Insights for mixing on an MPC?

Sorry, that‘s not what I wanted to imply; yes, it sounded a bit harsh, but please understand that I couldn‘t tell you how to conduct a proper tactical play for said football game by writing some post about 4-3-3 man-pressing approach with movement schemes for counter-play while staying open for offsides traps. No offense intended (but pun intended).

My experience just shows that it‘s really hard work to learn and gain the experience to become „sort of a pro“ to have enough credibility to pass on one‘s skills and not tell nonsense. Youtube is filled with people doing that, not with „evil“ intent but out of a false self-confidence. I‘d wholeheartedly suggest getting a book or tutorial by a pro and honour the work and time they invested into putting together a guide for anyone interested. Those measly bucks can get you far if you use that knowledge for 20+ years, and in the long run that‘ll pay off nicely. Learn from their experience and take those 20-30 quid, it might be the best money you ever invested.

At almost 40 years of age and teaching mixing I am still learning a lot by reading more and more books, watching tutorials on Groove3 and LinkedInLearning and getting that 1% extra the artist expects, and I myself expect A HUGE AMOUNT from myself and find it harder and harder to have a rough mix I can start from.

Just my two cents. The book I mentioned before was not only an eye-opener but an epiphany. And I just wanted to share that.

On a side note: Said author Bobby Owsinski is also at large at LinkedInLearning. Good investment for all kinds of curated tutorials.

83dude wrote:Sorry, that‘s not what I wanted to imply; yes, it sounded a bit harsh, but please understand that I couldn‘t tell you how to conduct a proper tactical play for said football game by writing some post about 4-3-3 man-pressing approch with movement schemes for counter-play while staying open for offsides traps. No offense intended (but pun intended).

My experience just shows that it‘s really hard work to learn and gain the experience to become „sort of a pro“ to have the credibility to pass on one‘s skills and not tell nonsense. Youtube is filled with people doing that, not with „evil“ intent but out of a false self-confidence. I‘d wholeheartedly suggest getting a book or tutorial by a pro and honour the work and time they invested into putting together a guide for anyone interested. Those measly bucks can get you far if you use that knowledge for 20+ years, and in the long run that‘ll pay off nicely. Learn from their experience and take those 20-30 quid, it might be the best money you ever invested.

Just my two cents.

I will try to find the book you recommended. Thank you for the info

Sorry, no preview available (2016 edition):

https://books.google.de/books?id=1m5KMQAACAAJ&dq=the+mixing+engineer%E2%80%98s+handbook&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi18aDupbbyAhWO_7sIHaV_AO4Q6AF6BAgFEAM

Not the answer you want but I would focus on your beat/music making skills rather than mixing.

I wasted years more concerned on how my music was mixed than what the content or feel was. Unless your goal is to become a mix engineer or something

The average person could give a shit about a well mixed song. If its hot its hot, regardless of the mix

J.O.BEATS wrote:Not the answer you want but I would focus on your beat/music making skills rather than mixing.

I wasted years more concerned on how my music was mixed than what the content or feel was. Unless your goal is to become a mix engineer or something

The average person could give a shit about a well mixed song. If its hot its hot, regardless of the mix

There you are. Source material quality, not just how to present it.

This thread spiraled into something I wasn't really intending. I know the basics of mixing and have spent years in a DAW already. While I appreciate the friendly advice to read books about it and to learn the basics, and even the slightly more arrogant advice to focus on making music rather than mixing (as if those are somehow mutually exclusive and that I'm focusing on the wrong things), I'm really mostly interested in learning how the signal flow works on the MPC compared to a DAW.

Specifically, I watched this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B836pv94s3k) and it make me very suspicious. Basically, he claims that the internal signal is running too hot before entering track/program inserts and that you need to bring the levels down pre-fader in order to solve this inherent 'problem' with the MPC. So basically, doing stage gain with the faders because you'll end up with a distorted signal on the effects.

I find that hard to believe so I asked the author of that video what evidence he has of this being true. Perhaps unsurprisingly, he then recommends that I purchase his services to find out the answer, not unlike the answers I got here to instantly purchase books and other fixes.

I'm not interested in buying books about it, I guess I'm directing the question to someone who has some inside knowledge about how the MPC signal chain is designed.

Let's take Reason as an example: it's track channels have a whopping 64 bit depth which gives it crazy high headroom way beyond 200 dB. Mix buses even have 128 bit depth. So in a DAW, there's no such thing as an internal signal "running too hot", and in any way influencing an internal fx, causing it to distort (unless we're talking about deliberate distortion, of course). So, my sense is that this guy is just misinformed and certain that he's knowledgeable, or, worst case, deliberately deceiving people so they purchase his services.

So I pose that question here (that was my first question in this thread) and immediately I'm presented with two other purchase recommendations to supposedly find out the answer. Coming from the Elektron forums where paid staff frequently add their expertise to discussions, I guess I was hoping for more inside knowledge here, but maybe I should direct my question directly to Akai instead if they're not active here.

