MPC Key 61: New FCC Filing From Akai

HUBA wrote:Haha! You're right I haven't. I hear they are pretty archaic. In several ways.

No I was thinking more like the EPS-16+. Haven't played with that one either, but it looks pretty impressive on paper to be from 1990, and the sequencer in it is always praised for its fast and easy workflow. I actually thought about getting one a year ago, and not only out of curiosity. I needed a compact multitimbral sampling keyboard with a friendly realtime sequencer. I ended up with a Roland FA06 instead, which is OK I guess, but doesn't really sample, and so except for having a bunch of fancy ROM sounds you can say it's superseded by the 30 year older EPS

KaoticShock wrote:Thanks for the correction. It is 62GB of solid state storage. Is it built in or removeable?

(Also, it's $3400, interesting if the MPC Key 61 MSRP is that much)

Straker wrote:The real point is not the storage but how much the cpu can handle complex synth structures and polyphony.
Just check Hype, which is in my opinion the most interesting one on Mpc and also a sort of half rompler.
We move between 4 and 8 notes of polyphony, depending on oscillators.
That's quite poor for a serious workstation that is supposed to compete with Kronos, Fantom or the sort.

Straker wrote:Yeah I agree, 8 or 16 qlinks would make a big difference, much more then a bultin keyboard since we can already use any midi keyboard we want.
I would say that if they wanna make a good workstation, they should put one more chip only for synths, otherwise we are stuck to a very limited polyphony and stripped down synths from Air legacy of 10 years old plugins.

Monotremata wrote:Oh man the Mirage did all of its editing on a two digit display and you had to use the hexadecimal codes to pick what parameter to edit. It came with this chart with all the parameters and their codes so it wasn't too tough but it was like 'WTF were you thinking Ensoniq?' hahaha. The EPS and EPS16 were way better, just like the ASR. If you look at the labels on the 10 key, each number takes you right to a specific page of the parameters so its easy as hell to move around on them. I really want an EPS16+ one day but I just cant justify getting one. They're not as user friendly nowadays as something like an EMU is, and parts for the Ensoniqs are even harder to come by then old Akai stuff.

EnochLight wrote:

Straker wrote:The real point is not the storage but how much the cpu can handle complex synth structures and polyphony.
Just check Hype, which is in my opinion the most interesting one on Mpc and also a sort of half rompler.
We move between 4 and 8 notes of polyphony, depending on oscillators.
That's quite poor for a serious workstation that is supposed to compete with Kronos, Fantom or the sort.

You make a good point, however; Kronos, Fantom, and MODX can't even come close to MPC's sequencer IMHO, and once it gets the Arranger from Force, it will make that difference even greater. I would like to see the MPC Key 61 have a dedicated CPU (or faster SoC) for virtual synths and other specialized "workhorse" uses, though. That said, something tells me it will share the exact same SoC as the MPC/Force line, I'm afraid..

HUBA wrote:

Straker wrote:Yeah I agree, 8 or 16 qlinks would make a big difference, much more then a bultin keyboard since we can already use any midi keyboard we want.
I would say that if they wanna make a good workstation, they should put one more chip only for synths, otherwise we are stuck to a very limited polyphony and stripped down synths from Air legacy of 10 years old plugins.

I haven't run into polyphony issues as much as sloppy MIDI timing, pops, gltches and hickups with somewhat busy projects, which I guess is more or less the same thing i.e. reaching the limit of processing power. I don't see them changing/adding cpu for one specific MPC model though.

Even more reason then not to skimp on things like knobs, ins and outs if the processor is indeed inferior to current workstations. Empty surface area is not going to help if the competition is already stiff in other areas, especially when the hardware part is exactly where it's possible to empty the gap or even surpass the competition for those who value an effective physical UI.
Four Qlinks and limited I/O may be perfect for a 49 key version. I see no need however for an empty space to place a trumpet on the 61 key model that could possibly surpass the need for proper physical control. Particularly considering the group of users likely to consider an MPC workstation over a Fantom if done right. Let's hope they get to their senses.

johnnytravels wrote:What I really want to know is whether this keyboard version will allow chopping and drum program triggering from the keyboard. Because right now when I add a keyboard, the mapping is a mess

johnnytravels wrote:What I really want to know is whether this keyboard version will allow chopping and drum program triggering from the keyboard. Because right now when I add a keyboard, the mapping is a mess

Straker wrote:I don't know if you ever tried a new Fantom. It's another planet.
For the rest, Mpc is better in all, workflow sequencer etc.
But for synth oriented people, mpc doesn't offer so much.
Then for me is ok, I am not synth oriented so I have all I need now on Mpc and I use Hype a lot plus sounds from a mc707 that I autosampled before selling it.

HUBA wrote:

Straker wrote:I don't know if you ever tried a new Fantom. It's another planet.
For the rest, Mpc is better in all, workflow sequencer etc.
But for synth oriented people, mpc doesn't offer so much.
Then for me is ok, I am not synth oriented so I have all I need now on Mpc and I use Hype a lot plus sounds from a mc707 that I autosampled before selling it.

I agree that more cpu power would have been nice, but I highly doubt it being even considered by Akai at this point. Hope I'm wrong.

I haven't used a Fantom so I don't have much of value to say about the level of synths in Fantom vs the MPC. I'm synth and sampling oriented, and mostly use external devices for synth stuff. I bought the MPC for sampling and sequencing, and even though the MPC indeed offers more, I would still assume most other people considering an MPC would have roughly similar priorities and expectations.

I don't hear about many being terribly disappointed with it either. Sure, the sampling engine could certainly have more adventurous features, but all in all I think it's a joy to work with, particularly with the amount of effects available for tweaking things together. The overall workflow is pretty good too. Yeah the synths could certainly be enhanced if the processor would allow it, but as others have pointed out, the MPC is primarily a sampler, highly regarded for its sequencer and workflow. Which also is the best possible base for building a workstation IMO, as it's much easier to add those multilayered 200 GB piano sound packs later than the other way around.

Either way, IMO an MPC keyboard workstation should embrace the things that makes it what it is, and the priority should be rounding off the sampling engine with a proper mod matrix and continue perfecting the workflow, underlined by the best possible foundation hardware wise.