Double Time and Quantize

I'm having a little trouble understanding what double time is good for if you quantize. I get the idea behind it, give yourself double the resolution, and maybe I'm missing something here but I don't see how this works out.

If you use 1/32 quantize on a normal bpm, say at the beginning of the sequence, you have 8 spots from 1.01.00 to 1.02, and the quantize is dividing the beat by 120 ticks each spot. If you go double time with 1/16, as i hear a lot of people recommend, you have the same exact thing, as far as I can tell...8 spots where the note can be placed, and 120 ticks on each spot since its 240 but with double the number of beats. If someone can show me how I'm wrong I'd appreciate it because if thats the case, I don't get how double timing does anything if you quantize, it doesn't seem to be increasing the resolution, at least to me.

Its the sound not the math......

yeah i asked cause they sounded the same to me...

Dante310 wrote:I don't get how double timing does anything if you quantize, it doesn't seem to be increasing the resolution, at least to me.

Yeah, man, I think you're probably right. Quantize at 1/32 is the same as double time at 1/16. Only gonna make a difference if you don't quantize.

greeny_green wrote:

Dante310 wrote:I don't get how double timing does anything if you quantize, it doesn't seem to be increasing the resolution, at least to me.

Yeah, man, I think you're probably right. Quantize at 1/32 is the same as double time at 1/16. Only gonna make a difference if you don't quantize.

Like I said, whether you actually record in those extra spots is on you. If not, then you won't hear a difference.

Lampdog wrote:It doubles the resolution, meaning it give youdouble the recordable spots to record in. Whether you actually record in those extra spots is on you. If not, then you won't hear a difference.

You can have a 2 seater car with only 1 seat installed, if you install the 2nd seat but never ride with another person, you won't be using the difference in feature. It's still the same as you riding by yourself.

for sure, i get the doubling the res thing if its unquantized. maybe my problem is that i misunderstand how quantize works so correct me if i'm wrong- but my impression was that quantize actually imposes a much lower resolution on the sequencer...like if you've got 1/16th quantize on, there's only 16 spots (divided by 240 ticks) where you can place notes within one bar. thats why I didn't quite get why that extra res matters if you quantize. I guess you get slightly more accurate note placement before you quantize if you use double tempo, i guess maybe thats what gives it a bit of a different sound? no big deal i was just curious about this cause i hear it discussed a lot. peace

greeny_green wrote:

Dante310 wrote:I don't get how double timing does anything if you quantize, it doesn't seem to be increasing the resolution, at least to me.

Yeah, man, I think you're probably right. Quantize at 1/32 is the same as double time at 1/16. Only gonna make a difference if you don't quantize.

only makes a difference if you DO quantize.

if you DONT quantize(timing off) you have a blank paper with no lines or margins, get it? limitless possibilities. when you quantize you have a set number of "lines" in which to "write" in, no matter where you write a "word" it atoumatically lands on one of the lines.

1/16 in double bpm is like 1/32 regular bpm

look man, if you want a "mechanical" sound to your beats put the quantize on, experiment.

quantize: 1___2___3___4___5___6___7___8___
unquantize: ________________________________

massproduce wrote:if you DONT quantize(timing off) you have a blank paper with no lines or margins, get it? limitless possibilities. when you quantize you have a set number of "lines" in which to "write" in, no matter where you write a "word" it atoumatically lands on one of the lines.

massproduce wrote:quantize: 1___2___3___4___5___6___7___8___
unquantize: ________________________________

there is no limitless possibilities or blank sheet of paper setting. the maximum recordable spots is fixed at 96 per quarter note. recording at double bpm will give you 192 instead.

massproduce wrote:

greeny_green wrote:

Dante310 wrote:I don't get how double timing does anything if you quantize, it doesn't seem to be increasing the resolution, at least to me.

Yeah, man, I think you're probably right. Quantize at 1/32 is the same as double time at 1/16. Only gonna make a difference if you don't quantize.

only makes a difference if you DO quantize.

if you DONT quantize(timing off) you have a blank paper with no lines or margins, get it? limitless possibilities. when you quantize you have a set number of "lines" in which to "write" in, no matter where you write a "word" it atoumatically lands on one of the lines.

