Is the REN doomed to fail in the market?

scoobylol wrote:1. I'd wager that most people who would consider spending that much money already have an audio interface of sorts. I wouldn't consider the Ren an entry level product afterall, it's the new flagship model. Also as you've mentioned yourself if you're doing everything in the box in a Maschine-esque fashion then surely the ins/outs are redundant to a point?

2. And I mean really, the same ins/outs from a machine made in '97? No idea who's supplying Akai but I will find them components at half the price if they need to mark-up the Ren that much haha.

3. Honestly, I just don't see what the fuss is about Hell. Call it an MPD XL and stop trying to cash in on a moniker that died with the 5000 IMO.

JAH wrote:
Nearly every model MPC uses a different program or project format. So its impossible for projects on one MPC to translate perfectly to another. Some MPCs have multiple LFOs and/or multiple Filters (MPC 4000 and 2500). The MPC 5000 doesn't have these capabilities so its possible that loading music created on these legacy MPCs will not sound exactly the same. I don't see this changing. The MPC Ren will most likely just ignore parameters from legacy MPCs that it doesn't have.

ntalec wrote:

JAH wrote:
Nearly every model MPC uses a different program or project format. So its impossible for projects on one MPC to translate perfectly to another. Some MPCs have multiple LFOs and/or multiple Filters (MPC 4000 and 2500). The MPC 5000 doesn't have these capabilities so its possible that loading music created on these legacy MPCs will not sound exactly the same. I don't see this changing. The MPC Ren will most likely just ignore parameters from legacy MPCs that it doesn't have.

Exactly.
So it's a nothing feature.

JAH wrote:Hardware MPCs are already loading legacy formats and ignoring parameters that they don't have...going all the way back to the MPC 3000 loading MPC 60 files. Whether you believe its a marketable feature or not is irrelevant. It only makes sense for new MPCs to support older file formats to the greatest extent possible.

DJ Hellfire wrote:

JAH wrote:Hardware MPCs are already loading legacy formats and ignoring parameters that they don't have...going all the way back to the MPC 3000 loading MPC 60 files. Whether you believe its a marketable feature or not is irrelevant. It only makes sense for new MPCs to support older file formats to the greatest extent possible.

Yeah, my XL loads my boys 2000 Classic beats perfectly fine. But my 2500 doesn't load programs from my XL too well. The parameters are all **** up. But I don't know if it's because of the JJOS or not!

JAH wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:

JAH wrote:Hardware MPCs are already loading legacy formats and ignoring parameters that they don't have...going all the way back to the MPC 3000 loading MPC 60 files. Whether you believe its a marketable feature or not is irrelevant. It only makes sense for new MPCs to support older file formats to the greatest extent possible.

Yeah, my XL loads my boys 2000 Classic beats perfectly fine. But my 2500 doesn't load programs from my XL too well. The parameters are all **** up. But I don't know if it's because of the JJOS or not!

That's easy. Install the Akai OS and see if you get the same results....

DJ Hellfire wrote:

1. True! But Akai can't bank on the possibility that everyone has an interface already. Those that do can easily just get the Studio for $600 if the $1200 bothers them. I personally do have another interface. However, it likely won't allow me to use hardware modules through my interface directly from within the MPC software. And most peoples interfaces only have 1 or 2 midi in and 1 or 2 out, which may already be used by other ****. Also, if I wanted to take my Ren to my homie's studio to get some work done, I personally would not wanna disconnect the million cables going to my 003 and lug that big ass **** with me. Otherwise, if the Ren didn't have an interface built in, I'd either have to 1) use the headphone out of my laptop to plug into his mixer/interface, which doesn't offer the best sound, 2) disconnect his interface from his computer and connect it to my laptop, as well as install drivers for his interface, or 3) install the MPC software on his computer and connect the Ren to it. Not exactly ideal situations if you wish to use the Ren outside of your own lab. But I do think it would have been nice for them to offer the Ren with or without the interface.

2. I don't mean literally the same exact i/o components! I mean a comparable amount of connections! And again, most comparable standalone audio interfaces worth anything are around $500-600 anyway. Decent interfaces at lower prices usually have no midi i/o.

3. I think the name is irrelevant personally. But everything has to evolve at some point. You may not see the big deal. But those of us who have been dying to fuse our MPC's with the power of our computers see's how great this is, or rather the potential of how great it can be, if they don't **** it up!

Blue Haze wrote:Is it me or is it the fact since the ren's samples are all on the hd or external drive the main issues will be the outputs? I mean if everything is already in the digital realm a decent sound card and great monitor is the main deal.

