is Superior Drummer better than BFD3?
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
My supposition is "modeling behavior" = physical modeling. I wouldn't know, not being the developer of it. I have OTOH seen it stated clearly that the toms resonance is not about samples other than the kit pieces use normally. IE: that would seem to mean a physical model applies, in that there is no level of this kit piece with the others which was specially recorded being crossfaded in somehow.
But these could be two different areas. As far as I know, it could be shaping, they use the word in the manual; along with 'different algorithms' which means there is a 'hi hat splosh', a hi hat 'default', <short cymbal/med cymbal/long cymbal swells>, 'subtle ride', 'washy ride'. But there is a potentiometer for amount of 'bow'. I don't know, I'm sure I'm not clever enough to.
But these could be two different areas. As far as I know, it could be shaping, they use the word in the manual; along with 'different algorithms' which means there is a 'hi hat splosh', a hi hat 'default', <short cymbal/med cymbal/long cymbal swells>, 'subtle ride', 'washy ride'. But there is a potentiometer for amount of 'bow'. I don't know, I'm sure I'm not clever enough to.
Last edited by jancivil on Tue Feb 05, 2019 8:38 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 23102 posts since 7 Jan, 2009 from Croatia
I am not mocking you and sorry if you understood it that way. It's a hypothesis of mine. I have both BFD3 and SD3 and I'm not hearing anything special in the way BFD3 is doing it vs how SD3 is doing it...
I think I agree w.r.t. tom modeling. But "modeling behavior" of cymbals doesn't necessarily imply physmod, I would say.
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Well, the lol emoji made me think you took something as laughable.
I don't know. I have seen the word 'algorithms' in the manual, which doesn't help more than this, and the fact of extent of bow included. The latter, I don't know how that would be achieved, it would seem to be more taxing on resources which they didn't want with the toms resonance and bleed modeling.
I don't know. I have seen the word 'algorithms' in the manual, which doesn't help more than this, and the fact of extent of bow included. The latter, I don't know how that would be achieved, it would seem to be more taxing on resources which they didn't want with the toms resonance and bleed modeling.
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
I agree it doesn't necessarily imply physical modeling. That's my supposition based in the two things.
"Cymbal articulations played in rapid succession are shaped to simulate their real-world behaviour." - the BFD3 manual
I don't think I can know more from my standpoint, I don't understand enough to form a better basis and I don't think anybody there is going to reveal to me.
"Cymbal articulations played in rapid succession are shaped to simulate their real-world behaviour." - the BFD3 manual
I don't think I can know more from my standpoint, I don't understand enough to form a better basis and I don't think anybody there is going to reveal to me.
-
- KVRAF
- 6462 posts since 17 Dec, 2009
I don't know if SD3 has it, but BFD3 drum damping is much better and more natural than SD2's gating...
I find all kits except roots too clean and i never came across naturally recorded drums that sound like SD2/SD3 sets.
except Roots. Roots is really exceptional.
else i much prefer BFD3's nastier approach, it just sounds more oozing, but takes a bit more work.
at least you can't hear it from miles away.
I find all kits except roots too clean and i never came across naturally recorded drums that sound like SD2/SD3 sets.
except Roots. Roots is really exceptional.
else i much prefer BFD3's nastier approach, it just sounds more oozing, but takes a bit more work.
at least you can't hear it from miles away.
-
Funkybot's Evil Twin Funkybot's Evil Twin https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=116627
- KVRAF
- 11519 posts since 16 Aug, 2006
I take the words "model" or "modeling" with a grain of salt. Everyone has "models" and the quality of these models can vary greatly. I think a lot of it is semantic.
Any attempt to approximate something via some other means can be described as a model. The word modeling doesn't have to "I've recreated every individual component in a circuit simulator" (few actually do this) or "I'm using physical modeling models of tuned comb filters and resonators to create this sound..." As far as I know, there's no legal definition to what a "model" is, and just about anything that tries to approximate something else can be described as a model. What I'm really interested in is, how good is the model at doing what it's supposed to? Don't care how the sausage is made.
