Gearslutz.com

Gearslutz.com (http://www.gearslutz.com/board/)
-   Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production (http://www.gearslutz.com/board/rap-hip-hop-engineering-production/)
-   -   grittier drums through a 16 bit sampler? (http://www.gearslutz.com/board/rap-hip-hop-engineering-production/287223-grittier-drums-through-16-bit-sampler.html)

diggin24seven 10th August 2008 05:30 PM

grittier drums through a 16 bit sampler?
 
i was on mpc forums the other day and i heard a dude say "if you were to sample drums at the 40khz sample rate from an LP at 45rpm into the MPC60 (or S900 etc for that matter), and then pitch them down to normal speed, the sample playback rate would be reduced to roughly 29khz, which is close to what you get from the SP1200."

i wanted to hear your opinions on if this is true or not cuz i kno heads from gearslutz are professionals and kno what they're talking about.
and if the above statement is true then my question is, if i were to sample drums through a 16 bit sampler at 44.1 khz, how many rpms do i need to sample at to pitch back to normal in order to achieve that 12 bit crunch from let's say a sp1200?

beat you down 10th August 2008 08:15 PM

there's only 33 1/3 and 45 rpm nowadays, waaaayback there also was 78 rpm.

people sampled at 45 rpm back then to "increase" sample time not to get a certain sound. so i'd say 45 rpm.

but, why not look up the sp 12 specs and cram these into some bit crush plug.
not the same i know... but you can get results that are damn near.
at least i did using the sonic decimator.

"certain" people onhere will disagree though. abduction

Jake Gilla 10th August 2008 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beat you down (Post 3029951)

people sampled at 45 rpm back then to "increase" sample time not to get a certain sound.

Half true, though I dont know the exact specs sampling at the highest speed your turntable allows and then pitching it back down does decrease the sample rate. Supposedly different samplers gave this effect a different character.

Think of it like this, if I'm sampling at 48htz with the record at double its normal speed and slowed it back down in the sampler the sample rate would in effect be at 24htz. Hooray.

peterpiper0815 10th August 2008 08:46 PM

I tell you. You will not get the sound that you want. Its not about numbers, samplerate and bitresolution. I guess you want the SP sound. But that sound is unique. There is no way to get this sound with an Akai and most of the so called LoFi plugins are also crap. There are two Freeware PlugIns that create "a kind of" SP sound: time machine and mda degrade.
Dont focus on the bits cause bitreduction in a plugin just "cut the bits" and this sounds horroble IMO.
The SP does a lot to the sound when pitched down. there are frequency mirrors over the whole bandwidth and resonaces and notches at the nyquist frequency and the next harmonic (double nyquist).

When you pitch down with the s950 you wont get these mirror frequencies. Its a different sound. The s950 is more a clean and dull sounding sampler. But there is much color in the filter if you use the settings beween 55 and 70

peace

Jermaine 10th August 2008 08:46 PM

yes, i disagree! ;) i dont like, and i dont use bitcrusher plug in for hip hop. bitcrushers just put white noise to the signal and turns it in extreme disproportionate digital signal.

you miss so much things: the unknowingly compresson / transients, the alaising, the filter, the a/d converter and the way you have to treat the machine is very important.

you can make your drums dirty with plug ins and 16bit sampler, no problem! but you cant emulate a sp1200 or an s900. if you try it, most of the time it sounds absurd.

believe me, i tried it many years on my own.. ;)

Jake Gilla 10th August 2008 08:52 PM

Agreed using a bit reducer to emulate a sound often does sound lacking, but that doesn't mean that they're not fun in there own right.

Every tool has a use.

Jermaine 10th August 2008 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake Gilla (Post 3030403)
Agreed using a bit reducer to emulate a sound often does sound lacking, but that doesn't mean that they're not fun in there own right.

Every tool has a use.

like i said: you can make dirty sound with these thinks, no problem: but you cant make it sound like a sp!

i personally dont like bitcrusher. in my ears they sounds wrong, but that just my opinion, i also dont like techno and electro, but millions loves it! ;)

peterpiper0815 10th August 2008 08:58 PM

Oh if you sample at 45 rpm you need to pitch down -5 semitones to get the original speed.

peace

Jake Gilla 10th August 2008 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jermaine (Post 3030483)
like i said: you can make dirty sound with these thinks, no problem: but you cant make it sound like a sp!

i personally dont like bitcrusher. in my ears they sounds wrong, but that just my opinion, i also dont like techno and electro, but millions loves it! ;)

Depending on what you use (if its software) you might try using one in combination with a filter, that take out alot of the noise aspect of it gives it a little more musical character. This is great for synth bass especially.

