Why should I choose the MPC 5000 over the Roland MV8800

^^^ That may have applied back then when the MPC was the only option but times have changed. The MPC is simply a hardware option .

2. The Akai that made those classic machine's is dead and gone - and with it their brand philosophy and quality.

3. Ski Beatz ( Jay Z 's producer )actually uses a MV-8800.


inthemix: My suggestionis that sit down with both boxes with someone that knows them borh inside and out. Make a decision on what suites you. Don't rely on salespeople because they barely know enough sell the machine in most cases. I left the MPC-4000 behind (with no regrets) for the 8800 but that simply what worked for me.

The 5000 is a better machine for those that don't want to deviate from the MPC workflow. Anybody that watches the Roland Start-up vid can work the MV from scratch so it's not complicated at all. You simply can't walk up to an MV and expect it to behave like an MPC.

FL on a laptop with a pad controller is more powerful than both the MV and MPC-5000 so don't limit your options.

I disagree that the Akai that made the early MPCs is dead and gone. We are witnessing the birth of a new classic. I owned those early legendary MPCs. I now use the MPC 5000. I can actually sell the MPC 5000 today, and have enough money from the sale to buy an MPC 60, 3000, MPC 4000 or even an MV-8800, and still have money left over to buy at least 40 GB of samples. But after 5 months of using the MPC 5000...no other MPC or MV can replace my MPC 5000. There is no feature the MPC 4000 or MV-8800 has that would make me give up my 5K.

I choose the MPC 5000 as my hardware platform, because it builds upon the features I love about the older MPCs and adds much more. If they haven't done so already...I believe many more MPC users will be making the switch to the 5K during the next year...like this dude:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02S9zJqYkaM

In my journey to find the hardware sequencer/sampler that was best for me I always had a look at the MV 8000 and the MPC 2500. Later the MV 8800 was released and I was about to buy it. But I often had doubts cause I just liked the looks of the MPC 2500. There was always this "I wanna have it" feeling when I saw it in a shop. Okay, the MV had more features and a maxed out MPC 2500 was nealry the price of a MV 8800 at that time. So I was considering and considering...

I tried both machines at a big store. That made me choose the 2500, cause while playing around with it I made a nicer beat with it than with the MV 8800. It was "fast" while the MV was kinda "slow". With its mouse and screen it reminded me too much of a PC system and I wanted to leave this way of working behind. After the release of the MPC 5000 I was absolutely certain!

To make a long story short: sometimes you can compare two machines and one is far superior! But you make a decision for the other one because it just feels better. It's hard do describe and it's something you can only experience on your one.

Test both machines at a store or get it from a dealer with something like 30 day money back policy, so you can get deep with the machines!

Just my 2 cents!

Good points! It really is a personal choice of what strong points each posses that are most important to YOU! Unfortunately, there is no perfect MPC/MV They all have advantages and very serious shortcomings. You will have to compromise and get what is closest.

If you want stability, the MV has been upgraded and supported very well by Roland. The MV 8800 is simply an 8000 with one OS update, a color screen, lead free solder, and new paint. If you look at it for what it is (an MV 8000 SE) it has been supported far better than any other product of its kind with the exception of JJ OS for the 1000 and 2500. By support I mean upgrades and bug fixes which is what really counts. When it was first released it really sucked bad.

The 8800 has some advantages over an MPC without JJ OS. Better chopping, nondestructive chopping with clipboard feature,VGA out for mouse editing sequence/sample data, and real time time stretch with BPM sync. The disadvantages is that it is very slow for loading and saving. The layout and workflow is awkward without the VGA and if you like intuitive button and knob operation over a mouse then the MPC 5000 is the best bet. I think the MPC 2500 with JJ OS has a generally faster workflow despite the VGA of Roland and it is stable. The MV also suffers sloppy timing and midi jitter at its higher resolution. Quantizing does not have its own feel like the MPC so finding the right settings is hard at the lower 120 resolution it requires to get it to stay in time.

The 5000 is in a buggy state and will be supported by Numark so just don't expect a stable OS to ever happen or many new features. History could change but that remains to be seen. JJ does not have the source code for this machine since he did not help design it so don't expect him to come to the rescue. Still it has some really good features and sounds a little better than the cheesy sounding 100 and 2500 series. You may not notice a difference or care but I did not like the sound from those units.

b-righteous wrote: The disadvantages is that it is very slow for loading and saving. The layout and workflow is awkward without the VGA and if you like intuitive button and knob operation over a mouse then the MPC 5000 is the best bet. I think the MPC 2500 with JJ OS has a generally faster workflow despite the VGA of Roland and it is stable. The MV also suffers sloppy timing and midi jitter at its higher resolution. Quantizing does not have its own feel like the MPC so finding the right settings is hard at the lower 120 resolution it requires to get it to stay in time.

