Akai mpc two

Now that the akai mpc One is out, I wonder what the mpc two will be like

A Live with 8 qlinks, 8gb Ram and fast cpu?
Just dreaming of course.

It better finally have a coffee maker.

Lol

SCSI... it’ll have SCSI.

I wait for the mpc one to join back the mpc family, but as I have read through the posts here in the last time I often read that people say it should have more ram..?
I don't mean that in a bad way but let's say you can use 1gb ram for sampling, this should be enough for roughly 100 minutes of sampling time.. Isn't that enough time to find some chops for playing?
Or is it that the fx/synths eat up very much ram?
Is the 2gb ram really an issue/do you often run out of ram?
Cheers

elstebbano wrote:I wait for the mpc one to join back the mpc family, but as I have read through the posts here in the last time I often read that people say it should have more ram..?
I don't mean that in a bad way but let's say you can use 1gb ram for sampling, this should be enough for roughly 100 minutes of sampling time.. Isn't that enough time to find some chops for playing?
Or is it that the fx/synths eat up very much ram?
Is the 2gb ram really an issue/do you often run out of ram?
Cheers

It's not 2gb, it's around 800mb of Ram, the rest is taken by the OS.
And yes, I am reaching the limit with some projects and I started to avoid using audio tracks for that.

Following MPC history, we shouldn't expect a MPC Two for a VERY long time. Better chance of a Live mk2, followed by a X mk2 (name changes factored in of course).

Name conventions are killing me. I wish they would have stuck with the numbers of old. I can understand with the more controller-centric stuff, but with Live/X/One being Standalones again - they should have gone to like MPC 6000 or something.
- Unreall

Unreallystic wrote:Following MPC history, we shouldn't expect a MPC Two for a VERY long time. Better chance of a Live mk2, followed by a X mk2 (name changes factored in of course).

Name conventions are killing me. I wish they would have stuck with the numbers of old. I can understand with the more controller-centric stuff, but with Live/X/One being Standalones again - they should have gone to like MPC 6000 or something.
- Unreall

For me a Live mk2 with more Ram and better Cpu would be perfect.
I am fine with the hardware as it is.
People complaining about lack of buttons, I would like to remind you that menu+pad is exactly like having buttons.
I would just add another stereo output, but I can work good also with 6 as it is now.
We just need more Ram to use audio tracks.

I don't think having shift+menu is the same, even if they are very welcome. It is for example possible to not push the shift button very well and so having a hit play with the pad. Another downside: to engage the metronome, there is no shortcut. There is no TC shortcut too. A button for writing automation would also be a good improvement imho. The less we use the TUI the more the experience is focused on the music, be it playing gig or in studio session. By the way, since I'm not a good finger drummer, I don't why the MPC Live is called "Live" (even if it's a good machine), especially because of the lack of buttons (but also disk streaming, multi-MIDI, descent mixer view, etc.).

im a go against the grain right now....I think it'll be extremely hard create an X successor. Maybe it'll be the same Footprint. And have a Detachable LCD Screen. Kinda like how the Z4/Z8 Sampler Line was back day.

Now Upgrading the Live....Nahhh... I say another Portable Live with battery. Smaller than the MPC One. Scaled down MPC One. With Force Type Pads. Concentrate on Sampling on the Fly. No HDD. Micro SD Slot. HeadPhone/Mic Jack with Optional External Microphone. Keep it in the $300 to $400 Range.

COVER ALL BASES!

Just my Thoughts

I was under the assumption, the reason why they implemented Touch screen technology, is because its easier than pressing buttons to Navigate. Seems like we wanna go back to pressing buttons to access menus.
Sorry if offend anyone lol.
To me...It takes me Point Two Seconds access all areas of the OS.

I kinda compare it to Cell Phones of today. Like saying Apple needs to Incorporate a Dedicated "Text" Menu button because i dont feel like srolling to my On-Screen Menu to text someone

Or a Physical "Back" Button to go to the previous menu, instead of hitting the "Left arrow" icon on the screen

40Beatz wrote:I was under the assumption, the reason why they implemented Touch screen technology, is because its easier than pressing buttons to Navigate. Seems like we wanna go back to pressing buttons to access menus.
Sorry if offend anyone lol.
To me...It takes me Point Two Seconds access all areas of the OS.

