Sytrus vs Rhino [6 years dead thread bumped; go to page 21]

[jens]

he confirmed that Rhino is using samples in the form of pre-generated wavetables... - that's imo hardly the same as a 'sample bank'

Call it what you will. Is Rhino playing samples, yes or no? Tick said yes. Argument over, therefore, Jens, Gol didn't lie about that. It wasn't a half-lie, half-truth, misleading statement or whatever. Forget it.
He simply said that Rhino contained samples from version 1, which you took great offence to. These were sounds that Rhino cannot 'generate' through synthesis. For the record, I'm not saying that this is bad. I think its a neat feature. Not something I need, but there you go.

it's just that my definition of 'sample' is completely different from that of a developer - Rhino1 had only several different oscillator-waveforms - wether those waveforms are computed on the fly or are wavetables which are generated each time I load the thing or each time I install it or if they are already included in the installer or whatever doesn't matter for me - they are different oscillator waveforms just as you find them in many many synthesizers - a sample-bank however cosists of samples I can tweak - I can set the start-stop points, the loop-points, can reverse them whatever - so for me doesn't matter 'where does it come from' but rather 'how can I use it' - Rhino has always been a pure synhtesizer to me offering various synthese-forms - since page 1 of this thread Gol tires to tellus that Rhino was always less pure synthesizer than Sytrus is. I don't like the way he is bad-mouthing the product of another company - that's all. And I'm not a fantatic Rhino-fan who gets mad whenever someone says something negative about his beloved synth or something like this. I just don't like what Gol tries to imply and when you read some of the reactions there are at least two users in this thread who are also saying than Rhino is less of a 'real synthesizer' than Sytrus - this just isn't true and thus it is unjust if Gol manages to convince some people who read this thread and might not yet know Rhino that Sytrus is more of a 'real synth' than Rhino.

Again: this is what Gol is trying to imply and it is not true - therefor he is a liar.

[tony tony chopper]

I know you'd try to escape behind some 'ok it uses samples, but it's not what a sample is in my definition'

[Big Tick]

Well, why does this whole argument feel so much like déja vu ?

'Tick

[jens]

then then thought probably isn't too far-fetched, is it?

(in reply to Gol)

[jens]

Well, why does this whole argument feel so much like déja vu ?

'Tick

Rhino supporting samples doesn't make it any worse - well Sytrus probably will as well, later.

priceless - I had forgotten about this thread...

[jens]

from the same thread:

OTOH, "samplers" are totally bad named in the software world. None of them can sample as their hardware counterparts (well, except GS3). They are al 'sample players'.

Now, if I use a 256 sample wavetable which I fill real-time, and then I loop it. Isnt that playing a sample? yes it is. Now, if I don't store the waveform itself, but I store the impulse trains to compose the waveform realtime, isn't that playing a sample as well?

In case of resynthesis... doesn't the harmonic content comes from a sample? So, isn't it just a sample manipulation as well?

There's a difference between playing a straight wav and resynthesizing sound of course. But there's no spec to tell you what's the minimum transformation you have to do to call it a 'synthesizer'. Actually, I happen to think of Kontakt more as a synthesizer than a sampler.

So I guess anyone can set the fine line between synthesizers and samplers anywhere, according to his convenience

-René
Let's Rock & Roll

[tony tony chopper]

yes, I had planned to implement sample import in sytrus, and? While I finally won't (only for technical reasons), if I had, I wouldn't have said 'here, take this drumloop sample, it's what Sytrus can synthesize'. Big Tick didn't say anything like that neither, but some users like you BELIEVE things like that.

I think you still haven't understood anything of what this thread was about.

[jens]

[fuego96]

Sure, weasel your way out of an apology.

I don't like the way he is bad-mouthing the product of another company - that's all.

Yeah, bad-mouthing Gol on a personal level by calling him a liar (which was unfounded) on several replies makes you what, a saint?

Explaining facts to you wasn't good enough. The real truth, as I saw it, was that you simply didn't like anyone (and there's a few that you dissed in this thread) with a different opinion - that's all.

[Big Tick]

And now this thread shall end as his predecessors: closed.
'Tick

[kodama]

gol, I would have to say that although you can tweak the waveforms, there aren't any ways to tweak them in realtime via the envelopes, (except for the pluck damp).

It would be nice to open some of those waveform parameters to the envelopes.

Oh ya, and Frank from Ableton confirms that Live only shows the first 128 Published parameters.

[MickGael]

Well, why does this whole argument feel so much like déja vu ?

