beats coming out of 2kxl vs. recorded 2kxl beat on comp

I wanna see if y'all hear a difference between what you record on the comp versus what you hear coming straight out of the 2kxl.

I compared a beat coming out the 2kxl and it seemed to bump a LOT more than how it comes out on the comp. I'm using echo's miamidi so y'all know it ain't some bullshit soundblaster I'm comparing the mpc to.

the comp version stripped away a lot of the bass, it seems. particularly in the kick.

you ever notice anything like this happening??

What type and how long are the cables you use to connect to the computer?Sometimes it can be a difference in sound because of length of cables or between balanced and unbalanced cables.

anon_twist wrote:I wanna see if y'all hear a difference between what you record on the comp versus what you hear coming straight out of the 2kxl.

I compared a beat coming out the 2kxl and it seemed to bump a LOT more than how it comes out on the comp. I'm using echo's miamidi so y'all know it ain't some **** soundblaster I'm comparing the mpc to.

the comp version stripped away a lot of the bass, it seems. particularly in the kick.

you ever notice anything like this happening??

THat has nothing to do with your MPC or your computer, thats a soundcard issue,

class...

I got a 8 channel snake running and maybe an 8ft hosa..

and like I said.. it's an echo miamidi.. the soundcard shouldn't be an issue.

it's all good though, I re-did the beat with the eps16/mpc60.. shit's already sounding better than what came out of the 2kxl..

peace

thats gotta be some way u either recording or a soundcard issue... has nonthing to do with the MPC

the original intention of my message was to see if anyone else experienced a difference in sound quality when recording from their mpc.

seeing how echo products are studio-grade, I didn't think the sound card is the issue. but now it seems some feel the echo midimia isn't studio quality.

is the miamidi really that bad? or are you guys not aware of echo soundcards??

when I reworked the same samples into the eps/60, it already sounds different to how it came directly out of the 2kxl..

but now I'm convinced beats made from the 2kxl are light in the ass compared to the 60

peace

Soundcard issue.

Electronics a/d d/a issue.

Algorithm issue.

Cable issue.

Component issue.

Just different machines, the way they were made
and they way you hook them up is the simple answer.

Everyone is right and wrong..

HAHAH!

What is going to become clear to you depending on how u think, is your going to be abled to realise that for certains type of song, track, beat your doing a particular process of either mpc60, xl, or what ever are going to use has better advantages, sound etc over the other....

so enjoy experimenting nothing is completly right for anything...its how u go about it.

true, fellas.. I see the error in my ways.

this all started after I read quik's interview in the recent scratch mag.. how computers strip away what he calls "third harmonics" or something.. and it ends up with less bass presence (I assume) than recording to tape, through analog circuitry.

but what I don't get is, if he went through all the trouble of using strictly analog gear.. it all ends up as 1's and zeroes when it gets transferred to CD..

yeah but these guys don't burn CD's from their computer, they get a really high end CD recorder and play the song through serious converters if it's coming from digital, or from the tape directly, hence no computer, but still a CD.

You get a more accurate digital representation that you would by just grabbing it in your computer which is constantly shifting resources from here to there, and the burner is mediocre at best.

Of course, homie probably means in Pro Tools, which is known far and wide to have negative effects on your bass and generally sounds like sparkley dog doo doo. But tape makes a difference, but that good shyt'll cost ya.

anon_twist wrote:true, fellas.. I see the error in my ways.

this all started after I read quik's interview in the recent scratch mag.. how computers strip away what he calls "third harmonics" or something.. and it ends up with less bass presence (I assume) than recording to tape, through analog circuitry.

but what I don't get is, if he went through all the trouble of using strictly analog gear.. it all ends up as 1's and zeroes when it gets transferred to CD..

he is right in some senses, for the digital wave is not a variable wave its serious of 1, 0's as u mentioned, where as the analogue contains it all.
hence why we now use very hi sample rates to try capture the parts being missed out normally.

you might lose some low end when you record digital.

Sorry Ive gotta jump in here, I dont post much but I read a lot.

You get what you pay for.

You will lose the "anaglogue" asthetics if you continue to use crap a/d converters. A lot the "quality loss" is also much to do with the mathematical algarythms the software uses to dither the digital signal and very much to do with the Bit Rate and sampling speed of your DAE.

I wouldnt mix digitally on anything less than 24bit 96k, the digital artifacts become too apparent when dropping lower, esp with low end and high end signals.

On the other hand if you can't afford or use quality converters then you could print into your DAE system Spdif, but then you are also bottlenecking on the dithering algarythms and bitrate capabilities of the software and I've tried and tested pretty much every DAE. Nothing can touch the digidesign software. The motu hardware with Digital Performer came close but I still wouldnt touch it.

If you do go down the Spdif route you will be recording in 16b 44.1k which would give you a perfect representation of the sound inside your akai. I personally preffer to make use of the famous akai D/A sound and then record analogue in a much higher quality convertors and higher bit and sampling rate. I find my sounds bump more using this method.

I'm the fussiest **** when I mix and I wouldnt mix any of my tracks on anything less than Pro Tools HD 192 with Apogee convertors or if I was going down the analogue route. the lowest I would go to is an SSL Jade desk, I preffer the Rupert "Neve" sound over the SSL sound (see the neve focusrite desk in my pic) but Dr Dre might disagree with me.

I also found Radar HD recorders to have brilliant A/D converters built in, close to the quality of the apogee convertors.

Also When you print your mix down to 16bit 44.1k make sure you dither the signal which will give you less digital artifacts and a true representation of the resolution your printing to.

Hope my post helps.

J

thanks for the info jess. some good points to think about and moreso to encourage me to make due with what I have/can afford.

Here's an article for you to read, make sure you read it though. It talks about in detail what i've been telling you about.

http://www.digidesign.com/digizine/archive/digizine_september04/techtalk/