Profiling any sound you like ...

    When people ask me about the Profiler I always say: "I can record the sound of my amp, but not the music I play, only the sound. So then later I can play new, live music with that recorded sound." I don't know it this is really technically accurate, but it gives them quite an instantaneous idea of how it works.


    I hope I will live up to the day when we can profile all kinds of sounds, like on an audio-recorder, and then play with them like malleable samples. Todays samplers sound so rigid, unchangable. To me they always sound a bit like parrots, meticulously repeating the same sound over and over without the ability for variations. Granular synthesis can offer some degree of flexibility but it very soon sounds very digital, artificial.


    Wouldn't it be cool to play a guitar solo with the sound of a jet engine, or a tiger or a blackbird?

    www.audiosemantics.de
    I have been away for quite a while. A few years ago I sold my KPA and since then played my own small tube amp with a Bad Cat Unleash. Now I am back because the DI-profile that I made from my amp sounds very much convincing to me.

    Quote from fretboardminer

    Wouldn't it be cool to play a guitar solo with the sound of a jet engine, or a tiger or a blackbird?


    You scare me! 8)


    In all honesty though, the older I get, the more I learn to appreciate the beautiful sound of pure guitar.
    That's why I find the profiler this appealing.
    I'm always open for experiments though. ;)

    Yeah these dudes at IRCAM are incredible, they invented a piece a software to 'profile' the style of a given player and improvise/play along in this exact style.


    http://omax.ircam.fr/


    Hard to believe, but here is an example with Jaco Pastorius


    http://omax.ircam.fr/jaco.omaximpro.small.mp3 ( I still cannot believe this is played by a piece of software )


    Hey Christopher , we need this in the next upgrade , 1st profiles should be Hendrix / Gilmour ;)

    These guys at IRCAM are certainly clever, but this here is not really putting the sound of something else right on to the strings of your guitar. Like the Kemper Profiler puts other amp-sounds on your strings. This is the great benefit of the Kemper, that it does not change or limit your musical expressivity, it just offers you a wider range of sounds.


    For me a software that "learns in real-time typical features of a musician's style and plays along with him interactively" is quite frankly the opposite of Improvised Music. These kind of experiments have been around for quite a while and are admittedly very demanding high tech, but the musical results (if you compare it to machine translation) are more or less on the level of babelfish.

    www.audiosemantics.de
    I have been away for quite a while. A few years ago I sold my KPA and since then played my own small tube amp with a Bad Cat Unleash. Now I am back because the DI-profile that I made from my amp sounds very much convincing to me.

    Guitar to MIDI allows what you describe and has been around a long time. I play "other sounds" from my guitar at every show.This works by detecting pitch and velocity and converting to MIDI to drive a synth.


    Analog synthesis that morphs a guitar sound directly to any sound you like is not possible today. Morphing to simple sounds like sine or square waves is already being done. Kemper can accomplish this already and more filters can be created to enhance this.


    bd

    Quote from fretboardminer

    These guys at IRCAM are certainly clever, but this here is not really putting the sound of something else right on to the strings of your guitar. Like the Kemper Profiler puts other amp-sounds on your strings. This is the great benefit of the Kemper, that it does not change or limit your musical expressivity, it just offers you a wider range of sounds.


    For me a software that "learns in real-time typical features of a musician's style and plays along with him interactively" is quite frankly the opposite of Improvised Music. These kind of experiments have been around for quite a while and are admittedly very demanding high tech, but the musical results (if you compare it to machine translation) are more or less on the level of babelfish.


    They are not clever , just mathematicians whose implement the theory. The Signal's theory is french for a huge part.
    You should check their work. They release their algorythms under licence fees for every commercial companies.
    They made some brass simulation used by Arturia then with "voxinstrument" they made it pilotable by voice. I don't know if it's only pitch detection but i doubt it's so simple. The project ended in 2009.


    http://www.arturia.com/evoluti…products/brass/intro.html