Do you sample lossy sounds?

It's not real until you've heard it, so I made an example:
http://jamon.name/sample+recompression+mp3

The reason why I feel it is important is because lossy compression artifacts actually hurt to listen to. With a high-bitrate file properly encoded direct from a master it doesn't sound very bad, it's listenable or even indistinguishable from the source. But with the common bitrates, it's barely tolerable, not enjoyable, and with recompressed lossy files it literally causes ear pain.

It has become so common to use lossy compression, and most people don't seem to understand it, which results in poor use. It's a potential shame because what if an incredible song is produced using MP3 files? We can still enjoy listening to old classics because tape doesn't sound harsh to listen to, even with hiss, and noise, because it's a more natural sound that's smoother.

It'd be a loss if in 30 years no one even bothers to listen to some music made today because it sounds so displeasing. Between our over-compression of loudness, and over-compression of quality, our music today doesn't seem like it'll stand the test of time. If you do your best to preserve quality from beginning to end of the signal chain, people might still listen to your work after you're dead.

I haven't read all the replies in this post, so forgive me if I bring nothing new to the table...

Personally I sample from vinyl on 60% of my beats, MP3's (only 192-320kb) on 35% of my beats, and CD's on about 5% of my beats. That's a rough estimate.

When I use MP3-files they are ALWAYS 192-320kb/sec. and are always rips of vinyl. Because sometimes you can just find some obscure rare shit on those sample-blogs that you won't find in your local second-hand shop.

Especially where I live, in Denmark, it's hard to find really interesting used vinyl shops, unless you live in Copenhagen which has relatively many vinyl shops. But I live in a small town in Jutland near Horsens, and it's not that easy to find the real gold here, other than the usual often-found soul records such as The Temptations, The Supremes, The Stylistics, etc.

Jazz is even harder to find here where I live. To this day I haven't found an Ahmad Jamal record, although I hear they are easier to find in Copenhagen. I have however found some Quincy Jones, George Benson and stuff like that. But - again - not the rare stuff. So if you ever go to Denmark for cratediggin', go to Copenhagen. (Unless you're looking up private persons who have a collection for sale, they'll often have something interesting). The good thing is, though, that the vinyls are very cheap in the vinyl shop in Horsens. In the cheap bin you can find LP's for 5-10 DK kroner (1-2 US dollars).

But despite it being so hard to find good rare obscure quality vinyls here in Denmark, I STILL use them to make about 60% (or perhaps more) of my beats, because there's just NOTHING like that real vinyl feeling. It's the sound, the crackles and pops, the atmosphere. You won't find this on CD! So for me vinyls and MP3's for semi-emergency situations are the way to go.

Back to the subject though: do I ever sample lossy formats (besides 192-320kb MP3's which in theory are lossy formats, although it's very hard to hear)?? NO! The lowest I'll go, and that's only if I'm VERY hard pressed, is 128kb MP3's. Cus when you get that low in kb/sec. it's easy to hear that frequencies are missing. And when you get below 128 (112 and below) the sound quality is just plain wack.

I also NEVER EVER sample from Youtube. I think I read that some people actually like it's grittiness because the sound quality is low. They must be out of their minds! The sound quality loss is digital! It's not a good thing. The crackles, pops, dust, and scratches on vinyl are a good thing cus they are analog and authentic. Youtube sound quality just sucks however you put it, and anyone who actually makes a beat based on a sample from Youtube I refuse to call a professional beatmaker. It's amateurish. It's better to find a song you want to sample on Youtube, and THEN go dig it up on vinyl - even if you have to buy it on eBay. Or at the very least find a proper FLAC or 320kb MP3 rip of the song.

I just don't see the advantage/necessity of sampling from Youtube. If it's available on Youtube, then it's also available on other, better formats.

It's kind of comparable to those who get their drumbreaks from PhatDrumLoops (website). The wave-files on that site are in horrible quality (it's a mad old site which was made back when ordinary people didn't have fast internet connections). The site is very useful for FINDING out artists/song-titles of good drumbreaks, but don't just grab 'em directly off the site. Go out and dig the break up yourself.

Haha, perhaps I sounded a little pissed in the last part of my post. Didn't mean to. I just feel strongly about this subject. People shouldn't be so lazy, and should care more about their sample sources.

_Stilo_ wrote:

dmarz45 wrote:You can find a lot more samples and you dont even have to leave your house and they're FREE nonetheless!

I don't know...maybe I'm old-fashioned, but when I sample something to use it in a track at least I want to own the original recording (unless it's a free broadcast like tv anyway)...as in, having paid for it to get it. That's the least respect you can give to the artist.

Those sample-blogs are good for listening pleasure and to know what you want to dig for.

buying a used redord, in no ways supporst a recording artist.
don't fool yourself

I'm from Holland to, and every thursday I visit RushHour Record-Store, niceeee shit over there.

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 3:39 am
Posts: 1426
Location: mpc heaven

Yes. Any sound is a good sound to me. The Filter King is in the House.

Theres times I'll be watching TV, and hear a sample I want.

Go to youtube, search up the show and then Bam! If I could find a better quality version, I go for that.

