Thanks for this feedback. I agree with your remark, which probably has to do with the realtime control potential of model-based virtual instruments. Yet, I want to discover how to best use any collection; this will require tuning the preset parameters. Currently preparing another video with more solo brass instrument testing and playing.
@@Metalpazallteway I think the big problem with people using modelling plugins is they forget that they are super dry. you need to add effects that are recorded in samples but are not existent in the modelled instrument. And you need to tweak the SWAM instruments to really get their full potential. Also you need to automate a lot more parameters to generate a realistic moving sound and stop it from sounding like a synth.
You're doing a very valuable service by making these comparison videos. I wish you'd concentrate on comparisons of the solo instruments. I feel trying to compare whole symphonic performances is a little too much to ask. It would also be great if you'd take a stand on how these products rank against each other.
Thanks for your feedback. Indeed I am planning to compare playing single instruments; I do experience specific response aspects when using either EWI or Midi keyboard. A ranking, however, I find hard to do. I do respect and admire the developers since they provide musicians with tools for creating music in a DAW (or live), with a degree of realism that would have been impossible a decade ago. Besides, I have only a limited set of samples and modeled instruments. I am still learning to play the recent instruments and trying to evaluate their potential and best use, while waiting for updates that reduce the shortcomings.
Thanks for the video! What's important to take into consideration is that physical modeling has a lot of ways to improve over time, while sample modeling is extremely limited in that sense. So, I believe it's quite certain to say that future belongs to physical modeling.
@fortissimoX, Indeed your remark is very much to the point: I agree with your view on physical modeling instrument development potential. What is hard to foresee is the effect that AI and learning models will have on both branches. I expect that there will be AI (smart) MIDI interpretation scripts for both the physical modeling and sample library approach. On a more detailed level (timbre, transients, time domain signals) making predictions is harder. Thanks for the comment!
For Reason users a new player just entered the market. Their Friktion modeled Strings instrument is really great. It's not for brass (yet?) but all 4 string instruments and a lot more freedom to make new sounds for only 109 Euro is a steal. It's still rough around some edges but it can compete nonetheless. As an added bonus you can even make it sound like a guitar or a flute if you want to. It really makes me reconsider buying SWAM as overnight it seemingly became a heavily overpriced thing.
Thanks for adding information about this new set of modeled instruments. I will look into this library; great to hear that more virtual instrument programmers are taking up this most challenging task.
Thank you for this comparison. For me it sounds like expression and flutter settings on SWAM is lower than Sample Modelling. Though I know SWAM is capable of more expressive playing (I have it on iOS). Would be interesting to compare string quartets for SWAM Strings.
@Daniel Samulevic Thank you for the detailed comment on this comparison. Since the examples were from the classical music repertoire, I did not use any flutter setting. I may have been overcautious with the expression values. Since uploading these tests Audio Modeling have released brass bundle update V 1.6.2, with improved sound and controllability (probably the version you have on iOS). Did you watch the recent (APR 2021) video, where I played some string quartet phrases with the SWAM Solo Strings V3?
Great job Frans !! Thank you for the comparisions , I realize it's hard work. Well done. I hope I am not too demanding, but , given that you have spent so much time with the Sample/Audio Modeling software and the EWI controller.......could you summarize what would be the optimal parameter adjustments to both the software and the EWI to play them live, according to your experience ? Thank you very much in advance
Thanks for the comment. This video is made with SWAM Solo Brass V 1.0 and mostly default instrument parameter settings. I am still experimenting with SWAM presets. When finding an optimum I will provide a download spreadsheet on my website. In the meantime here are some of my current settings for SWAM Brass V 1.5.0 (FHn/Tbn/Tpt). Expressivity>Att Tongue 0.0, Reactivity 0.42/0.5/0.5. Timbre>Bell Res 0.49/0.0/0.77, Breath Noise 0.0, Dirtiness 0.0, Dyn Sens 0.75/0.94/0.9. Advanced>Dyn Pitch 0.5, Auto Expr 0.067/0.1/0.1, Dyn Res 1.26/1.1/1.1, Random Lips 0.6/0.5/0.6, Portam MaxTime OFF, Att Ctrl Vel Soft. I aim for a classical music sound, so try to prevent 'dirty, jazzy' sounds, dynamics-to-pitch effects and portamento between legato notes. On the EWI I use air flow rate (pressure) for CC11 (Expr), single (du vs. tu) and multiple tonguing (t-k-t-k, etc) for attack control (the best response ever!), and diaphragm breathing control for vibrato (I do not use bite CC1 vibrato for realtime playing, OK for SWAM winds and strings, not for brass. In fact I turned off the bite sensor, and use the portamento glide plate for CC1 control with my left thumb). Because of the limited air flow rate (too small diameter bore, poor AKAI design), I let air slip at the edges while playing (as others do). When editing Midi I may modify the vibrato (combination of CC1 and CC19), add minor pitch bend data ('imperfect' intonation simulation), and may add some breathing noise and random tonguing effects. Plus some EQ. Just downloaded the Aug 14, 2020 update to SWAM V 1.5.1 and will continue experimenting. The SWAM standalone instrument apps have unsurpassed realtime control, and the company keeps improving timbral aspects. I believe in a great future for the modeling approach. Does this answer your questions? Some UA-camrs provide detailed EWI/SWAM settings; if you cannot find these links yourself let me know and I'll look them up in my bookmarks.
