Is it just me or....

Wal Martian wrote:I have 0 experience with these machines but what does the 4000 offer over the 5000? More thump? Just curious.

4000 has pretty much the 96kHz/24bit sampling engine from the Z8 rack mount sampler.

A lot more complex/powerful sampler section than the other MPCs, and a more detailed graphic interface to go with it.

It was a large step up from previous MPCs in sampling power, many think the 5000 as a flagship was a step backwards and not worthy of the flagship number/status.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

Wal Martian wrote:I have 0 experience with these machines but what does the 4000 offer over the 5000? More thump? Just curious.

4000 has pretty much the 96kHz/24bit sampling engine from the Z8 rack mount sampler.

A lot more complex/powerful sampler section than the other MPCs, and a more detailed graphic interface to go with it.

It was a large step up from previous MPCs in sampling power, many think the 5000 as a flagship was a step backwards and not worthy of the flagship number/status.

Im not too sure about that. Its actually a bit impractical these days. You will have better quality using a sampler for multi-sample instruments that has more ram. The aliasing isnt the best on the 4000. Youre not going to compete with a 5 gig multisample piano. Do you really want to wait that long for the sample to load on the 4000? The 4000 convertors are screechy. It turned my nice analog synths into shit. I would like to modify the 4000 convertors. I think I know who can. More on that later.

For these reasons I think Akai actually went in the right direction with the 5000. It is streamlined. You dont need that much ram for a phrase sampler. Of course its not perfect. One, the midi clock is meh. It works great if your sequencing hardware. I actually prefer some of the looseness. It backfires when syncing to a computer.

dustymaestro wrote:The 4000 convertors are screechy. It turned my nice analog synths into shit.

How are you recording your synths? What sample rate are you using?

I've been recording a lot of synth stuff recently and get decent results on the whole.

Direct outputs into 4000 inputs at 44.1. Im on my 2nd mpc 4000.

I haven't worked at 44.1 for years, especially not in the 4K. You should consider stepping things up to 24/48 and see if you get the same result. Maybe even swap cables, go in via a mixer or ideally record in digitally. The term "screechy" is disconcerting because it's not something I have noticed personally. Maybe you've just got golden ears... or a broken machine?

In regard to the 5 gig piano library vs the 4K onboard memory - I think it's an extreme example. I wouldn't want to piece together an 88 note, 4 velocity layered piano in either Kontakt or the 4K. With a gun to my head I'd still do it in the 4K though, simply because I like the hands-on workflow. If I got bored I'd switch to AKsys for a bit, then get back on the machine.

Powerful tools don't need to be used for complex tasks.

dustymaestro wrote: The 4000 convertors are screechy. It turned my nice analog synths into ****. I would like to modify the 4000 convertors. I think I know who can. More on that later.

For these reasons I think Akai actually went in the right direction with the 5000. It is streamlined. You dont need that much ram for a phrase sampler. Of course its not perfect. One, the midi clock is meh. It works great if your sequencing hardware. I actually prefer some of the looseness. It backfires when syncing to a computer.

Akai didn't go the right direction with the 5000 unless you prefer your sampler dumbed down. As you also point out the 5k also suffers from midi jitter. Its looseness basically means a machine designed to keep time cant do what it was designed to. Before I purchased the 4000 I could only view Youtube videos and I swear I could hear the 5ks jitter. That was a big no no for me, but it was a no no anyway when I read about its underwhelming feature set. Roland did the same with the MV8000. They butchered the excellent S 750/60 sampler, dumbed it down massively and stuffed it inside a box which has the timing of a foam fecked, swivel eyed drunken sailor

"screechy". I dont sample in to the 4k so I cant comment on that aspect. But play back is definitely not screechy. I have done a number of listening tests comparing the exact same kit via a soft sampler in my Daw and the 4k. I can barely hear any difference at all. Akai went for a transparent sound - at least on the out puts and they achieved that.

I don't need the 4k to load a 5gig piano and Im pretty sure most folks buying a 4k are not thinking multi gig pianos. Anything I do load is in there in a matter of seconds. Kind of clutching at straws there suggesting its some kind of flaw that we need to wait a few more seconds for something to load in the 4k

These my "model mpc is the best" debates are corny.






Sorry I like that head nod smilie.

labcoats wrote:Akai didn't go the right direction with the 5000 unless you prefer your sampler dumbed down. As you also point out the 5k also suffers from midi jitter. Its looseness basically means a machine designed to keep time cant do what it was designed to. Before I purchased the 4000 I could only view Youtube videos and I swear I could hear the 5ks jitter. That was a big no no for me, but it was a no no anyway when I read about its underwhelming feature set. Roland did the same with the MV8000. They butchered the excellent S 750/60 sampler, dumbed it down massively and stuffed it inside a box which has the timing of a foam fecked, swivel eyed drunken sailorv

"screechy". I dont sample in to the 4k so I cant comment on that aspect. But play back is definitely not screechy. I have done a number of listening tests comparing the exact same kit via a soft sampler in my Daw and the 4k. I can barely hear any difference at all. Akai went for a transparent sound - at least on the out puts and they achieved that.

I don't need the 4k to load a 5gig piano and Im pretty sure most folks buying a 4k are not thinking
multi gig pianos. Anything I do load is in there in a matter of seconds. Kind of clutching at straws



there suggesting its some kind of flaw that we need to wait a few more seconds for something to load in the 4k

+1 on that. When reading the specs on the 8800,it seemed so promising with the audio tracks, & being able to install a gig of ram...But when I got it in the studio it was very uninspiring. It took to many takes to get the timing how I envisioned them.

