SPDIF card solve SYNC?

Will getting the SPDIF card for the 4000 solve the issue of the sync between protools and the 4000. I have some delay between the two units. I currently have the 4000 setup as master and protools as the slave. Thanks.

well, it does have a wordclock input, which you can use to sync the SPDIF signal's clocking.

But that's nothing to do with syncing the MPC4000's sequencer.

So my question is, can I go from SPDIF out from the 4000 to SPDIF in on the 003 rack and use that for syncing the two machines? Will that work better than MTC?

NO, 2 different types of sync. You can only use MIDI and SMPTE for sequencer sync.

SPDIF, ADAT, and WORDCLOCK are for digital sync which has nothing to do with that.

Do you have 2 empty bars at the beginning of your sequence? Having 2 empty bars will give time for the 2 units to "lock" together.

So I guess I would need Midi Beat Clock for syncing the MPC and Protools. MIDE TimeCode is only an internal time clock for the sequencer, so I guess I would want Midi Beat Clock since the tempo and bars, etc.. are being sent out the midi cables to protools? But if I use MTC then I would need to manually set the tempo in protools to match the MPC. Is this the main difference between the two syncing options? So McSmooth are you saying that I can't use SPDIF as the clock source for SYNC?

Adrian, see this is what I don't get, SYNC should just work between the two machines. I don't know why I would need to add two bars in the beginning of the sequence. I mean, I know why, but its just whack that this is the case.

I use MTC with nuendo and it works fine (MPC master - Nuendo slave)
BTW I put 2 blank bars but not for sync reasons, I mix everything in an analog desk and need these bars for mixdown..

i never understood why people NEED to sync. do yall do it just for looping stuff ?

i dont even loop my joints, i run it straight through now. midi seems to mess up the feel/swing so i run all 8 at the same time straight through.

^ For multitrack recording. Unless you can record all your tracks on one take, the second pass is not going to line up with the others by manually hitting play at the right time (you CAN manually do it, but its a pain). Also, 2 machines never have the same clock, so one will drift over time unless you sync.

I use SMPTE (PC to MPC) for sync since it is a dedicated line without the latency of MIDI. MTC is basically SMTPE over MIDI. NO other MPC connection will give your sequencer sync.

Midi beat clock is more for linking looping devices. MTC gives control over absolute time, so makes it much more ideal for multitrack recording.

Most computers will always have some sort of delay due to latency. It shouldn't really cause a problem if you insert bars into the beginning as mentioned.

also reduce your buffer size down to 128 while (and only while) recording you tracks. note: the more tracks you use to play back or record the larger the buffer size you will need as well as for adding effect plugins. but reducing your buffer size on you computer will give you a better handle on latency

McSmooth wrote:^ For multitrack recording. Unless you can record all your tracks on one take, the second pass is not going to line up with the others by manually hitting play at the right time (you CAN manually do it, but its a pain). Also, 2 machines never have the same clock, so one will drift over time unless you sync.

I use SMPTE (PC to MPC) for sync since it is a dedicated line without the latency of MIDI. MTC is basically SMTPE over MIDI. NO other MPC connection will give your sequencer sync.

Midi beat clock is more for linking looping devices. MTC gives control over absolute time, so makes it much more ideal for multitrack recording.

Most computers will always have some sort of delay due to latency. It shouldn't really cause a problem if you insert bars into the beginning as mentioned.

so its basically for people that dont have 8 outs really. i mean ive done all that b4 but ive noticied my beats sounding different after syncin and only runnin for like 8 bar loops and looping them in protools. i just run it for the entire 3 or 4 minutes instead of looping. im not worried about the HD space cause i got plenty.

Getting my card in today.

Installed my card. Quick question. I currently now have my Digi 003 rack as the master and the 4000 as the slave. Should I go use the internal clock on the 003 rack and make that go SPDIF out into SPDIF in of the MPC?

Also, what is the benefit of having the internal clocks synced? Isn't this the job of the MIDI sync? When would you choose SPDIF over MIDI? Or do you need both. An explanation would be great.

Thanks everyone.

Installed my card. Quick question. I currently now have my Digi 003 rack as the master and the 4000 as the slave. Should I go use the internal clock on the 003 rack and make that go SPDIF out into SPDIF in of the MPC?

Also, what is the benefit of having the internal clocks synced? Isn't this the job of the MIDI sync? When would you choose SPDIF over MIDI? Or do you need both. An explanation would be great.

Thanks everyone.

lbratzi wrote:Installed my card. Quick question. I currently now have my Digi 003 rack as the master and the 4000 as the slave. Should I go use the internal clock on the 003 rack and make that go SPDIF out into SPDIF in of the MPC?

Also, what is the benefit of having the internal clocks synced? Isn't this the job of the MIDI sync? When would you choose SPDIF over MIDI? Or do you need both. An explanation would be great.

Thanks everyone.

Like what was previously posted...clocking in the view of digital connectivity only references the ad/da converters between two or more devices.

In other words, this type of syncing keeps the digital signal straight (which means no pops, clicks, stutter & etc.), it has nothing to do with syncing midi instruments...it's all about the soundcard.

If you're looking to sync midi, then take the advice of using MTC. This way when you start one device, everything else will "chase" or follow the master device. MTC & Midiclock are the only means of doing this through your DAW program.