would you sell your 2000xl for a 2500?

i have a damn near brand new condition mpc 2000xl se1. I'm really intriuged by the new features of the 2500 but i love my 2kxl. also i have a ton of beats on zip that i don't wanna get rid of.... so whats your opinion would you trade up? or stay put. i've had my 2kxl for about 2 1/2-3 years now and know it inside out. also if my beats from zip aren't compatible then i'm not gonna do it. i'll just have to wait to buy one outright and keep my xl also. (wich is gonna suck cause i'm bout to cop a g5 after this winter too)

I switched, and I wouldn't go back. There are so many little things that make the workflow of the 2500 much more efficient than the XL. And as far as converting the files, it's a **** but it's worth it.

The mpc2500 will read the files from your XL its just a matter of u getting the information off of the zips to your PC or at least an CF card. If u are wanting to do the switch then I say go for it.

Nicole

If you find the additional features of the 2500 useful, then my answer would be yes.

do it. if you approach it with an open mind and expect new results, you will love it.

plus, expandability and further development of the 2500 >>>>> the 2000xl

Not trying to pick a fight, but.....1000 Master, have you ever used an MPC 2000XL?

I traded mine to get a 2500 and bought a cheap $600 beat up {no pun intended} 2000xl ..just for layering snares and kiks and filters...It's worth the upgrade cause your workflow increase is greatly improved. But it does take some getting use to and you must use workaround methods for saving but other than that it's killer.

occasionally flickered with one at GC, but i know from reading what the features are and the workflow. spesh has one and we've conversed about it a couple times, not to mention the vast wealth of information here. and frankly the stuff you give up (largely simult) is waaay inferior to the stuff you get (largely grid edit) in my opinion.

couple that with the fact that the 2000xl will no longer get OS upgrades and you have a "finished product." i'd rather buy a product with a lively future.

this is not to say that the 2000xl wasnt great in its day or that people need the stuff in blah blah blah tired argument, i'm just saying more features = more opportunity for experimentation = breakthrus and good tunes

plus, the man posted this in the 2500 section, just as someone else posted a similar topic in the 2000 section. understandably, the results of his thread were skewed in either direction.

Antonym wrote:
this is not to say that the 2000xl wasnt great in its day or that people need the stuff in blah blah blah tired argument, i'm just saying more features = more opportunity for experimentation = breakthrus and good tunes

But...people also say the direct opposite.

An MPC 2000 and a ASR versus a 2500 and workstation (take your pick...Triton, Fantom, Kurzweil, etc)...can accomplish hot shit no matter what side of the fence you stand on. One set-up is limited, the other has enormous potential....

jahrome wrote:

Antonym wrote:
this is not to say that the 2000xl wasnt great in its day or that people need the stuff in blah blah blah tired argument, i'm just saying more features = more opportunity for experimentation = breakthrus and good tunes

But...people also say the direct opposite.

An MPC 2000 and a ASR versus a 2500 and workstation (take your pick...Triton, Fantom, Kurzweil, etc)...can accomplish hot **** no matter what side of the fence you stand on. One set-up is limited, the other has enormous potential....

This will open another major discussion......hum........

the quesiton wasn't 2000 + asr or 2500 + workstation, it was 2000 or 2500. and in that case, the limitation is totally not worth it in my opinion. 2500 features gives you far more than any limitation of the 2000 will do for your tunes, regardless of what "hot shit" other producers have cranked out on less.

Antonym wrote:the quesiton wasn't 2000 + asr or 2500 + workstation, it was 2000 or 2500. and in that case, the limitation is totally not worth it in my opinion. 2500 features gives you far more than any limitation of the 2000 will do for your tunes, regardless of what "hot ****" other producers have cranked out on less.

co-sign, i'm looking at getting the 4k or the 25k at the end of this year or begining.There's only a few thing that the XL has that give it a good rep,and that is Pads are built sturdder and it's unique zoning ability's that's it.

tell me a little about zoning on the 2000.

these days on the 1k, as you may know, we're able to specify how many equal sliced zones to make - from 1 to 64 even zones. however, we can also have tenths slices - ie, you can make 4.5 zones if your sample is 4 quarter notes and 1 eighth note...see what i'm saying? that's 4 even zones and one half zone...

how does the 2000 do it? what's unique and cool about it? i ask so maybe i can suggest it to jj for implementation into the new os's.

you might have seen my hope/idea of chopslicing, basically start/end points are created while you play the sample and tap pads...

Zoning is basically sliceing, the XL only goes to like 16 but you can continue chopping it in little piece. 1k can zone or slice up to 64 which is good and not good . not good for beginners,but good for advanced users.
I compare Zoning and Sliceing like Analog and digital ,jus in different terms and newer tech knowledege. I don't know NYm...... I might consider getting the 4k because of it's syncing skills than the 25k.The 25k has bug issues with the MTC syncing and midi clock OS.Tho 25k is real nice,I would have to step up to the 4k.
I've jus seen Chris on the Carters real tv siccom show (Backstreet boys lead singer's)his brother studio,he uses the 25k.

PS I still might add the XL back to my collection.