Emu XL-7 & MP-7 User's Group

Sorry for my ignorance but how can a lower PPQN sequencer be more
tight than a higher PPQN one ?

It would mean that in cases where many tracks are used it would
slip more. IMHO this is a myth.
Simply create 16 tracks on the MPC and put the same sound on them
at the exact same position. Do it the same on the Emu.
I'm curious at the result. I worked with all kind of MPC's before, even the
3000 and I must say personally I don't feel it more tight than any other
high quality stuff, be it a software sequencer or hardware.

Just speculation: on the MPC I believe I always heard the same beats at
the same timeline positions through the loops. However, I'm not sure
about my XL7. I remember Aaron's mail where he said the lower tracks
are higher priority but still ... sometimes it seems to me this is not the 
case,
or my mind is playing tricks on me.

Regards,

    Zsolt


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "gonzinigonz" <gonzini@...>
To: <xl7@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 3:41 AM
Subject: [xl7] Re: good partners for the px-7?


> yer the mpc2KXL is 96ppqn as well, it does keep things really tight.
> 32nd note resolution is good enough for me :0)
> I will normally correct everything anyway after busking stuff in.
> Not come accross the alesis yet? has that got some kind of sequencer
> then?
>
>
>
> --- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, "djnorythm" <djnorythm@...> wrote:
>>
>> I used to have a command station and am thinking about getting
> another one.
>>
>> About the timing of the command stations and mpc's.  I felt that
> they both had very good
>> timings, but they sequence in different resolutions.  They call it
> parts per quater note.  PPQN
>>
>> The PPQN for the different sequencers are.....
>>
>> MPC 500   =   96
>>
>> Command Stations   =  384   i think.. ;)
>>
>> MPC 4000   =  960
>>
>> Alesis Fusion  =  480
>>
>> just something to think about.....
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>