The Best Drum Sample Library!

[Burillo]

24 bit samples are not identical if you sample the source at both bit depths. This is assuming the source and equipment used have high enough dynamic range to make a difference. You are still arguing about this even though I have a feeling you know you're wrong.

so, you're saying that if you take 24 bit sample and downsample it to 16 bit, they won't null up to ~16 bit noise floor?

16 bit FLAC takes 2/3 the space 24 bit FLAC takes. That's 7 GB less on a 20 GB library or 48 GB less on a 145 GB library. Not silly at all.

yes but the samples are still identical without being bit-identical.

The question for you is, do L/R sound different enough to YOU. To me they do and you can't argue with that. The last time I was thought controlled was before I was born. Sorry I'm not brainwashable.

yes, actually i can. blind test is my argument. if you can't pass it, you don't hear anything, even if you think you do.

Your take on this is weird since every freaking hit is a "different variation of the same sound" since you are recording the same instrument.

no. rim shot sounds different from straight hit because it's a different sound i.e. an instrument played differently.

Whether L/R are just extra round robins or a different sound depends of course how they are recorded. I think we established this few pages ago already. In any case they may be similar but not identical. Which means there is a difference.

the question isn't if they are identical, they aren't. but by the same token, round robin variations of the same sample are "different" too. the question is, again, are they similar enough to be considered round-robin variations, or are they indeed different to the point of being different sounds. i argue for the former, while you seem to freely jump back and forth between the former and the latter without actually stating anything.

[jancivil]

"Don't be angry" is the resort of a troll that has no real argument on points and is a sign of a lost argument...snip useless rambling snip...So it occurs to me, and to other people here, that you have a belief about yourself (that is probably overconfident). You seem invested in showing that to us. What you're showing is ignorance and that you aren't really dealing with people's points.

If you can't hear it don't assume no one else can't either. I have no need to argue what I hear. The only one losing here is you because of your narrow view.

Listen, I have no interest in showing anything to you. I did not start this "argument". Someone quoted my post and tried to tell me what I can and cannot hear. I can't accept bullshit like that.

What narrow view? What do I not hear do you think, what evidence is there of anyone's hearing? You're saying things which don't really stand to reason, and as if a proof, you can hear it and we can't. It seems important, 'you can't hear what I can' as if it makes a a developer's decision necessary. I like the idea myself, on paper. But then I'm a skeptic when it's presented as you did.

I think should we test you at a stop playback point a few times and when you have reliably detected L versus R hand, we know you're right. It seems absurd, and if you're at the same time arguing more Round Robins is necessarily better, the argument seems to falter. So what point are you after but 'I can hear it'. 'I'm right!'? I don't mind what you prefer but what is there gained by this?

You want to go snarkmeister on 'KVR people'? this exemplifies fighting for your preference of a plugin. You want to say some shit about a product you're too good for. BFD2 is fine for Bill Cobham but here's you.

I do know 'bit' as measured should read as depth, there. *bit rate* is sample rate x bit depth x no. of channels.

I see, now I understand why you are so upset standing on your back feet and started picking on me. I insulted your beloved drum sample library BFD2. Aww.

I'm not upset. What indicates to you my upset? You're the one with this heated 'thought control, brainwashing' quality of gesture. And now trying to make fun of an emotional state that didn't happen. It's pretty childish, that.

I think the thing you like sounds good in demos. GOOD FOR YOU! I think your estimation of - I like Nekro's 'next level' - your ears is driving your rhetoric now, because you're back on your heels after talking about physics and all of this nonsense that just doesn't track and no one bought it. Actually you did start this 'argument', you want to tell people they can't hear this thing you can, a left hand hit is through itself noticably different than the right hand hit. There is no physics for that until a definitely differently tensed part of the drum comes into play, I'm sorry reality is this disagreeable to you.

