MPC Renaissance vs Legacy MPCs

cyrus wrote:okay, sorry to go off topic, but I decided to play gertie's track whilst watching hellfires sig. haha! that dudes grooving to gertie's tune! lolz

nice track btw gertie! peace

Look at him go!!

Ill-Green wrote:

cyrus wrote:okay, sorry to go off topic, but I decided to play gertie's track whilst watching hellfires sig. haha! that dudes grooving to gertie's tune! lolz

nice track btw gertie! peace

Look at him go!!

You should see the original video I took that from.

Ya'll think that ones funny, look at this other one I made. Looks like it's dancing to almost any music you play!

thanks Cyrus!

To be honest what actually attracts me to the renaissance is the programme that comes with it and the mode that lets it sound like old mpcs. But i dnt know why they couldnt just bring out a brand new MPD with that type of programme with that type of options for 500€ cheaper. For me as a first time buyer i could see myself buying a mpc 2500 and some class of a mpd for working on my computer. The programme does seem to have a great workflow though anyone wanna help me out and tell me im right or wrong

from the information ive gathered on these forums over the past year or so id say the software has some great potential, but isnt quite there yet... features, stability, and "legacy mpc" comparability wise...

only time will tell if nukai are commited to, and capable, of changing this for the better...

maschine has been the "rave". and nukai seems to want to head in that direction instead of "traditional mpc" functionality... or maybe that is just the natural progression being dictated by the experience and perspectives of these current nukai "mpc" developers...

anyhow. at this moment in time, i think there are better ways to invest your money... if i had to be specific with recomendations, id say maschine and/or a "legacy" mpc... this isnt to say that you shouldnt pay close development to the mpc software and these forums... its just that you could probably have a "legacy" mpc and a maschine from the secondhand marketplace for the price of this unproven and reportedly unstable product...

From the experienced I've gained over the past year on the Ren and a decade plus on hardware MPCs, the Ren already exceeds legacy models in many features and stability wise to include but not limited to:

1. Choose your own 3rd party AD/DA converters. Technically, you can do this with the MPC 4000 and MPC 5000 on a certain level. But with the Ren/Studio being software that uses any AD/DA converter attached to your computer, you can have your new MPC with Apogee, RME, Lynx, SSL, Avid, Focusrite, etc AD/DA converters

2. Load/Save times. Load/save times for hardware MPCs are bad especially with larger projects. The Ren loads/saves project files, samples, programs in a fraction of the time hardware MPCs can.

3. Memory. The Ren/Studio 32 bit suppots up to 4 GB of memory. The closest MPC is the MPC 4000 with 512 MB of memory. The most popular MPCs only have 128 MB of memory maxed. Trying to drop an entire song (wav file) into these MPCs to chop as forum members do with the Ren is nearly impossible.

4. CPU. The Ren uses the CPU of your computer. Hardware MPC CPUs are ancient. Trying to create a large Ren-sized project on a hardware MPC with alot of effects, will cripple it.

5. Effects processing. All hardware MPC effects are average at best. This was never a strong point. The most recent hardware MPCs have a 4 buss send effects processor...shared with everything in memory. The Ren/Studio has dedicated effects for every pad and track. This includes 4 send and 4 insert effects for each pad and track. The Qlinks provide convenient control over effect params. No MPC can come close to this. Plus you have the ability to use higher quality 3rd party effects.

6. Sample Edit processing. Time stretching/pitchshifting is barely useable on hardware MPCs. The quality os average..and depending on the model MPC....it can take up to 20 minutes to applied processing to a small sample. Not only does the Ren use iZotope processing. The Ren sounds incredible compared to hardware MPCs.

7. Chopping. The Ren uses iZotope for auto slicing via threshold as well. Not all hardware MPCs can slice using this method and those that can are inferior. The Ren can chop a sample into 128 regions and map it to pads or program in a matter of seconds. You will struggle trying to do the same thing on a hardware MPC.
The Ren /Studio also have an unlink slice function. Only the JJOS has something comparable.

8. Automation. Most MPCs have a very basic mixer automation. MPC Ren/Studio's automation is quite extensive when compared to MPC hardware and enhanced even further with the use of its 16 Qlink knobs. Plus the Ren/Studio allows users to draw in automation using pencil tool.

