Post your questions, opinions and reviews of the MPC1000. This forum is for discussion of the OFFICIAL Akai OS (2.1). If you wish to discuss the JJ OS, please use the dedicated JJ OS forum
User avatar
By silverman567 Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:10 am
Ive started trying to use MIDI and computer sequencers with my MPC 1000. However, I get bored after half an hour of trying to sort it out and revert back to my more instictive methods. These are basically recording any samples from my turntable onto my computer (neatening them up on cool edit) then transfering them onto my MPC, cutting, filtering, eqing, mastering, and sequencing on my MPC, and then recording back to my computer the final product. This method works fine for me, but I cant help thinking that there are more efficient methods im missing out on, especially in terms of sequencing whole songs. I also feel Im missing out on DAW features such as extra effects, and compression etc. Is anyone else using my basic style, or is everyone hooking it up MIDI etc.?
User avatar
By DJ-T Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:22 am
I use cool edit,to track from the mpc,what I would do is search the forum
for midi info. So you can get use to sequence,midi,tracking,etc. jus don't limit
your self to jus using daw,maximize it all.T" 8) 8)

By littlerob Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:12 am
if it sounds good it sounds good. ur way is definitely efficient, as u do all the eqing and wat not before hand. but mayb a mastering tool for the final product could be of some use, something like T-Racks adds some warmth to the final product. i personally like to edit samples first, as u do, make main body of the tune in the mpc, record to ableton to add aditional synths, layers, and watevers needed as u can visually see wat is missing once its in a program like ableton/cubase/logic/wateva else (which allows u to go back to the mpc to add any obvious additions if need be). also if u record each track separately, and put everything on separate tracks, e.g separate tracks for bass samples, kiks, snares, hi hats, and other samples, u can master things properly....then i would run it all through t-racks to make it nice and crisp...its wateva u find most easiest or logical i guess.
User avatar

By silverman567 Mon Dec 19, 2005 6:23 pm
hmmm interesting thanks for the advice. i spose its a personal thing. but when you listen to people like pete rock, you get such a raw sound...you know it hasnt got any where near a computer! similar thing with premier...whats this t racks business...is it a standalone software or plug-in?
User avatar

By WaxAegis Mon Dec 19, 2005 6:38 pm
silverman567 wrote:hmmm interesting thanks for the advice. i spose its a personal thing. but when you listen to people like pete rock, you get such a raw sound...you know it hasnt got any where near a computer! similar thing with premier...whats this t racks business...is it a standalone software or plug-in?


T-Racks is a top-notch mastering suite of effects. It's available in both standalone and plug-in editions. It's built to simulate the effect of tube EQ/compression/limiting has on the program material, giving you any desired amount of warmth and tube clipping to your mixes.

I swear by it.

By littlerob Mon Dec 19, 2005 6:43 pm
t-racks is standalone. yeh i agree with u. i prefer the raw sound of pete rock and the old skool hip sound. premier's older stuff was more like that, although im sure premier has done some fine eqing with many of his later tracks as they are super crisp. i mean these producers probably hav hardware mixing desks, compressers and limiters for their mastering if they do do it. tracks is the option to do it on computer, cheaper than buying those things separately, prob not as good, but definitely cheaper. still in digital music t-racks is used widely as a mastering tool by many pros. i dont really like that super smooth crisp sound, its just i make tracks for an mc i live with who's constantly trying to promote his shit, and will only take the beats that are mastered to sound smooth and crisp...unfortunately hes the only mc i know, and he lives with me, and ive tried arguing that if something sounds good it sounds good, but he's just one of these ppl who demands beats to sound clean...personally i prefer making as many tracks as possible and not caring too much about mastering as i dont hav a record company i wanna impress....but i guess theres nothing wrong with learning how to master properly. ive got some interview with Babu from dilated peoples saying how he and Iris Science always argue about this, as Babu likes raw sounding beats, but Iris Science is also a sound engineer and demands that they need to be mastered properly to sound good. personally, looking at Pete Rock, Mecca and the Soul Brother would nt hav sounded anywhere near as good if it was super clean, it would be a completely different sound...be it for better or worse.
User avatar

By silverman567 Mon Dec 19, 2005 6:56 pm
...worse... :lol: