers in each instrument to do that.
2.not support program change yet, but you can use the sample layers in each instrument to do that.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 36 posts since 24 Oct, 2005 from Norway
Ok I will need to find something else then. I'm looking for a sampler that can use compressed formats such as mp3, ogg or some other kind of compression. And that has the ability to create regular MIDI bank structures of patches. I'm seeking out to create a XG compatible lib, that has exeptional fidelity, but a low file size (512MB max)
Doc-Z
Doc-Z
-
- KVRian
- 858 posts since 14 Sep, 2004
mp3\mp4 files are too lossy and don't decompress fast enough for a sampler. (It's one thing to load a song fast on an mp3 player, something else again to load hundreds of samples one after the other.)Ogg is faster and has better sound. I've been pressing for people to develop a sampling platform for ogg. (DirectWave says it has ogg support, but ogg files crashed my system when I tried to use the demo.)
-
- KVRian
- 858 posts since 14 Sep, 2004
Double post. Sorry.
Last edited by Jake Jackson on Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 36 posts since 24 Oct, 2005 from Norway
It's not imperrative for me to use mp3, it could be anything, just as long as it is able to use compression in some form.
Doc-Z
Doc-Z
-
- KVRian
- 858 posts since 14 Sep, 2004
I did the Google search myself, and found that the Dimension Pro ads say that it supports ogg files. I've also read that SFZ+ supports ogg, but there is no mention of ogg support on their page at the Cakewalk site. I would be sure to obtain a demo of any program that says it supports ogg. Apparently, many people want this support, and developers want to include it, but few are programming it into their samplers.
-
- KVRian
- 858 posts since 14 Sep, 2004
doc-Z:
Did you try the DirectWave demo? Any luck with ogg files in it, or in any other sampler?
Did you try the DirectWave demo? Any luck with ogg files in it, or in any other sampler?
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 36 posts since 24 Oct, 2005 from Norway
so far I've only managed to load ogg files in sfz. To bad, since sfz only supports program and bank change messages with sf2 files, and you cant create instrument and preset libraries in sfz format.
Doc-Z
Doc-Z
-
- KVRian
- 858 posts since 14 Sep, 2004
Mispost. Please delete.
Last edited by Jake Jackson on Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 19134 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
-
- KVRAF
- 4276 posts since 8 Mar, 2005
-
- KVRian
- 858 posts since 14 Sep, 2004
I just created a multisample from ogg files in DirectEave and found to my astonishment that it doesn't support ogg after all: when you add an ogg file into a multisample, DirectWave converts the ogg file into a wave file, greatly expanding its size. In other words, DirectWave won't do it. Sorry for the earlier mispost. Nothing on the DirectWave site said anything about ogg files only being expanded into waves.
-
- KVRAF
- 4420 posts since 7 Nov, 2005 from Florida
You guys realize that compressing a wav file to mp3 or ogg makes it much more crappy - right? You also begin to get generational loss, like VHS video tape copies. After a while you lose much of the sound across the spectrum.
Lossfull file formats should be a last resort/last step - not involved in the main part of the audio editing process.
Hence why few, if any, would even think of including that in their products.
Mike
Lossfull file formats should be a last resort/last step - not involved in the main part of the audio editing process.
Hence why few, if any, would even think of including that in their products.
Mike
-
- KVRian
- 858 posts since 14 Sep, 2004
I'm not optimistic about ogg support. I can't say that I understand the problem with using it. Some people argue that an ogg file must be decompressed, which hits the CPU too hard. But you can now record directly into the ogg format, so the entire process of compression is, from what I understand, skipped. (But what I understand is limited...And I worry that the idea that a wave or aiff file is the only true method of accurately digitizing a sound may be founded on code that could be itself the problem, though profitable. Or is recording into ogg a matter of invisibly recording a big file that is compressed as it's saved?)
But about the sound quality: No,no. Don't think either wave or ogg. Think of using both in the same multisample. Three things:
1. Ogg has gotten much better in the past year. The high frequency loss has been greatly, greatly reduced. Try recording several different sounds as both an ogg and a wave. (Do not record a wave and then translate it to ogg--this loses more frequencies. Create both files by recording from the source into the different formats.) Do a blind test, asking someone else to play the samples and letting you guess which is which. (Sine waves will not fare as well as others. See below.)
2. Ogg tends to lose a few upper mids and a few highs. You will notice the difference most in recordings of good women singers who sustain their notes well. They will sound a little too brittle at times, on some recordings, depending on the notes they hit. When a note is sustained for a long time at good pitch, a brief lapse in the pitch is noticeable as graininess--the note doesn't change pitch; it just disappears or gets reduced in amplitude for a millisecond or two. Lower frequencies, however, are fine. So are high frequencies that are not sustained.
3. This means that a lot of the spectrum is available as recording in ogg. For the purposes of multisampling, this means that on many instruments, notes below middle C will sound fine but be 1/5th size. With some obvious variation--hard hit piano\sax\etc notes in the lower register have some low-amplitude upper harmonics that could be cut or could become grainy using ogg files. But for many sounds, half of all of the samples could be 1/5 the size of their wave file size. And many of the supporting layers or groups that are used in multisamples can be recorded in ogg--on a low cello note, for example, the actual note could be an ogg file, while the additional sample of the scrape of the bow across the string could still be a wave file.
Ogg files may not be able to replace wave files, but they used with them to greatly reduce the load on hard drives and RAM.
And what the hell is wrong with a grainy sound, anyway?
But about the sound quality: No,no. Don't think either wave or ogg. Think of using both in the same multisample. Three things:
1. Ogg has gotten much better in the past year. The high frequency loss has been greatly, greatly reduced. Try recording several different sounds as both an ogg and a wave. (Do not record a wave and then translate it to ogg--this loses more frequencies. Create both files by recording from the source into the different formats.) Do a blind test, asking someone else to play the samples and letting you guess which is which. (Sine waves will not fare as well as others. See below.)
2. Ogg tends to lose a few upper mids and a few highs. You will notice the difference most in recordings of good women singers who sustain their notes well. They will sound a little too brittle at times, on some recordings, depending on the notes they hit. When a note is sustained for a long time at good pitch, a brief lapse in the pitch is noticeable as graininess--the note doesn't change pitch; it just disappears or gets reduced in amplitude for a millisecond or two. Lower frequencies, however, are fine. So are high frequencies that are not sustained.
3. This means that a lot of the spectrum is available as recording in ogg. For the purposes of multisampling, this means that on many instruments, notes below middle C will sound fine but be 1/5th size. With some obvious variation--hard hit piano\sax\etc notes in the lower register have some low-amplitude upper harmonics that could be cut or could become grainy using ogg files. But for many sounds, half of all of the samples could be 1/5 the size of their wave file size. And many of the supporting layers or groups that are used in multisamples can be recorded in ogg--on a low cello note, for example, the actual note could be an ogg file, while the additional sample of the scrape of the bow across the string could still be a wave file.
Ogg files may not be able to replace wave files, but they used with them to greatly reduce the load on hard drives and RAM.
And what the hell is wrong with a grainy sound, anyway?