9. MIDI. The Ren's 16 Qlinks and 6 banks gives you control of up to 96 params of your external MIDI instrument. The MPC 5000 is next in line but gixes you 5x less functionality.

10. Plugins. MPC Ren/Studio are the only MPCs that can host plugins or be used as a plugin within your DAW. The Ren/Studio ships with several plugin instruments.

11. Step Sequence. Most MPCs do not have a drum maschine styled step-editor...the Ren does.

12. Rex file import. Only the MPC Ren can import Rex files.

13. Drag-n-drop. Outside of the MPC 4000 w/Aksys and Ren/Studio, no other MPC has this capability. The Ren is so wasy to drag-n-drop samples to pads for quick program creation.

14. Export audio tracks. This feature is not found on most hardware MPCs. The Ren can export up to 128 tracks of audio; no MPC comes close to this.

15. MP3 support. Only the Ren supports exporting in MP3 format.

16. Pad banks. The Ren has 8 pad banks for drum programs; double the amount of most hardware MPCs and 2 more than the MPC 4000.

17. Keygroup sampler. Only the MPC 4000, and 5000 have a keygroup sampler. JJ OS has a limited one. No other MPC has this capability.

18. Swing/quantize. MPC Ren/Studio outshines any MPC not named an MPC 4000 and 5000 in this regard. It is equal to or better than the MPC 5000. The MPC 4000 has real time advantage over the Ren. However the Ren beats it on the other emaining capabilities.
19. Pads. Akai did an excellent job with the pads of the Ren/Studio. Gone are the days when striking the corners of pads would not trigger samples. The Ren's pads are equal or better than hardware MPCs.

19. Waveform play indicator. The Ren/Studio provides this most requested function. The JJOS has a similar function. MPC 5000, MPC 4000, MPC 3000, MPC 2000XL/2000, and MPC 500…not possible.

20. Song/Next Sequence Mode. No other MPC can rival the Ren/Studio in this regard.

21. Pad/Track Mute Modes. The Ren is equal to or better than all hardware MPCs in this regard.

22. Mixer. While the Ren/Studio’s mixer is not as flexible as other DAWs on the market, it easily trumps hardware MPCs. Not all hardware MPCs have a track mixer (older ones only have a program mixer). And those with Track mixers don’t have routing to outputs/submixes and insert effects.

23. Sample Record. The Ren /Studio quickly records samples and assigns samples to the active program. You get a visual representation of what sounds are assigned to which pads. Hardware MPCs don’t have the same capability.

24. Global program edit. With the Ren, selecting Edit All and the changing a param with effect the entire program. This applies to most params. Only the MPC 5000 has something similar as well as the JJ OS.

This list grows a little longer with the next update.

JAH wrote:From the experienced I've gained over the past year on the Ren and a decade plus on hardware MPCs, the Ren already exceeds legacy models in many features and stability wise to include but not limited to:

1. Choose your own 3rd party AD/DA converters. Technically, you can do this with the MPC 4000 and MPC 5000 on a certain level. But with the Ren/Studio being software that uses any AD/DA converter attached to your computer, you can have your new MPC with Apogee, RME, Lynx, SSL, Avid, Focusrite, etc AD/DA converters

2. Load/Save times. Load/save times for hardware MPCs are bad especially with larger projects. The Ren loads/saves project files, samples, programs in a fraction of the time hardware MPCs can.

3. Memory. The Ren/Studio 32 bit suppots up to 4 GB of memory. The closest MPC is the MPC 4000 with 512 MB of memory. The most popular MPCs only have 128 MB of memory maxed. Trying to drop an entire song (wav file) into these MPCs to chop as forum members do with the Ren is nearly impossible.

4. CPU. The Ren uses the CPU of your computer. Hardware MPC CPUs are ancient. Trying to create a large Ren-sized project on a hardware MPC with alot of effects, will cripple it.

5. Effects processing. All hardware MPC effects are average at best. This was never a strong point. The most recent hardware MPCs have a 4 buss send effects processor...shared with everything in memory. The Ren/Studio has dedicated effects for every pad and track. This includes 4 send and 4 insert effects for each pad and track. The Qlinks provide convenient control over effect params. No MPC can come close to this. Plus you have the ability to use higher quality 3rd party effects.

6. Sample Edit processing. Time stretching/pitchshifting is barely useable on hardware MPCs. The quality os average..and depending on the model MPC....it can take up to 20 minutes to applied processing to a small sample. Not only does the Ren use iZotope processing. The Ren sounds incredible compared to hardware MPCs.

