Vintage Mode Marketing Discussion continues....

JAH wrote:

MPC-Tutor wrote:Have to say, I was initially under the impression that 'Vintage Mode' was a hardware/software combo. Why wouldn't you? It's a feature locked in to the MPC that has an audio interface with the 'mpc3000-modelled' circuitry. It's a very easy assumption to make.

As for NAMM videos clearing it up, well I guess it depends which one you watch. Try 2.56 on this one.

That is what I was pointing out earlier when I stated there were product specialist(s) stating incorrect information...which Dan quickly cleared up. Everyone here has seen Dan's video multiple times over the past year...and still confused...

While you ignore Tutor's succinct and accurate description of how the confusion ensued and was not properly made clear even after Dan's "retraction/clarification", or whatever you'd call it. Both terms are too generous really.

And of course the copy on the box itself. So yeah it's a year later and Akai hasn't shown one bit of proof that anything internally in the Ren is 1:1 to the 3000. And of course that makes you take issue with anyone asking the questions rather than Akai.

Only you would take a well written post that is largely a counter point to your whole position and try to grab one sentence and act like the post co-signed your (very often "moving target" of a) position.

JAH wrote:Everyone here has seen Dan's video multiple times over the past year...and still confused...

Nope, have not seen Dan's video at all.

Not everyone watched Dan's video 100s of times, like you, that is a little weird.

The only one confused here is you.

Metatron72 wrote:Only you would take a well written post that is largely a counter point to your whole position and try to grab one sentence and act like the post co-signed your (very often "moving target" of a) position.

It is crazy sh it!

I didn't need to read what Tutor wrote to know how confusion ensued. Just like you are confused as you are responding to me but didn't read or don't understand what I wrote.

I very clearly stated product specialists gave misleading information. Dan had to clear up this information. This info was available (again) 1 year, 3 months ago......

Now you want proof that the Ren's circuit path is the same as the MPC 3000? I seriously doubt anyone would entertain your paranoia. That is some crazy sh!t....

SimonInAustralia wrote:The only one confused here is you.

As always.

Please note as usual you are the ONLY person here with your position. Most sane people don't take that as confirmation they are correct.

What am I confused about about?

Again it's a year later and these phantom 3000 circuits are yet to be seen, discussed or described. The issue isn't whether Dan in one video said, " oh yeah it was confusing".

Last time I checked ad copy on a retail box would qualify as marketing, obviously the broader topic at hand. So enough about how Dan's statement made all this a non issue, and somebody show the alleged circuits.

How the hell is people wanting confirmation of something directly stated, albeit vaguely, on the damn box paranoid...?

No, paranoid is making it your unpaid life's vocation to defend a company like they're your damn blood relatives.

Metatron72 wrote:...and somebody show the alleged circuits.

This is silly....

The videos being discussed is marketing. Continuing to discount a clear, concise explanation makes no sense...

If you don't understand or confused...just admit it. If you believe Akai is lying...just say so. If you want proof, then invest time, energy and do your own research and not ask someone to do it for you.

I doubt Akai is going to bend to your whims and take apart an MPC 3000 and Ren and post it on You Tube. You actually think most people actually care about this topic?

JAH wrote:

Metatron72 wrote:...and somebody show the alleged circuits.

This is silly....

Expecting what is advertised on the box is far from silly. You're running out of BS "retorts".

Really all you've established is you believe whatever Akai says as gospel truth and someone saying, "umm...can that claim be verified" is some radical thing...

JAH wrote:

Metatron72 wrote:...and somebody show the alleged circuits.

This is silly....

The videos being discussed is marketing. Continuing to discount a clear, concise explaination makes no sense...

If you don't understand or confused...just admit it. If you believe Akai is lying...just say so. If you want proof, then invest time, energy and do your own research and not ask someone to do it for you.

I doubt Akai is going to bend to your whims and take apart an MPC 3000 and Ren and post it on You Tube. You actually think most people actually care about this topic?

no one is expecting AKAI to post this info online, jah... but why would you be against people on these forums looking further into the ren's cicruitry and posting it here?? aren't you at all curious about what "your favorite MPC EVER" has inside it?? ...or are you just scared that the poop is about to hit the fan big time regarding false claims on AKAI's behalf???

Metatron72 wrote:

JAH wrote:

Metatron72 wrote:...and somebody show the alleged circuits.

This is silly....

Expecting what is advertised on the box is far from silly. You're running out of BS "retorts".