Well the loading times are dependent on how large the Project is. If you load Projects with different mixes of a song , opposed to several different songs with different samples , the load time is optimized. The MV's workflow is slow only if you become "mouse dependent" and not learn the control surface-which is lightening fast for navigating.

The timing issue is user based. The biggest factor here is not knowing how to control the quantization. It's considerably more flexible than the MPC more simplified swing. Once you know your way around it it's pretty simple. The usual culprit is unknowingly using "Input Quantize". I haven't experienced midi jitter or clock latency that has produced an audible result.

The one point I would stress to anyone even thinking about switching to an MV is that you have to prepared let go of you MPC habits. This is what held me back for the first few days. I kept the 4000 for a few months to be sure but I eventually let it go.


Before getting 5000 I would really be sure the 1000 or 2500 doesn't do what you want. On the MV front, the 8800 has some advantages over the 8000 (beyond the screen)but many have learned to lived without the additional OS. There's some good bargains out features. At $800 the 8000, $600/2500, and $450/1000 I
would explore all options before laying out for the 5000 at close to $3000 maxed out.

2500/1000 + synth of your own choosing + HD mutitrack for audio.....still way cheaper than the 5000.

I've made beats on the MV8000, and I can tell you this; without help, I wouldn't know what to do on that thing. I find it HORRIBLE to use. Simple parameters require scrolling through a bunch of windows. I don't know how anyone remembers how to use this thing.
I like machines that are easy to use. You may not know how to use 100% of any machine right away, but I should be able to do 50% of a machines capabilities without a manual. Everyone that I know who has the MV8000 is "still learning" how to use it. They can make beats on it that are less complicated than what I'm doing on my "less powerful" MPC2500, but how good are features if you don't know how to use em.
Go online and listen for yourself. I bet that you don't hear one single beat where the MV8000's additional features are being utilized. If you do hear something out the ordinary, let me know. Post a link when you return.
And besides the timing, I don't like the velocity from the pads. My friend adjusted the sensitivity and it still can't compare to his MPC2000XL. In the 16 level mode (or whatever Roland calls it) Pad 4 sounds just like Pad 8, and the last 8 pads barely have enough difference to notice any volume difference. This may not be an issue for you, but if creating dynamic sounding drum patterns is important, it may be a slight problem. Even with full velocity turned off, I wasn't able to get a good range out the MV8000.
It does have some nice features though, but this isn't Rolands first attempt at stealing Akai's customers. The MC-909 was released in 2002 and still has features that current MPC's don't have..
MC-909 specs
# 16MB sample memory expandable up to 272MB using optional DIMMS, and SmartMedia™ storage for sample data
# Hundreds of new high-quality patterns, sounds and rhythm sets; expandable via SRX-Series wave expansion board
# Studio-quality effects including 24-bit reverb, 2 multi-effects processors, compression/EQ and mastering effects
# Built-in USB port for sample/Standard MIDI File transfer and User data backup
# S/PDIF digital I/O, six analog outputs and stereo analog inputs
# Dual D Beams, Turntable Emulation and velocity-sensitive pads-—plus front-panel knobs, buttons and sliders to modify sounds and patterns
# New V-LINK function for integrating audio and video in performance.
...There's a reason why the MC-909 didn't sell well, and the robust features ain't one of em. They should have added an "ease of use" option to the OS! haha

I partially agree on both sides about the MV ease of use. Once you learn it it is pretty fast. I still feel the MPC's are a just a little faster and easier to use but that is a high mark as far as hardware samplers are concerned. The thing is the learning curve is so high on the MV. I know how to use it very well now but it took a while to get there and I have been using samplers for many years and catch on fast.

The timing thing is usually dismissed as newbies not knowing how to use it. That may be the case for most complaints but I know exactly how to use it and don't use input quantize. Some may not be able to detect the difference but I can. Like i said, it operates well at 120 ppq but if you leave it at the default 480 it can't record your performance quite as accurate. I had the 4k with input quantize off at 960ppq and it always recorded my playing exactly as I played good or bad. Same with my Motif XS that operates at 480 ppq What you put in is what you get out and I never quantize on input. The MV has nice quantize features with strength and real time tweaking etc. But at 120 ppq it won't capture the feel of you playing so reducing the strength won't help much. On the other end, because it quantizes to a stiff equal grid then it sounds stiff at 100% unlike the MPC's. The 5000 has 960 ppq and strength so if the clock is as tight as most MPC's then it should be a winner for quantizing. Only it is off line so you can't audition your tweaks to quantize in real time like the 4k and MV. Like I said, they all have shortcomings.