Sorry for not boiling the original post down to this core from the outset. Hopefully I've now asked a straightforward question - does anybody know the answer?

Without watching the video provided, the guy doesn‘t seem to be wrong. In modern day DAWs mixing „in the red“ might not have you get any undesirable artifacts in your mix. As soon as you boil it down to a 44.1kHz file with „only“ 16 bits is where your flaws will be heard. Getting down the master level will get you your desirable outcome, but mixing like that in an analogue world will show you the flaw in that approach. You‘ll have a distorted mix, but a quieter one.

It is the basic understanding that levels work like a glass of water. Adding to that will make you finally spilling water like mad, but those approches compare to increasing the volume in (or size of) the glass instead of improving the amount you add to it. Mixing in an additive manner is where most people tend to do it wrongly and increasing their problems, too, since any plugin or bus can‘t handle that properly. And it is partially that understanding that mixes sound „pressed“ and too dense to leave room for the signals to breathe. You can use all the headroom you have in your protected environment (DAW), but as soon as you‘re trying to put it in servicable amounts to your customer you‘ll need to fill those glasses of drinks you serve - and putting a barrell of drink into a „drinkable“ amount in a glass is where you‘ll undoubtedly spill it or have them get a glass large enough to not being able to drink it.

You asked for help and you apparently didn‘t like the answers you got. If you refuse this serious and well-meant advice, please feel free to continue to doubt it. But moving out of your comfort zone is where true learning begins. If the only replies you‘ll get suggest reading or watching stuff that costs money, maybe there‘s a reason why people do. I myself wouldn‘t suggest that book or anything else if there‘d be a sufficiently satisfying resource for free. If you find a resource that teaches as much for the price of naught, please educate us all. That‘s just stuff that can‘t be taught by a single link or a comprehensive and manageable reply here.

Sorry, but I feel I‘ve already put too much energy and time into telling you why there‘s a reason behind all that. This is the point where I‘ll stop because I don‘t feel it‘s worth it if you won‘t take sound advice. Good luck my friend.

djst wrote: I'm really mostly interested in learning how the signal flow works on the MPC compared to a DAW.

Specifically, I watched this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B836pv94s3k) and it make me very suspicious. Basically, he claims that the internal signal is running too hot before entering track/program inserts and that you need to bring the levels down pre-fader in order to solve this inherent 'problem' with the MPC. So basically, doing stage gain with the faders because you'll end up with a distorted signal on the effects.

I'm not interested in buying books about it, I guess I'm directing the question to someone who has some inside knowledge about how the MPC signal chain is designed.

Let's take Reason as an example: it's track channels have a whopping 64 bit depth which gives it crazy high headroom way beyond 200 dB. Mix buses even have 128 bit depth. So in a DAW, there's no such thing as an internal signal "running too hot", and in any way influencing an internal fx, causing it to distort (unless we're talking about deliberate distortion, of course). So, my sense is that this guy is just misinformed and certain that he's knowledgeable, or, worst case, deliberately deceiving people so they purchase his services.

Sorry for not boiling the original post down to this core from the outset. Hopefully I've now asked a straightforward question - does anybody know the answer?

why do u care about that mans claims about the internal signal flow the MPC; that's his opinion; u may think different based on when u use the MPC, I dont see why u want an external answer test it urself and then u will know if what that dude said is accurate.

But the question is why do u care to want find out if what he is saying is true; just mix how u want to mix and use ur ears to determine the correct settings

its very simple; it appears u seek a paint by numbers template ti dial in the correct mix by industry consensus but there is not right levels; its based on the sounds ur working with and what outcome u seek to achieve.

83dude wrote:In modern day DAWs mixing „in the red“ might not have you get any undesirable artifacts in your mix. As soon as you boil it down to a 44.1kHz file with „only“ 16 bits is where your flaws will be heard.

...which is exactly my point and we're in total alignment here.

83dude wrote:Without watching the video provided, the guy doesn‘t seem to be wrong.

The guy on the video claims something very different from what you and I are saying: he claims that there's an inherent flaw in the way the MPC digital signal flow is set up that makes the signal distort already at the fx inserts signal input level unless you gain stage by bringing the level of e.g. the pad program down from the default of 127, and using the pad or channel mixer to gain stage won't fix this problem. And my point (like yours), is that at that stage in the internal signal flow, there has to be plenty of headroom (even with just a 32F resolution, it's still so much more headroom than the final 16 bit 44.1 kHz audio) so surely he must be wrong about the signal processing works on the MPC.

Anyway, sorry you feel you've wasted your time on this thread. In my mind, this was a specific, technical question that should be relevant to most users of the MPC, but I guess if you don't care about mixing in the box and go straight to exporting stems, this stuff won't really matter.

jpeg wrote: why do u care about that mans claims about the internal signal flow the MPC; that's his opinion;

Because this obviously isn't a matter of personal opinions.

jpeg wrote:But the question is why do u care to want find out if what he is saying is true

Because this should influence the mixing workflow. Either this guy is right and we should all do the gain staging at the program level (pre-fader) and completely ignore the channel/pad mixer since that won't solve the inherent problem that he claims the MPCs have - or he's completely wrong and we can mix the way you'd mix in a DAW.

