About a PAD pair - short version of the drawbacks

Forum to discuss all matters relating to the MPC1000 and MPC2500 operating systems created by 'JJ' (all versions).
 Reply Share on Facebook

About a PAD pair - short version of the drawbacks

By torsig1967 Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:05 pm
I did a lengthy post (too lengthy I guess) on this a few weeks ago.
Well here's the short and easy version. I sent it to JJ also. Hope he understands it, I heard from some of you guys he's not so good at English.

---------

Mapping in JJ OS2 very strange and confusing:

1. Remap midi in (external keyboard) to requested pad not possible.
Possible in JJ OS1, better!

2. Remap notes in midi file (*.mid) to requested pads not possible.
Possible in JJ OS1, better!

3. Remapping of pads in Seq+Program AFTER recording is done, not possible in JJ OS2.
Possible in JJ OS1, better!

4. Remapped drum-program in JJ OS2 + external keyboard:
Recording: midi out/soft thru = original note.
Playback + step edit = remapped note.
Strange and confusing.

5. JJ OS2 records both pad number AND midi note = waste of space + confusion.
Instead: midi note + map => pad. Good logic, easy to understand. JJ OS1 -style.

I wish JJ OS1 mappings to come back in JJ OS2XL.

JJ OS1:
midi -> map -> pad
pad -> map -> midi
Easy to understand, like Keygroup in Akai S1000.

Otherwise JJ OS2 is great!

Re: About a PAD pair - short version of the drawbacks

By Sovereign Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:41 am
torsig1967, ironically enough this goes all the way back to the original MPC60 and how it mapped the pads.
They changed it for the MPC3000 and added the change to Roger Linn MPC60 OS.

Since JJ is actually taking XL in the direction it's going it would be a good time to incorporate standard mapping and making the pad assignment and sample mapping work like the Roland MV's make keyboard function.

Re: About a PAD pair - short version of the drawbacks

By torsig1967 Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:37 pm
Sovereign wrote:torsig1967, ironically enough this goes all the way back to the original MPC60 and how it mapped the pads.
They changed it for the MPC3000 and added the change to Roger Linn MPC60 OS.

Since JJ is actually taking XL in the direction it's going it would be a good time to incorporate standard mapping and making the pad assignment and sample mapping work like the Roland MV's make keyboard function.


That's interesting. So the original MPC1000 (and JJ OS1) assignment, is that like the MPC3000?

Anyone who understands the general idea behind the mappings in JJ OS2? I don't get it at all. I see no advantages at all. Basically there're no mappings anymore. It's overridden mostly - making it useless.

Re: About a PAD pair - short version of the drawbacks

By dtaa pla muk Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:41 pm
Since software is very troublesome, this is changed as follows.

MIDI IN note ==> DRUM Program
Note 36(C_1)->PAD 01
Note 37(C#1)->PAD 02
|
Note 98(D_6)->PAD 63
Note 99(D#6)->PAD 64
These are fixation.
A user cannot change.

The PAD number recorded on a sequence.
It is changed into a note number and a sequence memorizes.
(This method is the same as AKAI OS.)
PAD 01->Note 36(C_1)
PAD 02->Note 37(C#1)
|
PAD 63->Note 98(D_6)
PAD 64->Note 99(D#6)
These are fixation.
A user cannot change.

PAD ON/OFF -->MIDI OUT.
PAD 01-64 -->MIDI out note36-99(default)
Sequence play note36-99(PAD 01-64) -> MIDI out Note36-99(default)
A user can change this.

XL is set to 36-99 although the range of the note of OS2 is 35-98.
"PAD 1= C_1(36)" is better than "PAD 1= B_0(35)"

Re: About a PAD pair - short version of the drawbacks

By dtaa pla muk Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:45 pm
FIRST OF ALL, i'm happy to see that the pad assignment has been changed from general midi. a user can still load a general midi program if he likes, but i will no longer be bothered by an ancient norm which is no longer utilized.

second, the rearranging of pad numbers to +1 (from b_0 to C_1) makes a lot of sense.

Re: About a PAD pair - short version of the drawbacks

By Sovereign Thu Nov 20, 2008 1:33 am
torsig1967 wrote:
Sovereign wrote:torsig1967, ironically enough this goes all the way back to the original MPC60 and how it mapped the pads.
They changed it for the MPC3000 and added the change to Roger Linn MPC60 OS.

Since JJ is actually taking XL in the direction it's going it would be a good time to incorporate standard mapping and making the pad assignment and sample mapping work like the Roland MV's make keyboard function.


That's interesting. So the original MPC1000 (and JJ OS1) assignment, is that like the MPC3000?

Anyone who understands the general idea behind the mappings in JJ OS2? I don't get it at all. I see no advantages at all. Basically there're no mappings anymore. It's overridden mostly - making it useless.


I was referring to the PAD to Note mapping problems.
A simplistic expalaination would be that the orginal MPC was done from a drum machine perspective and had to be improved to work better as a sequencer.
This was also the reason that the Auto Chromatic function was such a welcome function when it was added to the MPC family.

Re: About a PAD pair - short version of the drawbacks

By torsig1967 Thu Nov 20, 2008 8:44 pm
Nym wrote:FIRST OF ALL, i'm happy to see that the pad assignment has been changed from general midi. a user can still load a general midi program if he likes, but i will no longer be bothered by an ancient norm which is no longer utilized.

second, the rearranging of pad numbers to +1 (from b_0 to C_1) makes a lot of sense.


Yes I agree that is a better functionality for the default mappings.

But I can't understand why these things must lead him to completely remove the midi in (wheter it's from file or external keyboard) mapping functionality. He removes 50% of the mapping functionality. Why?
User avatar

Re: About a PAD pair - short version of the drawbacks

By Bugfix Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:18 pm
torsig1967 wrote:But I can't understand why these things must lead him to completely remove the midi in (wheter it's from file or external keyboard) mapping functionality. He removes 50% of the mapping functionality. Why?

I'm just guessing that it has something to do with translation between mpc drum mapping and midi, right? Maybe, some users have claimed :? Nym, not intend to dissapoit you, but it's still general midi, no matter which mapping you are using. I'm using chromatic and I don't really gettin the idea behind removing B_0 which stands for acoustic BD below pads range.. why this makes a lot of sense?
 Reply
Return to MPC1000/2500 JJ OS