The age-old question about the dark art of Resampling

[TweakHead]

I'm going to repeat myself here:

you can assign DIFFERENT samples to different keys on Ableton's sampler. That's the same as:

"one sample spread across the keyrange WITHOUT pitchbend"

You can slice the sample from transients or what have you, which translates into:

"playing different notes only alters the sample's start position"

I know Reason and how it works. That's how I started: I've seen it grow. Later moved on to Logic and then Ableton. In the former two, both with ESX24 and Ableton's Sampler you can do what you're saying - that I understood correctly the first time, by the way.

You can have it both: spread a single sample across a set key range with a pitch algorithm (that you don't want, at least for the time being); and you can indeed place different samples (or slices of the same sample, there's no technical difference, btw) to different keys - like you would with Dr Rex, Recycle... So the problem here, is that you haven't took the time to fully explore the tools you already have and started wondering if it wasn't their limitation, but it's not, it's really just your own. This is a very tired argument that comes about everywhere on the internet. The answer is: Ableton is capable of that and much more, how else do you think it would suit professionals? Don't say it doesn't do something, just say you can't do it and ask how it's done.

Better still: google it, search youtube.

Agree on the restriction of gear and software. My post is something within those lines. The more time I spend making music, the more I notice how some things have always been there and are easily overlooked and how nearly everyone would profit immensely from simply exploring all the menus and options to really get to know the software they already have - along with other tools. Hope this doesn't come across the wrong way.

I know it can be done 'cause I've done it myself, btw. And I know many people, specially hip hop beat makers would kill if such feature wasn't there, for example.

Kontakt is a whole different story: it's worth it just for the libraries you get access to alone and the technologies implemented in there. It's also great for creating one's own instruments, but you'd be impressed to find out it's much more used as a rompler then a proper sampler - most people don't go under the hood with their stuff. So make sure you do!

[OPERATOR]

Well I appreciate your assertion, but the reason I brought up that limitation is that I'm trying to simplify my workflow, and unlike the MPC or ReCycle style of transient sampling, Sampler has no one-button, automatic way (that's all) to spread samples that way by splitting one huge file into a zone per key - not by transient, but 61 even-length samples - kind of like there's a one-button option that automatically slices a large sample by transient into a Drum Rack - excellent for syncopating loops but using instances of Simpler instead of Sampler and the slicing options are defined by Live's transient-detection algorithm (which I'm aware you can manually change) but in my experience isn't the greatest for sounds that aren't really transient.

I'm fully aware that there's a way to do this manually, in a handful of short steps - it's exactly what Evoke's tutorials show that were posted on the last page, that I mentioned in my last post ("even just typing this I'm thinking of several workarounds"). I don't mean to be antagonistic or at all to suggest that this is anything more than a 'PEBKAC' issue. BUT, the whole reason I started this thread was that I'm trying to find a relatively simple, quick workflow with as few technical steps to stifle creativity. Having such a feature 'on automatic'; a one-button click in a drop-down menu, would help immensely. But you're right, I am 100% comfortable doing it manually by duplicating zones (or entire Samplers) and manually choosing start position, like in the Evoke tutorials. It's not that much more work, but like I said, I started on the topic in search for the path of least resistance to satisfying sounds - isn't that what we're all after?

Again, to reiterate, I'm not trying to be deliberately obtuse with you, I greatly appreciate what you're trying to impart. I'm a bit verbose and poor at explaining, but I've just been looking for every little way to simplify the process so I can focus on the creative.

Thanks for your help!

[Innovine]

Don't get hung up on the one-button-does-all solutions. Assigning a sample to a key might take one button, or a couple, but this is only a small, small part of the workflow. If you can do it within a few seconds per key thats good enough.

You really wanna look at how the editing works: ideally you want to hit the key and have a knob which moves the start position and some other knobs for the cutoff and the amp envelope, maybe even pitch. Then, when yow press a different key, you want those same knobs to edit the newly selected sample/slice. This, for me at least, is a really importart part of the workflow, much more so than assigning the sample..

You could take this to the extreme, and just assign your big source sample to one key, then hit that key over and over while tweaking the sample start and recording the results. Then just pick the best bits, and cut THAT up and continue.. the only thing you really need is patience and a discerning ear.

