From ccmacdon@rogers.com Tue May 02 15:40:35 2017
Subject:Re: Sampling vs. Modeling [Was: Arturia b-3-v]

Bruce,

Based on my limited understanding of the technology (I generally know enough to be dangerous), the simplest way to illustrate the difference between sampling and modelling, is with the leslie and or CV..

You can sample a note with leslie stopped (or on chorale), and a note with leslie on tremolo, but you can't sample the transition between the two.. THIS requires a separate "modelled" leslie effect.. Similarly you cannot sample a note with CV on and a note CV off and expect a smooth/realistic transition between the two when you turn the CV on and off..

Modelling involves taking every component in the B3 and recreating it digitally. It also involves a deep understanding of the inner workings of Hammond organ and leslie speaker, and the ability to recreate each component digitally, via software. The best example of this, in my opinion, is illustrated by the editor included with the Mojo VB3CE2 (a modelled Hammond engine). It is, in fact, designed like an organ laboratory, allowing you to select and/or adjust virtually every aspect/component of the organ to create your own personalized organ (s). This includes starting with from the year and model of the tonewheel generator, and adds other options like choosing the characteristics of the matching transformer, selecting which type of wiring in the keyboard, complex tonewheels or not, the interaction of tones and tonewheels, the relative strength of drawbars etc. etc. (There are a huge number of other parameters).. You simply cannot do this with samples! The samples required would be huge.

That is the basic reason why modelling is a superior technology. Hybrid is good too... you can start with samples of the raw tones, and then model the balance of the electro-mechanical workings of the organ. BTW, just because something is modelled doesn't necessarily mean it's good. Some modelled instruments are better than others..

Craig

Sent from my iPad