I'm saving for Christmas...SD2 or BFD3?

No question BFD3 is the one to get!

You can't really go wrong with either one, Clint. Personally, I've been a Superior Drummer user for years and never once regretted that purchase.
 
I've never even bought any additional libraries for it. It's so malleable that I can make it sound any way I want iusng only the default kit. I don't know how many BFD users are still using the samples that came with the product - most end up collecting a lot of add-ons. Of course, BFD add-ons are cheaper than SD2's so it kinda works out in the end I guess.

If you get BFD3 you have a huge number of controls to tinker with. I have it, but sometimes I just go with AD2 because it's real simple by comparison. If you want total control it would be hard to beat BFD3. I use about 20% of its capabilities.

If you are going with BFD and like rock music get the platinum samples evil drums if still 56 at musiciansfriend if you can.

Stock bfd3 kits sound great too.

Not mentioned is SSD4 (Steven Slate Drums). I have BFD3 and SSD4 and switch between them when I need something specific. They are both really well done and the drum samples are very good.
 
Regards,
Dan
 

Have used BFD3 in other studios. I have BFD Eco. AD2 gets some use here and there. Hardly ever use it. My main goto always seems to be SD2! I, too, have purchased many of the EZ kits and they work seamlessly in SD2 with more features to control to boot. IMO, the cymbals sound better in a mix with SD2 than BFD but everyone hears differently. Your choice also should be based on what type of music your doing as well. In my project studio I work very closely with songwriters of every genre. I have to have as many options as I can because we never know what will come along. I have AD2 and occasionally there will be a project where nothing else sounds better for the song than AD2. The niggle that I have with BFD is the samples seem a little top harsh sometimes. I almost picked up the Steven Slate when it went on sell a while back but I have so many drum kits now I feel it would be redundant as far as sounds and spending more money. SD2 has served me fantastically over the last 5 or 6 years and I will patiently wait to pounce on SD3 when it comes along!

BassDaddy
Superior Drummer 3 should come with a  new version of EZ Player Pro and it should have the great browsing and song building functions of EZ Drummer 2. I will be looking for the blowout prices on SD 2 then buy the SD 3 uppdate/upgrade.

What info do you have that Superior drummer 3 is even being planned let alone imminent?
Have done a google search and all I can see is speculation, most of which is last year and older.
 
 
Steve

I'm trying to think of anything that SD2 lacks that a version 3 might address. It already gives you a ridiculous amount of control over bleeds and mic positions, and it has outstanding built-in effects. I'd like to be able to hide unused mixer channels, but that's about the only missing feature I can think of asking for.
 
The biggest downside to SD2 versus BFD and Slate is that the samples are minimally processed, meaning it's more like mixing real drum recordings and takes a bit more time. Slate just sounds great out of the box with no fuss. But what some may consider a downside, I consider a big plus. Maybe I'm just a control freak, I dunno.

clintmartin
A lot to think about. I plan on keeping EZD2 and AD2...In a lot of ways SD2 makes a lot of since. I'm not sure how well EZD2 works with BFD3? Being able to drag and drop the midi patterns back and forth would be nice.

Try the demo before deciding, it won't cost you anything and there are plenty of people here who can help and loads of on line tutorials so it shouldn't be too hard to get your head around.
 
I'm not a fan of SD2 whatsoever, don't like the mixer/interface and the sounds are thin clicky and insipid to my ears but that's just me.

cclarry

clintmartin
A lot to think about. I plan on keeping EZD2 and AD2...In a lot of ways SD2 makes a lot of since. I'm not sure how well EZD2 works with BFD3? Being able to drag and drop the midi patterns back and forth would be nice.

As long as you have the right maps it's no problem...

Not if the velocity layers are vastly different between the two. IIRC many BFD3 kits have up to far greater velocity layers than EZD2 and so MID that recorded for EZD2 may not com across the same in BFD3.
 
OBO (Only Bapu's Opinion).

bitflipperThe biggest downside to SD2 versus BFD and Slate is that the samples are minimally processed, meaning it's more like mixing real drum recordings and takes a bit more time. Slate just sounds great out of the box with no fuss. But what some may consider a downside, I consider a big plus. Maybe I'm just a control freak, I dunno.

 
I'm baffled by this, BFD2 and BFD3 have 0 processing on any of their kits and never have had.
It's been discussed to death on here over the years.
 
I don't think BFD2 had any processing and BFD3 has included 2 "comp" channels which were recorded with a small amount of compression. These is optional and can be mixed in or muted to taste.
 
Slate on the other hand is very processed.
Very well processed I should add although a little too processed for my liking.
 
Steve

BTW, it did not happen to all EZD MIDI played by BFD2/3 just sometimes.
 
