Resampling from an External Source

[pazword]

I've seen this phrase thrown around a lot lately, (looking at you SP-USER ) but I must admit I'm not as enlightened as many of you to know how this could fully be utilized...

What kind of use cases would this allow? The only thing that I can really think of would be for layering audio from another sampler/drum machine while resampling pads in order to get things bounced down quicker, but isn't that just sampling/resampling but with less steps?

I can see how that could optimize your workflow when using multiple pieces of gear, but what purpose would it serve if like your input is only a record player?

[Jaytreaze]

maybe doing some old school style dubbing? but even then youd rather do that on tape tracks. maybe its just easier to perform an instrument in with everything else playing for reference but again that would be better done on like a 4 track?

i feel like its something that is either defunct or too much for an SP model to be useful really when theres other bits of gear that serve that purpose?

[SP-USER]

I've seen this phrase thrown around a lot lately, (looking at you SP-USER ) but I must admit I'm not as enlightened as many of you to know how this could fully be utilized...

What Jaytreaze just said sounds absolutely crazy to me

It has to be one of the most important functions you could wish for on an SP (and I suspect that Roland know this which is no doubt why the 404 OG/SX/A doesn't have it). There are many reasons why it's such a powerful feature, but there's one especially important reason why I personally need that ability (I want it to act as a stand-alone DAW, not just a beat-making machine).

Imagine you have the pattern sequencer triggering some samples, and these samples are basically forming a beat to play to. Now, while that pattern is playing you can connect an external device such as a synthesizer and choose to do one of two things. You can have the pattern playing to give you something to play over and record ONLY the input signal from your synth, or, you can record the sound of the pattern that is palying AND the synth that you are playing over it. WHatever you choose gets recorded to the Loop Capture.

Now that you have this recorded sample sitting in the Loop Capture, you can do ANOTHER two things with it. You can either copy the loop to a sample pad or you can go into Overdub mode. Overdub mode will basically play your recording in a loop and each time you play something (whether external or internal) it will be added to that looped recording (Sound-On-Sound), and that loop in turn can be sent over to a sample pad when you're happy with the loop.

In effect, what this means is that you have a multi-track recorder built on to your SP. The only limitation is that you have a maximum loop length of 15 seconds per loop. This does not matter, and the reason it does not matter is because it's a beat-based device with a sequencer, so all you need to do is build-up your song in loop-sized sections and trigger them using the pattern sequencer after sending those loops back to the pads. There is no limit to the amount of loops you can make as long as you have free pads to stick 'em on!

The SP-555 can be used as a stand alone DAW in that sense, and everything I just said is just ONE example of how you can use it.

There are many ways, but I'll give you one more example by linking to this Roland video demonstrating another way you might find the 'Overdub' function useful in conjunction with the 'Loop Capture' and 'External Input'.

The video should play from 6:22 but if not, just skip to 6:22:
https://youtu.be/U71STzTa8xI?t=382

[Jaytreaze]

it’s called linear sample and sequencer but now you want it to be some sort of linear sampler sequencer 4 track in a box the side of an iPad. It won’t happen lol, this will all fall on deaf ears when there’s already the designated gear that does what you want to do but this one that you once wanted doesn’t, so stop trying to want to enjoy the sps and find something more you lol

Every limitation you described is pretty much the characteristics of a linear sampler and sequencer of its time, it is what it is, it won’t change

Maybe the octatrack does it idk

Buy the 555 and tell us how it goes

[SP-USER]

Not true, I far prefer the SP line which is why I've stuck by it regardless. I did look at the SP-555 briefly after getting a first-hand feel for the 404's limitations, and the only reason I never continued to look into it at the time was due to the lack of tape-like pitching.

That's not a problem now, and I know how I'll use that beast so it's definitely happening bruh!

[pazword]

but again that would be better done on like a 4 track?

I've considered getting a Zoom R8 (or dusting off my conversation-piece BR900) to use with a 404A for proper track management, but part of me doesn't want to stray too far away from the SP workflow or lug it around frankly. I'd say it's defunct if the device you're using already has that functionality, but besides for the 555 Roland was just lazy.

The SP-555 can be used as a stand alone DAW in that sense, and everything I just said is just ONE example of how you can use it.

That eventually ended up being the reason I didn't buy a 555, I didn't want to use to use an SP like another MPC (btw if you haven't gone down the JJOS rabbit hole yet, it's probably the most optimized production software I've ever used)

...the only reason I never continued to look into it at the time was due to the lack of tape-like pitching...

Tape-like pitching? Is that the same thing as vinyl pitch shifting, or do you mean tape effects like magnetic warble?

[SP-USER]

If I were ever to go the MPC route (which is not happening), then absolutely I would go for one of the JJOS-based devices. After experiencing that MPC ONE though, there is no way I'm touching anything made by "inMusic" again. I'm not interested in gear designed with a corporate agenda in mind (selling sound-packs and pulling peeps into a computer-based ecosystem).