I rewind it back, pause it, TV output to MPC input, then record .
But it requires digital TV, it's working very well.

Cases wrote:I rewind it back, pause it, TV output to MPC input, then record .
But it requires digital TV, it's working very well.

Never thought about doing that, thanks for the tip

take from anywhere, does't matter.

any recording or data reduction mess should add to the beat.

if it's dope, it's dope.

At the moment I have been sampling from AAC and MP3 straight from my iPod.

I had a turntable lined up to use, was waiting on a mixer or a receiver of some sort, then my son put his booger fingers in the turntable and broke it. I lack the disposable income to repair my shit, so here we are with the iPod.

I personally encode any music that I own to no less than 224 bitrate AAC (MP4). Sometimes I'll do FLAC. If I already own it I will sample its original format (usually CD).

I've also been enjoying the texture of sampling from cassette. When I first started listening to music that was the medium I had, and with the advent of MP3 I feel like the thick frequency response is long gone. Tapes have a sentimental value to my ears.

When I produced beats on a computer with software, I would sample MP3 and WAV frequently (almost always). I have a rather large collection of music in MP3 format, a lot of it is rare stuff, a lot of production library music, and obscure experimental artists from the 90s.

That also makes it a challenge because when you get MP3s from someone else you can't decide how good you want the quality. If it's a rare-assed record you can't ever find, but managed to grab it on P2P, it's 128 bitrate shit and you're out of luck.

On the other hand, sampling an actual instrument that you played a completely original passage with is another workaround (and free of legal hassle).

yeah.. i'll sample it if i think it will be of use.. the fact that it is lossy should not always matter.. all that happens to it could be seen as another effect that has changed the sound.. just like any of the thousands of varriations of effects and plugins or recordings methods out there will do to a sound

it all comes down to if it sounds good or not when it is placed where it is supposed to be..

i would not waste any time obsessing over it not being hi def, which i know a lot of people do.. they put in a lot of time to get a sound as hi def as possible only to process or use it as a layer in such a way that it renders all that extra work completely unecessary.

a lo-fi muffled snare that sounds completely useless on its own may be just that special ingredient when used as a layer or in combination with sometihng else.. in fact, if that sound then had been hi def, it might not even have worked at all

so yeah, personally i dont put in any extra work until i am sure it is actually needed

I think I've sampled from lossy audio files just a few times, but I don't have rule (i.e. it can be from anywhere), I'd sample as long as it sounds right.
While I don't think I'll ever sample MP3 for something musical, but I think it depends on the situations. If it is just, say, voice of Bugs Bunny, I don't think the sound quality matters much!

Having said that, it's rare that I've ever found sounds that I want to sample from MP3 or lossy audio, so that's the reason I'd sample from vinyls most of the time. Plus, sampling from vinyl is easier, you can cue, stop, spin, speed up, pitch down with your fingers!

You CAN (and should) tell the difference between MP3 audio and lossless audio, if you have decent audio system. It can be hard (or nearly impossible) to tell a part, if you are listing with iPod with earphones, listening outside. AAC format sounds better than MP3 (even with the same rate), so I use AAC format for encoding.

A lot of audio files (Usually lossy audio files, but FLACs are no exceptions) that floating around internet are often sound worse that the bit rate. I think many of them are converted from lossy audio, rather than original CDs!

get those black lion guys to mod your tivo box haha

I rewind it back, pause it, TV output to MPC input, then record .
But it requires digital TV, it's working very well.

Yes. Sometimes if it's vibes or something lo-fi you can use that as more of a background "ambience" type noise and just layer stuff on top of it that sounds better(horns, strings).

I've sampled many many times from mp3s in every bitrate and personally - i hate it.
At first it wasn't big pain, on the mpc it sounded lil bit thrashy but then when it come to mixing iit was pointless - you put shit in you get the shit out.
Now I avoid sampling from youtube - only if it's 720p or more, now i'm looking for flacs, wavs and cd. When i've got a possibillity(still don't have my own deck) i sample from vinyl.

Don't waste your time because of lossy format.

mp3 is like the borg. Resistance is futile.

Records (and old school samplers and analog synths) sound so much better but in between raising kids and paying the mortgage, I don't have the time or energy to be a real digger (or spend ages chopping up a sample or shuttling a minimoog back and forth to the repair shop). I barely have time to make beats period. Wish I could be true to the game but its just not practical anymore. At least for me.

Anyway the musical idea trumps everything IMO. Every single one of us has heard a great sounding wack beat but who here thinks Dilla for example would have been wack if he was on fruityloops sampling mp3s?

mp3 wrote:Records (and old school samplers and analog synths) sound so much better but in between raising kids and paying the mortgage...

You are not alone! But to me, listening music from computer / ipod and listening from music directly coming from record player are two totally different things. I am not dissing digital audio form (I appreciate for what it is, and I know digital audio can sound good), I use both, but digital audio won't replace vinyls, at least to me.

mp3 wrote:Anyway the musical idea trumps everything IMO. Every single one of us has heard a great sounding wack beat but who here thinks Dilla for example would have been wack if he was on fruityloops sampling mp3s?

I'd say yes, not because of MP3's sound quality, but that would've meant that Dilla stopped diggin' and started compromising.