the AM/SM seems to lead to some artificial sounding phasing. The Spitfire ambience sounds more natural too. Both could in principle be solved with better modelling of the instruments and their spatial position, but this is easier said than done!
Thank you for taking the time for this comparison. A problem IMO with SWAM is that no matter how much time you spend with various placement & spatialisation plugins / reverbs, and moving around controllers: they still sound close-miced. While I applaud the enormous effort put in these modeled instruments, the lack of "body" remains an issue. This video shows again the advantage of capturing the space / hall *at the same* time as part of a sample or performance. This applies especially to brass, for strings SWAM somehow works much better, at least in my humble opinion.
Thanks for the interesting comment and observations about the intricacies of modeled instruments. I am not an expert on positioning these in an acoustic ambiance, having worked with a limited set of plugin tools. However I find the realtime control of the sound source with wind (or breath) controller currently unsurpassed, and that makes playing them fun. I expect sample libraries with clever scripting on the one side, and better modeling on the other to come closer to the real thing (initial attack, instrument body resonance, realtime timbre control etc.). I accept today's shortcomings and hope to see improvements as updates arrive.
Thanks for suggesting this product, that I did not know about. In the meantime I read about EAReverb and watched demo videos. The Pos Mode might help improve the spatial distribution of virtual instruments. However, you have to explain to me how it might remove timbre differences and deficiencies that I noticed in some brass instruments.
Sample Modelling has the most potential in my opinion. But requires lots of work placing it in a room and programming. For quicker results, Spitfire Symphonic Brass is better.
@brickblock369 Thanks for asking. Quoting from the Manuals (search string: sampl): French Horn and Tuba v.3 (brass). P. 3 [Kontakt 5 Sampler] 'and no access to the samples', P. 7 [Introduction] 'it uses samples of real instruments as base material', [Real-time Timbral Shaping] 'This revolutionary new feature adds a virtually infinite timbral variety to sample-based instruments'. Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v.2.0.2. P. 3 [What's new?] 'the original sustain samples are played'. P. 4 'Yes, using samples. But also using our renowned technologies to “model” them by the user', 'Why samples? Our virtual strings use recorded samples of real strings as base material'. P. 5 [Kontakt Sampler] 'no access to the samples'. P. 9, [Real-time Timbral Shaping] 'This new feature adds a virtually infinite timbral variety to sample-based instruments'. Based on this information I label these instruments as 'hybrid approach' (like the Aaron Venture collections). Clever Kontakt scripting allows realtime user control of the sound characteristics. That is why they have such good reputation as 'realistic/natural sounding', and that is where the challenge lies for fully physical-modelling based instruments (such as SWAM). In the latter approach the attack phase (and other transient phenomena) are hard to 'simulate'. Does this answer the question?
@Stories read aloud, thanks for sharing your observations. However I must add the nuance that the comparison outcome is biased by the fact, that my tests are about realtime control with the Akai EWI. In that case model-based instruments are more suitable than sample libraries with articulation keyswitches. The latter are in a more favourable position with keyboard input, plus keyswitch selector and realtime breath controller.
