MPC 3000 Vintage Mode Samples

The other things about samplers which is rarely addressed is ...

The digital summing engine.

Ever heard about back in the day how certain big time engineers wouldn't use certain software because they didn't like the summing of the software? Well this stuff is very real and not pseudo science.

There is certainly something in the way old samplers were coded with regards to their summing. People rarely consider this when accounting for the sound of something. This is why I said from the beginning a whole beat is needed to really test the way these things sound.

There is something about old samplers like MPC3000 and ASR10 and the way there coding (not just their digital and analog circuitry) affected the stereo output of the beat. The limitations of software at the time added to the nuances of the sound. You can't brush that stuff off as insignificant. It's completely pertinent to the sounds of these old school samplers.

One thing though the OP got correct is that you probably need the Ren and 3000 next to one another to really know. Otherwise you'd need to be extremely familiar with the sound of the MPC3000 to make a call. So you can buy both (and flap your trap about that) or go to Tokyo (or wherever) and do some listening tests.

OR . . .

Get your advice and information from someone who KNOWS what they are doing/talking about, has no ulterior motive, isn't a fanboy and more interested in informed, non biased information. They do exist but they are hard to find amongst the waffle sometimes.

OR

Keep your current MPC and just make beats and avoid buying into this overpriced/overhyped piece of kit. Just to get one thing clear, just because I don't like the price of this thing or the hype, doesn't mean I don't like it as a tool. If you already have a soundcard, I'd advise waiting for the Studio.

The "Snoop Lion Pan FX" are now shifted to the left on example Y and now there's digital distortion on the samples. I'm not trying to be a jerk but how are onlookers and the few who are interested to do a listening test when the defects in the audio are more pronounced than what we're supposed to be listening for?

I initially pointed out the issues not to be negative but just in case they were not noticed by the OP. However, it seems that they are apparently a part of his "hypothesis".

At the end of the day though, at least in this instance, vintage mode is moot. The real question is: Does either of these samples actually sound good or have anything desirable sonically? For me, the answer is a resounding and unquantifiable "no". That's not to say that others can't get a great sound out of the emulation and of course the originals but in this instance it does invalidate the merits of this particular test, to me personally. To each their own though, I will leave you guys to it.

tapedeck wrote:wow.
fail at adding 'differences are negligible' option to the poll after you already been running it another way.

Since this is a test about an emulation, there are those that may make an assessment that they sound the same or close to it. That option was requested by a forum member so I added it as it make sense.

As I stated earlier, it doesn't matter what sample I choose. One or more forum members will find something else to discredit the test. The test is not fixed. What you are hearing is the exact same sample playing in both MPCs. To make sure it is exact as possible, I use the same cables going into the same audio interface channels to record into Pro Tools 10. I recorded at -3 db to ensure there is no clipping (previous test recorded at 0 db).

Seems a bit flawed to not sample into a sampler i think, christ, thats like listening through the sample-window.

I'd like to see a real test of this tho, with 45rpm+8% included.

So what was the result of the first test?i chose x i think altho the test was flawed id like to kno.Thanx

There is barely any difference between the two. If you really scrutinize the samples, then yes, one sounds a tiny bit different. The consumer won't know the difference. I can't believe this topic got 7 pages of responses.

roxstar wrote:There is barely any difference between the two. If you really scrutinize the samples, then yes, one sounds a tiny bit different. The consumer won't know the difference. I can't believe this topic got 7 pages of responses.

Some people like myself, really enjoy tech.

sensei wrote:a whole beat is needed to really test the way these things sound.

AMEN!

i really hope we can find a forum member who is a beat maker, a ren & 3000 owner and as unbiased as it gets!

roxstar wrote:There is barely any difference between the two. If you really scrutinize the samples, then yes, one sounds a tiny bit different. The consumer won't know the difference. I can't believe this topic got 7 pages of responses.

There was a test before this.The answer did not come by the look of things.Jah?

The thing is that it should not be a contest to try to find what file is the 3000 and what is the ren. Any good testing involves multiple steps:

Test #1- take a sound file, load the exact same file in the 3000 and ren, and record the output. Then provide the identified files to people so they can judge themselves.

Test #2- record the same audio sample from the 3000 input and from the 3000 input, then record the output. Again provide the identified files to people so they can judge themselves.

just my opinion..

toxicc wrote:The thing is that it should not be a contest to try to find what file is the 3000 and what is the ren. Any good testing involves multiple steps:

Test #1- take a sound file, load the exact same file in the 3000 and ren, and record the output. Then provide the identified files to people so they can judge themselves.

Test #2- record the same audio sample from the 3000 input and from the 3000 input, then record the output. Again provide the identified files to people so they can judge themselves.

just my opinion..

Co-sign. Making it a "game show" serves less purpose. That and the samples should be recorded to the machines rather than loaded as has been mentioned to death.

dryad-66 wrote:So what was the result of the first test?i chose x i think altho the test was flawed id like to kno.Thanx

I posted the results of the first test twice:

Below are audio samples from the MPC 3000 and the MPC 3000 emulation. These audio files were recorded from the analog outs of the MPC Ren and MPC 3000 into Pro Tools 10 via a Universal Audio Apollo audio interface.

Test#1 Results (20 participants):
40% of the forum members participating (8) correctly selected MPC Y as the MPC 3000.

60% of the forum members participating (12) incorrectly selected MPC X as the MPC 3000.

MPC Renaissaance is:
http://soundcloud.com/jahrome-1/mpc-x

MPC 3000 is:
http://soundcloud.com/jahrome-1/mpc-y

marrelarre wrote:Seems a bit flawed to not sample into a sampler i think, christ, thats like listening through the sample-window.

I'd like to see a real test of this tho, with 45rpm+8% included.

The MPC 3000 Vintage Mode models the output characteristics of the MPC 3000. It doesn't model the input and the output characteristics.

This test compares the MPC 3000 DA versus the MPC Ren DA with Vintage Mode applied. Nothing more nothing less.

Metatron72 wrote:Co-sign. Making it a "game show" serves less purpose. That and the samples should be recorded to the machines rather than loaded as has been mentioned to death.

I will consider that for my next test.

JAH wrote:The MPC 3000 Vintage Mode models the output characteristics of the MPC 3000. It doesn't model the input and the output characteristics.

actually it's a little unclear exactly what vintage mode models. akai claimed it modeled the "output circuitry" but later backed out of that claim, and the recent teardown by a fellow member showed that the Ren outputs seemed like those of a standard audio interface. so that leaves the software emulation which we do not know either what part of the MPC3000 exactly it emulates. only we can figure this out for ourselves (unless akai is willing to go into specifics) which is why it would definitely be interesting imo to do a test sampling into both Ren & 3000. just putting it out there (no flaming)

daftmunk wrote:

JAH wrote:The MPC 3000 Vintage Mode models the output characteristics of the MPC 3000. It doesn't model the input and the output characteristics.

we do not know either what part of the MPC3000 exactly it emulates.

I do know. It is the emulation of the output character of the MPC 3000.

JAH wrote:

daftmunk wrote:

JAH wrote:The MPC 3000 Vintage Mode models the output characteristics of the MPC 3000. It doesn't model the input and the output characteristics.

we do not know either what part of the MPC3000 exactly it emulates.

I do know. It is the emulation of the output character of the MPC 3000.

care to elaborate?