The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Amazing thing I just realized about Pete Rock and similar-style producers of the 90s Drum Machines & Samplers
Old 3rd January 2011
  #1
Gear Addict
 

Amazing thing I just realized about Pete Rock and similar-style producers of the 90s

I have the foundation for a beat I made over a year ago that I used in a SongFight competition (got 3rd), but I haven't been able to complete it because I've never been able to find or create a bass line for it. The melody is created by a chopped up and rearranged Fender Rhodes intro to a song, sampled from vinyl at 45rpm (original speed: 33 1/3rpm). Right when I created it, another SongFight musician tried playing bass guitar to it and was stumped. It just didn't sound quite right, and I agreed. This was actually after I originally experimented with playing a synth bass to it, and then I spent hours and hours trying to do so again. Later, I even tried to hire a "Studio Pro" (complete disaster btw) to play a bass line to it, and that didn't work either. So I returned to trying to do it myself, using every method I could think of, periodically.

Yesterday, I had an epiphany. I took that sample in at 45rpm, when the original speed was 33 1/3rpm. This shifted the pitch, but not by an exact number of semitones, thus throwing it out of the traditional scale of notes. No keys on the keyboard are ever going to match it because they're all slightly off. I mean, it sounds good by itself (most listeners wouldn't be able to say, "Hey, that's not A440!") but introducing new notes is a mess because they can't match. Sure, there are ways it can be done, but this has been my stumbling block. Obviously, I need to learn more music theory.

So my thoughts on this were "no more sampling at 45rpm!" Sample at the original pitch, even though it will take up more time and also I won't get the vintage low(er)-fi sound of the late 80s and early 90s, but at least my samples will be in traditional notes that I can pitch up or down by whole semitones. Then I started thinking about the greats like Pete Rock, blending three or four samples on the SP-1200, undoubtedly sampled in at 45rpm (if not 45rpm with +8% pitch!). Blending these samples at their original pitch is quite a feat, imo, but to get them to match up when they're all "out of tune" (at least at the sampling stage) is truly mind-blowing, imo, unless I'm missing something. I can't imagine having sounds stored up on disk, all out of tune, and then somehow getting them to match. Or maybe Pete assembled them all on the spot, but others had to have had the stored sounds approach. This has given me even more respect for the great beatmakers.
Old 3rd January 2011
  #2
Lives for gear
 
ncoak's Avatar
 

you have to adjust the pitch of various samples so things are in tune or it sounds like ****...case closed. probably one of the most fundamental aspects of creating any sort of music
Old 3rd January 2011
  #3
Lives for gear
 
AndyFromDenver's Avatar
you are missing something simple!!! fine tuning the synth/bass
Just gotta find it by ear. same thing with the samples. I'm surprised the hired studio musician didn't nail it easily (unless they were just a total d!(k about retuning their instrument or something else)
As an aside, sometimes they didn't get it right and I think to myself omg they released that! (not talking about the above mentioned geniuses)
example: Mc Lyte Poor Georgie (love the song), but when the sample mash-up comes in I always die inside a little. No disrespect intended if the people who did the song are on here

Seriously though, pm me about the song and I will put a bass to it in a few minutes just to back up my point. If'n you want
Old 3rd January 2011
  #4
Gear Addict
You need to add -20 cent to get to the correct semitone. sampling at 45rpm -5,20 semitones = original pitch (as on 33 1/3). You can avoid this by tuning the sample with the turntable. I guess thats what PR (and other SP user) do/did. Just play a simple sinewave (with a synth or use a sample or...whatever) with a straight flat note, set the turntable to 45rpm and pitch the turntable till the song on the record and the sinewave fit together and the it loose the "uuuuh out of tune"-feeling (of course this is something to learn. learn to really listen and get the feeling, train the ear). If you do this with all your samples you can sample at higher speed but all samples are tuned to a straight semitone. peace
Old 3rd January 2011
  #5
Lives for gear
 
atma's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterpiper0815 View Post
sampling at 45rpm -5,20 semitones = original pitch (as on 33 1/3)
interesting, never knew that! when i used to sample from vinyl, even at 33 i'd find entire records would often be out of tune. it was a rare occasion that that i wouldn't have to adjust the pitch of things up or down in cents to match a standard tuning.
Old 3rd January 2011
  #6
Gear Addict
 

