Salisbury Willis Volume 1 Released

[B. Milan]

I suppose MDA doesn't have a Salisbury Cathedral IR?

We are not in the IR recording business thus we will not be offering an IR of this venue.

We have Altiverb and as far as I am aware Audio Ease hasn't sampled the acoustics in Salisbury. Perhaps the Speakerphone article was stating something to the effect that you could replicate the building by setting your own parameters and simulate the building? Best to contact Audio Ease should you need a definite answer though.

I suppose MDA doesn't have a Salisbury Cathedral IR?

We are not in the IR recording business thus we will not be offering an IR of this venue.

Thanks, Brett - I wasn't saying I thought you ought to have got involved in extracting an IR - I assumed you probably wouldn't have. From what I understand, it's quite a big undertaking to get a decent IR - mainly because the simpler ways like the starting-pistol method or that rather quaint approach of recording the popping of a balloon don't come near the quality achievable by using swept sine waves - and that method involves an enormous step up in equipment/technology.

Still, I thought it was worth asking. - Well, you just might have been a secret Impulse-Response nut, with a hard disc full of IRs from everywhere you'd ever been. (As in "Oh dear, I just fell down a hole and broke my leg - but, fortunately, I've got a balloon and a dictaphone with me." )

Hi Brett
Re the piston "Couplers" quoting form the User Guide

Code: Select all

Couplers Piston
The Coupler piston serves as a General for all of the couplers including the Great Reeds on Solo and Great Reeds on Choir couplers. You may use it as an all couplers on or off, or simply have a single preset of your choice to trigger any coupler preset you prefer. To assign couplers simply use the normal Set piston then select the couplers you want and activate the Couplers piston to store that preset into memory.

Reading the User Guide it appears that this piston triggers whatever combination of Couplers you want On OR Off.. might it not be more useful if reversible ?

Best

Peter

[B. Milan]

Hello Peter,

Reading the User Guide it appears that this piston triggers whatever combination of Couplers you want On OR Off.. might it not be more useful if reversible ?

The idea with the Couplers piston is to simply use it as a General for the couplers. This is how it should work on the real organ as well and is how Daniel Cook preferred it to function, thus it isn't meant to act as a reversible, rather a simple General type piston for the couplers.

[B. Milan]

Hello all,

Just a reminder that the introductory price for the Willis will last for a few more days through the 16th of March.

http://store.hauptwerk.com/Salisbury-Ca ... _p_88.html

Thanks to everyone that has placed an order so far!

Also don't forget that there is an evaluation demo on the Hauptwerk instrument downloads page to try it before buying:

http://www.hauptwerk.com/downloads/inst ... downloads/

See this post for further information on the evaluation version:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6361

I have to say I think this is an outstanding sampleset, and so much fun to play. As someone who never really quite 'clicked' with the Metz for some reason, I absolutely love playing this one - it makes you smile and then shout out loud! Admittedly, for me, it's mostly for the bigger sounds at the moment (which are huge once you apply the various couplers) - although there are already a few nice softer stops, once we get access to the Choir there will be an enormous range of tonal possibilities. The Swell is just pure joy, and what I have always been hoping to find on a Hauptwerk organ. And the wealth of coupling options available is spectacular - 'Unison Off' for example opens up all sorts of interesting possibilities.

Sorry, I'm gushing. ...but if you can't decide whether to take up this offer or not, my personal advice would be 'just go for it, you'll love it'.

As we all know, quality organware is far more important than food or new shoes for the kids.

deW

I have to agree with deWaverley. I also love the Metz, however, having played the Willis for a few days now it is by far the BEST virtual organ I have played. (I am kind of happy about that as my console was built specifically for this sample set)

You have absolutely nailed this one Brett. Congratulations on a brilliant sample set. As others have said it is a capable and well conceived specification for the first volume and has a quality unsurpassed in my opinion. I now wait patiently for the next 2 volumes

Cheers,

Actually, the lack of IR raises one quick question - will you be providing (or getting somebody else to) an IR for Salisbury when the dry set is released? Would seem to be the perfect showcase for a dry set to be able to then add the IR that matches the organ? (I'm thinking of course for when HW natively supports convolution reverb).

... will you be providing (or getting somebody else to) an IR for Salisbury when the dry set is released? Would seem to be the perfect showcase for a dry set to be able to then add the IR that matches the organ? (I'm thinking of course for when HW natively supports convolution reverb).

Wouldn't that just be, roughly, the "wet" set??

... will you be providing (or getting somebody else to) an IR for Salisbury when the dry set is released? Would seem to be the perfect showcase for a dry set to be able to then add the IR that matches the organ? (I'm thinking of course for when HW natively supports convolution reverb).

Wouldn't that just be, roughly, the "wet" set??

Nope as theoretically (although not necessarily), it could consume much less memory, and of course the theory being that dry samples + convolution reverb should sound more authentic than wet samples, although given the latest improvements in multiple releases etc. I guess the realism gap has narrowed considerably.

[mdyde]

and of course the theory being that dry samples + convolution reverb should sound more authentic than wet samples

In terms specifically of acoustic/room/spatial impression (=>perceived clarity), dry+convolution could only really approach wet in terms of realism if you had one separate impulse response and convolver instance for each pipe.

I.e. you would need to record a separate impulse response with its sound source (speaker playing swept sine, etc.) at the position of each pipe mouth, probably with the pipework removed physically (not usually logistically feasible), and then to have one convolver instance running in your computer for each simultaneous pipe (not feasible on today's computer hardware for non-trivial-sized organs) to give the same degree of realism in terms of spatial impression that a wet sample set can give. So for 4000-pipe organ you would need 4000 different impulse responses and potentially 4000 convolvers running simultaneously.

Nope as theoretically (although not necessarily), it could consume much less memory

The impulse responses together with the dry samples would also probably then consume at least as much memory as a wet sample set of the same organ.

(Of course wet and dry sample sets have plenty of other advantages and disadvantages apart from realism of spatial impression.)

Thanks Martin - I was under the (incorrect) impression that even without a separate impulse/pipe that dry+convolution would sound better than wet. Aaargh, I'm slowly losing the fight not to buy Salisbury Vol1 wet...

[mdyde]

To emphasize, dry sample sets have plenty of other advantages, uses and supporters, but I think most people would agree that at the current point in time, the most realistic way at home to feel that you were playing Salisbury Cathedral's organ in Salisbury Cathedral would be to use a wet sample set of it, rather than a dry one with convolution.

Some more discussions on the various advantages and disadvantages of wet vs. dry:

http://forum.hauptwerk.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2293
http://forum.hauptwerk.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=6251
http://forum.hauptwerk.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=464

In terms specifically of acoustic/room/spatial impression (=>perceived clarity), dry+convolution could only really approach wet in terms of realism if you had one separate impulse response and convolver instance for each pipe.

Perhaps I'm just splitting hairs here, but would there really need to be as many as literally one per pipe - eg not one per two pipes or one per four pipes, ... ? Still an awful lot of convolution reverbs to run at once, of course. But I was just wondering how coarsely spaced it would be possible to make the "grid" of IRs before it was possible to hear the difference from a one-per-pipe grid. I suppose we won't know til someone actually tries it?

(I wonder what would be a good way to allocate a cluster of IRs to an enclosed division.)

Well, you all talked me round just in time for the discount