Maschine vs MPC 4000

Can't decide which MPC to choose? Read these resources or post your questions here.
 Reply Share on Facebook
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Blue Haze Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:55 pm
Ill-Green wrote:No doubt, its the user not the gear that makes good music. I wasn't saying my devices are better than the Maschine, I was just saying I can do that on what I got and not looking to spend money on new stuff. I'm sure Maschine can do it all.

On the timestretch issue, I'm not even concerned, but can it at least pitch tune samples? If it can then thats better because then all I would have to do is pitch shift the sample to its original pitch after I speed it up or down.

Cool vids BTW.



It`s all good man. My comments for aimed at Askia aka Jahrome. But yeah it pitch shifts. And the user is really what I was getting at. You and I do see a like if you are good at what you have you don`t need anything else.
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Blue Haze Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:20 pm
All I know is that Jahrome doesn`t know wtf he is talking about.


The videos speak for themselves anyone can see you can edit samples on maschine you have to be blind with hate if you can`t.

Damn i like, own and use an mpc too but it isn`t all that is it the user that impresses me.


Making beats is relevant that is the reason most of us buy the gear unlike collectors that just dribble off specs. Stop hating and make a beat. If we were in person it would be a nothing to edit a sample side by side you on your mpc and I on maschine and do all the crap you said couldn`t be done simple. It is the person we are not in the same league.

Beat battle or you gonna run again. Remember you called me out first I never forgot and I never ran you did. If maschine can`t do anything what are you afraid of surely what all the features you decry are necessary that you have on your mpc and maschine doesn`t you would win.


If you can`t come back for a battle to prove you are right then stop with the bs on my thread.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENN_TGviB9w
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Lotuz Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:29 pm
Ill-Green wrote:On the timestretch issue, I'm not even concerned, but can it at least pitch tune samples? If it can then thats better because then all I would have to do is pitch shift the sample to its original pitch after I speed it up or down.


There's no pitch shift/time stretch function. Of course you can pitch up/down a sample, but that will speed up/slow down the sample.
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Blue Haze Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:33 pm
Yeah I should have say pitch tunes the sample. I thought he meant the old school say like in the videos of tuning the sample to the tempo. But yeah like lotuz says there isn`t a pitch shift parameter to preserve the length of the sample. 8)
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Askia Shaheed Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:54 pm
Blue Haze wrote:All I know is that Jahrome doesn`t know wtf he is talking about.


More untruths....I have never claimed Maschine doesn't edit samples. I clearly stated that Maschine doesn't have the same level of sample editing tools as numerous samplers created over the past decade.

I own Machine and an MPC..as well as several software samplers. These samplers have numerous destructive sample editing tools as well as nondestructive sound design tools to include (at a minimum):

1. Snap to zero crossing
2. Zooming in/out
3. Discard/Truncate
4. Delete
5. Silence/Insert Silence
6. Extract
7. Covert Stereo to Mono (Mono to Stereo)
8. Name/Rename
9. Pitch shift (real time or offline)
10. Timestretch (real time or offline)
11. Copy
12. Normalize
13. Reverse
14. Gain
15. Bit reduce/Resampling
16. Fade in/out
17. Slicing/Chopping (auto/manual); destructive and non-destructive
18. Divide/combine region
19. Auto loop
20. Ring Modulation
21. Sample layering
22. Sample layer crossfade
23. Quick FX/Input Thru (fast sampling through FXs or FIlters)
24. Create programs from sliced samples (across several pad banks)
25. Extensive Amp/Filter/Pitch ADSR and LFO settings

Now...Maschine can do some of this..but not all. However, some of these functions that Maschine can do are not quite as extensive as other samplers mentioned earlier...such as chopping samples.

I am quite ready to break down specific details of each of these functions without insulting or attacking someone. My favorite functions to start with is chopping samples and layering sounds but everyone who uses Maschine and an MPC knows that Maschine is way behind in this regard. So where would you like to begin?
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Askia Shaheed Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:58 pm
Blue Haze wrote:Yeah I should have say pitch tunes the sample. I thought he meant the old school say like in the videos of tuning the sample to the tempo. But yeah like lotuz says there isn`t a pitch shift parameter to preserve the length of the sample. 8)


Yes...pitchshift samples to retain the length of the sample as well as timestretching has been a staple of samplers since the late 90's. The MPC 2000XL could do this in 1999 and wasn't the first sampler to accomplish this. Its unacceptable for a sampler in 2010 to not have these functions.