You can't support your contentions, that is clear to more than one person here. You want round robin for this, one hand vs the other for that, in order to do what? Is there someone here that is arguing for less detail?
Which is it? How does round robin respect L v. R exactly? It seems like to me it would kind of defeat that. It just looks like bullshit, and you look silly now trying to dance around the fact a couple people have questioned it.

[jancivil]

are you saying that L/R hand samples are identical (*just like 24-bit vs 16-bit samples*) and really just provide more round robin (headroom in case of bit-depth) to the snare? or are you arguing that they are different, *just like 24-bit vs 16-bit samples*? if the former - you're proving *my point*, not yours. if the latter - you're even more trouble, because now you're arguing magic.

or do you agree that this analogy with bit depth doesn't work and we get back to our original subject i.e. whether L/R hand samples really are *different* sounds as opposed to more round robins of the same sound?

It is not an invalid comparison. 16 and 24 bit sample are NOT identical because the dynamic range is better in the 24 bit sample (assuming the recorded signal and equipment allows this). 24 bit sample takes 1.5x the bandtwidth and memory space compared to 16 bit sample.

L/R samples are NOT idetical either, even though you (you as in "Burillo") can't hear the difference in a mix. It is physically different spot and/or sound seen to the mics and this is a FACT you can't argue.

You seem to be having kind of basic problems with the information* you're tossing about, and you aren't quite reading what people write here.

It's already been stated, if the different spots on the snare drum mean a different tension, this will tend to be true. L v R does not, through itself, do that. Unless the drum is tuned so poorly that all bets are off, this can't be that significant per se. It's been argued that the mic'ing of the drum should not be done in such a way as to pick that L/R diff up per se. I think I can gauge that well enough, I don't buy your contention. You're using these out-of-context factoids* to prove you hear things, essentially. There is a proof for that and Dean has offered you the chance for it! Show us one of your drum tracks and point out where L and R happened, even. Let alone 'in a mix' as you now assert.

*: The amount of space a file uses does not correspond 1:1 with a perceptible difference in the sound. It's just a silly thing to argue. 24-bit was a silly thing to bring in, just as the upstroke v. downstroke with a plectrum was a silly thing to bring in.

I feel pretty confident your claim to hearing any of these things is not going to stand a blind test. I'd bet money, no exaggeration. Even 320kbps mp3 vs. wav 24-bit. Are you really unaccustomed to being challenged? You talk of people insulting you (while you tell a guy to consult a physician). It's the internet, it's entertainment to argue, and you're the one dancing about.

The thing is, this sort of focus on the minutia of a product seems like something someone does in preference to using the thing. But maybe you'll knock our socks off now with a track showing your next-level capacities like we've never heard!

[pljones]

The thing is, this sort of focus on the minutia of a product seems like something someone does in preference to using the thing.

Damn, I'm found out...

[Tubeman]

so, you're saying that if you take 24 bit sample and downsample it to 16 bit, they won't null up to ~16 bit noise floor?

yes but the samples are still identical without being bit-identical.

yes, actually i can. blind test is my argument. if you can't pass it, you don't hear anything, even if you think you do.

no. rim shot sounds different from straight hit because it's a different sound i.e. an instrument played differently.

the question isn't if they are identical, they aren't. but by the same token, round robin variations of the same sample are "different" too. the question is, again, are they similar enough to be considered round-robin variations, or are they indeed different to the point of being different sounds. i argue for the former, while you seem to freely jump back and forth between the former and the latter without actually stating anything.

No, not downsample but "sample the source at both bit depths."

They are not identical, 24 bit takes 150% the space and bandwidth and has higher dynamic range if the circumstances are met I mentioned in my previous post.

If you think they are identical why do you use 24 bit samples? Answer this question instead of avoiding it and redirecting questions at me. This can be used as an argument that you should not use 24 bit samples since you can't hear the difference. This was your argument for not using L/R samples.

There are several variations how to hit drums and cymbals and a rimshot is not the only one. For example it is possible to hit cymbals several different ways which all produce different sound.

It looks you have ran yourself into a corner and can't get out without admitting you were wrong hence you're circling this around with unrelated points.