7. Chopping. The Ren uses iZotope for auto slicing via threshold as well. Not all hardware MPCs can slice using this method and those that can are inferior. The Ren can chop a sample into 128 regions and map it to pads or program in a matter of seconds. You will struggle trying to do the same thing on a hardware MPC.
The Ren /Studio also have an unlink slice function. Only the JJOS has something comparable.

8. Automation. Most MPCs have a very basic mixer automation. MPC Ren/Studio's automation is quite extensive when compared to MPC hardware and enhanced even further with the use of its 16 Qlink knobs. Plus the Ren/Studio allows users to draw in automation using pencil tool.

9. MIDI. The Ren's 16 Qlinks and 6 banks gives you control of up to 96 params of your external MIDI instrument. The MPC 5000 is next in line but gixes you 5x less functionality.

10. Plugins. MPC Ren/Studio are the only MPCs that can host plugins or be used as a plugin within your DAW. The Ren/Studio ships with several plugin instruments.

11. Step Sequence. Most MPCs do not have a drum maschine styled step-editor...the Ren does.

12. Rex file import. Only the MPC Ren can import Rex files.

13. Drag-n-drop. Outside of the MPC 4000 w/Aksys and Ren/Studio, no other MPC has this capability. The Ren is so wasy to drag-n-drop samples to pads for quick program creation.

14. Export audio tracks. This feature is not found on most hardware MPCs. The Ren can export up to 128 tracks of audio; no MPC comes close to this.

15. MP3 support. Only the Ren supports exporting in MP3 format.

16. Pad banks. The Ren has 8 pad banks for drum programs; double the amount of most hardware MPCs and 2 more than the MPC 4000.

17. Keygroup sampler. Only the MPC 4000, and 5000 have a keygroup sampler. JJ OS has a limited one. No other MPC has this capability.

18. Swing/quantize. MPC Ren/Studio outshines any MPC not named an MPC 4000 and 5000 in this regard. It is equal to or better than the MPC 5000. The MPC 4000 has real time advantage over the Ren. However the Ren beats it on the other emaining capabilities.
19. Pads. Akai did an excellent job with the pads of the Ren/Studio. Gone are the days when striking the corners of pads would not trigger samples. The Ren's pads are equal or better than hardware MPCs.

19. Waveform play indicator. The Ren/Studio provides this most requested function. The JJOS has a similar function. MPC 5000, MPC 4000, MPC 3000, MPC 2000XL/2000, and MPC 500…not possible.

20. Song/Next Sequence Mode. No other MPC can rival the Ren/Studio in this regard.

21. Pad/Track Mute Modes. The Ren is equal to or better than all hardware MPCs in this regard.

22. Mixer. While the Ren/Studio’s mixer is not as flexible as other DAWs on the market, it easily trumps hardware MPCs. Not all hardware MPCs have a track mixer (older ones only have a program mixer). And those with Track mixers don’t have routing to outputs/submixes and insert effects.

23. Sample Record. The Ren /Studio quickly records samples and assigns samples to the active program. You get a visual representation of what sounds are assigned to which pads. Hardware MPCs don’t have the same capability.

24. Global program edit. With the Ren, selecting Edit All and the changing a param with effect the entire program. This applies to most params. Only the MPC 5000 has something similar as well as the JJ OS.

This list grows a little longer with the next update.

That is a very short list of improvements for products thats have been out 20+ years ago. Even funnier that half those features you listed arent even implemented in a logical way or the way they are implemented makes the workflow terrible.

InspectahEX wrote:

JAH wrote:From the experienced I've gained over the past year on the Ren and a decade plus on hardware MPCs, the Ren already exceeds legacy models in many features and stability wise to include but not limited to:

1. Choose your own 3rd party AD/DA converters. Technically, you can do this with the MPC 4000 and MPC 5000 on a certain level. But with the Ren/Studio being software that uses any AD/DA converter attached to your computer, you can have your new MPC with Apogee, RME, Lynx, SSL, Avid, Focusrite, etc AD/DA converters

2. Load/Save times. Load/save times for hardware MPCs are bad especially with larger projects. The Ren loads/saves project files, samples, programs in a fraction of the time hardware MPCs can.

