Fairlight-CMI

Hi Matthew,

I too wondered about this until I got my IIx a few years ago. I think there are several things that make Page R-created songs sound the way they do. 

1. Only 8 tracks. Yeah, many (or most) artists laid the tracks down on tape and then did eight more (and so on) to achieve big track counts. But I would imagine that many of these songs started life as an eight track sequence and so retained some of that character.

2. Monophonic tracks. This is the big one. I think this accounts for more of the "Fairlighty" feel than anything else. There were eight tracks alright, but each track could only play back a monophonic line. No chords. If you wanted, say, a C major chord in your track, you'd have to hold down a C on track 1, an E on track 2, and a G on tracks 3 (here's where multi-tracking to tape really helped). Remember, the "R" in Page R stood for Rhythm. So the whole thing was implemented with rhythmic sequences in mind, not full chords. I didn't actually realize this about Page R until just before I got my machine. It DEFINATELY affects how you program your parts.

3. Pen (step) entry. Although, you could play the parts from the music keyboard, of course, I think many people used the light pen to enter and repeat notes regularly. Perhaps this was a hold-over from drum machine programming of the day. Page R could record note velocities, but most drum machines could not. I think people were just used to programming these rigid, ultra-quantized, rhythm parts because that's how they had been doing it on the LinnDrum, for example. In 1982, very few keyboards had velocity sensitivity and people were just used to hearing these more "machine-like" lines.

Anyway, to answer your question. There aren't any Page R simulators out there, and I'm not sure I'd recommend them if there were. Page R programming is mind-numbingly tedious compared to even the humblest Atari sequencing program and the results can be emulated in easier ways. To emulate the feel of Page R: 

Try to use only eight tracks in your sequencer. You can add more (just as an artist would do by multi-tracking to tape), but try to get used to just using 8 tracks to get your ideas across. It's a good exercise anyway. 

Set your sound source (synth, sampler, softsynth, etc) to MONOPHONIC. If you can't do that, edit your sequences so that no two notes sound at once on the same track. This will be an eye-opener, I think. :-)

Finally, either reduce (or disable) velocity-sensitivity on your sound source, or edit your notes to all have the same velocity. Entering the notes one by one in a matrix or grid editor instead of playing them will also go a long way toward getting the feel right.

If you do these things with some Fairlight samples from your cds, well, Robert's your father's brother. :-)

Sorry about the length here and I hope any of this helps. 

Laurence

----- Original Message ----
From: matthew_weiner_2000 <matthew.weiner@gmail.com>
To: Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, October 2, 2006 8:55:12 PM
Subject: [Fairlight-CMI]Re: Page R — What Made It So Unique and How Can I Emulate It?

Well, right -- I think that's exactly it: I need to see how it works.
 It's just interesting that it takes a LOT of work to recreate not
just the "sound" of the Fairlight on modern gear, but perhaps more
importantly, the "feel." 

Is there any kind of Page R emulator out there?

--- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com, Marcin 'Rambo' Roguski
<rambo@...> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 21:36:08 -0000
> "matthew_weiner_2000" <matthew.weiner@...> wrote:
> 
> > Hello, I'm new to the board — a lover of the Fairlight sound who
> > doesn't own one.  I have a few questions:
> > 
> > 1) What was it about the Page R that led people in the musical
> > directions it did?
> 
> If you saw how it works, you'd also understand how did entire 
> XOX and "tracker" subculture evolve. you didn't have to have musical
> experience, just a good ear and some ingenuity to "squeeze"
> the power harnessed into 8 tracks, "4/4 measure" patterns.
>







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

I hope this isn't a stupid question.  I don't have a Fairlight so I'm just 
on this list for gathering information.

As I recall (from many years ago :D), the Series II had Page R as a rhythm 
programmer, but also Page 9 as a sequencer.  I would have expected if that 
was the case that Page R would usually be used for rhythm events - 
percussive stuff - and Page 9 for note sequences.

But that doesn't seem to be what's being said here, which refers to Page R 
being used for rhythmic note sequences.  Is this because - as many people 
complained at the time - there wasn't a way to link Page R and Page 9?  I 
always assumed (dangerous, I know) that Fairlight would fix that with a 
software update, or sort it with the Series III, but it doesn't sound that 
way from what's being said.  So I'm curious about Page 9 and why people 
didn't use it for sequencing.

