Vintage Mode Marketing Discussion continues....

JAH wrote:If you don't understand or confused...just admit it.

Everyone here understands, and no one is confused except for you.

JAH wrote:If you believe Akai is lying...just say so.

We do, we are, they did, they do.

JAH wrote:If you want proof, then invest time, energy and do your own research and not ask someone to do it for you.

He is perfectly entitled to ask.

I am happy to try and help, if I can.

JAH wrote:I doubt Akai is going to bend to your whims and take apart an MPC 3000 and Ren and post it on You Tube.

This is not one of our whims, that scenario is a figment of your imagination.

No one expects they would, users will do it themselves.

JAH wrote:You actually think most people actually care about this topic?

We care, that is all that matters.


So stop trying to shut down yet another thread that you do not agree with, sh itting in it with page after page of illogical trolling and irrational circular debate.

Coz wrote:

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.

So he is saying that it is actually the same output circuitry?

Doesn't matter what he says really, someone needs to check it to know for sure.

JAH wrote: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..

...even Jerome admits that they are marketing it as having MPC3000 circuitry in the Renaissance, and that circuitry is supposed to give you the legendary MPC3000 crunch, the MPC3000 sound.

Problem is, any crunch added by increasing gain in an MPC3000 is happening in the input circuirty, when the sample is being recorded, not in the output circuitry, which is what they are using in the Renaissance?

It is misleading advertising for sure.

Coz wrote: not using a legitimate schematic.

Non schematics and non mathematics

SimonInAustralia wrote:So he is saying that it is actually the same output circuitry?

That's what I've heard several times across the various videos, but the whole vintage mode spin has completely unravelled at this point.

This thread is a worthwhile discussion because the whole premise of the Ren was marketed around the 'iconic' feel, sound and workflow of hardware MPCs. What part did they get right? There's gaping holes in every aspect IMO.

sally wrote:

Coz wrote: not using a legitimate schematic.

Non schematics and non mathematics

Or non-sense.

It's clear you (plural) are skeptical of Akai's marketing as you wrote it dozens of times across multiple threads. So now what?

You are options are to:
1. Not purchase the Ren
2. Find someone to verify Akai's claims...then buy or not buy the Ren
3. Chase your tail

The problem is, you will most likely not find anyone that owns both the Ren and the MPC 3000. If you did find such a person, it is likely they will not be interested in anything being discussed here. And even if you did find a willing MPC 3000/MPC Ren owner, it would be doubful they have the capacity or technical know who to assess Akai's claims.

The only interesting thing about this thread is the fact that the individuals responding the most don't own either product.

So typical of you, your de facto gods make a claim, people are like OK cool, how was that actually carried out...?...and you think the people asking the question are the weird ones?

Find someone to verify Akai's claims...ummm how about Akai?

And cut this BS about Akai doing tear downs and You Tube videos, just laughable ish from you as always. All it would take is a statement from a technically savvy Akai rep that could properly describe, 1. the original components in question, 2. how these components were reproduced in the physical architecture of the Ren.

It's no more complicated than that. Take Korg's new MS20 mini videos. There you have the original MS20 designer describing what is identical in the new model and what changes had to made and why. That is how you market to an informed user base.

And Jerome don't even clutch at straws that I'm using a near 1:1 synth remake as an example. The example is valid because we are discussing marketing, claims made therein and demonstrable proof of the claims.

JAH wrote:You are options are to:
1. Not purchase the Ren
2. Find someone to verify Akai's claims...then buy or not buy the Ren
3. Chase your tail

4. Discuss it as much as we want to.

Why do you think it is up to you to decide what we do and don't do? Fuk off, seriously!

This is an example of you trying to shutdown a thread because you do not agree with what is being said.

JAH wrote:The problem is, you will most likely not find anyone that owns both the Ren and the MPC 3000. If you did find such a person, it is likely they will not be interested in anything being discussed here.

We don't have to find someone that owns both a Renaissance and an MPC3000, we only need someone with a Renaissance to trace out the circuit.

...or, find a copy of the schematics.

JAH wrote:And even if you did find a willing MPC 3000/MPC Ren owner, it would be doubful they have the capacity or technical know who to assess Akai's claims.

I do not doubt that there will be a Renaissance owner who is interested enough to trace out the circuit.

Once you know how the circuit is laid out, and what components are being used, it is not very hard to compare that to the same circuits in the MPC3000, it is either the same, or it is not.

JAH wrote:The only interesting thing about this thread is the fact that the individuals responding the most don't own either product.

You might be obsessed with what everyone else owns, or doesn't own, that is your problem, and you might find this discussion uninteresting, that is fine, don't post in here.

We find it interesting, go away.

JAH wrote:The only interesting thing about this thread is the fact that the individuals responding the most don't own either product.

whatever helps you sleep at night

the only interesting thing is that after you've owned, bragged and worshiped particular products you still haven't posted a single beat

guess in the end it's same difference..

Metatron72 wrote:So typical of you....

...to discuss products I own and not concern myself with products I don't own. But let's try to stay on topic for once and stop with the side attacks when you are losing a debate.

