Spot the MPC60

yeah i'm with toon on that 1... i'm already mad as it is LOL. Nah I'll do a test if headz want me 2. I'm not sure if I can be as empirical as Max but i'll give it a go. Only raw samples or loops and let the audience judge 4 themselves. Hopefully we will all be pleasantly surprised. Maybe if I do the test cats will be more inclined 2 put they floppy drive numbers up Stay tuned. -uno-

max1973 wrote:The discussion is becoming philosophical...I think both Elmacaco and Boogie are making valid points. I tend to agree more with Elm, because the instrument is fundamental to the development of the musician, any classical musician will tell you that.

I play guitar (classical) since the age of 12, and started with a low budget student guitar. My teacher, when I reached a somewhat intermediate level, advised me of getting a better guitar because he said that at that point my student guitar was hindering my progress both sonically and technically. I did, and my playing just made a tremendous leap forward in every aspect. The reason was that I had already made that progress, but the cheap student guitar was holding me back. Any serious musician will tell you the same thing. Of course, I can play a **** guitar, and with years of playing, I can make it sound decent, but that's not the point.

It's not about being a gear slut, it's fundamental to the experience of making music. Same is true with samplers in hip hop. The only difference is that most samplers are objectively good samplers (which is not true for guitars!). You only need to find the one that fits you well, whether that's an MPC4k, SP1200 or A4000.

max - dope post there - i cosign everythin ... and no dissin intended on the gear slut ... enjoy your 60, 3k, sp and whateva else you got there ... the sole reason i said get a 4k is coz i really like mine and as such i d really like to hear a test 60, 3k, sp with a 4k ... anyways, lookin forward on your next test ...

uno - niceone too ... lookin forward on thatone too ... but yo - maybe someone in here havin a 60,3k or sp to do a separate test with a 4k,z8 or z4 ... would be great ...

bangin beaz y'all

People tend to forget one thing about the "gearslut" thing....
Look at a proper studio that is fit for mixing with outboard gear...
Yes, youre right. They dont have 4 compressors.
They have 12 and they also have different tubepres and a couple of analog eqs...

Why?cuz they like looking at and buying expensive gear?Cuz they are Gearsluts????
Every unit does a different job.
So what kind of client/job you're on decides what you use on it,...
which mic, which pre, etc

So have you envious morons ever thought of using a SP if you digg up a sample that just screams out for that raw vibe???
Or you discover you dont need the dirty sound and need alot of sample time for the new track?? Just use the 3000. Face it, no machine does everynthing in one....

Sorry if this was already discussed,.. I just had to let that out.
I cant stand ppl using the "gearslut" term on anyone who was several machines for the same job.
Think before you call someone a gearslut. We should have a difinition on the faq
I hope we'll hear more soon!!! get at it max! (Sorry I dont care too much about the 2k vs. 60 - I already know the 2k sounds like ass )

.toon

as the 2k and XL heads always say "it's all in how you process your sounds"

God help you if you don't!

I would almost say that the fact the the sp1200 has the best decay on the drum samples that beat 1 is not an sp1200 at all.....it still baffles me. If you listen closely to the last beat (mpc-60), you hear the air in the hats being truncated. I'd also have guessed that the original drums were sourced from the sp1200 and resampled into the 3000 and 60. Either way I think the Sp1200 sounds the most cohesive as a drum kit; although, the swing was a bit spaced. How were these beat patterns constructed (maybe you mentioned it later on in the thread)? In other words, what were the swing settings and velocity for each note? Thanks!

DRUMZ.1

drumat!c wrote:I would almost say that the fact the the sp1200 has the best decay on the drum samples that beat 1 is not an sp1200 at all.....it still baffles me. If you listen closely to the last beat (mpc-60), you hear the air in the hats being truncated. I'd also have guessed that the original drums were sourced from the sp1200 and resampled into the 3000 and 60. Either way I think the Sp1200 sounds the most cohesive as a drum kit; although, the swing was a bit spaced. How were these beat patterns constructed (maybe you mentioned it later on in the thread)? In other words, what were the swing settings and velocity for each note? Thanks!

