Mpc 3000 King Of Mpcs Yes or No and why?

Okay as long as we are expressing our OPINIONS.....

My opinion is that the 5000 sucks donkey balls. I bet the sampling engine is similar to the mpc1000. That synth sucks too, boy does it suck. Unless an OS release gets rid of the parameter stepping those knobs are just a tease, I guess the basic tone is not bad, but you are better off with a Juno, Waldorf, Nord, Studio Electronics..I have played alot of synths and the one in the 5000 does not stand out from other cheap-mid price VA synths...I see this MPC as destined for mediocrity but of course it can make heat no problem. But a well designed machine in the footsteps of the classic MP's it is NOT.

The 2500 is OK. It can pitch bend real time, a major omission from the XL, and the multimode filters are.....decent. The 4000 however has a real z-series sampler, to my knowledge the only non-Roland 24-bit hardware sampler, with a modulation matrix and real envelopes/LFO's. And I would bet those LFO's go alot faster than the ones on the 2500 or even the 5000 but someone would have to test that out. It has an option for ADAT out. But I guess what you are saying is the 2500 wins because you don't need those features, and the 4000 doesn't fit on the desk in your bedroom

Do you want a plastic MPC or a metal one.....More features or a streamlined classic Roger Linn OS....I would be happy with either one (currently have only an asq-10)

Askia Shaheed wrote:We can debate MPCs all day...but the fact is the MPC 3000 is a dinosaur. It does nothing special. The MPC 2500 is the machine to get for someone thinking they need an MPC 3000. The MPC 3000 doesn't really do much: limited memory, no graphic waveform editing, not timestretch/pitch shift functions, no audio tracks, no hard drive, not CF card drive, no resampling, no q-link sliders/knobs, poor effects, limited use of multiple programs, no grid edit, no automation, no recording track mutes, no chop shop, no patched phrase, no auto-chromatic assignment of samples, limited filters/envelopes/LFOs, no global program editing, input thru, no sample layers, etc. So why get an MPC 3000 today?

The MPC 5000 is almost exactly what I was looking for in an MPC because it expands on what the 2500 does. Simply look at the old MPC 2500 Feature Request threads. The almost look like the specs of the MPC 5K.

In 2010, I will be banging on the MPC 6000 perhaps. But until then, the MPC 5000 is the hottest machine of the block and at less than $2500 maxed out, it is actually cheaper than the MPC 2500 when it was released. The best part of the MPC 5K is that it is on its first/second OS release and it is an amazing machine. But I expect even more excitement around Winter Namm or at the latest Summer Namm for the MPC5K.

Look here Akai/Numark,
Some people like myself don't need all that ish to make music. Dude I've owned a MPC 1k with the JJ o.s. and with the exception of multiple programs & global program editing I rarely use any of that stuff. To me 32 mb of memory is already overkill. The 3k for me has the sound I prefer and superior rock solid timing. The fact that it's "nothing special" equates to it not being gummed up with extraneous ish. It's simple and it's simplicity is one of it's strengths. No menu scrolling, No problems...

The Instrument should fit the needs and Ideals of the producer and his music. What is the best for one can be a hindrance for another. But if you wanna go tech and base your discussion for what's best on pure spec, then I would say that the 4k still has got the 5k beat, hands down.

If features are what turn you on then fine, your entitled like whatever your feeling. But all this callin the 3k a "Dinosaur" and comparing it to an elderly person is just uncalled for. It trips me out how some of these new bootie MPC owners seem to detest our love of the 3k when we sing it's praises. Are y'all jealous? You should be able to state your opinion of what's better without bashing.

I for one have never met an MPC that I didn't like, (or at least wouldn't use...)
and IMHO the 1k or 2.5k w/ JJ o.s 2 is a much better buy than the 5k any day.

Askia Shaheed wrote:Its 2008....

The MPC 3000, while a great sequencer, is over-rated for the price. The MPC 2500 is a better choice. Soundwise, no one in the forums could correctly identify the sound of the 2500 and 3000.

MPC 1000, which is identical to the 2500 software-wise, is also an option as long as you find one of the newer models.

MPC 2000/2000XL? Wouldn't be the first MPC I would choose if I am getting my first one because the MPC 1000 and 2500 are reasonably priced now on the second-hand market.

MPC 4000? Akai over-thought themselves. A more streamlined OS and a slightly smaller footprint would have saved this MPC which would still be sitting on the throne.

