Harware Samplers - anyone still rock them?

popslut · Post by **popslut** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:08 pm

Nah - I wrestled with S-612's with 128k of memory, S-950's with 750k and 1mb,
S1000's with 4 mb and S3200's with 32mb and all of them were a total pile of shit compared to Kontakt on a modestly specced PC.

It's all very romantic to fantasise about hardware samplers but the cold, hard truth is that they were well and truly superceded by soft samplers and slipped into well deserved obsolescence.

In a way that, say, the Prophet 5 or the Minimoog didn't.

Pitch Black · Post by **Pitch Black** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:11 pm

technically supersceded, yes. but in some cases, sonically, no.

popslut · Post by **popslut** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:21 pm

Pitch Black wrote:technically supersceded, yes. but in some cases, sonically, no.

My Emax had great filters, as did my S3200s but nothing I can't approximate with Kontakt and some plugins.

The differences are so negligible that they completely eclipse the bullshit of midi delays, external SCSI drives and wasted rackspace and all the other shite that goes with them.

Samplers were essentially devices for spitting out streams of digits and converting them to voltages - a task which your average PC is more than adequately suited to.

But what do I know? I know a fella who sequences on a BBC-B micro with a UMI 2b sequencer package because he swears it sounds "funkier".

I think it's a bag of shit and his records are rubbish.

forge · Post by **forge** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:52 am

I sold my Yamaha A3000 for 50 quid when I left England - they have a weird thing where the knobs start turning in the wrong direction after a while when they get full of finger grease and canabis resin

but more to the point, I just found that every time I had a moment of nostalgia and got it out, by the time I'd plugged it in, pissed about with leads, zip drive etc and spent half an hour loading up one song, as soon as I started trying to access anything and the knobs kept turning the wrong way and I couldnt se more than 3 letters on the stupid LCD screen I everytime ended up saying fuck this and sticking it back in the loft

there are enough distractions as there is, the last thing I need is to make everything 50 times harder than it needs to be in 2008

glu · Post by **glu** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:05 am

I hope for a new age of sampling technology in hardware.

Imagine a sampler the size of an iphone with touchscreen capabilities (and a stylus of course!), optional break-out box for ins/outs and a built in mic for field recording. The internal software includes a multisampler, rhythm sequencer, efx section. Hooked up to the computer, the software expands and the physical device becomes an touchscreen/programmable controller for the software. Flash HD and smaller, cooler, faster processors, touchscreen innovation... the technology is here.

astromass · Post by **astromass** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 5:41 am

using a hardware sampler helps my 'quaity control', as i tend to work slower and squeeze every bit out of each sample

Pitch Black · Post by **Pitch Black** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 6:07 am

popslut wrote:My Emax had great filters, as did my S3200s but nothing I can't approximate with Kontakt and some plugins.

Approximate is the key word there.

popslut · Post by **popslut** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 8:48 am

Pitch Black wrote:
Approximate is the key word there.

I chose it carefully.

The fact that I can't replicate precisely the character of an Emax filter doesn't make any qualitative difference to the sound of my records.

In fact, it wasn't until I sold my last hardware sampler [actually swapped it for half an ounce of charas] that my tracks started sounding good enough to release. I think there may be a connection.

popslut · Post by **popslut** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 8:49 am

glu wrote: Imagine a sampler the size of an iphone...

Aaaaarrrrghghghghg!!

Purgatory.

forge · Post by **forge** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:49 am

popslut wrote:
glu wrote: Imagine a sampler the size of an iphone...

Aaaaarrrrghghghghg!!

Purgatory.

yeah that was my first thought too, but I initially thought maybe from a field recording standpoint it might be an idea - but really, I'd rather just record with a field recorder then actually work with the audio on a reasonable sized screen, so yes +1

popslut · Post by **popslut** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:54 am

forge wrote:I initially thought maybe from a field recording standpoint it might be an idea...

forge · Post by **forge** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:21 am

popslut wrote:
forge wrote:I initially thought maybe from a field recording standpoint it might be an idea...

yeah well exactly - I just meant maybe from an interface point of view - but again, I dont need a fancy interface if I'm not going to edit on it - I'm hoping to get a zoom in the near future, or maybe the new Sony one if I can afford it

popslut · Post by **popslut** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:25 am

I bought the Zoom H2 and I'm really impressed. It has virtually no self-noise and the mics are wonderfully sensitive.

The built in compressors and limiters are extremely usable and the overall quality is incredible, especially for the price.

I use it as a mic for recording instruments - works amazingly well on acoustic guitars and percussion.

forge · Post by **forge** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:29 am

popslut wrote: I use it as a mic for recording instruments - works amazingly well on acoustic guitars and percussion.

that's really good to know

they're going for 30% off fuck all now so that sounds like the way forward

MacGuffin · Post by **MacGuffin** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 4:00 pm

I'm getting a TX16w for dirt cheap, Typhoon 2000 OS looks really cool! (programmed by the guy who did the Microtonic VST)

anyone have general advice on that weird gem?

Harware Samplers - anyone still rock them?

Re: Harware Samplers - anyone still rock them?