If I mainly sample with a computer, is an MPC 4000 still rel

jimfowler wrote:you might be surprised at how quick you can get with sampling on the 4K. i prefer it over sampling in ableton (my host of choice) and there is a significant sonic difference - in this case i'm comparing echofire i/o + whatever ableton does to audio VS. the mpc. if you prefer the clicking and dragging then more power to you but i like to touch the computer as little as possible.

the 4k should integrate seamlessly with your daw regardless of the extent to which you incorporate it.

- jim

Sampling and chopping is a breeze for me on the 4k.

Can't imagine a Piece of equipment working more seemlessy with a DAW than a 4k with the ADAT and S/PDIF expansion boards. Tracking out a beat into my DAW with my 4k is almost effortless.
With my 2500......not so much. It's a chore tracking out beats from my 2500.

MPCWeapon1 wrote:

jimfowler wrote:you might be surprised at how quick you can get with sampling on the 4K. i prefer it over sampling in ableton (my host of choice) and there is a significant sonic difference - in this case i'm comparing echofire i/o + whatever ableton does to audio VS. the mpc. if you prefer the clicking and dragging then more power to you but i like to touch the computer as little as possible.

the 4k should integrate seamlessly with your daw regardless of the extent to which you incorporate it.

- jim

Sampling and chopping is a breeze for me on the 4k.

Can't imagine a Piece of equipment working more seemlessy with a DAW than a 4k with the ADAT and S/PDIF expansion boards. Tracking out a beat into my DAW with my 4k is almost effortless.
With my 2500......not so much. It's a chore tracking out beats from my 2500.

That's good to hear.. can you elaborate a bit on the differences between the 2500 and the 4000 when it comes to tracking out? That's really the main hangup for me, and I'm sure a lot of other producers. Tracking out, although not THAT bad, is certainly a chore.

I didn't see it mentioned but a 4k with ak.sys is cold. You can program the hardware from the computer and use your wav editor of choice to chop samples.

JesseHolmz wrote:

MPCWeapon1 wrote:

jimfowler wrote:you might be surprised at how quick you can get with sampling on the 4K. i prefer it over sampling in ableton (my host of choice) and there is a significant sonic difference - in this case i'm comparing echofire i/o + whatever ableton does to audio VS. the mpc. if you prefer the clicking and dragging then more power to you but i like to touch the computer as little as possible.

the 4k should integrate seamlessly with your daw regardless of the extent to which you incorporate it.

- jim

Sampling and chopping is a breeze for me on the 4k.

Can't imagine a Piece of equipment working more seemlessy with a DAW than a 4k with the ADAT and S/PDIF expansion boards. Tracking out a beat into my DAW with my 4k is almost effortless.
With my 2500......not so much. It's a chore tracking out beats from my 2500.

That's good to hear.. can you elaborate a bit on the differences between the 2500 and the 4000 when it comes to tracking out? That's really the main hangup for me, and I'm sure a lot of other producers. Tracking out, although not THAT bad, is certainly a chore.

With the 4k, I have it hooked up to my DAW thru ADAT and the S/PDIF Word clock expansion boards. I can digitally monitor my 4k through my DAW while making a beat. There's no loss of sound so I can even use my software plugins to color my sounds while I'm mixing in the 4k...When I'm done with the mix, just hit the record on my DAW...Done. Crisp, clean, and professional.

MPCWeapon1 wrote:
With the 4k, I have it hooked up to my DAW thru ADAT and the S/PDIF Word clock expansion boards. I can digitally monitor my 4k through my DAW while making a beat. There's no loss of sound so I can even use my software plugins to color my sounds while I'm mixing in the 4k...When I'm done with the mix, just hit the record on my DAW...Done. Crisp, clean, and professional.

