The MPC-V: A Virtual Akai MPC

Coz wrote:

Askia Shaheed wrote:Are we talking about chopping or sequencing? Because sequencing has nothing to do with this discussion.

Being able to audition your sounds while the sequencer plays without having to duck in and out of Trim is perfectly in keeping with the discussion. If Akai produce a virtual MPC they need to maintain the ability for the sequencer to play without glitches in all editing modes. This is the wall that JJ has hit with the OS and lack of horsepower with the 1k/2500. I bought XL at version 1.13 and Trim was flawless with regard to handling editing tasks while the sequencer played, but somewhere along the line this has progressively gone to ****. If this isn't important to you that's cool, but why wouldn't you want to be able to adjust your chops in time to your beat?

Also, I would never have any need to chop anything up into 96 parts, and if I did I certainly wouldn't be going for 96 equal chops which is what JJ defaults to. It's far too much work to dial in 96 and then adjust each start and end point manually... not to mention working between multiple programs of the same chopped sample. It's not that practical if you just want to make music.

It doesn't really seem you understand NDC because it isn't work. Duplicating is work. With NDC, as soon as it is on, you can play the entire sample by heating consectutive keys or pads. NDC slices do not share the same sample start/end points while duplicating does. You are focusing on 96 samples and multiple programs when we could just change the example to 64 samples and one program.

Let's put things in perspective. It is obvious that you are a Maschine user. I am an ex-Maschine user and I no longer own an MPC that runs on the JJ OS. You are not really talking about useful features that should be in a virtual MPC. Your are justifying Maschine. Do you actually believe duplicating and pasting one sample to multiple pads is the best way to chop? Is this really how you feel a chopping function should be implemented? I don't. If Maschine had NDC, you would not want or need to use duplicate. Now I could see your point if you just don't like the way JJ implemented NDC and want to tweak this function slightly. I would be interested to hear your thoughts. But to say duplicating is better, I beg to differ. And there are plenty of NI Forum members that also want NDC or a variation of it.

Do I believe a virtual MPCs sequencer should work in every mode? Yes. The MPC 5000 does and I would want future MPCs to do the same. Do I chop and edit samples while the sequence is playing? No way. I am trying to audition my chops/samples and edit. I don't need the sequence playing. I know that there are people that put together a sequence with sounds and then go into Trim Mode to edit samples slightly. But this is something I don't see people doing all the time. Sample -->Sample Edit-->Program-->Program Edit-->Sequence is the typical workflow.

Upright wrote:Reaktor: Rolodecks (Twisted Tools) New Multi-FX VST + Maschine


Can't do this in an MPC. So being able to use something like this in standalone mode is awesome IMO


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERxWGxu5 ... ideo_title

This is not about what can be done in an MPC. This is about a virtual MPC and what we would like to see in it. Besides, current MPCs are not designed to host MPCs. But they certainly can sequence a VST as well or better than Maschine. Some of you should check out Tutor's Logic and MPC eBook.

Askia Shaheed wrote:It doesn't really seem you understand NDC because it isn't work. Duplicating is work.

I should have stopped reading at this point... the childish part of your brain obviously kicked in and replied to my post.

This ceases to be a discussion when you are attempting to school me on gear that I own and use every day, yet you don't. If anything it makes you look ignorant.

Coz wrote:

Askia Shaheed wrote:It doesn't really seem you understand NDC because it isn't work. Duplicating is work.

I should have stopped reading at this point... the childish part of your brain obviously kicked in and replied to my post.

This ceases to be a discussion when you are attempting to school me on gear that I own and use every day, yet you don't. If anything it makes you look ignorant.

Its a simple misunderstanding. I didn't mean to offend you. I apologize. Based upon what you wrote, it sounds as if you are over complicating a simple process based on your passion for another product. The fact is, as soon as you turn on ADC, it s exactly the same as if you used duplicate to copy a sample to multiple pads with minor exceptions: no additional sample is added to memory, and hitting the pads plays back the sample sequentially.