MPC 5000? The current flagship and obvious choice to sit on the throne. However...it lacks some highly sought after features. If these features are added...there will be no need to look any further.

you work for NUAKAI. you are the guy with glasses doing the demos on youtube.

kneebone77 wrote:

Askia Shaheed wrote:We can debate MPCs all day...but the fact is the MPC 3000 is a dinosaur. It does nothing special. The MPC 2500 is the machine to get for someone thinking they need an MPC 3000. The MPC 3000 doesn't really do much: limited memory, no graphic waveform editing, not timestretch/pitch shift functions, no audio tracks, no hard drive, not CF card drive, no resampling, no q-link sliders/knobs, poor effects, limited use of multiple programs, no grid edit, no automation, no recording track mutes, no chop shop, no patched phrase, no auto-chromatic assignment of samples, limited filters/envelopes/LFOs, no global program editing, input thru, no sample layers, etc. So why get an MPC 3000 today?

The MPC 5000 is almost exactly what I was looking for in an MPC because it expands on what the 2500 does. Simply look at the old MPC 2500 Feature Request threads. The almost look like the specs of the MPC 5K.

In 2010, I will be banging on the MPC 6000 perhaps. But until then, the MPC 5000 is the hottest machine of the block and at less than $2500 maxed out, it is actually cheaper than the MPC 2500 when it was released. The best part of the MPC 5K is that it is on its first/second OS release and it is an amazing machine. But I expect even more excitement around Winter Namm or at the latest Summer Namm for the MPC5K.

Look here Akai/Numark,
Some people like myself don't need all that ish to make music. Dude I've owned a MPC 1k with the JJ o.s. and with the exception of multiple programs & global program editing I rarely use any of that stuff. To me 32 mb of memory is already overkill. The 3k for me has the sound I prefer and superior rock solid timing. The fact that it's "nothing special" equates to it not being gummed up with extraneous ish. It's simple and it's simplicity is one of it's strengths. No menu scrolling, No problems...

The Instrument should fit the needs and Ideals of the producer and his music. What is the best for one can be a hindrance for another. But if you wanna go tech and base your discussion for what's best on pure spec, then I would say that the 4k still has got the 5k beat, hands down.

If features are what turn you on then fine, your entitled like whatever your feeling. But all this callin the 3k a "Dinosaur" and comparing it to an elderly person is just uncalled for. It trips me out how some of these new bootie MPC owners seem to detest our love of the 3k when we sing it's praises. Are y'all jealous? You should be able to state your opinion of what's better without bashing.

I for one have never met an MPC that I didn't like, (or at least wouldn't use...)
and IMHO the 1k or 2.5k w/ JJ o.s 2 is a much better buy than the 5k any day.

This is an MPC 3000 is king thread. I simply gave my reasoning for why it isn't which is what the thread starter wanted. Calling the MPC 3K a dinosaur wasn't an attempt to discredit that hits have been made on it past and present. But the term was used to compare the operating system of the 3K versus the new models. If Akai or anyother company released a new drum machine with the OS of the 3000, nobody would buy it. Even Roger Linn is attempting to take the OS of his new drum machine to another level.

Getting back to the MPC debate....I owned the MPC 3000 and the 2500 with the JJ OS2. I did a sound comparison of the two. The MPC 2500 came out ahead. That debate was put to rest years ago. There are threads about the timing of the old MPCs versus the newer ones. There wasn't a significant difference. The bottom line is that the newer MPCs do much more. They have functions that MPC users have been asking for during the past decade. This is the reason why I retired my MPC 3000. This is the reason why I retired my 2500. However, the 2500 does have some functions that I would like to see in the 5K. But the feature list of the 5K is so extensive, it makes up for it. I am interested to hear why you believe the 1K/2.5K is a better buy.....especially since new 5Ks are being sold maxed out in the same price range of the 2.5K when it was released a few years ago.

The 4K? A good machine. It could have been great if they would have streamlined the OS more and add the new features that the current MPCs have. The 5K will get better with each OS release just like the previous MPCs before it. Just sit back and watch.

For the record...I am a hobbyist like many of you. I have used MPCs for quite sometime and will continue to do so. There will never be a highend MPC that is released that I won't own.