Are there any resources you recommend for learning how to do that? Is the manual enough?

hey mpc weapon, do yo find that when you go adat out on the 4k, you still get the "sound" the 4k offers as you would if you used the analog outs and recorded that way?

i think this would only apply if you sampled into your 4k via the analog inputs, because if you went in digitally and came out digitally, then you would be bypassing all those converters that color your sound.

i realize that my question is very subjective, and some people dont even notice the sound of the 4k, but some think it still has a certain character to its sound although very subtle. do you think you can hear a difference when using the digital outs?

and also your saying you can digitally monitor your 4k through your DAW while making a beat. does this mean that before you start your beat, you first must open up your DAW, set up all the i/o and route your signal?

or can you use your mpc with the adat card and still hear the output of your monitors even if your DAW isnt opened or your soundcard isnt connected to your computer?

then after you make your beat (all in the 4k) you can open your DAW and route the i/o and click record and record it from there.


i ask this because with my current interface, i have the stereo analog out of my mpc 1000 going into line 3/4 of my interface, but i can still hear the output of the monitors regaurless of if my sound card isnt connected to my computer. it seems to let the analog signal pass through it to the monitors even without my computer being connected. im just wondering if anyone elses interface does this, or especially if it would do it thru adat or spidif outputs.
i find it to be a real cool thing, i can just use my monitors ect ect even if my computer isnt connected, so i just leave my interface and monitors on all the time.

im using a tc electronics impact twin btw, but if i were to get a 4k again, and keep it this time, i would probably have to upgrade my interface, and that would be how i would want to work.

damien907 wrote:hey mpc weapon, do yo find that when you go adat out on the 4k, you still get the "sound" the 4k offers as you would if you used the analog outs and recorded that way?

i think this would only apply if you sampled into your 4k via the analog inputs, because if you went in digitally and came out digitally, then you would be bypassing all those converters that color your sound.

i realize that my question is very subjective, and some people dont even notice the sound of the 4k, but some think it still has a certain character to its sound although very subtle. do you think you can hear a difference when using the digital outs?

and also your saying you can digitally monitor your 4k through your DAW while making a beat. does this mean that before you start your beat, you first must open up your DAW, set up all the i/o and route your signal?

or can you use your mpc with the adat card and still hear the output of your monitors even if your DAW isnt opened or your soundcard isnt connected to your computer?

then after you make your beat (all in the 4k) you can open your DAW and route the i/o and click record and record it from there.


i ask this because with my current interface, i have the stereo analog out of my mpc 1000 going into line 3/4 of my interface, but i can still hear the output of the monitors regaurless of if my sound card isnt connected to my computer. it seems to let the analog signal pass through it to the monitors even without my computer being connected. im just wondering if anyone elses interface does this, or especially if it would do it thru adat or spidif outputs.
i find it to be a real cool thing, i can just use my monitors ect ect even if my computer isnt connected, so i just leave my interface and monitors on all the time.

im using a tc electronics impact twin btw, but if i were to get a 4k again, and keep it this time, i would probably have to upgrade my interface, and that would be how i would want to work.

I sample analog, track out digital with S/PDIF and ADAT. I don't know About the MPC sound, but to me, it sounds beautiful when it's tracked out. A big crisp sound. Much better than my 2500. You're right though,sound is subjective.

Yeah, when using my 4k I have to open my DAW first when I digitally monitor it. I mean I really don't have to because I also have the 8 out expansion board. So I can make a beat while monitoring it through my outboard Mixer and when it's ready to track out switch the assignable outs to ADAT and S/PDIF. I choose to monitor it digitally so I could use some of my go-to software plugins to color my sound while creating the mix.

tapedeck wrote:if you have a working mpc, with a workflow you like, with a modern os, and you still like sampling with a wav editor - then no i dont think an mpc4000 that needs repairs, has a foreign workflow, with an outdated os, which you cant use as easily with a wav editor - is for you.

[/quote]


The 4k is still very modern by todays comparisons (sequencer and sampler), and connected up to your PC/Mac its extremely fast to transfer samples using AKSYS. Even if you dont use that just throw them on to a USB stick.

Foreign to what, The MPC2500? What you say makes no sense at all. Outdated - like the MPC60, 3000, 2kxl, ASQ10 etc. Its more advanced than any of them even with the various upgrades they can get. Im not familiar with the MPC2500 but my hunch is that whilst it will have some, small sequencer enhancements I dont consider its sampler any more advanced at all. Then again, I'm not obsessed with having a machine cut loops up for me.

