Timestretch : mpc 1000 vs mpc 5000 vs mpc renaissance compar

Hi all ! I made this comparison timestretching a drum sample from 129 bpm to 85 bpm
these are the results


ORIGINAL SAMPLE

http://www.4shared.com/music/4yLNZDON/Bk_129_Bpm_Original_Sample.html


MPC RENAISSANCE

http://www.4shared.com/music/4TtBiA1S/Bk_85_BPM_RENAISSANCE.html


MPC 5000

http://www.4shared.com/music/B5cDjOfn/Bk_85_Bpm_mpc_5000.htmll


MPC 1000 jjos xl2

http://www.4shared.com/music/aQNShVP8/Bk_85_Bpm_1000JJOS2XL.html


you should download the file to listen it entirely

What do you think? notice some difference?

Kaia wrote:The Mpc renaissance and 5K results are similar but For the 1K The Original Sample Time wasn't 128 bpm...What do you think?The Mpc 1000 Has a different Timing?

Pointless exercise. If you used the same sample the BPM would be the same in each machine. But it was still a pointless exercise, unless there was a point you're trying to prove.

What exactly are you trying to compare?

i had some trouble with the 1k now i'll upload new files

Clint wrote:

Kaia wrote:The Mpc renaissance and 5K results are similar but For the 1K The Original Sample Time wasn't 128 bpm...What do you think?The Mpc 1000 Has a different Timing?

Pointless exercise. If you used the same sample the BPM would be the same in each machine. But it was still a pointless exercise, unless there was a point you're trying to prove.

What exactly are you trying to compare?

Ok now i've modified my post, i had some trouble with the 1K now is all right and i reupload the files.I'm trying to compare the differences between the time stretch of each mpc.

Kaia wrote:I'm trying to compare the differences between the time stretch of each mpc.

Maybe a better idea to also actually stretch the samples then rather than just reducing them, and use different algorithms. Just a thought...have fun.

Short answer: They are all going to stretch/ compress/ sound differently. There is little to learn here.

Clint wrote:Maybe a better idea to also actually stretch the samples then rather than just reducing them

Isn't he already stretching the samples, by going from 129bpm to 85bpm?

I kind of wish there weren't so many algorithms to choose from.

I know that having more choices in most things is usually better.

But it kind of discourages me from using timestretch in the MPC at all.

Because I dont want to sit there and stretch the sample 12 times using each algorithm and then compare them.

And if I just choose one,
what if chose the wrong one!

So I end up figuring its better to just leave it un-stretched and retain the sound quality.

Or if I really want to stretch something,
I'll stretch it with TimeFactory on my laptop first before putting it on the card.

Because TimeFactory doesn't have a bunch of different algorithms to choose from (just a quality setting).

Ergo: it must be using the right one.

I used Percussion C for both mpc 1000 and mpc 5000