[Tubeman]

I'm not upset. What indicates to you my upset? You're the one with this heated 'thought control, brainwashing' quality of gesture. And now trying to make fun of an emotional state that didn't happen. It's pretty childish, that.

Maybe this:

the resort of a troll that has no real argument on points and is a sign of a lost argument... What you're showing is ignorance and that you aren't really dealing with people's points.
You want to go snarkmeister on 'KVR people'? this exemplifies fighting for your preference of a plugin. You want to say some shit about a product you're too good for. BFD2 is fine for Bill Cobham but here's you.

In those short quotes you did: call me a troll with no argument because I don't agree with you. Calling me childish and ignorant. Accusing me of "talking shit." Comparing me to a Bill Cobham.

Tsk tsk, mister jancivil. That is not very civil if you ask me.

Your posts come off as very angry and hostile. You three are hardly 'KVR people.' You are member number #163537 yourself. What preference are you talking about? Are seriously saying people must think they are "too good" if they don't like a plugin, isn't THAT childish?

[Burillo]

Tubeman, i'm sorry for this cheap shot, but you increasingly seem to lack reading comprehension, let alone knowledge in basics of digital audio.

No, not downsample but "sample the source at both bit depths."

source, sampled at both bit depths will be different because even if you sample the same source twice, it'll be different. this is an unclean experiment. a clean experiment would be to sample source in 24 bit, and then downsample it to 16, so that there would be no difference between the sounds other than the noise floor.

They are not identical, 24 bit takes 150% the space and bandwidth and has higher dynamic range if the circumstances are met I mentioned in my previous post.

as *I* mentioned in my previous posts, your "higher dynamic range" IS "lower noise floor". if you have lower noise floor, you have more space between the loudest and the softest sound you are able to store without audible artifacts, and thus, have higher dynamic range. space and bandwidth are irrelevant. you keep missing both points.

If you think they are identical why do you use 24 bit samples? Answer this question instead of avoiding it and redirecting questions at me. This can be used as an argument that you should not use 24 bit samples since you can't hear the difference. This was your argument for not using L/R samples.

i already told you why. because of lower noise floor. this is a technical decision, however, because, other than the noise floor, the samples will sound the same. to illustrate that point, i'm offering you to do a simple experiment - take a 24-bit sample, downsample it to 16-bit, and compare results. they will not only be audibly the same, the samples will null up to ~16-bit noise floor (that is, around -90 or -100 dBFS i think). that means the samples are identical. whether you like it or not. there is nothing more to it.

There are several variations how to hit drums and cymbals and a rimshot is not the only one. For example it is possible to hit cymbals several different ways which all produce different sound.

this is irrelevant. we're not talking about rimshots or hitting cymbals different ways. we're talking about hitting (almost) the same spot with left versus right hand. this really boils down to a simple question, which i ask over and over, and which you keep ignoring: do L/R hand samples sound different enough to be considered different sounds, or do L/R hand samples sound similar enough to be considered round robin variations of the same sound (namely, the snare hit). and to determine that, you will need to do a blind test. your "but i hear!!!1111" and "but they are different!!1111" doesn't add anything to the discussion.

so, i've done my blind test. i do not hear any difference between L/R hits (or rather, they differ no more than two R or two L hits). the conclusion from this is that L/R hand samples are to be considered round-robin variations as opposed to being different sounds altogether. at least to me.

It looks you have ran yourself into a corner and can't get out without admitting you were wrong hence you're circling this around with unrelated points.

it's you who is circling around every point i make. you keep insisting on this (failed) analogy with 16/24 bit while clearly demonstrating lack of knowledge in this department. as i already said before, i may not be a drummer and have golden ears, but i happen to be well versed in basics of digital signals. you clearly aren't. hell, it doesn't even register in your mind that "lower noise floor" equates to "bigger dynamic range".

[Tubeman]

You seem to be having kind of basic problems with the information* you're tossing about, and you aren't quite reading what people write here.

