EXS 24 Logic Sampler Users Group

I am happy with the latest version of the EXS24 but I have 4 wishes 
for improvement... I sincerely hope that the Developers at Emagic 
read this list....

1. I have over 10,000 instruments that are in my sampler instruments 
folder. Call me crazy, but I like it this way.  Logic takes about 5 
minutes to start up while scanning this folder (on a G4 400). Also, 
sometimes in the middle of working, the mouse pointer will turn to an 
hourglass and I will be locked out of the program for a few minutes 
while it does some thinking... I am a programmer and I would be 
willing to bet that the developers are using some kind of iterative 
hierarchical data structure (tree) to store all of your instruments 
in that neato little flip menu and whenever you do anything that 
might change it (like saving a new instrument) it has to re-scan or 
traverse that entire tree which is a complete waste of time... One 
elegant solution would be to remove the need for pre-scanning (which 
I am guessing is a limitation due to the fact that plugins must get 
their resources from pre-defined folders) and replace the flip menu 
with a standard Mac OS dialog that allowed you to load the instrument 
from anywhere on your hard drive, CD roms, etc...

2. When editing an instrument, pressing a key on the keyboard should 
play that instrument, whether you are on the right track in the 
arrange or not... just my opinion.... Also it would be nice to be 
able to audition the instruments from the "open" dialog (if we ever 
get one) without having to load them...

3. (Artistic request - hence most important) On the topic of VELOCITY 
ZONES.  Ok, so as of this moment they allow you to set 
velocity "windows" for zones and groups, which is ok, but they can do 
better.  For example, if you have zones with overlapping velocity 
windows then when velocity is in that overlap area, the zones should 
be mixed together... as it is right now, it seems one arbitrarily 
plays over the other, probably in reverse zone order....  The ideal 
situation would be one in which you didn't even have to specify these 
zones, but could just say "OK here's the three samples for this key 
range, crossfade inbetween them as I play harder".  In reality, 
instruments don't "switch" between loud and soft tones, they FADE 
from one to the other... actually, it's more like they MORPH, but I 
would accept FADING.

4. get rid of hard coded limitations... for example, there is no way 
to have a sound get softer as you play harder.  Sample start point 
can't be set to move closer to the beginning of the file as you play 
softer etc... there are probably 10 other artificial constraints like 
this that seem arbitrary and pointless... 

Thanks for making a great product, and I hope my voice is heard when 
developing the next revision... Thanks!!!

> 2. When editing an instrument, pressing a key on the keyboard should
> play that instrument, whether you are on the right track in the
> arrange or not... just my opinion.... Also it would be nice to be
> able to audition the instruments from the "open" dialog (if we ever
> get one) without having to load them...

I'll second that!


> be mixed together... as it is right now, it seems one arbitrarily
> plays over the other, probably in reverse zone order....  The ideal

That's weird. I believe I have experienced otherwise. I have a piano with
overlapping zones that play simultaneously (Mac).


> 4. get rid of hard coded limitations... for example, there is no way
> to have a sound get softer as you play harder.  Sample start point
> can't be set to move closer to the beginning of the file as you play
> softer etc... there are probably 10 other artificial constraints like
> this that seem arbitrary and pointless...

This would be a dream come true for strings and such...

 
> Thanks for making a great product, and I hope my voice is heard when
> developing the next revision... Thanks!!!

These are welcome suggestions.

In a message dated 4/12/01 2:36:09 PM, HELP@... writes:

>> 4. get rid of hard coded limitations... for example, there is no way
>> to have a sound get softer as you play harder.  Sample start point
>> can't be set to move closer to the beginning of the file as you play
>> softer etc... there are probably 10 other artificial constraints like
>> this that seem arbitrary and pointless...

Agree wholeheartedly with most of the suggestions except this one. Part of 
what makes the EXS so cool is its interface, which is intentionally limited 
in a very musical and intelligent way. (Notice that -except for sample 
mapping- all the parameters fit on one page!) To me, it's the Minimoog of 
samplers....very simple, but also very powerful and musical in its layout. 
This is the opposite approach of a matrix modulation system like Kurzweil, 
Emu, SampleCell or Reactor, which are more powerful, but much more difficult 
and time-consuming to use.

Why do you actually need reverse velocity dynamics anyway? What are you 
trying to do musically? If you really need it, this can easily be 
accomplished already through the Transform functions in the environment. 
(Same with your reverse Start point idea). 

>This would be a dream come true for strings and such...

Actually, for strings, the current system is more ideal as slow attacks 
without the real bow strike (Start point offset) can be played with soft 
velocities (and a velocity attack time), while harder velocities bring in the 
start point and the attack time in to the hear the real bow attack (marcato). 
Having it reverse for strings sounds good only in theory, fast/hard velocity 
attacks with the front of the samples snipped off sounds very artificial.

I'm all for flexibility, but not at the expense of a great interface. The 
limitations imposed in the EXS are not arbitrary or pointless at all. It's 
clear that a great deal of thought and musical thinking went into it. Think 
about it....how exactly would you accomplish this esoteric option with the 
current interface? You really can't do that kind of stuff without a complete 
redesign of the interface....and redesigning the interface is a big deal.