Is that your SP as your avatar? If so do you often sample faster and pitch down?

peterpiper0815 10th August 2008 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jermaine (Post 3030483)
like i said: you can make dirty sound with these thinks, no problem: but you cant make it sound like a sp!

i personally dont like bitcrusher. in my ears they sounds wrong, but that just my opinion, i also dont like techno and electro, but millions loves it! ;)


Did you hear about John Nolting?? I think the examples sounds very good.

John Nolting


But I also agree that these machines got specific workflow and thats what no computer can emulate.

peace

Jermaine 10th August 2008 10:29 PM

dont get me wrong my friends: the only thing i say is, that you cant emulate an sp1200 with plug-ins, if you have a/b comparison. maybe in the future, but not now. i am no software hater, but you can pitch up and resample it for 1000 times, you dont get the sp sound. but i DOESNT say, that you cant get great sounds out of software (maybe for basses, like you said). but no sp ;) thats all. and yes, i hate bitcrusher, that true! :) i prefer many other technics to make it sound dirty, and organic and i dont like sounds thats sound to "digital" (like some bitcrusher), maybe its because of my rock/funk background.. if you like bit crusher, great. but i think they sound creepy. dont be mad, just my opinion. :)

YOU DONT NEED A SP12 FOR GREAT HIP HOP!!!!! ... but dont try to copy them with some bitcrusher! ;)

yes, the nolting experiment sounds really awesome, but i think it isnt made with software plug ins, or am i wrong (my english is not the best)? ;)

jsrockit 11th August 2008 12:50 AM

I agree, you cannot emulate the SP1200...it has to do with the converters, the filters on the outs, and the sample rates... not to mention the little tricks people used back in the day to max out what little ram they had.

computa 11th August 2008 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit (Post 3033293)
I agree, you cannot emulate the SP1200...it has to do with the converters, the filters on the outs, and the sample rates... not to mention the little tricks people used back in the day to max out what little ram they had.

I agree, and in addition, the sound of the SP and older samplers is a little more than just the unit itself. Those records that folks r attached to that used these older units were all recorded to 2" analog tape, mixed on a full sized analog console (ssl/neve), used outboard processing, and were all mixed to 1/2" analog tape by a real engineer.

You will never get that sound running an SP, etc. into a DAW & mixing ITB. Those extra processes r the biggest difference in the sound of the records of pre/post 1999

Jermaine 11th August 2008 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by computa (Post 3036071)
I agree, and in addition, the sound of the SP and older samplers is a little more than just the unit itself. Those records that folks r attached to that used these older units were all recorded to 2" analog tape, mixed on a full sized analog console (ssl/neve), used outboard processing, and were all mixed to 1/2" analog tape by a real engineer.

You will never get that sound running an SP, etc. into a DAW & mixing ITB. Those extra processes r the biggest difference in the sound of the records of pre/post 1999

i totally agree!

edit: i read an article in the www, about premo, and someone meant, that premo on pro tools sounds like crap. i think this is far to extreme, but i cant understand what he means...

sd-cd 11th August 2008 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jermaine (Post 3031792)
(my english is not the best)? ;)

Hello 12BitJunkie.

beat you down 11th August 2008 12:48 PM

"anything" can be emulated.

there's nothing mystical about a machine like the sp 12, well...

each sp 12 component can be separated, analyzed and tested to see what exactly it does to a soundwave. from it's converters to it's filters to it's circuitry etc etc.

e-mu is not interested in developing a soft-sp 12, i emailed them about this years ago.
one of my nerd friends who studies artificial intelligence passed as well, but he agreed it can be done. you'd have to deal with complicated stuff like Fourier transform - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia though. heh

for now i'm satisfied using these following settings in hyperprism's sonic decimator:

bit depth: 12
rate hz: 26667 (supposed to be the exact sp 12 rate instead of 27500)

peachh

terrytee 11th August 2008 01:25 PM

Degrade is very helpful & it's a free VST/AU. it can effect the signal in order to change to sample rate. Got lots of parameters and maybe of some help.

