Funny
You do realize that what you say is panning, isn't panning, right? That that is one of the results of the timing difference.
So, although this was just a test to make it very very easy for everyone to hear the results of different small timings differences, and, you noticed it too, as you say, although you called it panning, it's not that difficult, is it, to imagine situations when using several samples with different startpoints create situations where one can't accurately place a sample without artifact, right?
A bit surprising though that you didn't hear anything of the other things different, but still I think my main point stands, that it is easily heard
Edited: wrote 'can' instead of 'can't'peter.muzika1986 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:48 pmI tested your theory in real, I gathered 5 people / no producers / if they recognize any differences in this sample, no one even noticed any timing changes
your listeners can`t hear that, and if u hadn`t said what`s going on, I wouldn`t have noticed either, I would`ve said its difference in panning / which is noticable / and little bit volume changes , that`s all
plus those time changes are good when it comes to shuffle, low PPQ is perfect actually, if u put your drums *on grid* with perfect timing with highest PPQ it sounds unhuman and artificial same with automation on 960 PPQ sucking off your CPU , because few powerusers do these things LOL
why producers turning *grid off* when making drums?
if other people / non producers / can`t hear these differences , why on earth would anyone make a changes in it?
majority of listeners wants to listen music with imperfections, humanizing is important, not artifical sounds
why do you thing analog sound is so popular? there`s phase imperfections all the time ,
why do u think DIVA has been rated as best synth ?
so if u say higher PPQ and *better timing * is most important thing, it`s not !
it`s important for minority !
apply changes for minority is not a smart move