MPC 4000 DA Convertors -vs- MPC 2500 DA Convertors

mpc 4000 - 96, 48 or 44.1 kHz, 16 or 24 bit

mpc2500 - 44.1 kHz

the 4000 sounds way better in the low end puch and the high end shimmer. basically you can really hear it in the kick drum, bass and cymbals.

honestly, I seriously doubt anyone here can point out the difference in a double blind test senario. 2500 lifeless? lol. Cats sittin in they bedroom with shitty m-audio/krk speakers and no sound treatment cannot give a valid comparison. Its garbage in garbage out...there are plenty of successful producers using both MPCs in a studio environment and they get the job done. So the opinions of bedroom producers should be taken with a grain of salt and like i said...there are better reasons to choose one over the other. 2500's converters sound fine as do 4k's. People seem to disregard the other, more likely, causes to your 'lifeless' sound. Take note of room acoustics+the monitors you're using+sample source...then...maybe you can start comparing an MPC's converters.

im sure your beats will sound much better with the 24 bit converters.

vibewithTy wrote: Cats sittin in they bedroom with shitty m-audio/krk speakers and no sound treatment cannot give a valid comparison. Its garbage in garbage out.. So the opinions of bedroom producers should be taken with a grain of salt and like i 2500's converters sound fine as do 4k's. People seem to disregard the other, more likely, causes to your 'lifeless' sound.

I think you fall in to the same category as you described...but that's besides the point.

Im assuming you are slighlty def, or never used 4000...I happened to have 4000 and 2500 side by side at one point, and I can tell you sonic difference between the two machines is there, and is signifcatly noticable

I thought with near field monitors accoustic treatment is not necessary as long as you dont put them up against wall and stay within the sweet spot ?

honestly, I seriously doubt anyone here can point out the difference in a double blind test senario.

See that is the difference. You are making assumptions because you never did the comparison on a good monitoring setup. Don't assume what you don't know. I made no assumption and am talking from experience with both units side by side.

I agree about the m-audio bedroom comment but if I can actually hear the difference on my setup and you can't then who has an inferior monitoring setup? Maybe you were talking about yourself.

Of course the 2500 sounds good enough to get the job done. I know a few songs made on that. But this is a comparison on what sounds better and the 4k wins.

Okay I'm not getting something . I understand somewhat how room acoustics and cheaper monitors can affect your MIX , but how in the hell can it affect the sound you get out of your sampler ? If I'm using a decent cartridge , decent mixer , decent vinyl , sample with the right methods , my samples will sound decent no matter how my room is treated or what monitors I use . Therefore if my sound is fat from the bat , wouldn't this make it easier to get a decent mix provided I understand a little something about mixing ?

The monitoring setup does not effect what goes in. Just effects what you can hear. If you use cheap Hosa cables and listen back through the speakers that came with your computer, you won't hear what is going on accurately. This will affect your mixes like you said but also you won't be able to tell the difference between the sound of an MPC4k and a 2500. They will both sound equally bad using the same samples because your monitoring chain won't let you hear the difference.

If you use cheap Hosa cables

to further complicate this discussion, pros couldn't tell the difference between monster/mogami and a clothes hanger...

http://boingboing.net/2008/03/03/do-coa ... -soun.html

does anybody know the exact convertors used in both machines?