The vintage vs. new school MPC battle

Hey all,

I'm off to New York in a couple months and am looking to do my first real MPC purchase (I own a 500, but you can't reeeally count that ).

I've been making beats for awhile now, used a lot of equipment and a lot of software so I know my way around most things but have fallen in love with the MPC work flow.

Anyhow, my dillema is that I am looking to get my hands on a bigger MPC, and the 2500 is appealing to me because of its size and flip up screen, however I also have the older MPC models calling me in my dreams.

The 3000 and 2000xl are pieces that I have wanted for awhile but i've never really got around to getting. Now that I can get them, I'm not sure if I should go for the newer flashier lights quicker work flow MPC or one of the classics? I have a nostalgic connection with floppy discs and zip discs, and if I could hook up a floppy drive to the 2500 it would be a wrap.

What are your thoughts? Am I trading off too many functions and ease of use by going for an older model or are things relatively the same? Is chopping 20 times easier on the 2500, or will I not miss it that much?

Cheers,

QL

Haha nice response, love it.

I've been looking around for a specific list of what the JJ OS does for the 2500 but I can't seem to find it anywhere, do you have a link or perhaps give me a quick run down of what JJ OS adds?

Cheers,

QL

Quartz Loque wrote:Haha nice response, love it.

I've been looking around for a specific list of what the JJ OS does for the 2500 but I can't seem to find it anywhere, do you have a link or perhaps give me a quick run down of what JJ OS adds?

Cheers,

QL

Here you go my dude http://www7a.biglobe.ne.jp/~mpc1000/mpc2500/chart.htm

i have a 2500 and want a 500. to add on of course. i think even w the 500 you're already a new mpc user. there's no going back from its luxuries. just cop a 1k or 25 and learn that fcking machine for real and you'll be playing with the big boys.

Vintage equipment is a pain in the ass. Unless you know the guy who owned it previously, he was the sole owner, and he knew how to properly maintain his equipment, and you know he didn't mistreat his equipment -- then forget it.

That's the only way you can guarantee you're not buying something that will need instant repair on arrival and/or six months later.

Buy vintage if nothing else currently in production can produce the same sound. Don't buy into nostalgia. Guys who tell me two samplers at the same bit and sampling rate sound 'different' will always be full of shit to me.

Invest in records. Invest in a nice desk or chair. Invest in some books that might help you spark ideas. Spend money on something that will increase your creative juices. Forget about wasting money on nostalgia unless you have money to blow and time to waste in pursuit of it all.

Speaking from someone who's dealt with floppies, zip drives, and all that bullshit -- there's nothing nice about them. Thank God for memory cards. I never want to deal with a floppy again in my life. I don't want to deal with SCSI termination. I don't want to have to keep spare machines around just for 'parts.' There's rarely any positives to going vintage when modern alternatives exist.

And yeah -- I'm the guy who owns an Oberheim DX and ripped apart a dead Casio RZ-1. The RZ-1 I can justify (crappy bit and sampling rate -- crunchy drums). The Oberheim DX? I'll never try to justify having that big thing around other than saying, "I wanted it."

bedouin wrote: I'll never try to justify having that big thing around other than saying, "I wanted it."

Thats how i feel about my 60 lately lol

Thanks for all the replies, really helped me out.

Cheers,

QL

Just another perspective......

I have a 2000xl and a 2500 (I bought them both recently), obviously the 2500 has more features like upto 128mb, HD support, USB, faster sample editing, CF slot etc.


BUT the 2000xl has better screen, better build quality, better wheel, and quite a few operational niceties that are lacking in the 2500, (such as naming midi devices, erase muted tracks, nice easy manual chop, rate convert etc) also the sound quality is exactly the same, and it is much cheaper to buy.

So I would say try them both before buying, JJ OS adds a lot to the 2500 but sometimes it comes down to what feels better rather than endless features, and ask yourself what you will be using the MPC for - If you want a complete production centre in 1 box the 2500 has it, but if you want the MPC to provide drums and drive your midi setup the 2000xl is definately worth a look.

Personally I am currently deciding which one to keep, both have their individual strengths, I got the 2000xl for cheap and was immediately impressed with it (way back I had a 3000), then I was offered a 2500 for a good price and figured it would be a step up from the 2000xl in every way so I got that and planned on selling the 2000xl, I have found though that it is not the case, and not the easy decision I thought it would be.

you cant go wrong with a 1k or a 25 4 sure 4 get about it lol if cash is like dat

cop em all get ya ol school on just cause u want it but on the flip side its not what u

use but how u use what u got to get the results u want Me personally I love the new
technology and resources available 4 the new school dig me!

^^ I didn't really understand a word of that (or should I say dat??), so i'm not diggin' anything my man!

phat phace wrote:Just another perspective......

I have a 2000xl and a 2500 (I bought them both recently), obviously the 2500 has more features like upto 128mb, HD support, USB, faster sample editing, CF slot etc.


