Can't decide which MPC to choose? Read these resources or post your questions here.
User avatar
By sirparksalot Wed Oct 05, 2011 10:36 pm
Very true. 4k takes the cake. Period. Also, as far as learning an entire new machine.....it really only took me about 2 weeks before I was feeling somewhat at home on the 4000 coming from a 1000. After that, it's just about finding new features. I really honestly feel that if you have mastered a 2000 or 3000, unless you simply do NOT need or want more from your machine, there is no reason to not move to a 4k. Some people just don't need the features, and that's cool.
User avatar
By MPCWeapon1 Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:42 pm
sirparksalot wrote:Very true. 4k takes the cake. Period. Also, as far as learning an entire new machine.....it really only took me about 2 weeks before I was feeling somewhat at home on the 4000 coming from a 1000. After that, it's just about finding new features. I really honestly feel that if you have mastered a 2000 or 3000, unless you simply do NOT need or want more from your machine, there is no reason to not move to a 4k. Some people just don't need the features, and that's cool.


If you have a set way of creating and layering drums or sounds for that matter Tuning and filtering etc. On a 2000xl you can get frustrated trying to do it on the 4k. It's a different machine.

4k is next level. You only realize it's next level through continuous usage and experimenting with its features..Features I didn't think I needed are heavily incorporated in my beat making process now with the 4k. To me it's the best drum machine ever.
User avatar
By sirparksalot Sun Dec 04, 2011 11:34 pm
MPCWeapon1 wrote:
sirparksalot wrote:Very true. 4k takes the cake. Period. Also, as far as learning an entire new machine.....it really only took me about 2 weeks before I was feeling somewhat at home on the 4000 coming from a 1000. After that, it's just about finding new features. I really honestly feel that if you have mastered a 2000 or 3000, unless you simply do NOT need or want more from your machine, there is no reason to not move to a 4k. Some people just don't need the features, and that's cool.


If you have a set way of creating and layering drums or sounds for that matter Tuning and filtering etc. On a 2000xl you can get frustrated trying to do it on the 4k. It's a different machine.

4k is next level. You only realize it's next level through continuous usage and experimenting with its features..Features I didn't think I needed are heavily incorporated in my beat making process now with the 4k. To me it's the best drum machine ever.


Word. If I had started on a 2k it would be different.....but trying to go from a 4k to a 2k I was just like...."what is this.....this SUCKS".
User avatar
By mr_debauch Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:41 am
sirparksalot wrote:Word. If I had started on a 2k it would be different.....but trying to go from a 4k to a 2k I was just like...."what is this.....this SUCKS".


I think it really depends on what you are trying to do with the machine.. like, it's a tool.. so it does a particular job well.... right?

OK, now you wouldn't think the 2k(xl) would be amazing at doing a 4k's job... that would be expecting too much from it and it simply wasn't made for anything like that...

but, I like having those older machines around not really because they do something the rest of my gear (daw especially) cant do... it is strictly for a combination of simplicity, as well as fun factor.

You know those days when you are just chilling listening to records? well running it through the 2k is something I would do in that situation just so when I hear something while casually listening ... I push record quick and save the clip... and continue listening. by the end of the night you maxed it's ram... and you can do some chopping.

Also, you aint thinking really about crazy amounts of effects, automation, mixing, sorting through piles of samples... you just are taking samples as you hear them and making something stress free. It takes a step back from the usual.

I like that..
User avatar
By tapedeck Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:50 pm
i had an opportunity for 4k just pop up ... and i let it go.

i understand the sampler is better what with the more filters and the proper adsr + lfos.
also 24 / 96 is cool, but almost just for the novelty.

i was unclear if the sequencer itself was improved, and if you could do more while the sequencer was running. anyone care to comment on that?

anyway, i figured with the fx card in an xl + 8 outs + smpte + digi, all i was missing from the 4k was a couple filters / lfo / envelopes. imo the sequencer is the killer feature, and i didn't get the impression it was much different at all in the 4k (besides the higher resolution).

would be interested to hear thoughts on this from owners of both.
User avatar
By Mike Boogie Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:21 pm
The ability to record while the sequence is running is hella dope due it causing me to test samples before recording.

I also love the fact that I can save the entire memory into one folder and load it in two button presses. Saves time.

The ONLY feature that is missing from the 4k is one that the 5k has... It can assign a folder full of samples to a program in a few button presses!
User avatar
By tapedeck Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:59 pm
are you saying you can sample while the sequencer is running?

has anyone ever explored the looper potential of that? or i guess youd still have to assign the sample to a pad which might throw off the looper workflow.

what else can you do with the seq running that you cannot on an xl?
User avatar
By sirparksalot Thu Nov 22, 2012 3:17 am
mr_debauch wrote:
sirparksalot wrote:Word. If I had started on a 2k it would be different.....but trying to go from a 4k to a 2k I was just like...."what is this.....this SUCKS".


I think it really depends on what you are trying to do with the machine.. like, it's a tool.. so it does a particular job well.... right?

OK, now you wouldn't think the 2k(xl) would be amazing at doing a 4k's job... that would be expecting too much from it and it simply wasn't made for anything like that...

but, I like having those older machines around not really because they do something the rest of my gear (daw especially) cant do... it is strictly for a combination of simplicity, as well as fun factor.

You know those days when you are just chilling listening to records? well running it through the 2k is something I would do in that situation just so when I hear something while casually listening ... I push record quick and save the clip... and continue listening. by the end of the night you maxed it's ram... and you can do some chopping.

Also, you aint thinking really about crazy amounts of effects, automation, mixing, sorting through piles of samples... you just are taking samples as you hear them and making something stress free. It takes a step back from the usual.

I like that..

Word....after another year, I picked up a 3k LE for a good price in great condition. I always wanted one, and for once had cash in my pocket, so I thought why not. I use it for exactly what you described above. Just chillin out, fillin up the ram, and making some chops. It's a great tool to step back and just get to chopping and diggin for samples. It's good to slow down sometimes, and honestly, the 3000 workflow is fun once you learn how to chop up records using numbers. I wish I had used the 2kxl for the same role rather than looking to dumb down my setup, I should have complimented it with a 2kxl like I did with the 3000.
By foge1 Sun Jan 06, 2013 2:22 pm
Like Haze Also started with a 2xl then moved to the 4k.
I missed the extra 16 level functions from the 2k
Other than that the 4 was an amazing step forward.
The 4 is a truly brilliant midi seq.

Now on the Ren not happy with it yet.... But Giving it time.

G