Thanks peterpiper for the 5.2 figure. I'd heard 5 1/2 semitones, but it wasn't quite right. I've been using an MPC 2000 classic for the past few months, and I don't think there is such fine tuning available. I'd also be very surprised if there was on the SP. (Could be wrong on both accounts though!)
Old 3rd January 2011
  #7
Lives for gear
 

This is very basic musicianship. i don't wanna sound like a dick but it is. Be in tune and in time. Not that difficult.
Old 3rd January 2011
  #8
Gear Addict
 

It is basic musicianship for all of your notes to be in tune with one another. The difficulty of doing this is compounded severely when you're out of A440 tuning. That was my point. Whatever. I made it through 80 posts here without anyone being a dick to me. That might be a record.
Old 3rd January 2011
  #9
Lives for gear
 

Do you play any instruments? It's not really difficult at all, you tune your guitar, keyboard, bass, drum set, turntable, voice to whatever key the sample has shifted to and keep it moving. I guess unless you're a harmonicist. Than this might become a problem.
Old 3rd January 2011
  #10
Lives for gear
 
viewing's Avatar
tuning and sound placement for that matter is all relative to the base elements of the track. like you start with one sound and that is the pointer, everything else must be stacked according to that initial sound or rhythm. like dilla, if he played just the shakers of a beat they might sound way off, then he brings in the kick and snare and everything fits perfectly. but all of that whole beat is stacked according to the first sounds he laid down. it's the same thing for tuning and rhythm. loving these threads btw =)
Old 3rd January 2011
  #11
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Studio507 View Post
Do you play any instruments? It's not really difficult at all, you tune your guitar, keyboard, bass, drum set, turntable, voice to whatever key the sample has shifted to and keep it moving. I guess unless you're a harmonicist. Than this might become a problem.
No, I'm not a musician. I am just starting to study music theory. I guess my point in making this post was a) for others who are not musicians but are learning, and b) secondarily, I was sort of thinking about my approach to sampling, which has always been to find bits and pieces of records and then store 'em on disk for later recall, and I kind of assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that this is what Pete Rock and Primo did. I was also under the (perhaps mistaken) assumption that they were always sampling as fast as possible to overcome memory limitations. I guess this post was a dud. My bad.
Old 3rd January 2011
  #12
Here for the gear
 

wowwwww....

this is pretty nuts, hearing all of this. First off, production back in those days was a whole different ball game. You had to invent methods, most of the time really unconventional ones that traditional engineers would scoff at, that would achieve the result you wanted. Technology was prehistoric but you made due and a lot of that stuff is legendary both sonically and aesthetically. IMHO the stuff that 'hip-hop' producers turn out today has no soul...

I used to work at Green Street recording as a second back in the early 90's. I worked maybe half of the "Main Ingredient" sessions back in 93' and can tell you, everything was sampled into an SP-1200 at 45 from vinyl. 4 bar samples were chopped into 1 or half bar segments and triggered in sequence or rearranged as necessary to differentiate song segments. Single sounds were 'played' at different pitches to make melodies or to define progressions. If you really listen to those old tracks, they're mostly sampled from a single source, so everything is pitch shifted the same amount. The high and low frequencies for that hook were 'separated' using filters and eq and triggered simultaneously and tracked to 2" or split on the console (amek apc 1000) and processed there. any subsequent samples from other sources were tuned and stretched to fit (usually in an S950) but there weren't many in PR's productions . When there were, he knew what was going to work even if it was dissonant. That is the true talent of early hip-hop producers, knowing what works together or how to make it work. Eric Sadler, Hank and Keith Shocklee...they were the kings of this. Making collages out of dozens of different sources and making sense of it all.

Keep in mind this is way before you could hop on an internet forum and start asking the world, "what do i do...?" If you know your gear, use your noggin and think outside the box you find the answers right in front of you.
Old 3rd January 2011
  #13
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drollz View Post
No, I'm not a musician. I am just starting to study music theory. I guess my point in making this post was a) for others who are not musicians but are learning, and b) secondarily, I was sort of thinking about my approach to sampling, which has always been to find bits and pieces of records and then store 'em on disk for later recall, and I kind of assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that this is what Pete Rock and Primo did. I was also under the (perhaps mistaken) assumption that they were always sampling as fast as possible to overcome memory limitations. I guess this post was a dud. My bad.
Yes to finding bits and pieces and storing em on disk for later recall. I think that's what all sample-based producers have always done.

I didn't really understand your original post. At all. I couldn't see what your epiphany was, or how it helped you to come up with a bassline. or indeed, whether you even did eventually manage to come up with a bassline.

