Korg Forums Forum Index Korg Forums
A forum for Korg product users and musicians around the world.
Moderated Independently.
Owned by Irish Acts Recording Studio & hosted by KORG USA
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

sampling question,sf2 vs WAV: what type of sample is better?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korg Forums Forum Index -> Korg Kronos
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Epictetus



Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Posts: 38
PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2016 3:45 pm    Post subject: sampling question,sf2 vs WAV: what type of sample is better? Reply with quote
as far as I know, sf2 has more programming data thrown in the samples, for example basic keymapping....whereas WAV doesn't have that. But if you take two samples exactly identical, and one is sf2 and the other WAV, does that means that the sf2 is exactly the same quality but a smaller file?

I ask this because I believe that sf2 samples vs WAV files are like high quality mp3s vs WAV files....the latter take more space. Am I correct?

So for a sampler that uses only, say, 192 mb of sampling RAM, doesn't make more sense to use sf2 instead of WAV ?
_________________
.


Korg Pa300. Keyboards I have owned over the years:

Kurzweil K2000, Ensoniq SQ1, Korg Trinity, Roland XP-80, Yamaha Tyros 2
Roland F20, Yamaha MOX
and various others.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Infa Red



Joined: 25 Nov 2015
Posts: 9
Location: San Francisco, CA - USA
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 2:48 am    Post subject: Re: sampling question,sf2 vs WAV: what type of sample is bet Reply with quote
Epictetus wrote:
as far as I know, sf2 has more programming data thrown in the samples, for example basic keymapping....whereas WAV doesn't have that. But if you take two samples exactly identical, and one is sf2 and the other WAV, does that means that the sf2 is exactly the same quality but a smaller file?

I ask this because I believe that sf2 samples vs WAV files are like high quality mp3s vs WAV files....the latter take more space. Am I correct?

So for a sampler that uses only, say, 192 mb of sampling RAM, doesn't make more sense to use sf2 instead of WAV ?


Well this is kind of a 2 part answer here. In general, as far as music industry future proof standard and quality, .wav files are the way to go. I personally only use .wav files.

But for a specific reason or usage that was never going beyond that specific reason or purpose then saying "best" can only have a opinionated answer. Cause "best" would be broken into the operator's desires. Best for drive space (as you seem to be concerned about) or best for quality, or best for compatibility, or best for speed are all different things.

So I would keep all that in mind when choosing your desired format.

Now the second part issue/variable here is the settings/limitations of each device. Cause in this particular situation you bring up, I believe sf2 can do 24bit files (I'm unsure of their sampling rate limit though). Wav files can also do 24bit (actually 32bit float) files and can even be recorded as high as your devices capable recording sampling rate (96k, 192k, 384k, and higher !).

So here in a comparison to sf2 vs wav files, "best" would apply to how each one was recorded. If they were both recorded equally (lets say 24bit/96k), then I would say they should sound equal. BUT don't quote me on that. I have no experience with sf2 files, and imo if they record with less data, then rule of thumb is they aren't as good sounding.

If sf2 compresses, then uncompresses (which I think it does) I personally do not like that. But thats my opinion. Again, for safety reasons in all measures, I just stick to .wav files unless I have to use something else.

Hope this helps.
_________________
ROULETTE RECORDS™
(415)334-8742 office
(267)219-4490 fax
www.rouletterecords.com
info@rouletterecords.com

Any fool can complicate things;
It takes a genius to simplify them
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Epictetus



Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Posts: 38
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
thanks for your input.
_________________
.


Korg Pa300. Keyboards I have owned over the years:

Kurzweil K2000, Ensoniq SQ1, Korg Trinity, Roland XP-80, Yamaha Tyros 2
Roland F20, Yamaha MOX
and various others.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SanderXpander
Platinum Member


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 7860
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 7:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The programming/mapping data that goes into an SF2 is pretty minimal compared to the audio data. It's basically a text file that says which sample goes where. I'd be surprised if it'd be over 1kb even but maybe that's too optimistic. Your HD/SSD cluster size is probably at least 4kb anyway and it's definitely less than that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Epictetus



Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Posts: 38
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 10:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
SanderXpander wrote:
The programming/mapping data that goes into an SF2 is pretty minimal compared to the audio data. It's basically a text file that says which sample goes where. I'd be surprised if it'd be over 1kb even but maybe that's too optimistic. Your HD/SSD cluster size is probably at least 4kb anyway and it's definitely less than that.


Thanks.

What I am trying to understand is whether or not sf2 is a better choice (same quality but smaller file?) compared to WAV, in a sampler with a limited RAM capacity, since WAV files are quite large.

Example: let's say that my sampler has a 192 mb RAM capacity, and I choose to load in a nylon guitar patch. I have exactly the same sound in two different formats, sf2 and WAV, sampled at the same frequency, etc. Would the sf2 file be a smaller file than the WAV file?
_________________
.


Korg Pa300. Keyboards I have owned over the years:

Kurzweil K2000, Ensoniq SQ1, Korg Trinity, Roland XP-80, Yamaha Tyros 2
Roland F20, Yamaha MOX
and various others.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SanderXpander
Platinum Member


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 7860
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The sampler is going to convert it to PCM data anyway, it wouldn't really matter unless the loop points are different or the bit depth is different.

Most soundfonts consists of WAVs as far as I'm aware. If your player supports MP3 (somewhat unlikely) you could benefit from the smaller format but most of the time, after "importing" a sample it's converted to linear PCM (read: uncompressed WAV) anyway.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Epictetus



Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Posts: 38
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ok, thanks. So it means that sf2 has no particular advantage compared to WAV, except for the additional data about basic keymapping having already been done, etc.
_________________
.


Korg Pa300. Keyboards I have owned over the years:

Kurzweil K2000, Ensoniq SQ1, Korg Trinity, Roland XP-80, Yamaha Tyros 2
Roland F20, Yamaha MOX
and various others.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SanderXpander
Platinum Member


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 7860
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2016 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
And looping info. But in raw file size, no.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korg Forums Forum Index -> Korg Kronos All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group