@Ido Music. No worries about me choking; I don't take any food while recording these voiceovers. However, when Grandmaster JSB is involved my minimum level of respect is to try and use German pronunciation. [Denn sonst geht alles den Bach runter.] But who knows, maybe one day there will be a de-bacher plugin. Until then, hopefully you still can enjoy these videos. Thanks for the feedbach.
@@FransAbsil Haha, (hopefully it was clear I was just making a stupid joke and didn't insult you) as a native english speaker I have always pronounced it wrong and I love to hear the true German pronunciation! And yes I will certainly be bach to enjoy more of your videos thank you :)
@Dory Video, Thanks for this legato playing style comment. Unless there is an EWI setting that I am unaware of, the control of phrasing and articulation (staccato-legato) is achieved with tonguing, affecting the CC11 (Expression) curve while changing the fingering between notes. For legato phrases I minimise the use of the tongue, yielding a smooth CC11 curve. The EWI monitors the time interval between notes and automatically generates CC68 when playing legato. However, neither the modeled nor the sample instruments respond to this CC. So when I am not happy with the result I edit the Midi recording, creating overlap between legato notes, and add articulation keyswitches in case of a sample library. More detailed suggestions about improving the EWI performance during the recording phase are welcome. Hopefully this answers your question.
Thanks for the feedback. Right now I am preparing a new set of modeled solo brass instrument comparison videos, based on the Sample Modeling V3 and the updated Audio Modeling V1.5.1, and each instrument playing classical music pieces.
Thanks for sharing your opinion about the sound in these examples. Let's hope that the fully modeled approach will improve with each version, in particular regarding the attack phase and the legato playing of brass instruments.
@tcb Your remark about the phasing sound aspect made me think. Indeed, what I label as 'synthetic' has a phasing quality. Somehow this implies that the modeling approach not only incorporates resonance and standing waves in certain instrument model components, but also echoes, since these might yield phasing. However, only the developers know what's going on. Thanks for the comment.
Tonally the SWAM instruments sound very strange to my ears, I really didn't like them at all. Sample Modeling won all of the stringed instruments although their brass instruments were much weaker, Spitfire did best with most of the Brass
Thanks for the feedback. As far as I understood Audio Modeling is working on an update of their SWAM Solo Brass instruments. What examples are you referring to when comparing the quality of the strings?
The problem is that in every video review I watched they sound different. I guess one needs to learn how to make the most out of them. I had the same impression here, while elsewhere I was astonished by how good they sounded.
@@marcoscorsolini8803 Marco you are right, it's very difficult to get a true idea of what these instruments are capable of, the best productions I have heard are the ones where the expressions are edited in detail after recording the notes rather than live performances using pedals and breath controllers etc. Check out this yt channel 'Leandro Gardini - Music Channel', he has produced some staggeringly good pieces using Sample Modeling Solo & Ensemble Strings
@Marco Scorsolino. Thanks for the feedback. Indeed, the sounds will differ significantly depending on the parameter settings. Most videos I watched are focusing on jazz/pop, mutes, and keyboard + modwheel/pitchbend playing, or the 'comical' effects. What I am looking for is an authentic classical player sound and style. I've installed the recent V1.5 update, now tuning the preset parameters for the EWI, then I will do another comparison. In general, I'm an absolute fan of the SWAM modeling approach, it's only the Solo Brass bundle where I'm still looking for the best possible sound. I may have missed some good online demonstrations, so I'm open to suggestions and links.
To my ears, SM sounds like players actually playing. But you really can't go wrong with any of them.
Thanks for this feedback. I agree with your remark, which probably has to do with the realtime control potential of model-based virtual instruments. Yet, I want to discover how to best use any collection; this will require tuning the preset parameters. Currently preparing another video with more solo brass instrument testing and playing.
Yep. I would second that.
Definitely - however, the SWAM instruments sound very synth-y to my ears
I agree. SWAM has certain particular characteristics of a real instrument but overall not suitable for trust worthy legato.
@@Metalpazallteway I think the big problem with people using modelling plugins is they forget that they are super dry. you need to add effects that are recorded in samples but are not existent in the modelled instrument. And you need to tweak the SWAM instruments to really get their full potential. Also you need to automate a lot more parameters to generate a realistic moving sound and stop it from sounding like a synth.
