No comparison chart, we're not trying to be Ableton :)

Hopefully Serato Sample can help provide a different workflow or allow another way to attack an idea!

It has a better time stretch/warp algorithm than ableton.
Its good to not get so much degradation/artifacts. Its very clean sounding.

Scott,

I know Serato Sample isn't trying to be Ableton, I am still trying to figure out why someone would pay $100 for something most DAW's already can handle for free.

Beat Wilson, I did not notice any difference in quality using Serato Sample and Just using Ableton.

So far all the features I have played around with Ableton can already do and this is true with Logic as well.

The plugin is neat but for $100 why not just use your DAW?

I get the comment from Scott about attacking an idea differently, but if someone is proficient with their software they should be able to get the same results.

I was hoping I was missing something that my DAW couldn't do. The old school Akia MPC 3000 could do what Serato Sample does.

Same here (although I have not used it... but can't see any features in description or the demos that sound/look interesting to even try)...
The only case I can think of (and this is a slightly dark/cynical one I must admit) that this 'product' makes sense in is widening Seratos' product spectrum to look more interesting on paper for a potential sale/investors.
Oh well, hopefully it will generate some income to work on & finalize (SDJ 2 &) the much needed library rewrite...
c.

I disagree, I've been asking for something like this for a decade.

Serato has some technology that lends itself quite well to production software. Meaning it does things well and much better than existing software.

I suppose it depends on your genre of music and workflow. Being able to set slice points on the fly as you hit a pad on a controller greatly speeds things up.

Previously I was doing this with the DDJ-SX2 and then looping it on a pedal or in a DAW. That function and the accuracy of the timestretch / pitch shift were what got me into Serato, not necessarily DJing. So for me, coming from a production standpoint and being able to quickly manipulate audio- Serato Sample is really cool.

You're are right, I could do quite a bit of what Serato Sample does on my MPC 2500 or ASR-10, but it would take a lot longer and there's no future on those devices, they are maxed out and vintage at this point.

To your point of the price - Sample is cheaper than an AKAI s3000, and would be much more mobile. If you don't see the value, than just stick with Ableton and make music. =)

+1!! Totally agree. I've seen you're feature requests..

We have mono mode now!

I respectfully have to disagree with the main poster as I find this plugin amazing in many ways, one of them being the extremely easy and intuitive workflow that it allows. I too have been looking for something like this for ages and although I'm encountering a few early stage bugs I know that this is going to be one of my main go to plugins. and can't wait to see what's added in future updates to make the workflow even better.

I'm a bit baffled as to why you'd voice what you've voiced on here, if it doesn't suit your needs why even bother coming here to make comments? I'm not having a dig I just don't understand why you'd waste your own time doing that.

I'm actually looking at changing me hardware bassed on it.

For the record, I was not dissing the product. I was hoping there was some sort of comparison chart on what this plugin does that Ableton does not. I never bashed the plugin or even said it was dumb. I was trying to justify $100 on something that most DAW already do if you know how to use the DAW well.

I have played around with the plugin and it is fun to use and it handles some stuff faster than Ableton. But as I originally asked, what else does it do? I made this post less than 24 hours after it was released, that is why I asked.

Not a hater, just asking questions. even Native Instruments Mashine can do what this plugin does. Different work around but does the same thing for free.

The real time time stretching in Serato Sample is amazing. You can't do that in Maschine. Not even close.

You can get a lot of the same results just using Ableton Live, though I still think there are some very good reasons to get Sample. I think the sound is better during pitch shifts. Ableton seems to have more artifacts at more extreme shifts. Sample is smoother.

Also, the work flow in Sample is conducive to very quick experiments, particularly with per slice pitch shift and reverse. I can pull out an old sample, see the pitch, slice it up and play it in thirty seconds. It is a longer process in Live. Doing something quickly when the inspiration hits has value in and of itself.

I have been using Sample and Simpler in the same projects. They complement each other nicely.

this replaces 3 softwares for me. i used to use recycle to slice, then export those and use in idrum, then open in my DAW. the third software would come in if i wanted to shift the pitch or tempo of the sample, IF i knew that beforehand. if not, then back to step 1. i'm interested in a comparison with maschine because someone just told me that it was the best but i've never used it.

