Bug reports & end-user support for Akai's MPC Software 'controllers' including the new MPC Studio 2, the MPC Touch, MPC Renaissance & original MPC Studio and MPC StudioB lack.
By LetsRoll022 Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:40 am
Well I haven't read or heard anything about the vintage mode swing! Do you think they change individual swing patters in vintage mode.. seems obvious but we may never know until it's released Watched everything on youtube and am really excited since I've almost purchased a 3000 but have waited since I feel ebay prices are too high(people in the biz of buying and reselling old drum machines for crazy prices) or there is some 0 feedback bidder jacking up the price.. as a follow up question do you see 2000/ 3000 prices dropping in the near future due to the mpc ren? I am saving my $800 and putting it towards this regardless of swing
User avatar
By Lampdog Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:12 am
Swing has to do with the sequencer and not vintage mode I'm thinking.

AD/DA converters that color the sound is the vintage mode thing you are talking about.
By LetsRoll022 Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:52 am
Yeah I heard the 3000 was supposed to have more deep end.. But do you think the 2000, 3000,60, and in standard mode will all have the exact same swing time when playing 16th notes since it has the same sequencer? If this is so they will be making many people upset I feel.. If they can make groove templates for you to install in logic then I hope akai could figure out how to use that to adjust it or something to give it that real feel.
User avatar
By Lampdog Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:14 pm
Coloring of sound has nothing to do with swing.

Maybe you should ask in the thread where the AkaiPro/Numark guys are actually answering questions, find that thread and ask them. They made a few of them.
User avatar
By Lampdog Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:06 pm
+1 on not believing in magical swing. People just wanna believe their machine is magical and that myth has gotten way outta control.

Some people chop by ear (=not sample or zero cross point accurate)
Some people chop by numbers.
Some people chop by both.

Then there is the actual timing latency


http://www.innerclocksystems.com/New%20 ... itmus.html

Image

Akai MPC-3000/OS Version Vailixi 3.50T3

Mansell-Labs Web - http://www.mansell-labs.com/

Test Date:17.02.12

This Test: Pattern Mode/Cycle - Internal Sync

Number of samples [48 kHz] between consecutive Sixteenth Notes:
5999/ 5999/ 6000/ 5999/ 5999/ 5999/ 5999/ 6000/ 6000/ 5999/ 6000/ 6002/ 5997/ 5999/ 6000/ 5999

Maximum variation between any two consecutive Sixteenth Note intervals:
5 Samples [0.10ms]

This Test: Song Mode - Internal Sync

Number of samples [48 kHz] between consecutive Sixteenth Notes:
6000/ 5999/ 6000/ 6001/ 5998/ 6001/ 5998/ 6000/ 6000/ 5999/ 5999/ 6000/ 5999/ 5999/ 5999// 5999

Maximum variation between any two consecutive Sixteenth Note intervals:
3 Samples [0.06ms]


This Test: Pattern Mode/Cycle - Sample Accurate Midi Clock Sync

Number of samples [48 kHz] between consecutive Sixteenth Notes:
6000/ 6001/ 6004/ 5995/ 5995/ 6006/ 6000/ 6000/ 5998/ 6004/ 5991/ 6002/ 6003/ 6005/ 5992/ 6000

Maximum variation between any two consecutive Sixteenth Note intervals:
13 Samples [0.27ms]


This Test: Song Mode - Sample Accurate Midi Clock Sync

Number of samples [48 kHz] between consecutive Sixteenth Notes:
6001/ 5998/ 5998/ 6004/ 6001/ 5999/ 5999/ 6009/ 5994/ 6001/ 6006/ 5997/ 6001/ 5999/ 6002/ 6002

Maximum variation between any two consecutive Sixteenth Note intervals:
15 Samples [0.31ms]

ALL of this contributes and is in addition to the normal swing of the machine.
User avatar
By sally Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:33 pm
DJ Hellfire wrote:It's all the same mathematics.

There is information about the
mathematics used?
I would like know it.
( too, xparís, can you answer me, please?).
Then, in 2500 is the same?
Thanks very much, for your attention. :wink:
User avatar
By tapedeck Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:52 pm
sally wrote:There is information about the
mathematics used?
I would like know it.

it's all right there on the screen.
50% means that every 'swung' note hits 50% between two 'unswung' (bitchin word right?) notes.
75% means that every 'swung' note hits at 75% between the two unswung notes - that is further away from the first one and closer to the second one.

i could have it backwards but that is the basic idea.
User avatar
By DJ Hellfire Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:46 am
tapedeck wrote:
sally wrote:There is information about the
mathematics used?
I would like know it.

it's all right there on the screen.
50% means that every 'swung' note hits 50% between two 'unswung' (bitchin word right?) notes.
75% means that every 'swung' note hits at 75% between the two unswung notes - that is further away from the first one and closer to the second one.

i could have it backwards but that is the basic idea.



