Upgraded resolution?

is upgrading to 960ppq resolution for the 2500 possible or are there hardware limitations?

respect_mbs wrote:is upgrading to 960ppq resolution for the 2500 possible or are there hardware limitations?

If this could be possible, i would be totally happy with my 2500 and still keep my 4000 for Dual 960 PPQN power performance

it would be real nice,i have notice with the 300,000 note capacity we now
have with JJ'OS 5xx. it give more of a real time feel when sequencing,so
if its possible it will be another big bonus for the 2500 user to have that
higher resolution.

Are you implying that the additional note capacity has altered the way your MPC performs?

groove, do you ever double the sequencer on your 4000 to work in 1920 ppq resolution?

if so, can you even tell the difference anymore or is it overkill?

There is probably a hardware processor limitation. But who knows what that limit is? Akai.

When the MPCs sequencer ppq resolution doesn't fit your needs, that is when you record synths/drums in realtime as audio tracks. This is one reason why the MPC has the audio tracks, continuous sample track, direct recording, etc. Also, if you are not using a computer DAW in your studio, its time you should. A computer based DAW is not limited like MPCs. PPQs can run into the thousands using a PC based DAW.

PPQs can run into the thousands using a PC based DAW.

yup
daws are far better than mpcs for manipulating live audio tracks, which is why so many people "track out" audio to be mixed in a daw

BUT with the good comes the bad
daws with midi (and other apps like reason) do have much higher ppq than an mpc, but they lack as solid great timing. this doesn't always matter but if you're a control freak it might drive you crazy as to why the midi you exported into your daw doesn't sound as tight as when it was on the mpc.

Antonym wrote:
BUT with the good comes the bad
daws with midi (and other apps like reason) do have much higher ppq than an mpc, but they lack as solid great timing. this doesn't always matter but if you're a control freak it might drive you crazy as to why the midi you exported into your daw doesn't sound as tight as when it was on the mpc.

Maybe years ago but not today. It is not the programs but the MIDI interfaces that you use with the programs (as well as the computer). Most reasonably priced MIDI interfaces today provide low latency and excellent timing when used with a DAW Programs like Cubase has exceptional quantize features and are even modeled similar to the MPC. Any MPC MIDI file imported into a DAW should playback exactly the way it did in the MPC..

do the audio tracks record the pad performances(samples on the pads) or just audio via analog input?

jahrome wrote:

Antonym wrote:
BUT with the good comes the bad
daws with midi (and other apps like reason) do have much higher ppq than an mpc, but they lack as solid great timing. this doesn't always matter but if you're a control freak it might drive you crazy as to why the midi you exported into your daw doesn't sound as tight as when it was on the mpc.

Maybe years ago but not today. It is not the programs but the MIDI interfaces that you use with the programs (as well as the computer). Most reasonably priced MIDI interfaces today provide low latency and excellent timing when used with a DAW Programs like Cubase has exceptional quantize features and are even modeled similar to the MPC. Any MPC MIDI file imported into a DAW should playback exactly the way it did in the MPC..

yeah, i believe this nowadays, but since the rise of usb midi interfaces accuracy took a nosedive, i was told that the tightest midi ever was either off an mpc or an atari....not software daw's and usb midi interfaces.

but now theres a turbo midi device off Elektron industries out of sweden.
10x midi.

jahrome wrote:

Antonym wrote:
BUT with the good comes the bad
daws with midi (and other apps like reason) do have much higher ppq than an mpc, but they lack as solid great timing. this doesn't always matter but if you're a control freak it might drive you crazy as to why the midi you exported into your daw doesn't sound as tight as when it was on the mpc.

Maybe years ago but not today. It is not the programs but the MIDI interfaces that you use with the programs (as well as the computer). Most reasonably priced MIDI interfaces today provide low latency and excellent timing when used with a DAW Programs like Cubase has exceptional quantize features and are even modeled similar to the MPC. Any MPC MIDI file imported into a DAW should playback exactly the way it did in the MPC..

I use Nuendo 3 on a very suped up PC based machine, and it's timing and feel is not great imo, not so good as other apps i use on my mac.

My friend (a PC geek and IT expert) uses Cubase SX 3 on a very high end custom pc, and everytime i work on a drum part, i.e. using Halion, stylus rmx, or guru, we always find the timing to be less tighter compared to using midi in his PC version of Logic 5.5 or when using Logic 6/7 pro on my Mac.

Logic has 960ppqn (for many years now), whilst Cubase was only 480 (not sure about now). Logic was also the first software app to have groove template control, followed by all the rest such as pro tools/le, etc. Infact, protools is still playing catch up in the midi side of things compared with the other guys.

As for an MPC based midi file playing back the same on a DAW system, i have to disagree. Have you even tried it? I have, and it is definately not the same feel. As Lamp puts it, it's about the audio (and what you hear), but in this case you can actually see it too, and if you render the mpc midi file to audio as well as the same imported midi file (from mpc to the daw) and compare the waveform data - be preapred to see the difference. I'm pretty sure if have decent hearing, you will notice it with you're ears too

But in general, i do agree that PC/Macs and related audio application are far more superior over mpcs in every department. Just maybe drums are not quite everybodies cup of tea, and this is where mpcs are great (as we all know this and have heard it before)

.....protools is still playing catch up in the midi side of things compared with the other guys.
.....But in general, i do agree that PC/Macs and related audio application are far more superior over mpcs in every department. Just maybe drums are not quite everybodies cup of tea, and this is where mpcs are great (as we all know this and have heard it before)[/quote]

yo, protools has never really been on the market to catch midi users from what i see, more audio editor types, and it was solid for that end of work...so in a way midi must have been there just keep studio's interested..

but if its midi resolution y'all lusting after, ditch logic, its not so advanced as they'll have you believe, logic was 2 years behind Digital Performer in introducing 32bit midi (controller bezier curve) resolution, and has sample accurate (44.1khz) for midi , ie: any midi event can be nudged or placed at the same accuracy of the audio signal.

arebee wrote:
yo, protools has never really been on the market to catch midi users from what i see, more audio editor types, and it was solid for that end of work...so in a way midi must have been there just keep studio's interested..

but if its midi resolution y'all lusting after, ditch logic, its not so advanced as they'll have you believe, logic was 2 years behind Digital Performer in introducing 32bit midi (controller bezier curve) resolution, and has sample accurate (44.1khz) for midi , ie: any midi event can be nudged or placed at the same accuracy of the audio signal.

You can do the exact same thing with Logic, i don't know what you're talking about.