SV1200 wrote:Ive owned almost all the mpc's and im here to tell you that the 3000 is overhyped. Only gritty a$$ sounding MPC is the 60, thats why I always will keep mine as a secrect weapon, i love that thing. 3000 just got so hyped because it was still a roger linn & most of our favorite classics came from that box...as far as audio though its not much diff then 2000's series. ya dig.

mpc 60 power

There is no MPC that does everything I want it to do. To try and declare a king is kinda silly.

firework wrote:you work for NUAKAI. you are the guy with glasses doing the demos on youtube.

Yeah,doin' this gay techno MPC5000 demos

This is not meant to be sarcastic, just asking because I don't know the answer-

What makes the timing better on a 3000? Can anyone give examples?

Damn Jbraudio,
you wakin up all the old threads tonight...

I've already ran through all the new ones! lol...damn night shift...8 hours on the 'net a night will do that...i think i'll slide over to the biz section next lol

Askia Shaheed wrote:Its 2008....

The MPC 3000, while a great sequencer, is over-rated for the price. The MPC 2500 is a better choice. Soundwise, no one in the forums could correctly identify the sound of the 2500 and 3000.

MPC 1000, which is identical to the 2500 software-wise, is also an option as long as you find one of the newer models.

MPC 2000/2000XL? Wouldn't be the first MPC I would choose if I am getting my first one because the MPC 1000 and 2500 are reasonably priced now on the second-hand market.

MPC 4000? Akai over-thought themselves. A more streamlined OS and a slightly smaller footprint would have saved this MPC which would still be sitting on the throne.

MPC 5000? The current flagship and obvious choice to sit on the throne. However...it lacks some highly sought after features. If these features are added...there will be no need to look any further.

sorry to do that 2 years later but ive always promised myself id do

...

1- the mpc 3000 IS different then the mpc 1000 which IS different from the 2kxl.

2- those differences exist at many levels, sonic, ergonomic, limitations (which is one of my main reasons to declare the 3000 one of my favourite)... the axis of this discussion has not been defined at first so anyone trying to push an answer by being absolute and stuff is a blatant troll. OP said right away that he wanted people to give opinionated answers with arguments and such and most of yall answered poorly.

3- it is a fun subject

4- ^about that comment, on a level of harmonics / formants / spectrum there is NO EFFIN WAY you are gonna tell me that there isnt a sonic difference between the 2500 and the 3000. Now u didnt exactly say that but ur answer implies such statement. Any test about a unidimensional-ran thru a basic interface (which would destruct or tarnish the harmonic content) couple bars drumloop could leave people guessing forever. Now try and go produce a full song with resampled parts, synthesis, proper panning, experimented use of the machine, sounds ran at hot levels, etc... get my point...

someone could come along with good mixing skills and post a 100% sotfsynth/downloaded sample-generated wav straight out of a free/stolen daw and leave us all like ... would that mean that any mpc is overpriced

dedicated musicians grow relationships with their instruments.. those who fail to recognize it often manifest such failure in various ways : amongst, one would be to push the idea that the gear makes no difference at all (...). another would be to hold on to the idea that certain pieces of equipment are absolutely crucial to the process of making great music and will make someone a dope producer in no time/effort (thus the overpriced mpc3000s)... to me that is plain old human-brain-limitationesque dichotomy ...

I have talked to alot of staff producers from various labels. The general view is that the 3000 has a swing and bounce to it you just caint get on the others. Slow loading not feature rich. but a beast of a patern to daw device. The 4k is more of a full production center. You dont hear much about it because veterins in the game grew
Into 2ks and 3ks after learning on 60,500,1k . Play n skills are some very very hot producers in the game young and talented with 2 grammy credits. they only use the 4k. Its funny when you look at the gear theae pros use.. they learned on something and stick with it. So, among new commers the 2500 and 4k are there weapons of choice . Based on price and needs. The 5k is still to new to be industry proven.

b.read wrote:This is not meant to be sarcastic, just asking because I don't know the answer-

What makes the timing better on a 3000? Can anyone give examples?

i donno what it is ... but ive noticed the difference between the 3000 and the 1000 JJOS
timing and groove.
i shall try to do a A-B comparison soon.... will keep you posted

jazzroom wrote:

b.read wrote:This is not meant to be sarcastic, just asking because I don't know the answer-

What makes the timing better on a 3000? Can anyone give examples?

i donno what it is ... but ive noticed the difference between the 3000 and the 1000 JJOS
timing and groove.
i shall try to do a A-B comparison soon.... will keep you posted

my theory is the timing groove difference is from how you adjusted the start points of your samples on the 3000.

Co sign person above