Hi,
Series III still had (an updated) version of Page R. Incidentally,
Page R now stands for Rythm Sequencer whereas on the 2 and 2x it stood
for Real-Time Composer.
The SIII's Page R has 16 tracks although the principle is the same as
always.
CAPS (Composer Arranger Performer Sequencer) is much more powerful,
being able to control up to 40 internal instruments and up to 80
external ones. Later III's are also able to record Direct-to-Disk,
although this has limited editing facilities.
You can also transfer data from one sequencer and record it into
another via midi (very useful), which means songs can be "recorded" in
page R and edited in CAPS, which is much more comprehensive!

Hope this helps,
CJ

Hi there,

This is a pretty interesting thread : I am a big Reason user and a 
Fairlight owner, and this is something I was thinking about also.

One of the important things about page R is that although you are 
restricted to eight tracks (on the series II) each of those tracks 
can contain different sounds on each tick. So If you wanted to do 
just drums for example, you can have all your drums in one track, as 
long as you only have one note playing at one time. If you needed a 
snare and bass drum to play simulatanously, you can use the sample 
merge function to merge a snare and bassdrum sample offline, and then 
use the composite sample in correct position in page R.

This system was also used in a lot of early sample based trackers on 
the atari and amiga computers, and if you listen to these early 
trackers, they can often sound very like a fairlight, with their 
rough lofi samples and tracked sequencers.

 As soon as you start using these composite samples, you tend to do 
your rhythm programming in a different way, which is why page R stuff 
can often sound more complex that it really is becasue of the 
composite samples.

To do this in reason, however, you need an extra program to premix 
samples, but this isnt really a problem : most wav editors can do 
this.

Then just download the composite samples into NN19, set the polyphony 
to 1 and program from the matrix sequecer. Its lot of work, but it 
creates the effect.

Its pretty obvious that the same sample mixing technique is ofted 
used for standad note sequences also, giving a simliar sound. The 
orchestra hits demonstrate this nicely : these can be layered up and 
used as a partly rythmical, partly tuned source. Any other chord 
cluster can and was used in a similar way.

Another important factor was that the samples contained ambiant 
effects like reverb and delay in the actual samples, and so when 
transposed, the effects would also be transposed, leading to a a more 
complex sound.

For example, an snare with gated digital reverb will get increaing 
gritty in in the reverb tail as it is pitched downwards.

Hope these hints help !

BTW for added authenticity, there is a Zimulator IIx refill for 
reason, which is very badly recorded, but gives you a lot of 
recognisable failight sounds to play with.

Arron,

Outstanding insights there — despite understanding the polyphony
limitations of the machine, the composite sample thing was something
never occurred to me (much less adding in the reverb and all or doing
chords that way).  I will try it this evening and report back!  

--- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com, "Eight to Infinity (Arron)"
<arron@...> wrote:

>
> Hi there,
> 
> This is a pretty interesting thread : I am a big Reason user and a 
> Fairlight owner, and this is something I was thinking about also.
> 
> One of the important things about page R is that although you are 
> restricted to eight tracks (on the series II) each of those tracks 
> can contain different sounds on each tick. So If you wanted to do 
> just drums for example, you can have all your drums in one track, as 
> long as you only have one note playing at one time. If you needed a 
> snare and bass drum to play simulatanously, you can use the sample 
> merge function to merge a snare and bassdrum sample offline, and then 
> use the composite sample in correct position in page R.
> 
> This system was also used in a lot of early sample based trackers on 
> the atari and amiga computers, and if you listen to these early 
> trackers, they can often sound very like a fairlight, with their 
> rough lofi samples and tracked sequencers.
> 
>  As soon as you start using these composite samples, you tend to do 
> your rhythm programming in a different way, which is why page R stuff 
> can often sound more complex that it really is becasue of the 
> composite samples.
> 
> To do this in reason, however, you need an extra program to premix 
> samples, but this isnt really a problem : most wav editors can do 
> this.
> 
> Then just download the composite samples into NN19, set the polyphony 
> to 1 and program from the matrix sequecer. Its lot of work, but it 
> creates the effect.
> 
> Its pretty obvious that the same sample mixing technique is ofted 
> used for standad note sequences also, giving a simliar sound. The 
> orchestra hits demonstrate this nicely : these can be layered up and 
> used as a partly rythmical, partly tuned source. Any other chord 
> cluster can and was used in a similar way.
> 
> Another important factor was that the samples contained ambiant 
> effects like reverb and delay in the actual samples, and so when 
> transposed, the effects would also be transposed, leading to a a more 
> complex sound.
> 
> For example, an snare with gated digital reverb will get increaing 
> gritty in in the reverb tail as it is pitched downwards.
> 
> Hope these hints help !
> 
> BTW for added authenticity, there is a Zimulator IIx refill for 
> reason, which is very badly recorded, but gives you a lot of 
> recognisable failight sounds to play with.
>