1/16 in double bpm is like 1/32 regular bpm

look man, if you want a "mechanical" sound to your beats put the quantize on, experiment.

not really. actually this is why i started this thread...there seem to be some misperceptions about this from a lot of mpc users i've spoken to. if you don't quantize, there are most definitely limits...96ppqn is your limit...that would be 96 very small 'lines' per quarter note using your analogy. if you double time, this makes a huge difference here- you double your ppqn. i never argued that double time doesn't make sense if you don't quantize...my issue is with the idea that double time does anything if you record with quantize on, as so many people i know do.

look, if you record with quantize on, in double time, at 1/16, you are giving yourself exactly as many ticks between lines, or note spaces, as you are at normal time in 1/32, period. it makes no difference whatsoever. if your beats bounce more its probably because you're recording with what is essentially a 1/8 metronome thanks to the double time, and 1/8 is easier for a lot of people to keep pace with.

thanks for puttin me on to that 96ppm thing, i wouldve never guessed. i guess you cant really pick that up just by listenin to it. but ya 1/32 give u more spots to record in. i used to do that wit that old ps1 game, mtv beatmaker. it was real limited.

Dante310 wrote:look, if you record with quantize on, in double time, at 1/16, you are giving yourself exactly as many ticks between lines, or note spaces, as you are at normal time in 1/32, period. it makes no difference whatsoever. if your beats bounce more its probably because you're recording with what is essentially a 1/8 metronome thanks to the double time, and 1/8 is easier for a lot of people to keep pace with.

That is correct, the only advantage you are getting with quantize is that now you can use 1/64 (by selecting 1/32) in double time. And you actually lose the 1/8 option because its now 1/16. The real reason to ever use this method is more for when quanize is off and you want more realistic timing. The 4000 owns in that department.

massproduce wrote:
only makes a difference if you DO quantize.

if you DONT quantize(timing off) you have a blank paper with no lines or margins, get it?

Sorry, dude, that's wrong. With quantize off, you still have "lines"- i.e. 96 ticks per beat on my 3000. So if you double the BPM of your beat (meaning that 1 bar is actually gonna take up two bars on the MP) you would have double the ticks (192), thereby doubling the resolution.

I've read & herad about the doubling of the resoulution by recording in double time for a while now. I can see what Dante310 is saying in his original post. It makes sense to me. The thing I think you all are overlooking is that you CANNOT, I repeat CANNOT increase the resolution of a machine with a fixed resolution.

The MPC has a resolution of 96 PPQ no matter what!

If you record at 80 BPM or 160 BPM, you are still going to have the SAME RESOLUTION of 96 PPQ. It will be 96 PPQ if you record at 1/8, 1/16 or 1/32.

As it has been stated several times already

"if you record with quantize on, in double time, at 1/16, you are giving yourself exactly as many ticks between lines, or note spaces, as you are at normal time in 1/32, period. it makes no difference whatsoever."

This is not correct! No matter the tempo, 1/16 timing will not give you 1/32 timing. The same amount of space will ALWAYS be fixed. 160BPM may be someones Normal tempo as is 80BPM for someone else.

I think the best example is this right here -
quantize: 1____2____3____4____5____6____7___8 - 1/8
unquantize: _________________________________
quantize: 1_2_3______________________30_31_32 - 1/32

No matter the tempo it will still look like the above.

There is no difference. So if you want more locations to place your notes, just use 1/32 timing instead of 1/8 or turn quantize off. That is the maximum that you can do. If you double the tempo, it does not add another 32 spaces of useable area, there are still the same number of spaces as there are at half the tempo. Doubling the tempo does nothing but increase the rate at which the tempo is played, NOT add more resolution.

So can we put this doubling the resolution thing to bed now. Just make good music! How we do it may vary, but none of us are reinventing the wheel. The techniques may vary but the capabilities of the equipment we use is definitely fixed.


I do think that those who use this technique give it a misnomer. It's definitely not adding resolution. If you want more resolution, go get a 4000 or an MV.

Muchos gracias compadres.