what you guys think mpc 3000 or mpc 2500

I didnt read the results but i could tell that the 2500 was the first one. I can tell cause i try to focus in very hard on the sounds but i dont feel there is much a difference to say one is really better sounding than the other. I think its more about feel. Things just start to grow on you and you just become so use to them that your body or mind or ear makes it hard to feel other wise. alot of use got cars and while driving sometimes you can feel and hear things with your car that somebody else might not pick up on. i think thats how it is with the 3k.

This was just a simple test. It really has nothing to do with the feel, swing, or anything else. Just the DA converters.

Personally, they sound pretty close to me with very little difference. However, most of the folks that responded says that the prefer the first sample and believed that one to be the MPC 3000.

damn i wish i'd gotten in on this topic before you told which one! now i know you all are gonna say "well now you know" but i could tell the mpc25k was the first one. i'm not saying which one is better or worse, and jahrome is right, its damn close.

anyway, i work a lot in Beyerdynamic Dt770 headphones and have for 8 years now. you can hear the difference in the horn blast in the first break. the 25k is a tadbit crisper/brighter...and i mean a tad...lady's private parts hair even. but going back and forth (before the spoiler) i could hear that little difference. i mean its hard to notice on a full track but when you're identifying solo'ish sounds it becomes more prominent.

i'm actually quite surprised at how close they are. obviously their both 16bit but i just remember the 3k being a noticeable pretty warm. but at that time i was comparing my buddies 3k to my older og 2k.

anyway...keep'em coming Jahrome.

well there you go. nice test. tought me a thing or two.

So with this simple test, those of us that thought the first sample sounded better would have to say that the 2500 sounds slighty better.Right? I mean, I thought the first one was for sure the 3000. Huh, funny how this all worked out. Great test Jahrome!!!1

yeah. well there wasnt much difference. I was just listening extremely carefully and somehow came to the conclusion the first was slightly sonically smoother.

goes to show you that these modern machines CAN produce stellar results..

Hey Jahrome

Great Test. I just have a few questions. These are identical sequences and not just sampled loops right? Are the velocities identical on both sequences? Also the timing is also identical right? Cuz at first I thought both were really similar. Then i started listening over and over again picking out each individual hit and started to feel tha thte second one had a different timing. I couldn't say better or worse. I could only say that the second one was a bit more "old school" for lack of a better word. I will admit that this is after I knew which was which so this may have been psychological so i did some research.

I loaded both examples into ProTools and lined up the first kick by the sample. EXACT to the wavelength and the zero endings. Then I went through the track to find if the hits were exactly to the sample. They were not. The Track 2 had a few hits that were actually ahead Track 1 then went back to perfect alignment on the ensuing hits. At the first drum fill at around 6 seconds you can see this. It must be said that the differences were very very very small and could only be seen at the sample zoom level. But I find it interesting that some hits were lined up PERFECTLY and some were not.

I am not saying the average listener will feel this at all. I am not saying you will care. I am just sayin there is a timing difference between MPCs and if this is an accurate test, then this proves it. If someone will tell me how to take a screenshot on a PC I will post the picture.

sky

they werent even sampled. most people buy mpcs to sample their own sh1t. pointless test. why dont we compare the screen brightness next?

Figured it out...

Here are the screenshots of PT and the timing issues:

first kick aligned:



5 seconds- a bit off



10 seconds- back in line

You guys didn't read through the thread completely. I was going to do further tests but stopped due to lack of interest.

This test just compares the DA converters (digital to analog) and nothing more. It had nothing to do with the MPCs timing or anything else. Both are playing an identical sample.

so these are not sequenced beats? it is still wierd that it would play the sample differently isnt it?

sky8studios wrote:........... But I find it interesting that some hits were lined up PERFECTLY and some were not.

sky

Wow , that is interesting.

lack of interest? maybe you need to read more thoroughly. more people wanted to hear sounds being sampled thru sample inputs than hear the digital ins. sure, just blame the people for your laziness

jahrome wrote:You guys didn't read through the thread completely. I was going to do further tests but stopped due to lack of interest.

I wih I had gotten in earlier too. I preferred the second one because it was smoother and had less graininess, and that was before I knew which was which, but of course nobody will believe that huh. The 2500 is more forward in the highs but its also harsher in the highs compared to the 3000. Problem is, you can EQ some more highs on the 3000, but you can't eq out the harshness on the 2500.

And remember, a small difference in one track adds up to a huge difference in 8 or more tracks when you track it out to pro tools. And if yall think yall are splittin hairs over the sound, go to just about anyplace where they talk about eq's and compressors and shyt.

I would definitely be interested in more tests.