we've been to hard

illiac wrote:My point was that for every producer who is using a 16-bit drum machine, there are 10 other producers using 24-bit samplers in software.

and for every dope producer using a 16-bit or less drum machine, there's 100 sh!tty so-called producers using 24 bit samplers in software that aren't even worth mentioning.

the 60, 3000, 2000 and 2000xl are all capable mpc's. the 60 samples at 12 bit and the rest at 16. the 60 had what, 1.5mb of memory? the 3000 had 16 and the 2000xl 32.

you 4000 users can stop kidding yourselves. 192mb, 16bit 44.1khz and 64 voice polyphony makes the 5000 more than capable, whether it should've been called the 3500 or not. you don't need 512mbs of samples at 24 bit to make dope music. it's been done with a lot less.

so just stop complaining. we get it, you're not going to buy it since it doesn't have ak.sys, or your 24 bit samples can't be loaded, or it's sample rate isn't up to your standards. good for you. keep your 4000 or switch to the mv, and stop being bitter that your OS hasn't been updated while akai comes out with new machines.

and just for the record, i had a 2000xl since 2001 and switched to the 2500 late in 06. i'm glad i made the change, and i was not interested in the 4000 (waste of money with features that i wouldn't use) or the 1000 (crappy pads). i probablly won't upgrade to the 5000, but i'm not gunna come in here and bash it just cuz i'm upset that i spent $2000 on the 2500 when a little over a year later they're releasing a machine based on it for only $500 more with a bigger screen and more features.

Mike Feedback wrote:you don't need 512mbs of samples at 24 bit to make dope music. it's been done with a lot less.

This is a great argument for using an old machine, and I agree with it from that point of view.

It's a terrible argument for buying a machine that was announced at NAMM in 2008!

You know, it's not *so* unreasonable to ask that a successor machine at least be able to load the samples, programs and multis of the machines that came before it.

-illiac

Mike Feedback, you quoted him talking about people using soft samplers, what does that have to do with the 4k? I guess it just says that the 4k (and real samplers in general) have been replaced by software and to get anything more than phrase sampling you need to go oldschool or move to the computer.

I'm not sure why you are arguing about how people did fine with the 60, 3000, etc, if this is about a new "flagship" model with new features? Why didn't you just stick with your XL? Because you desired more. I had been using an XL as long as you and was seeking more in the Akai line. I'm not sure what about the 2500 made it worth the upgrade to you (it all comes down to personal needs), but it must have had something important to you. As consumers, we demand top quality to justify spending more. The 4k users are simply stating that they will not be purchasing the new line unless it surpasses what they already have. (shouldn't you expect that from a flagship model 6 years later?) Maybe the user base is small enough where they do not care.

If Akai had any chance of keeping Roland's foot off of their necks they should brought the house on this play. Unfortunately for Numakai, they've shown their hand and now Roland is going to counter hard.

Interesting Observation: One of the cats at MV Nation pointed out that much of what's makes the MPC-5000 is actually repackaged from the Alesis Fusion 8/6HD.

The standard retail price for the 2500 is $1999. Without question they will shoot for new $2800 (minimum) price point held by 4000. They know there's enough fanboys that will pay a premium to own it first. Serious users will certainly wait it out and let the early adopters lower the price for them. I think the pre-order price is only to fund production. It's not even shipping until June!

* I would turn the OS over to JJ right out of the box and let them have at it. With Roland having superior synth knowledge, a successful rival with the MV, HD recorder technology, and deeper pockets - Akai has no other choice IMO. Otherwise, I would look for the bug ridden tradition of Numakai to continue.

At least it's confirmed that Akai has no plans on revisiting anything from the old Akai.

moyphee wrote:If Akai had any chance of keeping Roland's foot off of their necks they should brought the house on this play. Unfortunately for Numakai, they've shown their hand and now Roland is going to counter hard.

Interesting Observation: One of the cats at MV Nation pointed out that much of what's makes the MPC-5000 is actually repackaged from the Alesis Fusion 8/6HD.