Ok, reporting back:

I took Arron's advice and did some composite sampling w/ Reason and
Ableton Live last night.  And I have to say, the sound almost
immediately got a lot closer to what I've heard on records made with
Fairlights.  And I've been working on this for months.

As for the drums, I took a kit with a Fairlight bass drum, snare and
hi-hat, put a gated reverb on it, sampled into Live all the various
combinations (BD-Sn, Sn-HH, etc.), and put it back into Reason in both
a ReDrum drum machine emulator and NN-19 sampler.  Using the Matrix
sequencer with the NN-19, the results were pretty good, but actually
programming in the beats was a bit cumbersome and not exactly user
friendly (on the bright side there, it's still probably easier to
program than the Page R was, based on what I've read).  I suspect the
key to making this even more effective is to spread out the composite
drum kit over the entire keyboard, so all the sounds can have an
octave or more of pitches to hit.

Composite sampling pitched sounds was perhaps even more interesting. 
Especially if you sample in blasts like ORCH 5 chords or something
with gated reverb, you get that really "cut-uppy" sound so many
Fairlight records have.  It might be interesting to do major, minor,
seventh and suspended chords of certain blasts.

Maybe this is a good place to ask: what OTHER tricks did people do on
the Fairlight?  I imagine there's a lot of reversing of samples, as on
a lot of these records you hear sounds fading in rapidly...


--- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com, "matthew_weiner_2000"
<matthew.weiner@...> wrote:

>
> Arron,
> 
> Outstanding insights there — despite understanding the polyphony
> limitations of the machine, the composite sample thing was something
> never occurred to me (much less adding in the reverb and all or doing
> chords that way).  I will try it this evening and report back!  
> 
> --- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com, "Eight to Infinity (Arron)"
> <arron@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi there,
> > 
> > This is a pretty interesting thread : I am a big Reason user and a 
> > Fairlight owner, and this is something I was thinking about also.
> > 
> > One of the important things about page R is that although you are 
> > restricted to eight tracks (on the series II) each of those tracks 
> > can contain different sounds on each tick. So If you wanted to do 
> > just drums for example, you can have all your drums in one track, as 
> > long as you only have one note playing at one time. If you needed a 
> > snare and bass drum to play simulatanously, you can use the sample 
> > merge function to merge a snare and bassdrum sample offline, and then 
> > use the composite sample in correct position in page R.
> > 
> > This system was also used in a lot of early sample based trackers on 
> > the atari and amiga computers, and if you listen to these early 
> > trackers, they can often sound very like a fairlight, with their 
> > rough lofi samples and tracked sequencers.
> > 
> >  As soon as you start using these composite samples, you tend to do 
> > your rhythm programming in a different way, which is why page R stuff 
> > can often sound more complex that it really is becasue of the 
> > composite samples.
> > 
> > To do this in reason, however, you need an extra program to premix 
> > samples, but this isnt really a problem : most wav editors can do 
> > this.
> > 
> > Then just download the composite samples into NN19, set the polyphony 
> > to 1 and program from the matrix sequecer. Its lot of work, but it 
> > creates the effect.
> > 
> > Its pretty obvious that the same sample mixing technique is ofted 
> > used for standad note sequences also, giving a simliar sound. The 
> > orchestra hits demonstrate this nicely : these can be layered up and 
> > used as a partly rythmical, partly tuned source. Any other chord 
> > cluster can and was used in a similar way.
> > 
> > Another important factor was that the samples contained ambiant 
> > effects like reverb and delay in the actual samples, and so when 
> > transposed, the effects would also be transposed, leading to a a more 
> > complex sound.
> > 
> > For example, an snare with gated digital reverb will get increaing 
> > gritty in in the reverb tail as it is pitched downwards.
> > 
> > Hope these hints help !
> > 
> > BTW for added authenticity, there is a Zimulator IIx refill for 
> > reason, which is very badly recorded, but gives you a lot of 
> > recognisable failight sounds to play with.
> >
>

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.

