@ Jiri:
Afore said: The promised evaluation set (Silbermann/Petrikirche Freiberg) is a very good consumer-friendly idea.
I still think three native releases would be better - seeing "The reverberation time is up to 4 seconds". The "automatic release scaling ..." isn’t the silver bullet. But now your new Freiberg demos are slightly better – except the wind model. Karel wrote "up to two release samples", you wrote "multiple releases (2 sets ...)".
What is true?
___________
In particular the dry demos are nice.
Some questions to these:
1. “Dry: … (recorded in front of the Prospekt, not inside the case).”
Why not inside the case? Okay, the case response would be also an acoustic feedback problem. But it seems to be the lower problem. Recording in front of the case enlarges the possibility of staccato artefacts.
2. http://www.sonusparadisi.cz/organs/freiberg/demo/jacquet/BWV_650_-_Schuebler_-_Kommst_du_nun_-_Freiberg_dry.mp3
What about the trills? I’m irritated.
3. “This sample set may be used well in self-reverberant spaces (such as halls) …”
Some of my Orgeljournal readers are worry to digital organ producers could steal these unprotected dry samples and affect the work of traditional organ builders. I suppose it is perhaps an important consideration.
For clarification: I like dry sets. Click here! (Don’t forget: I’m your purchaser.)
No offence and best regards,
Matthias
________________________________________
Hauptwerk-News for German readers
www.Orgeljournal.de
________________________________________
Afore said: The promised evaluation set (Silbermann/Petrikirche Freiberg) is a very good consumer-friendly idea.
I still think three native releases would be better - seeing "The reverberation time is up to 4 seconds". The "automatic release scaling ..." isn’t the silver bullet. But now your new Freiberg demos are slightly better – except the wind model. Karel wrote "up to two release samples", you wrote "multiple releases (2 sets ...)".
What is true?
___________
In particular the dry demos are nice.
Some questions to these:
1. “Dry: … (recorded in front of the Prospekt, not inside the case).”
Why not inside the case? Okay, the case response would be also an acoustic feedback problem. But it seems to be the lower problem. Recording in front of the case enlarges the possibility of staccato artefacts.
2. http://www.sonusparadisi.cz/organs/freiberg/demo/jacquet/BWV_650_-_Schuebler_-_Kommst_du_nun_-_Freiberg_dry.mp3
What about the trills? I’m irritated.
3. “This sample set may be used well in self-reverberant spaces (such as halls) …”
Some of my Orgeljournal readers are worry to digital organ producers could steal these unprotected dry samples and affect the work of traditional organ builders. I suppose it is perhaps an important consideration.
For clarification: I like dry sets. Click here! (Don’t forget: I’m your purchaser.)
No offence and best regards,
Matthias
________________________________________
Hauptwerk-News for German readers
www.Orgeljournal.de
________________________________________