The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
MPC 5000 Timing
Old 24th January 2011
  #1
Gear Head
 

MPC 5000 Timing

I'm thinking bout buyin a mpc in the near future cause I really like the groove of the mpc 3000. I read that the 5000 has the clock of the 3000 becasue it should have been released as mpc 3500. Is this right? Does 5k have the same groove as the 3000?

I don't know which one I should purchase, mpc3k is hard to fund here and the 5000 has synth, folder, hard drive etc. But the 3000 has the tight timing.

Help's appreciated.
Raymon
Old 24th January 2011
  #2
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

If you're counting on your drum machine to give you timing...you've already failed.
Old 24th January 2011
  #3
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post
If you're counting on your drum machine to give you timing...you've already failed.
here you`re seriously mistaken. Timing of a sequencer has NOTHING to do with beat timing magic expectations. The thing is - different machines have different MIDI TIMING JITTER values, so be it unquantized MIDI input record or just a MIDI playback - stable timing is everything. I`d believed in "magic MPC MIDI jitter" swing until I actually got a 3k after a 2kXL.
Yes, both share the same soft sweet pads that I love and an immediate response, as far as sound is concerned - I do not believe in MPC "sound"; it`s all good until you try to tap down unqunatized stuff into it. with the 2k I seem to never have managed to record anything but a crippled man strolling pattern (and I am weak on the pads, too ). But, with the 3k i can tap out some pattern I can bob my head to myself (at least while being high ). What`s the difference between them then? It`s MIDI jitter values - I measured it as described at Innerclock Systems - Precision Midi Clock Din Sync and Tempo Synchronisation Solutions

2kxl - quantized to 1/8:
22049/22055/22056/22058/21999/22052/22056/22054/22058/22058/22094/22050/22053/22050/22046/22048 - max. 53 samples. (over 1 msec)

quantized to 1/16:
22052/22047/22048/22101/22046/22046/22046/22041/22046/22104/22043/22047/22048/22046/22088/22047 - max. 61 samples. (over 1 msec)

3k (though measured @93 BPM so sample length is different still you get the idea ) 28453 – 28449 – 28451 -28450 – 28452 – 28452 – 28451 – 28450 – 28453 – 28451 – 28450 – 28452 – 28450 – 28451 – 28452 – 28450 – 28451 -28451 – 28451 – 28451 – 28451 – 28452 – 28452 – 28450 – 28452 – 28451 – 28451 – 28451 – 28451 – 28451 - 28451
- max. 4 samples (less than 0,1 msec)
Ten times difference - plus when you record unquantized - the MP captures with some jitter and plays back with some jitter so the time error multiplies.
Old 24th January 2011
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Retrofreak's Avatar
 

MPC 5000 FTW

I have an MPC 60 mkI, MPC 3000 LE, MPC 5000 and MPC 1000 (JJOS)

The 3000 is the **** and i'll never part with it, but my 5000 has now become my workhorse as it can do everything a 3000 does with the addition of ADAT and USB for easy computer integration.
Old 24th January 2011
  #5
Lives for gear
 

Different midi timing jitter? Never heard that one. heh

The timing of the older sequencers are just not as tight as the newer ones. The mpc3000 was only 96ppq (parts per quarter note). The newer mpc's are 960ppq. 96ppq gave you a more wiggle room in between the 1,5,9,13. Not as stiff.

The mpc4000 works for so many of us came from the 3000 because you can set the mpc4000 to 96ppq. I don't know about the 5000 but I would guess you can set it up for 96ppq as well.
Old 24th January 2011
  #6
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrofreak View Post
MPC 5000 FTW

I have an MPC 60 mkI, MPC 3000 LE, MPC 5000 and MPC 1000 (JJOS)

The 3000 is the **** and i'll never part with it, but my 5000 has now become my workhorse as it can do everything a 3000 does with the addition of ADAT and USB for easy computer integration.
What do you say about the groove of the 5000 compared to the 3000?
Old 24th January 2011
  #7
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by PopularDemand View Post
Different midi timing jitter? Never heard that one. heh

The timing of the older sequencers are just not as tight as the newer ones. The mpc3000 was only 96ppq (parts per quarter note). The newer mpc's are 960ppq. 96ppq gave you a more wiggle room in between the 1,5,9,13. Not as stiff.

