[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [fluid-dev] Supported Wave/Flac format other than SF2

From: Garth Hjelte
Subject: Re: [fluid-dev] Supported Wave/Flac format other than SF2
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 15:19:43 -0800

At 01:21 PM 2/5/2015, you wrote:

>Sure, we could "just transfer it in", but then again, the results would 
>be slightly wrong. Just as an example, sfz seems to have a three band EQ 
>built into every voice [1], which SF2 voices do not. This is stuff we 
>would have to add into the playback engine.

>If we should bring SFZ into the engine, then my wish would be that the 
>goal should be to play it as perfect as SF2 files are played today. 

I understand what you mean, but I don't agree. You don't have to import every 
opcode, and people understand that. There are several base-level sample players 
that import SFZ in a limited way - just the basics.

EQ's are pretty esoteric and if FS doesn't regard it, so be it. In fact, the 
only reason EQ's would exist in a SFZ file is if it were converted from 
something else, usually a Kontakt file. There is no sampler that truly uses SFZ 
as a native format so programming EQ's can't be done in SFZ in realtime. One 
would do it in Kontakt and then convert it using Translator into SFZ.

Further, SFZ has perhaps a hundred of opcodes that SoundFont/FS doesn't 
support, but my point is that just the ability to quickly form your own 
instrument - I mean, Notepad and 10 seconds later - and have it running in FS 
is the advantage.

But I understand you guys' authority over what happens, I support that. But my 
input would be I'd suggest simply using SFZ import just in part. I don't think 
there's a reason for an all-or-nothing approach, even SFZ wasn't designed that 
way. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Thanks for asking for input.  

Garth Hjelte
Sampler User

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]