MPC 4000 Should I Really Buy One Plz Help

I curently use reason and logic but want to use the mpc just something diffrent and looks like a really nice way to get ideas and for sampling but i have to say im not to impressed by the 2500 so i sold it didnt really get to use it but just found to many bugs etc i really really love the look of the 4000 but i really dont think it will ever be updated the question is, is there anything wrong with it at the moment cause i really want one and dont know wether its foolish of me especially as it seems the roland has more features i just seem to want the 4000

What i have found is I bought the mpc and roland mv second hand and the mv is far more fun and easier to get to grips with (thats as a previous mpc user!), however the mpc4k is by far deeper and more capable machine. If you combine it with aksys and bias peak you have an awesomely powerful combination.
However for me logics environment destroys anything you can do on an mpc with such ease that I find myself using the sequencer of the mpc and logic as a sound module.

The mpc has a brilliant step sequencer too.

The roland is great fun but the sequencer glitches in timing when doing certain things. I also find the mpc quantise always works with my playing however the mv quantise often shifts things I have played to the place I don't want them, I have run them back to back to prove to myself I wasn't imagining this!

Do I think the mpc is all that no I don't. But its a bloody good sequencer.
The rest for me is a bit of an ergonomic mess.
g

Nice one good reply
so in my situation now if it was you would u stick to software or makes things bit more intresting and buy the 4k

giaandjuice wrote: but i have to say im not to impressed by the 2500 so i sold it didnt really get to use it but just found to many bugs etc

I would think it was more of a computer based person not being able to adjust to or vibe with hardware.
Happens a lot in either direction.
Some of us hate computers and some of us hate hardware, there's also the people who try to sell you on both.
Regardless of what people recommend or use it's about what feels right to you.
Chances are if the 2500 did catch you interest the 4k probably won't either since the 2500 still has many of the advantages of using hardware.

The 2500 is a pretty straight forward unit, the 4k is a more refined and ergonomically correct unit, you just have to understand it's 3 seperate devices in one box.
Once you understand that the workflow makes perfect sense.
The MV adds some cool aspects but the flow isn't exactly functional in certain regards, but that's just Roland in general.
There is a distinct flow to every hardware device if you work against that it just becomes a headache.
The MV is more akin to working on the computer so it may feel more comfortable to you.

I would get one if it was the right price but I wouldn't recommend spending big money on it as its the sequencer and the method of being able to make songs in that way thats great about the mpc4k, although saying that thats true of most mpcs. The fact it has full keymap sampling doesn't really mean that much these days as although its very capable without the effects that your used to in logic it will probably feel very basic.

Just my opinion.
I have a love hat thing with the 4k because of what I feel are its poor ergonomics. The mv is much better in that respect.
G

foge1 wrote:I would get one if it was the right price but I wouldn't recommend spending big money on it as its the sequencer and the method of being able to make songs in that way thats great about the mpc4k, although saying that thats true of most mpcs. The fact it has full keymap sampling doesn't really mean that much these days as although its very capable without the effects that your used to in logic it will probably feel very basic.

Just my opinion.
I have a love hat thing with the 4k because of what I feel are its poor ergonomics. The mv is much better in that respect.
G

You like the MV's ergonomics

The 4000 design is genius in all respects - a clear central layout. Even the 4k LCD is much better than the MV's.

Yep to change the pitch, filter amp env of any sample on the mv simply press quick edit then the slider change those parameters..... want to edit that samples start point you can go from that page straight there, the work flow a very logical and the 8! sliders make quick editing of parameters very fast, the mpc is hopelessly slow in comparison! as one screen doesn't lead into another as one would expect,
The mv is simply alot faster for basic sample editing changing of parameters than the 4k downside is its not as capable.
they are the facts as I see it.

The mpc4k could have implemented quick edit functions for the slider to edit att / rel/ pitch coarse etc. but they didn't and it sucks! The lack of a basic inc/dec buttons is also appalling.
g

Good points. But like many gear reviews in this world - it all boils down to the sound, and in this case (being a drum machine / sampler) - the feel of the sequencer.

The 4000's drum timing and clean neutral sound is way above the Roland MV 8000/8800 - it just cannot touch the 4k.

I am not alone with the toughts that the MV has something odd about it's sequencer feel / bad timing. Roland really messed up here.

