MPC1000 questions

A black 1000 is more likely to have the pad fix in already. The ones with Serial numbers that have "N" at the end for "new pads" should have the upgraded pads. Most if not all the ones with the "N" in the serial have black backs, the silver ones seem to be a toss up.

Older red and blue models are less likely to have the updated pads unless the previous owner swapped in the new ones prior to getting rid of.

The way to check is grab a corner pad and try to rock it side to side. When you grab it right you should see adjacent pads also wiggling slightly. This is because the improved pads are a uniform sheet of 16 pads. The original flawed design is 16 separate sensors mounted individually. So on one of those the wiggling off the pad would never make any other pads move.

As everyone says, seems like you shouldn't rely on color of panels alone. The only way to know for sure is by moving the pads around. Buying new, you should buy from a reputable dealer that sells more than most and has a fresh supply coming through, so there is less chance of them storing old stock. Those dealers will be helpful if you explain your fears of buying a unit with dodgy pads and probably back it up with the chance to return it if you're not happy.

Buying second hand, I guess you just have to ask as the right questions before you buy. If the owner doesn't know then you'll have to accept that there is a small risk involved. But if you take everyone's advice in this post and forum into account you can minimise the risks considerably.

it is good to know, there is a place with wise people called mpc-forum!
thanks

When comparing the 1000 against 2500 features, can anyone explain what No 8 means here -

http://www.mpc-tutor.com/mpc1000-vs-mpc2500/

8. Track mute to pad - assign sequencer tracks to pads for easier live experiemntation of track mutes (similar to the ‘sequence to pad’ feature found on most MPCs)

Im guessing JJOS makes software features a level playing field though, right?

Thanks

j0hnny wrote:When comparing the 1000 against 2500 features, can anyone explain what No 8 means here -

http://www.mpc-tutor.com/mpc1000-vs-mpc2500/

8. Track mute to pad - assign sequencer tracks to pads for easier live experiemntation of track mutes (similar to the ‘sequence to pad’ feature found on most MPCs)

Im guessing JJOS makes software features a level playing field though, right?

Thanks

It allows you to toggle the pads from triggering individual sounds and/or MIDI note data and lets you mute and unmute entire tracks as they playback. It's good for live performances and a nice way to to get an idea of how you might put your tracks together in song mode.

Yes, the addition of JJOS2XL makes the 1000 almost identical in functions to a 2500, with the differences mostly centering on the 2500 having more hands on controls.

Cheers,

The bit that confuses me is that the article is explaining the differences between the two, implying that the feature isn't available in the 1000. But Ive read elsewhere that track muting is available on the 1000 even with the Akai OS. So not sure what the difference is that is being highlighted.

j0hnny wrote:Cheers,

The bit that confuses me is that the article is explaining the differences between the two, implying that the feature isn't available in the 1000. But Ive read elsewhere that track muting is available on the 1000 even with the Akai OS. So not sure what the difference is that is being highlighted.

Truth be told 99% of us here 1000 or 2500 have extremely vague recollections of the Akai OS due to installing JJOS and never looking back. Even the free JJ OS is useful as it's essentially the final Akai OS with most of the bugs squashed.

Looking at the chart on the JJ site is probably the easiest way to answer that and any other thing you are wondering about. (The Akai OS is in the chart as well)

http://www7a.biglobe.ne.jp/~mpc1000/chart.htm

Cool, Cheers.

JJOS really adds a lot functionality. Does all this extra stuff come at a price in terms of processing power? e.g crashes when too many features are used, or does it run slower or anything?

One thing I guess isnt possible, is the streaming of longer audio files direct from CF (as seen in the Octatrack)?

Thanks again

j0hnny wrote:JJOS really adds a lot functionality. Does all this extra stuff come at a price in terms of processing power? e.g crashes when too many features are used, or does it run slower or anything?

One thing I guess isnt possible, is the streaming of longer audio files direct from CF (as seen in the Octatrack)?

Thanks again

Not at a price of processing power so much as a price of feature trade off. For example JJOS2XL allows one less pad layer, and use of one less Q-link. The OS has to fit in such a small memory footprint that JJ has had to 86 some things to make way for others.

It certainly has bugs but this forum and some very thorough users here (certainly not me ) do a great job of reporting the bugs, communicating with JJ directly and keeping everyone up to date in their posts here. The bugs are generally dealt with in as quick a fashion as I've ever seen in the whole audio industry.

The CF transfer speed on the MPC's is too slow to do what the Octatrack does. But JJ does have audio tracks as a feature. (They have to fit in the 128MB of maxed RAM in the MPC though, no HD streaming if your MPC has an HDD).

Cheers for all the useful info.

Metatron72 wrote:The CF transfer speed on the MPC's is too slow to do what the Octatrack does.

I didn't think drive streaming limitation was a speed issue. I thought it was due to the lack of a dedicated hardware drive controller. You can stream from the CF or HD in the load screen because that's when the soft controller kicks in. Switch out of SAVE/LOAD and it's gone, so no more streamy. JJ has stated that there isn't enough processing power to run both the sequencer and the software drive controller at the same time without causing serious performance problems.

I honestly , cant understand what yall people are talkin about when yall talk about the pad issue on the MPC 1000----

THERE is nothing wrong with the MPC 1000 pads, you are BUGGIN homie....I hate to see yall MPC forum n****** always complaining about the MPC 1000..let the MPC 1K HAVE ITS GLORY...LIKE FOR REAL.///

Comment back if u want...but u know im right

shycarter wrote:I honestly , cant understand what yall people are talkin about when yall talk about the pad issue on the MPC 1000----

THERE is nothing wrong with the MPC 1000 pads, you are BUGGIN homie....I hate to see yall MPC forum n****** always complaining about the MPC 1000..let the MPC 1K HAVE ITS GLORY...LIKE FOR REAL.///

Comment back if u want...but u know im right

No your not.

And you're in a minority of maybe 2 or 3 people who I've seen think that in 8 years.

Why are you even mad that we are "taking the 1000's glory" ? Which is ridiculous.

Let me guess you leave them on full level and do everything at 127 velocity...only people that do that defend the terrible, and less terrible 2nd revision pads. And anyone who thinks that the pads are great so long as left on full level is missing the point entirely. (And would have drums with no dynamics)

strait up, i have drums with no dynamics until i go edit them in afterwards. **** a blue mpc 1k without the pad upgrade, especially when you dont have an extra 2 bills lying around. **** 1k, thats with the fat pads too!

let me be clear here though, the fat pads are a thousand fold upgrade, and make it real sensitive, at this point its just user error.

back to editing all my drumhits