Effect of session sample rates vsti samples

Discussion in 'Tracking / Mixing / Editing' started by kmetal, Apr 1, 2016.

  1. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    hey I've been looking into BFD 3 closely while its %50 off. When I looked on google someone in a forum said that BFD 3 samples were recorded at 44.1, so the computer has to re-sample in real time when your using it st any other sample rate in a session.

    I was under an assumption that the sample sets in vsti were done at each sample rate supported by the pluggin, as opposed to re calculated in realtime. Is this the common way in most vsti?

    I'm wondering about fidelity/src issues sonically, and computer processing based issues like increased tax on cpu due to recalculations, in addition whatever load introduced by the sessions 'high' sample rate.

    Also they BFD claims the use a "propriety lossless compression" for the audio samples to get them from 160 to the 55gb they are in the package.

    I'm concerned of a situation where I'm using a reduced quality sample (i.e. The data compression in general) than the session I'm at, any sort of strange resulting SRC issues/artifacts, and using excess CPU power as opposed to other drum bass vsti.
  2. DonnyThompson

    DonnyThompson Distinguished Member

    Chris uses BFD, Kyle... you should talk with him; last time I heard, he was very happy with the samples... ( @audiokid )
  3. Sean G

    Sean G Well-Known Member

    How does it compare to SSD or Addictive Drums ?
  4. audiokid

    audiokid Staff

    Hey Kyle, not sure about how it compares with the others mentioned or how they SRC . For "real", BFD 3 sounds amazing, everything from cymbals to snare sounds stellar. I like it. :)
    kmetal likes this.
  5. Makzimia

    Makzimia Active Member

    +1 on BFD. I have used Superior Drummer for years. About 3 months ago I bought BFD, it's just a more flexible system for creating songs. I love in particular the ability to switch between drummer and audience listening.
    audiokid likes this.
  6. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    To my ears it's a,ways been the best. I'm just concerned about going from the samples original rate, re-converting for the session sample rate (96/192), rendered to audio within the session to save CPU processing (instead of realtime triggering), then yet another SRC down to the final capture. That seems like a lot of conversions. In reality for most things it's just going to be used to augment live recorded drums, along w drumagog, which can host some drum instruments like BFD, triggering them in realtime. Druma got will also output midi data from audio, complete w velocities! This is going to help preserve the performance over time, as opposed to hoping all my samples and pluggin settings open correctly 5 years from now.

    Proper filing and track management are a big part of my new workflow. It's scary how many sessions I have that won't open the same, or at all, so proper long term recall ability is big for me. Futurproffing is important.

    AD is on sale 50% as well, for $125. They only offer 3 kits stock. For pop/rock ad seems to have a more polished / finished sound. And eventually I'll probably purchase it. BFD sounds more like raw tracks well recorded, requiring some additional tailoring work in the mix. It's got some excellent options for quickly rendering drums to audio , separating direct and ambient tracks, i.e. Submixing to audio, or to quickly export each channel within the instrument separately.

    Chances are I'll go BFD anyway, since I've liked it since version 1.5, and since it's the most expensive of the vsti instruments on my list, it seems like it's the most opportune one to buy. BFD, drumagog, VSL, and the samplitude suite, as well as any other stock instruments, will round out my starter set, which should have plenty of reference quality, and garden variety samples.

    Besides mixing augmentation, and scratch tracks/idea, I want to use the sameple sets, to program the brief little 3sec hooks/cue played, while someone displays their logo, before their YouTube vid. So it's important to have both organic, and synthetic sounding stuff. It's one area becase they're so short, that vsti can go undetected as 'fake' because of how short the cues are, but authenticity doesn't necessarily apply in that arena. I'm finding even borderline cheesy/robotic/synthetic samples can work wonders layered under a live performance, even if it has to sound authentic. Blending live and sample drums is the closest I've come to commercial sounding recordings. I'm getting closer and closer to the status quo over the years.

    I'm still just curious how this all works, particularly with regard to high sample rates like 192 which is what I'm moving into w the new setup/business plan. I think track bouncing, submixing, and freezing and disabling, is going to be a big part of my new "modern" workflow.

