No Mixer...

I find it funny people saying that the 500 needs another mpc to run it properly..... Why not just get another mpc and no 500?

engineer wrote:I find it funny people saying that the 500 needs another mpc to run it properly..... Why not just get another mpc and no 500?

I agree completely...the 500 will work fine from start to finish.

engineer wrote:

J.Daniels wrote:people rely way too much on their sight. i believe that if you dont rely on vision, you will have a hightened sense of sound

good luck finding the pads.

For real tho, when you close your eyes the focus/concentration/processing power of your CNS is freed up from one of its most data intensive tasks:

Vision

Thus, allowing/forcing(think of what your body does ASAP if you are blinded in a fight) every other aspect of our sensory nervous system to be heightened/increased.

Don't believe me??
...close your eyes when mixing for the duration of the song.

alpha80 wrote:...close your eyes when mixing for the duration of the song.

good luck finding the faders. How do you know what you're adjusting? Brail?

Seriously though, humans' sight is by far the most powerful of our senses. That's why our hearing/smell pales in comparison to other animals. I would love to see someone try to mix a song with a blindfold on the entire time.

Even if you could find the faders you would be so disoriented your other senses would be thrown off. You'd be nervous. Your mind wouldn't work the way it's used to working. You couldn't focus. Basically, you'd suck because your mind is so used to vision always being there, that when it's taken away the brain's entire thought process has been thrown off.

There's nothing wrong with closing your eyes and concentrating on listening. Mixing a song from top to bottom with a blindfold? Absolute nonsense.

Tell Stevie Wonder that

engineer wrote:
Seriously though, humans' sight is by far the most powerful of our senses. That's why our hearing/smell pales in comparison to other animals. .

Cats can smell better than humans and can see in the dark...

lovesign wrote:Tell Stevie Wonder that

He ll mention the people that have always programmed his synths for him.

I wouldnt knock visual waveform editing myself. Depending on what you re doing it can be pretty useful as long as the graphic acurately represents the wave data. But yeah it isnt a must by any means, just can speed some things up a little.

If im using a set of representative numbers or a representative graphic to edit a wave, im still using my eyes. Same goes for the step edit and grid edit debate that sprang up a while back. The latter in each case is just more economical, a quicker and more accurate way to show the same info at once. That said i still agree that some people end up switching their ears off...the point is.. these things can be useful and economical to someone who is still listening.

unloop wrote:But yeah it isnt a must by any means, just can speed some things up a little.

Exactly...

question
does anyone here know someone who makes an entire song without once using his or her ears? me either. people here act like this is a serious problem with the youth of today. unless a colony of deaf producers exists somewhere (if it does, it's probably in utah or backwoods W. VA) i really think some of the concerns expressed in this thread and others are misguided.

i mean yes - we DEFINITELY have a problem if people are shift timing and groove building visually instead of based on what sounds good, and sure, probably somewhere, sometime someone is dumb enough to be doing that.

but editing a waveform? that's not "making music." that's...editing a waveform.

Yoshimi wrote:Cats can smell better than humans and can see in the dark...

They can't mix music though.

Lampdog wrote:

Yoshimi wrote:Cats can smell better than humans and can see in the dark...

They can't mix music though.

Oh, I dunno ! My kitties jump up on my decks and make some freaky scratch beats every now and again !! LOL

engineer wrote:There's nothing wrong with closing your eyes and concentrating on listening.

That's what I was saying...

Sit down, fire up the project, get comfy, and open your eyes when looking for a certain knob/fader...but I almost always close my eyes, and "tune in", when making those extra small adjustments to the knobs/faders.

You seem smart, so I'm sure you already know all the details of the CNS I mentioned in my post. Processing speed/focus is diverted. Certain personality types might even be uncomfortable, like you said.

Not me.

Peace.

"but editing a waveform? that's not "making music." that's...editing a waveform."

Plucking a string? Thats not making music. Thats plucking a string.
Striking a piano key? Thats not making music. Its striking a piano key.
Pushing a button?.....

and so on. It all adds up.

If you make music with a sampler editing a waveform is a massive part of the many little things that add up to making music. What exactly is making music if not haveing melodic and rythmic ideas and then doing all those countless (and if you re as obsessive as me) fun things that take it out of your head and into the real world?

Myself I dont think anyone is making music without using their ears. But some people definatly do arrange parts (particuarly drum parts) into looping sections and whole songs from looping sections whilst paying too much attention to what they see on screen rather than by thinking about the arrangement and then using the economy of something like a computer sequencers arrange window to realise it quickly. What im saying is that graphical interfaces can be bloody useful ways of makeing something happen quickly and intuitively but its important to think about what you want to do first rather than letting whatever interface you re using lead you as you put it together on the hoof. Can hear the result of this in the sameyness of some peoples music ... others make wonderful exciting new things happen. Same as ever.

There is definately difference between 'playing live music' and 'producing music'. That difference is widened significanly when you don't sequence by playing a digital instrument, but rather, glue things together with grid programming. Not that this is bad, but there is a difference in execution. That being said, I think you are right. Personally, I think it's insulting when people say that playing live renders a better product than programming. Depends on the sound you are going for. I don't do grid programming, but then again, that's just a personal preference, so do you and F*** what anyone says. Although, learning to play live stuff never hurt anyone (except your flatmates' ears, LOL).

Stevie Wonder? kittie cats producing beats? This has gotten very deep!

Hey does the MPC500 have the grid programming thing?

yes,
one row per 4 columns