You gentleman assert that Akai is deceiving customers and potential customers and want them to show evidence to the contrary. And you are probably even writing this with a straight face. Do you actually believe Akai is going to take busy time out of their schedules to address this? Especially when you would simply say afterwards, you need 3rd party verification. Hopefully, you start to see how ridiculous this sounds.

...and I know exactly what you will respond next with. You will go on about how ridiculous I sound by stating the obvious.....call me a shill, gear collector, challenge me to beat battles, etc, etc. All because you don't have anything new to add to the topic that you haven't already said dozens of times....

JAH wrote:

Metatron72 wrote:So typical of you....

...to discuss products I own and not concern myself with products I don't own. But let's try to stay on topic for once and stop with the side attacks when you are losing a debate.

...no, for you to try and derail a thread that you do not think has any value.

It is you that has lost this debate, like most others.

JAH wrote:You gentleman assert that Akai is deceiving customers and potential customers

There is no assertion, there is proof.

JAH wrote:and want them to show evidence to the contrary. And you are probably even writing this with a straight face. Do you actually believe Akai is going to take busy time out of their schedules to address this? Especially when you would simply say afterwards, you need 3rd party verification. Hopefully, you start to see how ridiculous this sounds.

No, we will analyse the circuits ourselves, find our own evidence.

Unfortunately, you will never see how ridiculous you sound.

JAH wrote:...and I know exactly what you will respond next with. You will go on about how ridiculous I sound by stating the obvious.....call me a shill, gear collector, challenge me to beat battles, etc, etc. All because you don't have anything new to add to the topic that you haven't already said dozens of times....

No, it is because you feel a need to debate this over and over, a topic that you are not interested in, you just want to argue and derail the thread because you think it has no value.

This thread has not gone off topic in a single post. And there is no debate, only in your warped mind Jerome. Every other poster agrees it's confusing marketing and merits a definitive explanation as part of the advertised premium Ren exclusive features.

You are the only one that doesn't think it was presented poorly (even post retraction in your precious video) while everyone else sees the issue with the vague nature of the copy on the box coupled with conflicting statements, with no definitive description of the box's claim.

For the last time, it is not a consumers responsibility to verify product claims. It is the responsibility of the vendor to make sure the claim or advertised feature is described factually. (But as Simon mentioned Akai's vagueness would force a user to verify he actually got what was advertised.)

You're right this thread is repeating the same obvious observations. It's the fact you can't leave it alone that it's gone into circle mode. Which as always is your intention. Only one chasing tails is you.

Why if the feature was presented and described and demonstrated and proven to share circuitry with the 3000 as claimed would we need third party verification? Don't assume we are all as bizarre and paranoid as you.

You need to keep straight who you're talking to and quoting. It's konc3pt who brings up you having no beats. A shill, well yes certainly I would call you that until the end of time itself. Because that's what you are.

Last time. Claim on box = unverified. Explanations from Akai = contradictory and vague. But you post an implication that you are winning a non existent debate with other posters just observing a situation and not finding satisfactory answers.

You're just assuming that the claim is 100% factual and/or not caring yourself constitutes you winning a "debate".

The next time a thread is an actual real debate...a win would be your first here.

Metatron72 wrote: Every other poster agrees it's confusing marketing and merits a definitive explanation as part of the advertised premium Ren exclusive features.

Andreat668, Es-K, AnSola, Konc3pt, Labcoats, SimonInAustralia, Crossing, Clint, Kaydigi, Haze3000, Hermit Crab, Fobedafied, Cloud777, Coz, Ill-Green, MaZe, Metatron72, Tapedeck, Sally, MPC Tutor, Danny, Pk1, Typo, Grinchmob, Mcroepster, and Jah (me) all have left feedback in this thread. Some comments were on topic. Half the comments were personal attacks as usual.

The consenus is that Akai's marketing is misleading. And that is telling. What is also telling is that most of you guys responding don't own these products and spend every minute in this section of the forum usually saying something negative. Of course you will deflect this and claim its not relevant. Also note that the majority of Ren/Studio users in the forums are not participating in this thread....I should follow their lead.

Please do follow their lead. If you had just not pulled your usual BS this thread would be a page long. But intelligent observant people tend to have to point out nonsense, so you force hands to keyboards. (But that's your plot by design and you know it)

Just another one of your posts that in 2 paragraphs says absolutely zero.

What's your point in the second paragraph? You notice the consensus of this thread is in opposition to you're personal view? Well yeah... A quick glance at your stupid list shows immediately that the consensus of this marketing being an issue is at minimum 20-2.

Only 3 people on that list just straight troll/clown you. Everyone else is just posting normally. This as always, all stems from you going into manic mode every time you read an observation or concern or even gripe about these products that is not shared by you. (Or flat out denial of reality as in this thread).

All your posts have established is you're upset at everyone who noticed the obvious and said WTF?

Metatron72 wrote:Please do follow their lead. If you had just not pulled your usual BS ?

I gave my opinion without attacking or insulting anyone. But because I disagree it is BS? Sounds like that is your usual BS when I don't agree. Then take into account what I am actually agreeing or disagreeing about.

I make no claim what the Ren is or isn't. I simply said I was never confused about the marketing pointing to Dan's video. What mature person of sound mind and body is going to attack another because they didn't understand what someone else understood?