'Tick

I have ALWAYS been polite, restrained and respectful here, but when I read this thread, so when I read the above thread I was shocked that a developer would stoop so low (even if one arues it was tongue in cheek, it is astonishingly unprofessional):

In "Textures" most of the patches rely on new samples

does that mean Rhino 2 isn't good enough to make such presets by itself

I still give Gol his props, and concede there is much that is first-rate with his work, but his dismissive, defensive, rude and obnoxious accounting of himself here is an embarrassment and I'll warrant it has alienated more than a few potential customers.

I will say this: it has lead me to be even more appreciative of all the friendly, receptive, responsive developers I have goten to know here at KVR.

[diverdee]

I completely agree with MickGael - i've got a mate who swears by fruity - but the way this Gol dude expresses himself, after reading this thread & others i've finally got to say that he comes across as an arrogant opinionated obnoxious twat - i may be completely wrong about the guy, but i can only judge on what i've seen of him here. If he was to respond 2 what i've said here I wouldn't start a dialogue with him, wouldn't waste my time on him.

[René]

Please don't close the thread, it has been both informative and interesting. And I had fun reading it.

Some history for the young generation: Back in 1986, Yamaha introduced the long-awaited second generation of their world-renowned FM synthesizer, the DX7II. They released it in two flavors: DX7IID and FD (with a floppy disk!). Later they added another couple of versions.

It was a superb synthesizer, and all the old-and-bad pieces of hardware that made the original DX7 users unhappy were gone: the membrane keyboard was replaced, the display had a nice light, and the audio was now 16-bit. New features included the ability to layer two DX7 presets, polyphony was doubled (for a whole total of 16 voices!) and it was microtunable. A killer.

However, pretty close in time, Roland unveiled their D-50 Linear Arithmetic synthesizer. It had about the same features in the previous Roland synths, but guess what: it included 'transients', which were exactly... samples, with a total length of 256 samples.

The whole innovation to the synthesis was that one: the ability to play a transient, which would quickly 'morph' into one of the old wavetable playback sounds. It had a couple of other goodies, but the shine was on that one.

Everyone in the industry was mad at Roland, because they were 'cheating'. They were combining real sounds with synthesized ones, breaking the spartane and fundamental laws of synthesis, to engage the celebrity-party-driven dark arts of sampling. A very funny scenario, old timers might recall it: everybody obfuscated for that 'dirty and nasty' trick.

I don't need to say that the D50 was great, and so was the DX7. This scenario returns cyclically: few weeks ago, Synful orchestra vs. the 'pure' sampling. Then, RMX vs. the 'pure' looping. Debating is a sport

I don't think musicians care about what's inside the box. I think they pick synthesizers based in how fast they can make music with them, or how good their music becomes with them, or how inspired they feel with them. Fm, sampling or hidroacoustic stimulation are just accidental tools.

-René

[tony tony chopper]

he comes across as an arrogant

Considering I'm a french speaker, and that most american who visit france see french people as arrogant, then it must be cultural.

Maybe where you live you see my answers as arrogant or rude.
Meanwhile, this is the kind of answer I find rude:

I collect toys, and there are some good ones at cartoonnetwork.com, but they don't ship internationally. Some days ago I asked them why - not really expecting an answer, but anyway it costed nothing to write a 2-lined email.

This is the answer I got:

Dear Customer,

I received your email inquiry regarding shipping to international destinations.

We currently ship to the Continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, Marianas Islands, American Samoa, US Virgin Islands, APOs and PPOs and Canada.

If you have any further questions, please feel free to reply to this email or send an email to shop@cartoonnetwork.com.

Thank you for shopping with Cartoon Network.

Sincerely,

This may appear like the polite answer an american user would expect, but here it appears as a fuckin rude answer. First, because it's an automated reply of someone who didn't even read the email, or maybe an automated reply of some script.
Second because of the 'thank you for shopping with cartoon network', while I just clearly wrote that I can't shop. Maybe an american user reads that kind of answer as a polite one, but here I just read a big, clear 'f**k you'.


So if what you expected was 'all synthesizers are great, you should buy them all', then just imagine someone from Image-Line came here and wrote that.

Meanwhile, I don't think that everyone can buy them all, and if it had been the case, the author of this thread wouldn't have asked the difference between both. I did reply to him, and anyone who's interested, listing the differences between both - well if you found that rude, it wasn't addressed to you anyway.

There are other companies that DO compare products, and some even let you 'convert' a license from a competitor's product to theirs at a special price. Not everyone sees this as rude.