A maximum of 16 velocity layers, 16 bit raw files and an MP3 losy compression are facts and I can hear that with my ears quite clearly.
 
If by recording technique you mean mics, desk and room used then obviously these will affect the sound too but I am absolutely certain that what I hear is not the result of bad, or different recording techniques and everything to do poor with low bit rate and poor compression.
 
To my ears it's like the difference between MP3's at 320kbps and 128kbps, not massive but quite noticeable.
 
Hey vintage, do you not own BFD2 or BFD Eco ?
 
Steve
 

Totally agree with a Steve regarding Addictive Drums. As a drum junkie who has bought most VSTis (BFD 1-3 almost all expansions, Superior drummer 2 plus all expansions, Slate Drums, both expansions, all of NI Abbey Road series, NI Studio Drummer, ocean way drums gold, drumasonic 2 and Luxory, plus sonic reality drum masters gold series and epik drums), Addictive Drums plus all expansions up to reel machines is the only VSTi I have ever sold. I found the compressed mp3 sound severely lacking especially compared to everything else.

twaddle
A maximum of 16 velocity layers, 16 bit raw files and an MP3 losy compression are facts and I can hear that with my ears quite clearly.
 
If by recording technique you mean mics, desk and room used then obviously these will affect the sound too but I am absolutely certain that what I hear is not the result of bad, or different recording techniques and everything to do poor with low bit rate and poor compression.
 
To my ears it's like the difference between MP3's at 320kbps and 128kbps, not massive but quite noticeable.
 
Hey vintage, do you not own BFD2 or BFD Eco ?
 
Steve
 

I have BFD2 and BFD3 as welll as AD.  I agree on the sound.  i just don't think data compression is the culprit.  BFD3 uses data compression also.

twaddle
A maximum of 16 velocity layers, 16 bit raw files and an MP3 losy compression are facts and I can hear that with my ears quite clearly.
 
Steve
 

You might find these facts interesting...

“All sounds in AD are recorded, edited and mixed at 24 bit/96 kHz. They are then converted to our own format, which is 44.1 kHz and uses variable bit depth; this is very effective on percussive sounds. Our compression algorithm is virtually lossless, and the signal to noise ratio is around 140db, equivalent of 24-bit resolution.”

You guys have some awesome ears if you can hear this...

I'm sure in a world of HEAVY Professionals who do lot's testing on these things...there would have 
been a tremendous outcry of "foul" if the so called 16 bit MP3 format you talked about was used...
The RAW files were 24 bit 96 Khz...whereas the BFD 2 raw files are 24bit/48 khz....
 
Try turning off the effects on the drums in AD and then listen to the sound....you'll be surprised...

Yes BFD3 has developed a lossless compression format. XLN audio could learn how it's done form fxpansion
Vintage, why do you think addictive drums is only 2GB in size ? It's severely (badly) compressed and it's NOT lossless and that makes all the difference, just like the difference between mp3s at 128kbps and 320kbps.
 
Steve

You might find these facts interesting...

“All sounds in AD are recorded, edited and mixed at 24 bit/96 kHz. They are then converted to our own format, which is 44.1 kHz and uses variable bit depth; this is very effective on percussive sounds. Our compression algorithm is virtually lossless, and the signal to noise ratio is around 140db, equivalent of 24-bit resolution.”

You guys have some awesome ears if you can hear this...

I'm sure in a world of HEAVY Professionals who do lot's testing on these things...there would have 
been a tremendous outcry of "foul" if the so called 16 bit MP3 format you talked about was used...
The RAW files were 24 bit 96 Khz...whereas the BFD 2 raw files are 24bit/48 khz....
 

Try turning off the effects on the drums in AD and then listen to the sound....you'll be surprised...

 
I did and I wasn't.
 
That is interesting though. Is this the version that ships with Sonar X3 ?
Trust me, when I bought addictive drums in 2007 all of the facts I listed were true at that time.
I've not heard anything from them about new updates so I'd assumed it was still true but I'm glad to hear otherwise.
Perhaps I should update mine but I'm more than happy with BFD3.
 
Steve

I'm sure in a world of HEAVY Professionals who do lot's testing on these things...there would have 
been a tremendous outcry of "foul" if the so called 16 bit MP3 format you talked about was used...
The RAW files were 24 bit 96 Khz...whereas the BFD 2 raw files are 24bit/48 khz....

In a world of "heavy" professionals (whatever they are) addictive drums wouldn't get a look in.
 
Don't get me wrong, for what it is I think AD is a great product but it's not something I would want to use in a professional studio and I am NOT a professional in any sense of the word. When I bought addictive drums I thought it was the best thing I'd heard and it was, at least until I heard BFD2.
 
Anyway,whether it's down to a poorer compression format or just where and how it was recorded it doesn't sound close to the fxpansion stuff for dynamics and realism and now platinum samples have recorded the kits for BFD3 fxpansion have raised the bar for me.
 
Steve

You might find these facts interesting...
The RAW files were 24 bit 96 Khz...whereas the BFD 2 raw files are 24bit/48 khz....

I must admit I didn't really know what the difference was between the different sample rates and have happily stayed at 44.1 khz partly because I got crackling at 48 khz but having just done a little reading it doesn't seem to make a lot of difference so this thread may interest you.
48kHz-vs-96kHz
 
Steve

For whatever reason I don't think AD sounds as good as either the Toontrack or FXpansion stuff.  That said it provides some nice "straight from the box" kits. I would say its in the ECO / EZDrummer arena rater than being a BFD/Superior competitor.
 
BFD 3 seems to have raised the bar surpassing my previous favourite, Superior drummer by a considerable margin. I prefered Superior to BFD 2 but the new BFD3 kits are amazing.

When I A/B my Steven Slate Drums with 

twaddle

I'm sure in a world of HEAVY Professionals who do lot's testing on these things...there would have 
been a tremendous outcry of "foul" if the so called 16 bit MP3 format you talked about was used...
The RAW files were 24 bit 96 Khz...whereas the BFD 2 raw files are 24bit/48 khz....

In a world of "heavy" professionals (whatever they are) addictive drums wouldn't get a look in.
 
Don't get me wrong, for what it is I think AD is a great product but it's not something I would want to use in a professional studio and I am NOT a professional in any sense of the word. When I bought addictive drums I thought it was the best thing I'd heard and it was, at least until I heard BFD2.
 
Anyway,whether it's down to a poorer compression format or just where and how it was recorded it doesn't sound close to the fxpansion stuff for dynamics and realism and now platinum samples have recorded the kits for BFD3 fxpansion have raised the bar for me.
 
Steve

We all have our own ears.  I never used BFD2 for drum kits because I always liked AD far better.  Even my Steven Slate Drums 4 is collecting virtual dust.  I do think that BFD3 is definitely more real sounding than anything else I have.