MPC 2.8 worth the wait

Eyalc wrote:This is what I think the problem is.

Monotremata wrote:Especially with the MPC. There are so many ways to get what you need done. Its the king of 'workarounds', you might be pulling something off with another function and not touching half of the features inside the OS. Thats alot of **** to skip over, and the way the code itself interacts with the rest of it is kinda important. One teeny tiny change to fix one feature everyone else uses, might break a feature that only 10 people use, so those bugs will just get swept under the rug if those 10 people aren't involved in the beta test.

This is a clear sign that they're putting in too many features. If I was the P.M, I would say okay, lets hold off on adding new features and lets iron out all these wrinkles for our current line up the X, Live 2, One, Force, and Software.

I would then say, sorry MPC Live, touch, Studio, and Ren users. We no longer officially support these machines.

If this is the case they need to release an update 2.8.1 in the next 30days.. just dont see why they would do this.. maschine is regrouping so why not just hit then harder.. idk!!

Monotremata wrote:

Eyalc wrote:This is what I think the problem is.

Especially with the MPC. There are so many ways to get what you need done. Its the king of 'workarounds', you might be pulling something off with another function and not touching half of the features inside the OS. Thats alot of **** to skip over, and the way the code itself interacts with the rest of it is kinda important. One teeny tiny change to fix one feature everyone else uses, might break a feature that only 10 people use, so those bugs will just get swept under the rug if those 10 people aren't involved in the beta test.

I agree 100%. And this is exactly what I think is happening during their testing. It’s also why I keep saying... the foundation needs the attention, not the shiny stuff they keep adding to it. People celebrate the shiny stuff, but the foundation is clearly a mess.

CharlesRandolph wrote:This is a clear sign that they're putting in too many features. If I was the P.M, I would say okay, lets hold off on adding new features and lets iron out all these wrinkles for our current line up the X, Live 2, One, Force, and Software.

I would then say, sorry MPC Live, touch, Studio, and Ren users. We no longer officially support these machines.

Yep, agree.

And yes, drop support for those machines. Heck I would even drop the software if there wasn’t a compelling use base to warrant support.

CharlesRandolph wrote:

Eyalc wrote:This is what I think the problem is.

Monotremata wrote:Especially with the MPC. There are so many ways to get what you need done. Its the king of 'workarounds', you might be pulling something off with another function and not touching half of the features inside the OS. Thats alot of **** to skip over, and the way the code itself interacts with the rest of it is kinda important. One teeny tiny change to fix one feature everyone else uses, might break a feature that only 10 people use, so those bugs will just get swept under the rug if those 10 people aren't involved in the beta test.

This is a clear sign that they're putting in too many features. If I was the P.M, I would say okay, lets hold off on adding new features and lets iron out all these wrinkles for our current line up the X, Live 2, One, Force, and Software.

I would then say, sorry MPC Live, touch, Studio, and Ren users. We no longer officially support these machines.

Why would you not include live1? Its the exact same platform minus CV & usb3(?).

Tabletop wrote:Why would you not include live1? Its the exact same platform minus CV & usb3(?).

Because the MPC LIVE 1 have less buttons and other options which means another software layout to deal with. Best to use that energy/time to make the current models better. From what I see Akai Pro is all over the place.

MPC ONE, MPC LIVE 2, MPC X, FORCE all have different Layout and Program Options. They all share the same bugs and have bugs of their own. I'm not sure how their dev team is setup, but it doesn't appear that they have separate teams for each of them.

To abandon Live 1 (and by extension, Touch) wouldn't be a wise move at all. The difference in button layout is hardly a deal breaker (see: X), and the platforms are fully capable of supporting any changes in the OS/firmware, with a metric shit ton of users still out there (at least for the Live 1). Jesus - thank the magic sky daddy Charlie isn't the P.M.!

There may be a day when that hardware is deemed worthy of losing support, but it's way too soon, IMHO. If anything, dump the Ren.

EnochLight wrote::hmmm:

To abandon Live 1 (and by extension, Touch) wouldn't be a wise move at all. The difference in button layout is hardly a deal breaker (see: X), and the platforms are fully capable of supporting any changes in the OS/firmware, with a metric **** ton of users still out there (at least for the Live 1). Jesus - thank the magic sky daddy Charlie isn't the P.M.!

There may be a day when that hardware is deemed worthy of losing support, but it's way too soon, IMHO. If anything, dump the Ren.