On a side note: Pitch shifting samples while preserving the length is a major flaw of my Fantom G but not the Motif XF (or any recent MPC..again).
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Blue Haze Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:05 pm
Beats battle c mon son. Whatever you do I can use maschine to do the same.
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Blue Haze Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:28 pm
Askia Shaheed wrote:
Blue Haze wrote:All I know is that Jahrome doesn`t know wtf he is talking about.


More untruths....I have never claimed Maschine doesn't edit samples. I clearly stated that Maschine doesn't have the same level of sample editing tools as numerous samplers created over the past decade.

I own Machine and an MPC..as well as several software samplers. These samplers have numerous destructive sample editing tools as well as nondestructive sound design tools to include (at a minimum):

1. Snap to zero crossing
2. Zooming in/out
3. Discard/Truncate
4. Delete
5. Silence/Insert Silence
6. Extract
7. Covert Stereo to Mono (Mono to Stereo)
8. Name/Rename
9. Pitch shift (real time or offline)
10. Timestretch (real time or offline)
11. Copy
12. Normalize
13. Reverse
14. Gain
15. Bit reduce/Resampling
16. Fade in/out
17. Slicing/Chopping (auto/manual); destructive and non-destructive
18. Divide/combine region
19. Auto loop
20. Ring Modulation
21. Sample layering
22. Sample layer crossfade
23. Quick FX/Input Thru (fast sampling through FXs or FIlters)
24. Create programs from sliced samples (across several pad banks)
25. Extensive Amp/Filter/Pitch ADSR and LFO settings

Now...Maschine can do some of this..but not all. However, some of these functions that Maschine can do are not quite as extensive as other samplers mentioned earlier...such as chopping samples.

I am quite ready to break down specific details of each of these functions without insulting or attacking someone. My favorite functions to start with is chopping samples and layering sounds but everyone who uses Maschine and an MPC knows that Maschine is way behind in this regard. So where would you like to begin?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENN_TGviB9w
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Blue Haze Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:21 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u82-QRHt ... re=channel My man on 2K




MPC still gets love when it`s in the hands of masters. Working with less than all the noise cats claim it needed in maschine. Workarounds are excellent when it comes to our workflow as you can get the sound you want. 64 regions and timestretching isn`t needed for everyone to make great music.
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Askia Shaheed Sun Dec 05, 2010 9:31 pm
Blue Haze wrote:Beats battle c mon son. Whatever you do I can use maschine to do the same.


What a cop out. I could have sworn this is the MPC comparison forum (Maschine vs MPC)...not a beat battle forum nor a work around forum.

And while 64 regions and timestretching isn't needed to make great music...all great modern samplers have these tools as options. Maschine doesn't.

Another area where Maschine lacks is an easy way of layering drums. This is a huge complaint in the NI Forum. This isn't an issue with an MPC. NI admits this and claim they will address it in a future OS update (see NI Forum)

Using Maschine, you have to layer drums using its unintuitive keygroup programming to accomplish this. An MPC 4000/5000 can layer drums via keygroup programming but also via drum program editing which is the easier more flexible way to accomplish this task. Using these MPCs, you can quickly stack up to 4 sounds on a single pad to create bangin drums without the work-arounds us Maschine users have to endure.



1. Snap to zero crossing
2. Zooming in/out
3. Discard/Truncate
4. Delete
5. Silence/Insert Silence
6. Extract
7. Covert Stereo to Mono (Mono to Stereo)
8. Name/Rename
9. Pitch shift (real time or offline)
10. Timestretch (real time or offline)
11. Copy
12. Normalize
13. Reverse
14. Gain
15. Bit reduce/Resampling
16. Fade in/out
17. Slicing/Chopping (auto/manual); destructive and non-destructive
18. Divide/combine region
19. Auto loop
20. Ring Modulation
21. Sample layering
22. Sample layer crossfade
23. Quick FX/Input Thru (fast sampling through FXs or FIlters)
24. Create programs from sliced samples (across several pad banks)
25. Extensive Amp/Filter/Pitch ADSR and LFO settings


I started placing the functions in bold that the MPC outsines Maschine. By the end of this comparison, most of these functions will be in bold.

