Vintage Sampler Re-Sample Into New Sampler

The Lounge Other Gear
1

People always bang about the amazing sound of old hardware samplers - I agree to a certain extent that old high quality hardware has a fat/rounded/(insert preferred term here).

In contrast the same people bang on about newer samplers (like the mpc 1000 etc.) sounding thin and weak in comparison - to whatever degree.

So my question is this: If you re-sampled a vintage sampler into a new sampler (like an mpc 1000), will it loose some of it’s depth/roundness/(insert preferred term here), or will it simply just not add anything?

I ask because I currently use a couple of vintage samplers which I like the sound of - but I’m not really enjoying the workflow of setting programs/patches up.

So an option could be to run samples into the old boxes, get things sounding how I like and then resample them into a newer sampler/sequencer (like an mpc 1000). This would give me better work flow, better live use and USB for back up etc.

But would any gains in using the old hardware be lost by the ADC / DAC in the 1000 - or would make no difference at all and just sound like I was still coming direct from the vintage hardware?

Thanks

2

[quote=“” henryoakley""]
People always bang about the amazing sound of old hardware samplers - I agree to a certain extent that old high quality hardware has a fat/rounded/(insert preferred term here).

In contrast the same people bang on about newer samplers (like the mpc 1000 etc.) sounding thin and weak in comparison - to whatever degree.

So my question is this: If you re-sampled a vintage sampler into a new sampler (like an mpc 1000), will it loose some of it’s depth/roundness/(insert preferred term here), or will it simply just not add anything?

I ask because I currently use a couple of vintage samplers which I like the sound of - but I’m not really enjoying the workflow of setting programs/patches up.

So an option could be to run samples into the old boxes, get things sounding how I like and then resample them into a newer sampler/sequencer (like an mpc 1000). This would give me better work flow, better live use and USB for back up etc.

But would any gains in using the old hardware be lost by the ADC / DAC in the 1000 - or would make no difference at all and just sound like I was still coming direct from the vintage hardware?

Thanks
[/quote]

Why not just copy the sample files to the new machine?
Which vintage samplers are you using?

3

Akai S950 and Roland S760.

They’re both floppy drives so I’d have to re-sample them at some point anyway, either into a modern sampler or into my laptop via my Audient id14.

The biggest work flow killer is setting up patches properly to save and recall later. The idea of re-sampling would be to bypass that whole process, do a quick and dirty sample, quickly mess with some filter settings, LFOs, loop points, whatever, on the fly, and sample it all live into a more modern environment to build the track. Quick and easy, grab the audio and move on.

Even though I like the sound of what I get with my old samplers, I mostly sample from old commercial recordings which already sound great anyway. So I wonder if I would miss the old boxes too much if I ditched the vintage stuff completely and went straight into an mpc 1000 by itself. Never used a modern sampler (except a soft sampler, which was fine, but not really inspiring), so no idea.

What does anyone think??

4

First off, yes, for the most part, if you sample into the vintage machine, then sample that into the newer machine, you still impart some of that vintage feel.

However, its just really not that simple. All those bits and pieces of workflow and circuitry and code give a machine ‘that sound’.

Example: have you ever noticed that different samplers have different algorithms for pitching a sample down (resampling only, nothing fancy)? I can hear an emu-sampler a mile away just listening for the artifacts that occur due to those particular machines resampling algorithms. So in this case, I could sample something once into an emu, then sample that into an akai, but now if I pitch the sample on the akai, it won’t sound the same as if I pitch it on the Emu.

Make sense?

Not to mention just workflow - the workflow you don’t like actually forces you to work in a certain way that sort of naturally brings out a certain sound of a machine. Consider how working with limited memory encourages you to sample your material sped up, then slow it down in the sampler. Again, the resampling algorithm when you slow it down, combined with that machines converters, etc, is going to give you a very unique sound.

What about the way samples cut each other out?
What about some unique looping function (EPS samplers have insane sample looping options)?

So by sampling into a vintage sampler, then bringing that back into a modern sampler, you get the sound of the preamps, the sound of the first AD conversion (and back, depending on how you do it). But you miss a whole lot of what gives it ‘that sound’ too.

Is that enough? Is that even worth it? Don’t people still make records today using modern tools and make it sound good anyway? All of those are personal questions you’ll answer for yourself either trying these things out, or just thinking about it and moving forward.

4 Likes
5

Yep makes sense Jeffe.

I agree about the pitching to a certain extent, but it isn’t a massive deal for me - the electronics, ADC/DAC etc. of the machines impart enough noise/kick/something interesting for me.

For example, I’ve previously had a MV8800 which I used by itself, fairly modern sampler and the sound of samples coming out of it really kicked it for me. It wasn’t an old machine, with old algos, but it sounded great. Actually wish I’d kept it.

I guess I’m answering my own questions here :slight_smile:

6

[quote=“” henryoakley""]
Akai S950 and Roland S760.

