Does The Size of Sample Libraries Really Matter?

[djquikcompton]

Check this out
http://glumbert.com/media/sizematter



Seriously though, how do companies like Kurzweil make such realistic sample libraries using only 64mb of memory.

[bluedad]

Seriously though, how do companies like Kurzweil make such realistic sample libraries using only 64mb of memory.

they've been at it forever and take the time to do the job right.
I was always of the mind the larger the sample the better, but my Motif showed me that's not always true.

[boybird]

"It is never the size that matters, it is the way you use your tools" (Casanova)

[Failed Muso]

I've seen some pretty neat "bonsai" sampling that has been used to get big samples into a tiny footprint. I was privvy to the Korg MicroX library whilst it was in development and couldn't believe how a library so small sounded so good. I've also seen big sounding instruments created in all sorts of Akai samplers that could never occupy anything more than a few MB. Today's bloatware libraries are a combination of lazy sampling (no sustain loops ) and high sampling rates, which on paper seem impressive, but when listened to in a mix, sound no better than something a tenth it's size.

Size, in this case, does not matter. It's the skills of the sound developer that make the difference.

[djsubject]

well my Ex told me size really dose matter (just before she left me for another man )

[boybird]

well, dj, it seems you do not know who Casanova is. i will give you a hint; he is NOT the inventor of the shock-and-awe-strategy.
as for your wife; she wil come back, as;
"it is a joy to look at a 3-pound steak, eating it is something different" (John G. Porterhouse)

[taijiguy]

As Maria Muldaur once sang, "It ain't the meat, it's the motion".