It's already been stated, if the different spots on the snare drum mean a different tension, this will tend to be true. L v R does not, through itself, do that. Unless the drum is tuned so poorly that all bets are off, this can't be that significant per se. It's been argued that the mic'ing of the drum should not be done in such a way as to pick that L/R diff up per se. I think I can gauge that well enough, I don't buy your contention. You're using these out-of-context factoids* to prove you hear things, essentially. There is a proof for that and Dean has offered you the chance for it! Show us one of your drum tracks and point out where L and R happened, even. Let alone 'in a mix' as you now assert.

*: The amount of space a file uses does not correspond 1:1 with a perceptible difference in the sound. It's just a silly thing to argue. 24-bit was a silly thing to bring in, just as the upstroke v. downstroke with a plectrum was a silly thing to bring in.

I feel pretty confident your claim to hearing any of these things is not going to stand a blind test. I'd bet money, no exaggeration. Even 320kbps mp3 vs. wav 24-bit. Are you really unaccustomed to being challenged? You talk of people insulting you (while you tell a guy to consult a physician). It's the internet, it's entertainment to argue, and you're the one dancing about.

The thing is, this sort of focus on the minutia of a product seems like something someone does in preference to using the thing. But maybe you'll knock our socks off now with a track showing your next-level capacities like we've never heard!

And the insults just continue. The 'people' you refer to are nothing more than three posters on a forum.

This all may seem 'silly' to you if you don't know any better. I remember people still arguing about higher than 128k MP3 being silly. Look at them now. All happily using FLAC or +192k.

You can call it 'focus on the minutia' if you like but it doesn't mean others can't benefit from those details even if you do not. You just need to accept that others may have higher standards than you. I bet with a grand piano samples you were happy with a real pianist would find lots of faults you were not aware.

[Tubeman]

, i'm sorry for this cheap shot, but you increasingly seem to lack reading comprehension, let alone knowledge in basics of digital audio.

It is common for people to start insulting when they can't change others to obey their opinion. Nothing new here. I won't lower myself to that level though.

source, sampled at both bit depths will be different because even if you sample the same source twice, it'll be different. this is an unclean experiment. a clean experiment would be to sample source in 24 bit, and then downsample it to 16, so that there would be no difference between the sounds other than the noise floor.

You can sample the same source simultaneously and then open them in an editor like Sound Forge to see they are not identical. You are conradicting yourself with this and the next quote below.

as *I* mentioned in my previous posts, your "higher dynamic range" IS "lower noise floor". if you have lower noise floor, you have more space between the loudest and the softest sound you are able to store without audible artifacts, and thus, have higher dynamic range. space and bandwidth are irrelevant. you keep missing both points.

Hence they are not identical because the other has better DR. Space and bandwidth are not irrelevant when developing sample libraries, why do you think so?

i already told you why. because of lower noise floor. this is a technical decision, however, because, other than the noise floor, the samples will sound the same. to illustrate that point, i'm offering you to do a simple experiment - take a 24-bit sample, downsample it to 16-bit, and compare results. they will not only be audibly the same, the samples will null up to ~16-bit noise floor (that is, around -90 or -100 dBFS i think). that means the samples are identical. whether you like it or not. there is nothing more to it.

Please save me from trying to teach me about digital audio, there is nothing you can tell I don't know already. I guess this is a tactic of yours to try to make me look uneducated, similar to you stating I have a reading comprehension. How low can you stoop?

You use 24 bit samples because of better SNR. Can you hear it in a mix? You continue to avoid this question. The same logic was used against not using L/R samples because you can't hear them in a mix. You use the same logic in the quote below. So why not use 16 bit samples instead. It is EXACTLY same logic.

this is irrelevant. we're not talking about rimshots or hitting cymbals different ways. we're talking about hitting (almost) the same spot with left versus right hand. this really boils down to a simple question, which i ask over and over, and which you keep ignoring: do L/R hand samples sound different enough to be considered different sounds, or do L/R hand samples sound similar enough to be considered round robin variations of the same sound (namely, the snare hit). and to determine that, you will need to do a blind test. your "but i hear!!!1111" and "but they are different!!1111" doesn't add anything to the discussion.

so, i've done my blind test. i do not hear any difference between L/R hits (or rather, they differ no more than two R or two L hits). the conclusion from this is that L/R hand samples are to be considered round-robin variations as opposed to being different sounds altogether. at least to me.