....but the 4k for me, not only oozes with inspiration, but being able to load my old emu e4 cd-rom in the machine & getting the sound + playability is indispensable. Although I have soft samplers, im really looking to getting a z sampler to add on.
To each his own, but for feature to feature comparison, I would always recommend the 4k.

I feel like I been missing out all these years.....

Owning both the 4000 and a 8000 I can tell you that they are both amazing machines. The 8000 is very dumbed down compared to the amazing 770 but it has it moments (sample slicing like a ninja). The 4000 to me is a little brite, not so much as to be harsh, just bright. I actually like this aspect as it alows me to use it for my samples I want to cut thru the mix. The 8000 on the other hand is a little.... wooley. To me though I really like its sound. And with the prices of 8000/8800s lately I dont know how sample heads can pass on them. Same goes for the 4000 even though around my area they are still going for double what the 8000 is going for. I dont understand why people always want to argue which is the best... blah blah blah. Each one of these machines has a place and should be used to it fullest.

Roecker

You guys really need to stop with the misinformation.

You ready?

What you call midi jitter on the mpc 5000 is considered better than a tight drummer who can play meter in real life. If a hardware sequencer has a max 5 ms of "random shift" (not that random if you look at it), it can't be called "sloppy", because the best option of a real drummer is to be at around 15ms of maximum shift. Is it really that sloppy as some of you claim?

labcoats "I don't need the 4k to load a 5gig piano and Im pretty sure most folks buying a 4k are not thinking multi gig pianos."

Your contradicting yourself because on one hand you say most mpc users dont need those features. When they went back to satisfy the workflow of those "folks" you say they dumbed it down. In actuality they added features specific to chopping in the 5000, that are not available on the 4000.

Uh, wait times on the 4000 arent a few seconds. hey if you like to wait by all means load to your hearts content.


Coz, this is the 2nd 4000 I have owned. If you like to work hands on the mpc, do you! Theres 512 memory in the 4000. You couldnt load a large multsample if you wanted to. I usually end up at 44.1, so thats where I keep it. Sample rates dont mean much to me. I love how the sp1200 sounds. I only need to match the sample rate it will end up on. Ill try it out though, especially if it doesnt make it as bright sounding.

You raised the MIDI jitter as a problem yourself, then you are arguing against it?

It is a drum machine/sequencer, I don't care what a real drummer does or doesn't do, the MPC isn't a real drummer.

If it isn't a problem, why did you mention it yourself as if it was?


You are the one going on (and on) about 5GB pianos, no one else seems to care about them. I don't understand how you are going to load them into an MPC5000 anyway, and what the point is of arguing about 5GB pianos in a MPC4000-MPC5000 comparison.


The MPC5000 is a dumbed down sampler because it is not a fully featured sampler, as you say yourself, it is a phrase sampler. It is nothing to do with having chop shop or not.


You have a 96kHz/24bit sampler, you are using it at 44.1kHz, wondering why your analogue samples don't sound right, while expecting it to sound less bright like an SP1200?

Ummm, if you want it to sound like an SP1200, maybe 96kHz/24bit isn't the best choice of sampling engine.


So, just to recap, MPC5000 is a superior to the MPC4000 because the MPC5000 timing is better than a real drummer, the MPC4000 can't load 5GB piano samples that everyone needs to use, the MPC5000 has a more powerful sampler engine because it has chopshop, and your analogue synths sound screechy/bright in the MPC4000 at 44.1kHz and not like an SP1200.

No point trying to argue with logic like that.


I'm not sure which fails more, the MPC5000 at being a flagship MPC, or your arguments that it is.

Jogar bonito!

The timing on the MPC 4k or 5k isn't the issue with regard to real drumming.

The problem is the amount of work you need to do to replicate the feel of a real drummer. Just think about using a simple ride cymbal - when a real drummer continually hits a ride cymbal in part of a track the subsequent hits choke off the decay of the previous hit so when using a ride cymbal sample you have to account for that.

Then there's all the variability with where the drummer actually hits the cymbal; almost every square inch produces a slightly different timbre. It's a lot of work to get samples to sound like the real deal.

As for mega gig piano samples, yeah yeah. Any piano sample can get your point across. If you have one, and that's the hard part...

Simoninaustralia

Again.... It works great if your sequencing hardware. I actually prefer some of the looseness. It backfires when syncing to a computer.

Your problem is your caught up with "superior" My logic?

I have both of these. I realize they have different features, that excel at different tasks.

Do you know what happens during sample rate conversion? If you mix a project at 96 and have to go down to 44.1 for todays commercial format. Changing to a higher sample rate on my system means changing other pieces as well. Your talking out your ass.

My view on these things arent biased. They all have their pros and cons. Whats good for you doesnt work for everybody. Get over the title of "flagship" It is a marketing thing.




Is it just me or........did you twist my words all around.

SimonInAustralia wrote:So, just to recap, MPC5000 is a superior to the MPC4000 because the MPC5000 timing is better than a real drummer, the MPC4000 can't load 5GB piano samples that everyone needs to use, the MPC5000 has a more powerful sampler engine because it has chopshop, and your analogue synths sound screechy/bright in the MPC4000 at 44.1kHz and not like an SP1200.

No point trying to argue with logic like that.


I'm not sure which fails more, the MPC5000 at being a flagship MPC, or your arguments that it is.

How about a 2 gig rhodes?