This allows me to ditch MPC, not worry about upgrading to 2.0 and do almost everything Reason

lotta ppl still use mpc 3000s for a reason. also 100$ is cheaper than $2-4k

Hey Nathan!

Not going to lie, Ableton (and for that matter most other professional DAWs) largely have the same features (and then some), when it comes to the typical things you see in samplers - attack, release, adjusting start and end points of the sound etc.

Where I think Serato Sample is unique, comes to three cornerstones for me personally:

1. Workflow. We built this in mind for DJs who also make beats, and often come up with ideas inside their DJ software messing around with cue points. The cue points, the big colored waveform, the fast waveform overview navigation aren't as common in other samplers. If you are a DJ, then this is stuff you'll be accustomed to working with already, but even if you aren't a DJ, this might offer a fresh perspective to your current workflow that you may not have experienced before.

2. The time stretching + key shifting of Pitch 'n Time. At the end of the day, the quality of an algorithm comes down to taste and there are a lot of good ones out there already. You should find this one handles things pretty smoothly and lets you take the sound to extreme limits for interesting results. Like every algorithm, it has its own character, so you may simply find this another option to have in your arsenal to manipulate sounds, on top of the ones that Ableton already offer.

3. Auto Setting cue points. Serato Sample has a set of options to have cue points automatically set on the audio track in one click. You may prefer to find the sounds you like manually, but in times of low inspiration this feature can help you stumble across happy accidents that allow you quickly move into laying down an idea.

Being the first release, we intend to extend Serato Samples features driven by the communities feature requests in future updates, but we don't want to compromise on simplicity and speed. We are coming from an angle where less is more, and although seasoned beat makers may find that Sample doesn't have all the features they expect, we hope users are going to find creativity within our carefully consideration limitations.

Beyond that, all I can say is just try it, free trial no strings. I'm sure within the first few sessions you'll be able to decide if this is something that makes sense for you.

Hope that helps :)

Martin

@Martin C


I spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to use SSL for my production work flow for this reason. But it falls slightly short. I wanted to mention this for if you ever create a stand alone system.

So, the great thing about triggering with cue points is a live element and feel. That will not necessarily transfer to the sequencer. Seems like it would, but why it doesnt: If you turn off quantize to try and get the performance feel, you still have to follow a click. If you turn off the click the issue will be the exact tempo.

When you are taping samples out, you are creating an imprecise tempo. Its not possible to just adjust the sequencer tempo after the fact.

Difficult to explain. It would be nice to be able to unlock the notes from the grid and adjust the tempo loop. So that the performance nuances are preserved. To my knowledge there is no sequencer/daw that you can do this with because they are designed to play with the click.

If you play a midi instrument into a sequencer without the click its not possible to then change the tempo to match the performance.

If you could simply record a performance into a 'sequencer' then choose loop points and adjust the tempo after the fact it would be awesome. My current work around is just recording the audio instead of the sequence. Maybe there is some other work arounds..... But...

confused at what youre saying?

you can record in most programs turn off grid and still move the midi notes around to your liking. and daw would have exponentially more resolution than almost any mpc or hardware sequencer

This is difficult to explain. You can slide notes around however you want. But what you can't do is change the tempo while the notes slide.

For example. Suppose your tempo is at 120. You turn off quantize and click. Record a performance to your own rhythm tempo. Your performance was a different tempo. Let's say it was 95.5. Now how do you change the app tempo from 120 to 95.5? With instrument notes, drum sounds, piano, whatever that's fine. But with samples (set length recordings) the samples will move apart if you change the tempo.

Now, if you could change the tempo without the notes being 'stuck' to their position that would be what I'm after. I've never heard of a sequencer that could do that.

i see what your saying, but if they are one shots(drums/ short hits) they stay in the same place ala 1.1 is always 1.1

if you mean by sampling loops, in logic you use flex but in ableton it should work just by warping the samples.

Right, one shots it's fine. I don't like using warp if possible. But for Sample what would you do?

I would like to do this with any daw/sequencer but particularly with Sample being based on tapping cues.....

i think whats cool about sample is just the difference in work pattern and flow.

Didnt like it at first, but at some level its almost like a instrument like a synth where you are or can get a drum machine effect really quickly and at this point, its almost a 'serato cue' effect.

Hey AKIEM,

Thats an interesting problem you raise. Have you ever seen this solved in any other DAW? Or has it been something you've forever struggled with?