On the other hand if the cuz for concern is sampling through the inputs (Maschine users and Spark users don't seem to bother (myself included) with the standard sound cards we are using now. I tend to see sampling as a separate process and from using 2xl, 3k, and 4k inputs each ad converters were different in their own right. From using my motu ultra to sample into my audio editor was different along with the same into logic and ableton. However once I got the sound into the sampler hardware or virtual I would tweak it to how I wanted it anyways from the original sound so I never had much problem with getting my sounds in.

But when it came to getting my sounds out in a great form my sound cards and monitor had to be up to scratch.

As far as the Ren it now and from a little tads of feedback I get beyond this forum the inputs and outputs are up to standard the same as an actual legacy model. The main issue is getting the guts the software complete to take full advantage of the sound.

groovemonger wrote:Another point is how good the audio interface is or, more importantly, how good the pre-amps are. I've owned a few interfaces over the years and these days they all have epic resolution on paper but there's quite a difference. The M-audio 1812 was very precise but very sterile, the MOTU 828 had a good warm sound, the Alesis io26 (what i use now with an Apogee One) sounds a bit raw and coarse with the in-built pre-amps. Where it matters I run things through a tube pre-amp and it sounds peachy. So what I'm saying is, unless the Ren packs something a bit special in the audio interface department it might be neither here or there.

If it's a computer-tethered device I personally wouldn't bothered if it had audio inputs or not as I have two audio interfaces already already hooked up.

groovemonger wrote:

Blue Haze wrote:Is it me or is it the fact since the ren's samples are all on the hd or external drive the main issues will be the outputs? I mean if everything is already in the digital realm a decent sound card and great monitor is the main deal.

On the other hand if the cuz for concern is sampling through the inputs (Maschine users and Spark users don't seem to bother (myself included) with the standard sound cards we are using now. I tend to see sampling as a separate process and from using 2xl, 3k, and 4k inputs each ad converters were different in their own right. From using my motu ultra to sample into my audio editor was different along with the same into logic and ableton. However once I got the sound into the sampler hardware or virtual I would tweak it to how I wanted it anyways from the original sound so I never had much problem with getting my sounds in.

But when it came to getting my sounds out in a great form my sound cards and monitor had to be up to scratch.

As far as the Ren it now and from a little tads of feedback I get beyond this forum the inputs and outputs are up to standard the same as an actual legacy model. The main issue is getting the guts the software complete to take full advantage of the sound.

Yeah, towards the end of my time with the MPC 2000XL about three years back I guess I was using it in a different way that when I first got it - I had a CF card reader upgrade and I'd often prep my loops on the computer so they were already neat and tidy when they arrived at the MPC. A lot of those loops were sampled direct from the computer's CD drive, or off a turntable into an audio interface, or sometimes things audio hijacked from the net. So the MPC's inputs I used less and less and eventually the MPC was semi-retired to be a live backing tool rather than a studio tool, although sometimes I did use it as a computer-free sketchpad, which is why getting rid of itwas a bit of an error.

Guess people are getting their wav files from anywhere these days rather than putting everything through their sampler's analogue inputs.

DJ Lampfire wrote:I RARELY sample into my 4k. Most shit is transferred from computer to the MPC via USB and out through the 4k adat.

DJ Hellfire wrote:

Interesting you guys mentioned this. I RARELY sampled into my 2500. Most **** was transferred from computer to the MPC via USB or CF. But it went out the 2500 outs. So for me, the Ren will be the same way mostly. I doubt I will be tracking Rens physical outputs much, unless it sounds amazing.

But to respond to Blue Haze, I guess another angle to Ren's "sound" will be sample into it through it's inputs. Who know's if it'll really make much difference though. Maybe the sounds they are giving you with it were already sampled through Ren's inputs?!

groovemonger wrote:
Yeah, which kinda goes back to the whole 'the Ren is really expensive' argument -unless it's packing some serious magic somewhere it's seems a tough sell to me. I've alway been skeptical of things like the 12bit/16bit sound of classic MPCs or the swing or the sequencer or whatever else. Logic's bit crusher adds plenty of old-skool crunch to a snare - doesn't have to be an MPC60 unless you're some crazy purist.

I mean, Geist has clearly been thought out with the MPC-type user in mind. Then there's the Maschine for a bit more money. Ren has to outdo those by miles to justify the big price tag. Yes, the brand will help, but they'll get found out if it's not stunning. I'm generally 90%+ happy with Geist as an 'MPC in software' and it was only £69 boxed in a sale (it's £189 download from FX Expansion's website').