For loading, of course smaller files load faster but that same file size on the newer MPC's will still load way faster than an MV

The timing issue is user based. The biggest factor here is not knowing how to control the quantization. It's considerably more flexible than the MPC more simplified swing. Once you know your way around it it's pretty simple.

The MPC more simplified swing? Please clarify. The MPCs swing is not any more simplified than the MV..it just simply works. It has a huge advantage in this area. The best thing Roland can do is to copy this feature exactly how it is implemented in the 5K. If it doesn't, the MV will always be lacking in this area.

The 5K's Timing Correct parameters:

1. Timing correct: 1/4, 1/4 triplets, 1/8, 1/8 triplets, 1/16, 1/16 triplets, 1/32, 1/32 triplets, 1/64, 1/64 triplets. Turning this off gives you 960 ppqn!

2. Swing field: Provides the classic MPC swing based on % from 50-75

3. Shift timing: can shift notes backwards or forwards

4. Strenght: Determines how rigidly the track will be quantized. First MPC with this function.

5. Window: Lets you set the width of the area for each timing point. First MPC with this function

6. Note repeat: Will following TC settings. You can latch this function so that it stays on.

If you want stability, the MV has been upgraded and supported very well by Roland. The MV 8800 is simply an 8000 with one OS update, a color screen, lead free solder, and new paint. If you look at it for what it is (an MV 8000 SE) it has been supported far better than any other product of its kind with the exception of JJ OS for the 1000 and 2500. By support I mean upgrades and bug fixes which is what really counts. When it was first released it really sucked bad.

The MV did "suk bad" when it was released. Visit the MV Forums and read the older threads. I have verified that they are still there. Roland took their sweet ol time to fix the OS. It wasn't until OS 3.0 that MV users could rejoice (years after the initial release?). You state that it has had better support than any other product of it's kind? The MPC is the only other product on the market that is similar. So would you say that the MV has had better support than the MPC 2000/2000XL, and 3000..the most popular pad-based workstations ever? Or even the 4000? The MPC 5000 has just been released 5 months ago and is on OS 1.02. Upgrades and bug fixes will obviously come.

Chopping. Producers have been chopping samples for decades. They done this blindly on older MPCs and other samplers. The MPC 5000s chopping is good. It is so easy to chop the sample into 2-64 equal parts or chopped automatically based upon the peaks in volume. The 5K then creates a program with these chops. In this aspect, it is equal to or better than anything on the market. However, when it comes to manual chopping and non-destructive chopping, it can be improved. Both the MV and MPC 1000/2500 have better chopping in this area.

Real time timestretch w/ BPM sync. This is a highly regarded function in these forums. Roland has added this in pretty much all of their products. I have this in my Fantom G. This is not available in an "official" Akai OS. JJ OS has this function without BPM sync but it is not fully implemented. Along with the VGA monitor support, these are the main selling points of the MV (my opinion). I would love to see this added to the MPC 5000. While this is in my Top 10 list of feature requests, it is not in my Top 10 list of functions that I use everyday. Chopping samples is the best way to go. Besides, all the latest MPCs have offline time stretching that you can set the BPM. In addition to that, in studio use...every major DAW has this function in real-time. So to wrap this up, real time timestretch w/ BPM sync is something live performers will get the most use of.

The 5000 is in a buggy state and will be supported by Numark so just don't expect a stable OS to ever happen or many new features. History could change but that remains to be seen.

I am willing to share music created using the MPC 5000. It doesn't limit me at all. It does have some bugs indentified here in the forums from actual users. But overall, we love this machine. Akai/Numark just released an OS update for every MPC they currently sell. How's that for support? I have confidence that OS updates/improvements are coming. See what I wrote above about earlier OS of similar products.

Still it has some really good features and sounds a little better than the cheesy sounding 100 and 2500 series. You may not notice a difference or care but I did not like the sound from those units.

Your opinon is respected, however....there is a thread on this subject that compares the sound of the MPC 3000 and 2500. Almost everyone choose the MPC 2500 in a blind test That is all I will say on the topic of sound.

The thing that really makes me lust after the MV is my migration from Reason to the MPC. I think I got the MPC in April maybe? I can't remember when. I have not reinstalled Reason since then, and I've only opened it once or twice to load some older tracks. I really like dedicated, simple, hardware that lets me get the job done.

What I do miss though is Reason's automation and on-screen sequencing. I like being able to drag and drop bars and visually delete and rearrange tracks as they play; I like the automation on the mixer and effects, even sample filters.