DRUMZ.1

You all have made interesting suggestions for the next test. I hear that several were disapointed with the SP in terms of output volume and bass, and I think those comments arise from a wrong expectation: IMO the SP does not enhance the low end, it just make it sound good, compact and therefore easier to boost on a mixer. The output volume on the SP is lower than the 3000's and comparable to the 60's.

Drumatic: The drums were not resampled into the 3000 and 60, they were sampled on each machine from the same source. Now, the source is a breakbeat record and the breaks may have been initially sampled on an Sp. I am not sure I understand your comments concerning decay, but I listened to the SP again closely and realised that I should have decayed the bass drum and hat more.

Lastly, the swing settings were the same on each machine (63), but I doubled the bpm w/8 notes on the SP. full velocity on each, w/ 2 sampled bass drums.

I will try and post the next test this weekend. I will make it:

1. raw, machine straight to tape
2. w/ a loop instead of chopped up drums
3. sampled from a super clean real drummer's sample cd

That should properly showcase the characteristics of each machine.

Max

Hmmmm.....maybe i'm confused?

I'm sorry, but are you listing the beats correctly?

Soundclick page as listed:

Beat 1 = beat test 3
Beat 2 = beat test 2
Beat 3 = beat test 1

OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH............my apologies.......


YES! YES! YES! The first joint listed, is what i am referring to as the sp1200 because it sounded the most cohesive......but it is actually the mpc-60?

That's why I'm confused.....because you were numbering the machines in order in sequential order 1-3, but your Soundclick page reverses that order, which to me is confusing. I'm an idiot.....

Could you just clarify that order one more time for me....

1. BEAT 3 = MPC 60
2. BEAT 2 = MPC 3000
3. BEAT 1 = SP 1200

Is that correct? If so....I knew the SP was the 3rd track listed on your SoundClick page (which in actuality, is beat 1). If you read my statement on the previous response, you'll see that i'm explaining the use of decay on the 3rd beat (which i had mistaken for the 3rd beat, but is actually the 1st beat in your test).

Whatever.....this type of shit is fun man!

It reminds me of some of the games we play at our shows. We do a, "guess that sample" with the crowd and offer free cd's, or beers (usually Guinnies), if someone can guess the name of the record and song we used in a particular track. It's fun ****' with the old heads.....especially when we do appearances in the record shops.

D R U M A T ! C

drumat!c wrote:Hmmmm.....maybe i'm confused?

I'm sorry, but are you listing the beats correctly?

Soundclick page as listed:

Beat 1 = beat test 3
Beat 2 = beat test 2
Beat 3 = beat test 1

OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH............my apologies.......


YES! YES! YES! The first joint listed, is what i am referring to as the sp1200 because it sounded the most cohesive......but it is actually the mpc-60?

That's why I'm confused.....because you were numbering the machines in order in sequential order 1-3, but your Soundclick page reverses that order, which to me is confusing. I'm an idiot.....

Could you just clarify that order one more time for me....

1. BEAT 3 = MPC 60
2. BEAT 2 = MPC 3000
3. BEAT 1 = SP 1200

Is that correct? If so....I knew the SP was the 3rd track listed on your SoundClick page (which in actuality, is beat 1). If you read my statement on the previous response, you'll see that i'm explaining the use of decay on the 3rd beat (which i had mistaken for the 3rd beat, but is actually the 1st beat in your test).

Whatever.....this type of **** is fun man!

It reminds me of some of the games we play at our shows. We do a, "guess that sample" with the crowd and offer free cd's, or beers (usually Guinnies), if someone can guess the name of the record and song we used in a particular track. It's fun ****' with the old heads.....especially when we do appearances in the record shops.

D R U M A T ! C

You got it. But I understand, I got confused myself when I made the poll!

The "guess that sample" game should be a lot of fun.I would really suck at it, though - I generally can't remember song titles.

drumat!c wrote:Hmmmm.....maybe i'm confused?