Again, OBO.
 

FWIW, this thread makes me happy I own EZD2, and it's all I need.

mudgel

bitflipper
I'm trying to think of anything that SD2 lacks that a version 3 might address. It already gives you a ridiculous amount of control over bleeds and mic positions, and it has outstanding built-in effects. I'd like to be able to hide unused mixer channels, but that's about the only missing feature I can think of asking for.

Pretty much agree. For times when I use the SD2 mixer I'd like to see it scale up a bit more on screen. Also there's no question about the quality of the fx in SD2 if you want/need to use them. Over the years though I've refined how I set it up and use individual audio tracks in Sonar and mix and add fx there.

It would be nice to see some updates to Ez Player Pro.

I felt the same way when fxpasnion were canvassing BFD2 users as to what features they wanted to see in BFD3, all I could think of that BFD2 wasn't at that time was 64bit. But when you look at the feature set of BFD3 compared to SD 2 there must be things in there you'd like to see in SD2 surely?
 
There's quite a few things that BFD2 had that made it the choice for me over SD2, things that to me really matter like a global fx button as well as other global parameters. Host automation and one that I really appreciate is just never having to use drum maps. Editing the keymap in BFD3 is so smooth in comparison to using drum maps and the fact that all the kit pieces/note are just there in sonars piano roll and are continually updated when loading new kit pieces is a really significant advantage. I just went back to have a look at a drum map and set it up how I liked it, really not a nice experience compared to the keymap page in BFD3.
 
Steve

twaddle

bapu
All I know is that occasionally (depending on the kits chosen) what sounded good in the source MID program (ie EZD) sounded wrong in the resultant program (ie BFD2). Almost like the level (velocity?) of a kit piece hit was considerably off between the two programs; either much softer or much louder.
 
I'm not speaking of overall kit level but on an individual kit piece hit basis.
 
As I said, OBO.

Ah, okay, that could be down to the dynamic range or loudness curve in BFD3.
There's a "loudness panel" in BFD3 where you can adjust the range, curve and velocity dynamics so this can make a big difference to how it will play with one midi file in two different drum vsti's.
 
The drums in both BFD2 and BFD2 were recorded very hot and so will sound much louder anyway, that's what I liked about it. The Platinum Sample stock BFD3 kits are much quieter in comparison but still louder than EZdrummer.
 
Steve

Steve,
 
Let me make an case based on what you said and what I believe happened to me.
 
Say the MIDI I choose was made against an EZD2 kit. And suppose that kit had 10 levels of hits on the snare. And let's say they range from -10db to 0db in 1db increments. I believe that when EZD2 receives a MIDI Velocity of 127 it will play the 0db (loudest) sample. When will it play the -1db sample? I suspect that will play the -1db sample when velocity is between 103 to 115 and so on down the MIDI veloity scale of 1-127. 
 
Now, say that same velocity is sent to BFD3 kit that has 20 levels of recorded hits ranging from -10db to 0db in .5db increments.
 
When will BFD3 play the loudest and when will it play the next loudest based on MIDI velocity? I assume it will play the loudest sample at 127 but will play the next loudest somewhere in the approx MIDI velocity of 115-121.
 
Will each MIDI velocity produce the same audio output level assuming all "audio" parameters are equal in both EZD2 and BFD3. IOW a 127 MIDI velocity in both systems would be "balanced" to achieve a 0db level. Then what happens to both systems as the receive each midi velocity down the scale. Will the both produce the same db output. I highly suspect not because what would be the point of some kits that that tout have more sample layers than other kits?
 
I suppose that the number of audio level samples for toms is less than snares and within toms that may vary (ie less samples for lowest pitched tom vs the highest pitched) and that cymbals are less audio samples than toms. Get my drift (see what I did there).
 
Maybe I am misunderstanding the relationship of the audio levels and number of samples per kit piece to the received MIDI velocity by the drum host. But that is the best explanation for what I was sure I was hearing when I used another manufacturers supplied MIDI for a specific kit mapped into another drum host using a "similar" tyoe kit (IOW I was not using a Jazz MIDI from EZD2 to run a Metal Kit in BFD3).
 
And again, this is OBO based on what I heard when I took an EZD2 MIDI file and mapped it in BFD3. It wasn't an overall drum kit level as was one of your supposition but a weirdness in the relative volumes of the kit pieces within the context of kits chosen for the two hosts.
 
If all drum hosts had the same number of audio samples and interpreted the MIDI velocity exactly the same I wiould expect the same MIDI in both hots to sound the same (in relative kit piece context) between the two hosts. But I believe that this is not the case and therefore some sample libraries tout their sample layer counts (are these what you are referring to as articulations?).