Hi Dan.



Your right, sorry. The 32bit limit is 4GB. Don't know why but I had 3GB in my head for some reason.

The set I would like to use with vArranger would be in around 16 GB.



Sure, just head on over to KORG's website. There's two video's there that showcase my work.

https://www.korg.com/Services/kronos_registration/Productoptions.aspx?pd=598#tabsIRISHACTS

Regards
James

3GB limit is on 32Bit OS
With some options in the 32bit program, it is possible to use up to 4GB on 64 bit OS.

You did nice job with Korg

I am now going to studio to record a true drummer for creating drum kits for vArranger

Thats true, but there are still some 32 bits VST that perform unstable under a 64 bit windows version. Most however work good these days. And if not you can allways use tools like Jbridge.

But many 32 bits VSTs come with both a 32 bitand a 64 bit dll, and many 64 bit apps likeCubase 64 bit version also handle 32 bit dlls.

The RAM limitation I was talking about was in relation to vArranges ability to load SF2 files. So in this case I would assume Jbridge wouldn't work since it's for VST's, not standalone software.

Regards
James

Thats very true, unless he would use a vst that reads sf2 files, which is not the case.

Anyway, Jbridge has no relation to local SF2 data. My mistake, i was clearly talking about a limitation for vsts.

You're doing sampling now too? That is good - I really like what this becomes!

Tough its a sad thing, there is no option to testdrive the software, and sadly there is noboddy i know that uses it, and there are no shops to test it out..

As an owner of live-styler that does not live up to what it promisses, i need a real life test to convince me, it functions just like a hardware arranger, things like stabillity, automisation and fluent operation of styles and espescially chord changes are very important for me..

350 euro is not the kind of many i will ever pay for something i have not seen our heared, and i would greatly appreciate it if Dan could make a testversion that either works for a limmited time (prefered) or has limited functionallity

Yes, now that the virtual synth is working very good, I will start to improve every sounds, one by one.

The first one will be the drums.

Recording in studio (sampling) and Creating drumkits is a big challenge for me, but I hope to be able to release a product better than any other today arrangers

I am sorry about not creating a test version.

CONTENT... content.. content!

The Achilles Heel of 'open arrangers' (or one of the biggest!).

Having seen a few of these things sputter and die (along with 'open' WS's), it seems the main reason they don't make it is they can't match the content of the best hardware arrangers. Can't count how many times I've pointed out the obvious... a T5, PA3X, even my little BK-9 is PACKED with great sounds and kits, already balanced and tweaked to match the vast selection of styles designed specifically for THAT sound set.

Open arrangers have always been something of a 'do-it-yourself' project. You get the hardware, the content is primarily up to YOU. Few realize the skill, time and money needed to do this with a software arranger. There is no decent over the counter solution that comes even a BIT close to a TOTL closed arranger. Yes, you get certain specific areas of sound that easily better the majors, but it's when you look at the ENTIRE sound-set and style-set of a TOTL arranger, and you find that it's a major PITA to get your open keyboard even usable.

So far, it seems few of the open makers have had even the resources to get the hardware perfect, let alone the content. And, of course, if EITHER of them is sub-par, people are going to flock to the working solution.

I honestly think we are going to have to wait for the majors to do this (Oasys and Kronos are baby step starts) before a successful 'open' arranger offers a comprehensively better product than closed ones. In the meantime, of course, the closed ones get better and better, to the point where it's tough to justify the complexity of an open system.

Not to mention, rampant piracy still rears its ugly head over the issue. Hard to get anyone to pony up the millions it would cost to do it RIGHT, if, being 'open' also means that it is copyable. The hardware costs a fortune to develop... THEN the software costs a fortune, or is easily copyable, then the sounds themselves will have cracking issues. The only way anyone is going to do all this work is if they expect a reasonable return on their investment of money and especially time.

You've also still got the issue of computer hardware and software moving forwards (in the PC and laptop world) at a pace that the tiny independents can't really afford to keep up with. Newer OS's address far more data than they used to be able, so anything designed on a 32 bit system now has to deal with more and more of the best, newest VSTi's requiring a 64 bit system and OS to run on. A closed system simply works... but the promise of future=proofing and expansion doesn't really play out for very long when everything is tied to hardware and software that evolves faster than the manufacturer can afford to keep up with.

Wersi sort of side-step this issue by firstly being hugely expensive to start with, then requiring quite a lot of money for any significant upgrades that deal with new technology and codes. But they are so boutique, they barely factor into the issue. Dom, I guess, finally started to see some of the things coming to fruition long after I warned him this was coming. He tried to make an open arranger in the price ballpark of the majors, and found out the hard way that it wasn't as easy as he wanted it to be!

The majors don't really have to invent the wheel... they start out with a soundset already developed (for their WS's and the like) then they tweak and add to it. No arranger ever comes out with 100% original, new samples, and it's successor probably only has 10% new content at the most (probably far less). But the open guys had to try to get something done from complete ground zero, or use existing software solutions that fared very poorly in comparison.

I always thought he needed to talk to East-West or one of the major sample players, and cut a deal for a proprietary soundset, and then get all the styles developed for that, but maybe that was more than he could afford. It certainly would have taken a LOT of very unpaid effort. TBH, I've tried quite a few all-in-one VSTis, and NONE of them is balanced and consistent to the degree that an arranger's soundset is. And, I think that's what it is going to take before the 'open' world really takes off.

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa wonder where he'd been, getting up a head of steam in between writing a symphony.