Sample Modeling is a winner here
With default presets the SM brass instrument timbre indeed sounds more natural than the AM SWAM version used here.
You're doing a very valuable service by making these comparison videos. I wish you'd concentrate on comparisons of the solo instruments. I feel trying to compare whole symphonic performances is a little too much to ask. It would also be great if you'd take a stand on how these products rank against each other.
Thanks for your feedback. Indeed I am planning to compare playing single instruments; I do experience specific response aspects when using either EWI or Midi keyboard. A ranking, however, I find hard to do. I do respect and admire the developers since they provide musicians with tools for creating music in a DAW (or live), with a degree of realism that would have been impossible a decade ago. Besides, I have only a limited set of samples and modeled instruments. I am still learning to play the recent instruments and trying to evaluate their potential and best use, while waiting for updates that reduce the shortcomings.
Thanks for the video!
What's important to take into consideration is that physical modeling has a lot of ways to improve over time, while sample modeling is extremely limited in that sense.
So, I believe it's quite certain to say that future belongs to physical modeling.
@fortissimoX, Indeed your remark is very much to the point: I agree with your view on physical modeling instrument development potential. What is hard to foresee is the effect that AI and learning models will have on both branches. I expect that there will be AI (smart) MIDI interpretation scripts for both the physical modeling and sample library approach. On a more detailed level (timbre, transients, time domain signals) making predictions is harder. Thanks for the comment!
For Reason users a new player just entered the market. Their Friktion modeled Strings instrument is really great.
It's not for brass (yet?) but all 4 string instruments and a lot more freedom to make new sounds for only 109 Euro is a steal.
It's still rough around some edges but it can compete nonetheless.
As an added bonus you can even make it sound like a guitar or a flute if you want to.
It really makes me reconsider buying SWAM as overnight it seemingly became a heavily overpriced thing.
Thanks for adding information about this new set of modeled instruments. I will look into this library; great to hear that more virtual instrument programmers are taking up this most challenging task.
Thank you for this comparison. For me it sounds like expression and flutter settings on SWAM is lower than Sample Modelling. Though I know SWAM is capable of more expressive playing (I have it on iOS). Would be interesting to compare string quartets for SWAM Strings.
@Daniel Samulevic Thank you for the detailed comment on this comparison. Since the examples were from the classical music repertoire, I did not use any flutter setting. I may have been overcautious with the expression values. Since uploading these tests Audio Modeling have released brass bundle update V 1.6.2, with improved sound and controllability (probably the version you have on iOS). Did you watch the recent (APR 2021) video, where I played some string quartet phrases with the SWAM Solo Strings V3?
Beautiful. Thx a lot
@ben c You're welcome. I guess I have to redo this type of test with the recent 2021 SWAM updates.
Great job Frans !! Thank you for the comparisions , I realize it's hard work. Well done. I hope I am not too demanding, but , given that you have spent so much time with the Sample/Audio Modeling software and the EWI controller.......could you summarize what would be the optimal parameter adjustments to both the software and the EWI to play them live, according to your experience ? Thank you very much in advance
Thanks for the comment. This video is made with SWAM Solo Brass V 1.0 and mostly default instrument parameter settings. I am still experimenting with SWAM presets. When finding an optimum I will provide a download spreadsheet on my website. In the meantime here are some of my current settings for SWAM Brass V 1.5.0 (FHn/Tbn/Tpt). Expressivity>Att Tongue 0.0, Reactivity 0.42/0.5/0.5. Timbre>Bell Res 0.49/0.0/0.77, Breath Noise 0.0, Dirtiness 0.0, Dyn Sens 0.75/0.94/0.9. Advanced>Dyn Pitch 0.5, Auto Expr 0.067/0.1/0.1, Dyn Res 1.26/1.1/1.1, Random Lips 0.6/0.5/0.6, Portam MaxTime OFF, Att Ctrl Vel Soft.
