That exactly meets my point about samplers:A lot could probably be done with reason. I probably would not. case study samplers. All I ever used NN-XT was for loading a nice sample bank. Never really needed to tweak anything in there, maybe a little ADSR, if at all.
There are 2 tasks that people want to do:
-quickly play with a single sample they have/found (and that's what our quick FL sampler channels achieve)
-load soundbanks as instruments and play with them
That's why I don't much consider 'simple' samplers like NN-XT, that is, samplers with no in-depth features but easy editing.
I don't think that many people:
1. have loads of multisamples on their HD that aren't in a bank already
2. can record noise-free samples, or have the time for, or have the real instruments to record (if they do, they don't need a soundbank of them)
3. want to bother re-doing a bank each time
To me, it's a huge job to craft a soundbank properly. Huge job in a quality recording, huge job in the looping & articulation. If that job is done properly, all you need is to load that soundbank and you don't need/want to see what's inside.
So to me a sampler should come in 2 parts: a simple player on the host side, with just the minimum controls like ADSR & filter, and an in-depth, complex editor, aimed at the few who will create soundbanks.
Merging both is a suicide, because if NN-XT had the features of the SoundFont specs, it'd need quite a lot of pages to edit them all, and no one would use them. So wanting an editor built-in a sampler can only imply reducing its amount of features.
As for the soundfont player in FL, yes it has some problems, but you must see it as a VSTi, as it was licensed, and we can't do much about it (except removing it).
I'd like to do a sampler, but the reason I won't is that I don't find it interesting to start one with the same goal as NN-XT, I'd prefer a bigger project, which would of course take more time.