I don't understand the point to the argument or discussion is here. When you get down to it both JJ and Maschine can accomplish the same thing. To argue over the .5 sec it takes to duplicate a pad is a bit on the absurd side if you ask me. Both devices have their strengths and weaknesses. Don't forget that the JJOS is an additional (hefty) fee on top of a $1,799.99 price tag compared to Maschine's $599.99. Again, both have their strengths and weaknesses but to debate a .5 second difference in chopping speed is ridiculous IMO. Ok,....carry on.

Why does every thread turn into a discussion about Maschine?

Ok so there are similarities with the MPC concept but I just don't get why Maschine users can't contain themselves.

Is it not possible to continue this thread without the constant technical references.

We get the point, Maschine has its positives and shortcomings, it's time to move on.

Try comparing the concept of a virtual MPC to the realities of a physical MPC.

The hardware controller could be based on an MPD (for example) and the software?

The idea is very cool.

I can see Akai moving onto a software + MPD type of deal...

Just not sure if it would be any good.

I hear that Ex...

But having said that some software recreations of classic hardware are able to capture the 'essence' of the original hardware, albeit in software form. Rebirth anyone?

A virtual MPC would need to capture the essence of the hardware.

Some ideas:

The sixteen pads/ bank selection
The sequencer
The imperfect timing (groove templates for each model??)
The ability to sample
Import/ export between software and hardware.
Use Akai or 3rd party 'OS' in software
Drag and drop samples - built-in Aksys/ NI Battery type deal
Choice of software GUI - MPC60, 3000, 4000, 1000, 2500 etc.
Ability to use keygroups in all versions
Support for multiple modular controllers (MPD24, 32 etc)
Greater midi integration and assignability for Q-links and external midi control
Note Repeat and quantise
Plug-in or standalone operation
Built-in bitcrusher to emulate 12 bit MPC60
Modelling of the MPC3000 A/D/A conversion
Load .snd and .wav files as well as .pgm and .akm etc.
Must be fully compatible with hardware models

Everything you listed sounds very easy to do in a software.

Not sure why Akai hasnt jumped on this.

They are falling off the charts so fast.

To bring it back to focus:
1. ASR-10 - will assign a sample across a range of keys. Each key will initially have the same sample start/end point but still reference the same sample. My Korg Kronos uses a "Copy" function to assign a sample to one or more keys. These copies reference the same sample as well. Subsequently changing the start/end points of each key is used as a method of chopping since 1992/1993 if I recall correctly.

2. JJ OS - uses the same concept as these workstations but takes it a step further. It takes a sample and assigns it to a range of pads based upon user preference (it can be 2 or all the way up to 64). What is different is that each pad will reference a different region of the sample...thus creating a nondestructive chopping effect. But unlike current samplers that chop, the start/end points of each region is independant of the adjacent regions. So these slices can be modified to actually overlap as much as you like (as seen above).

Either of these methods will be suitable to me to add to a new MPC. All of these methods do no not make physical copies of the sample. This is great because it keeps your projects files smaller. My Korg Kronos will be the last method I choose because I have to copy the sample to each key.

Oh snap.....got to bump this as this idea came true

*bump*

MPC-V vs MPC REN

I remember this...

krush777 wrote:This is the same cycle. Remember those "old, outdated tube based hardware boxes" and "analog keyboards" that we couldn't wait to replace with the new Digital stuff. Now they are selling for thousands. I did it too. But I am not gonna make that mistake again. I will embrace new technology WITHOUT BLINDLY abandoning what is working for me right now.

+1000

Well said.

master-ceo wrote:

krush777 wrote:This is the same cycle. Remember those "old, outdated tube based hardware boxes" and "analog keyboards" that we couldn't wait to replace with the new Digital stuff. Now they are selling for thousands. I did it too. But I am not gonna make that mistake again. I will embrace new technology WITHOUT BLINDLY abandoning what is working for me right now.

+1000

Well said.

"We adapt to see, what we can Master Next." ~ Rakim