KVR Audio

herodotus · Post by **herodotus** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 6:42 am

OK, as everyone must know by now I am working on a loop c.d (or rather, a series of same). But I personally don't use loops and have little use for samplers ATPT. So I really have no clue what people are talking about when they say that these loops or those loops are in sample format X,Y or Z. Nor do I know anything about which formats are proprietary or how to convert them from one to the next.

Someone care to enlighten me?

intel · Post by **intel** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 6:47 am

might help if you define "X" "Y" and "Z"

herodotus · Post by **herodotus** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 6:57 am

intel wrote:might help if you define "X" "Y" and "Z"

Lets see: Rex, Rex2, Giga, sf2....Is it really necessary that I continue to parade my ignorance?

Pretty much I don't know SHIT about using samples.

DwarfNebula · Post by **DwarfNebula** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:05 am

its all about WAV

and thanks for your loops, will dl em when ive got the chance to.

Bassballjg · Post by **Bassballjg** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:13 am

John, check your pm.

meeks · Post by **meeks** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:23 am

herodotus wrote:
intel wrote:might help if you define "X" "Y" and "Z"
Lets see: Rex, Rex2, Giga, sf2....Is it really necessary that I continue to parade my ignorance?

Pretty much I don't know SHIT about using samples.

Pretty much realates to SamplerX, SamplerY and SamplerZ.

WAV is pretty much the basic and can be picked up in everything, but can be somewhat large, so some people post in mp3 and we (the user convert) and a great debate occurs as to wether the sound integrity was comprimised. They can also be ZIPped or RARed for compression. The suffixes pretty much relate to a preset in a particuliar sampler that sets parameters to the sample if desired (i.e. a filter setting in Kontakt). Since no one person has every sampler...stick with WAV.

[Give and take with the above comments I was really loose in the discriptions and not looking to be corrected or flamed.]

herodotus · Post by **herodotus** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:42 am

Thanks all.

intel · Post by **intel** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:59 am

yes. stick with wavs. lossy formats in a pinch if you're strapped for space or bandwidth.

as for all the other various sampler-specific formats, I wouldn't bother unless you're putting together a package or product specifically geared toward a particular sampler.

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:07 am

As an alternative to .wav you may consider "acidized" waves.
They can be loaded into anything, just like a plain wave file, but they contain additional info which will make them "auto-stretchable" when loaded into any program/sampler recognizing this extra info.

I wouldn't happen to know which would be the best way to produce acidized stuff. In any case, Sony's ACID does so - but I'm sure there's more than that.

intel · Post by **intel** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:17 am

Sound Forge will also add "ACIDized" information to a loop.

hefty · Post by **hefty** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:17 am

Wav format is king in my book. Gig files are typically largest and best quality (and most expensive), with the ability to import/export a ton of Wav files to/from a single Gig file (with Gigastudio, CDXtract, or Translator) in one shot. In the past year I have only bought GIG and Wav.

Rex and Rex2 are lame when it comes time to edit the data in a Wav style editor. Sound quality is OK, realtime slice control can be incredible on some kinds of material, but the format is too proprietary, too linked up and often locked into Reason which doesn't currently even have a tempo map. Still, if your content is amazing good you might sell alot in this format, otherwise forget making any money here.

Sound Fonts are often free. The file format itself is typically better than the content contained within. They contain Wav compatible files, and many other parameters. There are a couple of good sound fonts out there, but if you want to sell them think cheap.

Acid compatible Wav format is cool, yet some of the commercial libraries in this format sound useless (it's the wav data, not the format). The Waves works in any Wav compatible applicaton I've used. Number of beats (and therefore instrinsic tempo) as well as a root note/key can be stored in the file. I haven't used Acid in a long time, but any acidized Wav files in my collection are fine in any application I use a Wav, this format just works.

Conversions to/from AIFF and Wav are solid. No quality loss (unlike MP3). 24bit 44.1K and 96K Wav for PC and AIFF for Mac are pro level, with solid conversion available between platforms.

Audio enlightenment comes only to the true seeker. Loop libraries of the future are surround sound.

Back to basics, I am looking for specifications on the internal header format for reading/writing Acidized Wav files, even if it is only getting or setting the number of beats. Anybody have this info?

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:01 am

Not exactly related to the format question, but I'd like to recommend something many people *may* like:

Try to record a lot of very "dry" or rather "basic" loops and patterns. By this I mean grooves only containing kick, snare, hat and probably not much room information (so, stay away from overheads).

Why? Because many people will slice those loops up to suit their tempi and do further manglings with them. For such purposes cymbals usually aren't suitable (because they ring all over the place and slicing things up would just create funny interrupted cymbal rings).

It might be worth trying to record the basic groove and then add the cymbal stuff fitting the groove in an extra file - I know, that would mean a less organically played loop (because you would play the groove without cymbals first), but for the end user it'd be a benefit.

In any way, record as much "basic" loops as possible!

herodotus · Post by **herodotus** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 3:19 pm

Sascha Franck wrote:Not exactly related to the format question, but I'd like to recommend something many people *may* like:

Try to record a lot of very "dry" or rather "basic" loops and patterns. By this I mean grooves only containing kick, snare, hat and probably not much room information (so, stay away from overheads).

Why? Because many people will slice those loops up to suit their tempi and do further manglings with them. For such purposes cymbals usually aren't suitable (because they ring all over the place and slicing things up would just create funny interrupted cymbal rings).

It might be worth trying to record the basic groove and then add the cymbal stuff fitting the groove in an extra file - I know, that would mean a less organically played loop (because you would play the groove without cymbals first), but for the end user it'd be a benefit.

In any way, record as much "basic" loops as possible!

Sascha, thanks for the input.
I will consider doing some of what you suggest.

Doing cymbals separately is probably a non-starter. As you say, the 'organic' element would be lost. This won't work, because I think that the organic element of my playing is the only thing that distinguishes my loops from those of countless others with much bigger budgets.

On the other hand...releasing separate mixes of the same loops (e.g. some with only the kick and snare channels, some without the room mics, etc.) is a very real possibility. I have noticed that throwing a wash of sampled cymbals over a live kick and snare loop sounds much more 'real' (at least to my ear) than if the whole package were sampled.

Again thanks for the input Sascha. And thanks to all for their help!!!!

Could someone please explain loop file formats?