One of you brought rimshots into this, not me. And as we found out he didn't even know what a rimshot is. As stated many times, how different the sound is depends how you record and hit the drum. No one is ignoring this, roll back a couple of pages and there it is explained. I do not need a blind test it's easy to hear a longer pattern assuming the samples are really from a physically different hit and not just doubled left hand hits like in many drum libraries. Again, your definition of "different sound" is weird. "I do not hear anything above 10k therefore we can conclude there is no sound above 10k." What do you consider center and halfway hits to be?

it's you who is circling around every point i make. you keep insisting on this (failed) analogy with 16/24 bit while clearly demonstrating lack of knowledge in this department. as i already said before, i may not be a drummer and have golden ears, but i happen to be well versed in basics of digital signals. you clearly aren't. hell, it doesn't even register in your mind that "lower noise floor" equates to "bigger dynamic range".

The analogy is totally relevant as we are talking about whether you hear the difference in a mix or not. Why do you assume I don't know what SNR and DR means? These are just baseless insults from you because you are angry. You refuse to answer if you can hear the better SNR/DR in a mix like you ask me if I hear the L/R hits. Do an another blind test for SNR/DR. Make a round robin pattern with every other sample 16/24 bit and listen if you hear the difference.

[Burillo]

It is common for people to start insulting when they can't change others to obey their opinion. Nothing new here. I won't lower myself to that level though.

i don't want to "change you to obey my opinion". it's just that you keep missing every point i make, regardless of how much into detail i go in trying to explain what i mean. in disagreeing with me, you're not simply disagreeing - you make arguments that show that you didn't understand what i just said. therefore i'm thinking you're either illiterate, or deliberately ignoring my arguments. i don't think it's the latter, because you don't seem like a troll. therefore, i suggested it's the former.

You can sample the same source simultaneously and then open them in an editor like Sound Forge to see they are not identical. You are conradicting yourself with this and the next quote below.

i'm sure you're implying something along the lines of "using a splitter box and two audio interfaces to capture the same sound twice", don't you? well, i've got news for you - these will be different even with both audio interfaces set to identical settings. you do know about jitter, don't you? you do know that differences in clock rate will make even two identical signals slightly different when captured by different interfaces?

if not, then allow me to ask - 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 (because, as far as i can see, you keep missing the point about basic things related to digital audio).

Hence they are not identical because the other has better DR.

no. they are the same samples, it's just one has lower noise floor. they aren't of course bit-identical, but they are identical in their frequency content in everything above the ~16 bit noise floor (that is, identical in up to 14-15 most significant bits of their sample values). when you compare two sufficiently loud samples, they will sound identical and will null. it's only when stuff goes below -100dBFS that you'll start to hear difference between 16-bit and 24-bit sounds. but you keep missing or misrepresenting this point also, which leads me to believe that you don't fully understand the ramifications of the term "noise floor".

Space and bandwidth are not irrelevant when developing sample libraries, why do you think so?

they are irrelevant to the discussion we're having.

Please save me from trying to teach me about digital audio, there is nothing you can tell I don't know already. I guess this is a tactic of yours to try to make me look uneducated, similar to you stating I have a reading comprehension. How low can you stoop?

nope, this is an attempt to make you notice errors in your own reasoning, most likely derived from your partial ignorance in these matters. you keep making unfounded assertions, i point you to them. you ignore everything i said, repeat the same assertions, i point you to them again. if that's what you call "stomping" and "trying to make you look uneducated", then so be it. but it's really you who is doing both of these things, not me.

