And next to recording a real instrument, physical modeling is the next best thing.īut my by far favorite aspect of physical modeling based VST instruments is that you can perform them, instead of using those pesky key switches to program the performances. It can not be expressed by piecing together audio samples, it has to be performed. In reality the dynamic layers from ppp to fff on for example a cello is infinite! But with sample libraries they usually record a couple of dynamic layers that you then cheat dynamic curves with using cross-fades.Īnother aspect is all the nuances and details that goes into expressive playing, emotion, soul…the character of a performance. They have found the key to good times, popularity and profit. Well, I am a huge fan of “real instruments”, but the problem with recording sample libraries is that you essentially create “snapshots” that you then piece together. A free Lesson-Sample actually showed them how easy it was to learn. They work on any up-to-date computer (see System Requirements), within any suitable host like a sequencer (Cubase, Logic, etc.), DAW (Digital Work Stations) or a free host. You can really PLAY them, shaping the sound like a real sax player does. Why would you want modeled instruments based on algorithms, mathematics and synthesis? Why would you not want sample libraries that are based on true acoustic recordings? Product description Our Saxophones belong to the most expressive virtual musical instruments.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |