chromatic note layout for mpc 60

Hey guys I wanted to if anyone has a chromatic note layout chart for the mpc 60 I have the 3.10os installed and wanted to find out how to set up my notes the way I would on a piano 60 so i can play my bass note samples like a real bass. this is an example of a layout for how it look on the 2500 and 1000 . If any one has a full note layout for the 60 it would be appreciated if you can post it thanks in advance.

PAD 01: 37 [C#1]
PAD 02: 36 [C1]
PAD 03: 42 [F#1]
PAD 04: 82 [A#4]
PAD 05: 40 [E1]
PAD 06: 38 [D#1]
PAD 07: 46 [A#1]
PAD 08: 44 [G#1]
etc, etc...

the default is general midi i believe...

its always wise to set em up sequentially imo... and save that and load it every time...

but im a noobster, and probably didnt come close to answering your inquiry...

fobedafied wrote:the default is general midi i believe...

I have always wondered where the default midi note number to drum voice/pad assignments originated from, and why.

The MPC60 (1988) pre-dates general midi (1991).

The manual for the Linn Sequencer (1985) shows a similar midi note to drum voice assignment map, and says that it is the Linn 9000 (1984) default drum voice assignment.

I wonder if that is where this mapping started, or if the Linn 9000 (or earlier Linn drum machines) took the midi note to drum voice assignments from somewhere else?

The MIDI specification was announced circa. 1983 and first appeared on hardware devices in 1984. The pad layout on those early machines is aligned to the MIDI drum sounds which would have been on MIDI channel 10. That is why to some people it may appear to be an illogical arrangement. The main purpose of these machine was to sequence drums internally or triggered via MIDI, so this note arrangement suits that intention.

@crate king 1

The instructions for setting up chromatic assignment are in the MPC60 bible which is one of the stickies at the top of this very forum. Every 60 owner should really go through this as it contains a lot of relevant information.

Clint thanks for that kick in the ass lol . I did like you said checked out the mpc 60 bible and followed it step by step like it said . Saved settings to disk as back up turned mp off and turned it back on to see if it save it internally checked my pads and bam chromatic notes all laid out perfectly you Da Man Thanks yo!!!!!.

clint246clint wrote:The MIDI specification was announced circa. 1983 and first appeared on hardware devices in 1984. The pad layout on those early machines is aligned to the MIDI drum sounds which would have been on MIDI channel 10. That is why to some people it may appear to be an illogical arrangement. The main purpose of these machine was to sequence drums internally or triggered via MIDI, so this note arrangement suits that intention.

Have you read the MIDI 1.0 specs, and is this a fact based on what is in the actual specs, or an assumption of what you think actually took place?

I haven't read the specs, but from this info about the GM spec, proposed by Roland in 1988 or 1989 (?), introduced in 1991, it seems like a standard MIDI drum layout, on MIDI channel 10, was not specified in MIDI 1.0...
http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tutr/gm.htm

There were deviances in regards to "drum machines" as well. Most drum machines (and drum units built into multi-timbral modules) play a different drum sound for each MIDI Note Number. But the 1.0 specification never spelled out which drum sounds were assigned to which MIDI note numbers. So, whereas note number 60 may play a snare upon one drum unit, upon another drum unit, it may play a crash cymbal. Again, this caused trouble with MIDI files, since sometimes a drum part would play back with the wrong drum sounds.

To address this discrepancy, the GM addendum contains a "drum map". This assigns about 48 common drum sounds to 48 specific MIDI Note Numbers. The assignments of drum sounds to MIDI notes is shown in the chart, GM Drum Sounds. Also, it was decided that a GM drum unit should default to using MIDI channel 10 to receive MIDI messages. Therefore, a composer of a GM MIDI file can safely assume that his drum part will play correctly if he uses the GM Drum note assignments and records the drum part upon MIDI channel 10.

