nope. i replied to every single point you made. you, on the other hand, seem to selectively (if not wholly) ignore what i say. as an example, i directly replied to your question about why do i use 24-bit samples like three times already, yet you still insist i evade it. you don't even acknowledge that. yet you're the one talking to the wall and it's me who's not reading your posts? come on, can we have some intellectual honesty for a change?Tubeman wrote:Same goes for you. It's like talking to a wall and you don't even read my posts and just keep repeating the same thing over and over.
i didn't know what rimshot was, i acknowledged it. i don't hear differences between L/R hand hits - i acknowledged that as well and ready to acknowledge that *you* can hear it in a blind test, if you really can. i have an open mind, and if i'm wrong and you're right - i will acknowledge it, as long as you present logically sound arguments and/or solid evidence that counters my assertions. i just ask the same of you. you bring in "three year olds" - well, don't behave like one yourself, for a start.
so? you have difficulties with reading long posts? i bet it would be easier to dismiss everything i said if i started going for insults instead of trying to explain whatever it is that you're missing, but that's not happening, so now you have a problem with how much i wrote? now, let's get back to the discussion, shall we?Tubeman wrote:That's not an insult. Look at his post. It's like kilometer long.
here are my words i would like you to read, understand, acknowledge and reply to (i cut out the babble):
example, please.Burillo wrote:what is it that you imagine would be "sampling the same source simultaneously"? please provide an example of such a setup so that we have some common ground to argue on.
[the context being, the same source simultaneously sampled at 16 and 24 bits, will sound different]
...
do you agree, or do you not agree? if not, why?Burillo wrote:no, i can't hear [the difference between 16-bit and 24-bit samples, in a mix or otherwise]. and neither can you, or anyone else, unless we're talking +40dB of gain while processing. but this isn't what normally happens.
and to anticipate another iteration of "but why do i still use 24-bit samples", i will provide the same reply i provided the last ten times - it's a technical decision. because sometimes i do want to do processing that raises the noise floor significantly (e.g. extreme compression, distortion and the like), and i want to have that headroom - that is, to be able to do these things without introducing more noise than the amount inherent in analog signals. this, however, has nothing to do with how samples sound, merely with amount of noise i want to have.
...
do you agree, or do you not agree? if not, why?Burillo wrote:it also doesn't change the fact that you [seem to] have a very strange definition of "dynamic range" - namely, that it somehow changes the sound of the sample. i could relate to that, as we are all musicians here, and for us "dynamic" is a loaded word associated with what we consider to be of great value. these musical "dynamics", however, have nothing to do with dynamic range [of a sample]. more dynamic range doesn't make the sound "more dynamic". it doesn't change anything in the sound itself. it only lowers the minimum noise level.
...
do you agree, or do you not agree? if not, why?Burillo wrote:the same can be said about round-robin samples of the same sound - yes, they sound different. but they sound similar enough to be considered the same sound. like other posters said here, you're aiming for consistency. if you hear a difference in round-robin samples, they're not round-robins (or the recording is faulty). that's what a round-robin is.
which is what i'm trying to establish. are they, or are they not round-robins? this is a simple question with a simple answer. are the samples identical? no. but round-robin samples aren't identical to each other either. so, what makes round-robin a round-robin? the fact that it's similar enough to other sounds to be considered the same sound. so, are L/R hand samples similar enough? this can only be determined by a blind test - that is, a test that is designed to test whether you actually can consistently pick out different sounds.
please note that "but they are different, it's obvious" doesn't count as an answer - because the difference is meaningless and doesn't matter if you *and anyone else* can't pick it out in a blind test. and, i already said, the case with 16/24 bit doesn't apply here, because the reasons for using 24 bit samples aren't sonic, but technical. reasons for using L/R hand samples, if you are right, will be sonic, because the resulting sound will be different, whereas result of using 16-bit vs 24-bit samples will not only sound the same, but also null in most circumstances (that is, identical).
to put it another way, if you're right, L/R hits *could* conceivably sound different, whereas 16 vs 24 bit by definition will not, bar special circumstances i mentioned above. whether you have good ears or not, there is no difference to be heard in 16 vs 24 bit samples (apart from noise). 24 bit samples are used for entirely different reasons than samples of L/R hand hits (if we assume your point of view), it's not a matter of "not hearing a difference in the mix" but a matter of having processing headroom. so, this analogy doesn't work.
again, do you agree, or do you not agree? if not, why?
...
do you agree, or do you not agree? if not, why?Burillo wrote:center and halfway hits are hits in different places of the drum [as in, much further from the center than different hand center hits]. are you saying that difference between center and half-way hits is of the same order of magnitude as difference between center hits with left or right hand? bringing back the guitar analogy, do you think that upstroke and downstroke are as different as two downstrokes on a different string position?Tubeman wrote:What do you consider center and halfway hits to be?
please note that we're talking relatives here. 6 is bigger than 5, 1000 is also bigger than 5, but they are bigger in different amounts. so, do L/R hits differ to the same amount as center/half way hits?
if not (and i believe it to be so), then the question is then, is L/R hits difference at all meaningful (that is, can you pick it out in a blind test)? note that this doesn't mean that the samples are "identical" - it will simply mean they are similar enough to not warrant the differentiation between L and R hand hits and consider them extra round robins instead.
and again, do you agree, or do you not agree? if not, why?
if you come to the conclusion i suggested above (i.e. that L/R hand hits are just extra round robins), you will therefore be proving my (and BFD developers') point - that there's no meaningful difference between L/R hand snare hits. which isn't bad in and of itself if another drum library has those - extra round robins are always great - it just doesn't support your assertions that L/R hits themselves sound audibly different. it doesn't mean having twice as many round-robins is of no benefit - quite on the contrary, it would arguably make fast snare rolls more realistic (scenario you mentioned earlier), but it would do so by virtue of having more round-robins, not by virtue of L/R hand samples sounding differently.
please note the distinction - more realistic sound of drum rolls does not, in and of itself, imply that L/R hand samples sound distinctly different as opposed to just being glorified round robins. while L/R hand samples being different to a point of being different sounds would imply realistic rolls (by virtue of using two distinct sounds), the opposite (snare rolls sounding realistic) does not necessarily mean that L/R hand samples are different to a point of being separate categories of sounds as opposed to being variations of the same sound (namely, snare center hit).
and yet again, do you agree, or do you not agree? if not, why?
it's not that hard. read my words, make sure you understand the question (if not, ask for clarifications), reply to the best of your knowledge and be intellectually honest - that is, acknowledge whatever conclusion the facts point to, regardless of whether you or i support this position or not. dismissing stuff without providing any explanation is easy, but it doesn't help you make your case - on the other hand, it implies that you don't have anything meaningful to say on this subject and therefore would like to avoid any substantive discussion, opting for rhetoric instead.
