Recording methods

So, before I had an MPC I used to record vinyl into Pro Tools via my audio interface. Then I'd chop it up on ReCycle, sequence on Reason, then re-record or re-wire back into Pro Tools for mix-down. These days though, all recording and sequencing is done through my MPC.

As much as I prefer recording straight into the MPC, technically I think my original approach will provide better quality with the aid of accurate metering, better pre-amps, and better AD/DA converters.

The majority would argue that the MPC will provide a unique 'rawness'! And to be honest, I probably agree!!

How do you guys approach the recording stage? Straight into MPC, or DAW first then dump files via USB. I will do an A/B comparison soon and hear for myself what is the better option.

Record it straight into the mpc through dj mixer and 7 band EQ

Sometimes I record my samples through dj mixer, eq and interface straight into ableton.

Sometimes I record my samples into the S950, re-record the samples from the s950 into ableton and chop and sequence from there.

I dont know about the computers inherent a/d being better, mabye newer. But I've heard folks say that they can sometimes be the definition of thin, but I'm sure that changes from machine to machine. For me personally using the AD/DAC on my MPC is like having a better button on all my samples. But if you have a newer machine then it's probably irrelivent. The pre amps suck in the computer IMO too, so quiet and and things get exponentially worse when you boost the signal after it hits the machine.

As for the ease of sampling stuff. I just monitor my MPC on my computer using a metering tool to ensure the samples are at good volume (combined with the input meters on the machine of course). I'll still take long stuff I want to chop into recycle.

I record from vinyl through my mixer which has two built in 15bandEQs (one for left and one for right channel. It's also got a nasty ass echo/delay effect.
I sample into my akai S01, which is a mono 16bit/32kHz sampler with only 15 seconds sampletime..
from there i sample into the 2500. sometimes I'll just run the samples through the s01 but only record into the 2500.. 1 because i think it sounds dope and 2 because I'm too lazy to rearange the cables everytime
Yeah I sample mono into the 2500, because the other input got destroyed by an aspiring "rockstar" with his electric guitar.. it's never been the same ever since..
Doesn't matter though.. I record the stereo image as mono, or each channel seperate .. or just the one I want sometimes using the above mentiond EQ and soometimes even the echo.. you can get sounds from nothing but the machines in em selves with that echo if you twist them knobs in the right way

i used to record the vinyls to a DAW(reaper or audacity) .. get some chunks of songs cut up, drop em into the MPC and do the intriquette chopping in there because i can't hack it with a mouse.. + I make beats while i chop.. it's one process.. not two steps.. most of the time.
Also my interface sounds shit (colours everything tinny) and i din't want that to colour all my sounds so.. ya, that's how I record my samples at the moment

I never understood that "this machines makes it raw" jargon. I just sample and make the best of it. If my drums sound weak, I sample them again at a higher gain and boost and/or cut the eq levels as I sample. Its funny too, because sometimes I get emails on what 12bit sampler was used on a track and I tell them its a [email protected] type sampler and they get pissed like "fine, don't tell me then." or the infamous "**** off" comment I usually get from the haters

Yall know I use Roland SPs and MV and an MPC500, they're all [email protected] Its skill, I'm a ninja in green

Ooh ya, good point!
how hot you record ur samples makes such a huge diffrence in sound!
The machine it self doesn't make anything sound raw.. in fakt the machine it self doesn't make anything .. period.

But you can make the machine do things..

-niN wrote:Ooh ya, good point!
how hot you record ur samples makes such a huge diffrence in sound!
The machine it self doesn't make anything sound raw.. in fakt the machine it self doesn't make anything .. period.

But you can make the machine do things..

Are you guys serious? I can definitely hear the ADC/DAC difference sampling into my 2000 rather than sampling into my computer.... But if you guys are saying its not needed to make a good raw sounding track then I agree with that.

ya, that second statement is what I meant.

obviousley the components and the build of a machine is going to effect or colour the sound.

BUT using a certain machine is not going to make ur beats sound "raw"..

It's still how you use the tool..

like recording at a 45 stead of 33 and pitching it down..
recording real loud till the kick clips a wee bit.. but just the peaks...
or recording at a low volume and boosting it loud in the machine thus using less bits

all stuff you make happen.. not any machine by itself just being what it is

^word, I can definitely agree with all that.

