EXS 24 Logic Sampler Users Group

At 08:39 AM 1/23/2004 +0000, you wrote:

>what is the difference between the EXS format on the Mac and on the
>PC? The reason why asked this: when setting Translator to convert to
>EXS, it has an option for the Motorola and the Intel format.
>
>An EXS generated on a Mac will work flawless on PC and vica versa?

Yes, but as a user you shouldn't really be concerned with the byte order of 
the exs file itself. EXS on either platform reads both.

Technically, it used to be that PC .exs files would load slower on the Mac, 
and I think the same way the other way. That's why that option is in 
Translator. But nowadays, I believe that there's little or no difference.

The file has a byte that says "this is Motorola" or "this is Intel". The 
EXS is built to read either one. The EXS Mac always WRITES as Motorola, the 
EXS PC always WRITES as Intel. All this means, really, is that Emagic made 
intelligent read routines but the write routines are platform based and 
likely simpler.

Interestingly, the byte order byte is on a per chunk basis, not for the 
whole file. For fun one day, i made an .exs file that had alternating byte 
orders in the same file. Loaded perfectly. This would never happen with the 
EXS, but it was fun nevertheless.

What is more important to you is the sample format. Although using .wav 
files on the Mac doesn't seem to slow down loading times (although i think 
it used to), for me personally I'd rather always deal with AIFF files on 
the Mac and WAVE files on the PC. It just makes for more efficient 
operation and less headaches down the road.

I hate dealing Sound Designer files (the other sample format EXS supports), 
since they are not platrom-portable, but they work well with Pro Tools, so 
an option is coming for Translator Mac to write to Sound Designer format.

Garth Hjelte
Sampler User