Considering a 4000 or 2500 - Coming from a 1K

Up until now I've been using a MPC 1k with JJOS 2XL, I love the way it works but have been considering upgrading to a 2500 with the JJOS so I would basically have the same MPC except I would gain two midi outputs, two Q-links knobs, tilt screen and dedicated note repeat, input through and 0-9 number buttons. Now I'm thinking why switch to the 2500 when I can switch to the 4k mand get more dedicated buttons, more Q-links, bigger screen, load samples from usb, keyboard option and the ability to preview samples directly from the without having to stop the music (a big plus!). One thing I know I'd miss switching to the 4k would be the quantization strength (I use it all the time) but besides that can anyone that is familiar with both the 2500 with the JJOS and the 4k tell me the pros and cons between them?

On a side note I was also considering a Roland MV-8800 (suppose to be very similar to thye 4k) but one of the first things I noticed when using one was that when you save samples to the hard drive the samples are not displayed in alphabetical order, samples are displayed from the oldest (at the top of the list) to the newest (at the bottom). This makes no sense to me, I've spent years building my sample library up and have it just the way I want it and to start saving samples out of alphabetical order just doesn't fly for me. I never had this problem when using my 1k with a cf card, I'd just conect the cf card to my card reader that is hooked up to my pc, drop samples in, put cf card back in 1k and that's it, everything in alphabetical order. Also, in the MV when I tried to preview a short sample like a kick, snare, hi hat, etc. for some reason (maybe because sample is being previewed from the hard drive) the first fraction of a second is not heard, it's like the sample preview starts slightly past the starting point of the sample which means you don't hear the initial snap in a kick or snare so what you hear in preview sounds different from what you'd actually import into your program to work with (previewing a sample is pontless if it sounds different when you finally begin to use it). This and the order of samples is something that I hope the 4k doesn't have a problem with otherwise I'd rather just play it safe and switch to the 2500.

I know this is a lot but this is a big change for me so I want to have all the correct info, what are your guy's thoughts on this? Thanks

Well i never noticed the empty space at the beginning of sample's, could be that who ever chopped the drums & sample left a space before the sample actually is heard. I have the 8000, it is a little different if all your been using is a Mp.

As far as saving samples, lets say i chop a break up, kick, snare etc, I Always save it as a patch, so next time you don't have to load up every hit by it self, takes to much to go thu & load drums all the time. Also by saving patches, You can get rid of all those drums & samples on your hard drive, because they are saved as patches. Keeps your stuff organized.

I actually had a opportunity to get a 4000 for $800 couple months ago, Mv works better for me.

The Mv is a unique machine but you have to be prepared to sit with it to really understand and use it effectively. I've used a mv8800 and an mpc 4000 and I enjoyed using the mpc 4000 more simply because I was already familiar with MPCS. That is not to say that the MV8800 is a bad machine, quite the contrary it is very powerful, although often misunderstood. In any case, you can get a new MV8800 for about 800$ you have trouble finding a used 4000 for less than 1000$

The MV, Asr x & pro are really slept on, there is a slight learning curve, i think that's why you see so many on e-bay & craiglist

RTFM is a understatement when dealing with the mv especially, i still open up mine every now and then after having the mv for a while.

picalo32 wrote:Well i never noticed the empty space at the beginning of sample's, could be that who ever chopped the drums & sample left a space before the sample actually is heard. I have the 8000, it is a little different if all your been using is a Mp.

Actually the drums I've noticed the problem with are drums that I personally chopped up myself and I've never had a problem previewing them in my 1k. It's not really like there is a blank space at the beginning of the sample, it's almost like when you preview the sample (before importing it to a patch) the MV automatically adjusts the starting point of the sample to start a little later and not at the original start point, once you've imported sample to a patch you can actually hear the sample play back from the beginning like normal. This is not a problem if you were previewing a loop or some longer instrument sample like horns or strings but for example when it is a short kick sample the first few fractions of a second mean the difference between hearing a kick that has some snap to it and a kick that doesn't. The way the sample sounds when MV imports the sample should be the same as it's preview. I mainly use my samplers for drums so this can be an issue.

picalo32 wrote:As far as saving samples, lets say i chop a break up, kick, snare etc, I Always save it as a patch, so next time you don't have to load up every hit by it self, takes to much to go thu & load drums all the time. Also by saving patches, You can get rid of all those drums & samples on your hard drive, because they are saved as patches. Keeps your stuff organized.