3. Memory. The Ren/Studio 32 bit suppots up to 4 GB of memory. The closest MPC is the MPC 4000 with 512 MB of memory. The most popular MPCs only have 128 MB of memory maxed. Trying to drop an entire song (wav file) into these MPCs to chop as forum members do with the Ren is nearly impossible.

4. CPU. The Ren uses the CPU of your computer. Hardware MPC CPUs are ancient. Trying to create a large Ren-sized project on a hardware MPC with alot of effects, will cripple it.

5. Effects processing. All hardware MPC effects are average at best. This was never a strong point. The most recent hardware MPCs have a 4 buss send effects processor...shared with everything in memory. The Ren/Studio has dedicated effects for every pad and track. This includes 4 send and 4 insert effects for each pad and track. The Qlinks provide convenient control over effect params. No MPC can come close to this. Plus you have the ability to use higher quality 3rd party effects.

6. Sample Edit processing. Time stretching/pitchshifting is barely useable on hardware MPCs. The quality os average..and depending on the model MPC....it can take up to 20 minutes to applied processing to a small sample. Not only does the Ren use iZotope processing. The Ren sounds incredible compared to hardware MPCs.

7. Chopping. The Ren uses iZotope for auto slicing via threshold as well. Not all hardware MPCs can slice using this method and those that can are inferior. The Ren can chop a sample into 128 regions and map it to pads or program in a matter of seconds. You will struggle trying to do the same thing on a hardware MPC.
The Ren /Studio also have an unlink slice function. Only the JJOS has something comparable.

8. Automation. Most MPCs have a very basic mixer automation. MPC Ren/Studio's automation is quite extensive when compared to MPC hardware and enhanced even further with the use of its 16 Qlink knobs. Plus the Ren/Studio allows users to draw in automation using pencil tool.

9. MIDI. The Ren's 16 Qlinks and 6 banks gives you control of up to 96 params of your external MIDI instrument. The MPC 5000 is next in line but gixes you 5x less functionality.

10. Plugins. MPC Ren/Studio are the only MPCs that can host plugins or be used as a plugin within your DAW. The Ren/Studio ships with several plugin instruments.

11. Step Sequence. Most MPCs do not have a drum maschine styled step-editor...the Ren does.

12. Rex file import. Only the MPC Ren can import Rex files.

13. Drag-n-drop. Outside of the MPC 4000 w/Aksys and Ren/Studio, no other MPC has this capability. The Ren is so wasy to drag-n-drop samples to pads for quick program creation.

14. Export audio tracks. This feature is not found on most hardware MPCs. The Ren can export up to 128 tracks of audio; no MPC comes close to this.

15. MP3 support. Only the Ren supports exporting in MP3 format.

16. Pad banks. The Ren has 8 pad banks for drum programs; double the amount of most hardware MPCs and 2 more than the MPC 4000.

17. Keygroup sampler. Only the MPC 4000, and 5000 have a keygroup sampler. JJ OS has a limited one. No other MPC has this capability.

18. Swing/quantize. MPC Ren/Studio outshines any MPC not named an MPC 4000 and 5000 in this regard. It is equal to or better than the MPC 5000. The MPC 4000 has real time advantage over the Ren. However the Ren beats it on the other emaining capabilities.
19. Pads. Akai did an excellent job with the pads of the Ren/Studio. Gone are the days when striking the corners of pads would not trigger samples. The Ren's pads are equal or better than hardware MPCs.

19. Waveform play indicator. The Ren/Studio provides this most requested function. The JJOS has a similar function. MPC 5000, MPC 4000, MPC 3000, MPC 2000XL/2000, and MPC 500…not possible.

20. Song/Next Sequence Mode. No other MPC can rival the Ren/Studio in this regard.

21. Pad/Track Mute Modes. The Ren is equal to or better than all hardware MPCs in this regard.

22. Mixer. While the Ren/Studio’s mixer is not as flexible as other DAWs on the market, it easily trumps hardware MPCs. Not all hardware MPCs have a track mixer (older ones only have a program mixer). And those with Track mixers don’t have routing to outputs/submixes and insert effects.

23. Sample Record. The Ren /Studio quickly records samples and assigns samples to the active program. You get a visual representation of what sounds are assigned to which pads. Hardware MPCs don’t have the same capability.

