Sound Comparison between 2000 and 2500

Sup,

I'd like to hear from the few 2500 owners a few comments about the sound quality coming out of their units. Every different mpc that i've heard has a distinctive sound, with the 3000 sounding the best. So those who have another mpc besides the 2500 please comment, still debating on getting the 2500 or a maxed out 2000.

Peace

I mentioned in another thread about the sound of the MPC 2500. As I won't go into a debate about which MPC sounds better...the MPC 2500 sound is incredible. What I mean by that..is that you will not be disappointed with sound. I guess its the balanced outputs. I had to reduce the preamp gains on my external mixer with the 2500 connected. With the XL, I had to turn the gain up a little.

Wassup with the review Jahrome???

If nothing unforseen comes up, I will post my user review before the end of the weekend. I have taken the next 4 days off from work. The wifey has returned from Japan to bring back my last few MPC 2500s

Actual Mpc 2500 user? LOL
Does that mean there are Mpc 2500 fakes floating around here in this forum who pretend to be rocking a 25 when all they're rocking is the shitty little 1000?

PhonoquO wrote:

Actual Mpc 2500 user? LOL
Does that mean there are Mpc 2500 fakes floating around here in this forum who pretend to be rocking a 25 when all they're rocking is the **** little 1000?

I am glad that I amuse you. Actual MPC user means that I have been using the MPC 2500 for the past few weeks and not just quoting things I read from a manual or website.

There are about 3-4 'actual MPC 2500' users here in the forum. Some of us received them from the same source

Jahrome, sorry for stalking you about this but i'm not sure you noticed my other posts about this.
I'm very curious to find out if the 2500 has the same glitch in its sample engine as the 1000.
Here's a demo MP3 with the sound i'm talking about
The other post might look a bit complicated but it's really simple. This is what you should do to test it.

- Go to TRIM mode and set start point of a sample to 0 and end point to 8
- turn loop ON in loop mode
- hit pad 13 (play loop)
- change the end point of the sample to hear different 'crunch' resolutions.

What do you hear when you try this? It's either a 'crunchy' lofi sample or (if the glitch isn't in the 2500) a very short loop.
I seriously love this bug in the 1000.
Thanks.

I tried. It just sounds like a sine wave. When I repeatedly hit the pads while I change the end point, the sound changes but nothing impressive

jahrome wrote:I tried. It just sounds like a sine wave. When I repeatedly hit the pads while I change the end point, the sound changes but nothing impressive

Yeah, that sounds like the 'normal' loop working. Thanks for checking.
Fock! i gonna have to stick with my 1K then
and if Akai takes out this 'bug' in a future update it's gonna be 1.0.7 for me for ever!

cowbell wrote:
Yeah, that sounds like the 'normal' loop working. Thanks for checking.
Fock! i gonna have to stick with my 1K then
and if Akai takes out this 'bug' in a future update it's gonna be 1.0.7 for me for ever!

You are joking right?

jahrome wrote:You are joking right?

No, i'm not. Did you hear the effect on the MP3 i made? I took it to the extreme to give a good example of how it sounds, but when applied subtle it sounds great. This way i can have hifi clear 16bit sounds AND crunchy SP like sounds in one machine. I do not like the bitgrunger effect in the 1000 (assuming the 2500 grunger sounds the same), this 'bug' sounds better for me.
I am looking forward to a new OS on the 1K. But if that takes out this 'cruch bug' and doesn't add new options i need, why upgrade? I don't archive ALL my sounds so the HD option isn't necessary for me.
Isn't that what makes stuff like this fun, to work with a 'glitch' that eventually makes thing better for your methods?

Personally i don't care for timestretching and auto-chopping, never use that. So that wouldn't be a reason for me to get a 2500.
Still, me being me, i might get a 2500 anyway but keep the 1K for this

cowbell wrote:
No, i'm not. Did you hear the effect on the MP3 i made? I took it to the extreme to give a good example of how it sounds, but when applied subtle it sounds great. This way i can have hifi clear 16bit sounds AND crunchy SP like sounds in one machine. I do not like the bitgrunger effect in the 1000 (assuming the 2500 grunger sounds the same), this 'bug' sounds better for me.
I am looking forward to a new OS on the 1K. But if that takes out this 'cruch bug' and doesn't add new options i need, why upgrade? I don't archive ALL my sounds so the HD option isn't necessary for me.
Isn't that what makes stuff like this fun, to work with a 'glitch' that eventually makes thing better for your methods?

Personally i don't care for timestretching and auto-chopping, never use that. So that wouldn't be a reason for me to get a 2500.
Still, me being me, i might get a 2500 anyway but keep the 1K for this

Ok. Do your thang

But times have changed. 12 bit...16 bit...20 bit...24 bit. Which one can be called 'hi-fi clear' today?

jahrome wrote:But times have changed. 12 bit...16 bit...20 bit...24 bit. Which one can be called 'hi-fi clear' today?

If i sample in the 1K it basically comes out 1:1. Not a big difference with the original sound. That's what i call hifi-clear. When i start applying this 'glitch' i can change that from slightly crunchy to unrecognisable.

Since the 2500 processes much more faster than the XL, then I'm sure you can resample the sound to get the same effect. I actually like the re-sampling in the XL, it's just really slow. But, you can get the same type of effect from adding a sp202/303 to your gear. Both have a lo-fi setting that sounds VERY simular to the glitch in the 1000. I tried the 1000 trick on my XL and it didn't work for me. I don't really need it though. Also, the resampling on the XL/2500 is adjustable, so it will sound better than the glitch on the 1000.

roxstar wrote:
Since the 2500 processes much more faster than the XL, then I'm sure you can resample the sound to get the same effect. I actually like the re-sampling in the XL, it's just really slow. But, you can get the same type of effect from adding a sp202/303 to your gear. Both have a lo-fi setting that sounds VERY simular to the glitch in the 1000. I tried the 1000 trick on my XL and it didn't work for me. I don't really need it though. Also, the resampling on the XL/2500 is adjustable, so it will sound better than the glitch on the 1000.

Resampling has not made it into the MPC 2500s first OS 1.00.

There are many ways to get a lo fi sound. But buying/adding an SP202/303 really necessary?? I would pass on that myself.