There is so much inside the MPC4k which makes it a highly advanced hardware sampler/sequencer. ADAT options, Analog outs option. 24bit/96k. large memory, key group sampler which is highly advanced, large polyphony, advanced hardware sequencer etc. It has many features that even brand new gear doesnt have.

i dont think the 4k is a whole lot 'tighter' than a 2.5k - the only mpc that really screwed this up was the 5k
http://www.innerclocksystems.com/New%20 ... itmus.html <-interesting but really make sure you understand the science behind this before accepting - i think a lot of people misunderstand and either give it too much weight or write it off.

But it is the tightest MPC of them all - and is tighter than the 2500 as is the 60 and 3000. The 4k is a sample or two away from sample accuracy. Not bad for an outdated machine, finished and dead from 2000 as you so eloquently put it, dont you think? You don't seem to think a sequencers timing engine is important, implying people don't really understand what the Litmus test means. Trust me , I understand. Its extremely important in today's world when your clocking your MPC to your sample accurate Daw,a nd its just as important for your sequencer to be tight even if your not clocking it externally. If accurate timing clocks are not important then why don't our daws randomly spit out jittery audio. They spit out jittery midi as you can see from the years of frustrated cries all over the web ( so thousands out there do think its rather important). Would you accept jittery audio from your Daw. Of course you wouldn't and neither would anyone else - there would be universal uproar. So, why accept it from a machine which is supposed to keep time.

The MPC5k sadly has the worst timing of all MPCs. Its a shameful display of bad engineering and no amount of excuses will remove that fact. Simply put, it cannot keep accurate time, the very thing its supposed to do. I dont say this at a dig at MPC5k owners at all. I think its a fine machine let down badly by lazy engineering.

By glossing such stuff over we would effectively hand manufacturers a ticket to continue producing sub par timing engines of which there are many around. One of the purposes of the Litmus tests is to wake up manufacturers that were watching, and their gear will be tested. If we vote with our wallet, they will get the message very fast. Instead of giving us features which is only intended for the PR they will give us excellent timing engines.

JesseHolmz wrote:I understand one of the main selling points of the 4000 is the sampler. Right now I'm using a 2500 with JJOS, but I have the opportunity to get a 4000 cheaply (although it may need some minor repairs).

I really would like to continue samping via a wav editor because it's quicker for me, and I also work with reason so I'm going back and forth. Is the 4000 something that would still be proven beneficial? Does it "sound better" than a 2500? My main concern is having a smooth workflow between an MPC and the DAW I use.

At the very least, I suppose I could fix and resell it. Thanks for the help!

The sampler its self is only part of the package. All its functionality has to be taken in to consideration. The smooth workflow between the 4k and a Daw is a 9.5 out of 10. The majority of my samples are transferred via my Daw and its a very easy process with the 4k.

As for the sound comparison against the 2500 I cant comment as I haven't expereinced the 2500. The 4k doesnt have a coloured sound like the 3000. It has an accurate, but not a lifeless sound which is what I found the 2kxl to have. I like the sound of the 4k. I personally make music that doesnt rely on a 12 bit MPC60 type thing or a hpyed 3000 sound both of which I like btw. However, I can colour the sound of the 4k no problem with my mixer and out board. Even when I have used it directly in to my sound card I found the exact same drum kit playing from the 4k vs a soft sampler was better from the 4k. Not massively so, just more life in it. Its hard to define but its there and the effect is cumulative.

Essentially you need to look at the feature comparison between the 2500 and the 4k. If you see stuff the 4k has you really want, and which the 2500 doesnt then go for it. If not, then its probably not for you.

If almost sample accurate/timing is important to you (as it was crucial to me) then the 4k is the one.

Em.p.cee.j wrote:I didn't see it mentioned but a 4k with ak.sys is cold.

Word is bond.

Try that on a 2500...

I got a 2000XL & MV-8000. If could find a 4000 for cheap and in excellent condition, I'm getting it!

yall really makin want to pull the trigger on this 600 4k i keep seeing.

i just <3 the xl too much.

labcoats wrote:

tapedeck wrote:i
The MPC5k sadly has the worst timing of all MPCs. Its a shameful display of bad engineering and no amount of excuses will remove that fact. Simply put, it cannot keep accurate time, the very thing its supposed to do. I dont say this at a dig at MPC5k owners at all. I think its a fine machine let down badly by lazy engineering.
.

