960 ppq in a 2500 is it possible j.j ?

Be careful what you ask for, there's alot of things JJ can break trying to add this feature.
Based on the track record something gives with every add.

That same argument goes for any software update.I own cubase 4 and believe me there's been some bugs, but they work them out.If jj did this it would be great, and for those who didn't want to try it,well they can stay scared str-8 and remain at a current version or whatever version they fell stable at.The idea that it would totally ruin the 2500 is b.s. besides jj actually does try to fix the bugs unlike alot of other software developers.

i'd vote against this. if they change the ppq it will most likely change the groove of the mpc.

it may overwork the processor and cause it to be less accurate.

bobbybland wrote:That same argument goes for any software update.I own cubase 4 and believe me there's been some bugs, but they work them out.If jj did this it would be great, and for those who didn't want to try it,well they can stay scared str-8 and remain at a current version or whatever version they fell stable at.The idea that it would totally ruin the 2500 is b.s. besides jj actually does try to fix the bugs unlike alot of other software developers.

No, JJ makes the bugs and that's the real problem.
JJ has been doing the 2500 since Jan 07 and there has yet to be a bug free OS.
So EVERYONE who is using it has to make a choice on what broken features they will accept.
There is no practical reason for him not to have at some point worked to debug the OS, instead every new feature or repair simply moves the problem to another feature or function.
It would be easier to deal with if you could at least say smoething like I will stick with version X.xx since it didn't have problems.
Instead you have to say I will use version X.xx because I don't use the _ _ _ _ function so it won't matter that it doesn't work.
This is far different from your buggy Cubase 4 since he is working within the confines of a hardware unit.
Rohan's 3K software works, why? Because that was his goal and that's why it's cost more than $30.
All things considered I guess JJ's OS is pretty good for a hacked $30 job.
If he would have offered a refund I would have taken it.
Again I say JJ can slur the math to change the PPQ but be prepared for the onslaught of problems that will follow.
Send him a feature request.

If he would have offered a refund I would have taken it.

you've adopted a lonely position there pal

I haven't had any problems with the JJ bugs. It is much more easy to work with.

I would think higher ppq would probably increase overclock problems with the processor especially with multiple tracks. I think it is just fine. Most of your listeners probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

Antonym wrote:

If he would have offered a refund I would have taken it.

you've adopted a lonely position there pal

Not really I can only speak for myself, something that seems to be a lost art in todays world.
Just because others can accept the he broke it but he'll fix it is not a reason for me to change my view.
Reminds me of a bad mechanic working on a car.

Still don't let me stop you from enjoying your JJ.
Seems like a Game Show where you list the things he just added or fixed and you have to now guess what he broke this time.
Funny why Akai still has not addressed the JJ OS on any level.
No legal actions and they haven't hacked or reverse engineered his OS.
Strange indeed.

udenjoe wrote:I haven't had any problems with the JJ bugs. It is much more easy to work with.

I would think higher ppq would probably increase overclock problems with the processor especially with multiple tracks. I think it is just fine. Most of your listeners probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

I guess you weren't around for the Input Thru bug, that once you pressed the Input Thru button the 2500 would go into a constant reset/reboot.
The only way to get rid of it was to go back to the Akai OS then reinstall a earlier JJ OS.
If you just reinstalled a earlier JJ OS it would continue to do it.

Doesn't matter if your listeners can tell the difference it's about if the user can tell the difference because PPQ is a work flow feature.
Example;
Someone sends you a session tracked 93 BPM's, now you need to double your tempo to get your resolution to try to do a remix or some drum replacement.
You are going to have to jump through some hoops to make it happen instead of just getting the work done.

How is jj ever going to create a bug free OS when each time he releases something, everyone cries for more features? When I look at my OS version, it says 5.41(A). Anytime he tries to solely fix the OS there's messages like, "ohh, no new tricks..guess he's running out of space", but even if the OS is bugged out and has new tricks, the reaction is, "YEA, THIS IS WHAT I"VE ALWAYS WANTED, THANKS JJ!!"
Never in the history of electronics has someone been so consistent and improved a machine. What we are going through is will mark history as far as musical equipment goes. It's no different than the Roger linn upgrade for the MPC-60. 20 years from now, I doubt anyone will want an MPC1000 or a 2500 with the stock akai OS (even if it was bug free).
My point to this message is that if we REALLY want a bug free OS, how about someone start a "Were satisfied" thread and then we can beta test and bash the OS to death to find any new faults.
In the meantime, either use the machine for what it is, or use the akai OS until everything is worked out. We all have a choice now. How many of you can say the same thing regarding the other equipment in your studio? We've all been using this OS for about a year now and it cost you $30 to upgrade about 30 times. $30 will buy yourself two coffee's and three donuts at starbucks (with no future upgrades!) Seriously!

You still don't get it.
The problem is everytime he fixes something he breaks something else.
That is the big drawback to the JJ OS.
When he said he was done adding features that was a good thing but he didn't stop he slipped a few more things in.
It is in no way comparable to what Linn did, he simply ported the 3k OS to the 60.
It was pretty straight forward and didn't break any functionality of the machine.
JJ should just hold the line and get at least one version that is bug free as it stands now your $30 hasn't achieved a bug free OS to date so we paid $30 to be allowed to test his OS.
He just seems to look at the OS from the point of what do they want and can I do it without looking at the casualties it produces in other OS functions.
It funny math you are looking at since the 30 upgrades were mostly cased by upgrades.
The majority of the updates are to fix a problem the previous version added not new features.
What's even crazier is that when his fixes something it's like the majority of the users didn't even know it was broke.
That explains why most are happy with the OS, they don't use it in a way that shows them the added bugs.
Coffee and donuts are pretty nasty but at least if I would have did that I would have gotten coffee and donuts instead of a cup of mud and a bagel trying to pass.
Oh well enough of this nonsense enjoy your JJ

The problem is everytime he fixes something he breaks something else.

if this were true, we'd have an equal number of working and not working functions. which is obviously not the case.

go ahead and list "broken" functions, then list working functions...

http://www7a.biglobe.ne.jp/~mpc1000/mpc2500/bug/bug.htm

http://www7a.biglobe.ne.jp/~mpc1000/mpc ... 500bug.htm

As what was written earlier, every OS released by JJ had a bug in it. The lastest OS fixed a bug....guaranteed when the next OS is released, it will list the bugs people found in the previous one.

Antonym wrote:

The problem is everytime he fixes something he breaks something else.

if this were true, we'd have an equal number of working and not working functions. which is obviously not the case.

Antonym, your logic is flawed. he didn't say anything about the amount of working functions compared to the amount of non-working functions. he's simply saying that when bugs are fixed more bugs are created which basically means there's always bugs and there's never a version with no bugs.. which is true.

you could start with 100 working functions and 1 non working, he fixes the non working but causes one of the working functions to stop working. there's still 100 working functions and 1 non working function.

it has nothing to do with the amount of working functions matching the amount of non working functions. not sure where you got that from.

so you don't think the system as a whole is less buggy now than it was four months ago?

I think the current OS is a stable as it was 4 months ago. And to clear things up, I actually use the JJ OS. And with the latest changes (changes not bugs ), JJ has added a feature that I have requested for almost 2 years.....

I guess that means I will ease up off of JJ for a minute or two....