age concern

hi people new to the site and sad to start on a negative note but was just thinkin and is anybody else becoming concerned by the age of their 2000/xl and therefore concerned about how much longer it can possibly keep workin for?

They're pretty rugged -except for the screen issue. I'm on my second 2000 (xl) cos the screen on the first one (a classic) burnt out, but i did keep it switched on for months at a time. Unless someone comes up with a replacement screen for a reasonable price, 2000's with good screens will become more and more sought after

agreed on the screen issue...dont buy one with any lines in the screen. Alot of these machines weren't heavily used over the last decade, some of them still have alot of life in them. You still have mpc60's running strong which are 7-8 years older than the 2000's.

I wouldn't worry about the lifetime of the machine, but you would be investing time in learning a machine that's quickly becoming obsolete. As an 2000xl user, I love the workflow of the sequencer, but the machine is somewhat limited when you look at what can be accomplished with a computer. The limitations can inspire some creativity but I think outgrowing the machine is an inevitability nowadays.

yea i agree about the limitations but that probably has a lot to do with why i got an mpc and why i chose the 2000xl in particular, im quiet a seasoned daw user but just felt that the extreme of freedom that a pc based system gave me was just hindering me as i fell in to the habit of making a few presets and then over using them i feel that with my mpc my tracks are more personal to me, but yea im becoming somewhat paranoid about the age of my machine. It is definatly reassuring though that people are so confident about the robustness of the 2000xl

mQueue wrote: You still have mpc60's running strong which are 7-8 years older than the 2000's.

thats because the 60 was designed better and the 2000 was just a cheap knock-off

mQueue wrote:I wouldn't worry about the lifetime of the machine, but you would be investing time in learning a machine that's quickly becoming obsolete

If you buy obsolete things on purpose then you shouldn't have any worry about them being obsolete

Grenozh wrote:
thats because the 60 was designed better and the 2000 was just a cheap knock-off

the 60 was built like a tank because thats what it took to accomplish the machine's objectives in 1990. The case was bigger and the boards were bigger. The 2000 is smaller and more efficient, years of engineering and processor power growth will streamline the machine. It should last just as long, we're talking about circuit boards.

The two machines have different screens, with a replaceable backlight you can get more life out of a 60 but the 2000's are hardly 'cheap'.

To the OP, if you're having trouble in a DAW and want to restrict yourself (and are a sample based beatmaker) the 2000 is a good move. It forces you to focus more on your percussion and looping, which are fundamental skills for what we do. The sequencer makes it easy to shift things by a 64th or a 128th note, which makes a bigger difference than you'd think if you've only worked with software sequencers. It also gets you very close to the audio you're working with. 100 samples here or there can make a difference.

I started with reason and went nowhere for about a year then moved on to the mp for 3+ years and am now trying to move back into the box.

2000 was made in China 60 was made in Japan

Grenozh wrote:2000 was made in China 60 was made in Japan

The 2000 was MANUFACTURED in China in 2000, 60 was MANUFACTURED in Japan in 1988.

Besides both being designed and engineered in the good ol U.S.A, China's come a long way in the last quarter century.

I am a bit concerned. If Mine dies, will i get another? hmmm i dunno. That NI Maschine looks nice!

mQueue wrote:

Grenozh wrote:2000 was made in China 60 was made in Japan

The 2000 was MANUFACTURED in China in 2000, 60 was MANUFACTURED in Japan in 1988.

Besides both being designed and engineered in the good ol U.S.A, China's come a long way in the last quarter century.

well I like both the xl and the 60....

I think they went backwards with the 2000 stripping down half the features and making them expansions... okay the fx board what ever but the f-rom or some sort of eprom for the OS? them removing that was dumb... thank god they got over themselves and returned it on the XL model.


the other thing is they **** up on that screen model.... they should have designed that lcd connection better. I am quite satisfied how the 60 has held up though... you gotta think, we are over two decades since it came out (it was sent to manufacturing in 87 i believe) and I still use it. what other old 90's machine (video games aside) do you still use?

Fung45 wrote:

mr_debauch wrote:eprom for the OS? them removing that was dumb... thank god they got over themselves and returned it on the XL model.

Yes thank God because it's so much harder switch on and use a 2000 classic comparatively.

well it looks like they were trying to cut costs but still make features available to some bu offering them as a potential upgrade in the future....

having a built in bootable eprom should not have been look at as one of those features IMO.

planned obsolescence