So if you do some anlysis on drum hits and come the conclusion that, "hey, when drum hits are repeated in fast succession there's a softening of the attack on the repeated hits because the drum head is in motion as it's being struck" then you might decide, the easiest way to "model" that may be to build code that says, "if drums hits are received in quick succession, soften the attack of the samples." Maybe you'd expand that to include micro pitch changes, or change the duration of the softening by the type of drum or cymbal. That stuff would be a model. You'd be taking behavior from the real-world and finding a way to approximate ["model"] it via software. Doesn't mean your model is anything like Chromaphone or like what U-he was recently attempting with creating physical models of drums (which they killed because of the massive CPU required).
Anyway, just my two cents.
Any attempt to approximate something via some other means can be described as a model. The word modeling doesn't have to "I've recreated every individual component in a circuit simulator" (few actually do this) or "I'm using physical modeling models of tuned comb filters and resonators to create this sound..." As far as I know, there's no legal definition to what a "model" is, and just about anything that tries to approximate something else can be described as a model. What I'm really interested in is, how good is the model at doing what it's supposed to? Don't care how the sausage is made.
So if you do some anlysis on drum hits and come the conclusion that, "hey, when drum hits are repeated in fast succession there's a softening of the attack on the repeated hits because the drum head is in motion as it's being struck" then you might decide, the easiest way to "model" that may be to build code that says, "if drums hits are received in quick succession, soften the attack of the samples." Maybe you'd expand that to include micro pitch changes, or change the duration of the softening by the type of drum or cymbal. That stuff would be a model. You'd be taking behavior from the real-world and finding a way to approximate ["model"] it via software. Doesn't mean your model is anything like Chromaphone or like what U-he was recently attempting with creating physical models of drums (which they killed because of the massive CPU required).
Anyway, just my two cents.
-
- KVRist
- 228 posts since 23 Aug, 2013 from berlin
really good (if dusty) thread in the bfd vs sd discussion. I own bfd2 and a few expansions from way back but haven't used since 64 bit, I own sd2 and ezd2 which are great, and lots of ezx's but no sd3 or sdx's
researched bc of bfd's cheap 3 upgrade currently. any new comments? I actually don't need acoustic drums that often but might jump on this. of course it probably means 4 is coming. seems like there were a lot of bugs but no one here is complaining?
researched bc of bfd's cheap 3 upgrade currently. any new comments? I actually don't need acoustic drums that often but might jump on this. of course it probably means 4 is coming. seems like there were a lot of bugs but no one here is complaining?
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
There was a giant bug as to host automation at least for VE Pro but I hipped support to it in detail once I got someone on the line, and they reproduced all of it and totally fixed it back when the current version was in beta.
Then it was a huge problem when VSL made VE Pro 7 but that's sorted except for one bug. It doesn't appear to be a thing for too many people however.
I don't know of any other bugs and I use BFD3 all the time, and I use the effects rack and do some real mixing in it.
Macro Blend is pretty cool, to get its fader(s) to do all kind of things at the same time and in opposite directions and as wide or narrow a range as you tell it to. Automatable.
The cymbal swell modeling, whatever it is, is quite convincing, the spill and resonance, a sympathetic resonance where other kit pieces 'cause' a tom to vibrate, works fantastically.
BTW, the cymbal swell 'modeling' is shaped to specific behaviors 'hihat default', 'hihat splosh', short cymbal swells, med, long swells and gives 0-100% of 'bow' in the mix. And, 'very subtle ride' and 'washy ride'.
as to 'what sound' you're after, drum kits tend to be unique, kit pieces as well, and I'm into acoustic drums. Evil Joe Barresi is not very like Jazz 'n Funk and for instance has much deeper sampling. I think BFD3 is for the total drum freak, I don't know otherwise. I bought it for the name back in '03 and someone in Guitar Center was enthusiastic about it. Big Fugging Drums haha!
Also, and I'm such an idiot I didn't catch on to this or even look for it, I freed up 160GB Tuesday using the BFDLAC Tool, which compresses BFD2-era audio.
Lately the learn function for Host Automation in VE Pro 7 lags on my machine like it's 2002. I'm in rather constant contact with VSL's coder. There were tons of bugs, I have to pick my battles right now. But now, it conveys to Cubase the actual names per my renaming in all parameters, so what used to be, eg. 'Parameter 101' (and I was trying to configure things I could kind of remember, ie., 71 is the instrument's 'Gain 1' so 101 = 31) is now '[...]BFD3 (Ch)Manta Ray (Drive)'
so it's worth being squeaky.
