MPC Live + MPC X: new standalone touchscreen MPCs?

mr_debauch wrote:that is partially why you have people like dre, premier, and many producers still using the old models... the new models didn't bring anything valuable to the table for them to move on.

Yeah, this is key. Especially when your pay depends on it, you may not want to have to learn a new product, as that'll slow you down at least for a while.
E.g., I use Live for all my mixing and mastering (it's my job), and at one point I thought I'd give Pro Tools a shot in mixing as it's more capable than Live in that respect in a way. I got the hang of it and thought it's working well, but in the end, I couldn't help feeling that I've used Live so much, which allows me to work fast with it – despite its shortcomings – that I could not do the switch in the end. Being comfortable with your main tool does mean a lot.

Heru wrote:

soultrane28 wrote:Saying Akai is in a "design rut" w the MPC is like saying Steinway's in a rut with the pianos... Sales are still strong, though!

Look at Moog, they started cramming in feature after feature, but in the end, it's the release of the original model, the Minimoog, that created the biggest stir. Why? Because it had just the RIGHT amount of controls; not one too many, not one too few. That's the hard part in instrument design.

The Linn 60/3000 were great, but they're pretty unusable from a connectivity standpoint these days (SCSI, Zip Drives, retrofit CF cards nonwithstanding).

To me, the company got sidetracked after the Z4 - Z8; had they kept developing the Aksys software, people would have bought those, I think, because musicians have shown they don't have a preference for putting EVERYTHING on one main machine, i.e. a studio computer.

If this new MPC has 8 ins AND can run the software as good as the Ren in the studio, I'll sell my mixing desk and Ren and whatever else I need to cop to get it.

This will be the most powerful piece, at just the right size, in a long, long while. Especially now that Yamaha and Roland have all but left the workstation market, there's only this, and the Kronos, and we KNOW the MPC sequencer will wipe out the Kronos one.... (between the crashes!)

I see the point that you're trying to make but what makes a Steinway a Steinway is that is adheres to it's tradition of art case pianos which are a works of visual art that at the same time are high quality sounding instruments. Steinway makes traditional grands and uprights which they are more commonly known for but they are actually known for their highly acclaimed design innovation in what is referred to as their special design pianos. Also, a Steinway's relevance is determined by its brand, craftsmanship and aesthetics as an art piece instrument.
MPCs on the other hand are music production controllers/instruments and the nature of the type of technology that they fall under makes it so that it needs to change with the times by being innovative in both design and functionality in order to keep up with constantly evolving landscape of music production and recording which they are geared towards. Being that design in many respects is related to functionality in the production of electronic technology, it would be to Akai's benefit to explore new and innovative design along with new and innovative features and functionality in order for them to compete in a a market where they have lost a great deal of momentum and the the consumer market for not doing so while other companies have.

Yes, but Steinway stopped their innovating in around 1920, when they realized they couldn't get it any better.

The MPC as it was designed by Linn was very good from the instrument side. It looked nice, felt nice, and got quick results. It was soon bypassed by modern technology though, so the technology side of it has needed an update, but does the whole design of it need to be redone?

What I like best about the new MPC X, if it ever comes out, is I can tell how it works just by looking at the picture... It should have come out 5 yrs ago, but hopefully, they get it right.

Not true, Steinway went to electric pianos and made many models of those too.

Point is, it does not look revolutionary. A black Ren with an iPad on top is what it looks like, and knobs look cheap and lazy excuse for sliders.

Perhaps its whats in the box that counts but when I buy a steinway, I look for the most unique and distinct one among the rest.

It just hit me that 2017 will witness a new Blade Runner movie, new Twin Peaks episodes, and a new MPC or two.
I'm not sure I can handle all that.

soultrane28 wrote:

Heru wrote:

soultrane28 wrote:Saying Akai is in a "design rut" w the MPC is like saying Steinway's in a rut with the pianos... Sales are still strong, though!

Look at Moog, they started cramming in feature after feature, but in the end, it's the release of the original model, the Minimoog, that created the biggest stir. Why? Because it had just the RIGHT amount of controls; not one too many, not one too few. That's the hard part in instrument design.

The Linn 60/3000 were great, but they're pretty unusable from a connectivity standpoint these days (SCSI, Zip Drives, retrofit CF cards nonwithstanding).

