Sad state of Native Instruments

[concealed identity]

Who needs a sampler which samples in a DAW? Seriously, I never understood that argument.

Well for a long time, many DAWs either didn't have a sampler, or didn't have one even remotely as fully-featured or easy to use as Kontakt. For Cubase users, it was pretty much a necessity.

Now that Cubase has its own samplers (both as the Sampler Track and Groove Agent), it's not necessary. But it still is way more robust and has great effects, so I still use it as my main sampler. The workflow isn't a world-beater, but the more you want to modify your sound, the quicker it becomes relative to using outside plugins, modulations, etc.

[chk071]

Who needs a sampler which samples in a DAW? Seriously, I never understood that argument.

Well for a long time, many DAWs either didn't have a sampler, or didn't have one even remotely as fully-featured or easy to use as Kontakt. For Cubase users, it was pretty much a necessity.

DAWs themselves sample.

[revvy]

Who needs a sampler which samples in a DAW? Seriously, I never understood that argument.

Well for a long time, many DAWs either didn't have a sampler, or didn't have one even remotely as fully-featured or easy to use as Kontakt. For Cubase users, it was pretty much a necessity.

DAWs themselves sample.

how do you record audio and play back chromatically in Live (for example) without using Sampler or Simpler? (i'm feeling sleepy and not sure how I'd do it if I didn't have those tools; same for other DAWs. Maybe it's obvious but I can't think of it right now)

[concealed identity]

Who needs a sampler which samples in a DAW? Seriously, I never understood that argument.

Well for a long time, many DAWs either didn't have a sampler, or didn't have one even remotely as fully-featured or easy to use as Kontakt. For Cubase users, it was pretty much a necessity.

DAWs themselves sample.

Usually not with the features many people use a sampler for, though, e.g. playing samples chromatically like an instrument.

[concealed identity]

Double post

[spacepluk]

Who needs a sampler which samples in a DAW? Seriously, I never understood that argument.

Well for a long time, many DAWs either didn't have a sampler, or didn't have one even remotely as fully-featured or easy to use as Kontakt. For Cubase users, it was pretty much a necessity.

DAWs themselves sample.

how do you record audio and play back chromatically in Live (for example) without using Sampler or Simpler? (i'm feeling sleepy and not sure how I'd do it if I didn't have those tools; same for other DAWs. Maybe it's obvious but I can't think of it right now)

The point is you can record in the DAW and put the samples in Kontakt. For more detailed sampling it's actually the best way to do it.

[concealed identity]

Who needs a sampler which samples in a DAW? Seriously, I never understood that argument.

Well for a long time, many DAWs either didn't have a sampler, or didn't have one even remotely as fully-featured or easy to use as Kontakt. For Cubase users, it was pretty much a necessity.

DAWs themselves sample.

how do you record audio and play back chromatically in Live (for example) without using Sampler or Simpler? (i'm feeling sleepy and not sure how I'd do it if I didn't have those tools; same for other DAWs. Maybe it's obvious but I can't think of it right now)

The point is you can record in the DAW and put the samples in Kontakt. For more detailed sampling it's actually the best way to do it.

These days it's just an alternate workflow, that's all. For many years, DAWs didn't have drag and drop functionality with third party plugins, or easy access to recorded takes without bouncing them. So moving them to Kontakt was pretty cumbersome. The workflow improvements from drag and drop functionality have been huge imo

[chk071]

Who needs a sampler which samples in a DAW? Seriously, I never understood that argument.

Well for a long time, many DAWs either didn't have a sampler, or didn't have one even remotely as fully-featured or easy to use as Kontakt. For Cubase users, it was pretty much a necessity.

DAWs themselves sample.

Usually not with the features many people use a sampler for, though, e.g. playing samples chromatically like an instrument.

What I meant is that you can easily drop a sample into a sampler within the DAW. No need for the sampler to actually sample.

Like spacepluk pointed out.

[sjm]

Isn't SFZ a soundfont?

No. Soundonts were the format used by the ancient E-mu samplers and then Creative (of Soundblaster fame), and is an ancient, proprietary and monolithic format. SFZ was developed by Cakewalk/Rene (of Z3ta+ fame among others) in the early 00s, and is an open format that basically provides a human-readable mapping file that points to external sample files. While the SFZ and SF2 file extensions look remarkably similar, and the two formats solve similar problems, they are not the same. SFZ is much more modern, much more open (you can create an SFZ in notepad, no need for a dedicated editor) and remains popular to this day. SF2 has been a largely dead format for around 20 years - it got superseded by other options, including SFZ, long ago.

[revvy]

So you need a sampler within the DAW to provide the features you’d expect from a….er…..sampler. Agreed.

[chk071]

So you need a sampler within the DAW to provide the features you’d expect from a….er…..sampler.

"Sampler" is a historical term. It doesn't describe what samplers do nowadays. They're feature monsters, which do much more than actual sampling (if they even do that).

And, again, sampling is completely redundant for a sampler plugin.