One thing that sometimes used to work for me, is making a copy of your main sample and detuning it down an entire octave. Filter it hugely - take out all the top end and most of the mids. (Sorry, I used to do this on an S950, so filtering wasn't a question of top end or mids or specific passes or shelves, it was just turning the big dial most of the way to the left!) It will obviously now be twice as long, and sometimes that will make it clash with your main sample as it goes one, but sometimes it'll sound fine. Mix it in. Frequency-wise too, sometimes it'll be an unusable muddy mess, but sometimes it'll sound absolutely great - just a sort of 'ghost bass' that gels perfectly. I often found it worked quite well with Fender Rhodes parts, cos that's quite a thick, gloopy sound to begin with.
Old 3rd January 2011
  #14
Gear Addict
 

Okay, binarymilton, I will try to explain myself.

My epiphany was that the notes in my replayed sample were not in any conventional music scale. The reason no note I played on my keyboard would go along with any note played in the sample is because the pitch of the notes no longer corresponded with A440 tuning. That was the epiphany. I understand that this is obvious to the pros on this board, but I know I'm not the only one who didn't realize this. It was an "ah-ha" moment for me that I was sharing.

I have not yet come up with a bassline, but I'm in much better standing to do so.

But if these all-time great producers were storing sounds for later recall, then I guess they were sampling in at pitches that (at least roughly) conformed to A440, as opposed to being off by a half semitone or whatever; or they were able to fine-tune the playback of those samples to a greater degree than I'm aware is possible in vintage equipment (i.e., by cents and not just semitones). The issue I'm having is that when a sample is imported off by an inexact number of semitones, then pitch shifting it by an exact semitone will keep the sample in terms of inexact semitones. And the legend is that the greats would sample at 45rpm with the pitch control all the way up.

Again: I apologize if this is a stupid post. It was an "ah-ha" moment for me that I thought appropriate to share.
Old 3rd January 2011
  #15
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drollz View Post
No, I'm not a musician. I am just starting to study music theory. I guess my point in making this post was a) for others who are not musicians but are learning, and b) secondarily, I was sort of thinking about my approach to sampling, which has always been to find bits and pieces of records and then store 'em on disk for later recall, and I kind of assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that this is what Pete Rock and Primo did. I was also under the (perhaps mistaken) assumption that they were always sampling as fast as possible to overcome memory limitations. I guess this post was a dud. My bad.
not a dud at all...maybe it'll bring back the boom-bap.

to answer your questions, yes, we sampled at 45 to save memory and then dumped everything to tape. sometimes you save to disk, sometimes you don't. at $2k for a 14 hour lockout, you just keep working...quickly.

your approach to sampling is whatever works for you. there's no right or wrong way to work, there's what's right for you, creatively. Nowadays, with elastic time and pitch and all that crap, you can pretty much do anything once you dump it into protools. Seriously, there's no more technological limits anymore, only self imposed creative ones.

I wouldn't 'study' music theory, even a lot of working non-classical musicians find theory pretty much clinical at best. It's like theoretical mathematics, it's great when you want to flex your brain but it's vestigial when you have to calculate your taxes. do research as needed to answer some basic quesitons, know rudimentary musicianship (what a scale is, where a key comes from, the sound of the notes, what a time signature means. etc). but spending time on the merits of the minor lydian scale and how it's applied to various forms of music...well, i'd rather be learning the ins and outs of my gear so i can achieve my goals in a timely manner. You know when stuff sounds 'right' and when stuff sounds 'wrong'. figure out how to make the wrong stuff right instead of debating the question of why it's wrong or if it's actually wrong instead of right (that's theory...)
Old 3rd January 2011
  #16
Quote:
Originally Posted by drollz View Post
It is basic musicianship for all of your notes to be in tune with one another. The difficulty of doing this is compounded severely when you're out of A440 tuning. That was my point. Whatever. I made it through 80 posts here without anyone being a dick to me. That might be a record.
No it's not "compounded" at all. You just tune up or down. A C major scale is just a D major scale tuned down 2 semitones. All of Hendrix's recorded output is played on a guitar tuned down a semitone. He's still PLAYING an E chord, it's just sounding as Eb. Now make this only down a quarter-tone, and it's still an E-chord - just now sounding 50 cents flat. Really basic stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Studio507 View Post
This is very basic musicianship. i don't wanna sound like a dick but it is. Be in tune and in time. Not that difficult.
This.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drollz View Post
No, I'm not a musician. I am just starting to study music theory. I guess my point in making this post was a) for others who are not musicians but are learning, and b) secondarily, I was sort of thinking about my approach to sampling, which has always been to find bits and pieces of records and then store 'em on disk for later recall, and I kind of assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that this is what Pete Rock and Primo did. I was also under the (perhaps mistaken) assumption that they were always sampling as fast as possible to overcome memory limitations. I guess this post was a dud. My bad.
Indeed. It's really really basic music theory you're talking about here. Like, the sort of stuff you learn aged 11 if you study any sort of instrument at school.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drollz View Post
Okay, binarymilton, I will try to explain myself.

