that timestretch

mostblunted · Post by **mostblunted** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:54 pm

isn't all that bad. It just has a certain sound to it.

I found that madlib heavily uses it on strange ways on the MV album!

fauna · Post by **fauna** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:00 pm

well, i hear ya. i find for certain things it worx okay, and it does have its own sound...but it doesn't work for everything.

mostblunted · Post by **mostblunted** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:52 pm

I use it on drum loops all the time. It is real lo-fi like that.

606man · Post by **606man** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:03 pm

So long as people understand that timestretch IS going to affect the sound in some way, it's a perfectly creative tool. It's when people complain that they stretched something and it sounds different that's just plain stupid. I mean....derr :roll:

PHeMoX · Post by **PHeMoX** » Tue Dec 11, 2007 12:04 am

Very true, but I too only realized its common sense the sound will change after having fooled around with it. As obvious as it is to me now, I fell for that one too... perhaps Roland emphasized too much on how it doesn't change the duration like a normal speed up or slow down would. :oops:

By the way, you can do some cool stuff when you chop a time stretched sample (but somewhat lengthy sample).

brettweldele · Post by **brettweldele** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 3:37 am

all timestretch does is microloop portions of audio to make it longer, hence the warble sound on the 404.

i'm kinda disapointed by the timestretch, but for reasons other than most are. i do a lot of heavy granular processing, so i like timestretch that really bends a sound, similar to what you can do on an mpc.

drewzle · Post by **drewzle** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 10:06 am

^
are you making drones?

and out of interest, what's the MPC timestretch like?

Euclid Ov Oåklånd · Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:08 am

Kill game, here comes mpc users.

mostblunted · Post by **mostblunted** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:10 am

the mpc timestretch is wack too...

The only good timestretch would be on a computer.

balazs · Post by **balazs** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:50 am

the mpc timestretch is good. You can usually timestretch it around 10% before it sounds fucked up.

mostblunted · Post by **mostblunted** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:36 pm

juxt wrote:the mpc timestretch is good. You can usually timestretch it around 10% before it sounds fucked up.

exactly!
On the 404, you can stretch from 2 bpm to 40 bpm and it basically sounds the same. I use the timestretch all the time.

balazs · Post by **balazs** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:42 pm

mostblunted wrote:
juxt wrote:the mpc timestretch is good. You can usually timestretch it around 10% before it sounds fucked up.

exactly!
On the 404, you can stretch from 2 bpm to 40 bpm and it basically sounds the same. I use the timestretch all the time.

but if your doing a small time stretch up to 10% (maby more) the mpc will sound better.

Can we please just admit that the mpc is good at something?

Euclid Ov Oåklånd · Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:49 pm

Mpc's have a good time stretch, but good software will always trump the mpc or sp.

mostblunted · Post by **mostblunted** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:59 pm

if you straight compare mpc with the software the mpc sounds like a bunch of assholes. If you compare the mpc to the 404, to most, the mpc sounds like perfect timestretch.

Euclid Ov Oåklånd · Post by **Euclid Ov Oåklånd** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 1:04 pm

mostblunted wrote:if you straight compare mpc with the software the mpc sounds like a bunch of assholes.

I would've gone with "sucks a bag of dicks" but it's semantics.