Although as computa already said the sound of hip-hop pre 1999 is more to do with the mixing process than just the sample rate.

http://mda.smartelectronix.com/effects.htm

enjoy

Jermaine 11th August 2008 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beat you down (Post 3039472)
"anything" can be emulated.

there's nothing mystical about a machine like the sp 12, well...

each sp 12 component can be separated, analyzed and tested to see what exactly it does to a soundwave. from it's converters to it's filters to it's circuitry etc etc.

e-mu is not interested in developing a soft-sp 12, i emailed them about this years ago.
one of my nerd friends who studies artificial intelligence passed as well, but he agreed it can be done. you'd have to deal with complicated stuff like Fourier transform - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia though. heh

for now i'm satisfied using these following settings in hyperprism's sonic decimator:

bit depth: 12
rate hz: 26667 (supposed to be the exact sp 12 rate instead of 27500)

peachh

yes, you can emulate a sp. but you cant emulate it right now, with some software plugins. like i said, maybe in the future, but not now.
with SSM2044 ship,other hardware and knowledge, some people (like nolting) can emulate it. but i and maybe 95% of the users cant do it. :)

good idea, to write emu.. i cant imagine, that it isnt economic to make a soft (or maybe with hardware componets) sp1200. its a bummer, i would like to hear this simulation.

but in the end: its not only the machine, that makes the sound, its how you treat the machine.

beat you down 11th August 2008 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jermaine (Post 3040312)
...but in the end: its not only the machine, that makes the sound, its how you treat the machine.

yeah, there's a lot of factors affecting the results.
mix approaches were different too, like there was less separation between individual tracks/elements.

Jermaine 11th August 2008 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beat you down (Post 3041141)
yeah, there's a lot of factors affecting the results.
mix approaches were different too, like there was less separation between individual tracks/elements.

yes, thats right my friend!

its a shame that i'm such a eletronic-physic loser! i would love to make my own project, to simulate a sp1200 like john nolting. i think this would be fun :)

computa 11th August 2008 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beat you down (Post 3039472)
"anything" can be emulated.

there's nothing mystical about a machine like the sp 12, well...

each sp 12 component can be separated, analyzed and tested to see what exactly it does to a soundwave. from it's converters to it's filters to it's circuitry etc etc.

e-mu is not interested in developing a soft-sp 12, i emailed them about this years ago.
one of my nerd friends who studies artificial intelligence passed as well, but he agreed it can be done. you'd have to deal with complicated stuff like Fourier transform - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia though. heh

for now i'm satisfied using these following settings in hyperprism's sonic decimator:

bit depth: 12
rate hz: 26667 (supposed to be the exact sp 12 rate instead of 27500)

peachh

there is math and then there is the reality of ur ears. If u go by math alone- digital should sound better than analog and we all know it doesn't. Plug-in emulations should sound better or as good as their hardware counterparts (ie waves api 2500 plugin vs a real api 2500) and they don't.

i know there r alot of folks who all they know is digital and plug-ins and they swear by them. But it puts them at a distinct disadvantage when making comparisons to quality analog processes.

beat you down 11th August 2008 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by computa (Post 3041473)
there is math and then there is the reality of ur ears. If u go by math alone- digital should sound better than analog and we all know it doesn't. Plug-in emulations should sound better or as good as their hardware counterparts (ie waves api 2500 plugin vs a real api 2500) and they don't.

i know there r alot of folks who all they know is digital and plug-ins and they swear by them. But it puts them at a distinct disadvantage when making comparisons to quality analog processes.

maybe i'm not clear but...
i'm not talking about digital vs analog in general, let's not go there heh.
and it's not a question of "better" or "worse".

all i'm saying is that all artifacts or shortcomings of any piece of vintage analog gear can be emulated when done right.

if a plug version doesn't sound as good as its hardware counterpart it's because it's not done right, not because it's not possible.

analog processing too is "just" about math.
peachh

computa 11th August 2008 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beat you down (Post 3043143)
if a plug version doesn't sound as good as its hardware counterpart it's because it's not done right, not because it's not possible.

analog processing too is "just" about math.
peachh

u cant be serious. Name one plugin that sounds as good as what it's emulating?

with all the millions spent in r&d by software plugin companies and some really smart guys like paul frindle and george massenburg, etc. - IF IT COULD BE DONE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE ALREADY.