I'm sorry, but are you listing the beats correctly?

Soundclick page as listed:

Beat 1 = beat test 3
Beat 2 = beat test 2
Beat 3 = beat test 1

OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH............my apologies.......


YES! YES! YES! The first joint listed, is what i am referring to as the sp1200 because it sounded the most cohesive......but it is actually the mpc-60?

That's why I'm confused.....because you were numbering the machines in order in sequential order 1-3, but your Soundclick page reverses that order, which to me is confusing. I'm an idiot.....

Could you just clarify that order one more time for me....

1. BEAT 3 = MPC 60
2. BEAT 2 = MPC 3000
3. BEAT 1 = SP 1200

Is that correct? If so....I knew the SP was the 3rd track listed on your SoundClick page (which in actuality, is beat 1). If you read my statement on the previous response, you'll see that i'm explaining the use of decay on the 3rd beat (which i had mistaken for the 3rd beat, but is actually the 1st beat in your test).

Whatever.....this type of **** is fun man!

It reminds me of some of the games we play at our shows. We do a, "guess that sample" with the crowd and offer free cd's, or beers (usually Guinnies), if someone can guess the name of the record and song we used in a particular track. It's fun ****' with the old heads.....especially when we do appearances in the record shops.

D R U M A T ! C

I knew you were mixing things up..I was wondering what you were listening to:) But you picked up on the same things I spoke about earlier about decay cause I know you rock dat sp1200 and know exactly what it sounds like.

Peace

c.toon wrote:I cant stand ppl using the "gearslut" term on anyone who was several machines for the same job.
Think before you call someone a gearslut. We should have a difinition on the faq

Oh ooh ... seems i have screwed my english up again ... ... know what? ... the english they tought me once at schools here in italy is rather useless in forums like this (supposed to be oxford one) ... gearslut, aka, AFAIK, KISS, ... WTF! ... looks like i need to take some extra classes ...

anyways - in short - i thought the term "gearslut" describes people that really appreciate to use a lot of nice and dedicated gear coz they know why and when to use it ... and know what? ... your post was directed at me but i cosign it before i screw it up again! ... it was a good one and said it as i often wanted to already ... lets go on with the tests - this thread is to dope ...

... my apologies to max again and those i ve offended ... my fault ...

peace

btw: difinitions in faq's sounds like a goodone ...

Hands down Beat Test 3 sounds the best of all three. It sounds more studio finish. It don't make a differece on which machine is the loudest, because the lowest volume give you more room to edit the signal in the final mix. Yes, Best Test 2 is louder but adds higher frequences on the high end. Beat Test 1, the high end sounds compressed like a dolby noise reductions was used. Got test Max. It reminds me of the three bears. To make sure, which sampler was Beat Test 3 again?

I suppose i'll drop some quick wisdom.

1. The 60 and 3000 have stero playback.

2. SP is very flat sounding (you can hear that in the recording), you can more easily assess it's character prior to dynamic processing (same with the 60). The SP can be made to sound like it's not an SP very easily, Max proved that here. I've said this time and time again, 12-bit samplers are only "grimey" if you choose to go that route.

3. Reverb by nature, makes instruments sit further in the background. This detracted from the 60/SP sound, and made them seem a bit more even.

Also, a side note about the SP. The characteristic punch/ring comes from pitching down. If you don't pitch the SP down, it will be very difficult to distinguish it from another sampler.

Not to plug my shit, but heres a little SP test for ya'll. Http://www.myspace.com/rspctdue

Btw, I noticed the short time I spent with the 3k, it seemed like it had a built in exciter! This is probably why everyone thought beat (2) had a hyped up top end. I don't know what it is about the 3k, but bass gets bassier, and hi's gain more sheen after sampling.

it was also twice as loud as the rest of the beats going through the reverb, so the high end blur was less.

Lo Pass Filter wrote:Not to plug my ****, but heres a little SP test for ya'll. Http://www.myspace.com/rspctdue

i like it. how well do you know fingaz? cop that billy digital he dropped a few months ago?