Sforzando VS Kontakt merits for Sampled Libraries

MacMacMac

Yes, sforzando is lacking in features. For years I preferred Kontakt-based pianos, largely for the features that Kontakt offers.

Mainly … I can script in Kontakt. This lets me load a bunch of keyboard instruments (six pianos and three harpsichords) … and I can then change from one instrument to another by either clicking a button in the Kontakt UI, or by pressing a key on the piano whilst holding the sostenuto pedal.

The scripting also lets me change the sensitivity of each key individually … which helps when I have a loud key whose rubber pad needs to be cleaned … until I get off my butt and clean it. (That maintenance has been much delayed this year, first because of laziness and then because of a long recovery from knee surgery).

And there's more … but too much to discuss here.

Summary: Kontakt is very convenient.

But I find that my playing has improved IMMENSELY with sforzando-based instruments. Something about the responsiveness in Kontakt is lacking, and it hinders my performance. That hideous, unknown hindrance is just not present in sforzando.

I didn't realize this until I recently tried these sfz pianos from Sofia_MZ. Now I know: it's not me … it's Kontakt.

What is the cause? I do not know. But the dearth of good sfz-based pianos made the issue moot all these years … until now. Because now there are a fine batch of pianos from Sofia_MZ … pianos that just knock the ball out of the park.

So, three things:

Does anyone have a similar experience? Does anyone know whuzzup with Kontakt that hinders?
Will Sofia_MZ step up and tell us how an (amateur?) piano/audio person can produce such fine instruments?
And … will Sofia_MZ offer a mini-biography. I'd like to know about history, background, skills, interests … how you came to be such a fine producer of these products.

QuasiUnaFantasia

MacMacMac I haven't experienced any such difference between Kontakt and Sforzando, but I prefer the latter because it is easy to deal with. What it lacks, compared to Kontakt, is a velocity curve editor and impulse response-based reverb.

jdg78

MacMacMac So, three things:

Does anyone have a similar experience? Does anyone know whuzzup with Kontakt that hinders?

I can't say exactly if it's an issue with Kontakt itself, but when I survey all of the piano VSTs that I own, there isn't a single Kontakt-based instrument that would be in my top tier for playability.

All of the very best ones (VSL, Modern U, Garritan) run on their own platforms. To these I would now include Sofia_MZ's new pianos.

I have several pianos in Kontakt that I like quite a bit and play on occasion (Galaxy Vintage D, Noire, Hammers and Waves, Grandeur) but none of them reaches the level of the others in my opinion. It's possibly that this has something to do with limitations in Kontakt itself, but I don't have enough technical knowledge to identify if or what that limitation might be.

HZPiano

MacMacMac

Will Sofia_MZ step up and tell us how an (amateur?) piano/audio person can produce such fine instruments?

And … will Sofia_MZ offer a mini-biography. I'd like to know about history, background, skills, interests … how you came to be such a fine producer of these products

Hear Hear!

Just like the way @dore_m takes us along so nicely and generously in his endeavors.

MacMacMac

QuasiUnaFantasia I prefer [sforzando] because it is easy to deal with. What it lacks, compared to Kontakt, is a velocity curve editor and impulse response-based reverb.

Strictly speaking … yes, Kontakt has a velocity curve editor. But it's the worst one I've ever used! So I use an outboard program called "Velocity Curve" by Trombettworks. Others here seem to like Velpro. Perhaps I give that a try.

Yes, Kontakt has that reverb capability. But I don't know how to use it. Do you?

QuasiUnaFantasia

MacMacMac Yes, Kontakt has that reverb capability. But I don't know how to use it. Do you?

I've only used it with Dore's piano's, the commercial ones have a selection available that I just stick with. To get there I activate the technical details section (the wrench-button) and find the place where reverb is already attached. From there I change the reverb to fit my particular needs (there are quite a few "real rooms" to choose between).

dore_m

MacMacMac Strictly speaking … yes, Kontakt has a velocity curve editor. But it's the worst one I've ever used! So I use an outboard program called "Velocity Curve" by Trombettworks. Others here seem to like Velpro. Perhaps I give that a try.

Yes, Kontakt has that reverb capability. But I don't know how to use it. Do you?

I'm not surprised that people have mixed feelings about Kontakt. I do too, even though it's the platform that I primarily use now. SFZ is just too difficult to program and tweak, other than the core sample playback functionality. When I sample pianos, I lack the luxury of time with the piano, and because of this it requires a ton more programming and editing time given my conditions. The programming and editing is helped out quite a bit by the software I use.

Kontakt's velocity curve editor is serviceable, but not user friendly. SFZ's is - nonexistent. A better one can be programmed, but then it is difficult to swap custom the curve editor into a diff instrument. So the perception is that Kontakt's curve editing is bad. yes, the stock one is bad.
Kontakt's convolution reverbs are seriously awesome, but you have to want to tweak the instrument using the wrench menu, which is a small learning curve in itself. It's much easier and effective to download a third party reverb and tweak using a nice GUI. The nice think about Kontakt's convo reverb is that you can make your own impulses, and literally put the piano into your living room, literally.

Anyway, the perception that SFZ is simple and more immediate is probably correct. The pedaling is better - Kontakt pedaling was a pain to program and even then is kind of a work around using the given architecture. I've made libraries on both that have maxed out CPU, so I can see the limitations in terms of number of mixing channels and voices. Kontakt actually handles things more efficiently. I suppose a good analogy is a drag race car vs a F1 car. The drag race car can accelerate in a straight line very efficiently but can't take turns as well as an F1 car. If going fast is the most important thing to you, SFZ is best. If doing turns and going fast are equally important, the Kontakt is better.

