whats the best way to convert wav sounds threw a 3000?

Just bought a 3000for 760 and gonna get a zip or card reader and that mpc software for mac but not sure.about getting the full 3000 sound. If i just converted a program in the software and loaded them up in the 3000 would there be a difference than actually sampling in the 3000 first than make a program in the mpc? Kinda one of those debating questions of the 3000s sound and how they make drums punchy but i would like to know please.

I thought we discussed this in the other thread.. that was you right?

you could try and find some app that will set up your programs for your pre-chopped samples you made in recycle... sure... but then why did you get a 3000? You could have done a lot more with a 1000 or 2500 for the same price.

the thing that makes samples sound so good coming from old samplers is the entire path (or journey) the sample takes through the old school electrical circuitry, converters, etc...

the record inputs on the 3000 are a big part of how the machine sounds...


I dont get what people's huge gripe with sampling 1 second kick drums, and 3 second samples... it's faster than spending years playing with computer programs so you can do the least amount of work possible on the actual mpc... why not just use cubase or fl studio and get yourself the tonebooster timemachine pluggin?

I really wanna keep away from the computer for my hardware beats

I really do zone out when im just on hardware and felt it with the 4000 but fate said that i just told me that mpc wasnt for me. And all im really gonna do on that software is orginize my programs and then import back into the mpc. Oh and it says that the 3000 cant read wav they have to be snd to be able to read. So a few programs prefferly old school kits ill sample threw and some 808s the rest ill just keep there sound.

dmajor100 wrote:I really wanna keep away from the computer for my hardware beats

well the 3000 will do that for you... you sample in to it.. boom it's on a pad, you can trim the sound to the right size and you are good... next sound: rinse/repeat...

okay after you may want to record that into the computer.. or even, you may want to run your itunes/WMP/VLC from the computer to sample that into the mpc if you aren't using vinyl... but that is no problem either. Sampling is not the crazy time consuming task you think it is when considering all these converters and program builders....

Yeah i read there is a function in the 3000 that begins on the aound exactly leaving no dead space in front of it, a bit of trim at the end and thats it i guess. yes very easy but very time consuming to do enough kits for my liking.

Big question here for the 3000 and any Other mpc. Can u assign a pad to individual output rather than track? I alwaya thought u had to put sounds on seperate tracks so they can get there own output.

p.s.ps doea the 3000 have auto load all my programs will be loaded as soon as i start it?

dmajor100 wrote:Yeah i read there is a function in the 3000 that begins on the aound exactly leaving no dead space in front of it, a bit of trim at the end and thats it i guess. yes very easy but very time consuming to do enough kits for my liking.

Big question here for the 3000 and any Other mpc. Can u assign a pad to individual output rather than track? I alwaya thought u had to put sounds on seperate tracks so they can get there own output.

p.s.ps doea the 3000 have auto load all my programs will be loaded as soon as i start it?

okay for the first part... yes even the older mpc 60 had a thing where once it detects a sound coming in... it will record it. it is easy to do and use.

for your problem with wanting to make a bunch of drum sample kits.. I highly suggest you dont waste your time or money buying floppy disks or zips to fill with drum sounds. You wont be using 90% of those drums in actual songs... you are better off honestly recording/sampling the ones from the computer that sound good over the beat... sample them as you need them.

now, for the tracks/pads... you are correct. sending stuff to the individual outputs is done by the pad, not by the track. if the sound is mono (like most of your drum sounds should be...) it will take up 1 output. if your sound is stereo (which may sometimes happen for samples or things that have panning in them so you require stereo... which takes up twice the memory as mono samples by the way) they will take up 2 outputs... so you will need to choose 1/2, 3/4, 5/6, 7/8...

autoload.. if you start the machine with the disk inserted... it will load up the program, but not the sequence or params data... you will need to go to disk and do that manually I believe.

mr_debauch wrote:

dmajor100 wrote:Yeah i read there is a function in the 3000 that begins on the aound exactly leaving no dead space in front of it, a bit of trim at the end and thats it i guess. ?

okay for the first part... yes even the older mpc 60 had a thing where once it detects a sound coming in... it will record it. it is easy to do and use.

I think he was referring to the "Best Start" function not the sampling threshold.
Akai somehow figure that once they added visual waveform that it wasn't a necessary feature anymore.

Just gives the 60/3k samples a certain tightness without making them choppy based on attack once you get use to how to apply it to your chops.

mr_debauch wrote:
I dont get what people's huge gripe with sampling 1 second kick drums, and 3 second samples... it's faster than spending years playing with computer programs so you can do the least amount of work possible on the actual mpc... why not just use cubase or fl studio and get yourself the tonebooster timemachine pluggin?

The 3k is a killer box if you are a 3k person, if not then it a very frustrating box by most modern mentalities.

Take a kick from vinyl or even from another device, sample it into both the 3k and the computer.
Now convert it and load it into the 3k and compare the 2.
If you don't hear a difference then the 3k isn't for you.

The problem is the internet confuses people.
It constantly keeps making people think speed, speed and more speed, then it tells you about that classic sh*t .

People just have to understand that you have to make choices based on reality.
The reason most of use have 5 MPs, a SP, Maschine a MV etc is because we learned that the real deal on a device is what it doesn't do not what it does.
That's what really defines your methods when using it.
I can jump on Maschine and knock out a complete song in no time and it's already in the computer no tracking needed.

BUT

I might also understand that to get some element to sound how I really want or a certain feel doing certain parts on a hardware device is better.
Does it take longer if I use the hardware probably not since I already knew to use it along the way.
I could load the exact same samples in the 60 and 1k but the workflow of the box will make me think to do different things.
Same is true with all MPs, the man may control the machine but the machine governs the man.

Technology has really made people lazy.
It used to be create a kick to fit a song now it's more like where can I download that kick.

ntalec wrote:I could load the exact same samples in the 60 and 1k but the workflow of the box will make me think to do different things.
Same is true with all MPs, the man may control the machine but the machine governs the man.

exactly my point of view as well... ^^^


i guess i just figure that if you ar egonna do 90% of the programming and editing on the computer... what is the point of wasting time bringing it to the mpc.. I mean, sure the sequencer is fun... but you could just run geist or what ever controlled by the mpc.. no? I personally dont do all this syncing and stuff people seem to think they need to do.. or transferring. Not for this guy here, but in other threads made by new comers I notice a lot of guys are so caught up in transferring the sounds to play on the pads.. like, the mpc is only there so they can make a youtube video or something. I dunno.. I use a lot of software too, and when I use software... I use software. When I use hardware, I use hardware.

I understand what yall guys are talking about about lazyness and not appricating the old school

yes mr d, i'm one of those who's a bit obsessed with chopping samples..that is the 1 only thing that the 3000 frustrates me with.. it;s my first bit of serious hardware and i love the work flow and the old skoolness and zip discs don't p me off too much... but chopping 32 parts of a sample is just sooo long it does kill the moment a bit! i've been considering a 2nd machine just to sample and chop more quickly, just as a slave to the 3000. But you've just answered my question about the sound - if it's different then i'm gonna have to stick with it - and from what you say i need to learn the best start function!! back to the manual..

Precise setting of enveloppe, filter, resonnance, and delay effect will always have 1000x more impact on what you hear than any way you just "transfer or sample" a sound into an MPC3000.

Sounds to me you're taking more steps than you have to
like it was stated above, if you want that feel and sound you have to sample in to your MP, a computer program can't do that for you