In my quest...I found this page.
Think there's a difference in the versions of the MPC? Here's a note from one of the experts:
http://www.mpc2000xl.com/mpc_timing.htmSomeone wrote in repsonse to my "no one's going to tell what sequencer you are using":
> Obviously it's true that in the end result no one will be able to tell what sequencer you used, but YOU'LL certainly be able to tell while you're using it. Different sequencers do have a different feel, not so much in "sloppiness", but in how they record your playing with different "swing" settings.
Sevo replied:
There is no "swing" magic in any MPC. Timing-wise, there is no difference between the 2000 and 60/3000 other than the 60/3000 have twice the MIDI outs and hence, less likelyhood MIDI jams. All MPCs are solid 96ppqn MIDI sequencers (as tight as MIDI can be, which is not that much anyway) with a absolutely tight internal drum sequencer with zero delay between multiple simultaneous instruments. There is no particular groove magic going on in any MPC - the swing and note shift features are static, faultless and perform no more magic than their counterparts on any mid-eighties software sequencer. If you are looking for advanced shuffle and humanize functions, you'll have to switch off quantizing and play them by hand - or use a big software sequencer and suffer its sloppy MIDI timing.
Someone also said:
> This isn't too important in electronic dance music where you don't really use a swing setting at all, but for other forms - particularly R&B - it can make a huge difference to the composer. I know for a fact that my Linn 9000 has a different swing feel to any software sequencer I've used, and that's why I still use it today.
Sevo states:
The Linn 9000 has no swing magic either! If you are hearing a difference, it will be the higher mechanical precision rather than any artificial human sloppyness - humanizers are the domain of software sequencers. Or rather were - humanizers (which were the most advertized feature in the early days of Cubase and Logic) seem to be unpopular nowadays, and aren't mentioned at all in current software sequencer publicity. The Linn and MPC have realtime OSes, fully integrated sound generators, and a far, far better timing than software sequencers - even more so as the software sequencers have to pump their data through MIDI, which can't handle two events at once. But they are precise rather than magic. Try it, and plug your Linn into a harddisk recorder and count out the samples between beats - you'll see that the beats are dead on whatever grid you programmed or played rather than performing any swing of their own...
Someone also blurbed:
> I mean, if you play the same pattern using Logic to control a JP-8000 that play using an ARP sequencer to control a 2600 the listener won't care, but the composer will definitely find a difference in how they work.
Sevo's final word:
Different issue - ergonomics and conceptual models certainly shape the way you work. But that will alter the beat you write rather than its timing.
Sevo -- Sevo Stille
Yeah, they are the same thing as each other.
