Better Swing - Swing Gallop Fix

ucacjbs wrote:OK, so I got home and checked why I was getting around 58% swing when I worked backwards from ONE's 60% swing .wav file. It turns out that for 16th notes, 60% swing is 60% of 48 ticks, which works out to 28.8. It looks like the 1K rounds down, so for 60% swing on 16th notes, I get the following (you only need three hits to get the pattern):

1.01.00
1.01.28
1.01.48
1.01.76
1.02.00

and so on, alternating increments of 28/20 ticks.

The only difference I can think might be that the 3K rounds the 28.8 ticks up to 29, which would get you closer to the 'real' 60% swing value.

Other than that, my best guess would be that on the other machines, you just happened to program a rhythm with more dynamic variation; those .wav files had every hat at max volume. That is going to sound horrible. Try lowering the velocity on the swung notes, and see how you feel about it then.

Now, who's got a 60/3K/2K that they can quickly enter a 16th note pattern and swing it to 60%, then give us some tick values?

ben

ok in the meantime we wait a nice guy.. here the swing % relationship (just to kill time)

001.01.01
001.01.24
001.01.48
001.01.72

remember?

ok take 001.01.48

divided to 100.... and then for 50%

001.01.24

right?
this means no swing

ok take 001.01.48

divided to 100.... and then for 75%

001.01.36
this means triplet right?

if i apply a 60% swing is

001.01.48
divided to 100.. for 60%

001.01.28 ( .8 )
if u try in akai mpc 1000 the result is that...
001.01.28
as ucacjbs notice in the quoting here... is that probably the difference is approximation


what happen to old akai?

ale

FWIW (I'm a teacher in "applied electronics in musicproduction")
here is my opinion on this topic.

Now what I'm missing in this discussion is the importancy of dynamics.
When you clap a Jazzshuffle with your hands and you analyze why it sounds and feels the way it does, you start realizing the claps on 1 and 3 are way louder as on 2 and 4. Not only that, 1 is also louder as 3.
( example is half of 8/8 )

When you record your clapping (I simply assume you CAN clap a moving, grooving Jazzshuffle) and look at the waveforms, you'll notice
another thing. In relation to 1 and 3, 4 comes somewhat later as 2.

Conclusion: for 2 reasons you can't be satisfied if you don't take these parameters/facts in your own hand. Aspecially note repeat sounds like a galloping mechanical horse in this matter.

Someone mentioned earlier; Ticks don't lie.
I'm sorry they do. They are only displaying where the beats are ment to be before they go through the chain of software and hardware handling.
Soft-, Hardware and Midiprotocol-latency is a factor, even in the MPC.

Waveforms don't lie. In the past a lot of waveform overlay tests were done with different MPC's, SW-packages and MIDI-interfaces to reveal the secret of good groove. No surprisingly one parameter is most important: tightness of delivering on the timeruler. The MPC's were scoring very good in this matter. The early MPC's even better because of spartanic operating systems with almost no overhead for displaying lot's of information in realtime.
Between the midi-events there were simply fewer processorcycles needed to handle codelines.
With timestamping technology in recent MIDI-interfaces the discussion moved to the background.

In tests with students I discovered that trained ears recognize a beat comin later or earlier with timeruler differences little as 3-4 milliseconds.
If you're able to hear small differences like that, and the resolution of
one tick on the 1k is too poor to your ears, you should try the double-tempo technique. It demands a little more awareness when programming but will be very satisfying.

Sorry for repeating info, many of you undoubtfully already know, but I do
feel that it's of great importancy to analyze what you hear and feel as a musician, and then using research to fit felt music and numbers together.
It's all about the approach.

ONE wrote:The SWING on the 1k DOES NOT sound like the swing on the other MPC's. If you want Roger Linn Swing. THe 1k doesn't quite pull it off as well as the other MPC's.
[...]
I really have nothing more to say on this.
Peace!

you just keep repeating yourself over and over. there was nothing more to say from your first post in this thread anyway, until you give us samples for A/B comparaison to backup your claim. Then we can talk.

i can't beleive the 5 page of nonsense when there is NOTHING tangible to talk about.

btw, you will need to send the samples to JJ to get him to fix that if needed anyway.

FINALLY i find a good guy that send me a midi file with a 16th hi hat part, made with 2000mpc and swing at 60%

well.. the swing is exactly like the mpc1000...

the only difference is that 2k has the note longer that the 1k
i mean the note lengh is longer on the note repeat function of the 2k..
(but it could depend on the fact that the midi file i receive from 2kmpc is type 0, mine of 1k is type 1, so no addictional data... well maybe.. or maybe not)
but if your program is single shot (and not NOTE ON) the swing are the really exact copy

even in logic event list view is the the same... as the picture i attach here in the previuos page of this post)

so...

just a thought if i find someone else that do a swing with an mpc60 or mpc3000....

to your attenction
peace

just did the test with an xl and a 2500 yes the same thing !! THE SWING PUTS THE NOTES AT THE SAME PLACE at 65% the xl just holds the note longer when u use note repeat.


so people stop bitching!.... if you want me to put up them files I will do so!

im glad that sanity prevailed

there is only one way to do the 'swing': it is a mathematically clear concept

if we changed it to give unexpected results, we wouldn't be 'improving' something, we would be f***ing it up.


otoh, if the old machines had some random variation that made timing sound more human... could be an alright feature to emulate

you could call it 'humanize' (in fact thats what it should be called)

nothing to do with swing, though.

but tests seem to show the timing was identical anyway... so, oh wel...

"it's of great importancy to analyze what you hear and feel as a musician, and then using research to fit felt music and numbers together.
It's all about the approach."



Well said sir!

this thread is useless without soundfile comparisons!!!

let the people hear instead of this number and word mumbo jumbo

djobserv wrote:this thread is useless without soundfile comparisons!!!

let the people hear instead of this number and word mumbo jumbo

word!

djobserv wrote:this thread is useless without soundfile comparisons!!!

let the people hear instead of this number and word mumbo jumbo

I will put up the sound files tonight


word....


when I listened to both swings I noticed they were the same aswell as looking at the data