Dumping Track -Mpc loops correctly motif dosen't

I have a quick question and hopefully someone could answer it it would be a great help.

I'm using a 4000/digi 002/motif rack/pt 7.1. When I dump the drums in2 pro tools and duplicate them they loop perfectly, but when I dump the sounds from the motif rack & duplicate them they don't loop correctly. I've tried time correcting to make sure the playing might not be off, but the same result. It loops in the machine, but not in pro tool. I've used the search and tried some of suggestions, but still no luck

So if anyone could help or direct me 2 the correct way it would be appreciated.

record the MOTIF tracks twice through. so if the pattern is 4 bars, record it for 8, and get rid of the first 4. sounds like you got reverb or release sounds at the end of the pattern that are getting chopped off.

Thanks for the help mp3...ill try this hopefully it works out...does anyone have anything else?

I have run into that problem as well....Just throw a crossfade in between the regions and it should be kosher. Worked for me..

do the double looping thing on all of your dumps, takes a little longer but you will get better loops.

you could always track out the entire song in one pass, rather than trying to make loops of your motif's output.

Also are you in grid mode in protools?

dminor wrote:you could always track out the entire song in one pass, rather than trying to make loops of your motif's output.

Also are you in grid mode in protools?

Not a good idea, unless the song is already completely laid out.... The audio files would be very small when you do it by a few bars, versus a whole 4 minute long .wav file. So if you do 16 or 17(17 is for Strings, Horns, Etc.... so you can catch the movement going back in on the 1) bars for each instrument or seperate track you will use less "Hard Drive Space".

4dahaterz wrote:

dminor wrote:you could always track out the entire song in one pass, rather than trying to make loops of your motif's output.

Also are you in grid mode in protools?

Not a good idea, unless the song is already completely laid out.... The audio files would be very small when you do it by a few bars, versus a whole 4 minute long .wav file. So if you do 16 or 17(17 is for Strings, Horns, Etc.... so you can catch the movement going back in on the 1) bars for each instrument or seperate track you will use less "Hard Drive Space".

If you can't track out full passes, then you need to upgrade your hardware. As for catching overlap, you'd have to cross fade from the end of one loop into the other, so you wouldn't technically be getting the full effect of your instruments decay...unless you tracked them out on 2 tracks and then bounced them down to one stereo track...but if you're worried about file size, then you wouldn't do that, based on your statement. Additionally, every time you create a fade, you're creating a new file and using more disk space.

Also, what difference does it make if you track it all the way now or all the way later? Still using up disk space...

Once you're happy with your sequence you could always remove the unused files from the session/hard drive if disk space is still an issue.

dminor wrote:

4dahaterz wrote:

dminor wrote:you could always track out the entire song in one pass, rather than trying to make loops of your motif's output.

Also are you in grid mode in protools?

Not a good idea, unless the song is already completely laid out.... The audio files would be very small when you do it by a few bars, versus a whole 4 minute long .wav file. So if you do 16 or 17(17 is for Strings, Horns, Etc.... so you can catch the movement going back in on the 1) bars for each instrument or seperate track you will use less "Hard Drive Space".

If you can't track out full passes, then you need to upgrade your hardware. As for catching overlap, you'd have to cross fade from the end of one loop into the other, so you wouldn't technically be getting the full effect of your instruments decay...unless you tracked them out on 2 tracks and then bounced them down to one stereo track...but if you're worried about file size, then you wouldn't do that, based on your statement. Additionally, every time you create a fade, you're creating a new file and using more disk space.

Also, what difference does it make if you track it all the way now or all the way later? Still using up disk space...

Once you're happy with your sequence you could always remove the unused files from the session/hard drive if disk space is still an issue.

Your statement is half way correct..... once you create the crossfade, then you just copy and paste from there, and you arent creating new files once you copy and paste, because its the copying and pasting the same file, versus recording a whole 4 minutes worth of the same stuff... but its to each its own, people do different things, and apparently he chooses to track his stuff out the way a lot of other people choose too, which is a few bars, and then copy and paste. Some people like to make their whole song on their MPC, MV, or Fantom workstation, if thats what you do, do you, if so, this info doesnt pertain to you.

By the way, a fade isnt as big as an .wav Audio file

4dahaterz wrote:Your statement is half way correct..... once you create the crossfade, then you just copy and paste from there, and you arent creating new files once you copy and paste, because its the copying and pasting the same file, versus recording a whole 4 minutes worth of the same stuff... but its to each its own, people do different things, and apparently he chooses to track his stuff out the way a lot of other people choose too, which is a few bars, and then copy and paste. Some people like to make their whole song on their MPC, MV, or Fantom workstation, if thats what you do, do you, if so, this info doesnt pertain to you.

By the way, a fade isnt as big as an .wav Audio file

By creating the crossfade and looping that, you'd never have a true start point, so you'd miss any sort of attack that the sound had. But enough about that. lol

And yes, I know that a fade isn't as big as a 4 minute long .wav file. I was just stating that if the concern was taking up extra disk space, you'd have to address that when dealing with fades.

Your true start point is the beginning of the 1st measure of the 1st loop.

Maybe this is a method that you dont use or havent used successfully, again, people do things different.

You do you.....

No doubt man.