Comment by Sporktacular | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Sporktacular | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This reads like it's some oogoody boogidy magical audiophile hardware.

"The timing on the MPC 3000 is extremely tight and about as true as you can get". What does that mean? The clocking of the 16MHz CPU makes it audibly more precise than a 8 MHz CPU? Even for a tune at 10 000 BPM jitter would sound identically inaudible. Turn off quantization and what's the difference anyway?

"You can’t really get a computer or any DAW to sound like an MPC 3000. Some claim its a matter of boosting the low end, and cutting some of the high end frequencies to match the sound of the 3000. This is simply false."

This is just dumb snake oil level crap. All these things have transfer functions that can be modelled, if you really believe you can hear a difference, which you are almost certainly imagining.

"The DAC on the MPC 3000 is extremely unique. It’s a machine and it sounds like a machine, in a good way. In the best way possible."

Writer sounds like a machine. Not in a good way.

Yeah, I totally understand a tool being better for creating purely because of the interface and feel of the device and other things that might not be understandable.

But let’s stop pretending there is some implementation tech magic that modern hardware can’t replicate at work.

I haven’t used one, but I’m inclined to side with article. Just because a signal path can be replicated doesn’t mean it has been replicated. I have tons of music gear and can easily point you to the ones that inexplicably have a special something.

Have you ever used it though? I’ve produced records on an MPC 3000 and then later in pro tools, logic, ableton, fl studio, etc. the MPC 3000 has its own unique sound and timing. If you actually used it , I’d understand your comment perhaps? Sure the writer is exaggerating a bit and glorifying, but it’s amazing and you cannot compare the timing and sound of it to anything else. It is unique AF.

Here is what the MPC's inventor has to say about "timing", without bullshit, clickbait or myth:

https://www.attackmagazine.com/features/interview/roger-linn...

I feel you're just reinforcing the parent's points.

> the MPC 3000 has its own unique sound and timing

Why would I want "unique" timing?

The article says "The timing on the MPC 3000 is extremely tight and about as true as you can get". Timing can't be both "true" and "unique", which is it?

This paradox is literally in every discussion about old MPCs and has been for the past 20 years that I'm reading these things. Part of the character was "the swing" but also the hardware wasn't exactly able to accurately reproduce the timing. I remember reading someone doing tests that the midi latency however was very low.

Exactly. It has unique swing settings. 53% swing on an MPC 3000 is totally different than any other swing setting from other drum machines or DAWs. It’s a matter of taste. You either like the swing setting on it or you don’t. Lots of hip hop producers loved it because it wasn’t so computerized.

I have used one. Sound was fine but nothing that can't be approximated. The advantages over a DAW have a lot to do with interface and tactility.

Comment was about the article but can you elaborate on what you mean by timing? Jitter? Latency of the pads?

To follow up from article linked by throw_m239339 below:

"Regarding clock jitter and specifically MIDI Clock jitter, this can be a factor in software drum machines on older computers, especially Windows computers. But in newer, faster computers and especially Macs running newer drum machine software, it doesn’t seem to be an issue." - Roger Linn.

Nothing magic going on.

The obscurantism is typical of the discourse surrounding these machines.

The creator, Roger Linn, gives a pretty good interview here: https://www.attackmagazine.com/features/interview/roger-linn...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com