same sound, different mpcs

yo groove66

You are coming across as a total arrogant idiot. Your descriptions on these machines are all wrong. The 2000xl is thin, not punchy. The 3000 sound is not lo-fi. The 3000 sounds the best out of all of them, hands down. I dont think you know what the hell you are talking about. I suggest you crawl back under that rock from which you came.

The 3000 has converters that are not that good
but that is what gives it its sound

djdynasty wrote:yo groove66

You are coming across as a total arrogant idiot. Your descriptions on these machines are all wrong. The 2000xl is thin, not punchy. The 3000 sound is not lo-fi. The 3000 sounds the best out of all of them, hands down. I dont think you know what the hell you are talking about. I suggest you crawl back under that rock from which you came.

So you call yourself a DJ... You sound like a bedroom kid with a couple of beltdrives.

Seriously, The 3000 is well over rated...period. When i heard that from the horses mouth, i was shocked.

FWIW Most of the big studios that i have worked in (London, Sweden, Germany) have MPC 3000s gathering dust, which they keep for the sake of.

BTW i stick by my words, and the 3k sounds dull, and I much prefer my 4000 sound over it...anyday of the week, not to mention the tighter timing of the 4k over the 3k.

Now STFU, upgrade those beltdrives, and get your ears tested.

Yo Grove66,

I have recorded in many professional studios not just the bedroom like most people on this forum. I have been recording music since the mid 80`s. I record primary Hip Hop and House Music. I have done many remixes in the UK as well as the States. So your bedroom comment is mute. I stand by my word that the mpc 60/3000 is the best sounding. The 2000 /2000xl is thin sounding, and KIKs come back with a tinny sound. Dont get me wrong, you can overcompensate for the weak sound by stacking 3 kiks to make 1, which is a process I totally hate. Not to mention a complete waste of time. Sampling with a 60/3000, kiks and snares have presence, and punch. Only one kik needed to rock a mix. You have got to be the only one on this forum that thinks the 3000 sounds dull. You sound like a newbie with that dumb talk. So go back to the hole from which you came you **** CLOWN.

Obviously you have no idea about the mix process / sound engineering

I dont want a machine to have a so called 'fat' sound, and i dont stack loads of kick drums either. I use high end outboard gear to shape my sounds and i always get the sound i want without resorting to cheap converters inside a drum machine / sampler.

Yes i like a neutral sound, and dont mind the Xls sound for what it does, but ultimately i reshape the sound coming from any of my instruments.

The 4000 has a very transparent sound, couple that with a nice program eq, a hefty compressor, and a great pair of ears (like mine), it leaves the 3000 fit for nothing more some tatty looking cash tills.

Obviously you never heard of the word overprocessed. that is what a lot of you fools do to overcompensate for sh itty sounds. And you know what, it still sounds like sh it. I use as little effects as possible. It has to bang right out of the box for me.

let us hear sounds as suggested by the first post !!!

your bedroom comment is mute

the word is "moot" not "mute" but they are pronounced the same way.

Groove66 wrote:Obviously you have no idea about the mix process / sound engineering

I think most people here are talking about the sound coming STRAIGHT OUT OF THE BOX!!!! The 2kxl, straight out of the box with no effects, no processing, no engineering, IS NOT PUNCHY!!!!!
I started on a 60, it is much more punchy than the 2kxl...but with workarounds and knowing your machine, you can make it HIT!!!!

Antonym wrote:

your bedroom comment is mute

the word is "moot" not "mute" but they are pronounced the same way.

incorrect

punchy

i'll punch your mom

Cap_Ill wrote:

punchy

i'm your mom

Ewww!!!

"moot" not "mute" but they are pronounced the same way.

that's right, they AREN'T pronounced the same way, i knew that. got it mixed up i guess

The Akai s-950 is said to have the sound of an mpc-60, the s-2000 of the mpc-2000, the z-series from the newer mpc's. Is this correct?

And if so, what s-series do i need to get the bottom-end a mpc-3000 delivers to complement the rather thin and punchy sound of my mpc-2000xl??