12 bit, big deal?

mpc 4000 most advanced mpc: yes

but the mpc 60 had the grittiest sounding drums because of the fold over frequencies that added extra harmonics to whatever sound you put in it. you could never get the exact thing you put in with the mpc 60 while you could with the mpc 4000 (theoretically).

that is all.

and my samples knock harder then yours in my 60

Does it actually sh!t on the 60/3k sound wise?? NO.

Cosign.


so does protools shit on a 4k?


NO.


If you are making pop music, then a 4k is better than a 60


if you are making classic record based hip hop... a 60 shits on a 4k.


And yes it does knock harder than a 4000.

12bit vs 24 bit... equals more compressed sound.... no math needed.


less resolution makes more normalized samples (for lack of a better way to say it), so the sound you sample only can be slammed between 1-12 bits... less accurate, yup, but louder per unit per sample.

The Grublet wrote:

and my samples knock harder then yours in my 60

Does it actually sh!t on the 60/3k sound wise?? NO.

Cosign.


so does protools shit on a 4k?


NO.


If you are making pop music, then a 4k is better than a 60


if you are making classic record based hip hop... a 60 shits on a 4k.


And yes it does knock harder than a 4000.

12bit vs 24 bit... equals more compressed sound.... no math needed.


less resolution makes more normalized samples (for lack of a better way to say it), so the sound you sample only can be slammed between 1-12 bits... less accurate, yup, but louder per unit per sample.

yeah but dude thinks he can resample on his 4k to bounce his samples down to 12 bit internally...

he doesn't get that the hardware itself has to do a lot with the badassness of the 60's souns.

to each their own... but honestly..... most of the stuff I sampled into the 60 that I at some point sampled on other projects using other gear..... the sound of the one from the 60 to me sounded the best. Keep in mind that would be like drum sounds and not 15 second loops.

the asr 10 sounds more gritty to me than the 60. the 4000 smashes every mpc in terms of sound, hands down. somebody please put a video demo of just drum sounds (the same drum sounds) from each machine and let people vote, sample the same drum break off a vinyl record and lets see what machine really sounds better.

kaybee wrote:the asr 10 sounds more gritty to me than the 60. the 4000 smashes every mpc in terms of sound, hands down. somebody please put a video demo of just drum sounds (the same drum sounds) from each machine and let people vote, sample the same drum break off a vinyl record and lets see what machine really sounds better.

I've seen a video like that, so that's been done before.

You know, all the time people debating the merits of this machine's sound vs. that machine, you start to lose sight of the fact that its 80% about the samples you put into them.

I also think that a sampler's workflow and interface have more of an influence over the final product than whether its 12 bit or not. Trying to do a scientific test using the same samples on different machines to prove a point, all that stuff is pointless if you think about it. Because in real day to day use, you will choose and manipulate your samples differently on each machine.

At the end of the day, a beat is dope (or wack) because of the producer, not because of the equipment.

mp3 wrote:

kaybee wrote:the asr 10 sounds more gritty to me than the 60. the 4000 smashes every mpc in terms of sound, hands down. somebody please put a video demo of just drum sounds (the same drum sounds) from each machine and let people vote, sample the same drum break off a vinyl record and lets see what machine really sounds better.

I've seen a video like that, so that's been done before.

You know, all the time people debating the merits of this machine's sound vs. that machine, you start to lose sight of the fact that its 80% about the samples you put into them.

I also think that a sampler's workflow and interface have more of an influence over the final product than whether its 12 bit or not. Trying to do a scientific test using the same samples on different machines to prove a point, all that stuff is pointless if you think about it. Because in real day to day use, you will choose and manipulate your samples differently on each machine.

At the end of the day, a beat is dope (or wack) because of the producer, not because of the equipment.

You're damn right !
peace

I think the opposite... the ASR 10 is one of the cleanest samplers I have ever used.


It is all producer based, but the point of resampling to 12 in a 4k is not going to sound the same. Its the converters that make the 60 sparkle.

I would say that the best DRUM sounds will come from a 60... samples will sound best on a 3k or an ASR-10, and drag and drop "producers" (file managers) will be better off with ableton or FL.


Workflow is key,

Swing is key,

Chops are key,

Sample selection is key.



I think the 5k smashes the 4k for workflow+sound combo.


but that may start a whole 'nother discussion

thanks for all the input, its all personal but the opinions helped with my pre-conceived ideas

the best for drums are the 60 and 60ii and the 3000 period because they run on different sample enigines as you can not mimic their swing etc as for the SP1200.... but you have to consider sample time and stereo seperation

i hate the mpc 5000 period (too much money weak drums etc.. IM NOT GOING TO ARGUE WITH 5000 SUPREMISTS)

interesting, as most samplers are capable of downgrading samples to a 12 bit format. So i see sampling in 12 bit as an origin point to be obsolete. BUT SAMPLE ENGINES ARE DIFFERENT

i have the xl and ill make my drums bang out harder then an mpc 60. its all about knowledge. Ive seen dudes with MPDS bang out traccs with stereo seperation and eqing better then any mpc.

i just want to add a homie of mine bangs out HOUSE TRACCS on the MPC 60 just for drums...

