500 vs 2000XL

hey.

i have a 500, love it to bits.

Is it worth upgrading? I have my eye on a 2000XL.

I use them for drum cuts and stabs in all types of production, obviously this is an upgrade of sorts, but as i have had the 500 from new, it works fine with everything i have. What benefits are there to the upgrade? which, granted, is a eBay job.

any help or advise would be appreciated.

none the ease of use alone is worth milkin this baby to the end

IS the 200XL a new machine... I always thought the 2K's were older than the 1K and the 500.....




I always wanted to ask this question, but never thought it was imp enough to start a thread, so I piggy backed...

SHWELL wrote:IS the 200XL a new machine... I always thought the 2K's were older than the 1K and the 500.....

The 2000/2000XL is much older than the current MPC-1000/2500/500. The 2000s were made by the original AKAI. The 2500/1000/500 were made several years later after the company was sold to Numark.

what r the main benefits of 2000 over 500? not mentionin' the sound

More Midi Outs
Bigger Display that you can see the Waveform on
Additional Expansion options

Downsides are that it has less memory ( 32 MB vs 128), no standard effects, no USB connectivity...

and 2000xl is definitely better than 1000 for a studio?

Good info guys....

and 2000xl is definitely better than 1000 for a studio?

in 2004, yes. in 2008, no.

Antonym wrote:

and 2000xl is definitely better than 1000 for a studio?

in 2004, yes. in 2008, no.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
personal opinion.
but in 2008 there are probably more pro mainstream producers using a 2000xl than will ever use a 1000. but thats just because the 1000 is the low end mpc.

2000.3000 and 60 are heavy and ready for the road..

the new ones are like fisher price samplers

lololol

well, the question was asked "which is better for a studio"

in 2004, the mpc2000xl had more functional capacity than the mpc1000
in 2008, the mpc1000 has more functional capacity than the 2000xl.

though i agree there may be more name-recognized producers using the 2000xl in studio today than the 1000/2500, i don't think your addition of "will ever" is at all accurate. 4-5 years, tables will have turned on that one. they're beginning to already.

this "low end" mpc is currently the most functionally capable MPC outside of the 4000. and as far as rough/tumble, road ready goes, i bike 5+ miles a day, lots of hills etc w/ my mpc in the backpack bumping around against my laptop. i've fooled around in its guts, replaced buttons and rotary encoders, lost screws, etc etc etc. it's seen sub zero temperatures and 90 degree weather.

pretty damn rugged.

LunaticBastard wrote:

Antonym wrote:

and 2000xl is definitely better than 1000 for a studio?

in 2004, yes. in 2008, no.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
personal opinion.
but in 2008 there are probably more pro mainstream producers using a 2000xl than will ever use a 1000. but thats just because the 1000 is the low end mpc.

1000 has the upper hand in features. 2000xl are what a lot of people had as their main sampler before the 1000 ever came out and you see it more frequently in the studio than a 1000. 2000xl and 3000's are what i have personally seen in a majority of the studios. Now a days if its not a XL or 3000 it is a 2500. I agree the 1000 has its features and performance wise due to these features could technically be better in a studio setting. However build and studio durability are a whole other story. Just my opinion.

2000xl MCD is the way to go ... if you can still find one

get the 8 outs if you are into analog mixing..change ur life