24. Global program edit. With the Ren, selecting Edit All and the changing a param with effect the entire program. This applies to most params. Only the MPC 5000 has something similar as well as the JJ OS.

This list grows a little longer with the next update.

That is a very short list of improvements for products thats have been out 20+ years ago. Even funnier that half those features you listed arent even implemented in a logical way or the way they are implemented makes the workflow terrible.

Name a product that does it better? I will buy it tomorrow if I don't already own it.

Many of these arguments are fundamentally flawed from the outset in terms of comparing 'MPC's'.

1. Midi Production Center
2. Music Production Center
3. Music Production Controller

Some of y'all cant even say off the bat which models belong to which group. The evolving meaning of the acronym 'MPC' tells you all you need to know about how the machine was designed to be used. If you really must compare, compare two machines from the same generation of 'MPC'. Legacy mode must of course be compared to the machines it has been modelled on. I have a MPC3000 and an MPC60 so this mode holds no interest for me.


'Center' = in the middle, at the heart, central, the point of focus.
'Controller' = tactile surface, send/ receive commands to or from computer.

Aside from the users choice of controller (Renaissance or Studio) which contains very few components, these products are essentially fancy upgraded MPD's. One in the form of an MPC3000 with buit-in audio interface and another in the form of a square MacBook Pro. It is the software that harnesses the 'power' of the computer. The hardware has no power of it's own to speak of, nor can it do anything but send/ recieve commands or display information.

If you don't have a laptop, then you and the Ren become a fixed installation unless you're prepared to lug a desktop computer around. So the price you pay for the Renaissance/ Studio + the price of a decent laptop = no small investment. If you already have a laptop, good for you.

Don't get me wrong, I love standalone MPC's and always will. But the controller + software concept of the Renaissance/ Studio was an obvious and necessary progression for Akai Pro to remain competitive and move forward. The software has some good features, but for me the best thing about the products is the future potential. Yes rivals NI got there first, but now a new generation of 'MPC' users can get a taste of the hardware workflow, just a taste.

When the software stability is improved and legacy file import is at an acceptable standard, the Renaissance/ Studio may earn the right to sit beside my MPC3000 and MPC4000. For like many others, it is only the actual MPC software that is of any interest to me really.

I am prepared to embrace the future, without letting go of my 'vintage' past. Stop comparing MPC Renaissance and legacy MPC's, the truth is they will complement each other perfectly just like digital and analogue do, once the outstanding issues arte finally resolved. I could never have the MPC Renaissance/ Studio as my only MPC, but it has plenty of DAW-like features I could easily learn to love.


My 2 cents.

Basically at the end of the day legacy mpc hardware and the Ren and Studio are going to have different workflow by the nature of the design especially the design of the windows and the movement of samples. As of now each user can make what they wish with whatever, but on legacy units are mature and stabie with the Ren and Studio going through growing pains in their software. Some may get along without it but a step sequence editor is a basic part of hardware mpcs and that truly separates hardware from any computer based sequencers whatever form it comes in.

JAH wrote:From the experienced I've gained over the past year on the Ren and a decade plus on hardware MPCs, the Ren already exceeds legacy models in many features and stability wise to include but not limited to:

1. Choose your own 3rd party AD/DA converters. Technically, you can do this with the MPC 4000 and MPC 5000 on a certain level. But with the Ren/Studio being software that uses any AD/DA converter attached to your computer, you can have your new MPC with Apogee, RME, Lynx, SSL, Avid, Focusrite, etc AD/DA converters

2. Load/Save times. Load/save times for hardware MPCs are bad especially with larger projects. The Ren loads/saves project files, samples, programs in a fraction of the time hardware MPCs can.

3. Memory. The Ren/Studio 32 bit suppots up to 4 GB of memory. The closest MPC is the MPC 4000 with 512 MB of memory. The most popular MPCs only have 128 MB of memory maxed. Trying to drop an entire song (wav file) into these MPCs to chop as forum members do with the Ren is nearly impossible.

4. CPU. The Ren uses the CPU of your computer. Hardware MPC CPUs are ancient. Trying to create a large Ren-sized project on a hardware MPC with alot of effects, will cripple it.

5. Effects processing. All hardware MPC effects are average at best. This was never a strong point. The most recent hardware MPCs have a 4 buss send effects processor...shared with everything in memory. The Ren/Studio has dedicated effects for every pad and track. This includes 4 send and 4 insert effects for each pad and track. The Qlinks provide convenient control over effect params. No MPC can come close to this. Plus you have the ability to use higher quality 3rd party effects.