They’re both floppy drives so I’d have to re-sample them at some point anyway, either into a modern sampler or into my laptop via my Audient id14.

The biggest work flow killer is setting up patches properly to save and recall later. The idea of re-sampling would be to bypass that whole process, do a quick and dirty sample, quickly mess with some filter settings, LFOs, loop points, whatever, on the fly, and sample it all live into a more modern environment to build the track. Quick and easy, grab the audio and move on.

Even though I like the sound of what I get with my old samplers, I mostly sample from old commercial recordings which already sound great anyway. So I wonder if I would miss the old boxes too much if I ditched the vintage stuff completely and went straight into an mpc 1000 by itself. Never used a modern sampler (except a soft sampler, which was fine, but not really inspiring), so no idea.

What does anyone think??
[/quote]

I’m not sure about the S950, but I’m pretty sure that software like Chicken Systems Translator would be able to read and re-save the Roland data in a more recent format.
Of course, it would only be worth the investment if you had a substantial amount of data to transfer, and you wanted to avoid the re-sampling process.

7

I’m not sure about the S950, but I’m pretty sure that software like Chicken Systems Translator would be able to read and re-save the Roland data in a more recent format.
Of course, it would only be worth the investment if you had a substantial amount of data to transfer, and you wanted to avoid the re-sampling process. [/quote]
Yeah not really worth it for me, plus how would I get it into Chicken Systems - I don’t even have a CD drive on my Mac, let alone a floppy

1 Like
8

I’ve had my MPC 1000 since I started making beats 6 years ago. In the beginning, my beats were definitely lacking the punch and impact of others online using older models. It wasn’t until I spent countless hours trying out all the effects and compressor settings that I finally got the results I was after. Things like using the delay at very short time settings to act as a stereo-widener, and the somewhat hidden envelope section to manipulate samples.

As far as recording directly from an old sampler to the MPC 1000, I would say whatever is going in, will come out the same. I haven’t done any rigorous testing, but theres never any audible difference to my ears. I would recommend you get JJ OS for it, much easier and expanded upon UI compared to the stock one.

9

There’s nothing wrong with the MPC1k’s sound imho - it probably doesn’t add as much character to samples as the older ones … i.e. it’s a more faithful reproduction, which is no bad thing in my book … and insofar as it has any sound of its own I find it pretty clean and punchy. Found this video quite interesting at the grittier and more lo-fi end of things:

Some more sampler shootouts here: https://soundcloud.com/sampler-shootout

As it happens, I bought myself an S3000xl recently, mainly because it was cheap, but I’m just starting to get into it - doing chops in ableton, bouncing them out to the sampler and tracking back in again, that kind of thing. Sounds good, less detailed than just working with my daw or soft samplers, which makes it easier to get things to gel I think, but I’m really not sure if all the workflow hassle is worth it if I’m honest. Bit early to judge, though.

Anyway, not sure if all that is relevant - for sure a vintage sampler will colour your sound, don’t see why tracking through your daw or resampling with the 1k would negate this. People complain about the input converters on the 1k, but tbh I’ve never had any issues. Pretty sure you can alternatively do a midi sample dump from the 950 to the 1k over midi - which would take a while, and skips out the 950’s output converters. You could also consider getting drum samples that are already treated that way? Goldbaby has a bunch of really good ones.

Btw, how do you find the 760? It’s all over those old Roni Size records iirc, which I’ve always thought sounded great, would be half interested in picking one up myself if I got one for the right price.

10

I used to resample from a computer with an emax back in the days but the process went…

program loop -> bounce down to wav -> pitch up (maybe 5 steps? I can’t remember) -> sample with emax at low sample rate (16khz?) -> play back emax sample (5 steps down?) and re-record into computer -> open file in recycle…

This definitely added a character to the sounds that I didn’t know how to get with the computer and if I did it for a bunch of sounds at the same time it wasn’t as tedious as it sounds but still…

Personally I wouldn’t bother with re-sampling a s950 or s760. They just don’t create many artifacts. If you want punchier or warmer samples I’d suggest a compressor or an eq.

11

Thanks benway.
Yeah I guess this was the crux of my question in a round about way - is running into a 1k going to ruin the sound due to the (possibly) inferior ADC.
There is so much hype on forums, that it’s hard to tell if the 1k is actually inferior, or if it just doesn’t impart anything on the sound which leads some people to feel it is a poorer ADC than earlier mpcs - which is a whole different story.
The 760 sounds really nice. It has quite a punchy sound, I really like its envelopes, especially when applied to the filter. But it’s true what people say about it’s operating system, Roland didn’t design it in a completely intuitive way. It’s a bit of a ball-ache to work with - especially compared to the S950 which a 5 year old could use.

