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

You gentleman are introducing variables, guessings, skipping to the end to come up with your own conclusions, etc.

Here are my temporary conclusions :

First part : math formula + MIDI jitter = very slight shifts

Second part : AD(SR) + D/A convertor + human influenced by a loose consensus inside a musical genre = "MAGIC"

Off-topic

3. again s950: you've trim a nice snare sample. You've put it on a keygroup and edit the amplitude ADSR. The attack parameter should affect the way the sample comes in. Value 0 should sample with an instant 100% level. The higher the value of attack -> the softer the attack of the sample. But it happen to me a lot of times that the snares attack sounds harder if the value is set between something like 2 and 9. It should get softer.

Yeah that's strange. What surprised me too is the relationship between velocity and attack. I took these printscreen from the japanese manual one year ago :




So you can see from the graph, when the attack parameter is at 0 it's the same for low or high velocity.

If the parameter is set at 99 you have a quick and sharp peak with a high velocity setting.

Nevertheless there is a note explaining that if in the ADSR page the attack is set at 0 the velocity/ attack thing won't have any influence. But how will it behave?

From my tests I think I had better results with the 99 parameter but it's probably just me and my half-faulty unit

End of off-topic
Sorry for hijacking.

I know exactly why there IS a difference between not only the swing but the overall timing between various MPCs.

Its really high time the exact reasons for differences were put out there. The information is out there but I think some users are not prepared to accept facts.

The actual algorithm of the swing feature is exactly the same across the board. But how this is then translated by different MPCs becasue of inherent indisputable differences is why there will be a difference in feel.

Ultimately there is not some voodoo timing magic going on.

3. again s950: you've trim a nice snare sample. You've put it on a keygroup and edit the amplitude ADSR. The attack parameter should affect the way the sample comes in. Value 0 should sample with an instant 100% level. The higher the value of attack -> the softer the attack of the sample. But it happen to me a lot of times that the snares attack sounds harder if the value is set between something like 2 and 9. It should get softer.

I know this is old but any way...
... I tried to replicate that, i don't hear the difference between 0 and lets say 2 or 4.
by ADSR you mean the envelope page?

There is an unmistakable difference between the swing of a 3000 and a 2500 w JJOS in my experience.

For example I like to add a touch of swing on my hi hats to loosen them up. Not enough to where they sound swung, but enough swing so it doesn't sound like straight eighth notes anymore. On the 2500, a setting of about 58% does the trick. On the 3000, 53-54% is the trick...58% has noticeable swing to it.

Waveform chopping/non-waveform chopping might have an effect when it comes to sequencing multiple chops, but I'm talking about repeating one sample with some swing. Even if the sample that was chopped on the 3000 does have a different start point than the one chopped on the 2500, the amount of swing between repeated eighth notes wouldn't change.

My theory? Roger Linn has talked about how tight timing is imperative to a groove. Well, I wonder if the increased jitter on the 2500 works to lessen the perceivable effect of the swing on the listener. IE: the notes are placed in the correct position in the sequencer but are expressed in an inaccurate fashion, so the listener perceives a weakened swing effect. This would explain why the swing on the 3000 seems so much stronger than that of the 2500.

Granted, I have no way (nor desire!) to test any of this, but the difference in swing was the first difference that I noticed between the two machines.

At the end of the day, who cares...I'm able to get a good grove from either, but the difference IS there IMO

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

roger linn is talking a bit nonsens
the function is the same,yes but in real: the microtiming from any mpc is different .

you can test this in audio recording with 16 notes 120 bpm solo
but on komplete beat with many notes on same time is more different too
and thats independend from serial midi timing inside .

the thing is the microtiming on beat and offbeat notes
even worse :
the 4 and 8 beat notes on 8th swing have different ticks to 16th note swing 4 or 8 notes etc...
at simultaneous notes it is again different. depends on midi Priority.
pattern lengh can made a different start in 0.5-015 ms etc or others
8 bar pattern is soundet different on start as 1 bar in repeats

much of old grooveboxes have a different microtiming inside his patterns.
not only mpc have magical timing
korg electribe es1 or es 1 mk2 ,
yamaha rs7000 or an200

deviant from static sample exact timing
in the range between 2 ms and 0.3 ms
and some more variations.
you can feel it .
but mostly not analytically listening



i can gratulate myself -have fifty post

Don't forget that the MPC's quantize sample playback timing too (nothing to do with sample rate) This has been discussed before regarding the MPC5000 and is probably some sort of hardware limitation (clocking, data buffering/framing) that is totally independant of any software (os) implementation of swing, note shift or timing resolution etc. but it does affect the timing of beats on a micro scale. This is probably what labcoats was alluding to in a previous post. Note that this has nothing to do with midi timing though, which has its own constraints but is still very good on most MPC's.