PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Kontakt sounds much different than the STS. The STS is good for bass sounds or drums but not airy wind or vocals. I didn't know it colors the sound so much. Is this because it is a copy of the AKAI? I never owned an AKAI.

could it be because of this?

http://www.simonv.com/tutorials/quality.php

pulsar
"not much better than buzz, but a nice rolloff for the high frequencies.

Native Instruments Kontakt 1.3
"its average"

Buzz
"Aliasing errors when pitched up
and unwanted re sampling artifacts when pitched down

that's was the most accurate BS I've ever read...
certainly precise, but under what circumstances ?
that a program performs well under these conditions doesn't say anything about it's 'regular' performance - it's a complete false assumption to guess from that 'oh so demanding' task to what's up on everyday use.
But in the end - what does NOT color sound ?

cheers, Tom

braincell wrote:Kontakt sounds much different than the STS. The STS is good for bass sounds or drums but not airy wind or vocals. ...

imho practically all X86 routines have an extremely 'airy' touch, must have something to do with the basic compiler libs, as it's not company dependant.
NI's 'Reaktor sound' is quite noticable, also in guitar rig and FM7 and the B4.

I have an Arts Acoustic native reverb that sounds completely different from any Scope reverb - you guessed it - it's as airy as ..., well - maybe snow on a cold and sunny day in the mountains - you know that simultaneously crisp and damped sound
very fine drawing of acoustic scapes
you wouldn't want to send a bass or a guitar cabinet through that...
(it's a very good reverb, btw - and beats anything on GUI efficiency...)

imho native processing is usually kind of overrepresenting high mids - and some (rather deep) bass emphasis, but something in between just lacks.

cheers, Tom

Im not saying its better or worse just quoting that web site.

I thought STS sounded better myself. I havent found any VST sampler that i like as much.

it might just explain why they sound different.

this aliasing test doesn't tell anything at all about the 'sound' one experiences by any of those samplers 'tested' - simply because nnone will use a single sample transposed over 2 octaves (in musical context) and the source itself is extreme (a Tambourine - nothing but hifreq attack)

under regular conditions those artifacts may also appear, mathematically - but at a level that's (almost certainly) below the perceiption of typical 'sound' differences due to different programming styles of the developers.

if one doesn't read carefully what they've done and how, this leaves an entirely wrong impression about the samplers, imho - the only feature of the sampler tested was the note transpose...

cheers, Tom

Well, personally I think the STS series is awful.
A waste of DSP, bad interface and lousy stability.

I take Kontakt 2 any day - its features are remarkable, the interface is smooth, and I'm very pleased with its sound.

i agree about interface,
but nobody is mentioning the sts 5000 realtime timestretching that can not be compared to the ridicule one of the kontakt software.

I don't make much use of scope samplers, but i don't see any samplers able to timestretch like the sts 5000.

In my opinion the mentioned test is very old and at the moment i see the short shircuit and the emulator x very qualitative samplers.

For my music i'm using the emulator x and some self made vst for drums or the sts 5000 if i need realtime timestretch effects.