MPC2500 needs to read other formats

[quote="

As a beat box sequencer it does more than it's meant to, so it's great in that respect.
Marketed as a fully fledged sequencer is a misnomer in my eyes.[/quote]

The mpc2500 has the potential to do way more trust me. The new mpc is nice piece of hardware but I think it should have a few more features. I wounder what akai thinks about JJ? They probably like the fact this guy is selling modded o.s
cause now it get us off there backs. I like my mpc2500 but akai as a company sucks
I don't care what no one thinks the mpc2500/1000 should read aiff. You should be able to drop an aiff. file on the hard drive and see it!!!

And to me the mpc2500 is way more than a "beat box" the TR-808 is a beat box. The mpc is on a whole other level.

It's a great box so don't get me wrong.
But in terms of comparing it to any other sequencer it cannot even begin to compete.
Even as a sampler it has major shortcomings.

Akai are not happy with the JJ os, that I can assure you.

undersound wrote:surely if your chopping an MP3 clicking save as then 16bit wav isnt all that difficult? also mp3 is weeeak i only use it when i cant get a better source and id only use a tiny part so pre chop and save no problem.

anyone know some free software to batch convert? Cheers

unders

Some mp3s sound very very good, even djs now a days us mp3s, The radio stations play mp3s over the radio sometimes. alot of wave files were converted from mp3. So your really listening to a mp3 that was converted to wave So don't give me that shit about "undersound" its 2007 everybody's got an ipod and nobody's complaining. itunes store sells nothing but mp3s and not losing money. I sample whats hot and I dont give a F#%k if its a mp3, wave ,old record or F#%king cassette tape

Converting an mp3 to Wav adds no sonic advantages.

However, today's compression algorithms have vastly improved so some mp3 files have good sonic qualities.

[quote="Zukan"]Converting an mp3 to Wav adds no sonic advantages.

I never said it did, But what I was saying was just cause its a wav. dose not mean its a true wav. It could had been another format at first or could have been converted 20times. who really knows where a sound has been? or where it came from? Unless you mic it.

And the mpc is the dopest hardware I ever touched don't get wrong.

mdot_beatz take it easy lol dont be mad lol

mp3 loses quality... u should hear that !!!!!!!!!
the diff between a mp3 and a wav is big !
i can explain if u want..
also it's the reason why and mp3 is 3,4 mb and a wav 40 mb

((dose not mean its a true wav. It could had been another format at first or could have been converted 20times. who really knows where a sound has been?))

Well most of the people here sample from record.. means the record them... so it will be a 100% wav with all freq in it.. and an mp3 don't have that... the reason why an mp3 is little in its size is caus the freq around 20 hz and 20khz an above are removed, u think why ? caus the human ear cant hear below 20 and above 20k the s hit around 20 is hard to hear so is the s hit around 20k, so if u use eq on a mp3 u will only here what u normally hear... but if u use it on a wav (that is recorded from a record) instruments that play on the back our other things u normally dont hear will come in the front..etc. i can explain even more abot this but im not crazy to type a whole story here.. google it and u will know

sorry for my english

JJ v 5.39

`TK wrote:mdot_beatz take it easy lol dont be mad lol

mp3 loses quality... u should hear that !!!!!!!!!
the diff between a mp3 and a wav is big !
i can explain if u want..
also it's the reason why and mp3 is 3,4 mb and a wav 40 mb

JJ v 5.39

I know what the heck a mp3 is. do you?

I know a mp3 encoder compress certain frequences but some of them you can't hear with a human ear.
I know 80kbps sounds bad and I wouldn't sample from it, but 192kbps sounds good enough to sample from. So stop hating on mp3s cause some of them still sound good. just like I wouldn't look for a record with the most scratches on it and sample it, same concept. Mp3 are going to be the new vinyl.
Ask any real DJ
So let me ask you this do you think the producers 20years from now won't sample from mp3 they found from 2007.
Who would have ever thought back in the 70s that people would sample from records with crackling in them and think that crackling was good.

Think outside the box!

lol nefer mind man.. i was just saying the diff between an mp3 and a wav
not saying i hate an mp3.. or saying that im thinking inside a box ?
LOL

Pyp wrote:I use awave and renamer, but, if you have a carpet with 8917 hit-hats and cymbals, with names like: Paiste_ride_cup_velo004_openmic.wav........ rename that and change the frecuencies and bit resolutions... pfffff, is booooooored!!!!! (sorry for the english)

Amen