The standard retail price for the 2500 is $1999. Without question they will shoot for new $2800 (minimum) price point held by 4000. They know there's enough fanboys that will pay a premium to own it first. Serious users will certainly wait it out and let the early adopters lower the price for them. I think the pre-order price is only to fund production. It's not even shipping until June!

* I would turn the OS over to JJ right out of the box and let them have at it. With Roland having superior synth knowledge, a successful rival with the MV, HD recorder technology, and deeper pockets - Akai has no other choice IMO. Otherwise, I would look for the bug ridden tradition of Numakai to continue.

At least it's confirmed that Akai has no plans on revisiting anything from the old Akai.

The advertised price for the MPC 5000 is at $2500 now. That is what this fan boy will get it for. If it went up to $3000 I would still buy it.

You should take a look at the manual yourself. The layout of the MPC 5000 is identical to the 2500/1000. There are a few screen shots that are familar with the Fusion. But this isn't shocking since Akai and Alesis are under the same management. Its like looking at the MV, Fantom, and VP9000...same technology and features repackaged in the different boxes.

I don't think JJ would do any better being on the MPC 5000 team. He is still struggling with the OS for the 2500/1000. It has been..what? Two years?

McSmooth wrote:Mike Feedback, you quoted him talking about people using soft samplers, what does that have to do with the 4k? I guess it just says that the 4k (and real samplers in general) have been replaced by software and to get anything more than phrase sampling you need to go oldschool or move to the computer.

he was trying to make the point that 24 bit (which the 4000 uses) is better than 16 bit (which all other mpc's use, except the 60) simply because there are more people that use software samplers that sample in 24 bit opposed to hardware that samples at 16. i was showing that this is a bad argument. i'm not necessarily saying sampling in 16 bit is better than 24 bit or vice versa, just that it's a bad argument. it's like saying a ford taurus is better than a porsche simply because more people have them. just because more people use something doesn't make it better than something else.

i switched to the 2500 because i didn't want to deal with disk read errors over scsi any longer. the 2500 had a CF drive and i could put a hard drive in it. i also liked the direct record feature and i thought that the 2500 looked asthetically pleasing. pros outweighed the cons, if they didn't, i wouldn't have upgraded.

i was just trying to show that the 4000 users need to stop bashing the 5000. i don't believe that the 5000 was made to be the 4000 and then some, i think it's pretty obvious that the 5000 was first created to be the 3500 and they changed it to 5000 for marketing purposes. since it was supposed to be the 3500, doesn't it make sense that it's only 16-bit and has 4 pad banks? does it not trump all other mpc's besides the 4000 in almost every category?

the only thing that 4000 users should be complaining about is that akai called it a higher number than the 4000. if it doesn't suit your needs, then don't upgrade (or downgrade).

i do believe that it will sell, and in fact, it will probably slow down if not stop sales of the 2500.

*sigh*

I wasn't arguing that 24 bits is better because more people are using it. That's a ridiculous argument. I wonder if you could find one serious audio engineer who would say that this is the reason that 24 bits has become the standard for recording. (Not for delivery of final recordings, I'm talking about tracking and mixing, the bit depth used for production.)

What I was trying to say is that 24 bits is the standard for modern samplers and sample libraries. Battery, Kontakt, Giga, EXS24, all of them use 24 bits. Can you make good music with 16 bit sampling? Sure. Does it makes sense, all things being equal, to choose 16 bit sampling when there are scores of good drum libraries in 24 bit format, when all the audio world has migrated to 24 bits for tracking and mixing, and when you can easily get a 24 bit sampler in software?

Look, you can do a lot of computing on a 10-year old computer. They were very useful machines, and a lot of important, groundbreaking things were done on them. Does that mean that Apple should release 10-year old designs and then Apple fanboys should pee on anyone who complains that the thing can't run the software of last year's machine? I don't think so.

Anyway, I'm happy if other folks are delighted by the 5000 and want to buy it. Go for it! I'm frustrated because I depend on a machine for my work that isn't supported and has no successor. I'm willing to pay money to Akai to upgrade and maintain the thing, but there's nothing for me to buy with my money.