To me, the company got sidetracked after the Z4 - Z8; had they kept developing the Aksys software, people would have bought those, I think, because musicians have shown they don't have a preference for putting EVERYTHING on one main machine, i.e. a studio computer.

If this new MPC has 8 ins AND can run the software as good as the Ren in the studio, I'll sell my mixing desk and Ren and whatever else I need to cop to get it.

This will be the most powerful piece, at just the right size, in a long, long while. Especially now that Yamaha and Roland have all but left the workstation market, there's only this, and the Kronos, and we KNOW the MPC sequencer will wipe out the Kronos one.... (between the crashes!)

I see the point that you're trying to make but what makes a Steinway a Steinway is that is adheres to it's tradition of art case pianos which are a works of visual art that at the same time are high quality sounding instruments. Steinway makes traditional grands and uprights which they are more commonly known for but they are actually known for their highly acclaimed design innovation in what is referred to as their special design pianos. Also, a Steinway's relevance is determined by its brand, craftsmanship and aesthetics as an art piece instrument.
MPCs on the other hand are music production controllers/instruments and the nature of the type of technology that they fall under makes it so that it needs to change with the times by being innovative in both design and functionality in order to keep up with constantly evolving landscape of music production and recording which they are geared towards. Being that design in many respects is related to functionality in the production of electronic technology, it would be to Akai's benefit to explore new and innovative design along with new and innovative features and functionality in order for them to compete in a a market where they have lost a great deal of momentum and the the consumer market for not doing so while other companies have.

Yes, but Steinway stopped their innovating in around 1920, when they realized they couldn't get it any better.

The MPC as it was designed by Linn was very good from the instrument side. It looked nice, felt nice, and got quick results. It was soon bypassed by modern technology though, so the technology side of it has needed an update, but does the whole design of it need to be redone?

What I like best about the new MPC X, if it ever comes out, is I can tell how it works just by looking at the picture... It should have come out 5 yrs ago, but hopefully, they get it right.

Steinway & Sons has been around since 1853 and as recently as 1988, they made a piano designed by artist Wendell Castle which was considered an innovative design very much out of the box of their traditional grands and uprights. To my knowledge never have enrolled in the idea that they can't make'em any better.

I do agree that the MPCX should have came out a few years ago. It seems that it would have made more of a stir years ago. I am giving Akai the benefit of the doubt though because ultimately I can't make a final judgement until after the MPCX drops. Hopefully I'm wrong and it is a very impressive hardware/software combo. I have a lot of nostalgia when it comes to MPCs so I do want them to win. But at the same time I have to be real; I do feel that Akai has lost a lot of momentum and for a long time have unsuccessfully been playing catch up.

Ill-Green wrote:Not true, Steinway went to electric pianos and made many models of those too.

Point is, it does not look revolutionary. A black Ren with an iPad on top is what it looks like, and knobs look cheap and lazy excuse for sliders.

Perhaps its whats in the box that counts but when I buy a steinway, I look for the most unique and distinct one among the rest.

Right. Steinway's lack of innovation is only applicable to their traditional grands and uprights because the whole point of those pianos are their classic look. They are functional art pieces. But they do make other types of pianos. If you apply the logic that is being made above for Steinway's traditional grands and uprights to MPCs then MPCs should just never change regardless of how production and recording technology evolves and in theory they will always stay relevant because of their classic form and functionality... But you can't apply one's logic to the other because its apples and oranges.

Personally, barring a few minor oversights in the GUI design, I thought the Touch was a great piece of equipment. If they flesh out the details, it'd be a great piece of hardware. I'm in.

Ill-Green wrote:Not true, Steinway went to electric pianos and made many models of those too.

Point is, it does not look revolutionary. A black Ren with an iPad on top is what it looks like, and knobs look cheap and lazy excuse for sliders.

Perhaps its whats in the box that counts but when I buy a steinway, I look for the most unique and distinct one among the rest.

Steinway never made electric pianos, to my knowledge. Their last patent was in 1936.

Whoah I'm drinking my morning coffee, and I don't remember bookmarking Steinway forum.

Steinway & Sons has been around since 1853 and as recently as 1988, they made a piano designed by artist Wendell Castle which was considered an innovative design very much out of the box of their traditional grands and uprights. To my knowledge never have enrolled in the idea that they can't make'em any better.

