4 day poll, 1 vote

Asha c https://m.soundcloud.com/ashaxx4/sp358

Green dutch https://youtu.be/UAM7UHVIi8c

1616 https://youtu.be/XHE6GdXO4bw

Nunchaku Randy https://soundcloud.com/nunchakurandy/while-we-were-in-karate-class-spbb358

I went with Green Dutch! Loved that lofi 202 crunch! Everything about it had that nostalgic feel! Video worked well with the beat too!

I've also voted for Green Dutch, or rather, SP-USER's vote goes to Green Dutch regardless of his current and most unfortunate membership and voting status limbo!

Well done to all who participated in the battle, although for me it was the overall vibe of Green Dutch's track that tipped the scales in his favour.

Lotta votes but no indication of who’s voting but I think its clear green dutch better get some sample fodder ready after his sweet lofi crunchiness!!

It does have a nice vibe to it, punchy too and my SP-555 compressor sure as hell doesn't sound like that (not in isolation it doesn't anyway).

Unless perhaps it's got something to do with filtering which I suppose it could have. Either way his compression sounds fat and fluffy (best way I can describe it).

Very nice!

lossy data compression/low sample rate with the sp202 also greatly alters the dynamics of audio, especially when dynamic range compression is applied afterwards, not sure how the sp555 compares cus i've never worked with one

voted for green dutch

Damn thanks for the votes fellas. I chop my drums on the 404 first and then play all the samples from the 202 live with it to compose a song recorded to Ableton. I use compression on the drum and ext source from the 404 and record my samples in lofi1 on the 202 at a much lower volume setting. That usually gets beefed up with the 404's compression efx once its activated. 202 is all about timing and I use the reverse button to stretch melodies out.

This sample pack was right up my alley. I've been sampling from Fish Man for a long time and the drum record had some heat!. I'll start compiling the next battle and post it ASAP. PEace and thanks again!

@Zindan
To be honest, while I love the standard 'Comp' on the SP-555, I'm not a fan of 'Lo-Fi Comp' and can't see myself ever using it!

All it appears to do is waste a knob on letting you set the 'Type' which is basically letting you choose between various combinations of bit-rates and sample rates. Honestly, I'd rather use the dedicated 'Bit Crash' effect for that and then resample it throught the dedicated 'Comp' effect than use 'Lo-Fi Comp'.

So basically, using 'Lo-Fi Comp' means you loose two parameters compared to what you'd have by using the other effects independently and resampling, so for me it takes more than it gives.

@Green Dutch
Does sound as if Zindan was right then, although I'm surprised to hear they use lossy compression at all. Either way the process you used gives really nice results. Not sure if I'd be able to get it using just a 555 but I might give it a go later taking a cue from your process.

Hi guys.

I liked all members!
I really liked the loops of asha c and Nunchaku Randy.

My vote is for Nunchaku Randy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_compression

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range_compression

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog-to-digital_converter

https://www.vintagesynth.com/roland/sp202.php

"Sampler - 31.25kHz (hi-fi), 15.63kHz (standard), 7.81kHz (lo-fi), 3.91kHz (lo-fi 2); 32 to 260 seconds"

I know about that stuff, and sampling a 404 compressor at some of those sampling rates would definitely explain it. What I meant is that I didn't think they would use "lossy compression" on an audio device like the 202.

Generally when manufacturers use any form of data compression on such devices it is lossless, not lossy. Also bear in mind that any data lost through lower sampling rates and bit depth is not the same as lossy compression, it's simply a result of those lower sampling rates and bit-depths.

Anyway, getting OT now so back on topic before asha kicks my arse!

'The term "lossless" refers to a digital audio file that has the sample rate as a CD (16-bit/44.1 kHz). For years, the highest resolution audio that many lossless streaming services like Tidal, Deezer and Qobuz offered was CD-quality'

anything below 44.1 kHz is lossy

https://www.gearpatrol.com/tech/audio/a36585957/lossless-audio-explained/#:~:text=The%20term%20%22lossless%22%20refers%20to,Qobuz%20offered%20was%20CD%2Dquality.

'Sample. rates aren't arbitrary numbers. The computer should be able to recreate waves with frequencies up to 20 kHz in order to recreate frequencies within the range of human hearing—humans hear frequencies between 20 Hz and 20 kHz. But for computers to recreate that, they have to use sample rates double that. So a sample rate that is 40 kHz should technically do the trick, right?
This is true, but you need a pretty powerful—and at one time, expensive—low-pass filter to prevent audible aliasing. The sample rate of 44.1 kHz technically allows for audio at frequencies up to 22.05 kHz to be recorded. By placing the Nyquist frequency outside of our hearing range, we can use more moderate filters to eliminate aliasing without much audible effect. Most people lose their ability to hear upper frequencies over the course of their lives and can only hear frequencies up to 15 kHz–18 kHz. However, this “20-to-20” rule is still accepted as the standard range for everything we could hear.'

https://www.izotope.com/en/learn/digital-audio-basics-sample-rate-and-bit-depth.html

the sp202 was released in 1998 and AFAIK there weren't any samplers that were capable of storing lossless audio at the time, smart media cards were the most advanced compact consumer storage medium

No it isn't, and you're misunderstanding what those articles are explaining to you. There's a massive difference between what "lossy compression" does to audio and what lower sampling rates and bit-depths do to it.

You can test your own belief here, because if what you just said were true then technically Audio CD would be "Lossy" compared to SACD.

HAHA im a lover not a fighter, anything that sparks civilised discussion is welcomed!

it is generally accepted that anything at or above the quality of 16bit 44.1kHz PCM is considered lossless audio due to the physical limitations of human hearing, higher resolution audio does exist and there are certain advantages to using it in audio production

here's another resource you will disregard https://www.musicgateway.com/blog/music-production/lossy-or-lossless-audio-formats