So I was the one who made Broken Strings. I am sorry for the slow follow up, this was the first time I decided to go back through the forum so it was fortuitous that I came across this thread. Thank you all for bringing it up!
I was not sure how to go about updating the instrument in the Pianobook database so I have submitted a new file and we can see what happens. In regards to the problem itself, I am not sure what was wrong. I have resample everything so it should all be 48kHz and 24 bit but if there are still problems after this I would really appreciate it if you could maybe post again and I will take another look. Perhaps I am saving them wrong or getting mixed up somewhere.
The fact that I only happened to come across this thread got me thinking… Perhaps a new idea for the community would be to have a method of communication between members to bring these problems up with the instrument builders themselves. It could just be a simple bug report, more or less. We could develop a tick box feedback system that lists the common problems. The selected issue is then sent to the developer to fix. We would be interacting directly rather than eventually bombarding those monitoring the Pianobook site with notifications of problems they themselves cannot fix. Hopefully this way issues will be not be missed as easily and problems fixed faster.
There could be a separate dropbox folder that only updates are submitted to. Of course all files will need to be vetted still, hence still going through dropbox, but by separating the new instruments from the updates those monitoring the site might be able to prioritise uploads in the way they feel is most appropriate and efficient. Once the update has been uploaded, the instrument page could encompass a line of text stating which version of the instrument is now available and when this update occurred.
This type of system could potentially alleviate some of the pressure from those monitoring the site by allowing the community to take over any ‘bug catching’ responsibilities.
By restricting the ‘bug report’ to a tick box system we could limit the opportunity for misconduct. Also, we could quickly identify more areas that the community struggle with when developing. The data collected might help Christian/ the site developers/ other members of the community to develop more teaching materials for those who wish to make kontakt instruments, and help the community to curve the number of times these bugs appear in future uploads.
For the instrument builder receiving the ‘bug report’ it would be important not to overwhelm them with multiple notifications of the same error. It is also important for instrument builders to be able to determine between user error and problems with the instrument or files. Perhaps it is possible to build a basic analytics page for each member who has uploaded an instrument that shows an overview of their contributions. The page would be a directory which displays a running total for the number of bug reports received regarding their instruments. The running total(s) will correspond to the types of bugs reported via the tick box system which are then separated between instrument. Instrument builders would not need to receive notifications each time a bug was reported but could receive them periodically, potentially at a rate decided by them.
More importantly, this process might help the community to feel even more connected. We would have a more direct support system for each member. We can still discuss more complex issues in the forum like we have done so far, but we can also tailor feedback to those building instruments, helping personal development and creating a better catalogue for everyone to access.
These are only suggestions!! Just something to think about during the lockdown really… I apologise if I am simply repeating something someone else has already said!
Thank you again for your feedback on my instrument. These are my first ones so it is exciting to know that people are downloading them, let alone having opinions on them!