I guess your argument is that I should delete the bottom 8 bits of all my samples, throw out all but one program from my multis, and button it up. I'm much more likely to migrate all the stuff into software, even though I don't want to do that, because I haven't found anything that sounds the same as the MPC4K's filters. With luck I'll be able to keep the 4000 going for a while and can postpone this problem...

-illiac

OJ Reem wrote:

illiac wrote:

OJ Reem wrote:nobody outside of internet music production forums care if a sampler is 16 or 24 bit.

You also forget that recording 24 bits and then bringing it down to 16 bits, will give much better dynamics then doing both in 16 bits!

Its like looking at the MV, Fantom, and VP9000...same technology and features repackaged in the different boxes

Those boxes have little in common. The MV is a sampler only, the Fantom has entirely different OS and engine, and the VP9000 elastic technology is only in the V-Synth and VariOS. I agree that using what's at hand makes sence and is to be expected. I also would think that they would shoot for a "only here" type of feature like being able to route the samples throughout the synths analog path - that would have put it over the top . This would give them some breathing room in the attack coming from Linn and Smith.

I did indeed look at the manual. The fact still remains that the HD recording and synth are certainly pulled from the Fusion 8 HD.

I don't think JJ would do any better being on the MPC 5000 team. He is still struggling with the OS for the 2500/1000. It has been..what? Two years?

Maybe he can't do it all himself but at least put the OS in the hands of a team or someone passionate about moving it forward and making it better. If it was solely up to Akai, look at where the 1000 would be. I've always said that the OS should Open Source under Akai release and testing guidelines. Bugs would be addressed instantly and the overall OS can only get better.

I respect where you're coming from OJ Reem. As we know tone doesn't translate over text.

cyrus wrote:i think the 5000 could be a good aim at the vinyl samplerists. I mean, when you sample and chop vinyl, lots of times the only reason i have an external synth is to add a bassline. Witht he synth inside id imagine it makes that easier.

Its a perfect box for chopping vinyl and adding drums and basslines type machine.

I must admit, the lack of keygroups is just plain retarded.

Actually after reading the manual yes you can make a keygroup program using the autochromatic function. It is more of using a drum program with one sample and converting the keygroup from constant pitch to a pitch notes across several notes. I forget the page you have to read it up.

P.S. the MPC 3500 imports 24bits files just converts them to 16 bits at output I read in the ref guide. And I believe that the 24bit is still intact maybe at the digital output going to your DAW. I recommend to check the guide for more info.

moyphee wrote:

I don't think JJ would do any better being on the MPC 5000 team. He is still struggling with the OS for the 2500/1000. It has been..what? Two years?

Maybe he can't do it all himself but at least put the OS in the hands of a team or someone passionate about moving it forward and making it better. If it was solely up to Akai, look at where the 1000 would be. I've always said that the OS should Open Source under Akai release and testing guidelines. Bugs would be addressed instantly and the overall OS can only get better.

I respect where you're coming from OJ Reem. As we know tone doesn't translate over text.

I think Akai has done just that with their MPC 5000 team. While it is too early to speculate, many things have happened over the past few years since they designed the MPC 1000. I believe all their lessons learned will be integrating into this MPC 5000. I don't think they would waste resources to simply ignore a product. There hasn't been an "official" Akai OS update for the other two MPCs in a long time. The last updates are solid dispite people wanting more features. They have probably been busy tracking features users wanted most and designing an MPC that will satisfy their core users. I can't help but to be optimistic. I choose to use the MPC 2500. I am satsified with this products and have faith in the company. I didn't have the bad experience that users of the MPC 4000 and the first buyers of the MPC 1000 had. So I guess I am seeing things from a completely different and positive perspective.

I really can't wait to use one instead of simply talking about what it may or may not have in the future.....

