Why is my MPC so sloppy ????

Why is my MPC so sloppy?

Iv had my MPC200xl a few years now, and Iv never really been happy with my beats, they are OK but have always relied quantization for the timing, when I turn Quantization of my beats sound like ****, all over the place. Always blamed it on my bad sense of rhythm, although in my heart didn’t think I was really that bad.

Any this week I had a guy come round my place to work on a project together. He's a well know local drummer, and he’s been at it for years, and his beats a TIGHT, he has a record out at the moment and most of it is his live drumming but its so tight people think its a drum machine/sampler...

So he start banging some beats out of my MPC, not in record mode but just playing and they sound HOT, best beats Iv heard in years.
So we decide to hit PlayRecod and get some of these recorded. So he’s drumming along to the metronome, with quantizing (sp) OFF and all sounds great but on playback they sound **** real **** and sloppy not half as tight as he played them
IM real confused and quite upset about this, as it could be I been banging away on a **** MPC for a few years blaming it all on myself.

And Ideas


DWM

You just gotta tighten up them drums in the step edit scriddeen mane. I mean, i've been playing the drums for years and my timing was off when I first started but after awhile I could beetchslap those gray pads with the best of 'em....just gotta practice....I've heard too much hot sh1t made on the 2kxl to believe that it could be a timing error....just gotta work on that rhythm mane and leaarn how to tweak them drums in step mode...

The maximum resolution of the MPC is 96 ticks per quarter note. That means that even with quantization off every note you record will be moved to the nearest subdivison. That explains why the beats you recorded sound sloppy.

For comparison: The MPC4000's sequencer has got a resolution of 960 ticks per quarter note (the resolution is 10 times higher).

I have had the same problem you have described and personally I don't think that the 2k's resolution is fine enough for live drums (or solos and stuff). A workaround for you could be to record the MIDI information into a different sequencer i.e. a computer program like Logic. The resolution of that is 960 ticks as well which should be fine enough for any real world situation....

Isn't there a trick where you double the bpm to get a higher resolution or something?
Anyone done this?

ieism wrote:Isn't there a trick where you double the bpm to get a higher resolution or something?
Anyone done this?

exactly, i lot of my friends do this cuz you end up with 192 ticks. i do it sometimes but i never have had a problem with sloppy drums.

Make sure your drum sounds are tightly edited as well.

...from a technique point of view...when it comes to the MP- start with the basics...become accustomed to the metronome...the 4/4 beats...concentrate on the tempo...keep it simple...become one with the beat...and one with the rhythm...before there was ever a quantize, there was the rhythm...before there was digital, there was analog...to know digital, you must know analog...the real vets know exactly what i'm talkin' 'bout...just keep it simple...practice up on it...word...

Man this makes we wonder also, cause sometimes I have that same problem with the drums sequences not sounding as tight as i would like . But , when I listen to others that are supposed to be using a mpc there stuff usually sounds tight as hell. Obviously the resolution could be a problem , or else why would you have to doulble it to get smooth tracks?

i dont think you gotta double up to get the drums tight, (remember its a drum machine) The double up is more for laying down complex piano and string stuff.

"maximum resolution of the MPC is 96 ticks per quarter note"

This is plenty enough for any type of sequencing work. At 96 ppqn, two adjacent ticks are less than 3 milliseconds apart. Typical threshold for humans to differenciate between non-simultaneous sounds is 5 milliseconds.

This was a big consideration when midi was developed (even though MPC seq->samp does not use midi but is just as much if not better timing). Other sequencers claim to use 192, 480 or higher ppqn is nothing more than a bunch of marketing hype.

Foo's right, I double up for tighter resolution on the quantizing, not the ppqn.

i think its just practice....ive heard some hot stuff been tapped in- but the guy explained it took him ages to get good at tapping beats in.....

greg

How do you double the ticks per quarter note? Please explain.
Does this also double the midi ticks pqn? Because some of my keyboard lines come out sloppy as well & I thought it was a latency problem.

Thanks,
suenos

All you need to do is run the sequencer at twice the speed and play everything at half time...

At 96 ppqn, two adjacent ticks are less than 3 milliseconds apart. Typical threshold for humans to differenciate between non-simultaneous sounds is 5 milliseconds

This is not quite true because the resolution is tempo based (subdivisions of quarter notes). You therefore notice the "sloppyness" more at slower tempos.

I don't know about the 5ms thing. The resloution of the MPC will be fine for most people but a good drummer (and apparently Wicker Man's drummer wass s••t hot...) will be able to distinguish sounds less than 5ms apart. More importantly he will have his own "groove" and could still notice this being lost or changed by inadequate quantization to the nearest tick.


I don't want to start a discussion here about the quantization of the MPC or groove or tight beats or whatever.... This is my own opinion and based on my own experience...

make wure you are not blaming the machine for user error.

for some reason quantizing is hard to use properly for some without practice.