The mpc4000 works for so many of us came from the 3000 because you can set the mpc4000 to 96ppq. I don't know about the 5000 but I would guess you can set it up for 96ppq as well.
PPQ resolution has nothing to do with the ACTUAL timing accuracy.Think about it.
BTW, if you own some newer model as 5k or 4k or 1k or 2500 or 500 could you make a simple test - track out 2 bars of a metronome click and post it here as a (non clipped, non synced externally) wav file then we`ll see. I encourage everybody to do it since I already posted 2k and 3k values. Since 3k and 60 show small jitter values (comparatively to the 2k released right after 3k with no roger linn signature on it), I suppose that the trend toward larger midi jitter times was maintained in newer models (though more features were implemented)
Old 24th January 2011
  #8
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
PPQ resolution has nothing to do with the ACTUAL timing accuracy.Think about it.
BTW, if you own some newer model as 5k or 4k or 1k or 2500 or 500 could you make a simple test - track out 2 bars of a metronome click and post it here as a (non clipped, non synced externally) wav file then we`ll see. I encourage everybody to do it since I already posted 2k and 3k values. Since 3k and 60 show small jitter values (comparatively to the 2k released right after 3k with no roger linn signature on it), I suppose that the trend toward larger midi jitter times was maintained in newer models (though more features were implemented)
There can be many reasons for your "midi jitter". But unrelated to sequencer timing especially with quantize on.

As far as sequencer the higher the ppq the more accurately the sequencer will record what you are playing. The discussion of the timing and ppq went into overdrive for years when akai made the 2000. This is the secret behind the feel of the older sequencers and Akai finally realized this when making the 4000, making ppq adjustable for that reason.
Old 24th January 2011
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

@DAH - Thanks for taking the time to post such a detailed response but I wasen't suggesting it didn't exist...I just don't get it, that's all. So if a 3000 has a "groove" then everything you make with it will have the same groove? Sounds kinda boring to me...but I guess for boom bap, the groove is essentially the same so in that case, I guess it works. I don't know...Me personally, I like things as sterile and accurate as possible...that way the groove is in my hands. I mean what's next...the MPC 12,000, turn the knob to "Crunk" and it spits out the next lil' wayne hit? Ok...joking of course...I guess I'm just from the old school where we make the gear groove, not the other way around.

Now, since you brought it up...I have to go smoke a bowl now. heh
Old 25th January 2011
  #10
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post
@DAH - Thanks for taking the time to post such a detailed response but I wasen't suggesting it didn't exist...I just don't get it, that's all. So if a 3000 has a "groove" then everything you make with it will have the same groove? Sounds kinda boring to me...but I guess for boom bap, the groove is essentially the same so in that case, I guess it works. I don't know...Me personally, I like things as sterile and accurate as possible...that way the groove is in my hands. I mean what's next...the MPC 12,000, turn the knob to "Crunk" and it spits out the next lil' wayne hit? Ok...joking of course...I guess I'm just from the old school where we make the gear groove, not the other way around.

Now, since you brought it up...I have to go smoke a bowl now. heh
You didn't get what I meant at all. Precise timing IS ESSENTIAL for a sequencer ask Roger Linn about it. Under "precise timing" I mean actual keeping the programmed time between the played notes not the "magical swing" and humanizing random microshifts. The classiness of the 3k and 60 sequencer is that the MIDI JITTER caused by different hardware+software factors is comparatively (to the 2000 and I suppose newer MPC models) small (over 10 times smaller actually), so the programmed stuff is played tightly and consistently without loose micro time fluctuations. That`s the secret in the MPC timing. Actually, DAW sequencers triggering their internal sound modules can be even more stable than a 3k, however, proper MIDI input capturing is still lacking (at least in FL studio). An MPC, however, was INTENDED to be able to capture and play back events in real-time without many OS\processes\application calls, which is what`s going down in in a DAW host computer all the time.
Old 25th January 2011
  #11
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
You didn't get what I meant at all. Precise timing IS ESSENTIAL for a sequencer ask Roger Linn about it. Under "precise timing" I mean actual keeping the programmed time between the played notes not the "magical swing" and humanizing random microshifts. The classiness of the 3k and 60 sequencer is that the MIDI JITTER caused by different hardware+software factors is comparatively (to the 2000 and I suppose newer MPC models) small (over 10 times smaller actually), so the programmed stuff is played tightly and consistently without loose micro time fluctuations. That`s the secret in the MPC timing. Actually, DAW sequencers triggering their internal sound modules can be even more stable than a 3k, however, proper MIDI input capturing is still lacking (at least in FL studio). An MPC, however, was INTENDED to be able to capture and play back events in real-time without many OS\processes\application calls, which is what`s going down in in a DAW host computer all the time.
Oh, is that what people keep referring to is because of the low PPQ rate, there are "random microshifts" that give it a feel? Am I understanding you correctly?
Old 25th January 2011
  #12
Lives for gear
 
godphaser's Avatar
 

I think he says the opposite, the tightness is the "feel".