Funny that we have to discuss this on arguably the most popular software sampler there ever was. But, it's KVR, home of the NI haters. I understand.

[revvy]

So you need a sampler within the DAW to provide the features you’d expect from a….er…..sampler.

"Sampler" is a historical term. It doesn't describe what samplers do nowadays. They're feature monsters, which do much more than actual sampling (if they even do that).

And, again, sampling is completely redundant for a sampler plugin.

Funny that we have to discuss this on arguably the most popular software sampler there ever was. But, it's KVR, home of the NI haters. I understand.

Don’t be a f**king prick spouting such cliched garbage in a post quoting me. I wasn’t slagging of NI or specifically talking about the ability to record audio.

Basically stop acting morally and intellectually superior to me because you’re not

Edit as I don’t wanna build up my post count arguing with the moron who has quoted me again: clearly, my initial question asked which DAW features, if we avoid using a ‘sampler’, can take recorded external audio and play it back chromatically The answer is that you need a ‘sampler’.

Chky, my postcout is bad but yours is truly shameful. GFY.

[chk071]

What exactly is your point then? You've been told multiple times now that sampling on a software sampler has pretty much been redundant for the past 25 years. Why do you expect a software sampler to sample then?

Dumb? Desperately want to be controversial? Hatred against NI? These are the only reasons I could think of. I'm sorry.

[concealed identity]

Who needs a sampler which samples in a DAW? Seriously, I never understood that argument.

Well for a long time, many DAWs either didn't have a sampler, or didn't have one even remotely as fully-featured or easy to use as Kontakt. For Cubase users, it was pretty much a necessity.

DAWs themselves sample.

Usually not with the features many people use a sampler for, though, e.g. playing samples chromatically like an instrument.

What I meant is that you can easily drop a sample into a sampler within the DAW. No need for the sampler to actually sample.

Like spacepluk pointed out.

Ah ok, yeah like I said, for a long time it was actually a pretty tedious process recording into your DAW and moving it to Kontakt- or at least this was the case for Cubase. Now that it's much easier, I think it's just a matter of workflow preference.

[audiojunkie]

Native Instruments is actually still a thing ?

Hehehe!! Unfortunately, for some things, Native Instruments has not yet been beat--although I do hope for that to change. As an example, there are no virtual guitar instruments better than what currently exists in Kontakt (My particular example would be the Shreddage 3.5 series). Some would argue that Ample Sound comes close, but the point is that most of these highly specialized instruments are only found as Kontakt libraries.

Yes - and there are other indispensable libraries - unfortunately
only in a Kontakt-version.

Sometimes it helps to take a broader view and look at the big
historical line. Let's do this briefly:

----------------------------------------------------------------

In the 70s there were no samplers at all. You could only record
directly (vocals, guitar, organ) or use a synthesizer. Midi was
only introduced in 1982 by Dave Smith and Roland.

The basic idea of a sample was embodied in the 70s by the
Mellotron: it could reproduce natural tones at the touch of a
button. Mostly it was used for strings and choirs (everyone
knows "Nights in white Satin" by the Moody Blues).

In 1979, the first sampler, the Fairlight CMI, was introduced
(costing ~$1 million). It wasn't until 1985 that the Ensoniq
Mirage came onto the market for around $10,000. “Everything”
at that time was the Mirage.

At the end of the 80s and in the 90s, AKAI dominated the
market with good, inexpensive samplers: the first was the
AKAI S612. The newer AKAI S900, S1000, S3000 etc.
marked "the standard" - and there were many libraries on
ZIP and CDs.

In the noughties, software samplers emerged: Suddenly the
hardware boxes were no longer necessary - and everything
was integrated into the PC or Mac. The best known are EXS24
(Apple Logic), Halion and of course the GIGA sampler. The
GIGA sampler became the “market standard” and there were
countless GIGA instruments.

The Sampler Kontakt was introduced by Native Instruments
in 2002. But thanks to very open policies and broad
compatibility, it became more and more "the standard" from
2008 onwards. Almost all commercial sound designers
publish their libraries on a Kontakt-basis.

That is still the case today. However, it seems that NI is well
aware of its monopoly position and is using it today. And that
then promotes other, smaller standards, such as “SFZ”.

Agreed! And I still feel that SFZ is the most future-proof format available today. However, I have noticed that many sampler companies are developing their own samplers for playing their libraries to escape the grip held by Kontakt. This new competition is loosening the monopolistic stronghold held by Kontakt. It is very possible that in the future, if you want to buy a particular library from a company, it will require using that company's player. At this stage in the game, this too will benefit open standards, because they are now established. I'm betting that SFZ, Decent Sampler's format, and the format used by the upcoming ShortCircuit-XT will become the open standards of the future. Either way, I'm not seeing the Kontakt monopoly lasting too many more years. Kontakt will still be around, of course, but at last there will be competition between the various sample creator companies. That's how I'm reading the tea leaves as of right now.