which one 2000xl or 2500?

I'll say this. The MPC 2500(JJ OS XL)will blow the 2KXL out the water in every category except 3...Durablility, Sound, and Swing.

In those 3 categories it's the 2KXL hands down.

Tapuno wrote:...
The colour of the 2kxl's sound has absolutely nothing to do with the coinverters and circuitry, but rather the propietary .snd file format of Akai's vs the much clearer, much larger and much more generic .wav filetype used in almost every audio application(pc's, samplers, so on). So, in order to get that 2kxl warmth you need to record in .snd format. There is less digital information and it is a lower bit depth(13 bit I believe), therefore making the sound "coloured".
I don;t think the 2500 records in anything but .wav, but it will play .snd

MPC-2000XL's sound character (or any other samplers' sound character) has something to do with the AD/DA converter and circuitry (like preamp circuit in XL, discrete components VS integrated circuit, etc.). It may not be because of AD/DA converter, but each samplers sound different. Especially, samplers and DA/AD converters in the early days, each device had more characters, which was not really desirable in general, since generally you want to "recorder" and "player" to sound accurate.

I believe that Akai's SND sound file format is just a variation of a PCM sound file with MPC specific header data (like loop on/off, start & end point, etc.) MPC-2000 (XL) can save & read WAV files. No matter which format to save your sound file (WAV of SND), the sound character between WAV and SND files are exactly the same.

A bit off topic, but many MPC-3000 users say that MPC-3000 sounds different from MPC-2000. I've never used or seen MPC-3000 in person, but since MPC-3000 seem to use more discrete circuit and better components than MPC-2000, I can believe that they sound different to each other at least, even IF MPC-2000 and MPC-3000 would use exactly the same DA/AD converter.

2000XL uses 16bit 44.1KHz PCM sampling rate, which is same as Compact Disk audio format.
S900, S950 and MPC-60 use the same .SND file extension, but it is 12 bitrate sample. S900 sound files are very different from MPC-2000's SND file. (Aside from being 12 bitrate, S900 and MPC-60 would sound different from other 12 bit samplers.)

JVC wrote:S900, S950 and MPC-60 use the same .SND file extension, but it is 12 bitrate sample. S900 sound files are very different from MPC-2000's SND file.

yeah and the s900 cant and wont load mpc60 or mpc2000 SND files.

mr_debauch wrote: ... yeah and the s900 cant and wont load mpc60 or mpc2000 SND files.

I didn't know that S900 cannot read MPC-60's sound files. (I thought S900 and MPC-60 SND files were compatible.)

MPC-2000 can read sound files from S900 and MPC-60, but MPC-2000 would just convert 12-bit SND samples to 16 bit, 44.1KHz samples though.

JVC wrote:

mr_debauch wrote: ... yeah and the s900 cant and wont load mpc60 or mpc2000 SND files.

I didn't know that S900 cannot read MPC-60's sound files. (I thought S900 and MPC-60 SND files were compatible.)

MPC-2000 can read sound files from S900 and MPC-60, but MPC-2000 would just convert 12-bit SND samples to 16 bit, 44.1KHz samples though.

well maybe the s900 simply cant read the disks.. because when trying to load up mpc60 floppies whether you boot the machine with a floppy inserted or you boot normally and attempt to load programs, sounds, or any combination available.... it asks to format the disk.

yeah the mpc2000 can load mpc60 disks perfectly, never tried loading an s series disk in it though (or in any mpc for that matter).

MPCWeapon1 wrote:I'll say this. The MPC 2500(JJ OS XL)will blow the 2KXL out the water in every category except 3...Durablility, Sound, and Swing.

In those 3 categories it's the 2KXL hands down.

Having owned the MPC 2500 and owning an MPC 2000XL...I can't agree with those statements in any way.

not even the durability part (which is the one I agree with)

I use my 2500 and 2000XL side by side along with my 3000 and I will agree that they are all different. But there will never be a "best" MPC. In my opinion, of course.

JVC wrote:the sound character between WAV and SND files are exactly the same.

This is wrong. Pad up two of the exact same samples, one in .snd and one in .wav, the 2000xl can sample in both formats. The .snd format is ALOT smaller so it contains significantly less data, therefore cant be 44.1khz even if that is what the converters are rated at. PCM stands for Pulse Code Modulation, which is basically binary in hertz, ups and downs. Most digital recording and playback devices use PCM, so that is irrelevant. What gives the 2000xl its sound is most definately file format. Less data=muddier, couloured sound
I believe that .snd is 13 to 16 bit 41khz, smaller file, smaller bitrate, less data, coloured sound. Its my theiory but only the original programmers know.

krush777 wrote:I use my 2500 and 2000XL side by side along with my 3000 and I will agree that they are all different. But there will never be a "best" MPC. In my opinion, of course.

three different sample engines and different hardware platforms (converters,analog circuitry, etc.).

Tapuno wrote:

JVC wrote:the sound character between WAV and SND files are exactly the same.

This is wrong. Pad up two of the exact same samples, one in .snd and one in .wav, the 2000xl can sample in both formats. The .snd format is ALOT smaller so it contains significantly less data

The file size of the equivalent Akai SND file and WAV file are exactly the same (technically, almost the same, because header information is different.)
You can verify that by using audio file converter program, such as Wavsnd.exe.
Just like WAV or AIFF file, Akai's SND format is not lossy format (like MP3) or lossless compressed file format (like FLAC.)

But MPC-2000 does load WAV files slower than the equivalent SND file for sure.
I think MPC-2000 covert WAV to SND format internally, when it load WAV files.
MPC-2000's sample rate is 16 bit, 44.1KHz, not lower or higher frequency, which is the same as Compact Disk audio, and MPC-3000.

Again, the sound character between WAV and SND files are exactly the same, just like he sound character between WAV and AIFF files are exactly the same.

Tapuno wrote:I believe that .snd is 13 to 16 bit 41khz, smaller file, smaller bitrate, less data, coloured sound.

SND files from S900, S950 and MPC-60 contains 12 bitrate, mono sample, and frequency is user selectable. S900/S950's SND files are neither lossy nor compressed audio format.

I always thought they used SND format on those old machines because wave was proprietary or something... or required licensing or some sort of thing like that.. not sure if that is accurate or even possible but I somehow just believed that for some reason.

I'm with Lamp and all the other 2500 votes. I have both and while the XL sounds a little nicer, the difference is nothing like the gulf between a 1000/2500's sound and the 60/3000's sound.

USB, stock CF reader, 4x RAM potential, and of course JJOSXL, it's really no contest if your copping an MPC in the present. I just have a couple XL's because I'm a collector nerd.

Dude....WAV and SND's are very different, data wise and sonically. I have tested this myself on the 2000xl. .snd's are always much smaller(10-25kb) whereas WAV's are larger(usually 70kb-1mb)

moyphee wrote:

krush777 wrote:I use my 2500 and 2000XL side by side along with my 3000 and I will agree that they are all different. But there will never be a "best" MPC. In my opinion, of course.

three different sample engines and different hardware platforms (converters,analog circuitry, etc.).

So I guess we agree that they are all different. But I will never even try to rate which is "better". Its too broad of a "question".