Anyway, this topic clearly isn't seen as valuable to anyone in here so I'm happy to move on and for a moderator to just close it.

Well it's very easy to clip at the individual pad/keygroup level - hot samples, multiple layers, filters, FX etc, so gain staging the individual pad/keygroups within the program is definitely part of the normal workflow. Gain stage individual pads/keygroups, then adjust the overall program level, and so on, etc etc.

In that video he's actually adjusting the wrong 'level' control - he's only adjusting the 'layer 1' level which is bad practice when the aim is to reduce the total pad level as that method fails once you have multiple layers in use. He really should have used the pad mixer to explain this better, but that's just nitpicking, I know what he's trying to get at.

djst wrote:Because this obviously isn't a matter of personal opinions.

Because this should influence the mixing workflow. Either this guy is right and we should all do the gain staging at the program level (pre-fader) and completely ignore the channel/pad mixer since that won't solve the inherent problem that he claims the MPCs have - or he's completely wrong and we can mix the way you'd mix in a DAW.

Anyway, this topic clearly isn't seen as valuable to anyone in here so I'm happy to move on and for a moderator to just close it.

Most production forums seem guarded about giving out so called production secrets or they personal formulas for getting they mix or beats to sound a certain way.

but also its always down to personal preferences this no rule u try out the unit and find the settings that works for ur productions sounds and what ur going for.

when u completely ignore the channel/pad mixer how does that work with ur beats? if it sounds good then its good.

its not like a maths test where there is one answer; someone might mix at the program level and some might mix at the pad level, its all preference, I use a bit of both why do u think it has to be either or, just do whats required to get the sound ur after, rather then over complicate or drift into academic distractions about floating points and 0 db, etc.

MPC-Tutor wrote:Well it's very easy to clip at the individual pad/keygroup level - hot samples, multiple layers, filters, FX etc, so gain staging the individual pad/keygroups within the program is definitely part of the normal workflow. Gain stage individual pads/keygroups, then adjust the overall program level, and so on, etc etc.

In that video he's actually adjusting the wrong 'level' control - he's only adjusting the 'layer 1' level which is bad practice when the aim is to reduce the total pad level as that method fails once you have multiple layers in use. He really should have used the pad mixer to explain this better, but that's just nitpicking, I know what he's trying to get at.

Ah, yes that actually does make sense for sample based programs (keygroups and samples) where you can stack samples. For the Plugin synths though, there is no reason to bring down the level of the program's output like he claims, right?

jpeg wrote:Most production forums seem guarded about giving out so called production secrets or they personal formulas for getting they mix or beats to sound a certain way.

Thanks for the insight. I only have experience with two such forums, this one and Elektronauts, and they're night and day in this regard.

jpeg wrote:just do whats required to get the sound ur after, rather then over complicate or drift into academic distractions about floating points and 0 db, etc.

Sure, academic/technical details are not interesting to everyone. I was interested in eliminating any unintentional clipping/distortion and simply wanted to validate what sounded like made up claims from yet another MPC YouTuber who's more interested in profiting from other people than to share the love and knowledge. I guess that's a part of the MPC community DNA that I'll simply have to accept.

@djst - I suspect you're getting stuck in the land of objective vs subjective. Also as much what is observable/testable and what people are speculating. So you are right in questioning everything (and even what I am about to post) because a lot of information is just "unknown" how it is really implemented, and it isn't like manufacturers are always going to come clean or explain what they implemented for a lot of reasons like secret sauce or due to licensing constraints or whatever.

Specifically for the clipping issue though, as I am sure you are aware in most DAWs, that anything over a 0db signal you will get digital clipping, or in other words your signal gets cut off as it goes over 0db. More bits does not magically fix this issue, it is a hard limit, but what manufacturers can do is change where 0db hits. They can do this is 16bit, 24bit, 32bit, 64bit, etc... all they do is change their meters to have what is really -4db for example to read as 0db, and this would give them 4db of headroom at the expense of lower resolution. at 16 or 24 bit you might notice this, but at 64bit or 128bit you're very unlikely to hear this, so you can provide even more headroom.

On the MPC I would say it is not good practice to play your signals hot, in other words at or above 0db, except for the mixer levels that will show above 0db (I suspect the meter is using a trick like -4db reading as 0db for visual purposes only), as far as my experiments have shown, it clips hard at 0db anywhere in the chain. This is for any part of the chain, so if you have samples normalized to 0db and play them polyphonically you are going to get digital clipping if you don't reduce the audio level at the sample, and you want to also consider the Program master level, as well as the track level. Similarly for plugins, you want to make sure that you are exiting the plugin below 0db (unless you want that sound). Personally I try to start at -9 to -15db, and then adjust to taste in the mixer section from there.

This is mostly from what I have observed. It is very possible I am wrong, but from the video I do believe that the author is wrong or at least mischaracterizing some of the problems in the signal chain.

Hope that helps...