My epiphany was that the notes in my replayed sample were not in any conventional music scale.
This "epiphany" is unfortunately totally incorrect. It's a conventional musical scale - just a touch flat or sharp.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drollz View Post
The reason no note I played on my keyboard would go along with any note played in the sample is because the pitch of the notes no longer corresponded with A440 tuning. That was the epiphany. I understand that this is obvious to the pros on this board, but I know I'm not the only one who didn't realize this. It was an "ah-ha" moment for me that I was sharing.
You obviously didn't try bending any notes, or you'd have found something that fitted...or tried the global tuning on your synth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drollz View Post
I have not yet come up with a bassline, but I'm in much better standing to do so.

But if these all-time great producers were storing sounds for later recall, then I guess they were sampling in at pitches that (at least roughly) conformed to A440, as opposed to being off by a half semitone or whatever; or they were able to fine-tune the playback of those samples to a greater degree than I'm aware is possible in vintage equipment (i.e., by cents and not just semitones). The issue I'm having is that when a sample is imported off by an inexact number of semitones, then pitch shifting it by an exact semitone will keep the sample in terms of inexact semitones. And the legend is that the greats would sample at 45rpm with the pitch control all the way up.

Again: I apologize if this is a stupid post. It was an "ah-ha" moment for me that I thought appropriate to share.
Christ, I don't know what the "greats" were doing, but I'm guessing they knew how to tune a synth or bass guitar to a track that wasn't exactly at concert.

Glad you've learnt about cents as well as semitones anyway. Keep at it - there's a whole world of musical epiphanies out there.
Old 4th January 2011
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Yea sorry man, it's not an attempt to take shots at you, but either use your ears or learn a tiny bit of music theory, or get out and collaborate with more musicians...it'll all start to make more sense.

bassntreble...wasn't Pete using an S950 for a lot of the sample work? Most guys I know from that era used the SP for drums N stabs and such, and the 950 for longer samples... and there's a lot of pics with Pete & a 950... I've met Pete a couple of times in the last couple of years but I generally don't find it productive to grill them about **** that happened 15 years ago lol, but i would be curious to know!

Peace
Old 4th January 2011
  #18
mp3
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drollz View Post
No, I'm not a musician. I am just starting to study music theory. I guess my point in making this post was a) for others who are not musicians but are learning, and b) secondarily, I was sort of thinking about my approach to sampling, which has always been to find bits and pieces of records and then store 'em on disk for later recall, and I kind of assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that this is what Pete Rock and Primo did. I was also under the (perhaps mistaken) assumption that they were always sampling as fast as possible to overcome memory limitations. I guess this post was a dud. My bad.
Hey man don't worry, the internet has become less and less tolerant of those just starting out. When I was starting out in the 90's as a producer, none of these resources were around. No youtube how-to's, no getting started guides, no "basics of digital audio and MIDI" books, no forums, no nothing. It was me, my sampler, my uncle's small record collection and his cheap ass record player, and the manual.

In my case, my homeboy who had an SP1200, an ASR-10, and a Technics 1200 was my only resource, and he wasn't giving up any info. No samples, no tips, no techniques, nothing. His reason? I needed to learn and understand the machine my way to get my creativity out of it. I needed to find samples that suited my ear, and manipulate them in my own way, so I could get my personal best out of them. The only thing he did for me was encourage me, loan me his SP12, and say "I'm coming back for it in a year". He did say he would be glad to trade techniques when I got proficient, but by then neither one of us saw a reason to. Besides the fact that we could feel eachother out so well in the lab that the understanding was instant, its just that I had the same confidence in my technique that he had in his. Bottom line? Do your thing your way, and validate your **** internally.