I don't mind studying a manual and can't see myself getting frustrated with the MV simply because it's hard or different. It has the standard simple pad/button control for major functions, but also a mouse for things that can be done more easily with one (this is true of some things).

At the same time I definitely understand the hatred of pointing and clicking and how tedious and slow that process is.

Maybe what it boils down to is this: if you've spent years on the MPC and it's doing what you need it to, maybe it doesn't make sense to just hop onto a new system. If you're not so set on the MPC way of doing things or you're open for experimentation that comes along with some additional perks once you get the hang of it, the MV is for you.

For many people it's like -- they've been using an MPC for years. They've been making tracks on it for years, and that workflow is something they've shaped their sound around (or maybe that workflow shaped their sound to some extent). If you ask a dude who's really in love with his machine to move over to something else purely for better specifications and features, it might not always happen.

I have a funny feeling that with either the 5000 or the MV though I'd be throwing money down the drain that could be better spent on other hardware or vinyl.

bedouin, what do you know about Highland Park, East Liberty, Penn Hills, the Hill District, North Side, Stanton Heights, Oakland

What I do miss though is Reason's automation and on-screen sequencing. I like being able to drag and drop bars and visually delete and rearrange tracks as they play; I like the automation on the mixer and effects, even sample filters.

This is one reason why my daughter loves the Fantom. The visual aspect of dragging and dropping bars is appealing to many.

The 5K's Timing Correct parameters:......

The matches on all points except recording at 996PPQN. However the MV can/does indeed quantize and edit at 996 PPQN. The 996PPQN is relatively cosmetic spec. This why even the most complex workstation don't include anything his high. that includes the Oasys (480ppqn), Motif (480ppqn), Kurzweils (760ppqn), and Fantoms (480ppqn). They all top off under 996ppqn and for good reason. There comes a point where timinig increments become 100% inaudible and not humanly perceivable . That point is well before 300PPQN.


If you have any doubt just listen to Oasys sequenced demos by Jordan Rudess (keyboard) and Clairence Michaelson (drummer) at any GC.
There is nobody in Hiphop recording anything even remotely as complex as these works and it all done within 480PPQN without a hitch. The Michaelson demos are just plain sick. The tracking is incredible and again, well within the 480PPQN limit.
Given the fact that most MPC compositions are done within 96PPQN the notion of 996PPQN is a non-issue and cosmetic at best.


The MV shuffle/swing is also in realtime with more tweaking parameters and it's nondestructive. I like it better than the 4000 for that reason-and it sounds good. There's no need to copy Akai in this area as the MV holds it own IMO.

Askia Shaheed wrote:bedouin, what do you know about Highland Park, East Liberty, Penn Hills, the Hill District, North Side, Stanton Heights, Oakland

I lived in Friendship, which is wedged in between East Liberty and Oakland. I'm in Highland Park like every weekend. Used to work in Oakland.

North Side used to be my Hip-Hop record spot in the 90s at Stedefords. I haven't been there in years though so I have no idea what they stock nowadays in terms of vinyl. I only mess around with Jerry's in Pittsburgh; I've got little hideaways I've been raiding in other parts of Western PA. I worked at CCAC in North Side for a while (and also Homewood).

I used to go to the mosque in the Hill District in the late 90s, but sorta drifted away from that particular group. Not much there anymore though.

bedouin wrote:

Askia Shaheed wrote:bedouin, what do you know about Highland Park, East Liberty, Penn Hills, the Hill District, North Side, Stanton Heights, Oakland

I lived in Friendship, which is wedged in between East Liberty and Oakland. I'm in Highland Park like every weekend. Used to work in Oakland.

North Side used to be my Hip-Hop record spot in the 90s at Stedefords. I haven't been there in years though so I have no idea what they stock nowadays in terms of vinyl. I only mess around with Jerry's in Pittsburgh; I've got little hideaways I've been raiding in other parts of Western PA. I worked at CCAC in North Side for a while (and also Homewood).

I used to go to the mosque in the Hill District in the late 90s, but sorta drifted away from that particular group. Not much there anymore though.

Fellas..sorry to get off topic but I had to give a shout out to cat from my home town

Askia Shaheed wrote:Fellas..sorry to get off topic but I had to give a shout out to cat from my home town

Oh, by the way I used to guest DJ at times on "720" (before its host made it into a record shop) on 88.3 WRCT. I think that was on Sundays (Saturdays maybe?) from 5 to 7 or 8.

To this day I still don't have copies of those shows . . .

diegoeskryptic wrote:
I say go with the 2500 and jjOS mixed with your favorite software...

This is the best and most succinct advice in this thread. If I were going to get another beat machine, I'd do this in a heartbeat, or get one of the brand new 1000's with JJ.