Still seems like people don't under the flow and layout of the 4k so they take the wrong path to get to a function.
The key is to work from the Program and learn what functions come up with the Open Window button or Pad Assign button to go directly to the sample or function.
The Q-Links can quickly and easily edit parameters
Add in knowing when you can batch process things and you pick up a lot of functional time.
We can go on for days about how people miss most of the advantages of the 4k because they want to use it their way instead of the way the box flows.
It's amazing to me how quickly things can be done on the 4k especially when you use templates.

I sold my 4000 and moved to the MV-8800. There no timing issues if one learns to use the timing parameters. The sound is every bit as good as the 4000 unless you're using 24bit samples ( the MV reduces them to 16). On the upside , the MV won't reject a wav because it's bit depth so the range of sounds is increased without their native dynamic range.

The 4000 has the 4 mono MFX and the MV has the single stereo - i'm not set back by this implementation. Roland gives you the instant abilty to apply the MFX and resample the new sound so i don't find it an issue at all. The actual MFX unit in the MV crushes the 4000 outright.

As far as depth the 8800 is capable of anything the 4000 can do. The reverse can't be said. It's a matter of preference. The workflow is different but very simple.

Coming from a DAW background you'll pick up the MV in no time. I've bought them both and owned them both at the same time. I chose the MV because it outperformed the 4000 or equaled it IMO. The vga/mouse combo is sick but the color LCD is super sharp and you don't need the vga. It's just a different way of working. You have to do you.

* the 4000 OS is dead to Akai so be ready to make all of the nonsupport, bugs and crashes your own. Roland has been very responsive to addressing OS issues and furthering the capabilities of the MV.

The 4000's drum timing and clean neutral sound is way above the Roland MV 8000/8800 - it just cannot touch the 4k.

I am not alone with the toughts that the MV has something odd about it's sequencer feel / bad timing. Roland really messed up here.

Rubbish- every time there is an issue of timing with the MV it is always been traced to a misunderstanding of the parameters. Most don't turn off Input Quantize or don't know how to adjust the various quatising parameters such as type or percentage.

As far sound the Roland is every bit as clean and the converters are superior IMO.

* My only gripe with the MV is the lack of a Digital IN and individual Outs without the MV8-OP1 option installed.

I find MV's VGA output interface to be real ugly and rough

The 4000 has the 4 mono MFX and the MV has the single stereo - i'm not set back by this implementation. Roland gives you the instant abilty to apply the MFX and resample the new sound so i don't find it an issue at all. The actual MFX unit in the MV crushes the 4000 outright.

True in the sense of the MV effects are usable with little or no effort while the 4k effects require more understanding to tweak them to a usable level.
A person may not know how to get a good sound from them or want the effort.
Roland has been a effects company far too long to offer bad effects.
Still would have been better to have more routing options.

As far as depth the 8800 is capable of anything the 4000 can do. The reverse can't be said. It's a matter of preference. The workflow is different but very simple.

Coming from a DAW background you'll pick up the MV in no time.

That's the thing I try to get people to see, the MV is more like a DAW than most hardware so it should be an easier transition unless you were struggling with the DAW already.

I've bought them both and owned them both at the same time. I chose the MV because it outperformed the 4000 or equaled it IMO.

I would say equaled it since the biggest difference between them comes from how a feature is implemented and how the user wants to work.
They are two boxes that should not be compared and evaluated on paper or forum since hands on it the only way you can see how they really go about things.
One of the reasons Roland likes to do the DVD's to show their products in action.

The vga/mouse combo is sick but the color LCD is super sharp and you don't need the vga. It's just a different way of working. You have to do you.

That's one of the things about the MV I don't like.
The VGA can be helpful but makes me feel like I'm looking at a computer so I trend to use the LCD.
But the VGA does make your MV setup look so cool.

* the 4000 OS is dead to Akai so be ready to make all of the nonsupport, bugs and crashes your own. Roland has been very responsive to addressing OS issues and furthering the capabilities of the MV.

The 2500 is the only MPC I have ever had OS related problems with and I tend to look at a product for what it can do not what they will make it do in the future.
I would worry about a 4k running 1.7.1 having crashes and such unless there is a physical problem with the unit.

Rubbish- every time there is an issue of timing with the MV it is always been traced to a misunderstanding of the parameters. Most don't turn off Input Quantize or don't know how to adjust the various quatising parameters such as type or percentage.