I aim for a classical music sound, so try to prevent 'dirty, jazzy' sounds, dynamics-to-pitch effects and portamento between legato notes. On the EWI I use air flow rate (pressure) for CC11 (Expr), single (du vs. tu) and multiple tonguing (t-k-t-k, etc) for attack control (the best response ever!), and diaphragm breathing control for vibrato (I do not use bite CC1 vibrato for realtime playing, OK for SWAM winds and strings, not for brass. In fact I turned off the bite sensor, and use the portamento glide plate for CC1 control with my left thumb). Because of the limited air flow rate (too small diameter bore, poor AKAI design), I let air slip at the edges while playing (as others do). When editing Midi I may modify the vibrato (combination of CC1 and CC19), add minor pitch bend data ('imperfect' intonation simulation), and may add some breathing noise and random tonguing effects. Plus some EQ. Just downloaded the Aug 14, 2020 update to SWAM V 1.5.1 and will continue experimenting. The SWAM standalone instrument apps have unsurpassed realtime control, and the company keeps improving timbral aspects. I believe in a great future for the modeling approach.
Does this answer your questions? Some UA-camrs provide detailed EWI/SWAM settings; if you cannot find these links yourself let me know and I'll look them up in my bookmarks.
@@FransAbsil Fantastic !! Thank you very much , I will try them out see how it goes. Great information
the AM/SM seems to lead to some artificial sounding phasing. The Spitfire ambience sounds more natural too. Both could in principle be solved with better modelling of the instruments and their spatial position, but this is easier said than done!
Very nice!
Glad to hear you found this video useful. Thanks.
Thank you for taking the time for this comparison. A problem IMO with SWAM is that no matter how much time you spend with various placement & spatialisation plugins / reverbs, and moving around controllers: they still sound close-miced. While I applaud the enormous effort put in these modeled instruments, the lack of "body" remains an issue. This video shows again the advantage of capturing the space / hall *at the same* time as part of a sample or performance. This applies especially to brass, for strings SWAM somehow works much better, at least in my humble opinion.
Thanks for the interesting comment and observations about the intricacies of modeled instruments. I am not an expert on positioning these in an acoustic ambiance, having worked with a limited set of plugin tools. However I find the realtime control of the sound source with wind (or breath) controller currently unsurpassed, and that makes playing them fun. I expect sample libraries with clever scripting on the one side, and better modeling on the other to come closer to the real thing (initial attack, instrument body resonance, realtime timbre control etc.). I accept today's shortcomings and hope to see improvements as updates arrive.
Try EAReverb 2. It will solve your problem
ua-cam.com/video/I5RTiUsN-OY/v-deo.html
Look around 1min. There you can see what I mean
Thanks for suggesting this product, that I did not know about. In the meantime I read about EAReverb and watched demo videos. The Pos Mode might help improve the spatial distribution of virtual instruments. However, you have to explain to me how it might remove timbre differences and deficiencies that I noticed in some brass instruments.
Sample Modelling has the most potential in my opinion. But requires lots of work placing it in a room and programming. For quicker results, Spitfire Symphonic Brass is better.
How do you know that Samplemodeling's approach to audio is mixed? I thought it was just pure acoustic modeling.
@brickblock369 Thanks for asking. Quoting from the Manuals (search string: sampl):
French Horn and Tuba v.3 (brass). P. 3 [Kontakt 5 Sampler] 'and no access to the samples', P. 7 [Introduction] 'it uses samples of real instruments as base material', [Real-time Timbral Shaping] 'This revolutionary new feature adds a virtually infinite timbral variety to sample-based instruments'. Solo, Chamber & Ensemble Strings v.2.0.2. P. 3 [What's new?] 'the original sustain samples are played'. P. 4 'Yes, using samples. But also using our renowned technologies to “model” them by the user', 'Why samples? Our virtual strings use recorded samples of real strings as base material'. P. 5 [Kontakt Sampler] 'no access to the samples'. P. 9, [Real-time Timbral Shaping] 'This new feature adds a virtually infinite timbral variety to sample-based instruments'. Based on this information I label these instruments as 'hybrid approach' (like the Aaron Venture collections). Clever Kontakt scripting allows realtime user control of the sound characteristics. That is why they have such good reputation as 'realistic/natural sounding', and that is where the challenge lies for fully physical-modelling based instruments (such as SWAM). In the latter approach the attack phase (and other transient phenomena) are hard to 'simulate'. Does this answer the question?
@@FransAbsil Yup, it does! Thank you.