You use 24 bit samples because of better SNR. Can you hear it in a mix? You continue to avoid this question.

nope, i answered this question the first time you asked, you just keep ignoring everything i say. but OK, i'll repeat. no, i can't hear it. 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.

The same logic was used against not using L/R samples because you can't hear them in a mix. You use the same logic in the quote below. So why not use 16 bit samples instead. It is EXACTLY same logic.

i already told you, it's a faulty logic, because the examples aren't equivalent (because 16-bit and 24-bit samples of the same sound are identical, with only difference being the noise floor). or rather, if you're insisting on this analogy, you're proving *my* point, not yours. if anything, i'm trying to help you make your case by noting that it doesn't support your argument but rather contradicts it. but you keep ignoring that too.

One of you brought rimshots into this, not me. And as we found out he didn't even know what a rimshot is.

i did, and i didn't know what a rimshot is. now i know. doesn't change the facts i stated above. it also doesn't change the fact that you 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. 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.

As stated many times, how different the sound is depends how you record and hit the drum. No one is ignoring this, roll back a couple of pages and there it is explained.

well, we're operating on the assumption that whatever it is they're recording, they're doing it correctly.

I do not need a blind test it's easy to hear a longer pattern assuming the samples are really from a physically different hit and not just doubled left hand hits like in many drum libraries.

no, this is exactly when you need a blind test. DAWs don't sound audibly (or otherwise) different either, and yet there are gazillions of people who think they hear a difference. no matter how much rationalization you provide, no matter how obvious you think it is, a blind test is the only thing that will show if you really hear something, or it's just more round robins.

Again, your definition of "different sound" is weird. "I do not hear anything above 10k therefore we can conclude there is no sound above 10k."

there may very be a sound, but it's not discernible, so it doesn't matter. it matters in case of 10k because plenty of other people can hear those frequencies, but when we're talking 30k, then it doesn't matter. 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. which is what you're refusing to do because "you already know". well, i got news for you. human perception is far more unreliable than you apparently think.

What do you consider center and halfway hits to be?

center and halfway hits are hits in different places of the drum. 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? you gotta be kidding, right?

The analogy is totally relevant as we are talking about whether you hear the difference in a mix or not.

not really.

Why do you assume I don't know what SNR and DR means?

because your words demonstrate lack of knowledge regarding these concepts.

These are just baseless insults from you because you are angry.

no, i am not angry. well, i am somewhat tired of you ignoring everything i say and keeping insisting on stuff that's either wrong, misleading or irrelevant, but i wouldn't call that "anger".

You refuse to answer if you can hear the better SNR/DR in a mix like you ask me if I hear the L/R hits.

nope, i did answer that the first time you asked me this. keep skipping over my replies, maybe you'll miss even more points. you're going for a record.

Do an another blind test for SNR/DR. Make a round robin pattern with every other sample 16/24 bit and listen if you hear the difference.

you will be surprised when you try the same thing.

[Tubeman]

I think you are just retarded. Lol, enough is enough. It's like arguing with a three year old child.

[Burillo]

I think you are just retarded. Lol, enough is enough. It's like arguing with a three year old child.

oh the irony... not a single point i made is addresses or acknowledged, the same flawed arguments repeated over and over, and yet i'm the three year old child. yea, right.

[Genetic_Junk]

It is common for people to start insulting when they can't change others to obey their opinion. Nothing new here. I won't lower myself to that level though.

I think you are just retarded.

Yep.

[Tubeman]

I think you are just retarded. Lol, enough is enough. It's like arguing with a three year old child.

oh the irony... not a single point i made is addresses or acknowledged, the same flawed arguments repeated over and over, and yet i'm the three year old child. yea, right.

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.

[Tubeman]

It is common for people to start insulting when they can't change others to obey their opinion. Nothing new here. I won't lower myself to that level though.

I think you are just retarded.

Yep.

That's not an insult. Look at his post. It's like kilometer long.