Poll: Which MPC sounds the best to you?

Totally agree that my 2000xl sounded great to me. I had a 2500 at the same time for a while. They DEF did not have the same sound. Inputs or ouputs. The filters were miles apart. BUT, the 2500 had faster processing and better features so I didn't fully move on from the 2kxl til some time after JJOSXL. The new machines sound great to me.

IMO the best sounding of the lot was the 3000.

The only sentiment that I disagree with is that they all sound the same. I've used them all except the 60s.

Yeah ok. When a dude writes in yellow that means you wanna be seen have great night bee. No need to explain anything to me.
Peace

Lampdog wrote:
That implies I've never heard/played with X or Live in person. So naïve.

JeriKo Jackson wrote:Totally agree that my 2000xl sounded great to me. I had a 2500 at the same time for a while. They DEF did not have the same sound. Inputs or ouputs. The filters were miles apart. BUT, the 2500 had faster processing and better features so I didn't fully move on from the 2kxl til some time after JJOSXL. The new machines sound great to me.

IMO the best sounding of the lot was the 3000.

The only sentiment that I disagree with is that they all sound the same. I've used them all except the 60s.

Do you think in a blind test, you can tell which machine processed which drum loop?

If had the 3k / 2kxl / 2500 in the same room I probably could. Especially from the filters. And if I did a single cycle waveform test I def could between the 2kxl and 2500

But generally speaking no. All this stuff is very subjective. I'm not claiming magic sauce stuff, but I'm certain about the filter sound and other processing differences.

JeriKo Jackson wrote:If had the 3k / 2kxl / 2500 in the same room I probably could. Especially from the filters. And if I did a single cycle waveform test I def could between the 2kxl and 2500

But generally speaking no. All this stuff is very subjective. I'm not claiming magic sauce stuff, but I'm certain about the filter sound and other processing differences.

The thing with a blind test, is you can't see what machine is being used. It would have to be done, strictly from hearing the audio. I'm not saying their isn't a difference, but the difference is not as recognizable as we think.

In the past, instruments and equipment had unique sonic signatures. But in today's time, emulations has pretty much wiped that out. A plug in can make a SM58 sound like a Neumann U47. This is the reason, Behringer can release 300 dollar synths. They sound close enough to the original and once mixed, no one would be the wiser.

In general people buy based on Style (First), Price (Second), Functionality (Third), Convenience (Fourth), and sonic signature (Fifth). So asking the question: Which MPC sounds the best to you? It's a hard question to answer, because the users of the MPC, will to make it sound, how they hear it.

Profound!!!!!

CharlesRandolph wrote:In general people buy based on Style (First), Price (Second), Functionality (Third), Convenience (Fourth), and sonic signature (Fifth). So asking the question: Which MPC sounds the best to you? It's a hard question to answer, because the users of the MPC, will to make it sound, how they hear it.

If you sample through different filters on different samplers example "asr10" or even if you manipulate the samples with pitch, timestretch, and fx's just right to get the sound you are looking for there's no way you can tell the difference between which mpc is playing.

saltmcgault wrote:If you sample through different filters on different samplers example "asr10" or even if you manipulate the samples with pitch, timestretch, and fx's just right to get the sound you are looking for there's no way you can tell the difference between which mpc is playing.

At some point it is just all noise

CharlesRandolph wrote:A plug in can make a SM58 sound like a Neumann U47

Depends on the pream.
SM58 + High Quality preamp + a bit EQing = Fire
SM58 + shitty preamp = no matter what plugin you use afterwards.

peace

peterpiper wrote:Depends on the pream.
SM58 + High Quality preamp + a bit EQing = Fire
SM58 + **** preamp = no matter what plugin you use afterwards.
peace

All you need is a clean and transparent Mic Pre. Then apply the Modeling Plug In and tweak it. However, the most important part is, the person must know what a Neumann U47 sounds like on their vocals.

saltmcgault wrote:If you sample through different filters on different samplers example "asr10" or even if you manipulate the samples with pitch, timestretch, and fx's just right to get the sound you are looking for there's no way you can tell the difference between which mpc is playing.

Exactly, the sonic signature can be emulated. We used to do test with all kinds of samplers. The goal was to make the sampler, sound as close as possible to the original sample source. We would get so close, that you've sworn it was the original.

There were some samplers, that no matter what you sampled into them. Always added some kind of noticeable color, when compared to the original sample source. Most Akai Pro Samplers and MPC were transparent. The funny thing is every time another MPC comes out, there are people who say. It's too clean

CharlesRandolph wrote:
All you need is a clean and transparent Mic Pre.

Thats what I ment with "High Quality Preamp"
peace

peterpiper wrote:Thats what I ment with "High Quality Preamp"
peace

On the low scale the Audient Mico is nice, if you can find one. People tend to hold on to them. Great for any MPC with a digital input card.

I like the EQ and compressor settings from the 2500. I took those same settings and applied them to the master channel on the X and had good results. Using the effects you can get the X to sound like a lot of drum machines.

Back to the beats.

Danoc wrote:Yeah ok. When a dude writes in yellow that means you wanna be seen

I never understood what "Stop getting automatically offended when you see gold letters." meant until now. lol