The sample modelling wrecks spitfire, no comparison
@Stories read aloud, thanks for sharing your observations. However I must add the nuance that the comparison outcome is biased by the fact, that my tests are about realtime control with the Akai EWI. In that case model-based instruments are more suitable than sample libraries with articulation keyswitches. The latter are in a more favourable position with keyboard input, plus keyswitch selector and realtime breath controller.
Is that the correct way to pronounce Bach? Like you're choking on a bagel? I didn't know this. Oh and really nice comparison btw :D
@Ido Music. No worries about me choking; I don't take any food while recording these voiceovers. However, when Grandmaster JSB is involved my minimum level of respect is to try and use German pronunciation. [Denn sonst geht alles den Bach runter.] But who knows, maybe one day there will be a de-bacher plugin. Until then, hopefully you still can enjoy these videos. Thanks for the feedbach.
@@FransAbsil Haha, (hopefully it was clear I was just making a stupid joke and didn't insult you) as a native english speaker I have always pronounced it wrong and I love to hear the true German pronunciation! And yes I will certainly be bach to enjoy more of your videos thank you :)
:-D
why did you not play any of this with legato phrasing? this would have improved the experience enormously.
@Dory Video, Thanks for this legato playing style comment. Unless there is an EWI setting that I am unaware of, the control of phrasing and articulation (staccato-legato) is achieved with tonguing, affecting the CC11 (Expression) curve while changing the fingering between notes. For legato phrases I minimise the use of the tongue, yielding a smooth CC11 curve. The EWI monitors the time interval between notes and automatically generates CC68 when playing legato. However, neither the modeled nor the sample instruments respond to this CC. So when I am not happy with the result I edit the Midi recording, creating overlap between legato notes, and add articulation keyswitches in case of a sample library. More detailed suggestions about improving the EWI performance during the recording phase are welcome. Hopefully this answers your question.
SM Tuba is the winner
Thanks for the feedback. Right now I am preparing a new set of modeled solo brass instrument comparison videos, based on the Sample Modeling V3 and the updated Audio Modeling V1.5.1, and each instrument playing classical music pieces.
AM sounds foolish to my ear.I like SM more.
Thanks for sharing your opinion about the sound in these examples. Let's hope that the fully modeled approach will improve with each version, in particular regarding the attack phase and the legato playing of brass instruments.
@@FransAbsil Thanks your reply!I found AM sounds phasing.I think phasing is a main problem that sample library have.But AM have this problem too..
@tcb Your remark about the phasing sound aspect made me think. Indeed, what I label as 'synthetic' has a phasing quality. Somehow this implies that the modeling approach not only incorporates resonance and standing waves in certain instrument model components, but also echoes, since these might yield phasing. However, only the developers know what's going on. Thanks for the comment.
Tonally the SWAM instruments sound very strange to my ears, I really didn't like them at all. Sample Modeling won all of the stringed instruments although their brass instruments were much weaker, Spitfire did best with most of the Brass
Thanks for the feedback. As far as I understood Audio Modeling is working on an update of their SWAM Solo Brass instruments. What examples are you referring to when comparing the quality of the strings?
The problem is that in every video review I watched they sound different. I guess one needs to learn how to make the most out of them. I had the same impression here, while elsewhere I was astonished by how good they sounded.
@@marcoscorsolini8803 Marco you are right, it's very difficult to get a true idea of what these instruments are capable of, the best productions I have heard are the ones where the expressions are edited in detail after recording the notes rather than live performances using pedals and breath controllers etc. Check out this yt channel 'Leandro Gardini - Music Channel', he has produced some staggeringly good pieces using Sample Modeling Solo & Ensemble Strings
@Marco Scorsolino. Thanks for the feedback. Indeed, the sounds will differ significantly depending on the parameter settings. Most videos I watched are focusing on jazz/pop, mutes, and keyboard + modwheel/pitchbend playing, or the 'comical' effects. What I am looking for is an authentic classical player sound and style. I've installed the recent V1.5 update, now tuning the preset parameters for the EWI, then I will do another comparison. In general, I'm an absolute fan of the SWAM modeling approach, it's only the Solo Brass bundle where I'm still looking for the best possible sound. I may have missed some good online demonstrations, so I'm open to suggestions and links.
Frans Absil thank you:) Yes, me too I am looking for a classical orchestral sound. I have bought the cello and I am so impressed by it.