Dropping Live1 for Live2 support makes no sense at all.
They are the same device, same cpu, same OS, all is the same.

I would probably be a terrible beta tester because my workflow is pretty simplistic. It’s probably due to starting on older mpcs with limited features (compared to now).

Most hip hop producers I know that use mpcs use them in a pretty straight forward manner. Sample, chop, layer/simult , filter, sequence. A lot of the current features aren’t even being used. I remember when everybody freaked out when the software first came out that the classic envelope settings weren’t there (decay start etc). But in theory the new envelope was more versatile. I still prefer the classic envelope to this day lol

Lumi wrote:Dropping Live1 for Live2 support makes no sense at all.
They are the same device, same cpu, same OS, all is the same.

Yeah, same hardware under the hood... and the touchscreen interface is exactly the same, so even though button mappings produce a different workflow to some extent, the functionality is all there and you can get to all of the settings other than CV output.

NearTao wrote:Yeah, same hardware under the hood... and the touchscreen interface is exactly the same, so even though button mappings produce a different workflow to some extent, the functionality is all there and you can get to all of the settings other than CV output.

This is why there are so many bugs and why we get bloatware like splice, instead MIDI Polyphonic Expression. This is why we get ableton link, instead of audio over IP or the ability to cascade to Akai Devices. This is why the other Akai Pro hardware is not fully integrated with the MPC. This is why we can export MP3 but can't export MIDI files in standalone.

J.O.BEATS wrote:I would probably be a terrible beta tester because my workflow is pretty simplistic. It’s probably due to starting on older mpcs with limited features (compared to now).

Most hip hop producers I know that use mpcs use them in a pretty straight forward manner. Sample, chop, layer/simult , filter, sequence. A lot of the current features aren’t even being used. I remember when everybody freaked out when the software first came out that the classic envelope settings weren’t there (decay start etc). But in theory the new envelope was more versatile. I still prefer the classic envelope to this day lol

This is why the MPC ONE works so well. It' has 99% of the features of the MPC X and LIVE. It does 99% more than any other sampler/drum machine in that price range. A straight forward manner means, make music and less thinking about how to use the gear.

Eyalc wrote:
Yep, agree.

And yes, drop support for those machines. Heck I would even drop the software if there wasn’t a compelling use base to warrant support.

Yes, that's the only way to repair a fractured user base and it's the key to getting everyone on the same page. Everyone's on a different machines, with a different workflow, with a slightly different variations of the software. All with the same bugs and different bugs.

NearTao wrote:

Lumi wrote:Dropping Live1 for Live2 support makes no sense at all.
They are the same device, same cpu, same OS, all is the same.

Yeah, same hardware under the hood... and the touchscreen interface is exactly the same, so even though button mappings produce a different workflow to some extent, the functionality is all there and you can get to all of the settings other than CV output.

Exactly. The only reason - literally the only reason - there are bugs is because Akai refuses to do a proper beta test before official launch. Instead, the entire customer base becomes their unwitting beta testers.

CharlesRandolph wrote:

NearTao wrote:Yeah, same hardware under the hood... and the touchscreen interface is exactly the same, so even though button mappings produce a different workflow to some extent, the functionality is all there and you can get to all of the settings other than CV output.

This is why there are so many bugs and why we get bloatware like splice, instead MIDI Polyphonic Expression. This is why we get ableton link, instead of audio over IP or the ability to cascade to Akai Devices. This is why the other Akai Pro hardware is not fully integrated with the MPC. This is why we can export MP3 but can't export MIDI files in standalone.

I think I respectfully disagree on your points... but I suspect the reality is that we are making somewhat different points. Regardless of all that... I think we both agree that there definitely are a few stinkers in the 2.8 update that really should not have seen the light of day.

NearTao wrote:I think I respectfully disagree on your points... but I suspect the reality is that we are making somewhat different points. Regardless of all that... I think we both agree that there definitely are a few stinkers in the 2.8 update that really should not have seen the light of day.

Yes, that's going to happen. Especially, when there are too many version of the same machine. Typically most companies have the same OS but different CPU, RAM, and Internal storage. But the MPC does not follow that formula. They have different I/O, Knob and button layout, which requires a slightly different OS.

That has fractured the user base. Someone had an issue with their MPC LIVE 2 speakers, but no MPC X, LIVE, One user can help or relate. MPC Live and One user talk about the qlink overlay, but can MPC X users relate. Did they get the overlay?