BUT the 2000xl has better screen, better build quality, better wheel, and quite a few operational niceties that are lacking in the 2500, (such as naming midi devices, erase muted tracks, nice easy manual chop, rate convert etc) also the sound quality is exactly the same, and it is much cheaper to buy.

So I would say try them both before buying, JJ OS adds a lot to the 2500 but sometimes it comes down to what feels better rather than endless features, and ask yourself what you will be using the MPC for - If you want a complete production centre in 1 box the 2500 has it, but if you want the MPC to provide drums and drive your midi setup the 2000xl is definately worth a look.

Personally I am currently deciding which one to keep, both have their individual strengths, I got the 2000xl for cheap and was immediately impressed with it (way back I had a 3000), then I was offered a 2500 for a good price and figured it would be a step up from the 2000xl in every way so I got that and planned on selling the 2000xl, I have found though that it is not the case, and not the easy decision I thought it would be.

The 2000XLs screen is not better than the 2500. The pixels in the 2000XL burn out fairly easily which is a reason why you should turn it off immediately when you are not using it. After several years...I have yet to hear any reports of this happening with the 2500.

The build quality of the 2000XL is not better than the 2500 with the exception of the data wheel. It is really a waste of time trying to compare a 2000XL with the 2500. It doesn't matter which OS you use on the 2500. The 2500 contains several dozen improvements. Simply do a search in the 2500 forum. As far as prices...the 2500 can be purchased for as long as $1000 on the second-hand market. Even if the 2000XL sold for $400 (which you will not find many at that price), it is not a better deal.

I've worked with both models and i think that you forgot to mention:the sound quality.And i don't mean that 2500 has crappy sound but transparent,just like the newer MPCs.2000xl adds punch to the sound and that's the main reason (plus some other features which were new at the time it has been released) of making it an industry standard.On the whole build,2500 and 2000xl are sh!tty because of the cheap-as$ knobs they're having plus the crappy screens.

bedouin wrote: Guys who tell me two samplers at the same bit and sampling rate sound 'different' will always be full of **** to me.

Would make sense if all these machines were ONLY made up of bits, and somehow were only created and used in a world that had nothing to do with physicality in any way shape or form. There is A LOT that goes into making these machines. Different designs, different parts, different engineering, differing processes. All these things give each model of machine it's distinct sound. That distinctness could be major or minor compared to other machines in it's class.

If it were true that all same bit rate machines sound exactly the same, ALL cd players would sound exactly the same now wouldn't they? Virtually eliminating the need for different classes of components. Audiophile cd players sound EXACTLY like a cheap cd player you buy at walmart? So audiophiles are delusional when they hear differences too?

I know it's not the best logic in the world, but who needs it if you have REAL experience and can share it?!!

To anyone that says: "if two different machines are 16 bit...they MUST have the exact same sound..anyone who disagrees are pretty much lying to themselves and/or bs'ing me trying to make me feel bad about my sampler purchase" I call BS, especially if all they heard was just the machine they own.

It's obvious that the person is either too stubborn, too lazy, or just can't find the opportunity to hear the different machines. Since he can't or will not do the comparisons...he'd rather just sit there and deny till he's blue in the face that there are differences. It's like a little child putting his hands over his ears when an adult is telling them something they really don't want to hear, all the while screaming at the top of their lungs the contrary, and for no other reason than they are just unwilling, for whatever reason, to face what someone else is telling them. In this situation it's even worse cause the child won't even bother to even try and find out what the truth is...he wants to stay with his hands over his ears and yell into infinity just to be contrary. Maybe it's acting out of some kind if strange envy....not being able to have all those samplers to play with...so he must try and block out anything that would make him want them more...and rationalize as much reasons as he can to make him feel better about not having the toys that deep down...he really wants.

Anyways, whatever rationalizing someone needs to justify or un-justify sampler purchases based on this argument just doesn't hold any weight. The different samplers do sound different. People, do have a preference for the sound of particular machines.

Some may have a preference for a certain sound due to nostalgia, but it's still a preference. Doesn't mean they won't find beats made that have different sound qualities bad.

It's also true that mixing and mastering can change the character of the overall sound, and making which sampler was being used in the beat indistinguishable for most people...and I say most NOT all.

MPC 2000 sounds different from an MPC 1000...and both of those sound different than an ASR 10. All of which are 16 bit. Record the exact same sound in all three, and the output of that sample will sound different on each of them.

Same with audio interfaces, which also work on the same amount of bits...they do sound different.

Now if the argument is based on the fallacy of certain samplers having a "magical" sound. Well, there is no way that can be quantified. It's personal experience. Everyone has a different idea of what an "ideal" sound is. But proposing the idea that all machines sound exactly the same if they work at the same bit rate....is completely false.

Deterring sampler purchasers based on other merits, such as hard to find parts, antiquated media storage such as floppies and scsi, not enough sample time, not enough features, etc. are all valid though.