Timing Correct - MPC Swing shootout: Do all MPCs have the s

Swing is a variation of timing correct. Whereas a normal Timing Correct setting of 1/16 will quantize your drums to a straight 1/16th note, swing shifts the timing of the notes a few ticks based upon swing %. Ticks are divisions of beats or 1/4 notes. *Note - most MPCs have 96 ticks per beat except for the MPC 5000/4000 which gives you 960 ticks per beat.

MPC Timing Correct/Swing is considered in many circles as the best in hardware sequencers. Some consider the timing of legacy MPCs superior to the newer models.

In order to determine if swing is different among MPCs, we have to start with analyzing how swing corrects notes in the sequencers.

I spent time this weekend analyzing what the MPC 2000XL does to a sequence when swing is applied. I set Timing to 1/16 and used every swing setting 50-75%. A swing setting of 50% does not apply any swing. When I applied swing with percentages set to 51-52%, no swing was applied which is the same as a 50% setting. I found no differences in the sequence between swing settings of 53% and 54%..as both gave identical results. The same was true with settings of 55% and 56%...with both giving identical results, etc. I didn't expect this.

Here are my final results when Note Value is set to 1/16. When using the following settings, my drums were quantized to the following intervals:

SWING%: BARS.BEATS.TICKS:

50-52%: 001.01.00, 001.01.24, 001.01.48, 001.01.72
53-54%: 001.01.00, 001.01.25, 001.01.48, 001.01.73
55-56%: 001.01.00, 001.01.26, 001.01.48, 001.01.74
57-58%: 001.01.00, 001.01.27, 001.01.48, 001.01.75
59-60%: 001.01.00, 001.01.28, 001.01.48, 001.01.76
61-62%: 001.01.00, 001.01.29, 001.01.48, 001.01.77
63-64%: 001.01.00, 001.01.30, 001.01.48, 001.01.78
65-66%: 001.01.00, 001.01.31, 001.01.48, 001.01.79
67-68%: 001.01.00, 001.01.32, 001.01.48, 001.01.80
69-70%: 001.01.00, 001.01.33, 001.01.48, 001.01.81
71-72%: 001.01.00, 001.01.34, 001.01.48, 001.01.82
73-74%: 001.01.00, 001.01.35, 001.01.48, 001.01.83
75%: 001.01.00, 001.01.36, 001.01.48, 001.01.84

I was expecting the results to be more random but they are pretty straight forward. I would be interested to see the results of other MPCs using these same settings. Please feel free to comment and post your findings.

I dont think its different on other MPCs (ok maybe they "fixed" the 51/52 %) since its math and should result the same as long as the ppq is the same.
That doesn't mean that it sound the same cause what you've analyzed are just MIDI NoteOn messages. Thy doesn't show anything about the real timing of the samples played.
To measure the real timing you can sample an impulse sample into the MPC, program a sequence with 16th notes and record the different swing settings with your DAW. Measure the ranges from one impulse to the next. You'll see that there is always a slightly shifting in these hits.

BTW You could have saved some time :

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=139021



peace

Thanks for your feedback. You are probably correct but in order to come to a solid conclusion all aspects must be analyzed starting with the basics. When you start using a DAW other variables may come into play.

I hoping other forum members can take the time to chime in. Otherwise, I will have to locate different model MPCs..and test them myself.

Didn't Roger Linn just say recently that there is no difference in timing or swing in all the mpc models?

ArKyve-31 wrote:Didn't Roger Linn just say recently that there is no difference in timing or swing in all the mpc models?

I'm looking for his comments...but I believe he recently implied there is nothing special about the swing which is contrary to what he was saying when he benefitted financially from MPC sales.

But based on feedback over the years, forum members claim the timing is different..to include myself. I felt some differences while using an MPC 2000, 3000, and 4000 even when I set them all to 1/16 quantize. I always felt the MPC 2000's timing was more solid. So I am trying to put this to a test.

Dont underestimate the influence of chopping the samples. Since the 60 and 3000 have no waveform display the way you cut your samples is just by ear. With the 2000 there is waveform display but the display of the waveform is just for realative coarse setting (especially when it comes to setting the endpoint). I dont know about the newer MPCs and how they handle it.

peace


http://innerclocksystems.com/New%20ICS%20Litmus.html

Regarding samples, I think you could also take into account how AD or ADSR is handled.
I don't know about older models but for instance in the 1K, JJ made this change in his OS :



I think swing is a mathematical formula which audible results fluctuates according to other variables when comparing different machines.

Peace

Im speculating reason why timing on mpcs such as 3k or 6o is so legendary due to nature of not having graphic waveform display...making it near impossible to chop at zero point...therefore joints made on those machines might got that magic swing newer mpcs dont got...

when comparing identical single shots across mpc line should yield similar results imo

konc3pt wrote:Im speculating reason why timing on mpcs such as 3k or 6o is so legendary due to nature of not having graphic waveform display...making it near impossible to chop at zero point...therefore joints made on those machines might got that magic swing newer mpcs dont got...

when comparing identical single shots across mpc line should yield similar results imo

So when using the newer MPCs, simply close your eyes and use your ears to edit samples will give you that magical swing? lol

Does anyone here have an MPC 60 or 3000?

Askia Shaheed wrote:

konc3pt wrote:Im speculating reason why timing on mpcs such as 3k or 6o is so legendary due to nature of not having graphic waveform display...making it near impossible to chop at zero point...therefore joints made on those machines might got that magic swing newer mpcs dont got...

when comparing identical single shots across mpc line should yield similar results imo

So when using the newer MPCs, simply close your eyes and use your ears to edit samples will give you that magical swing? lol

Does anyone here have an MPC 60 or 3000?

nothing to lol about. closing your eyes will focus you brain to the ear and will result in other start/end points. This will give your beat a different groove.

peace

There is something to laugh about. Sample editing with or without graphic waveform editing has nothing to do with this topic. I am strictly focusing on the sequencer. In such a test, I will be using the same samples which takes sample editing out of the equation.

Askia Shaheed wrote:There is something to laugh about.

and it's the following statement

Askia Shaheed wrote: I always felt the MPC 2000's timing was more solid

which mpc are you finding to be out of rhythm

which mpc model has the least annoying metronome? (stock metronome sound only)