6. Sample Edit processing. Time stretching/pitchshifting is barely useable on hardware MPCs. The quality os average..and depending on the model MPC....it can take up to 20 minutes to applied processing to a small sample. Not only does the Ren use iZotope processing. The Ren sounds incredible compared to hardware MPCs.

7. Chopping. The Ren uses iZotope for auto slicing via threshold as well. Not all hardware MPCs can slice using this method and those that can are inferior. The Ren can chop a sample into 128 regions and map it to pads or program in a matter of seconds. You will struggle trying to do the same thing on a hardware MPC.
The Ren /Studio also have an unlink slice function. Only the JJOS has something comparable.

8. Automation. Most MPCs have a very basic mixer automation. MPC Ren/Studio's automation is quite extensive when compared to MPC hardware and enhanced even further with the use of its 16 Qlink knobs. Plus the Ren/Studio allows users to draw in automation using pencil tool.

9. MIDI. The Ren's 16 Qlinks and 6 banks gives you control of up to 96 params of your external MIDI instrument. The MPC 5000 is next in line but gixes you 5x less functionality.

10. Plugins. MPC Ren/Studio are the only MPCs that can host plugins or be used as a plugin within your DAW. The Ren/Studio ships with several plugin instruments.

11. Step Sequence. Most MPCs do not have a drum maschine styled step-editor...the Ren does.

12. Rex file import. Only the MPC Ren can import Rex files.

13. Drag-n-drop. Outside of the MPC 4000 w/Aksys and Ren/Studio, no other MPC has this capability. The Ren is so wasy to drag-n-drop samples to pads for quick program creation.

14. Export audio tracks. This feature is not found on most hardware MPCs. The Ren can export up to 128 tracks of audio; no MPC comes close to this.

15. MP3 support. Only the Ren supports exporting in MP3 format.

16. Pad banks. The Ren has 8 pad banks for drum programs; double the amount of most hardware MPCs and 2 more than the MPC 4000.

17. Keygroup sampler. Only the MPC 4000, and 5000 have a keygroup sampler. JJ OS has a limited one. No other MPC has this capability.

18. Swing/quantize. MPC Ren/Studio outshines any MPC not named an MPC 4000 and 5000 in this regard. It is equal to or better than the MPC 5000. The MPC 4000 has real time advantage over the Ren. However the Ren beats it on the other emaining capabilities.
19. Pads. Akai did an excellent job with the pads of the Ren/Studio. Gone are the days when striking the corners of pads would not trigger samples. The Ren's pads are equal or better than hardware MPCs.

19. Waveform play indicator. The Ren/Studio provides this most requested function. The JJOS has a similar function. MPC 5000, MPC 4000, MPC 3000, MPC 2000XL/2000, and MPC 500…not possible.

20. Song/Next Sequence Mode. No other MPC can rival the Ren/Studio in this regard.

21. Pad/Track Mute Modes. The Ren is equal to or better than all hardware MPCs in this regard.

22. Mixer. While the Ren/Studio’s mixer is not as flexible as other DAWs on the market, it easily trumps hardware MPCs. Not all hardware MPCs have a track mixer (older ones only have a program mixer). And those with Track mixers don’t have routing to outputs/submixes and insert effects.

23. Sample Record. The Ren /Studio quickly records samples and assigns samples to the active program. You get a visual representation of what sounds are assigned to which pads. Hardware MPCs don’t have the same capability.

24. Global program edit. With the Ren, selecting Edit All and the changing a param with effect the entire program. This applies to most params. Only the MPC 5000 has something similar as well as the JJ OS.

This list grows a little longer with the next update.

Thats got to be the most impressive list of things that I dont want in an MPC that I've ever seen.


It seems to me that if making beats is what your into,
you know,
like if your gonna buy an MPC,
that making beats on an actual MPC and then moving it into a daw would give you all that other stuff that a hardware MPC doesn't already do.
But with more soul.

I suppose it really comes down to what kind of interface you're into.

The kids like the daws and the fruityloops better.

I think it also encourages its own (their own) kind of music.
Just like SP's and MPC's did back when they came out.

Personally I'd prefer my beat machine to have a "brain" and a personality.

Then to be an impressively over-priced dongle.