Dubs Banger wrote:interesting, as most samplers are capable of downgrading samples to a 12 bit format. So i see sampling in 12 bit as an origin point to be obsolete.

i have the xl and ill make my drums bang out harder then an mpc 60. its all about knowledge. Ive seen dudes with MPDS bang out traccs with stereo seperation and eqing better then any mpc.

obviously... but I have taken drums from the XL, ran those into the 60, and then EQed those and re-banged them with with an MPD on the computer.

you can do infinite stuff and make infinite stuff with infinite combos of gear.

but me personally I find putting EQ aside, layering aside, when it comes to sampling right into the MPC, the 60 takes it in the ruggedness factor and it just comes out sounding harder IMO. maybe it isn't because of the 12 bit, and it's simply cause of the 80's converters and 80's hardware.. I dont know. for sure there is a combo of a few things going on that just sound bad ass. resampling in other gear doesn't sound like a 60 so I will have to say 12bit dont sound like the 60's 12 bit.

I owned the XL and I love that machine, but then I wound up getting a 60 one day and thought to myself.... why does this machine sound so damn good? I dont even know what it is. maybe growing up listening to the 60 in so much of my favourite music and then hearing a touch of that vibe in my own music just sounds good to me...

one day maybe you will have the chance to try out a 60 and have access to that tool when you think it would sound good in a track.

One thing I would love to some day afford to do is sequence some of my drums in the 60, sequence (not slaved but entirely independently) my samples in a 3000, some of the other samples in maybe a mirage.. and then add some extras with a prophet (the real thing) and who knows... maybe a moog or something. I know some guys here on the forum get the pleasure of doing things like that.

mr_debauch wrote:

Dubs Banger wrote:interesting, as most samplers are capable of downgrading samples to a 12 bit format. So i see sampling in 12 bit as an origin point to be obsolete.

i have the xl and ill make my drums bang out harder then an mpc 60. its all about knowledge. Ive seen dudes with MPDS bang out traccs with stereo seperation and eqing better then any mpc.

obviously... but I have taken drums from the XL, ran those into the 60, and then EQed those and re-banged them with with an MPD on the computer.

you can do infinite stuff and make infinite stuff with infinite combos of gear.

but me personally I find putting EQ aside, layering aside, when it comes to sampling right into the MPC, the 60 takes it in the ruggedness factor and it just comes out sounding harder IMO. maybe it isn't because of the 12 bit, and it's simply cause of the 80's converters and 80's hardware.. I dont know. for sure there is a combo of a few things going on that just sound bad ass. resampling in other gear doesn't sound like a 60 so I will have to say 12bit dont sound like the 60's 12 bit.

I owned the XL and I love that machine, but then I wound up getting a 60 one day and thought to myself.... why does this machine sound so damn good? I dont even know what it is. maybe growing up listening to the 60 in so much of my favourite music and then hearing a touch of that vibe in my own music just sounds good to me...

one day maybe you will have the chance to try out a 60 and have access to that tool when you think it would sound good in a track.

One thing I would love to some day afford to do is sequence some of my drums in the 60, sequence (not slaved but entirely independently) my samples in a 3000, some of the other samples in maybe a mirage.. and then add some extras with a prophet (the real thing) and who knows... maybe a moog or something. I know some guys here on the forum get the pleasure of doing things like that.

yeah the 60 is king and the 3000 is king only with the sample time. but ive achieved greater outcomes just with the XL as in sample time and stereo sample time and swing etc... if you want to mix match gear that is feasable to anybody with money to throw away i would definetly go with the 60 ii for drums or the SP 1200 and the 3000 for samples the and asr 10 for more sampling and the juno 6 for bass and an analogue synth with a moog for some bad ass bass and more analogue synth and thats all for me and i would die a happy man, of course with all of my wax to!!! . i dont like the mirage or the EPS or the EPS 16 + ive owned and sold all of them really fast

from the 60 to the 4k you good! would like to try the 2500,seeing a lot of 1& 5k's for sale.but whatever Daw your using,is gonna get the final say on bit rate.when the 60 came out analog was king,when the 4k dropped digital was the standard,so I believe akai was trying to keep up with that trend of better converters when they made the 4k.plus you gotta think the 60 came out in '87.ROGER LINN was a genius! they should let him design 1 more MP then shut it down.

rookie wrote:when the 60 came out analog was king,when the 4k dropped digital was the standard,so I believe akai was trying to keep up with that trend of better converters when they made the 4k.plus you gotta think the 60 came out in '87.ROGER LINN was a genius! they should let him design 1 more MP then shut it down.

C'mon. The 60 came out 1988. The musical instruments in that era were all DIGITAL. Analog was "king" in the 70s. Since the DX7 came out in 1983 analog was over.

peace

peterpiper wrote:

rookie wrote:when the 60 came out analog was king,when the 4k dropped digital was the standard,so I believe akai was trying to keep up with that trend of better converters when they made the 4k.plus you gotta think the 60 came out in '87.ROGER LINN was a genius! they should let him design 1 more MP then shut it down.

C'mon. The 60 came out 1988. The musical instruments in that era were all DIGITAL. Analog was "king" in the 70s. Since the DX7 came out in 1983 analog was over.

peace

yeah, but I think he was talking about recording methods and the types of media that was around.... and what was used to record productions. I could be wrong though, but that is how I pictured what he was talking about.