Yes, the machine gives it a certain color like niN said. Like different ink-jets printing the Mona Lisa, there will be slight differences on each copy but the magic comes when I zoom, reverse the colors and grain out the image. The machine didn't do it, I did with the tools within. I turned an artpiece into a statement

Ill-Green wrote:I turned an artpiece into a statement

Most of the time I sample into the PC using the m-udio FastTrackPro. After coarse trimming of the sample it goes to the library HD and eitherstay there for ca 5 years to age a bit and get really grimey .....
ok back to topic: For a long time I use to fiddle around with different filter inside the PC before I record the sample to one of my samplers but it didn't work out cause there was no fun in this kind of workflow.
I thought about Pete Rock and how he worked back in the days and read about that he used his DJ Mixer EQ to EQ the samples before sampling. Now the EQ of those big mixers like the Numark DM1650 or GLi PMX9000 were 5 and 6 band graphicEQs.
Since I dont have such an old Mixer I use the voxengo Overtone GEQ whic has 7 bands and each of the band can be adjusted in frequency. I made a preset with the same frequencies the of the Numark 1650 and another one with the frequencies of the GLi.
I was surprized how much more this 5 or 6 frequency bands allow me to create the sound I want. No more effin around with lo,hi whatever-pass filters for hours, just a quick bassfaders up mids and highs down = fat kick. Inverse = no Kick but nice hats.

peace

I used to do everything on the MPC then record each sequence onto an 8 track recorder, old school!

Nowadays I actually record straight onto DAW and doing all my chopping and drum programming using an MPD26 usb controller

-niN wrote:ya, that second statement is what I meant.

obviousley the components and the build of a machine is going to effect or colour the sound.

BUT using a certain machine is not going to make ur beats sound "raw"..

It's still how you use the tool..

like recording at a 45 stead of 33 and pitching it down..
recording real loud till the kick clips a wee bit.. but just the peaks...
or recording at a low volume and boosting it loud in the machine thus using less bits

all stuff you make happen.. not any machine by itself just being what it is

Or lowering the bandwith. That's why I like to use my s950 sometimes. Agree tha not just the 12bit converters alone gives it its 'sound'. Sample hot, higher rpm, bandwith, converters and even more techniques combined makes a sample sounding raw.

recording in mpc vs. computer, its minimal difference to me, someone is not gonna hear the final beat and be like oh shit, dude recorded this strait into his mpc, or, this sound so thin, he mustve recorded through his soundcard.

same thing goes for any piece of gear that is relatively clean/true to the input signal, now whereas if you used a sampler that had a more colored sound in the first place, someone would have a better chance of noticing that grit if they were looking for it.

any way you record it in, you have sound to play with in the end, and also all kinds of other sounds to add/layer to it.

i could track out of my mpc into my m-audio fw 410 and it would sound fine cause its a **** instrumental beat, not a vocal that was recorded live in an untreated room with a shitty mic pre.
it would also sound fine if i tracked the beat into my tc electronics interface, and furthermore, the average listener probably couldnt decipher the tracks that i recorded into each interface at the end of the day even if one had better AD conversion.

one of my teachers did tv commercials with an m-audio firwire 410 and never heard a peep about sound quality or bad ad conversion, this is because you can make lower end gear sound good if you have a treated room and a nice signal chain (mic/mic pre) going into it.

i guess my point is, unless you are looking for certain character in your sound by using a super obvious sounding sampler (s950, sp1200) then it doesnt matter what you use to record with because the average listener wont care or be able to tell either way. just make good music in the end and your all good.

I don't care if the listener can spot if it was a DAW or MPC recording.

I did a comparison recording the other day; DAW session was 24/96K with levels recorded at -3 DB FS, sample/s were bounced down to 16/44.1K with dithering applied, then finally imported into the MPC via USB.

The same sample was then recorded into the MPC. The A/B comparison showed that although the DAW file was cleaner and had 'tighter' qualities, the MPC file had more dynamic properties based on its waveform. But that 'louder' file is probably down to the minimal recording meter system.

The MPC file sounded like something was recorded straight from vinyl, while the DAW sounded slightly polished. Technically the DAW is probably the better option, but the MPC does make life a whole lot easier.