BlahBlahCafe Forum Index  
  •  FAQ  •   Search  •   Memberlist  •   Usergroups  •  Register  •   Log in  •   Album  •   Chat  • 

Previous topic :: Next topic
Sampling of Eminent 310 U
Author Message
mcpersso 


Age: 54
Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 9
Location: Denmark
Posted: Sat Feb 06, 2016 2:08 pm   Sampling of Eminent 310 U

I am in progress of sampling my Eminent 310U. Its a huge task. :|

Well done is string section.

Now i am on to the "knobs"

9 x 15 sampling and looping of each knob..... huh.

1. Im looking for someone who have Uvi Falcon and the Eminent for beta-testing when the time come.

2. In this video i have tried to figure the routing of phaser/delay/reverb to get the exact same sound. any suggestion ?

https://www.youtube.com/w..._U6mnM6&index=1
_________________
best regards

Peter Persson
----------------------------------------
http://www.youtube.com/mcpersso
http://mcpersso.dk
 
Analog-Umph 


Age: 35
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1712
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 2:57 pm   

Reverb before delay. Delay is usually last in the chain.
Phaser usually right after source and always before reverb and delay.
_________________
"All rulers have gained their power through fear, save one, Jesus Christ." - Napol駮n
 
ZooTooK 

Joined: 15 Jan 2007
Posts: 33
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:39 pm   

Sampling a stringmachine will never give a truly accurate approximation as the ensemble effect is a mono(stereo) effect on all the notes played but sampling one note at a time with the effect makes it into some kind of polyphonic chorus when playing chords. Also watch out for phase effects when playing back multiple samples. Divide down are phase locked accross all notes in contracts to analog synths. Sample playback engines usually are not...

That said, it will for sure sound very nice, the Eminent 310 has a lovely tone, I'm just highlighting that it will never sound 100% accurate when sampling these kind of instruments. True emulations can however overcome these limitations...
_________________
http://stereoklang.se/
 
mcpersso 


Age: 54
Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 9
Location: Denmark
Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:43 pm   

In autumn 2015 I bought a Eminent 310U. I was a happy man. It was the right Jarre sound that I had hunted in various plugins.
But I missed that one could quickly change in what had been recorded without having to record the whole effort again. I had just gotten reason 9, and there was a plugin called Combo 310 Unique Organ. It was a very nice interface and fairly sound, but stringer part failed bravely.
I thought there had to be better. And then I started (if I had known then how much work lay ahead, I would never have done it).
My first requirement was that the sound quality should be top notch. So I decided that it should sample at 24-bit / 96 kHz. In addition, having the noise removed. With RX3 and x-hum succeeded after many tests.
There should also be made a plan of the sampling process and then sampled. Then there should looped endlessly - especially at the samples with modulation. Then I became very happy with Wavelab 8.5.
Since I had sampled all the sounds (Cubase 8.5) and looped, should I decide which Samplers I needed. My first choice was Kontakt 4, which I borrowed from a friend. I made some patches there, but was not satisfied.
My choice fell on UVI Falcon. There was a tough learning process. Falcon lost and some of the macro options. Then I made them Presence XT, with the editor that can be purchased. Then I made it to TX16Wx (http://www.tx16wx.com),
which is a free sampler for Mac and PC. I wish I had been able to make the organ for EXS24, but I do not have a Mac.
Before I finished, Halion 6 arrived. It is indeed a pleasure when you do not just figure out how to program in LUA language. You can drag and drop your buttons and make a lot macro. AND IT WORKS.
There is both patches and vstsound. The latter is almost come to resemble and function as a VST instrument. There have been many setbacks along the way.
Then there was a lot of fixes and fine tuning.
The website is:
http://mcpersso310u.com
https://www.facebook.com/mcpersso310u/

Price is 14 Euro

What you get:
Info:
3 files which contains:
覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧
File1:
68 organ patches for Halion 6.
23 Organ multi patches for UVI Falcon.
17 synth patches for UVI Falcon.
50 organ patches for TX16Wx.
5 Daw setups for Cubase.
13 Daw setups for Studio One v3.
2.14 GB.
覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧
File2:
1 organ vstsound set (VSTi) for Steinberg Halion 6.
2.02 GB.
覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧
File3:
1 organ soundset for Presence XT.
2.54 GB. (Presonus Studio One V3)
覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧
_________________
best regards

Peter Persson
----------------------------------------
http://www.youtube.com/mcpersso
http://mcpersso.dk
 
Billy Bunt 

Joined: 24 Aug 2010
Posts: 29
Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:06 pm   

mcpersso wrote:
In autumn 2015 I bought a Eminent 310U. I was a happy man. It was the right Jarre sound that I had hunted in various plugins.
But I missed that one could quickly change in what had been recorded without having to record the whole effort again. I had just gotten reason 9, and there was a plugin called Combo 310 Unique Organ. It was a very nice interface and fairly sound, but stringer part failed bravely.
I thought there had to be better. And then I started (if I had known then how much work lay ahead, I would never have done it).
My first requirement was that the sound quality should be top notch. So I decided that it should sample at 24-bit / 96 kHz. In addition, having the noise removed. With RX3 and x-hum succeeded after many tests.


I have never understood the issue you've had with the string ensemble on Combo 310U, it sounds quite fine to me: in no way is it a failure, and no-one else has had an issue with it. If I recall correctly you kept claiming the samples were flat and had no movement, which is bonkers, given it's what my 310U sounds like - it's a DI recording (ignoring the entirely separate and somewhat experimental stereo recording of the speaker output). I disagree entirely with your assessment; I find the Combo 310U DI samples warm, rich, lively and naturally free of distortion or noise.