I do agree that the MPCX should have came out a few years ago. It seems that it would have made more of a stir years ago. I am giving Akai the benefit of the doubt though because ultimately I can't make a final judgement until after the MPCX drops. Hopefully I'm wrong and it is a very impressive hardware/software combo. I have a lot of nostalgia when it comes to MPCs so I do want them to win. But at the same time I have to be real; I do feel that Akai has lost a lot of momentum and for a long time have unsuccessfully been playing catch up.[/quote]

As mentioned, Steinway's last patent was in 1936; they always do innovative commemorative case designs as one-off's, but that's like saying that a Forat MPC3000 is an innovative design of the 3k. No it's not, it's a 3k with a custom paint job / case.

The basic piano itself, the action, the overstrung strings, etc etc, have not changed since the 30's, they're still made the old fashioned way (by hand) at an old factory in Long Island.

The point is not that the MPC is the Steinway of drum machines, but that the basic design is why people like it. There's no need for anything other than 16 pads, and just enough buttons and dials to control all it's functions.

If they have a winner, they can keep updating it in the form of faster processing and larger memory, ala the Kronos or the Nord, plus they can keep selling their expansion packs. But I don't think it needs sliders or any "innovations" to the basic concept; then it wouldn't be an MPC...

mr_debauch wrote:
that is partially why you have people like dre, premier, and many producers still using the old models... the new models didn't bring anything valuable to the table for them to move on.

most recent video I saw of Primo he was on a Renaissance.....someone posted it on here.....

Living Bate wrote:

mr_debauch wrote:
that is partially why you have people like dre, premier, and many producers still using the old models... the new models didn't bring anything valuable to the table for them to move on.

most recent video I saw of Primo he was on a Renaissance.....someone posted it on here.....

And I don't think dre has made a beat since da late 90's but his ghost producers use some use old equipment and some use modern equipment like Khalil use reason, nottz use machince

Fanu wrote:

MPC-Tutor wrote:Yup. That's why they should hook up some serious heavy producers with the units and collect feedback.
I don't mean you gotta be in some major league and earn big bucks, but Akai should send units to people from all fields who make a ton of music and put the units thru their paces (regardless of how much money they make*), rooting out the annoyances that pop up when you use a product heavily.

Yes in an ideal world, but I don't think most working producers have the time nor inclination to commit the required time needed for proper beta testing. I doubt they'd be willing to give up too much of their free time, and very few professionals are going to be happy using buggy software during their work day.

I managed bug reporting while initially writing my MPC Software book, the two went hand-in-hand, but even so I was shocked how much work was involved, it's very draining. For me it's something I'd prefer to dip in and out of when it suits me and my schedule, but that's probably not the kind of (lack of) commitment most companies need from their beta testers, but I suspect that's similarly pretty much the best they're going to get from most busy professionals.

I think it also depends on the company running the beta programme, I suspect Ableton are 'on it' in terms of how they handle their relationship with their beta testers.

MPC-Tutor wrote:I managed bug reporting while initially writing my MPC Software book, the two went hand-in-hand, but even so I was shocked how much work was involved, it's very draining.

This I agree with. Reporting bugs IS a lot of hassle and does take time when you report all the details needed (and if you don't, it may not be of very much use to the company).
This is why most of us just ignore a crash, reload the software and move on.

What's great about Ableton is that the DAW creates a crash report and links you to it, and you can email that to the company. I've also found out my own way of finding out what plugin crashes the DAW by snooping around in the crash log text file.
(non-sandboxed DAWs should be made illegal in 2017, imho, haha)

Living Bate wrote:

mr_debauch wrote:
that is partially why you have people like dre, premier, and many producers still using the old models... the new models didn't bring anything valuable to the table for them to move on.

most recent video I saw of Primo he was on a Renaissance.....someone posted it on here.....

sure, but i don't remember seeing him on a 3000, 2000, 2000xl, 1000, 500, 4000, 2500, or 5000... anyways it was just an analogy.. it isn't specific to what one guy may or may not use.

let's be honest... i doubt primo only used one piece of gear and that's it.. over the years we personally have tried many products... don't you think these full time producers also tried many different products as well? Primo probably has access to more gear to try out than we do. But somehow we look at a couple of pictures and assume we know his routine and more importantly... what is not in his arsenal. That is ridiculous.