Why doesn't Akai try to surpass the 4000 with the Renaissanc

I mean, Why are are they not, at least, trying to make a better mpc than the 4000. Seems like they are trying to make it superior to maybe a 2000 or maybeeee a 2500/5000. Whats up with that? I mean color pads, bigger projects, computer integration plugins, vst/au, vintage mode, mouse usage, wow big deal, where's all the features from the 4000? I mean it's the same company, the blueprints are there. What am I not understanding?

Why would Akai even think of going the software route thus having a below par software/controller combo, when they were already building hardware mpcs like the 4000 with built in software/OS that runs smooth already, barley crashes, and have tons of great features that were never transferred onto later models, kinda like the 1000/2500/5000, I mean they were ok but still not like the 4000, so with the Ren wouldn't they attempt to match the 4000, or even surpass it????(a decade later) Just saying...

I meant to post this in the main renssaince forum , not the feature suggestions can someone move it?

InspectahEX wrote: I mean it's the same company, the blueprints are there. What am I not understanding?

Firstly, the Akai we have now is a completely different company. The Akai that developed the MPC4000 went bankrupt and laid off all its staff leaving the administrators with a bunch of intellectual property (IP) and a pile of debts to deal with. So the IP was sold off to the highest bidder and then resold until eventually it was bought by Jack O'Donnell who added it to all his other brands (Numark, Alesis, M-Audio, Sonivox etc) under the umbrella 'inMusic'. Apart from the right to use the name 'Akai' and 'MPC', the two companies have no connection whatsoever.

Secondly if you ignore the MPC4000, the OS architecture used by all MPCs from the 60 to the 5000 is fundamentally the same, i.e. each one was simply a progressive adaptation of the previous MPC model. The 4000 wasn't based on that same architecture, it was an adaptation of the Z series sampler which is clearly an entirely different beast. I would also assume the 4000 was developed by a completely different set of personnel to the MPC team.

So when it came to inMusic developing their own MPC, it looks like they decided to go back to the original MPC architecture. Not only would this be more suitable for the kind of MPC they wanted to make (the easy-to use MPC1000), I suspect it was simply easier to understand the architecture of the traditional MPC OS and ultimately cheaper for them in terms of the kind of programmers they needed to hire.

And so the progression continues - the 5000 was just the 1000/2500 OS with a few more tweaks.

And so on to the MPC Software, a mammoth task for a company with no history of developing this type of computer application, so it seems a given that they would cut themselves a bit of a break and choose to base the core features on their last developed MPC, the 5000.

I'm sure some 4000 style features will come eventually, but I think it's also worth remembering that the MPC Software isn't claiming to be an advanced and powerful 'sampler', we've got Kontakt for that. But it would be nice to see 4000 features incorporated that can add to the MPC workflow

BTW I moved this to 'Feature Suggestions & Feedback' as I'm trying to keep the main forum purely about tech support and bugs and ultimately, this is a 'Feature Suggestion/Feedback' topic.

good read^ I agree, they probably used the architecture of the simpler mpcs, I still think they should of went with a more advanced approach with the architecture of the new mpc software like they did the 4000

MPC-Tutor wrote:The Akai that developed the MPC4000 went bankrupt and laid off all its staff leaving the administrators with a bunch of intellectual property (IP) and a pile of debts to deal with. So the IP was sold off to the highest bidder and then resold until eventually it was bought by Jack O'Donnell who added it to all his other brands (Numark, Alesis, M-Audio, Sonivox etc) under the umbrella 'inMusic'. Apart from the right to use the name 'Akai' and 'MPC', the two companies have no connection whatsoever.

I thought it was something like this...

1983-1999 Akai Professional division (parent Akai Electric Company bankrupt in 2000)
2000-2004 Akai Musical Instrument Corp (management buyout in 2000 by the previous American Akai Pro distributors)
2004-2012 NuAkai (Jack O'Donnell)
2012-now inMusic (Jack O'Donnell)

I think that the 1999-2000 change was related to bankruptcy, and that the 2004 change was a possibly a distribution deal and/or buyout.


1997 MPC2000
2000 MPC2000XL
2002 MPC4000

Wouldn't that put the MPC4000 development and production under the AMIC ownership, and not the original Akai Pro Japan, therefore the MPC4000 was possibly not developed by a company that went bankrupt, but the company in-between the original Akai Pro Japan and NuAkai?

Or was the MPC4000 development started before the bankruptcy and buyout in 1999, and further developed and released by AMIC in 2002?


