New line of Mpc?

Monotremata wrote:

Straker wrote:Well, the fact that 3.0 didn't come yet, makes me think that Akai is saving it for some new product.
Also the fact that Akai bought the 4gb soc together with 2gb soc but just used the 2gb one until now, makes me think that sooner or later they will use 4gb soc.
And X definitely need a revamp anyway, it is too expensive and big, the market is shrinking and people don't have money to pay so much for a unit which is the same as One or Live with a different hardware.
So I am quite sure something will happen soon.

3.0 is already in the pipeline for the lineup, it has been for quite awhile. They were already planning on this well over a year ago. And where did Akai state they also bought the 4GB version of the Rockchip? Nobody here knows that information. They would've used those long ago if they had them, the boards inside the MPCs aren't anywhere close to new or even recent products. Akai bought what they have when Rockchip was getting rid of them. Maybe they do have some and will be saving it for the 'workstation' version, but nobody here knows anything about this.

Although there is an employee (not Dan unfortunately) hanging out now on a drum and bass forum Im on.

It's years that Dan said 3.0 would come to Mpc.
The fact that we still don't have it, makes me think they saved it for a new product launch.
And as far as I know and read, Inmusic bought a stock of 2gb and 4gb soc from a bankrupted company to make Mpc and other inmusic brands product and as far as I know, 4gb ones have not been used in any inmusic product.
Anyway, I dare to say that something new will pop up with 3.0 and disk streaming and arranger, making these features a perfect launch for marketing.
A new Mpc with 3.0, disk streaming and arranger, doesn't this sound appealing?

Straker wrote:It's years that Dan said 3.0 would come to Mpc.

Counterpoint: it was years ago that Dan said Hype Synth would come to MPC, and - it eventually did (along with a lot of other plugins).

Straker wrote:A new Mpc with 3.0, disk streaming and arranger, doesn't this sound appealing?

A new MPC with 3.0 and disc streaming certainly sounds appealing, but I'm getting mixed feelings on Arranger (in its current form on Force) appearing on MPC. The way sequences and songs are built in MPC currently is one of its USP, so hopefully that won't go away if the elusive Arranger does appear someday.

EnochLight wrote:

Straker wrote:It's years that Dan said 3.0 would come to Mpc.

Counterpoint: it was years ago that Dan said Hype Synth would come to MPC, and - it eventually did (along with a lot of other plugins).

Straker wrote:A new Mpc with 3.0, disk streaming and arranger, doesn't this sound appealing?

A new MPC with 3.0 and disc streaming certainly sounds appealing, but I'm getting mixed feelings on Arranger (in its current form on Force) appearing on MPC. The way sequences and songs are built in MPC currently is one of its USP, so hopefully that won't go away if the elusive Arranger does appear someday.

Yeah I also thought how an arranger could work on Mpc, given that every sequence is indipendent, so different tracks on different sequences, that makes it harder to organize an arranger.
Also Dan said that they were working on a 1:1 sequences for Mpc, so that every track is mirrored in same order on all sequences.
I wonder how can they do this without breaking the current sequence concept, where every sequence is indipendent.

I wouldn't call the way songs are build a unique selling point lol. Its so backwards really.

ontherun wrote:i think they need to use real DSP for audio and midi stuff, its ok to use a SOC for GUI and stuff.
In the current line even the SATA goes over USB, goes thats the reason we dont see Streaming from harddisk.

Disk streaming exists from the old ATA hdd ages , usb2 protocol is more than enough

Straker wrote:Yeah I also thought how an arranger could work on Mpc, given that every sequence is indipendent, so different tracks on different sequences, that makes it harder to organize an arranger.
Also Dan said that they were working on a 1:1 sequences for Mpc, so that every track is mirrored in same order on all sequences.
I wonder how can they do this without breaking the current sequence concept, where every sequence is indipendent.

The simplest way would be choosing one or the other way, maybe on boot or before creating a new project
But I don't think it's hard to convert sequences to a big linear recording

PS. The Force "arranger" is a (cool) multitrack recording mode , nothing to do with arrange

SakisX wrote:

Straker wrote:Yeah I also thought how an arranger could work on Mpc, given that every sequence is indipendent, so different tracks on different sequences, that makes it harder to organize an arranger.
Also Dan said that they were working on a 1:1 sequences for Mpc, so that every track is mirrored in same order on all sequences.
I wonder how can they do this without breaking the current sequence concept, where every sequence is indipendent.

The simplest way would be choosing one or the other way, maybe on boot or before creating a new project
But I don't think it's hard to convert sequences to a big linear recording

PS. The Force "arranger" is a (cool) multitrack recording mode , nothing to do with arrange

If it's a (cool) multitrack recording mode, even better for me, it is what I need.
I never use song mode, it's really useless in my opinion.
I still ask how can you do a multitrack recording of tracks if sequences are indipendent and any sequence can have different tracks, programs, even bpm.
We'll find out.

Straker wrote:I still ask how can you do a multitrack recording of tracks if sequences are indipendent and any sequence can have different tracks, programs, even bpm.
We'll find out.

If you use different tracks per sequence then on a linear sequencer , all tracks will be shown ,but muted by part (by per sequence length)
Different programs per sequence on the same track is not recommended ,since mpc uses the first sequence as a reference . (long time bug)
Still ,on a linear sequencer it could translate to a group track (or even a completely new track)
For bpm changes , I don't know if Force supports this feature

Straker wrote:Yeah I also thought how an arranger could work on Mpc, given that every sequence is indipendent, so different tracks on different sequences, that makes it harder to organize an arranger.
Also Dan said that they were working on a 1:1 sequences for Mpc, so that every track is mirrored in same order on all sequences.
I wonder how can they do this without breaking the current sequence concept, where every sequence is indipendent.

Why do you think its taken them 'years' to get things like this done? Do you know anything about software development at all? Do you know anything about how the MPC was initially developed and how easy it is to break the entire foundation of it and get it running again? All the while keeping every other little piece of the puzzle that ties into its core from breaking as well? Do you think you just fire up some code for an arranger mode and tack it on and release it a week later? What happens when one line of code you added for an effect happens to break the MIDI subsystem? I mean thats amazing if you can throw the whole thing together, test it, debug it, test it again, debug some more, and wrap it all up in 24 hours. You should be working for Akai, Apple, Microsoft, and Oracle all at once, Im sure they would kill for those skills. But sadly, thats just not how development works..

Monotremata wrote:

Straker wrote:Yeah I also thought how an arranger could work on Mpc, given that every sequence is indipendent, so different tracks on different sequences, that makes it harder to organize an arranger.
Also Dan said that they were working on a 1:1 sequences for Mpc, so that every track is mirrored in same order on all sequences.
I wonder how can they do this without breaking the current sequence concept, where every sequence is indipendent.

Why do you think its taken them 'years' to get things like this done? Do you know anything about software development at all? Do you know anything about how the MPC was initially developed and how easy it is to break the entire foundation of it and get it running again? All the while keeping every other little piece of the puzzle that ties into its core from breaking as well? Do you think you just fire up some code for an arranger mode and tack it on and release it a week later? What happens when one line of code you added for an effect happens to break the MIDI subsystem? I mean thats amazing if you can throw the whole thing together, test it, debug it, test it again, debug some more, and wrap it all up in 24 hours. You should be working for Akai, Apple, Microsoft, and Oracle all at once, Im sure they would kill for those skills. But sadly, thats just not how development works..

24 hours?
Apparently is years they work on arranger and disk streaming.
I know the issues you talk about, it's called developing a product, coding, testing and so on.
It looks like you are thinking I am a kid.
No worry mate.
Have a nice evening.