I remember when Roland forced D16 to change the design, because it looked like a 909.NAD wrote: Tue Sep 05, 2023 2:30 pmYour hostility is completely uncalled for. I was actually having a nice day. Anyway, I find it interesting because I was not privy to that particular conversation 20 years ago. Sorry for not knowing something that you already know. Don't worry, I won't dilute your topic any more with my inane questions, but I really wish you would would try to express yourself more kindly.kmonkey wrote: Tue Sep 05, 2023 5:04 amIt's not interesting it is an old topic (people talked about it 20 years ago). And no, not even Roland was able to stop people from sampling it. I think anything could be enough, such asNAD wrote: Mon Sep 04, 2023 8:49 pm That's interesting. I wonder how exactly you go about altering the sample while keeping it recognizable, and how much you'd need to alter it to avoid legal problems.... Like would a couple of allpass filters be enough?
a: You use your own hi-hat that was the same model that Roland used because no one can stop you from doing that
b: You extract their sample from ROM (available on the internet) and then you shorten it by a few ms
c: Do your own thing, use imagination.
I would hate this thread to turn into something else apart of the new instrument so open your own thread instead and talk about the legality of sampling.
Roland is very afraid that other companies offer better alternatives, and they are right. I would not mention Roland as one of the DSP gurus !!!