Hello,

You may remember this Syco demonstration of the Fairlight IIx where the
guy draws two waveforms and then do an interpolation to compute the
intermediate frames.

I always wondered if it is possible to do the same thing using the  
FFT page
on the Series 3.   Does anybody here have the answer ?

Best regards.

       Laurent.

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.
>

Hi there,

Because of the resampling in the cd-rom of the IIx sample set, the information has already 
been lost before you start this expriment , as they are not bit for bit digital copies : they 
are variable unclocked analogue signals from the fairlight, resampled a an arbitary bitrate 
through an aditional A/D by the creators of the libaray. 

Probably the same is true of the Art of Sampling CD.

I guess there is no really way to do the test apart from getting you own fairlight samples at 
32 bit 192Khz, transfereing to a software sampler and a/b ing the fairlights transpose and 
the software sampler transpose.

One of the best examples though on record, is Instruments of Darkness by the Art of noise 
on In Visible Silence : there is a massive pitchbend of a sample being pitchshitfed down till 
it starts breaking apart. If you think about how a modern sampler sounds when you start 
pitching down that far, it should give an idea of the textural differences.

Cheers,

A







--- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com, "matthew_weiner_2000" <matthew.weiner@...> 
wrote:

>
> 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.
> >
>

Ah, very helpful -- I actually had that song handy, so checked it out
asap.  It's interesting how the sound breaks apart twice as it shifts
down and both times recollects its timbral qualities a few pitches
further down.  I imagine that has something to do w/ the inaccuracies? 

--- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com, "Eight to Infinity (Arron)"
<arron@...> wrote:
>
> Hi there,
> 
> Because of the resampling in the cd-rom of the IIx sample set, the
information has already 
> been lost before you start this expriment , as they are not bit for
bit digital copies : they 
> are variable unclocked analogue signals from the fairlight,
resampled a an arbitary bitrate 
> through an aditional A/D by the creators of the libaray. 
> 
> Probably the same is true of the Art of Sampling CD.
> 
> I guess there is no really way to do the test apart from getting you
own fairlight samples at 
> 32 bit 192Khz, transfereing to a software sampler and a/b ing the
fairlights transpose and 
> the software sampler transpose.
> 
> One of the best examples though on record, is Instruments of
Darkness by the Art of noise 
> on In Visible Silence : there is a massive pitchbend of a sample
being pitchshitfed down till 
> it starts breaking apart. If you think about how a modern sampler
sounds when you start 
> pitching down that far, it should give an idea of the textural
differences.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> A
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com, "matthew_weiner_2000"
<matthew.weiner@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > 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.
> > >
> >
>

Hi Peter,

I found the answer !!!

I did succeed to reproduce the same interpolation on my Series 3.

Here is the procedure I did follow :
- Load a voice
- Switch to WE page
- Activate the 3D display (Shift-F1)
- reduce the "Segment Lenght" value in order to have a simple waveform in first segment
   In my case, I used a Segment Lenght = 64
- run the "MERGE" command or "ME" or (Shift-F7)

Here you go, the linear crossfade is processed between the first and last segment. 
You can also specify a start & end segments for this command. You will find all
the details in the user manual in chapter 7.9.

You can also have a look at two screenshots I made before & after the MERGE command:

-> http://www.vectorsurfacingtools.com/fairlight/MERGE/

Hope it helps.

      Laurent.

Hi,
Are you running 9.34 on your series 111?
I ask because we do not have the facility on the WE Page on our
machine to call up a 3D Display. The Waveform Control Box is displayed
along the bottom. Neither is there a Segment Length Field on the page,
so we can't assign a value. We can do both these on the FFT Page, but
this is very restricting and time consuming. We are running 9.34 (?)
on our S111, so are we missing something?

Thanks
CJ

> >
> >
> > 
> >
>

Hello,

My CMI Series 3 is running a rev 6.03 ...

Best regards.

       Laurent.