When comparing the timing on the MV and 4k the 4k's 960 can make a difference but it's not because the Roland is bad it's just an enhanced aspect of higher resolution.
Both the MV and 4k allow you to take the resolution downward to make the timing of older MPC's so they don't loose on that fact either.
Roland just overlooked that most user would be coming from something with pretty specific terminology and setting, so the way you control the timing doesn't seem as obvious at a quick glance.

As far sound the Roland is every bit as clean and the converters are superior IMO.

Not sure that's even worth mentioning about either of the units.
I can't see why someone can't get a good sound out of either of them.

* My only gripe with the MV is the lack of a Digital IN and individual Outs without the MV8-OP1 option installed.

My issues can all be gotten around using the resampling but still easy for Roland to have dealt with
1) lack of MIDI I/O causes me to have to sample and re-sample things to use them
2) number of available effects and their routing
Some other little things but they are more from preferring how the 4k does it.

giaandjuice,
the best thing you could do is list out what you didn't like about the 2500 and then read the MV manual (8000 or 8800) then go to GC and try the box out.
Thge hardest thing to decipher about the 4k is what's really going on with them
They have been discontinued for quite some time and all of a sudden inventory is now showing up all over the palce plus GC has the 4k Plus and the 4k LE listed as available in their online store.
The 4k LE looks just like the previous LE that they offered before.
Who knows maybe you can go into a GC and see a 4k to play with.

moyphee wrote:I sold my 4000 and moved to the MV-8800. There no timing issues if one learns to use the timing parameters. The sound is every bit as good as the 4000 unless you're using 24bit samples ( the MV reduces them to 16). On the upside , the MV won't reject a wav because it's bit depth so the range of sounds is increased without their native dynamic range.

The 4000 has the 4 mono MFX and the MV has the single stereo - i'm not set back by this implementation. Roland gives you the instant abilty to apply the MFX and resample the new sound so i don't find it an issue at all. The actual MFX unit in the MV crushes the 4000 outright.

As far as depth the 8800 is capable of anything the 4000 can do. The reverse can't be said. It's a matter of preference. The workflow is different but very simple.

Coming from a DAW background you'll pick up the MV in no time. I've bought them both and owned them both at the same time. I chose the MV because it outperformed the 4000 or equaled it IMO. The vga/mouse combo is sick but the color LCD is super sharp and you don't need the vga. It's just a different way of working. You have to do you.

* the 4000 OS is dead to Akai so be ready to make all of the nonsupport, bugs and crashes your own. Roland has been very responsive to addressing OS issues and furthering the capabilities of the MV.

The 4000's drum timing and clean neutral sound is way above the Roland MV 8000/8800 - it just cannot touch the 4k.

I am not alone with the toughts that the MV has something odd about it's sequencer feel / bad timing. Roland really messed up here.

Rubbish- every time there is an issue of timing with the MV it is always been traced to a misunderstanding of the parameters. Most don't turn off Input Quantize or don't know how to adjust the various quatising parameters such as type or percentage.

As far sound the Roland is every bit as clean and the converters are superior IMO.

* My only gripe with the MV is the lack of a Digital IN and individual Outs without the MV8-OP1 option installed.

Fact is though, i don't know any big shot producers using the MV series (other than the hired endorsements ).

All i know is that i see many 4000's in the big studios used by the likes of Timbaland, Kanye West, Duran Duran and loads more.

MV - never seen one in a major studio.

All i know is that i see many 4000's in the big studios used by the likes of Timbaland, Kanye West, Duran Duran and loads more.

Real musicians don't look for otheres to validate their gear choices. I personally buy what works for me. When I bought the MPCs they were the only percussive based samplers on the market- just like the producers you listed. The MV is better for me and apparently for many other that moved to the MV and for those who choose the MV initially over the MPC.

The last generation of producers didn't have the choices we have now and use gear they know. If you look at what's being used on most hit recordings today the MPC is not dominant by any means. FL, Reason , Fantoms , VSTi s , and pad controllers have pushed the MPC aside. --and those items are in EVERY major studio in one form or another.

I don't play follow leader. I leave that game to the fanboys. I need gear to make my music not theirs.

The 4000 worked for me. The 8800 works better for me.

to answer dudes question: If you want it go and get it life is short....too short for that shoulds woulda coulda sht.