Regards the pitching, yes, I meant the same as with vinyl. I'm more into cassette than vinyl so I generally think of these things in terms of tape. This is why the Vinyl Sim on the 555/SX/A is more preferable to me, because to me, despite its name, it sounds more like the flutter you get from tape than the wow you get from vinyl.

This is something that seems to go right over the head of Danswift. I'm not buying this gear to sound like some well-known SP evangelist, I'm buying it for my own purposes.

[Danswift]

SP-USER wrote

This is something that seems to go right over the head of Danswift. I'm not buying this gear to sound like some well-known SP evangelist, I'm buying it for my own purposes.

No it doesn't you absolute mong.

I didn't buy the gear I own to sound like anyone else either ..I actually got the SP-808 when it was originally released, a lot of the later producer's who were using the SP series that came after weren't even around.
Before I got that first 808 I was working with the MS-1 and SP -202 chained together.

And one more thing ..you don't have 'a sound ' because you produce fuck all music whatsoever and lack any ability,talent or inclination to do so ..you're still drooling away ,over 2 years after joining this forum..this time over the SP 555 for the next couple of weeks ,maybe get hold of one then return it to the seller of course.

[SP-USER]

And one more thing ..you don't have 'a sound ' because you produce fuck all music whatsoever and lack any ability,talent or inclination to do so ...

True, but I have never claimed otherwise

[Danswift]

Then why are you lecturing people here ?

Why are you constantly proclaiming you're about to get the ultimate set up but yet doing absolutely nothing with it ..except complain, whine and drone on about it on here to beatmakers who've been utilizing these machines for years and getting along just fine.

Meanwhile you've been here for over 2 years now ,been through numerous combinations of gear and have produced absolutely nothing whatsoever.

It's not exactly rocket science mate .

[SP-USER]

Bruh, I'm not "lecturing" anyone when I talk about this stuff. You might see it that way but to me it's just general conversation about gear as far as I'm concerned.

So it's taken me two years to settle on some gear, but so what?

You obviously take my posts out of context, but I can't help that. Your posts often amuse me because I think to myself, lol, there he goes again responding to my post as if he thinks I'm acting like some sort of know-it-all, but it's not like that at all bruh. A lot of the sentiment behind the way I communicate is because of the way I see things, and I really don't see things the way most people do and a lot of that comes down to the fact that I've not been poisoned and brain-washed by social media and the establishment like most people appear to have been.

I'm having fun with you over your choice of gear due to the way you responded. You showed zero respect for my own choice even though, as far as I'm concerned, they are perfectly legitimate, sensible choices. Yet there you are with a piece of gear that pretty much embodies everything I hate about modern music production gear, while at the same time dismissing the best SP ever designed, and Korg's best designed sampling groove-box as a piece of junk!

That's pretty fucking hilarious bruh!

So as I've said time and time again (and you constantly ignore), yes, the MPC X is an awesome peice of kit, it's an absolute beast, it's very powerful and I sincerely wish you the best of fun with it. You won't catch me owning or even using one though, cause like I said, to me the modern MPC embodies everything I hate about modern music production gear. It is basically a cash-register for inMusic. They sell you the cash register, you press the buttons and fill it with money, and they continue to take the money as well as own the keys to what you pay for.

They can stick that manipulative corporate bullshit up their stinking corporate asses!

[pazword]

And one more thing ..you don't have 'a sound ' because you produce fuck all music whatsoever and lack any ability,talent or inclination to do so ...

True, but I have never claimed otherwise

If you practiced half as much of time as you are here, you'd be pretty good!

They sell you the cash register, you press the buttons and fill it with money

I might get this tattooed on my back

[13th of 36]

Resampling ext-out is nice on the sp303 and to some extent on the 555.
You can quickly build songs or beats if you mainly play external instruments. I can build a drum break via resampling the pads. Loop the break. Then resample drum loop AND external out while playing the keys. Then I can keep layering stuff via resampling.

If you mainly do sample based music or compile everything on another machine, the resampling of ext out doesn’t really add much for you.

BUT if you like playing your own instruments, it’s a game changer in terms of workflow if you are building SOLEY on an sp303. I’ve made a few albums just doing that.

Why they haven’t included this feature on the newer models is frustrating.

Bunch of sp303 resampling videos on YouTube for reference.

[Crane]

I value my time so I am not going to read the b/s above. In the short I think SP-Non-User. is saying.
"This is standard".
While you record you should be able to hear what you are mixing into. I agree with that 100%
External source should record your external source while samples are playing, this is pretty standard across units, which makes no sense why it does not apply to the 404.

[SP-USER]

No, not bullshit at all bruh, and again I gave this information because I was asked!!!

You're certainly on a roll lately spouting a lot of bullshit yourself though

What the SP-555 is capable of regards 'External Input', 'Sound-On-Sound' and 'Looping' is way more sophisiticated than what is possible on the PS-303, in fact the differences are so fucking drastic it is painful to behold. One of the many benefits of the system the SP-555 uses is that there is no need to have to resample in order to build-up your fucking loops!

That's just ONE of MANY benefits the 555 provides over the others!