As I pointed out the last time you posted a complaint here (and probably on RT too), samples of organs will never quite sound the same because of the lack of oscillator sync in samples. Within that natural and expected limitation, Combo 310U sounds as close to a 310U as I've heard, with higher fidelity samples than any previous attempt I am aware of, such as those I licensed for the Retrospective ReFill (and even those still pretty cool actually, the ones from Hollow Sun and Per Kristian), save perhaps GForce's VSM, which I've not heard, though now I'm curious to compare. However, that's somewhat a different thing anyway, a general strings ensemble mixer, rather than 310U emulation.

But consider this, the sampled E310's I mentioned above sound a hell of a lot better than the 310U Strings for Reaktor, which while oscillator-based, and thus does have the oscillator sync, which is good, on the other hand is it's far too bright, and worse, aliases really badly, making it entirely unusable above about C4 (4') or C5 (8').

It's hard to judge listening to the SoundCloud demos as you've swamped it in the phaser to hide the actual string ensemble, but to me it sounds ragged. Take the phaser off and it sounds loud but thin.

You're talking about wanting the sound quality to be "top notch" and the usual "24/96 sampling", but frankly, we all do that, and really, it's the 24-bit and using a DI box to prevent ground loops that's important at the recording stage to provide the best SNR at the destination when recording these types of things.

But that's by the by: it's the next bit you write that has me baffled: you state you had to remove noise with RX3 and x-hum. I know this is going to sound like sour grapes but since you were repeatedly and publicly so critical of me for really no reason other than you wanted to do your own version, it would be very remiss of me not to point out that if there was that much noise from your E310* that it needed RX3 and X-Hum to clean up the results, the sample quality at the recording destination couldn't have been that good to start with from the source, and I know from testing RX in the past the noise removal will have an impact on the overall tone. I don't know RX3+, I think it was RX2 I tested back when I was working on a project with Hollow Sun on the DK Synergy; I remember we hated the RX2 result so much I abandoned it and where relevant I truncated the sample decays to just before the compander brought the noise level back up to unusable levels. It actually worked quite well. The moral there is while I can't predict or claim to know how much impact it would have, you certainly can't say your samples are an exact recording of your organ: by your own admission you've changed the tone to some extent by using multiple de-noisers.

Nonetheless, based solely on my experience of the 310U I own, there is very little noise from the line outputs, nothing, in my view, that would need post-recording surgery at sample level**, and that little bit which is present I'd argue precisely one wouldn't want to remove as that's a crucial element of the make-up of the sound: turn up the volume and listen to that opening bass note of Equinoxe again. Vintage gear is not noise-free.

If your samples had that much noise into a modern 24-bit DAC (or rather, ADC) above the low but noticeable level of Jarre's original 310U recorded*** on a dodgy old 8-track, or whatever it was, that they needed to be heavily cleaned up with two different hum removal algorithms, then either your 310 line outs are faulty, or, and I suspect given their nature this might be more likely given that line outs in good order have a surprisingly high SNR****: did you sample via the headphone output? Those have a spectacularly poor SNR that one would have to run through lots of filters to in order clean up.


______
* I appreciate this might be seen as pedantry, as they are the same thing in a different box, but you are marketing a product for sale so you need to avoid being disingenuous or misleading: I do note your website photo clearly shows a 310 Theatre, not a 310 Unique, yet your product text and this thread state consistently you sampled a 310U. Is the photo not, then, the instrument you sampled?

** as opposed to standard HP/low-high shelf/notch filtering/EQ that could be applied from a mixer or insert effect at song mixing level

*** and much of that was in mono. When using the phaser, the 310U stereo out could only be connected to it in mono; it was the phaser output then that was made stereo via delay.


**** even after 45ish years. I doubt mine has ever seen an engineer, and dog knows I tried to find and pay one to give it a health check. ;)
 
Analog-Umph 


Age: 35
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1712
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 1:55 pm   

Billy Bunt wrote:
save perhaps GForce's VSM, which I've not heard, though now I'm curious to compare.


I found VSM's Eminent 310, to be the worst ever sampling job of the machine. The Strings are all wrong. I think they eq'ed them and messed around so much, it doesn't represent the way they are on the organ itself.


Quote:
But consider this, the sampled E310's I mentioned above sound a hell of a lot better than the 310U Strings for Reaktor, which while oscillator-based, and thus does have the oscillator sync, which is good, on the other hand is it's far too bright, and worse, aliases really badly, making it entirely unusable above about C4 (4') or C5 (8').


Have you tried the new one. Hugo Portillo released a new one, very recently. He fixed many of the old problems, esp aliasing.

https://www.kvraudio.com/...art=90#p6659670
https://www.kvraudio.com/...p?f=23&t=203453
https://www.native-instru...ntry/show/4923/
_________________
"All rulers have gained their power through fear, save one, Jesus Christ." - Napol駮n
 
Finaero 


Age: 28
Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 5155
Location: Finland
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:04 pm   

Still waiting for that one Eminent 310 VST that had the Oxygene 7 laser harp lead as a preset. ;)

(Probably really easy to replicate with something else, but eh ;) )
 
mcpersso 


Age: 54
Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 9
Location: Denmark
Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 2:39 am   

made a little demo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Cd2PH-jGxg
_________________
best regards

Peter Persson
----------------------------------------
http://www.youtube.com/mcpersso
http://mcpersso.dk
 
Jote 


Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 537
Location: Lodz, Poland
Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:17 pm   

Your cat stole the show, sorry :)
_________________
airwolfthemes.com
 
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Add this topic to your bookmarks
Printable version

Jump to:  

Powered by phpBB modified by Przemo © 2003 phpBB Group
Template FIBlack modified by Falcone
Page generated in 0.42 second. SQL queries: 12