Stick to the facts...stop trying to distract forum members with work-arounds or false claims. You said I don't know WTF I am talking about when I am giving specifics.....you? Not so much.
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Blue Haze Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:00 am
Another area where Maschine lacks is an easy way of layering drums. This is a huge complaint in the NI Forum. This isn't an issue with an MPC. NI admits this and claim they will address it in a future OS update (see NI Forum)

Using Maschine, you have to layer drums using its unintuitive keygroup programming to accomplish this. An MPC 4000/5000 can layer drums via keygroup programming but also via drum program editing which is the easier more flexible way to accomplish this task. Using these MPCs, you can quickly stack up to 4 sounds on a single pad to create bangin drums without the work-arounds us Maschine users have to endure.
Askia

The fault of your argument is that you think maschine has to operate in a mpc workflow to be good. It doesn`t and on the real since the 3k and 2xl mpc layering has actually gone backwards. From the 1k on up all the drums under one pad uses the same amp and fil envelopes so you have to do extensive editing before layering. But based on the previous 3k and 2kXL maschine is more akin to stacking aka three pads with individual sounds with individual sounds abet on the older mpcs you could hit sync for all three pads to play at the same time. On maschine you play different pads at different times stacking them as seen in the videos. Actually as a workflow it is good as I can take the attack of one drum for it`s sustain and sharpen the decay on the other to keep the attack and blend them better. Layering isn`t all that. I think stacking has many advantages plus I can shift the timing of each hit you to get the sound I want you see many producers using this technique especially for snares.

If the samples have already been editing using audio sampling then the 4 layer is easier but not necessarily better. What you dislike another man can do wonders with. We are not in the same league.


My man Boonie is a great example of what I`m talking about though he calls it layering he is stacking using different pads not all sounds on the one pad 4 layer argument you are hot for.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzTLHyRFVfA&feature=fvst.
Last edited by Blue Haze on Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:42 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Blue Haze Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:24 am
9. Pitch shift (real time or offline) = MPC yes/maschine no. Question do you use it or why not use Sound forge/Bia offline
10. Timestretch (real time or offline)=MPC yes/maschine no. Question do you use it often past 10 to 20 bpm. why not Ableton or the old school way of timeslice which give better results.
11. Copy
12. Normalize
13. Reverse
14. Gain
15. Bit reduce/Resampling
16. Fade in/out
17. Slicing/Chopping (auto/manual); destructive and non-destructive= Actually both have it but we all know that auto doesn`t give the best results. It is better to do it manually whatever the time takes aka happy accidents.
18. Divide/combine region
19. Auto loop
20. Ring Modulation=SP12 effect?
21. Sample layering=MPC yes/Maschine I agree I had trouble with the key groups so I just stack different workflow.
22. Sample layer crossfade=MPC yes hmmn maschine I don`t know.


I only highlighted these as pretty the other parts of editing exists on both units. The workflows are the differences not necessarily the lack of whatever you decry. I still prefer my 4k not for the editing as for me at least maschine is faster. But for the modulation of samples, my similarity with the 4k`s architecture and the mpcs sequencing for my workflow. And if at all any workflows I came across with the maschine I transferred by to my 4k. But some of my sequencing techniques for me at least was difficult for me to recreate on the maschine but it just the way I work. The 4k sequencer fits me better as my sonic making tool especially for me creating a groove. But that doesn'`t mean maschine wouldn`t be a good choice for others as I have hear and seen what alot of cool, great producers create incredible music with it. I would be blind not to see that and they didn`t use half of the stuff Askia is crying about.
Last edited by Blue Haze on Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar

Re: Maschine vs MPC 4000

By Blue Haze Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:33 am
Lord Toranaga wrote:for layering mpc4000 rules.

askia is real militant in his stance, i don't understand.


like no beats can be made unless time-stretch works perfectly.

there is no box to rule them all.


i like to say
make music, have fun



I say the same. I timeslice for tempo matching and I prefer ableton if I want better timeslicing more to me wrap and slice marker seems that way. It seems that the music should speak for itself.

I don`t know but classics were made without all the stuff h askia crys about.
 Reply
Return to MPC Comparison Forum