Bitwig 2.4 is out

[antic604]

https://www.bitwig.com/en/community/lea ... orial.html

To call it a sampler is selling it short - it's a wavetable synth and granular synth as well!

[jsp1979]

According to the comparison chart, the new version 2 of Bitwig 8-track includes Sampler. If it has the same features as Sampler included in the full version, that's a big inclusion. I"ll have to try it this weekend.

[EnochLight]

https://www.bitwig.com/en/community/lea ... orial.html

To call it a sampler is selling it short - it's a wavetable synth and granular synth as well!

That's pretty cool. Question: is there an actual "sample" feature on Bitwig's Sampler? I'm thinking something along the lines like all of Reason's samplers:

sample_or_no.jpg

I'm really considering ditching Studio One and picking up Bitwig as a secondary DAW.

[pdxindy]

That's pretty cool. Question: is there an actual "sample" feature on Bitwig's Sampler? I'm thinking something along the lines like all of Reason's samplers:

Sampler is now an exceptional sound design tool!

There is no multi-sample function that would automatically sample velocity layers and across key ranges.

What you can do is drag audio into Sampler. You can also drag another tracks midi clip into Sampler and it will bounce it to audio.

Also, if you have a group of tracks each with a midi clip in the clip launcher, and you drag the scene into Sampler, it will render each of the clips onto an individual key.

[EnochLight]

That's pretty cool. Question: is there an actual "sample" feature on Bitwig's Sampler? I'm thinking something along the lines like all of Reason's samplers:

Sampler is now an exceptional sound design tool!

There is no multi-sample function that would automatically sample velocity layers and across key ranges.

What you can do is drag audio into Sampler. You can also drag another tracks midi clip into Sampler and it will bounce it to audio.

Also, if you have a group of tracks each with a midi clip in the clip launcher, and you drag the scene into Sampler, it will render each of the clips onto an individual key.

So.. no actual sampler function? I find this is common in the VST-world, and it makes absolutely no sense to me.

[pdxindy]

So.. no actual sampler function? I find this is common in the VST-world, and it makes absolutely no sense to me.

What do you mean by a sampler function? What do you want to do?

[jsp1979]

He wants to play something and have Sampler record it.

In Reason, you click on that button and it "listens" to record what is played elsewhere.

[fmr]

He wants to play something and have Sampler record it.

In Reason, you click on that button and it "listens" to record what is played elsewhere.

And why would he need that when he has a DAW to record whatever he wants? He can record in the DAW, and drag the audio to sampler, AFAIK. That's what a sampling function would do, right?

In the old days, samplers were able to sample because you would have a cumbersome and quite complicated process to put samples inside them otherwise (you would have to use a computer and transfer them through MIDI, where a 4 seconds sample could take like half an hour to transmit).

That's not the case with soft samplers. The process to insert a sample is almost instantaneous.

IMO, sampling capability in a soft sampler is completely redundant.

[justin3am]

So.. no actual sampler function? I find this is common in the VST-world, and it makes absolutely no sense to me.

The ability of Reason samplers to record audio would be much more convenient if it were easier to select the source from which it records. It would also be useful if there were some transport based recording options (like 'don't start recording until the transport starts'). It's a cool feature in theory but it's difficult to use in practice. In the past, when I did a lot of sampling in Reason, I just recorded into the sequencer on audio tracks and bounced to samples, as I found the editing features more flexible there.

I agree it would be nice if it were possible to sample directly into Sampler. However, my sampling needs have grown over the years, so I'm not sure if it makes sense to put the features I need into the Sampler itself. Things like being able to record over a buffer which is currently playing back or multi-channel sampling, are more suited to a DAWs arranger than in the sampler itself.

When it comes to VSTs, it totally makes sense that they can't record. VST Instruments don't have direct access to audio interface inputs or the outputs of mixer channels, for re-sampling. The only option would be to route audio into an instrument or effect with the DAWs audio routing functions. That is nowhere near flexible enough to make recording to a VST sampler, a useful feature. At least, not in my opinion.

[pdxindy]

He wants to play something and have Sampler record it.

In Reason, you click on that button and it "listens" to record what is played elsewhere.

I asked because I thought he might mean auto sampling of a synth patch across a key range and with velocity layers... (I have no idea what Reason does or doesn't do)

If it is just playing something and recording it... then play something and record it, then drag the midi clip or audio clip into Sampler.

[Orbit-50]

And why would he need that when he has a DAW to record whatever he wants. He can record in the DAW, and drag the audio to sampler, AFAIK. That's what a sampling function would do, right?

In he old days, samplers were able to sample because you would have a cumbersome and quite complicated process to put samples inside them otherwise (you would have to use a computer and transfer them through MIDI, where a 4 seconds sample could take like half an hour to transmit).

That's not the case with soft samplers. The process to insert a sample is almost instantaneous.

IMO, sampling capability in a soft sampler is completely redundant.

You know, it's funny. I was just explaining to my son this morning as he was checking out my Akai S6000, and S950, and I was explaining the ability to sample anything externally and just get right into programming stuff through keygrouping, layering, looping etc... and how most software samplers don't have the ability to do that today. I think Halion 6 and Reason are the only ones that come to mind that have this feature, there might be others that I've missed, but anyway, in my opinion, doing it that way is way more fun and exciting than just dragging stuff into a sampler from an audio editor or a DAW or a browser.