Do Dan, Andy, and the two Petes at NuAkai predate NuAkai, were they working for AMIC or Akai Japan?

Do any of the current development team date back that far?

SimonInAustralia wrote:Wouldn't that put the MPC4000 development and production under the AMIC ownership, and not the original Akai Pro Japan, therefore the MPC4000 was possibly not developed by a company that went bankrupt, but the company in-between the original Akai Pro Japan and NuAkai?

Or was the MPC4000 development started before the bankruptcy and buyout in 1999, and further developed and released by AMIC in 2002?

I don't think anyone knows the exact goings on with this mysterious AMIC company, especially the guy who wrote about it in Wikipedia, my point was that the Akai now is not the same Akai that developed the MPC4000, whether it was Akai Pro Japan or AMIC, although I suspect it was a most likely a project started by the original Akai Pro.

Do Dan, Andy, and the two Petes at NuAkai predate NuAkai, were they working for AMIC or Akai Japan? Do any of the current development team date back that far?

Not sure, but I can't see how anyone who worked on the MPC2000XL OS could have signed off the MPC5000 OS

MPC-Tutor wrote:I don't think anyone knows the exact goings on with this mysterious AMIC company, especially the guy who wrote about it in Wikipedia

It matches what I (vaguely) remember reading on various mailing lists at the time, as it was happening.

I think Nukai accidentally shredded the blueprints for the 4K when they took over, mistaking them for a skanky old printer manual or something.

That's why the 1K, 2500 and 500 are only a fairly small evolution from the 2KXL.

Coz wrote:I think Nukai accidentally shredded the blueprints for the 4K when they took over, mistaking them for a skanky old printer manual or something.

That might also explain their ludicrous refusal to give out a copy of the Z8 Service Manual...

Logic has me thinking that the simple answer is that not enough people use all of the features in the 4000. I am sure they beta tested and the vast majority of users just wanted the bare essentials. Many of the items in the MPC4000 you will already have in other gear. Its a hard sell, trying to tell someone to spend money for the 1%.

In fact I have seen people get laughed out of meetings on that suggestion in the past. Spending money and not having anything to show for it gets you fired in the business world. In a lay person's personal finances they are not thinking about such loses as critically - because they are used to losing money.

Regarding Z4 / Z8.... yeah Lamp they are special units and some of the features not in the MPC-4000 make sampling much faster. It is a good combo to have especially since it doubles your polyphony. 128 polyphony is more than enough. Intense usage of 64 polyphony can leave you wanting. Though I doubt the average MPC user is using their 4000 to the max like that.


Peace
Ian

It's definitely a tough sell nowadays. The MPC4000 was the original "DAW" in a box. It was basically an MPC with Kontakt, and more, in it and at the time, and even now, there was NOTHING like it. Today though, your laptop (and an iPad mini for that matter) can run apps like Kontakt, and 100000000000s of other apps, so all you would really need is the MPC part of it and you are free to load up any number of the 1000000000000s of apps that will do the same thing, and better, than the 4000. If you want an all in one OTB solution, there is nothing like the 4000. If you are in the box, any modern DAW, including Maschine and the Ren, will surpass the 4000 in terms of functionality. There are many things from the 4000 that I'd like to see implemented in the Ren, like real time swing preview, but if you have the Ren and Kontakt, you aren't very far from the 4000 ITB in terms of functionality.

Also, as Ian said, when the 4000 dropped, it was bashed because it was to "radical" and "too much" at the time and too far left from the original MPC workflow. Only recently has the 4000 become appreciated and by now, people are using their laptops. Had the 4000 been appreciated a decade ago, the gear landscape as we know it today might be totally different.

I personally wish that more people appreciated the 4000 back then and maybe Akai wouldn't have gone bankrupt and maybe we'd see more monster all in one box OTB solutions today.

I think the keyword here is 'progress', or a complete lack of it from Akai. In fairness, the 4K and MV were the last of the big beast desktop workstations, and since then the DAW and soft samplers have reigned supreme.

It doesn't matter what you use though, Keygroup Programs can be a bit fiddly to create and assemble. The only major advancement in the past 10 years that I've seen was Keymap Pro, where you could literally throw any sound at it and it would automatically map it out across the keyboard with crossfades etc. Amazing bit of software… shame Apple bought it and subsequently buried it.

So yeah, while hip hoppers might be cool with simple phrase samplers with decent chopping, there's other people who would like to see the more advanced features make a comeback and be developed further.

I dont understand the comparison between an MPC4000 and... Kontakt lol