Fairlight-CMI

Arron, as before, good, thoughtful stuff.  In fact, I may have read
your post earlier on KVR -- I liked it then as well!  I particularly
liked your point regarding how people don't really get creative about 
microediting, which--I agree--has become something of a lost artform
in the wake of this machine's demise.

At any rate, I see what you mean.  I'm getting more satisfied as once
you've added in gated sounds and the composite thing, you do really
start approaching that cut-up sound I was talking about.  

One question about how different the machine sounded than modern
samplers.  I was thinking that I'd be interested in hearing a
side-by-side A/B-ing of a Fairlight sound as played by the Fairlight
and as played by a modern sampler, realizing that you would want to
transpose them to the other's sampled to hear the biggest difference.  

But since each sound with the Fairlight IIx sample library has two
samples apiece, usually an octave or two apart, for almost every
sound, I realized I could do it on my own.  So, I just tried A/B-ing
one of the vibes sounds, "Rhythm1" (which was sampled 3 octaves lower)
and "Tibet1" that way.  And honestly, some aliasing aside, there
wasn't a marked difference there.  

This isn't to refute your point about multiplexing, misaligned cards
or the analog filters--you are the one with the machine, I'm trying to
recreate it--but I am straining a bit to hear the difference you're
talking about.

--- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com, "Eight to Infinity (Arron)"
<arron@...> wrote:
>
> HI there : 
> 
> I glad to hear youre getting closer. Unfortunaly, you might be at
the point where you might 
> have to recognise the limitations of how close you can ultimately
get. This is a post I made 
> to the KVRAUDIO list describing why the fairlight is unique, and why
you cant emulate in 
> software with the current state of play in software design : it
refers mostly to the Series III, 
> but im sure some of the series I and II owners will have their own
thoughts :
> 
> --------
> 
> The series III specification wise still holds its own against
everything else Ive got. Sampling 
> up to 100 Khz theoretical maximum at 16 bits still sounds very nice. 
> 
> But is it still unique ? 
> 
> The series III comes with 3 sequencers : Page R, which is basically
a tracker, CAPS which is 
> like an old version of cubase, and MCL which is a text based
programatic sequencer. 
> 
> What makes it special is that for each step on the grid, you can
have a different sound 
> loaded, like an old amiga tracker, so for doing those old tracker
tricks, its great, especially 
> page-R. CAPS is clearly outdated, and not something thats very
usefull anymore. MCL is 
> great, but ive never got the hang of it, and might have been great
for achedemic electronic 
> music, if more fairlights had found their way into that environment. 
> 
> What gives the fairlights a unique sound is due to its brute force
engineering architecture : 
> 
> You have the digital side : with a digital voice card which controls
the data buffers etc for 
> each 16 voices, which routes to an analogue voice card per voice,
which has a sample 
> playback occilator, and the rest of each voice is an analogue
subtractive structure. 
> 
> So, you get all the nice sound of analogue filters etc. And of
course, misalignment between 
> the settings on the cards ensures each voice sounds a bit different. 
> 
> Also, each playback occilator transposes not by multiplexing, but by
altering the clock 
> playback speed. This means a note slowed down because it is played
lower sounds very 
> different than it does on a multiplexed system such as an akai S6000. 
> 
> Also if you play a note quiter, the analogue VCA levels are altered,
not the sample 
> playback depth, so even a quiet not is 16 bit, giving a lot more
dynamic range. 
> 
> There is no multiplexed output either : each voice is exposed as an
XLR output, and you 
> have to mix them on an 16 channel analogue desk, so you get into
that "Analogue 
> summing" vs digital multiplexing argument. Also it ensures there is
absolutely no 
> dithereing going on anywhere in the system. 
> 
> The upshot of all this, is that sounds a million miles away from a
s6000, or softsynth. 
> 
> In terms of interface : its very simple, and very focused. Its easy
to do what you need in 
> terms of sample editing, and is great for zooming in and doing
"micro" editing and mixing 
> different samples and crossfading to create new sounds : mixing a
tr808 bassdrum with a 
> bass guitar sample to produce a playable hybrid etc. The sort of
thing people are too lazy 
> to do these days. 
> 
> Lastly there is the additive and resynthesis functionality. Load in
a sample, click analyse, 
> and go in and manually redraw some of the FFT frames, interpolate
between them, etc etc. 
> Additive is the same thing, but starting with a blank waveform. I
dont know of any current 
> program that does that, maybe cameleon ? I know it does additive,
but i dont know about 
> resynthesis. And then you have all the standard analogue subtractive
on the outputs. 
> 
> It has 4 midi ins and outs, which are rock solid in timing, and a
funky graphics pad for 
> drawing stuff. It has a keyboard with keys dedicated to rests,
sharps and steps to make 
> programming much quicker than using generic keyboard shortcuts. 
> 
> It comes with a beutifull fully weighted keyboard, with a built in
remote keypad, and you 
> can get a extended MFX controller with even has a secondary display,
and some of the 
> alphanumeric keys are velocity sensative so you can triggers samples
without having to 
> reach over to the main keyboard. You can plug in a mouse to use
instead of the graphics 
> tablet if you prefer. 
> 
> There is a retrofit board to give you colour VGA output, and you can
also get a dedicated 
> DSP timestretch card. 
> 
> So its a pretty funky and unique beast ! And the additive and
re-synthesis subsystems 
> where never really tapped at the time, as sampling was the thing, so
there's still plenty of 
> room for original sounds beyond SARR1.VC 
> 
> Cheers, 
> 
> A 
> 
> /// edited to add : ive heard the IIX library, and as may possibly
be obviosus from the 
> above, playing a fairlight sample back on another sampler sounds
nothing at all like a real 
> fairlight, for all the reasons above. If yove heard the IIX sample
library, and think it sounds 
> nothing special : I agree with you. If youve heard a IIX or series
III playing back the same 
> samples, its a very different experiance.
>