Lots of happy accidents occur when sampling "on the fly" within your...well...sampler, and all of this without having to move away from the particular device that is being used to sample. Even in the software world, I think it's still cool to work that way.

My point is, that it's not always about what's more convenient or the way it should be done in all cases, but what's important to some people, is the inspiration and just plain fun and joy that they get from doing certain things in certain ways.

I firmly believe that recording, and sound design, through use of just a sampler, whether it be hardware or software, is an art and there will always be those that prefer to work this way.

[fmr]

You know, it's funny. I was just explaining to my son this morning as he was checking out my Akai S6000, and S950, and I was explaining the ability to sample anything externally and just get right into programming stuff through keygrouping, layering, looping etc... and how most software samplers don't have the ability to do that today. I think Halion 6 and Reason are the only ones that come to mind that have this feature, there might be others that I've missed, but anyway, in my opinion, doing it that way is way more fun and exciting than just dragging stuff into a sampler from an audio editor or a DAW or a browser.

Lots of happy accidents occur when sampling "on the fly" within your...well...sampler, and all of this without having to move away from the particular device that is being used to sample. Even in the software world, I think it's still cool to work that way.

My point is, that it's not always about what's more convenient or the way it should be done in all cases, but what's important to some people, is the inspiration and just plain fun and joy that they get from doing certain things in certain ways.

I firmly believe that recording, and sound design, through use of just a sampler, whether it be hardware or software, is an art and there will always be those that prefer to work this way.

I totally respect your POV, but you certainly realize that, even in the old days, many of us would not sample using the sampler (I never did, for example).

I bought a portable Sony cassete recorder (it was quite expensive, and a very good cassete recorder), and I used to sample with it. I would then transfer the recordings to my computer, where I edited them using Alchemy (usually), loop them, and then transfer them through MIDI to the sampler.

This last part was the most painful, but as usually the samples were short, due to memory restrictions, it would not take forever (but like between ten to to thirty minutes, depending on the duration of the sample). Once the instruments were programmed, I would then record everything (samples and patches) in floppies.

This was with a Korg DSM-1 and a Casio FZ-10M. Later I got an Emulator E-IV (still have it), but in the meanwhile I already started to use soft samplers, and the E-IV is collecting dust ever since. I think I never built a preset for the E-IV, just used the libraries that came with it. Yet, the E-IV already had the ability to use SCSI to transfer samples. The S6000 even had the ability to transfer them through USB already, if I'm not mistaken. The S950, however, would only allow MIDI transfer.

Anyway, I never understood how would someone want to go through the pain of editing and looping a sample inside the sampler - I confess I gave up immediately after the first attempt. I always edited them using the computer.

But the only thing soft samplers don't do nowadays is recording. They do everything else (keygrouping, layering, looping), much better, and way beyond that.

[pdxindy]

Lots of happy accidents occur when sampling "on the fly" within your...well...sampler, and all of this without having to move away from the particular device that is being used to sample. Even in the software world, I think it's still cool to work that way.

You still have to move away from the device being used to sample... it's not like whatever you want to record magically appears at the sampler inputs. If you want to record guitar, you have to pick up the guitar and play it. If you want to record a softsynth, you have to activate the track it is on and play it.

[EnochLight]

The ability of Reason samplers to record audio would be much more convenient if it were easier to select the source from which it records.

I've always found it easy to select the source from which it records. If you want to sample externally (from your audio interface, mic, etc), it should default to whatever i/o you have active. If you want to sample from within Reason (say from another device), then yeah - you have to do some virtual wiring, but I never found it difficult. Obviously, YMMV...

You know, it's funny. I was just explaining to my son this morning as he was checking out my Akai S6000, and S950, and I was explaining the ability to sample anything externally and just get right into programming stuff through keygrouping, layering, looping etc... and how most software samplers don't have the ability to do that today. I think Halion 6 and Reason are the only ones that come to mind that have this feature, there might be others that I've missed, but anyway, in my opinion, doing it that way is way more fun and exciting than just dragging stuff into a sampler from an audio editor or a DAW or a browser.

Lots of happy accidents occur when sampling "on the fly" within your...well...sampler

I firmly believe that recording, and sound design, through use of just a sampler, whether it be hardware or software, is an art and there will always be those that prefer to work this way.

Exactly. This.

I didn't realize that Halion and Reason were the only two that offers this sort of feature (that we know of). I guess what I'm asking for is pretty unique, then.

Anyway, I'm still interested in Bitwig - the new Sampler is pretty sweet, even if I can't sample on the fly.

[EnochLight]

Anyway, I never understood how would someone want to go through the pain of editing and looping a sample inside the sampler - I confess I gave up immediately after the first attempt. I always edited them using the computer.

I come from an era where editing audio on a computer wasn't commonplace (at an affordable price, anway). Late 80's/early 90's. So sampling through a mic or line-in on the fly was how most people did it. I don't know, it's just something that's fun to me. Anyway, these days I most certainly edit all of my samples in my DAW!

But the only thing soft samplers don't do nowadays is recording.

Well, aside from the aforementioned Reason samplers (all of them) and Halion.

But yeah, I get that what I'm asking for is not common these days. What Justin said about VST samplers not having direct access to your audio interface i/o makes sense.