[OPERATOR]

Yeah, it's a very small part of all of it. The more I approach the sampling with my hands on, the sillier I feel for having brought up such a mild annoyance.

How you described it is basically exactly how I've been working: creating a long tone with lots of harmonic thickness and movement, sampling it and playing with short loop lengths and different sample positions, duplicating the instrument when I'm satisfied with a particular sound. It eats CPU pretty quickly, and I'm still working on getting used to tiny MIDI regions for each note - I'm more the type to work with larger regions for my eyes' sake but I find myself zooming in and out more than ever now.

I've gotten some particularly gnarly results by doing the whole process over again once I have a one-note 'melody' made of different throbs and donks, etc., by throwing it back through the Virus' filters and effects, and then loading the recorded output back into the same bank of Samplers I've created.

Like I said, I feel pretty silly about harping over the 'less button pushes = more efficiency' side of it. The speed comes pretty naturally and I'm beginning to really enjoy the process. I'll be posting some neurofunk soon, thanks everyone

[TweakHead]

But Ableton does have a way to split samples from transient markers and you can, indeed, assign each of those slices to different keys - and doesn't (even) take you long to get there. This is similar to what you'd get with a REX file.

I'm not going to go into the details here, as it's all covered (ad nauseum) in the manual and on many (!!!) online videos you can find easily.

Takes a while to get used to the features in a DAW, but it's certainly worth it if you want to get some serious work done in there

[TweakHead]

https://www.ableton.com/en/manual/co...audio-to-midi/

[OPERATOR]

I mentioned 'slice audio to MIDI' a few times times above - I'm well aware of it, I use it all the time to resyncopate breakbeats. Anyway I'm not really hung up on any more 'one-stop shop' solutions; I'm pretty happy with how it's coming a bit faster each time.

Actually one thing I've been thinking about but haven't tried to implement yet (I'm not at home right now) is using the Virus' sequencer (er, 'Arp>Matrix') in creating a crazy moving reese sound. Applying the sequencer to something like an LFO rate or Phasor frequency could probably yield some pretty nasty movement - like the LFO's sample/hold mode, but with more control. Thoughts?

[TweakHead]

watch out for the phaser on the lows, as it produces a big mess and shreds your mono compatibility in one go. absolutely fine if you're doing this on a mid rangy or higher layer, obviously - pretty common practice in DNB chorus also works very nice for reese kind of sounds. that and dynamic distortion, choosing your saturation mix as destinations can deliver

aside from that, that's a clever way of sequencing some evolving patterns, of course. Arp>Lfo rate is good, specially combined with, say Lfo>filter cutoff. doing that to wave select, coupled with some fm in wave mode can be interesting to.

[OPERATOR]

Oh yeah, that phasor definitely is not friendly to mono coherence. I use Flux Stereo Tool a lot for its phase vectorscope, and it's really funny to take a look at the low end of something put through the Virus' phasor/chorus/comb filter... what should be a straight line looks like an amoeba.

You know, I've never thought to automate wave select in FM mode - that's an awesome idea. I've played around with the shape/index parameter to change a sine into one of the digital waveforms but it doesn't really do much. I'm gonna try the wave select modulation tonight, thanks!

[TweakHead]

^flux is great. they've got great tools, that's a pretty nice analyser. it's a good idea to keep things centred on the very lows for most EDM music.

but you still need to watch that correlation meter when doing wacky stuff, if it goes negative it means chunks of your audio will be gone once its collapsed to mono - like on some night club systems. some people like a steady (means no modulation depth) phaser, just to rotate it a bit - guess an all pass filter will work to the same effect - and make it gel a little better with other elements.

if you're talking about the classic oscillators, then full to the left you'd be on "wave mode" - where you can choose 64 waves, and the "wavesel" destination also affects this. At center position you have a perfect (kind of, watch with an oscilloscope...) sawtooth, then to the right it starts to morph into a pulse wave (perfect pulse all the way right); then from centre to left it starts to morph to a perfect sine wave, so it's kind like additive synthesis where you'd be taking of the harmonics gradually - this should presumably give you some ideas btw.

random>wavesel makes it change on each note press (note in), and can produce interesting patches; like an arp fm patch, where the timbre is rapidly changing, for instance. also interesting, since arp patterns have velocity information, is vel>wavesel.