I have been using Dyn BM15-A's for three years now, their repair department here in the states has been less than helpful to me here recently. So I tried out a pair of the Adam S3A's and I will not be going back to the Dyn's. The low end, and smooth silky highs - and all that present mid-range that the dyn's just smooth over (which are still VERY nice speakers) I am in love again. I used the Genelecs for a while, and I have to echo other people and say that I often found myself "underworking" and getting less than flattering results after taking things elsewhere that I did on the Genelecs. Granted I learned to work with them - but I also learned quickly that I do not have to do that. Enter Dyn and now Adam. I must say, the Adam's are a little pricey- so I am going to check out a couple different models - but wow - what a great speaker. Aaron

Simple question. I have a good hardware sampler with lots of options. I have never used a software sampler, but with the new Logic Pro 6 on its way, I will get to try one out. My hardware sampler is up for sale, but there is no interest (at the price I am asking). So, I wonder if it is even worth selling since I would need to sell it dirt cheap. My question is, is it worth keeping a hardware sampler on hand even though I will have a softsampler? In other words, do any of you use softsamplers (especially the ESXS24) but still find use for hardware samplers? And, why? (I realize CPU drain is an issue, but are there other reasons?). Or, is a hardware sampler 100% redundant?. Thanks for the input. Dave ========================================================================Curr ent Setup Mac G4, 867MHz, 1.5GB Ram Logic 4.81 (Soon Pro 6) on OS9

In > other words, do any of you use softsamplers (especially the ESXS24) but > still find use for hardware samplers? And, why? The main reason I use the EXS24 is because of it's sample accurate timing. The sound of the EXS24 is basicly as good as your soundcard. If you like the sound of your hardware samler, you could use it as a front end by connecting the digital out of your hardware sampler to the digital in on your soundcard. Every analog signal that you wish to record/sample goes thru the AD's of the hardware sampler. I don't do this myself since I find the difference marginal, but I know of some people who like the sound of their Akai S1100 and use it in the way I describet above. Regards, Roland

At 10:28 Uhr -0500 22.02.2004, amgshaffer wrote: >In other words, do any of you use softsamplers (especially the ESXS24) but >still find use for hardware samplers? And, why? (I realize CPU drain >is an issue, but are there other reasons?). Or, is a hardware sampler >100% redundant?. Don't know which sampler you got, so it's hard to tell. I presonally just sold an old bottom of the line EMU because there was no use for it here anymore. However: a friend of mine has his fully equipped E-6400 and still uses it regularly and I have to say: it sounds so much better than any of the soft-samplers out there... it's not even funny. Nonetheless I will not buy one because working with it is so much slower (I mean programming, routing, tweaking, filtering) and at the moment speed is what I need. But let me say it again (and I've said it a couple of times before in other places): In my opinion this EMU sounds much more wonderful than any of the softsamplers I've heard. And I've done an A / B test with the Siedlaczeks, which, yes, aren't top of the line anymore, but they're still pretty good. Cheers Hans

Hi Dave, A passionate hardware sampler fanatic here, so those of you guys who have seen me through the years on various hardware sampler lists would rather delete this without reading as for all of you samplist veterans my answer is deffinitely obvious :-) . On Feb 22, 2004, at 7:28 AM, amgshaffer wrote: > is it worth keeping a > hardware sampler on hand even though I will have a softsampler? In > other words, do any of you use softsamplers (especially the ESXS24) but > still find use for hardware samplers? And, why? Yes, I use a whole lot of hardware samplers in my studio, in fact, I have ditched all my synths in favor of having more samplers at hand, and yes, I use them along with EXS and (to a much lesser degree) Kontakt. No software sampler can get close to the warmth and character of a hardware machine, no matter what fantastic specs/algorithms/whatever else they have, software samplers are still behind in sound quality. EXS24 MKII is the closest in sound, but still can only complement hardware machines IMNSHO. The other reason for me to keep my beloved boxes is the lack of latency and CPU load. I can hardly play, say, a classical piano part on a software sampler as I simply can't hear what I play the moment I play it and thus can't follow up with the dynamics, nuances, etc., so hardware machines are the only choice when I play some critical part of the arrangement. Again, this is just an opinion of an old samplist and nowa days I myself have to use EXS more and more with those multigig sample libraries, so everyone is free to disagree. My advise is to work on anything you feel comfortable with, and if that's your hardware machine, just keep it, especially if it's dirt cheep now. Best, Andy -- Andy Hardwake Composer DIGITAL Mechanics - New Emotional Music formation DIGITALMechanics@... http://homepage.mac.com/DIGITALMechanics ICQ #134191508 ...Imagine the universe beautiful and just and perfect. Then be sure of one thing: the Is has imagined it quite a bit better than you have... ...The mark of your ignorance is the depth of your belief in injustice and tragedy... (Richard Bach)

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, amgshaffer <amgshaffer@c...> wrote: > My question is, is it worth keeping a hardware sampler on hand > even though I will have a softsampler? In other words, do any > of you use softsamplers (especially the ESXS24) but still find > use for hardware samplers? And, why? (I realize CPU drain is > an issue, but are there other reasons?). Or, is a hardware > sampler 100% redundant?. Dave, You may find that your hardware sampler is redundant much of the time, as the EXS is a very capable sampler. However, I bet you have a large library for the hardware unit, and it may take you some time (like a long time) to transfer everything to the new format. Also, if you're doing a large sample-based project (like an orchestral realization), you may need a large number of channels, outputs, etc. I have both the EXS and (Digidesign's) SoftSampleCell, as well as two Kurzweil 2500s, and there are projects where everything gets used. I haven't transfered my string, brass, and wind libraries to the EXS because it's a huge job, and it's just easier to use the 2500s. If you don't use the hardware sampler for a year, I'd say sell it (or give it away). It's not unlikely, however, that you'll find a use for it.

I appreciate all the responses about the hardware vs. software samplers. I will keep my sampler and see how it works along side the EXS sampler (when I get it). Although I can see the strengths in software samplers, I am surprise how cheaply hardware samplers are being sold on eBay. Good synths are being sold for more than good samplers (despite the wide availability of softsynths). Thanks again for the help. Kind regards, David

At 02:45 PM 02/22/2004, you wrote: >I appreciate all the responses about the hardware vs. software >samplers. I will keep my sampler and see how it works along side the >EXS sampler (when I get it). Although I can see the strengths in >software samplers, I am surprise how cheaply hardware samplers are being >sold on eBay. Strangely enough, hardware samplers vs. software samplers can now almost be equivocated with the broader analog vs. digital debate. My EMU's have 128 separate filters, enough for one per key per program, and each sounds fantastic. I think it will still be awhile before softsamplers can rival that kind of processing power, and of course they'll never exactly equal the character of the hardware processing particular to each sampler. But the RAM limitations, which, in light of the size of today's new libraries, can be called "severe," can't be ignored. My guess would be that libraries that were created using hardware samplers will nearly always sound best coming from those samplers. So if you can justify the hassle of integrating hardware samplers with your otherwise all-virtual setup, then by all means do it. I think it's likely I will forever hold onto at least one of my EMU's. Sean McCoy Oregon Sound Recording