You know, maybe we should cut this into a new thread.... @CyberGene

jdg78

MacMacMac Strictly speaking … yes, Kontakt has a velocity curve editor. But it's the worst one I've ever used! So I use an outboard program called "Velocity Curve" by Trombettworks. Others here seem to like Velpro. Perhaps I give that a try.

Yes, the velocity curve editor in Kontakt is horrible. I recently started using Velpro instead of the on-board version, and I've found that it's much easier to dial in the response I'm looking for.

Overall, my experience with Kontakt is that it has a lot of functionality but the interface is laughably antiquated, and just plain lousy from a user experience perspective.

It could really use a complete design overhaul, but for whatever reason they just opt for minor tweaks with each new release.

dore_m

jdg78 Overall, my experience with Kontakt is that it has a lot of functionality but the interface is laughably antiquated, and just plain lousy from a user experience perspective.

What do you mean by that? For a user of sample libraries, or for a samplist who tweaks the samples? Use cases for each are extremely different. For the user of sample libraries, I would say the interface problem is both the problem of the underlying architecture but mainly the problem of the GUI designer (developer). For the samplist, if you could find a better interface (I'm sure it's possible), point me in that direction cuz I'd love to try something better.

jdg78

dore_m What do you mean by that? For a user of sample libraries, or for a samplist who tweaks the samples? Use cases for each are extremely different. For the user of sample libraries, I would say the interface problem is both the problem of the underlying architecture but mainly the problem of the GUI designer (developer). For the samplist, if you could find a better interface (I'm sure it's possible), point me in that direction cuz I'd love to try something better.

To clarify, I'm talking purely as a user of the sample libraries, not a programmer or samplist. And yes, it's primarily a GUI issue, which is the main point I was trying to make. In my experience, Kontakt actually has a high level of functionality for the general user, but is saddled with such a poorly designed interface that they will either have no idea what it is capable of, or will quickly come to the conclusion that it's not worth the trouble to figure out how to use or access a particular feature.

Case in point is the velocity curve editor which prompted my original comment. I had been using Kontakt for close to 6 months before I even discovered that there was a more advanced velocity curve editor. This is because in order to access it, you need to press small, obscurely positioned button labeled KSP (meaning what?) and then go through a series of 3 submenus before you can open it. Madness. And once you manage to locate it, it has a bizarre multi-lined GUI that is extremely difficult to work with if you want anything other than a standard curve.

Contrast this with an excellently designed user interface like the VSL Synchron engine where everything is clearly and sensibly laid out so that even a beginner can use the most advanced features with minimal training.

I'm a UX designer by profession, so I guess I'm particularly sensitive to these types of things, but Kontakt is practically a model of poor UI design as far as I'm concerned, and I'm frankly amazed they haven't invested in some decent designers to overhaul it for the benefit of their customers.

David B

Concering Kontakt, I really like the Noire, but I find it unusable with Kontakt. I'm not sure the reason why, but the pedaling just doesn't work right, and I can't shape the sound to even out the unrealistically loud upper range. There a few other problems I can't sort out. Maybe people that know how to write script for Kontakt can do it, but it's beyond my scope.

Sforzando looks even more bare-bones. However, this is coming from someone that wants the finished product wrapped with a nice bow on it like VSL products.

God Bless,
David

dore_m

jdg78 I'm a UX designer by profession, so I guess I'm particularly sensitive to these types of things, but Kontakt is practically a model of poor UI design as far as I'm concerned, and I'm frankly amazed they haven't invested in some decent designers to overhaul it for the benefit of their customers.

Wow. I'll have to ask you for advice. I'm merely competent at many things but not expert at anything - I'm certainly not going to hire a GUI designer - its a real chore to me too. I'd rather just record and edit files for playability.

MacMacMac

Not only is the UI lame … the scripting language is so 1950s that it’s laughable.

jdg78

dore_m I'm certainly not going to hire a GUI designer - its a real chore to me too. I'd rather just record and edit files for playability.

Well, I couldn't script or program my way out of a paper bag, so I guess this is why they are split into 2 separate professions.

I should add that I assume one of the reasons NI doesn't prioritize updating the Kontakt interface is because they rely on instrument developers to design modern GUIs for their individual products, and some of them are actually quite good.

However most instrument GUIs only have limited functionality, and once you need to customize the settings outside of the instrument interface, it's like going back to Windows 95.

VST-Player

I have a Casio GP310, and for my Vintage D in Kontakt I had to draw a considerably bent velocity curve with the mouse, beginning at 21 and ending at 112 (none of the presets would fit), for CFX Lite I only had to shift the two middle anchor points a tiny bit down. Sofia's Blüthner in Sforzando works perfectly without any velocity plugin.

Joannchr

VST-Player just as a matter of curiosity , did you adjust the curve for vintage D , because your GP 310 cannot trigger velocity below 21 and above 112 or was it because you felt that this particular curve was more appropriate for the vintage D itself ? I would imagine the later , given the effort made by Casio/ Beichstein to replicate the distribution of weights and lengths in a traditional non hybrid , non folded action ?

dore_m

Default velocity curves between controllers are highly variable. I tried to crowd source this, but it was very difficult. I had to settle on copying the velocity curves of other commercial libraries because I could not find my own common denominator.

VST-Player

Joannchr The latter.