July 19, 2016 at 9:34 pm #2159
I’ll apologize in advance if we’ve made points on this topic too much before. There’s no agenda for making this topic other than to brainstorm pros and cons of each.
As I think of it..
Some of the big Pros for VST include
- “open” sound design
- modern production quality
- small amount of files to download
Some of the big Pros for Samples are
- cross-platform compatibility
- a lot of sound sources for a sample pack
- Old-school legacy production style
Some Cons for VST could be
- Lack of multi-platform compatibility
- high CPU usage when running multiple instances
- a limited number of free VSTs before we recycle them
Some Cons for Samples could be
- limited or “closed” sound design based on provided sounds
- could be considered dated production quality
- more work required to create “instruments” from raw samples
So there are some bulletpoint highlights I thought of off the top of my head.
Feel free to add to it or keep it in mind for further discussions.
July 20, 2016 at 6:30 am #2163
There are pros and cons on both, there is no better (but I prefere vst because the parameters modulation), the best is to alternate the rounds
(or leave soundevotion sample only, and move to kvrosc for vst only)
July 20, 2016 at 8:27 am #2164
ballacr75, I totally agree there’s no easy replacement for softsynth parameter automation.
What’s crazy though is what could be done as work-arounds even in the older days.
I built a real DOS computer recently with a SoundBlaster 16 ISA sound card. I loaded up Impulse Tracker with the MMX filter driver.
I was really surprised by this song made by Skaven that demonstrated significant filter modulation. It was really impressive, especially for back then..
Still a lot easier to automate parameters in Renoise with softsynth. ;P
July 20, 2016 at 9:01 pm #2165
The important thing when using the limited set, whether VST or samples, is that we’re all on even ground. When I listen to a great composition in the compo I know that there isn’t anything preventing me from achieving the same thing. It removes a huge distraction.
I’ve also been introduced to some very nice synths, effects, and samples that I probably wouldn’t have come to on my own.
July 21, 2016 at 9:03 am #2166
Yes exactly. That’s all good arguments for using the closed packs, be they VST or sample based. I like it too.
The interesting thing there is I think we have continued to make the round packs bigger and bigger. So it is actually easier to use a different set of sounds than your fellow participants.
I think for the most part that is a good thing because it gives people more options and sense of choice within the pack.
On the other hand, it is often so excessive (multiple VSTs or huge sample sets per round) that it could be seen as ‘virtually open’ because of the size of the pack compared to an old school set that would give you a much smaller set to work with.
July 21, 2016 at 11:35 pm #2170
I don’t like very much that the sample pack is so big, I’m confused looking around all that samples…
I think that Soundevotion is
“remember how great and powerful are old trackers…” and
“how beautiful song you can make with so few and small samples…”
July 21, 2016 at 9:19 pm #2167
It might be both interesting and expedient to run a special throw-back round. Since SDCOMPO has been running for a while, you could choose a pack from one of the earlier rounds and use it again. We could draw inspiration from and compare our own work to the entries from years back.
July 21, 2016 at 10:11 pm #2168
July 21, 2016 at 11:29 pm #2169
I like too!
July 22, 2016 at 5:33 am #2171
So actually throwback rounds have been done a couple times since switching to Audio Tournament. It wasn’t advertised as such because it was done for expediency.
I’ll tell you what though, I like what I’m hearing from you guys regarding smaller sample pack and I think we could do a bit of both worlds by taking a look at the size and scope of an old pack and then matching that scale with a custom new pack.
One thing that IMO I don’t particularly like about an old pack is the lack of multi-note/octave samples. That is very old school but it makes for lower quality instruments with too much aliasing. This makes it’s contrast to VST rounds even more noticeable.
For the sample pack I’m going to work on for next round, I’ll experiment with all this by making sets of custom sounds to match the scale of an older pack. With that big exception being they will mostly all be multi-note/octave for higher quality productions.
August 2, 2016 at 1:56 pm #2189
mats (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻Participant
flac doesn’t seem to work in the sunvox sampler on android. i’m batch converting them on my pc now so no problem though.
anyone know if it’s possible to use flac on android?
nice sample selection!
August 2, 2016 at 4:04 pm #2190
Hey mats, glad you like the pack. 🙂
Yeah FLAC is something we use to provide a smaller file size pack to the majority of users. But there are many trackers/formats that may require them converted to WAV. Sorry for the inconvenience. I know you can use Sunvox and FLAC in Linux but no idea for Android.
Hope the batch conversion process is an easy one for your method. I use Adobe Audition to batch convert. But I remember in the past just using xmplay with the FLAC plugin and then setting output to diskwriter and that worked as well. (Just in case there are others out there who had this question on batch converting).
August 8, 2016 at 7:15 am #2196
mats (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻Participant
ye, i used foobar2k to batch transform them to wav. 🙂
one suggestion (which i guess only applies to those few who use sunvox) is that all multi sampled instruments (most files in the pack are ok in this respect btw) have a naming scheme which identifies the octave and the note name. my favourite is for example
where [note number] can have the values 00 to 11 which corresponds to c through to b
- This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by mats (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.