will JJ for the 1000 ever have direct recording?

droan wrote:so with the direct record i could make an 8 bar drum loop on one track, make a new track and have someone play a synth line live that would be looped automatically into the seuence on the fly? If ive got it wrong, let me know, im looking to upgrade soon. sick and tired of Akais OS siht.

not quite. it just allows you to sample while the sequence is playing. after you're done recording, you can assign the sample to the pad and then it will insert an event to the current track to trigger the sound if you choose. when the sequence loops around as you're recording, it won't start playing what you've already recorded as you're assuming.

Lithion wrote:I don't really see the 1k as being a direct recording device. It's more designed to supplement a studio, not take the place of one. Buy and MV8800 if you want all that.

actually, the mpc is perfectly suited for direct recording. it's not suited for the audio tracks that the JJ OS has which would be more in line with the audio tracks an MV would have.

direct record automatically adds the sound to your program and then inserts an event to trigger that sound to your sequence so that the recorded sound is played in time with the sequence. since it utilizes programs and sequences the way they were designed, it's exactly what the mpc was made for.

Mpc_Monk wrote:Mike is the current mpc 2500 jj os got the direct recording and the muting working correctly, or is it like os 499 on the 1000?

the JJ OS for the 2500 is the same as the one for the 1000 just with the ability for the features that the 2500 has added in: extra outs, cd/dvd drive, dedicated buttons, etc. there is no direct record, i have to install the akai OS if i need to record anyone live.

Mike Feedback wrote:

droan wrote:so with the direct record i could make an 8 bar drum loop on one track, make a new track and have someone play a synth line live that would be looped automatically into the seuence on the fly? If ive got it wrong, let me know, im looking to upgrade soon. sick and tired of Akais OS siht.

Mike Feedback wrote:not quite. it just allows you to sample while the sequence is playing. after you're done recording, you can assign the sample to the pad and then it will insert an event to the current track to trigger the sound if you choose. when the sequence loops around as you're recording, it won't start playing what you've already recorded as you're assuming.

I don't see why the jj's audio tracks are any different then this. you just sample when the audio track is recording and then if you want to apply it to a pad you can.

sorry but Direct record is VERY different!

-Punch in and out!
-Record over the end of the loop and into the start of the loop
-The recored sound gets assigned to a pad so you can tweak it like any other sample ( filter, ADSR, effects, Q-Links............)

JJ seriously needs to look into changing his audio tracks to behave like the original Akai Direct Record! This would be amazing!

Peace!

thank you Mike,

has anybody talked with jj about this, has everyone sent him the message.
I find it just a little frustrating that there haven't been any responses to this and the muting issues. if this was about some esoteric functions that would be one thing but these are things that anyone can understand need to be looked into.
has jj heard ?

JJ will sure do something about this issue but i guess in several months.

This doesn't make any sense. Having audio tracks to record to is MUCH better than direct record. Why would you want to send your audio recording to a pad, then have to match up the timing all over again w/ the rest of your song?

Plus, when recording live your probably going to want to do multiple takes until you get it right. So then you'd have to go through the process of matching up the new audio with the song for every take. That would be very irritating when you could just record it to an audio track and press play to hear if its right. Then, if you want to do it over, just erase it and start again, like when recording any instrument into a song.

I don't understand why you would want to go through all that extra trouble.

If you really want that audio take on a pad, just resample it and assign it to a pad.

This doesn't make any sense. Having audio tracks to record to is MUCH better than direct record. Why would you want to send your audio recording to a pad, then have to match up the timing all over again w/ the rest of your song?

it did this automatically for you. which is quite nice, but unfortunately as i remember the result is the same frustration: if you miss the triggered midi note, the sound does not play. ie if the triggered note starts at 1.01.00 and you start playback at 1.01.48, you wouldnt hear your recording. this is where audio tracks is better - but it's give and take. direct record can't be beat for some things, audio tracks for others. luckily they overlap some too.

yeah, the both serve a purpose. I thought someone said they should replace audio recording w/ something else because they already have direct recording. I think they both can be useful, but for myself I need that audio recording.

this story about pad assign is because if you don't do that you can't integrate your recordings into a song.

le rat,

So your saying you can't just record something to an audio track and have it part of the song? Where does it go?

it remains in the sequence but it doesn't play in song mode.

http://www7a.biglobe.ne.jp/~mpc1000/os2/audiotrack_e.htm
blue notes at the bottom

you can make audio tracks convert in song mode but you may have to use the COMBINE function and some clever editing

by that point i'm tracking anyway

the main use/strength of audio tracks is for use outside of song mode
and also it's extremely valuable for non "final product" use: if ever i go portable, i can snag all the sounds that were in my DAW as vst/reason on audio track and continue to compose remotely.

that, in my usage, is the most helpful role audio tracks play.

you're right, it depends on the usage. for mine, mostly scratched chorus it's a pity you can "sequence" it.

anyway there's still the polyphony-wasting-pad-assign workaround.

so im looking at the 3.08 and i like the audio tracks on 61-64, but when i listen back after i recorded something there is like a little bit of silence in the recording which i have to delete everytime i record something in order to allign it right with the rest of the track. also, i dont hear my other stuff, just the metronome..

are those the limitations from the free os and are these fixed in 4.99? i'd like to hear the beat i made while i record something on the tracks.