And that's logic.

The best drummers are the tightest drummers.
Old 25th January 2011
  #13
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by godphaser View Post
I think he says the opposite, the tightness is the "feel".

And that's logic.

The best drummers are the tightest drummers.
Exactly!
You might play a loose groove tightly. 3k and 60 are comparatively "jitterless". Don't know about the newer models though, that's why I propsed to make a simple 4 bar 120 BPM metronome click test for them.
Old 25th January 2011
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by godphaser View Post
The best drummers are the tightest drummers.
Exactly! We're going in circles...so I guess some like having a low ppq as a kind of "buffer" to snap things tighter, when you're unable or unwilling to play it right vs 480 or even 960 where you have to get it right or plan to edit and quantize the hell out of it. That's not a diss, it's just everyone is not a world class drummer, including me. I get that.

I don't really consider that a "secret" of the mpc that's just the mathematics. With higher PPQ you have more slices for information to fall on. I don't believe those "random microshifts" are hardware or software based. It's all based on the timing of who's playing. People like the mpc because you only have to be close to being on beat for it to snap things tight because of it's low ppq. Darkchild had a video with this exact demonstration where a bunch of kids started adding parts to the mpc. They just had to be close to on time and the low ppq sequencer snapped it tight. This certainly has it's advantages but it's biggest drawback is not being able to create rhythms that fall beyond 96ppq. Thus leaving you confined to a certain set of rhythms within 96 pulses. Again, that may be just what the doctor ordered...

I'm sure the attraction to models like the 3000 are because the sequencers were not as accurate as current 96ppq models, leaving a groove of variables for misplayed information to fall into. I can't see how that could be labeled as "tighter" but definately has become a plus for hip-hop production.

I've always continued to climb the resolution ladder as seqencers improved. I think I've been so focused over the years on the advantages to having access to more slices for information that I forgot the also advantageous aspects of having a low PPQ, especially for rap music. Thanks for that! thumbsup
Old 25th January 2011
  #15
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post
Exactly! We're going in circles...so I guess some like having a low ppq as a kind of "buffer" to snap things tighter, when you're unable or unwilling to play it right vs 480 or even 960 where you have to get it right or plan to edit and quantize the hell out of it. That's not a diss, it's just everyone is not a world class drummer, including me. I get that.

I don't really consider that a "secret" of the mpc that's just the mathematics. With higher PPQ you have more slices for information to fall on. I don't believe those "random microshifts" are hardware or software based. It's all based on the timing of who's playing. People like the mpc because you only have to be close to being on beat for it to snap things tight because of it's low ppq. Darkchild had a video with this exact demonstration where a bunch of kids started adding parts to the mpc. They just had to be close to on time and the low ppq sequencer snapped it tight. This certainly has it's advantages but it's biggest drawback is not being able to create rhythms that fall beyond 96ppq. Thus leaving you confined to a certain set of rhythms within 96 pulses. Again, that may be just what the doctor ordered...

I'm sure the attraction to models like the 3000 are because the sequencers were not as accurate as current 96ppq models, leaving a groove of variables for misplayed information to fall into. I can't see how that could be labeled as "tighter" but definately has become a plus for hip-hop production.

I've always continued to climb the resolution ladder as seqencers improved. I think I've been so focused over the years on the advantages to having access to more slices for information that I forgot the also advantageous aspects of having a low PPQ, especially for rap music. Thanks for that! thumbsup
Sorry but you misunderstand the timing thing and low/high PPQ all over the place.
1. It`s not ONLY how people play it. If you play tight and the timing of the machine itself is fukked up, then the whole groove falls apart. U may believe what U want to believe in, the fact is that ALL SEQUENCERS have actual microshifting - u understand this? if you just switch on the metronome and hit play and record it - you will see that the distance between individual metronome clicks is DIFFERENT although in theory it must be EQUAL.
2. U have obviously never owned an mpc, right? Coz it`s not the low PPQ what "snaps" loose pad hits - it`s a special feature called Time Correction - automatic input quantizing after recording when pattern starts playing in loop.
3. High PPQ dont mean shiet! It only means that the time grid has finer intervals to displace events - but it does not mean ACTUAL TIMING STABILITY.
4. 3k is VERY tight in the world of hardware sequencers - it is NOT loose.
5. And believe me, you have a lot resolution even at 96 PPQ to "fall off" in terms of timing. Awful not on time playing can be as awful at 96 PPQ as it can be at 960. The thing is, if the ACTUAL timing of the sequencer is LOOSE, and you play it TIGHT - you will get LOOSE INCONSISTENT groove felt like a crippled man walk.
Old 25th January 2011
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