Then it was a huge problem when VSL made VE Pro 7 but that's sorted except for one bug. It doesn't appear to be a thing for too many people however.
I don't know of any other bugs and I use BFD3 all the time, and I use the effects rack and do some real mixing in it.
Macro Blend is pretty cool, to get its fader(s) to do all kind of things at the same time and in opposite directions and as wide or narrow a range as you tell it to. Automatable.
The cymbal swell modeling, whatever it is, is quite convincing, the spill and resonance, a sympathetic resonance where other kit pieces 'cause' a tom to vibrate, works fantastically.
BTW, the cymbal swell 'modeling' is shaped to specific behaviors 'hihat default', 'hihat splosh', short cymbal swells, med, long swells and gives 0-100% of 'bow' in the mix. And, 'very subtle ride' and 'washy ride'.
as to 'what sound' you're after, drum kits tend to be unique, kit pieces as well, and I'm into acoustic drums. Evil Joe Barresi is not very like Jazz 'n Funk and for instance has much deeper sampling. I think BFD3 is for the total drum freak, I don't know otherwise. I bought it for the name back in '03 and someone in Guitar Center was enthusiastic about it. Big Fugging Drums haha!
Also, and I'm such an idiot I didn't catch on to this or even look for it, I freed up 160GB Tuesday using the BFDLAC Tool, which compresses BFD2-era audio.
Lately the learn function for Host Automation in VE Pro 7 lags on my machine like it's 2002. I'm in rather constant contact with VSL's coder. There were tons of bugs, I have to pick my battles right now. But now, it conveys to Cubase the actual names per my renaming in all parameters, so what used to be, eg. 'Parameter 101' (and I was trying to configure things I could kind of remember, ie., 71 is the instrument's 'Gain 1' so 101 = 31) is now '[...]BFD3 (Ch)Manta Ray (Drive)'
so it's worth being squeaky.
-
- KVRian
- 840 posts since 28 Jan, 2008
I've tried both BD3 and have Superior Drummer 3. I sold BFD3 for a reason. SD3 just demolishes it in every category for me.
-
- KVRist
- 282 posts since 24 Aug, 2017
One thing I like with SD3 is that it supports layering and even ships with electronic drum samples. Does bfd have that nowadays? Sd3 can use the ezx libraries which has a lot of electronic, fx and percussion samples. The drum triggering module in sd3 is among the best I’ve tried as well.
My favorite library is probably indiependant sdx and I’m considering the new orchestral percussion library,
Anyway, I used both but never looked back since sd3 came out. There are no doubts both are great options.
My favorite library is probably indiependant sdx and I’m considering the new orchestral percussion library,
Anyway, I used both but never looked back since sd3 came out. There are no doubts both are great options.
-
- KVRAF
- 6462 posts since 17 Dec, 2009
The only issue i have with BFD3 is the GUI is so so sluggish it's absolutely horrifying to work with it.
SD3 the only good thing about it is Roots SDX. That thing sounds gorgeous.
Depends on what you opt for tho. SD3 is good for big processed sounds (except Roots which is amazing), but BFD is more organic and sound more like drums recorded in a decent (but not the top 1%) studio. SD is too damn clean.
SD3 the only good thing about it is Roots SDX. That thing sounds gorgeous.
Depends on what you opt for tho. SD3 is good for big processed sounds (except Roots which is amazing), but BFD is more organic and sound more like drums recorded in a decent (but not the top 1%) studio. SD is too damn clean.
-
- KVRAF
- 23102 posts since 7 Jan, 2009 from Croatia
AFAIK most if not all SDX samples are unprocessed, processing is only added later in the mixer. EZX expansions ARE processed (and compressed).
-
- KVRAF
- 6462 posts since 17 Dec, 2009
Yeah I know and you're right. I should've said "that sounds processed".EvilDragon wrote: ↑Tue Nov 05, 2019 11:48 am AFAIK most if not all SDX samples are unprocessed, processing is only added later in the mixer. EZX expansions ARE processed (and compressed).
I guess all the preproduction and careful sampling makes it sound kinda processed, most studio drum recordings are "dirty" in that sense.
In any case, i think BFD3 and SD don't really exclude each other, they sound different and it really depends what kind of sound you're after.
Except Roots. God. I'd buy SD just for roots. Other kits don't move me.
And GUI. BFD3 is just coded like garbage and its messy, i hate it.