I will say this since you're relatively new to it. There is nothing wrong with your technique because there is no right or wrong way to do it, as long as you don't slack on naming your samples.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bassntreble View Post
this is pretty nuts, hearing all of this. First off, production back in those days was a whole different ball game. You had to invent methods, most of the time really unconventional ones that traditional engineers would scoff at, that would achieve the result you wanted. Technology was prehistoric but you made due and a lot of that stuff is legendary both sonically and aesthetically. IMHO the stuff that 'hip-hop' producers turn out today has no soul...

I used to work at Green Street recording as a second back in the early 90's. I worked maybe half of the "Main Ingredient" sessions back in 93' and can tell you, everything was sampled into an SP-1200 at 45 from vinyl. 4 bar samples were chopped into 1 or half bar segments and triggered in sequence or rearranged as necessary to differentiate song segments. Single sounds were 'played' at different pitches to make melodies or to define progressions. If you really listen to those old tracks, they're mostly sampled from a single source, so everything is pitch shifted the same amount. The high and low frequencies for that hook were 'separated' using filters and eq and triggered simultaneously and tracked to 2" or split on the console (amek apc 1000) and processed there. any subsequent samples from other sources were tuned and stretched to fit (usually in an S950) but there weren't many in PR's productions . When there were, he knew what was going to work even if it was dissonant. That is the true talent of early hip-hop producers, knowing what works together or how to make it work. Eric Sadler, Hank and Keith Shocklee...they were the kings of this. Making collages out of dozens of different sources and making sense of it all.

Keep in mind this is way before you could hop on an internet forum and start asking the world, "what do i do...?" If you know your gear, use your noggin and think outside the box you find the answers right in front of you.
Thanks for sharing that. I read the Tape Op feature on Hank Shocklee a couple of years ago, and its funny listening back to their stuff, because as much of a collage as it was, it somehow gelled in ways that a lot of music didn't and still doesn't.
Old 4th January 2011
  #19
Lives for gear
 
atma's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassntreble View Post
this is pretty nuts, hearing all of this. First off, production back in those days was a whole different ball game. You had to invent methods, most of the time really unconventional ones that traditional engineers would scoff at, that would achieve the result you wanted. Technology was prehistoric but you made due and a lot of that stuff is legendary both sonically and aesthetically. IMHO the stuff that 'hip-hop' producers turn out today has no soul...

I used to work at Green Street recording as a second back in the early 90's. I worked maybe half of the "Main Ingredient" sessions back in 93' and can tell you, everything was sampled into an SP-1200 at 45 from vinyl. 4 bar samples were chopped into 1 or half bar segments and triggered in sequence or rearranged as necessary to differentiate song segments. Single sounds were 'played' at different pitches to make melodies or to define progressions. If you really listen to those old tracks, they're mostly sampled from a single source, so everything is pitch shifted the same amount. The high and low frequencies for that hook were 'separated' using filters and eq and triggered simultaneously and tracked to 2" or split on the console (amek apc 1000) and processed there. any subsequent samples from other sources were tuned and stretched to fit (usually in an S950) but there weren't many in PR's productions . When there were, he knew what was going to work even if it was dissonant. That is the true talent of early hip-hop producers, knowing what works together or how to make it work. Eric Sadler, Hank and Keith Shocklee...they were the kings of this. Making collages out of dozens of different sources and making sense of it all.

Keep in mind this is way before you could hop on an internet forum and start asking the world, "what do i do...?" If you know your gear, use your noggin and think outside the box you find the answers right in front of you.
word! good historical info
Old 4th January 2011
  #20
Lives for gear
 
atma's Avatar
i wasn't actually aware that the sp and 950, etc. couldn't adjust pitch in cent values.. interesting.
Old 4th January 2011
  #21
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
No it's not "compounded" at all. You just tune up or down. A C major scale is just a D major scale tuned down 2 semitones.
Yeah, but the difference between 45rpm and 33 1/3 rpm is (apparently) 5.2 semitones, so a C becomes something between a G and a Gb, right? Don't bite my head off, I'm asking humbly.

And I know one can tune their instrument so that it will play along, but I'm just sharing my learning experience of this being an issue.
Old 4th January 2011
  #22
Lives for gear
 
superjc's Avatar
 

In the 80's/90's when instant, hi-quality pitch shift and time stretch was not available, it made the craft of fitting samples together in time and to in key that much more difficult and respectable. Now you have all these programs that analyze the pitch and bpm and do at least half the work for you. So yes, when the art took much more passion and care to execute guess what... the quality was higher!
Old 4th January 2011
  #23
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by superjc View Post
In the 80's/90's when instant, hi-quality pitch shift and time stretch was not available, it made the craft of fitting samples together in time and to in key that much more difficult and respectable.
That was one of the points of my post. See the title. Thanks for understanding what I was talking about.
Old 4th January 2011
  #24
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drollz View Post
Yeah, but the difference between 45rpm and 33 1/3 rpm is (apparently) 5.2 semitones, so a C becomes something between a G and a Gb, right? Don't bite my head off, I'm asking humbly.

