OS2 of MPC2500 differs in specification from OS2 of MPC1000

aon wrote:

jimmie wrote:Thing I'm getting at is, you can get 960ppq already by doubling the tempo of your track

No, double tempo is 192 ppq.

derrrrrrr.
Of course

Still, 192ppq is worthwhile.....

192 ppq is very worthwhile, it's a fine resolution
esp in DAW, when you can zoom waaay far in and shift recorded tracks or single notes in finer increments

more interesting thoughts: TRIM is actually the finest resolution there is
you're dealing with a resolution of 44100 in TRIM
don't shy from changing start points along with your note shifting and swing application

sometimes holding on to a little bit of silence before hi hats and snares is a really good idea for this purpose, because you can drop the actual transient in between ticks this way even though the note itself was recorded in 96/192 ppq

Recording audio tracks is what I would use if I felt limited by the sequencers PPQ resolution...or look forward to the 1920 ppqs (by using double tempo) with the MPC 5000 coming in just over 1 week.

bobbybland wrote:On JJ website it says this.. OS2 of MPC2500 differs in specification from OS2 of MPC1000

Anyone know if there's anything the 2500 will do? What could this be.. ?

Now that we have the OS...I am trying to figure out what are the differences between the OS for the MPC 2500 and the 1000..if any.

96 ppq isn't good enough 4 u? i'd be weary about changing that, it might change to whole feel of the MPC sequencer we've come to know and love. 96PPQ 4 EVA

peyote wrote:96PPQ 4 EVA

you should get that tattooed in olde englishe on your stomach

there could be compressed cabinets in the flash that expand in to the dram memory giving more OS to work with.

Or is he doing this already?