Also, from this article about the original General MIDI proposal...
http://www.jungleib.com/1991/01/?afg36_page_id=3

The downside of modularity is that since MIDI has been to this point entirely voluntary, there is no industry standard minimum configuration or set of capabilities that one could rely on being in a given synthesizer. For example, there is no similarity between preset numbers and resulting timbres. Other examples of basic incompatibilities are defaults for pitch bend range, modulation effects, octave registration, the number of available voices, timbres, velocity response curves, and the mapping of sounds to MIDI keys by drum “kits.”

And this scan from the January 1991, volume 1, issue 1, of the JMMA (Journal of the MIDI Manufacturers Association), linked to from the webpage above, seems to suggest the same thing...
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7180/6904 ... 35cb_b.jpg

The proposal currently in front of the MMA suggests both standardized types of drum sets plus mappings of drum sounds to specific MIDI note numbers. The note numbers mapping proposed is an extension of the old Roland/Sequential mapping that appeared on some early drum machines, so even older equipment should be at least partially compatible with GM.

So, in this chicken and the egg scenario, it seems like the drum mapping came first, the GM channel 10/drum assignment layout standard came later.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

So, in this chicken and the egg scenario, it seems like the drum mapping came first, the GM channel 10/drum assignment layout standard came later.

Yes that's about right, notice I didn't say General Midi, I said MIDI specification. GM was a later revision, as was GM2 to provide more consistent mapping and control over a wider range of parameters.

All interesting, and a bit nerdy lol...

clint246clint wrote:Yes that's about right, notice I didn't say General Midi, I said MIDI specification.

My point is that a standard drum mapping to MIDI note numbers, and drums on MIDI channel 10, seems to not be in any official MIDI specification before General MIDI in 1991.

Based on what it says in the Linn Sequencer manual about it coming from the Linn 9000, and the Linn Sequencer seeming to be a direct successor to the MPC60, this mapping in the MPC60 seems like it might originate from the Linn 9000 from 1984, and probably somewhere else before that.

It seems there was not any actual MIDI specification for this drum mapping at that time, so the MPC60 pad assignment to MIDI note numbers couldn't come from any MIDI specifications.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter, it is something I always wondered, and I also assumed that it was based on some sort of MIDI specifications, such as General MIDI, but it seems that the General MIDI specifications for drum mapping are based on these earlier drum machines, and a loose standard that developed between manufacturers, rather than the other way around.

The joys of evolution!

If you interview him for the book, can you please ask where the MPC60 pad to midi assignments came from?

I would guess that it was what seemed to be the best layout of a standard early drum machine drum kit/sound layout onto a MIDI keyboard originally, and maybe the same sounds-MIDI notes were transferred onto the Linn 9000 pads, and then the MPC pads, in kit layouts?

Might do some comparisons of drum sound-MIDI note layouts between Linn 9000, MIDI keyboard, and default MPC pad to MIDI assignments, when I get some spare time.

i guess im wrong about general midi...

always thought that was the case...


im on 3.10e OS for the 60... i think the date is 1996 or 1997 on that... not sure of its the same layout for earlier OSs.

I always thought the same, but after reading the reference to the Linn 9000 in the Linn Sequencer manual recently, and looking at the timeline of the MPC60 release and GM specs, I am not sure it is.

Who knows, could be based on an early draft or proposal GM spec.

I suppose we would have to find out directly from Roger Linn or other developers to know for sure, if not already documented somewhere.

When I get around to it, I will swap back in the version 2 ROMs and see what they are doing, in comparison to the 3.10e, and whatever my ASQs and Linn Sequencers have in them.

Be careful swapping out those ROMs, don't risk it unless you have to.

Those legs bend and snap so easily!

Thanks for the caution Clint, but I did work in the service area of a computer store through the 90's, and inserted/removed many ICs into/out-of sockets, so I know how to do it without bending or breaking legs.

If you are bending or breaking legs, you are doing it wrong. There is no reason that they should break if inserted correctly into the socket, or removed correctly from it, without being pushed sideways or being forced down into the socket when the leg is not directly above a socket hole for example.

I plan to pull the 3.10e ROMs out of my MPC60 soon anyway, to allow testing of the cloned MPC60 SCSI boards in my ASQ10s.