12

Thanks Soup.
I kind of disagree about the s950/s760.
The 950 in particular has a definite sound to it which is a combination of 12bit ADC and storage format, mono only, and the analogue filter - plus lots of discrete circuitry inside.
The s760 not as much and I agree you could probably get a long way to the punch and tone with a compressor and EQ, but again it’s the combination, of sampling maybe at half rate, the filters and envelopes, pitching and modulating it all with LFO - plus all the old discrete circuitry again.
But still, even with all of these things…

13

[quote=“” henryoakley""]

[quote=“benway”] People complain about the input converters on the 1k, but tbh I’ve never had any issues.

Btw, how do you find the 760?
[/quote]

Yeah I guess this was the crux of my question in a round about way - is running into a 1k going to ruin the sound due to the (possibly) inferior ADC.
There is so much hype on forums, that it’s hard to tell if the 1k is actually inferior, or if it just doesn’t impart anything on the sound which leads some people to feel it is a poorer ADC than earlier mpcs - which is a whole different story.[/quote]
The MPC-1000 has perfectly fine and pretty damn transparent AD/DA convertors. It does not add anything to the sound like older samplers tend to do, but it most certainly does not remove anything from it either.

14

Honestly, I don’t think there’s much wrong with the ADCs on the 1k. Seems to me that people are way too caught up on the Numark takeover of Akai around that time and the move of some manufacturing to China… seems to be an article of faith that “Nukai” = bad. Another thing I’ve noticed on forums is that a lot of people tend to assume that just because you can get some gear relatively cheaply, this automatically means it’s bad.

Tbh, I kinda bought this for a while, was thinking that I have to get a 60 or 3000 to replace my 1k because these are the only ones that actually sound good - basically didn’t use my 1k for a couple of years, but then did a couple of sessions recently planning to sell, and realised that there’s actually not a huge amount wrong with its sound - generally what I put in is what I get back out. I’d just take care to gain stage the inputs correctly, it doesn’t take to clipping as well as maybe the older ones did.

I suppose another workaround would be to track through my UAD and send the wavs to the MPC via usb. But, like I say, I’ve never felt the need.

15

Thanks guys - nice clear answer - just what I wanted to know - I think I’ll give the 1000 a try and see how it fairs - it will be nice to build up some tracks into one box :slight_smile:

16

Benway - do you rate the UAD plugs? People rave about them, but I always wonder how much of it is hype - I’d be interested to know what their tape machines are like.

Benway and t - how do you rate the filters in the 1k? How do they compare against:

a) modern software filters - e.g. filters in Ableton and Logic etc.
b) filters in old samplers like mpc 3k, s950, or roland filters etc?

Thanks

17

I haven’t spent a lot of time with the s950 but used to have an mpc60 which I think has some similarities. It definitely has a sound but my guess is the vast majority of what you perceive as it’s sound is the high frequency roll-off of the anti-aliasing filters and any distortion you’ve added by sampling too hot. These are both things that are much easier to emulate and adjust to taste than to achieve by re-sampling.

Of course the filter has a sound as well but you’ll lose any control over it if you re-sample.

18

I think they sound great - I use an apollo and track most of my drums through the API Vision model, use the 1073 and 610 models for everything else. Had it for a about a year, at this stage I couldn’t work without the Pultec, Fairchild, 1176, LA2 for mixing, Fatso and especially the Culture Vulture for character. Reverbs are also excellent.

I got the Ampex plugin recently, also think it’s superb although I haven’t really experimented too much with it as yet - feel free to send me an audio clip and I’ll run it through a couple of presets so you can make up your own mind.

Only gripe is that I’m currently looking to buy one of the satellites because I don’t have enough dsp for most projects - the newer models in particular are pretty hungry. That, and the fact that I keep spending more money on the plugins … you can get good value if you wait for their sales though.

But yeah, the filters on the 1k aren’t great - serviceable, but tbh I tend to prefer more recent itb options like The Drop - think the models introduced in Live 9.5 are identical, they’re definitely by Cytomic anyway - UAD Moog and Soundtoys Filterfreak.

19

I’ve used the 1k for some years now and IMHO, as long as you never never ever pitch the sounds, everything sound great coming out of it :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

I recommend sequencing your vintage samplers with the 1k, to get the loop/phrase/part you need, then resample it into the 1k in its entirety (you can sample it as a patched phrase if you need to change the BPM afterwards, but this is a slight compromise).

I am pretty confident that things will not sound the same if you just sample a oneshot or transfer the actual sample file to the 1k without any conversion.

I used to think all the hype regarding vintage samplers was just a matter of some plugin processing (yknow redux bitcrush etc). after having used some more samplers, I’m not so sure how to replicate their exact sound via postprocessing anymore. You will get close, but it’s still not exactly the same, kinda like the UAD tape sims, which give a tapeish feel yet do not sound exactly like running audio throught tape. But as for how important these diffs are, that’s a matter of taste really!

20

Is it really that bad at pitching?
That, plus Ben saying it’s filters aren’t very good are putting me off the 1k a bit.
Are the 1K filters worse than the awful filters on the OT?