I see what you're saying about saving patches so you don't have to always go to your library to find a sample, I do this too and make patches/kits but this shouldn't be a work around for the MV saving samples out of alphabetical order.

Over the last month I've been able to use an MV off and on and it is a great machine with some awesome features that only it has but at the same time I need some of the basic features to fit me and the way I work. That's why I'm also asking for feed back about how the MPC 4k works because if some of my basic features that I use on a daily basis are going to behave differently I might as well just get a 2500 and stay in familiar territory with a few upgrades. I guess I'm just being picky and want the extra features without having to give up any of the features I already get with my 1k and the JJOS; is it really that bad to want your cake and eat it too?

séance wrote:I've used a mv8800 and an mpc 4000 and I enjoyed using the mpc 4000 more simply because I was already familiar with MPCS.

That's why I'm leaning more towars a 4k or a 2500 with the JJ OS although the MV-8800 is a beast too, it's just different. I wish I could use a 4k first to see how the work flow is compared to the JJOS so I can make a more educated decision, I already know a good amount of how the MV works.

Find someone with a 4k to check it & also go you-tube, there tons of vids that explain the how & to's

Be-Easy

B.A. wrote:I already know a good amount of how the MV works.

well then this thread is kind of done then... borrow a 4k or buy one and try it out... if it doesn't work for you then re sell it.

mr_debauch wrote:

B.A. wrote:I already know a good amount of how the MV works.

Well then this thread is kind of done then... borrow a 4k or buy one and try it out... if it doesn't work for you then re sell it.

Well the purpose for my post was originally to get feedback about the pros and cons between the 2500 with the JJOS and the 4k, I wanted to get some info from those that might be familiar with both, most importantly what they liked about switching to a 4k and what they missed about the 2500 and the JJOS. I know i can buy a 4k and re sell it if I don't like it but that's a hastle, I rather hear from someone who's done it; I wish I could borrow one.

As far as the MV goes I was just saying that I hope that the 4k doesn't save samples out of alphabetical order in it's hard drive and that I hope the 4k doesn't cut of the first split second of a sample when previewing it directly from the hard drive because these were two things I experienced with the MV and I didn't like it. I really wasn't trying to compare the MV and MPC's.

So if there is someone out there that made the switch to a 4k from a 2500 with the JJOS or even a 1k with the JJOS I'd like to get your thoughts on the change. Thanks

Never used a 2500, but I have used a 1k with jjos a lot, and I now own a 4k, so I guess take my comparison for what its worth.

I think the thing that the jjos really does well is the main screen. Almost everything on the jjos main screen is on the 4k main screen, except the grid edit and the pad assigns. Personally, I thought that was almost worth its weight in gold for the jjos, and made the workflow 100000000000x faster, easier and more intuitive.

However, in every single other aspect, the 4k wins hands down. Not only is the sound shaping better, and way, way more indepth, but little things like the usb keyboard, the modulation matrix and the fx routing make it kind of uncomparable to any other mpc, and Ive owned all of them cept the 3k. Theyre all the same for chopping up loops and throwing basic drums over them (though the lack of autochop is good or bad, depending how you look at it. I think its good, autochop is like having robots paint in my opinion), and if thats your thing than Id say the 2500 is your best bet. But if youre into tweaking the crap out of your sounds or experimenting, which I find to be both more frustrating and rewarding at the same time, I dont think the 4000 can be beat. If you want the jjos on a better machine, the 2500 is the obvious choice. If you want more jjos than the jjos actually gives you on a better machine, the 4000 wins.


And about naming samples in alphabetical order...whatever order you have them in Aksys is how they display in the 4k, so you can have it completely customized, or alphabetical, or whatever. Just a heads up.

