The most future proof format for sampled instruments is SFZ

[enroe]

Nearly all of the "popular" formats for sampled instruments are encrypted, which tie those formats to the single specific sampler they were created for.

--- What if that sampler is no longer available for you to use?
--- What if the company goes under?
--- What if your preferred choice of sampler changes?

You are completely out of luck, and your sample investment is rendered useless, unless you can find someone to buy them from you.

One could say: "It's rare for an entire company to be unreachable.
And that sample libraries could no longer be activated at all."

Well, unfortunately, it does happen sometimes. Right now,
Native Instruments has run into difficulties: NI is in preliminary
insolvency: Look here.

It's quite possible that NI could continue after a restructuring. It's
possible that NI will be completely sold off and broken up into
individual companies. It's also possible that NI will disappear
completely.

Let's hope that NI can continue after a restructuring and that the
activation of software and plugins will continue to work in the
future.

---> Nevertheless, let's recall the term "future-proof." Because we
now see: Only non-proprietary libraries and plugins are truly "future-
proof". Only non-proprietary sample software is truly "future-proof"!

[Zeisner]

The last time I took a look there were three SFZ standards. It would be nice if people would finally agree on one. Until then I stick to SF2.

[audiojunkie]

The last time I took a look there were three SFZ standards. It would be nice if people would finally agree on one. Until then I stick to SF2.

The third "standard" was a proposal, and never official--ignore it. The original standard (RGC) was superseded by SFZ v2, aka the Cakewalk version (when RGC sold it to Cakewalk). That means, there is only one official "standard":

SFZ version 2 (aka the Cakewalk version)

Now, all of the different players support different Opcodes. Only Sforzando supports everything, and it is available for free for Windows, MacOS, and Linux. Sfizz-ui almost supports everything and it is available for Windows, MacOS, and Linux. LinuxSampler, and LiquidSFZ support just a bit less than Sfizz-ui. There are several more players, and they support less. But the key thing to be aware of, is that for 95% of all of the SFZ files made, all of the important opcodes are supported by all of the players. Many players support the version 1 opcodes as well to remain backwards compatible. So the point of all of this is that more almost everything made, SFZ works great.

SF2 and Decent Sampler formats are also good--but be aware, the point of all of this, and why SFZ is listed as the most future proof format, is that the samples are readily available and accessible to be used by any sampler around. The most important thing is access to the samples themselves, and SF2 doesn't have the samples immediately accessible (which was one of the primary criteria in my determining SFZ as what I believe to be the most futureproof format).

Another good format that is coming, is the Surge Synth Team's Shortcircuit-XT sampler format, which has the samples available as well. I have high hopes for Shortcircuit-XT.

[enroe]

The last time I took a look there were three SFZ standards. It would be nice if people would finally agree on one. Until then I stick to SF2.

Which standards did you see, and where?

There is exactly one sfz standard. This is described in detail
on the sfzformat.com page - with a syntax overview,
examples and tutorials.

The difference is: There are countless samplers that
understand and work with the sfz format. Some of them
sometimes extend the sfz format a little. But that's not a
new sfz version.

The fact that many samplers understand sfz is precisely what
ensures its future viability!

Nevertheless, 99.9% of the opcodes of all these sfz dialects
are exactly the same. It is, after all, a single format.

[jancivil]

The insolvency is purely to solve debt issues. This doesn't say anything about the value of assets or even how well the business model is performing. Kontakt will have new ownership eventually, it has tons of value. NI under one roof, nobody knows.

I've only ever dealt with one thing that uses Sforzando player. It's not the worst imaginable thing but it's a PITA to me. I would never look to choose something because it uses that format. I'm stuck with it for the one thing, and it's also kind of ugly like REAPER is.
It's also called Aria when you install it [Garritan Harps from ages ago. Can't diss that because it works under Apple Silicon and OS 15.]. I don't know anything really about it other than the one experience. I get the same reaction when people talk Linux OS 'distros'. I'm into music, that's all.

[enroe]

The insolvency is purely to solve debt issues ...

Of course: There's no doubt that NI is a great company and has
brought many innovative things to market. That also applies to
Kontakt. And we can only hope that NI will continue to exist.

Nevertheless, the insolvency proceedings shed light on the "future
security" of all software. Because every commercial software must
be copy-protected in some way. If the publishing company no
longer exists – for whatever reason – its software most likely
cannot be activated. At least when a hardware change is pending,
this will be painfully apparent.

Once you've experienced something like this – for example, having
to migrate an entire library to another platform – you realize how
important and crucial "future security" really is.

That's why "future security" is paramount for me. Especially
when you "only" want to make music.