Please explain from ur experience how
Quote:

analog processing too is "just" about math

MattmaN 11th August 2008 06:28 PM

The tonal qualities should be able to be emulated with filters, and eq.
The aliasing sound when detuning can be done with samplerate reduction.
Lowering the bit rate has never helped me.
Exact pinpoint emulation would be tough, but getting close is very possible.
Close enough to fool the listener for sure.

I have a Zoom sampletrak, and it's also got a lot of lo-fi personality.
Emulating it is tough, but eq actually seems to be the gateway here.
Adding the aliasing artifacts helps with emulating detuned sounds.

I wasn't able to get close to the sound of my sampler until I added eq into the equation.

With that said I usually load up voxengo boogex with mpc60 impulse's, and use that.
It can do nice things to drums.

Jermaine 11th August 2008 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by computa (Post 3043292)
u cant be serious. Name one plugin that sounds as good as what it's emulating?

with all the millions spent in r&d by software plugin companies and some really smart guys like paul frindle and george massenburg, etc. - IF IT COULD BE DONE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE ALREADY.

Please explain from ur experience how

yes, thats true. plug in emulations are great, but the original hardware is better. look at waves api. it sounds great, but a real api is still better (personal opinion)!

Nahuel 11th August 2008 07:04 PM

Been listening to some audio files in that uad vs hardware thread, been suprised to choose the plugin files as my fav. sometimes the plugin can sound better imo depending on whut you want.

peterpiper0815 11th August 2008 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beat you down (Post 3043143)

analog processing too is "just" about math.
peachh

I agree with many of your comments but this is just not right. Analog processing is complex as the nature and has a kind of chaos in it and emulated chaos is just not the same i guess.

But I think that this thoughts are too deep cause there are many people who dont listen sooooooo deep (me too :)) I will be satified when John Nolting create a plugIn version of his script :) (or if someone will sell a SP1200 for 200 Euro)

peace

Jermaine 11th August 2008 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterpiper0815 (Post 3044102)
But I think that this thoughts are too deep cause there are many people who dont listen sooooooo deep (me too :)) I will be satified when John Nolting create a plugIn version of his script :) (or if someone will sell a SP1200 for 200 Euro)

peace

me too! i wrote him yesterday a mail, maybe he answers.. maybe ;)

syndakit 11th August 2008 08:55 PM

a couple more lofi drums tools..
 
i know these wont sound just like an sp12 but i use different combos of these plugins (most of them free) to achieve some really nice subtle lofi grit on my drums

ephonic lo-fi (try just a little bit of the pitch shift for some nice aliasing effects)
odaku effect (an old vst meant to emulate 12bit drum machines, doesnt sound like an sp but sometimes it can be nice...)
sonalklsis TBK1 and TBK2 (also can be used for some very subtle effects as well as harsh ones)

i agree that most bit crusher/lofi plugin sound way to digital... these ones can all be tweaked to yield much more smooth results...

enjoy!

Jake Gilla 12th August 2008 02:13 AM

It would be great if 112db the company that makes Morgana would do a 12bit sampler. The Morgana reminds me so much of the sound of the mirage its scary, reverse engineering is a beautiful thing.

Now as far as building plugs that sound accurate (waves API for example) you have to consider that we're dealing with business, and in business there is a difference between being able to do something and actually doing it. Could some one accurately recreate the sound of a vintage piece of analogue gear? Yes, would it be cost effective? NO. Would it be stable, and viable with constraints of modern DAWs? Probably not. Has Waves gotten close enough that they can sell products (sell being a slightly incorrect term) and make a profit? Hell yes, and that is the most important answer.

Reverse engineering is expensive and time consuming, analogue circuitry does have a lot of "apparent" chaos but with enough time and effort even this can be worked into the program. Analogue Circuitry is all math, any one who's taken basic physics and circuits courses should know this, but its not easy math.

So to put it simply, unless NASA gets into building plug ins we're probably not going to see ultra realistic plug ins for a while to come. But even if we did I doubt our modern computer hardware could handle it.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:12 PM.

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.