While i like to hear about the great 4k s timing ect and all the tests done and all im kinda confused about this timing thing.Ive run the 4k and 5k alongside each other many times and pitted them against each other and recorded them in real time situations together.I personally did not notice any timing issues you talk about constantly.Altho im sure its crap in this regard i did not notice anything really.Just 2 big crazy mpc s with solid mad timing and kicking out beats.Same with the Yamaha rm1x ive used extensively that im sure gets a thumbs down on the innerclock site but to me its fooking SOLID timing wise.A computer might be 100% tight but it certainly dont feel it to me.Anyway this divide the machines and conker with statistics is kinda not the point with creative music making .Thats all.If it feel tight it is.Rant over

Im more concerned about low resolution sequencers that are doing the rounds nowadays-Tempest,Elektron Md ect ect....Loosing funk there.

First of all - I'm not always talking about it - I do speak of other things as well . My purpose is just to let the information flow out there. Ive read so many threads on this site and at Gearslutz which talks of magic fairy dust, and secret hidden code in the timing of one MPC vs another. That's all nonsense and its better the facts are revealed rather than midnight stories abound which merely muddy the waters. Legendary timing of some MPCs is due to their solid clocks, nothing more. Problems with jittery clocks raise their heads much more when synced via midi clock to sample accurate Daws. This is when its really obvious. If its not why so many threads around the internet - Syncing problems etc. So , much of my focus is in the area of syncing sequencers to a Daw. Neither is this about robotic timing. Its actually the opposite.

Resolution is not the be all and end all. Without getting in to it to much a sequencer with a resolution of 1/96 vs 1/1096 will both sound the same when quantised is used at say/1/8th, 1/12th, 1/16th, 1/32 etc. Very high resolution was primarily designed to capture a musicians performance without using quantise just like it was when performances were recorded to tape. In such cases then the higher the resolution the better. You got to ask your self are you recording superfast quad trill drum and synth parts. Even a resolution of 1/96 with the quantise off is enough to capture the feel of most in the electronic music genres wishing to record their drums without quantise.

But, if the sequencers clock is sloppy then your non quantised performance you just recorded oozing with feel will be lost as it will play back a bit erratic. Jitter. You have to factor in if recording the part without quantise as the only way to capture and playback the crucial feel then you absolutely need its clock to be super accurate.


If you use a lot of loops in your music then you probably wont notice jitter so much, although from time to time loops will be ever so slightly off. If you programme everything from scratch, or mostly, then you may hear it more, but Hip Hop can be quite forgiving as there is little heavy syncopation in the music. Depending on the genre jitter is more and less noticeable.

But still, its no coincidence the MPC60 and 3000 feel is legendary and be assured its because they have super accurate timing clocks - there is no magic fairy dust thing going on. In the case of the MPC60 I believe its solid timing is even more enhanced due to its gritty sound. The hyped sound of the 3000 has the same effect to many people. The 4000 whilst having the tightest clock by a few samples doesnt have a hyped or low bit sound. However, put its sounds through some EQ and compression, and that thing can super funk like a mother f***r.

Anyway, the fact your happy with what you hear is all that really matters.


PS
Oh, interestingly I was reading a thread on Gearslutz a while back and a dude was saying how he couldn't get his non quantised drums from a 4k to groove like he could on his much lower resolution MPC 60 (96ppqn I think). Well, the 4k with its much higher resolution (960ppqn I think) was capturing his playing more faithfully. Our friends playing wasnt as groovy as he thought it was. The MPC60 even with its Q off was in fact quantising within its resolution. Both the Tempest and Machine Drum are sure to have higher resolutions than the MPC60 and possibly the MPC4k so resolution is no guarantee of the funk.


PS2
If our GS friend has switched the 4000s TC to 96 off which translates to the quantise off but reducing the resolution to 96 - the same as the MPC60, he would have got his groove back. Those kai engineers who designed the 4k put a lot of thought in to this machine. Its just a shame that when it was released the Daw revolution was in full swing. Magazines and techie music journalists were calling the hardware sampler idea finished and done with.