Holy Crap!

Coz wrote:33 GB is really excessive to rack up in under a year.

My 10+ year old folder containing all my projects, stems and works in progress is only 42 GB.

Not really! Depends on how often you make beats and how many sounds are loaded in the project. Let's say he did 200 beats this year and each project has about 50-100MB of samples and drums. Him using these same sounds in every project would come out to about 15-20GB. Now, if he used the infamous Akai NDC, that number will be even higher. Imagine someone like IMMB who does 150 beats a month! Shit adds up! Don't forget exporting stems and mixes takes space too if bounced to the MPC folder!

But like I said, it depends on how much shit you load and how many beats you do. My projects range from 26MB to 75MB, depending on how much shit I chopped up. Most of mine are around 40MB-60MB.

There's a lot of variables to consider before placing the blame on the software, honestly!

DJ Hellfire wrote:There's a lot of variables to consider before placing the blame on the software, honestly!

It depends on exactly how the software is handling the files. For example, if all my projects contained duplicates of all the huge Kontakt patches I had used over the years, then yeah, my main project folder would be in the terabytes!

I don't think it's sensible for a piece of software to duplicate every file, especially as you're likely to have static folders that are being referenced. I find Spotlight to be reasonably good for locating the occasional missing file. To be honest though, I think audio tracks inevitably allow you to trim your file sizes down. In terms of a beat anyway.

dazastah and Hellfire's responses are on point. Akai went with this method of saving so your projects will always remain intact although sacrificing hard drive space...which is not that much when talking drum kits. I prefer the current method of saving.

You can always add this to the growing list of feature requests/enhancements. Akai is listening to user feedback.

JAH wrote:I prefer the current method of saving.

You would. That's not really a surprise.

If hard drive space is being eaten away unnecessarily then it's an issue.

intelligent design.. yeah i was thinking the same thing like.. i just saved that project or program and it saved the same sounds that i have in another project or program... smh

Coz wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:There's a lot of variables to consider before placing the blame on the software, honestly!

It depends on exactly how the software is handling the files. For example, if all my projects contained duplicates of all the huge Kontakt patches I had used over the years, then yeah, my main project folder would be in the terabytes!

I don't think it's sensible for a piece of software to duplicate every file, especially as you're likely to have static folders that are being referenced. I find Spotlight to be reasonably good for locating the occasional missing file. To be honest though, I think audio tracks inevitably allow you to trim your file sizes down. In terms of a beat anyway.

Kontakt is a different ballgame though as it uses a library that stays stationary and can always be reinstalled from a disk or your NI account. Once you lose a drum sound, they are hard to replace, especially being that we all have 1000's upon 1000's of drum sounds. It's like finding a needle in a haystack. So in comparison, copying an entire Kontakt patch isn't even comparable to a single wave file, IMO.

I think it's very sensible, especially when moving projects between computers, which is why NI gave the option to do it. I just feel much safer with my sounds for my project being conserved in the same location as the project file. This is how I've always saved my beats, even on my XL and 2500. Remember, if a single sound/s is being referenced by multiple projects and that sound file gets corrupted or accidentally erased, you lose that sound for ALL of your projects that reference that file. Having to use some extra hard drive space to give me that piece of mind is well worth it IMO, with the price of storage media!

I will say though that the Ren's current NDC implementation is highly unacceptable as far as file duplication goes.

On the other side, if a Ren user didn't want duplicate sounds, one can simply just save all projects and samples in a single folder. That way, you'll have all your different projects in the folder that all reference the same sounds in that same folder. And there would be no duplicates of samples!

DJ Hellfire wrote:

Coz wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:There's a lot of variables to consider before placing the blame on the software, honestly!

It depends on exactly how the software is handling the files. For example, if all my projects contained duplicates of all the huge Kontakt patches I had used over the years, then yeah, my main project folder would be in the terabytes!

I don't think it's sensible for a piece of software to duplicate every file, especially as you're likely to have static folders that are being referenced. I find Spotlight to be reasonably good for locating the occasional missing file. To be honest though, I think audio tracks inevitably allow you to trim your file sizes down. In terms of a beat anyway.

Kontakt is a different ballgame though as it uses a library that stays stationary and can always be reinstalled from a disk or your NI account. Once you lose a drum sound, they are hard to replace, especially being that we all have 1000's upon 1000's of drum sounds. It's like finding a needle in a haystack. So in comparison, copying an entire Kontakt patch isn't even comparable to a single wave file, IMO.

I think it's very sensible, especially when moving projects between computers, which is why NI gave the option to do it. I just feel much safer with my sounds for my project being conserved in the same location as the project file. This is how I've always saved my beats, even on my XL and 2500. Remember, if a single sound/s is being referenced by multiple projects and that sound file gets corrupted or accidentally erased, you lose that sound for ALL of your projects that reference that file. Having to use some extra hard drive space to give me that piece of mind is well worth it IMO, with the price of storage media!

I will say though that the Ren's current NDC implementation is highly unacceptable as far as file duplication goes.

On the other side, if a Ren user didn't want duplicate sounds, one can simply just save all projects and samples in a single folder. That way, you'll have all your different projects in the folder that all reference the same sounds in that same folder. And there would be no duplicates of samples!

Well put.

DJ Hellfire wrote:So in comparison, copying an entire Kontakt patch isn't even comparable to a single wave file, IMO.

So how does the Ren deal with this? Does it duplicate the wavs from a Kontakt patch?

If you've got your standard 50MB project running and you decide to finesse the beat with your favourite 1GB Kontakt piano patch, does this additional 1GB get saved with your project? If it does then it's obviously pretty lame. I've not encountered another piece of software that acts that way.

No. It doesn't save an additional 1GB Kontakt piano patch with the project.

I never encountered a piece of software that 'acts' the way the MPC Software does...which is the reason why I and many others use it and prefer it over the alternatives.

JAH wrote:No. It doesn't save an additional 1GB Kontakt piano patch with the project.

Then what does it save?

I don't see how someone can rack up 33GB in under a year, unless it's a software issue or user error.

JAH wrote:...which is the reason why I and many others use it and prefer it over the alternatives.

I wouldn't use the term "many".

If you've got decent contacts within the industry you will already be aware that the Ren has woefully under-performed in terms of sales.

The average Ren kit uses 5 mb of samples. See Hellfire's post on the math.

As far as the other comments...I suspect the 'many' forum members here that use the Ren (and participate in this most active forum of all MPC models) don't care about the number of units the Ren has sold.

What 'many' of us do care is that it is a platform that is heavily supported by Akai/Numark. And more updates are pending/planned. I suspect the next 2 updates will excite 'many more' people.

JAH wrote:See Hellfire's post on the math.

It must be the "infamous Akai NDC" in that case then. A software issue, which is what the OP is alluding to.

Then that would be an issue that lies with the OP use of the MPC Software and not impact every user.

JAH wrote:I suspect the next 2 updates will excite 'many more' people.

Maybe... maybe not. A lot of people think the horse has already bolted with the Ren. The top brass at NI think exactly that.