EXS 24 Logic Sampler Users Group

--- In exs-users@yahoogroups.com, "Sascha Franck" <S.Franck@g...> wrote:
> Hi,
> (back and all from southern France, wasn't too bad but not as nice as I was
> thinking either, but anyways...)
> 
> As I can see, (almost?) all the content of the Hollowsun site has been
> converted by now.
> Nice group effort I think.
> Now, who's gonna start a "patch of the week" thing, based on those samples?
> I allready fooled around with some layers (of different instruments), making
> intensive use of the EXSs mangling capabilities, but as I'm not a synth
> kinda guy I'm having a hard time to get some proper results...
> 
> Allright, quite some time ago I made some patches, almost converting the EXS
> into some sort of standard VA synth. The principle was to use a lot of
> layers, all using keymapped samples of simple waveforms (sine, triangle, saw
> etc.), then select the samples by the slider only (instead of using velocity
> as a source). In short, I tried to replace the usual OSC(s) waveform
> selection by layers using appropriate samples.
> And while it didn't seem to be a bad idea at first, CPU useage is going all
> through the wall for my 30+ layer patch.
> Now, I seem to remember some update ReadMe, telling that each layer would
> use up the full amount of played voices, no matter whether they are actually
> sounding (read: their velocity zone is selected) or not. As I can't seem to
> find this ReadMe anymore, could anybody confirm this behaviour? 

I find that looped single cycle waveforms use up a lot of CPU cycles vs. nonlooped 
samples. I created a patch with a single cycle sine wave and playing chords sucked 
the life out of my 867Mhz G4. You might try rendering each waveform to be several 
seconds long, and therefore the samples won't loop as much or at all.
-Matt Miller
http://www.millertone.com


It'd almost
> render my "turn the EXS into a VA synth" efforts useless as I wouldn't save
> any CPU cycles (which has been my original intention) in case each and every
> zone would be triggered, no matter if it fits the selected velocity zone or
> not.
> Well, maybe it's not too much of a great idea anyways, as you can never tell
> from the EXS's UI which layer/waveform was selected, plus, the lack of being
> able to combine different layers (representing OSCs) without "saving as" a
> new patch would not allow constructing truly "fat" sounds. I'd like to know
> though.
> 
> Regards,
> Sascha