And I know one can tune their instrument so that it will play along, but I'm just sharing my learning experience of this being an issue.
If going from 33 1/3->45 RPM is a 5.2 semitone change, then if you tune your guitar, bass, or keyboard up 5.2 semitones and play in whatever key the sample is in (at +5.2 semitones) then everything should be in key.

I don't really know that the #'s are correct, but that's irrelevant. You should absolutely NOT sample at 45 then automatically tune your guitar up 5.2 semitones, TUNE TO THE SAMPLE, by EAR. You never know what tuning the original musicians were using...

hope that helps man.
Old 4th January 2011
  #25
Lives for gear
 
funkycam's Avatar
 

As a session guitarist I have worked on several tracks made by DJ's & it's not uncommon to have a track in between pitches, just simply tune by ear.

For the DJ/producer/beatmaker, your primary job is to "make it feel good". Any other musicians you bring in should be able to work around anything you make. eg sometimes 2 samples will be out of key or out of tune with each other but still "work". finding something to work in that kind of situation is a special kind of challenge, (but fun if the track is happening)

Not to mention some major label releases cut on tape back in the day are actually in between keys (eg bobby caldwell's "what you won't do") so you could be sampling something that wasn't @ A440 anyway.

The biggest surprise about your OP was that the bassist didn't catch it or couldn't work around it.
Old 4th January 2011
  #26
Lives for gear
 

Amazing thing I just realized about Pete Rock and similar-style producers of the 90s = they had talent.
Old 4th January 2011
  #27
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oxide54 View Post
Amazing thing I just realized about Pete Rock and similar-style producers of the 90s = they had talent.
You just realized that?
Old 4th January 2011
  #28
Gear Addict
 

.

Yeah I've only clicked to a few things as well and this is a great post so keep it coming.

I nutted out and fretted over music theory only to realise some similar things as you have done. I'd get frustrated when I sampled a loop and then pitch it down to whatever I thought sounded good, only to find that scales as we know them didnt fit it as such. So my break through came when I'd just tune the other samples to the first sample I had pitched down. Yeah sure it's not in any particlaur scale (so to speak) but the samples are in tune with each other and above all....


what do your ears say?? sounds good ? or sounds **** ?

this is all that matters and often is suc a simple concept we dont belive this can be all there is to it. So to we look into theory for the answers.

I personally reckon staying off the internet for a month and just playing with the gear would yield better results than fumbling through forums. I'm guilty of net surfing but as has been said before, the net wasnt here in the past and some seriously good sounds were coming out. Accidents and what you think are wrong can often lead to break through moments.

Read this article, you may not dig his music but that is not the point. He says the way he tuned the sample may not be how a guitar player would really play but it sounds good in the track.
DJ Format

Keep grinding I reckon and it'll all fall into place
Old 4th January 2011
  #29
Gear Addict
 

Just wanted to say I appreciate the helpful and constructive posts by Parks, Andy, bassntreble, AKA, and anyone else I missed.
Old 4th January 2011
  #30
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by atma View Post
i wasn't actually aware that the sp and 950, etc. couldn't adjust pitch in cent values.. interesting.
Can't comment on the SP1200, but the Akai S950s had something called "Fine Tune", which was basically cent values. Well, I can't remember quite how "fine" the fine tune was - maybe not quite as much as cent values, and I haven't used my S950 in about 10 years - but it was micro-tonal. Fine enough to be able to tune to any pitch you wanted.

The problem there, of course, was that timestretch was very limiting, so although you could anything in key with anything else, if the samples were too far out of key with each other there's no way you could get them in time with each other.

But that was one of the things I really liked about S950s. I liked the fact that when you pitched something up it sped up and when you pitched something down in slowed down. It was almost encouraging you to make discordant music.

Hmmm, I really must get that big old box back out from my parents' attic...
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Primativ / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
14
K-Bee / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
0
dialectic / Rap + Hip Hop Engineering and Production
4
rhythmic5 / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
1
DGrimmett / So Much Gear, So Little Time
23

Forum Jump
Forum Jump