In our user testing we didn't really see this come up and after I discussed this with a colleague, we agreed people usually follow this workflow:

1. Load an instrument an start playing a melody with their own natural rhythm.
2. Enable the metronome, but don't start recording yet.
3. Adjust the tempo of the project so it matches the natural rhythm you started with (by listening to the metronome).
4. Record the sequence, then tidy any mistakes up and make it fit the tempo more perfectly.

If I understand correctly, your workflow is:

1. Load an instrument an start playing a melody with their own natural rhythm.
2. Disable metronome (and quantise) and start recording.
3. Adjust the tempo of the project to match the natural rhythm, but in the process your natural rhythm is completely changed.

I can see how this would go wrong in the arrangement view. If you recorded into a clip, I think you would find the problem in a different form - the clip wouldn't loop naturally because your rhythm doesn't match the tempo of the clip.

In terms of solutions, this is probably a bit difficult to be solved from within Serato Sample, as its more the DAW workflow... in the above situations the instrument could be anything really.

However, if a DAW were to solve it, these are my two quick ideas for discussions sake:

1. After you record something, you can "lock" the notes in place, but shift the grid underneath it. You can then adjust the grid so it matches the notes you recorded. Does this already exist? I feel like it might.

2. When you record, the DAW can do some BPM of the pattern you just made, then automatically update the project to match your pattern. I suppose this solution could co-exist with the above idea too tbh.

For the short term, you might need to consider re-arranging your workflow slightly! But definitely interested to know where this problem is solved for you, whether it be a DAW or MPC or something.

This is something Ive struggled with for over a decade. I know a couple other producers who deal with this issue too. But I doubt its a huge issue for most who quantize everything.


Right. So you cant perfectly find the exact bpm and you wont be using your natural rhythm if you are playing to the click track. Even if you kinda ignore it, the issue is the bpm.

For most this is fine.


Right, only I dont use this method because it doesnt work, I use the first, basically.



I was sorta just bringing this up just in case you ever go stand alone and add a sequencer
(have a dif idea tho)



To my knowledge there there arnt any sequencers that allow you to lock the notes in time and distance from each other then adjust the bpm. Not any sequencer Ive used - Reason, Ableton, MPC - maybe it exists.

Cheers Akiem.

In all honestly I've not used an MPC extensively (was never my style) but I had a colleague explain a bit more about this workflow and how its common if you've come across from MPC particularly.

From what I understand with an MPC you could pretty much get away with this workflow without running into trouble and make a whole beat without even knowing the BPM or recording to a metronome. It only becomes problematic once you import the audio to a DAW, or perhaps you use note repeat on the MPC.

So I can see why people get into this situation and its an interesting problem. I feel like most other software or ways of making music (at least digitally) force you to tackle this problem up front in the early creation stages so it doesn't become a problem later on. MPC (and real instruments) are sort of unique in that they can allow you to create a composition without ever encountering it.

Not sure what the solution is, but we'll keep talking and thinking about it :)

im so confused by this

''From what I understand with an MPC you could pretty much get away with this workflow without running into trouble and make a whole beat without even knowing the BPM or recording to a metronome. ''

with the sequencer? or yall are saying just without sequencing/recording, just doing pad drumming?

I think there is a slight bit of confusion. Because making a beat without quantizing is a known technique to create a certain "feel". What I am talking about is one step further in that direction.

When you chop samples (manually) they are not precise segments of a given bpm. For example, if you were to chop several quarter notes from a song, each of those samples would actually be slighly different lengths (all sorts of reasons for this)

What was great about the MPC was the setting all samples to the same 1 polyphony. That means that the samples cut each other off when played. (previous samplers didn't do that, the treated different samples as separate instruments) In ableton it's called 'choke group' I think.

That's part of the magic of Serato, taping cues chop each other off.

Now, here's the problem. We are talking about tiny amounts of time. If you tap a beat manually and record it there is a certain distance between samples. Actually, it's the place where one sample cuts the other off. So you can catch a certain "feel". So if you do this with 4 quarter note samples, they are already different lengths and unquantized they will add to a certain measure/bpm.

The problem is you can't tell what that precise bpm is until you tap the beat. You can guess (which is what I do) then tap the beat, but it often never catches that magic feel when manually taping.

When you change the bpm, you change the relationship between the samples because they are locked to the sequencer.