Mike Feedback wrote:i switched to the 2500 because i didn't want to deal with disk read errors over scsi any longer. the 2500 had a CF drive and i could put a hard drive in it. i also liked the direct record feature and i thought that the 2500 looked asthetically pleasing. pros outweighed the cons, if they didn't, i wouldn't have upgraded.

i was just trying to show that the 4000 users need to stop bashing the 5000. i don't believe that the 5000 was made to be the 4000 and then some, i think it's pretty obvious that the 5000 was first created to be the 3500 and they changed it to 5000 for marketing purposes. since it was supposed to be the 3500, doesn't it make sense that it's only 16-bit and has 4 pad banks? does it not trump all other mpc's besides the 4000 in almost every category?

the only thing that 4000 users should be complaining about is that akai called it a higher number than the 4000. if it doesn't suit your needs, then don't upgrade (or downgrade).

i do believe that it will sell, and in fact, it will probably slow down if not stop sales of the 2500.

I hear you, agree with pretty much everything you are saying there. We are all here because we perfer to do this on hardware instead of the computer. Its just that we all would like our MPCs to do something different, but they aren't made to order. I think 4k users were probably just hoping for an upgrade paths for themselves, but it probably wont ever happen.

Well, my personal opinion is, AKAI and Numark and all of these companies have to earn money, so they use technology over and over again. Developing ground breaking new stuff costs too much money with all them share holders putting pressure on them. And people at these companies are probably not that enthusiastic about their gear. You won't find people at - let's say - Roland, who put all their effort in a guitar amp, stuff it with best tubes and premium parts and call it "F*ckin F*cker" (check metasonix.com)

Probably (or obviously) Akai doesn't aim at the all professional users anymore! And you have to admit, for a profit driven company it is hard to build a high performance hardware sampler with 24/96k, Multis and all that stuff when i can have Native Instruments Kontakt combined with a Daw and some controllers?!?!! In most cases hardware will loose against software concerning technical figures. People buy hardware for handling or workflow reasons.

For my part, I hate computers for making music. I will get an MPC 5000 to bang out beats. I have the S5000 sampler for keygroups and some 80s synths. I don't care about 24/96k since it is my hobby and 16/44k will be alright for me. The simple HD recording will be enough for a bit of vocals and guitar or bass tracking. If not I will go for an additional HD tracker like yamaha AW 2400.

I like simplicity and most DAWs distract me with their tons of features. I don't say the MPC 5000 is the greatest thing ever, but it will be okay for my needs. It's an okay machine with okay features and an okay price. Not more and not less!

Hey, I started with an 8 stereo track audio sequencing software and programmed drums with a freeware thingy! I had the time of my life! Don't just argue about the specs. Make some music!!!

Mike Feedback wrote:

McSmooth wrote:Mike Feedback, you quoted him talking about people using soft samplers, what does that have to do with the 4k? I guess it just says that the 4k (and real samplers in general) have been replaced by software and to get anything more than phrase sampling you need to go oldschool or move to the computer.

he was trying to make the point that 24 bit (which the 4000 uses) is better than 16 bit (which all other mpc's use, except the 60) simply because there are more people that use software samplers that sample in 24 bit opposed to hardware that samples at 16. i was showing that this is a bad argument. i'm not necessarily saying sampling in 16 bit is better than 24 bit or vice versa, just that it's a bad argument. it's like saying a ford taurus is better than a porsche simply because more people have them. just because more people use something doesn't make it better than something else.

i switched to the 2500 because i didn't want to deal with disk read errors over scsi any longer. the 2500 had a CF drive and i could put a hard drive in it. i also liked the direct record feature and i thought that the 2500 looked asthetically pleasing. pros outweighed the cons, if they didn't, i wouldn't have upgraded.

i was just trying to show that the 4000 users need to stop bashing the 5000. i don't believe that the 5000 was made to be the 4000 and then some, i think it's pretty obvious that the 5000 was first created to be the 3500 and they changed it to 5000 for marketing purposes. since it was supposed to be the 3500, doesn't it make sense that it's only 16-bit and has 4 pad banks? does it not trump all other mpc's besides the 4000 in almost every category?

the only thing that 4000 users should be complaining about is that akai called it a higher number than the 4000. if it doesn't suit your needs, then don't upgrade (or downgrade).

i do believe that it will sell, and in fact, it will probably slow down if not stop sales of the 2500.

That's what I am talking about. Let's get the MPC 5000 and be merry.