thinking of buying a 3000 next week but have questions?

Most about the mpc3000 I have a idea but have some questions that would give me closuer

1 can all samples be tuned all together like 2500 jjos or 5000

2.does each sample have to be assigned manualy To pad and keep going back for each chop

3. How is a program recalled and does every sample folder if there is folders,have to be loades again

4.Is the 3000 really the machine people say it is when it comes to sequencing,swing and sound?

dmajor100 wrote:Most about the mpc3000 I have a idea but have some questions that would give me closuer

1 can all samples be tuned all together like 2500 jjos or 5000

I don't know which function you are referring to, but most likely no. Please note that MPC-3000 has less functions than MPC-2000.

2.does each sample have to be assigned manualy To pad and keep going back for each chop

Yes, you have to assign each samples to each pads manually on 3000.

3. How is a program recalled and does every sample folder if there is folders,have to be loades again

Before you worry about that, MPC-3000 (and MPC-60 and MPC-2000 classic) does not support file directories. Furthermore, the maximum partition size is only 32MB!

4.Is the 3000 really the machine people say it is when it comes to sequencing,swing and sound?

I think it is overstated, however, I heard that MIDI sync is extremely solid, more "in sync" than newer MPCs. I've heard from many people that 3000 sounds greater than, say, 2000.
Here's interesting comment that I heard long ago; The user (who knows both 2000 and 3000) said that MPC-3000 mixes samples well than MPC-2000. On 2000, he'd find himself adjusting output level of each pads, on 3000, not so much.

I used to want to get MPC-3000 so bad, but not anymore (I know I'll hate the super limited data storage choice. I sold my MPC-2000 classic for the reason.) MPC-3000 is the coolest looking MPC for sure though.

Dam then how would u be able to load programs with sounds previous assigned to it? Idk im seeing one for 589 bucks and kinda debating on buying one instead of the rennasance just cause its solid hardware. But if I was miding it up to my cpu,modules and daw then it Will kinda be just like using maschine instead a bit more expesive controller. I could use it just for drums but i really dnt know how tedious it Will be. It is a sexy machine no dout and being just a vintage legendary machine kinda makes it worth buying

I think you can autoload sound files (.snd files) that are associated with the program with MPC-3000, but I don't think you'll like MPC-3000.

I guess things are too convinent now and going back is not ideal for fast workflow.

1 can all samples be tuned all together like 2500 jjos or 5000 NO.

2.does each sample have to be assigned manualy To pad and keep going back for each chop YES.

3. How is a program recalled and does every sample folder if there is folders,have to be loades again ONE PROGRAM AT A TIME, ALWAYS. NO FOLDERS.

4.Is the 3000 really the machine people say it is when it comes to sequencing,swing and sound? YES.

The workflow on newer models is more feature-rich, but relatively standard across the line.
There is no auto-chop/assign, global transposing and/or usb connectivity on the 3K.
It's also got limited file organization options. (it does indeed remember pad assignments on reload)

Could 'test' before you buy to get an idea of how it feels in comparison to what you're used to. (with sellers known & good working disk(s)
Once you try it out, your decision could be made for you.

Well sampling is one thing and using maschine has been fun for me and ill use it strictly for sampling and vsts. Now when it comes to standalone i want the a flawless setup and to me sequencing workflow and the most important thing is sound quality period. 24 bit drums really are plastic sounding and omg i love saturation and lowered bit drums so much more and sure computers are only imitating only about 80 percent of that sound, so id kinda like the real deal sound and the great workflow while sequencing loading and saving are a different issue.

the 3k is a great mpc, but if you are going from newer models and hardware, you will probably have to be a little bit patient. Getting used to the machine might take a little while, but they are definitely a solid machine which sound spot on.

Few things to remember which may effect your decision.

There is no waveform editing like in the 2000xl and newer mpcs.

Saving on floppies, unless you upgrade to a better drive like cf, floppy emulator etc.

Parts are getting harder to come by now, especially things like lcd displays.

You coming off of Maschine and looking at a 3000? Get a Mikro jackass!!

my 1st MPC is MPC1000 with JJ OS 2XL , with millions features i never use...

couple of years ago i moved to MPC3000 LE OS 3.10 and i hardly ever touch MPC1000
( only on the road) ... since i've learned to chop samples by ear , i feel wierd with the waveforms chop..

i dig MPC3000 , the sound and the swing is unbeatable, but it is NOT for everyone.

from what i've read above - i don't think its for you.

Fair point, but just because you sample by ear, doesn't mean you can't do that with waveform editing. It just makes it alot quicker and simpler when you can actually see what you are trying to chop, opposed to just guessing from numbers.

Using the auto chop is cheesy as hell, but I'd still opt for waveform anyday, just so it is easier to see what's going on.

micb wrote:Fair point, but just because you sample by ear, doesn't mean you can't do that with waveform editing. It just makes it alot quicker and simpler when you can actually see what you are trying to chop, opposed to just guessing from numbers.

Using the auto chop is cheesy as hell, but I'd still opt for waveform anyday, just so it is easier to see what's going on.

That depends on individual taste/preference however.

Unless we're talking about chopping drumbreaks (i really like to be able to see a waveform for that), i also prefer chopping by ear and without seeing a waveform. My chops are way better like this usually and i'll always take numbers and chopping by ear over looking at a waveform. To each their own...

jibber wrote:

micb wrote:Fair point, but just because you sample by ear, doesn't mean you can't do that with waveform editing. It just makes it alot quicker and simpler when you can actually see what you are trying to chop, opposed to just guessing from numbers.

Using the auto chop is cheesy as hell, but I'd still opt for waveform anyday, just so it is easier to see what's going on.

That depends on individual taste/preference however.

Unless we're talking about chopping drumbreaks (i really like to be able to see a waveform for that), i also prefer chopping by ear and without seeing a waveform. My chops are way better like this usually and i'll always take numbers and chopping by ear over looking at a waveform. To each their own...

What he meant was use the numbers not the waveform same as you would if the waveform wasn't there.

In other words look at the numbers to chop by the numbers look at the waveform to chop by the waveform since you have the option to do it either way on hte newer machines.

I just think you have to be careful recommending a 60/3k/2k to most people today since they are use to a lot of convenience that just isn't going to happen.

Can be a really challenging transition for most that they are willing to make.

dmajor100 wrote:Most about the mpc3000 I have a idea but have some questions that would give me closuer

1 can all samples be tuned all together like 2500 jjos or 5000

2.does each sample have to be assigned manualy To pad and keep going back for each chop

3. How is a program recalled and does every sample folder if there is folders,have to be loades again

4.Is the 3000 really the machine people say it is when it comes to sequencing,swing and sound?

If you are wanting anything even close to a maschine look elsewhere. Swing? If you yourself can make the drums swing, then yes, your 3000 will have swing as well.