If you're playing live and have to see your public (hence loosing less time as possible), I find easier to be guided with the body and let your hands find the right button, especially with the slow responsiveness of the touchscreen and/or you're IN the music (not drunk, but, you know, your head at less beats the tempo ^^). The way that all of the parameters are aligned and very symetric make difficult for me to remember everything (especially the program mode, which is very messy imho). This is why, for example, I sell my Ableton Push 2 (it was faster to click with my mouse because THIS function was at THIS place and this intrisincally made sense). But it's just my thought about it: a MPC Live 2 with more RAM/CPU and buttons

I think the main reason for implementing tactile technology is reducing costs lol

40Beatz wrote:I was under the assumption, the reason why they implemented Touch screen technology, is because its easier than pressing buttons to Navigate. Seems like we wanna go back to pressing buttons to access menus.

Yes & No, there is also false causality going on here.
A touch screen is good for navigation, it is dynamic and can be updated, the problem here is that - at least in the case of the Live, still involves pressing a physical button to menu-dive, or double pressing the screen (which can create issues in itself), this defeats some of the benefits - its the design of the menu system, and the lack of customization that makes it annoying at times, I'm positive I'm not the only one to lose a good dynamic take, because they forgot that TC was on by default, then after hitting the undo button *physical*, going from the piano roll view to the main view, clicking TC, turning it off, then going back, and have some difficulty getting that dynamic play to sound as good. It kicks you out of the immersive part of working in a groovebox. But again - its the menu design and lack of customization - that creates the want of more physical buttons.

I'll keep it a bean, half of the buttons on the X- seem dumb to me, the One has pretty much all the buttons that "I" would add" (a num-pad?). But if they re-worked the menu-system to require less back and forth, and fewer presses, then the request would drop.

As for the yes/no part of it, when it comes to "speed", a physical button just feels better, ask anyone who loves their mechanical keyboards. Its why people *such as myself* prefer 1-to-1 controls on their synthesizers, its not impossible to menu-dive, holding shift to do something isn't a big deal, but in some cases, when its deep diving, it takes away from the creative aspect, and when you aren't an expert with your equipment yet, it is gawd awful annoying. I went through the MPC Bible, it was terrific, but due to circumstances, I stopped using my MPC for maybe 6-months, and coming back to using it lately has been, a process - somethings I picked right back up, but my speed is WAY down as I try to remember when I have to shift, when "DEL" won't actually DEL (I hate that command), etc, and my speed issues are directly attributable to the menu system and having to remember things, hell I froze for a good 30 seconds my first time back, trying to remember how to slice to pad

The Live is a real solid piece of gear - even physically, there are a couple buttons I'd like to add (TC TC TC), buttons I'd like to move (Note Repeat), and one X feature I want brought over (4-OLED screens for Q-links) but its overall very efficient, just trading some convenience for that efficieny - and I can't fault them for it.
- Unreall

c-real wrote:

40Beatz wrote:I was under the assumption, the reason why they implemented Touch screen technology, is because its easier than pressing buttons to Navigate. Seems like we wanna go back to pressing buttons to access menus.
Sorry if offend anyone lol.
To me...It takes me Point Two Seconds access all areas of the OS.

If you're playing live and have to see your public (hence loosing less time as possible), I find easier to be guided with the body and let your hands find the right button, especially with the slow responsiveness of the touchscreen and/or you're IN the music (not drunk, but, you know, your head at less beats the tempo ^^). The way that all of the parameters are aligned and very symetric make difficult for me to remember everything (especially the program mode, which is very messy imho). This is why, for example, I sell my Ableton Push 2 (it was faster to click with my mouse because THIS function was at THIS place and this intrisincally made sense). But it's just my thought about it: a MPC Live 2 with more RAM/CPU and buttons

I think the main reason for implementing tactile technology is reducing costs lol

Touchscreen is good for editing and prepare projects for performances.
But playing live you don't want to use it in a dark club with tension and heat and so on.
But Live is well thought for that.
When I play live I never use the touchscreen, I just move around with mute+pad and qlinks.
So really nothing to complain about that, the interaction between touchscreen and physical knobs and pads are well organized on Mpc Live.