    With low budgets and diy recordings, I want to have my templates setup, so within minutes of importing audio, I'll have basic triggers and sounds already setup and routed, in a very industrial drag and drop style. Then I can tweak from there. With all the re- triggering and amping and midi and replacement going on, I want to keep my technical routing Ect, templated, whenever possible. I'll have various templates for various styles and circumstances.
  7. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    @audiokid are you using any of the additional drum / cymbal packs? I am particularly interested in the cymbal pack at first.
  8. audiokid

    audiokid Staff

  9. Makzimia

    Makzimia Active Member

    @kmetal I have several extras with mine. One lot is a zildjian set ( can't remember which) but, the quality is very good on all of it. Control over expression use etc is all part of why it's truly amazing of course. I've always treated drums in the past like audio tracks from my drum machines (sr16 Alesis etc). I really feel if you leave BFD raw, or if it's sets sound right, go for it.

    I would track midi back to audio tracks then mix. These programs being this good really eliminate that necessity imho fwiw.

    kmetal and audiokid like this.
  10. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    Good to know tony. I'm taking the plunge in a couple days. Between the samples in BFD , drumagog, and other garden variety, there should be plenty to choose from.

    How do you find it is on CPU usage? What sample rate are you using?
  11. Makzimia

    Makzimia Active Member

    Kyle, I have only ever worked up to 96/24. But, my machine I use is an absolute beast anyway. Not sure what your hardware is like. I'm running dual Xenons and 32gb RAM and these days an SSD. The Mac Pro barely notices most things. Logic Pro X just hums along maybe 5-12% even under heavy load.
  12. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    That's awesome. It's good to have a feel for what different systems can handle. Do you use a lot of the BFD built in mixer/effects? are you layering acoustic drums in too or using BFD exclusively?
  13. Makzimia

    Makzimia Active Member

    @kmetal Kyle, I literally just got this prior to moving to Scotland. Right now it's packed in a container at a shipyard :). My normal workflow these days uses my UAD quad card for effects.
    For room effect I have nice stuff with UAD or I have a lovely Eventide DSP 4000b+ to call on.
    All I have heard from BFD thus far though is top notch.

    Acoustic drums are off my menu from here on in, as I simply won't have room. I've either used this sort of thing or live drums, never the two to meet :). I think there is certainly a place for additive / replacement. Honestly though, that comes under the heading ( for me) of drive me crazy :). I like to keep things less complicated these days.

    kmetal likes this.
  14. DonnyThompson

    DonnyThompson Distinguished Member

    That's the curse of most home studios... mine included.

    There's no crime in using sample replacement - so many of us have "studios" in our homes these days, and we simply don't have the room - or the proper acoustics in any of our rooms - needed to mic up a full kit and get good drum sounds.
    Real drums need sufficient space - at least to record good sounding drums, anyway.

    In most residential homes, lower ceilings make it pretty tough to get those sweet overhead tones, of which I find makes up so much of "the sound" of a good drum kit recording, ( in my own experience, any ceiling under 10' is pretty much useless for good overhead sounds, IMO) and that's one of the problems that most home studios face, as so many of us live in homes where the ceilings are generally between 7' and 8'; and where the average room size is only 10' x 12' ( or so).

    And, I'm not gonna NOT record simply because I don't have enough space - or the right sounding kind of space - to use real drums - and - I say this being a drummer.
    If technology allows me to continue to produce decent sounding recordings, then I'm not gonna let the fact that I can't record real drums stop me from doing that.
    Not having a 9' Grand Piano or a real Hammond B3 and Leslie stack in my home studio hasn't stopped me - or thousands of other people - from using piano and organ samples... or strings, or horns... so why would using drum samples be any different? We use what we have available to us. What's the alternative? To not record music because we don't have those real instruments available? I can say that this is certainly no alternative for me.

    I'll sometimes set up a small version of my Yamaha kit; kick, snare, rack tom, floor tom, HH, ride and crash, which allows me to play with feel and groove, but the acoustics for the space I have here at home just aren't favorable to using the actual mic'd up tracks, so I reach for Slate, or Superior for sample replacement; although sometimes I'll use real cymbals.