Really all you've established is you believe whatever Akai says as gospel truth and someone saying, "umm...can that claim be verified" is some radical thing...

You are the one running out of 'retorts.' I am simply stating the obvious. No one said expecting what is advertised is silly. But expecting someone to prove it to you is silly. Acquire a Ren and MPC 3000 and take them apart to see for yourself.

This goes back to what I was saying earlier. It simply doesn't matter. You will continue to believe what ever you want. Some of you have some strange obsession with looking for a smoking gun.

JAH wrote:Acquire a Ren and MPC 3000 and take them apart to see for yourself.

Don't have to, dude in other thread posted schematic of Renaissance audio output circuit.

Just have to compare that to the MPC3000 audio output circuit in the service manuals.

It seems to just be a standard DA anti-aliasing filter circuit anyway, which they are using to try and claim that it has the same audio circuits, and therefore same sound, as the MPC3000.

JAH wrote:This goes back to what I was saying earlier. It simply doesn't matter. You will continue to believe what ever you want. Some of you have some strange obsession with looking for a smoking gun.

This thread is about the way it is marketed, it has been proven that it was marketed as having the MPC3000 audio components, obviously in an attempt to make people think it will sound as good as what they think an MPC3000 sounds.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

JAH wrote:Acquire a Ren and MPC 3000 and take them apart to see for yourself.

Don't have to, dude in other thread posted schematic of Renaissance audio output circuit.

Just have to compare that to MPC3000 audio output circuit and see how it compares.

I was under the impression he posted the schematics of the MPC 3000s output circuit. Either way, let us know what you find.

SimonInAustralia wrote:This thread is about the way it was marketed, it has been proven that it was marketed as having the MPC3000 audio components, obviously in an attempt to make people think it will sound as good as what they think an MPC3000 sounds.

Yes, the thread is about marketing. Marketing is claiming that the Ren has the MPC 3000 sound. It is advertised to accomplish this by using MPC 3000 'circuitry' which contributes to the MPC sound....adding crunch to your samples when you increase the gain, etc. It is advertised that the emualtions are software-based.

It has been verified that the emulations are software-based as advertised. What is left is for you to prove the 'circuitry' claim.

JAH wrote:Yes, the thread is about marketing. Marketing is claiming that the Ren has the MPC 3000 sound. It is advertised to accomplish this by using MPC 3000 'circuitry' which contributes to the MPC sound....adding crunch to your samples when you increase the gain, etc..

Yes, adding crunch to your samples when you increase the record input gain, overloading the input circuitry.

This is not the anti-aliasing output circuitry that they are using as the basis for their claims.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

JAH wrote:Yes, the thread is about marketing. Marketing is claiming that the Ren has the MPC 3000 sound. It is advertised to accomplish this by using MPC 3000 'circuitry' which contributes to the MPC sound....adding crunch to your samples when you increase the gain, etc..

Yes, adding crunch to your samples when you increase the record input gain, overloading the input circuitry.

This is not the anti-aliasing output circuitry that they are using as the basis for their claims.

Which takes us back to the video where Dan clarified what they did to the hardware and software to bring the MPC sound to your laptop. Maybe you should watch it 100 times....

SimonInAustralia wrote:

JAH wrote:Everyone here has seen Dan's video multiple times over the past year...and still confused...

Nope, have not seen Dan's video at all.

Not everyone watched Dan's video 100s of times, like you, that is a little weird.

The only one confused here is you.

Neither have I, Jah did even tho he "knew everything about the product already"


guess it's that much better when it's official

JAH wrote:

SimonInAustralia wrote:Yes, adding crunch to your samples when you increase the record input gain, overloading the input circuitry.

This is not the anti-aliasing output circuitry that they are using as the basis for their claims.

Which takes us back to the video where Dan clarified what they did to the hardware and software to bring the MPC sound to your laptop. Maybe you should watch it 100 times....

No, I shouldn't watch it 100 times, cause that is f'ing retarded.

Whatever he said in a video has no relation to how it was marketed.

It was marketed as having the same audio hardware as the MPC3000, it doesn't.

It said it in the press release, it says it on the box, that is how it is marketed.

SimonInAustralia wrote:It was marketed as having the same audio hardware as the MPC3000, it doesn't.

In one of the videos Dan tries to debunk the debunking, by saying something about the forum member not using a legitimate schematic. It's probably already been posted. I haven't got time to watch all that stuff again.