Back then, those libraries made users' workflows much easier, because they no longer needed to import phrases into their samplers, edit them, transpose them, adjust them, slow them down or speed them up, all while using what was, at the time, considered to be a ridiculous amount of RAM (lots of RAM back then meant at least 16. But even if you can find solutions to phrasing issues related to multi-sampling (see: the Orchestral String Runs by Orchestral Tools, a real game-changer for string lines), more often than not, a phrase played by a real musician or a complete section will sound better than one assembled with multi-samples, regardless of the quality of the multi-samples or the competency of the composer/musician/programmer.Īs such, certain library producers prefer to offer their clients a solution based on phrases to be layered, similar to those seen in the first audio libraries on CD. These include the number of articulations provided, the scripts developed for compatible platforms (especially Kontakt, predominantly used by orchestral library producers), and the development of specially conceived instruments (most notably those provided by VSL, which are certainly today's most effective ones). Multi-sampled instruments have become increasingly easy to use and realistic, thanks to a variety of factors. This method would soon be adopted by all sample library producers, from EastWest to Best Service to Zero-G and so forth. The second approach incorporated the use of "building blocks" to create layers with phrase kits, as Siedlaczek did with his Orchestral Colours in 1995. The first involved the extensive sampling of orchestral instruments, as done by pioneers Miroslav Vitous (the first to offer a complete library in 1992) and Peter Siedlaczek (with the Orchestra Library, launched the same year). If you consider the history of virtual orchestras based on recordings (not on synthesis), the first attempts were made using two different approaches.
0 kommentar(er)