Quote:
Sorry but you misunderstand the timing thing and low/high PPQ all over the place.
Yes, it is possible we're on two seperate topics. I'm actually reading some info on another site about this topic. My views or understanding may change but for now...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
1. It`s not ONLY how people play it. If you play tight and the timing of the machine itself is fukked up, then the whole groove falls apart. U may believe what U want to believe in, the fact is that ALL SEQUENCERS have actual microshifting - u understand this? if you just switch on the metronome and hit play and record it - you will see that the distance between individual metronome clicks is DIFFERENT although in theory it must be EQUAL.
How people play is the number one factor in timing...period and yes I understand there will be variable from sequencer to sequencer. Hence the reasons some people choose "X" and some people choose "Y". Still... I fail to see a grand revelation in all of this.

Quote:
2. U have obviously never owned an mpc, right? Coz it`s not the low PPQ what "snaps" loose pad hits - it`s a special feature called Time Correction - automatic input quantizing after recording when pattern starts playing in loop.
For more than 10 years actually and every modern sequencer has input quantize. Some just have to be setup whereas the MPC is set by default. Not talking about quantizing values. I'm talking about ppq. Less slices, less options for the sequencer to shift data too whether quantized or not. This really shouldn't be a debate. it's pure mathematics. Regardless of timing irregularities, data still can't fall beyond 96ppq. That's a very tight value in itself and one of the biggest reasons people like the MPC, even if they don't know that's why.
Quote:
3. High PPQ dont mean shiet! It only means that the time grid has finer intervals to displace events - but it does not mean ACTUAL TIMING STABILITY.
No, you're right...higher ppq does not guarentee timing stability...but you're not going to find may pro level seqencers in 2011 that don't have stable timing. Again, timing can vary from sequencer to sequencer by micro amounts but I just don't see enough evidence to suggest that it's enough to make one sequencer the end all and another unusable. In 2011 I'm referring to. 20 years ago? Absolutely! If you're suggesting that 960 slices vs 96 slices and the 864 additional slots for information isn't an advantage in programming, then I don't know what to tell you.
Quote:
4. 3k is VERY stable in the world of hardware sequencers - it is NOT loose.
That may be...but you're not going to convince me that the 3000's timing is better than the timing within todays sequencers. Technology doesn't usually evolve backwards. Scratch that...I'd love for you to convince me that the 3000's timing is better. That I have to see...I believe there may be an MPC timing that is good for Hip-Hop...but then again, Hip-Hop drums are not specifically realistic sounding drums either.
Old 25th January 2011
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Retrofreak's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by raymon View Post
What do you say about the groove of the 5000 compared to the 3000?
I can get the same results on both tbh

The only MPC that has the 'Groove' factor is my MPC 60
Old 25th January 2011
  #18
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrofreak View Post
I can get the same results on both tbh

The only MPC that has the 'Groove' factor is my MPC 60
Could you post an example? Jus a Boom-z Bap-z-Boom-z -ap-z-loop with same same samples quantized to 16th straight? Would be very interesting.
Old 18th April 2019
  #19
Gear Nut
 
rtype909's Avatar
Quote:
I`d believed in "magic MPC MIDI jitter" swing until I actually got a 3k after a 2kXL
This is true. I have experienced the same damascene moment having moved up to an MPC3000 after the MPC2000xl. It is simple easier to make beats with the MPC3000, less nudging, editing required - it feels right.

Also whilst the 2000XL and MPC3000 largely share the same analog audio section the 3000 has oversampling chips on the output and this really adds to the bottom end. Also there is a rumour, somewhere, that resonance is always on (because of coding) to some extent on the MPC2000xl ...because there is a ringing on hi-hats, a signature sound, which i do like but this is not apparent on the MPC 3000.
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
Forum Jump
Forum Jump