    Samples have come so very far quality-wise; it's not like it was even 5 short years ago when so many samples sounded "cheesy"... ( although in this business, 5 years is also a lifetime, when it comes to available technology).

    For those that do have the space to do it properly - both physically in size and in sonic response, and if there are enough good mics and input channels available, then sure... absolutely... I'd rather record real drums, too.

    But it's just not feasible in my current situation. I mean, I could do it, but the final result wouldn't sound nearly as good as the drum samples that are now available to me.

    IMHO of course. ;)

  15. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    That's the amazing beauty of drum sampling. Which btw, I didn't do up until a like 5 years ago, becasue I didn't know it was a technique (lol). As soon, as I started layering in samples, on top of a live kit, it was another 'aha' moment. Ahhh so that's how they do it. That comercial, larger than life, huge, rock/pop drum sound.

    Now I'm not saying I get sounds like slash does, but what I discovered is that, that sound is otherwise unattainable. You need both the classic " great room, player, song, gear" you also have to layer samples in. It's just not something mixers advertised over the years. Obviously not a hard fast rule, but more common than I realized. It's been being done for the last 25 years or more. Again, I'm not saying it's every production.

    I think samples and replacement make it more feasible to track live drums at home. you can bash along on a real kit for feel, and layer samples in underneath, or on top. Or completely replace. It could also be though of in reverse, and 'sample' a few kick and snare hit alone (maybe while listening to the track on headphones) and layering in those to a programmed kit.

    The kit doesn't need to be expensive or the room big. Even just a couple 57 is enough mics. If you deaden the kit with blankets on stands and one over the kit, you can get workable sounds out of most kits, provided the heads are reasonable, and the kit is in tune. Must be in tune.

    The idea is that it's not about fidelity, just the human element. basically comercial pop/rock is the marriage of human and electronic performance, and either one alone doesn't seem to stand up, as well as them paired. I see it as "watering down" the programmed performance, with life, and "tightening up" the live performance/sounds.

    Seems like "almost perfect" is the secret. Lol.
  16. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    Just ordered bfd3 while its 50% off. Thought this demo video was interesting. Simultaneous live and BFD.

    Does anyone know how/why, or have a link, to how 24/44.1 samples (which is what BFD was recorded at) work in a 96k or higher session? How does that work? Does the computer like 'fill in the blanks'?

  17. audiokid

    audiokid Staff

    You ask an excellent question that I cannot find the answer to either. It runs best @ 44.1 . I do use it at 88.2 and 96 and although it does seem to work harder, it sounds amazing at all SR.

    There are 3 detail levels available for the installation. Its been so long since I installed it, I don't recal if those are higher SR or the bigger kit.

    Sorry I can't help you more Kyle. I look forward to your answer though.
    kmetal likes this.
  18. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    No need to apologize, eventually an answer will develop. I've been readin and watching for a few days, from what I understand the detail relates to streaming quality/CPU performance, and all samples used within BFD player/format are currently 44.1.

    I'm guessing a word like "over sample" or something may come up? I'm gonna google it.

    Using soft synths and samples more seriously in the foreseeable future, it seems important to figured out how the samples base sample rate in all synths / vsti's, relates to the sessions sample rates.

    Main concern being phase/sync, and modulations resulting from internal 'bouncing to audio' then another transfer to the mix daw. I'm concerned about any SRC related things. Particularly when I start w string samples.

    im going to push it to 192 lol see if I can melt my CPU :)
  19. audiokid

    audiokid Staff

    I think BFD must be no different than an external library. It's not part of your DAW SR because it's independent.
  20. DonnyThompson

    DonnyThompson Distinguished Member

    Could it be remotely possible that when you install the program, that it installs all the various drum samples at multiple sample rates? So, along with your basic 44, it's also installing 48, 88 and 96 versions of the samples as well, and whichever SR you are using in your project determines which version of the drum samples are being used?

    I'm asking because I don't know...

Share This Page