I went from a 2000xl to the mv 8800 and now I'm using the 4000. Sound wise, the 4000 is ridiculous. The MV has a great work flow and it's awesome for chopping on the fly. I haven't used the 1000, but they're are like the most popular one now days. From what I've read, it seems like a 1000 w/ JJ installed is just as powerful as the 2500.

I say keep rolling w/ what you got man.

manji wrote: If you want more jjos than the jjos actually gives you on a better machine, the 4000 wins.

^^^THIS

Rumor has it that the OS in the 4k is JJ's primary design (the one he got ripped off over) So all incarnations of JJOS bring you closer to the OG 4k OS.

manji wrote:Never used a 2500, but I have used a 1k with jjos a lot, and I now own a 4k, so I guess take my comparison for what its worth.

I think the thing that the jjos really does well is the main screen. Almost everything on the jjos main screen is on the 4k main screen, except the grid edit and the pad assigns. Personally, I thought that was almost worth its weight in gold for the jjos, and made the workflow 100000000000x faster, easier and more intuitive.

However, in every single other aspect, the 4k wins hands down. Not only is the sound shaping better, and way, way more indepth, but little things like the usb keyboard, the modulation matrix and the fx routing make it kind of uncomparable to any other mpc, and Ive owned all of them cept the 3k. Theyre all the same for chopping up loops and throwing basic drums over them (though the lack of autochop is good or bad, depending how you look at it. I think its good, autochop is like having robots paint in my opinion), and if thats your thing than Id say the 2500 is your best bet. But if youre into tweaking the **** out of your sounds or experimenting, which I find to be both more frustrating and rewarding at the same time, I dont think the 4000 can be beat. If you want the jjos on a better machine, the 2500 is the obvious choice. If you want more jjos than the jjos actually gives you on a better machine, the 4000 wins.


And about naming samples in alphabetical order...whatever order you have them in Aksys is how they display in the 4k, so you can have it completely customized, or alphabetical, or whatever. Just a heads up.

This is the type of feedback I was looking for, thanks! How about when you preview sounds directly from the hard drive, do they sound the same as when you actually load in into a program?

kaybee wrote:I haven't used the 1k. From what I've read, it seems like a 1000 w/ JJ installed is just as powerful as the 2500.

I say keep rolling w/ what you got man.

Yeah, if I decide to stick with the JJOS I think that I'll probably switch to the 2500 anyway just for the fact that it's a better machine, it has full size pads, tilt screen, more Q-liks, a few more dedicated buttons and most importantly (to me anyway) 4 midi outs.

Mike Boogie wrote:

manji wrote: If you want more jjos than the jjos actually gives you on a better machine, the 4000 wins.

^^^THIS

Rumor has it that the OS in the 4k is JJ's primary design (the one he got ripped off over) So all incarnations of JJOS bring you closer to the OG 4k OS.

That's why I'm kinda leaning more towards the 4k, plus it's just a better machine over all.

Yeah, they sound right, UNLESS after you load up a program that contains that wav file and the program has some sort of parameter that changes the sound. For instance it plays the raw wav, lets say a kick, but after youload up that drum program, the program has the filter turned all the way down, then it obviously sounds different. I see what you mean about it starting the file like half way through, and my 4k at least does no such thing.


I didnt know that about jj and the 4k o.s., but it actually makes a lot of sense.

i know it may sound stupid but i did the opposite,used a 4k for some year, then sold it and bought a 1k , now with jjos2xl.

the only reason is that i needed to gig a lot with it and that is the only area in which i find the 1k better, its so small.
plus if you dont have a very good flightcase you have to be really careful with the big one.
that said the 4k is still an incredible machine and i miss it a lot, studio-wise. the modulation matrix and keygroup program being the most shiny features, imho.
you have a perfect drum machine with a perfect sequencer, a very powerful REAL sampler that, with all the filter goodness and modulation matrix, quickly becomes a monster synth. try using layers of different single-cycle waveforms and mess around with envelopes, filters and lfos...
you can produce complete tracks with it and entire livesets.
i really will never understand why nukai doesnt want to spend some cash on programmers to update the obsolete OS.
but even with that, it still is a monster.

if i had enuff money id keep both the 4k for the studio and the 1k for gigging...sooner or later...