Ren vs JJOS vs MPC 3000/60 [Vintage sound shootout]

RunningOnE wrote:well if most of you own mpc's I hope you have some decent monitors/ speakers. If your listening in on your laptop or even standard computer speakers... thats not what most producers are using. Don't expect apples and oranges. Example kick sounds like poop on mac book pro or even worse laptop.. decent speakers and you hear something completely different

Oh OK, thanks for the explanation. However, I was saying that I actually can hear a difference even at quiet levels. It's arguable if the difference is significant but I can definitely hear a difference with little effort. I was just curious as to how loud you had to monitor to hear it or rather why you said it needed to be loud. I'm using monitors by the way.

Undertow wrote:

RunningOnE wrote:well if most of you own mpc's I hope you have some decent monitors/ speakers. If your listening in on your laptop or even standard computer speakers... thats not what most producers are using. Don't expect apples and oranges. Example kick sounds like poop on mac book pro or even worse laptop.. decent speakers and you hear something completely different

Oh OK, thanks for the explanation. However, I was saying that I actually can hear a difference even at quiet levels. It's arguable if the difference is significant but I can definitely hear a difference with little effort. I was just curious as to how loud you had to monitor to hear it or rather why you said it needed to be loud. I'm using monitors by the way.

Well that could be because everything comes from the ren.. then resampled thru a 1000 with effects pretty much

But who knows.. I am only the REAL op of the samples

did all the recordings get done at the same gain setting, and through the same interface/signal path?

because that actually makes just as much if not more difference in sound quality, punchiness, etc..

and.. what exactly is the poll for? what exactly are people voting on? what they subjectively think sounds the nicest or on something else?

I just voted for the one that sounded the best, to me. The one that sounded subjectively "crunchiest" wasn't the one I thought sounded best…I actually chose one of the cleaner sounding ones.

If we were supposed to be choosing which we thought was a particular setting, unit or something else, I did it totally wrong.

mr_debauch wrote:did all the recordings get done at the same gain setting, and through the same interface/signal path?

because that actually makes just as much if not more difference in sound quality, punchiness, etc..

and.. what exactly is the poll for? what exactly are people voting on? what they subjectively think sounds the nicest or on something else?

Well my mixer will have different settings than his since my gain is slightly boosted and going thru audio outputs.. So yeah thats a very good point. I am not trying to be an ass .. this is just super inaccurate and people will get the wrong idea.. sorry just got back from chemistry

This is funny. It's also interesting how some people actually prefer low-quality sounds. There's some people who like 8-bit graphics, because that's what they grew up with:



But in general, if someone's digital camera made images like that they'd think it's broken, and hurts to look at. People used to try to avoid these chrunchy digital aliasing sounds.

Now it's a "feature".

^ ah, okay.. well I didn't bother voting.. as I dont see the point of the poll... half of that oldschool mpc sound is the fact that you gotta be crafty around that low sample time... really know where to cut corners and where to layer manipulated versions of the same sample... how to work around filling the gaps between short sample clips etc.. further more, it's the limitations of the feature set that inspires you to tweak sounds a certain way within your abilities. (for example: Having to work with note off so your samples dont overlap causes the edges of samples to hit or miss each other... that can add an element.)

I think maybe the bit reducer feature in jjos vs the vintage mode might be a legit comparison because they are something added after the fact as an effect... but I dont think the 12 bit is the main culprit behind the 60 sound.

That wasn't to say I liked the sound of even the one I chose but moreover that in context that the others were inferior in fidelity, even if slight.

I even wonder if the one I chose will end up actually being the dry one thrown in as a test.

The sample choice (way too short) and the way this test was recorded and put together is just too inconclusive. Not that I give a flying **** anyway!

It's all smoke and mirrors IMO... especially when comparing the sound of MPCs.

so what was what?

damien907 wrote:so what was what?

C is the winner. This is hillarious. The majority of people voted for the worst one.

Is that because the question asked which was "best/crunchiest"? The wording messes it up because it is asking 2 things at once, implying what is "best" is also "crunchiest", when it is not!

The vintage sound is about more than just low resolution, and everyone at the time knew what they were working with was worse than analog. Today we've got tools that finally reach resolutions where digital sounds natural, but people's psychological associations to the past modified how they perceive, so they actually prefer the outdated sound now? That's funny!





The thing is, when people were so limited, they were forced to be creative, and it came out simpler. When people have endless tools, they are more likely to just start squirting everywhere and make a big mess. But technically, one is better than the other. If you can just go into the mindset of someone working with limited tools, you can produce the same simple creative stuff, but in higher resolution, with a much richer sound.

We want more bits, not less. We want smoother lines, not jagged. You can use the crunch and low-res for effects, like that 8-bit tie posted before. But you don't want to just run your entire project through it, and go back to the '80s.

Moving on from the merits of vintage vs digital, it's clear to me that C is the loudest which is why I suspect it received more votes. In terms of which one is the 'crunchiest', they all sound pretty much the same, I certainly wouldn't like to comment either way. Maybe load them up and loop them all for longer, but it would be interesting to hear this done with a complete piece of music that features lots of different types of sounds.

But I would be genuinely chuffed if it turned out that vintage mode is more than just a marketing gimmick.

C E F are Ren.
A is JJ OS.
B D are 60/3000.