You are correct sir! 8)

LMAO @ 'unswung'!
By JVC Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:48 am
Lampdog wrote:...
Then there is the actual timing latency


http://www.innerclocksystems.com/New%20 ... itmus.html

Image
...

Wow, thank you for the link I've been looking for the info, exactly that! (It would've been nicer if they tested MPC2000XL.)
Both MPC-3000 and MPC-60's timing are extremely solid! Not surprisingly, newer machines (MPC-5000) are more sloppy.
User avatar
By sally Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:24 am
tapedeck wrote:
sally wrote:There is information about the
mathematics used?
I would like know it.

but that is the basic idea.

I thought that was enter my finger in my nose :P
Now, I would like to receive a more complex / advanced idea please.
That is math?
ok,
I thought you would go, even to explain the math in the time of the make timestrech, pitchshift, QLink realtime tune (for example) ... all mathematics for my 2500 please (xparis, you could talk in deep about all this please?)




thanks for all your atention.
User avatar
By tapedeck Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:21 pm
sally wrote:I thought you would go, even to explain the math in the time of the make timestrech, pitchshift, QLink realtime tune (for example) ... all mathematics for my 2500 please (xparis, you could talk in deep about all this please?)

why would you think we would talk about 'all math' in a thread about swing? ???

on older samplers, timestretch was accomplished by by breaking the sample into equal sized 'chunks', for example 1000 samples long, and crossfading between them while stepping through the sample length starting at different samples at a particular rate. the different 'presets' (percussive, vox1, vox2, etc) i THINK were simply adjusting the chunk size.

im not sure if the 2500 or the 1000 work this same way, but if you make a couple extreme examples i can hear, i could probably tell you.

the more modern way to do it is in effect very similar, in that you again take a part of the sample using various 'windows' similar, transform it via fft into frequency components, resample that to a new size, and the ifft it back into time-domain representation. then you put these back together. IF this is how the new machines do it then i'm sure the presets relate to window size/type. honestly i kind of doubt this is what they are doing because these phase-vocoders were not as popular back when these came out.
pitch shift works the exact same way in both cases you just resample (tune) the sample before the windowing/chopping.

finally, if you have been following along you would know that xparis is a legit dude working on the ren and i dont believe he is a programmer nor has he worked on the older mpcs. still, he might know or could ask someone else, but you'll probably have just as much luck reading some basic dsp books yourself instead of putting your finger in your nose. :mrgreen:

thats as far as ill go because i have not experimented with the 2.5k or 1k, so im really just guessing, though those are the standard techniques for anyone really.
User avatar
By sally Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:15 pm
tapedeck wrote: the different 'presets' (percussive, vox1, vox2, etc) i THINK were simply adjusting the chunk size.

which difference may exist between Lfreq orch B and Hfreq orch A ( chunk size here?) :?

tapedeck wrote:pitch shift works the exact same way in both cases you just resample (tune) the sample before the windowing/chopping.

Standard picth? *
Standard picth does not re-cut length the sample resulting ( as pitch akai do ).

tapedeck wrote:much luck reading some basic dsp books

I would not read out. wanted to read akai guts. thanks
:wink:


tapedeck wrote:though those are the standard techniques for anyone really.


standard techniques?
in akai, the length of the sample for picth is different final result ( respect at original sample ) why?


what maths here?


thanks for all your atention.
User avatar
By tapedeck Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:29 pm
sally wrote:
tapedeck wrote: the different 'presets' (percussive, vox1, vox2, etc) i THINK were simply adjusting the chunk size.

which difference may exist between Lfreq orch B and Hfreq orch A ( chunk size here?) :?

dont know - as i said i dont know much about the newer models and i definitely dont know these models in particular.
sally wrote:
tapedeck wrote:pitch shift works the exact same way in both cases you just resample (tune) the sample before the windowing/chopping.

Standard picth? *
Standard picth does not re-cut length the sample resulting ( as pitch akai do ).

im not sure what you are saying here but maybe we are talking about the most basic 'tune' parameter? that is simple resampling which just means using math (difference/2 or sinc function) to find the 'missing' samples as you resize a section of audio to a new length. 'pitch shifting' goes a step further and timestretches the resampled version back to the original length.
sally wrote:
tapedeck wrote:much luck reading some basic dsp books

I would not read out. wanted to read akai guts. thanks
:wink:

these are standard techniques used industry wide - reading up on it will give you insight into how akai is doing it.
sally wrote:
tapedeck wrote:though those are the standard techniques for anyone really.

standard techniques?

yes. standards emerge to maximise performance vs capability of processors.
sally wrote:in akai, the length of the sample for picth is different final result ( respect at original sample ) why?
if you are talking about the 'tuning' parameter that is because it is simple resampling which involves changing the length. if we are still talking about a form of pitch shifting, then i suppose it has something to do with window size.

sally wrote:what maths here?

???
fft, ifft, windowing, interpolation, resampling - not enough math for you?
it's a little more complicated than the swing formula.

perhaps you should start a new thread...maybe akai guys will see it.