Ultimate flexibility often comes at the expense of the interface.....(see 
Reactor). Both types of approaches are certainly valid, but I think that the 
"most-useful functions+great interface" approach is what makes for an 
inspiring and long-lasting instrument. Don't fix it if it ain't broke....

My two cents...

-EP

--- In exs-users@y..., PersingEP@a... wrote:
> 
> Why do you actually need reverse velocity dynamics anyway? What are 
you 
> trying to do musically? 

Really, this is tied to my suggestion about overlapping crossfading 
velocity zones... within the overlapping velocity zone between one 
sample and the next, the low-velocity sample should get softer as you 
play harder and the higher-velocity sample should get louder in the 
same region, gradually replacing the one in the lower region...

please tell me if this didn't make sense....

I get what you're saying. Actually, this is a very valid point. I had
actually reached the same conclusion as you trying to build a complex piano
sample kit. I had forgotten about the specifics of my frustration, but you
just jogged my memory very well. Thanks for bringing this up. Very well
explained. -Jer

> Really, this is tied to my suggestion about overlapping crossfading
> velocity zones... within the overlapping velocity zone between one
> sample and the next, the low-velocity sample should get softer as you
> play harder and the higher-velocity sample should get louder in the
> same region, gradually replacing the one in the lower region...
> 
> please tell me if this didn't make sense....
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> exs-users-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
>

I totally agree on all points. Especially point nr. 1. The whole advantage
of the EXS is the incredible speed you have when working with it. When it is
scanning all instruments (yes, I have 10.000 instruments also) you loose a
lot of time.
Maybe a good solution for this problem is only to scan the instruments at
the startup of logic, or maybay when starting up a new song. Tnhat would
help alot.

Another point: when I use the key command: Backup all USED samples, it works
great, but it would be very nice if there would be the possibillity to
append to to this backup. In other words: when you've already backed up your
instruments and samples you should be able to only save the changes of you
song in the same folder that you used to backup your files. Now, everytime I
choose to backup my used samples in a logic session it wants me to create a
new folder (with a new name) and it is backing up what was already there.

Compare it to the function in Sounddiver: "Append to library" Only the new
files are backed up and the doubles can be deleted if you wish.

I ralso really agree with point nr 2 as written below. When you are editing
an instrument youy should be able to hear it, even when it is not selected
in the arrange.

Anyway, emagic thanks for this  great product, and hope you can fix these
(big) things.

Jos

From: onelist@...
Reply-To: exs-users@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 20:29:25 -0000
To: exs-users@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [exs] EXS24 Improvements desired


I am happy with the latest version of the EXS24 but I have 4 wishes
for improvement... I sincerely hope that the Developers at Emagic
read this list....

1. I have over 10,000 instruments that are in my sampler instruments
folder. Call me crazy, but I like it this way.  Logic takes about 5
minutes to start up while scanning this folder (on a G4 400). Also,
sometimes in the middle of working, the mouse pointer will turn to an
hourglass and I will be locked out of the program for a few minutes
while it does some thinking... I am a programmer and I would be
willing to bet that the developers are using some kind of iterative
hierarchical data structure (tree) to store all of your instruments
in that neato little flip menu and whenever you do anything that
might change it (like saving a new instrument) it has to re-scan or
traverse that entire tree which is a complete waste of time... One
elegant solution would be to remove the need for pre-scanning (which
I am guessing is a limitation due to the fact that plugins must get
their resources from pre-defined folders) and replace the flip menu
with a standard Mac OS dialog that allowed you to load the instrument
from anywhere on your hard drive, CD roms, etc...

2. When editing an instrument, pressing a key on the keyboard should
play that instrument, whether you are on the right track in the
arrange or not... just my opinion.... Also it would be nice to be
able to audition the instruments from the "open" dialog (if we ever
get one) without having to load them...

3. (Artistic request - hence most important) On the topic of VELOCITY
ZONES.  Ok, so as of this moment they allow you to set
velocity "windows" for zones and groups, which is ok, but they can do
better.  For example, if you have zones with overlapping velocity
windows then when velocity is in that overlap area, the zones should
be mixed together... as it is right now, it seems one arbitrarily
plays over the other, probably in reverse zone order....  The ideal
situation would be one in which you didn't even have to specify these
zones, but could just say "OK here's the three samples for this key
range, crossfade inbetween them as I play harder".  In reality,
instruments don't "switch" between loud and soft tones, they FADE
from one to the other... actually, it's more like they MORPH, but I
would accept FADING.

4. get rid of hard coded limitations... for example, there is no way
to have a sound get softer as you play harder.  Sample start point
can't be set to move closer to the beginning of the file as you play
softer etc... there are probably 10 other artificial constraints like
this that seem arbitrary and pointless...

Thanks for making a great product, and I hope my voice is heard when
developing the next revision... Thanks!!!


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
exs-users-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]