MPC XL - CODE NAME ACV5S - A NEW MPC X FOR SOON ?

jpeg wrote:what is missing from the akai sampler and what is missing from the sequncer appart from the force arranger mode

Have you ever used a 'real' sampler before or just the janky playback machine inside the MPC? There's a whole world out there aside from just being able to play back your static drum hits and loops with some third rate effects plugins piled on. I just picked up the new Halion last week, and just like my old EMU it shits all over the 'sampler' inside the MPC..

I could spend a fair amount of time listing all the sampling features they could add, it's really lagging behind in that respect and it doesn't seem like that's the direction they want to take things. In fact it's been pretty static on this front since the original MPC Software release (which was mostly based on the MPC5000 sample engine). They only need to look to their own legacy (MPC4000, S series) to see the kind of features and workflows they could start adding; this is before looking at what's now possible in modern solutions.

If plugins are the new direction, maybe they could look at developing a kontakt clone. Obviously would prefer that they built it into the core software, but if it brings higher level sampling features I'd be happy either way.

MPC-Tutor wrote:I could spend a fair amount of time listing all the sampling features they could add, it's really lagging behind in that respect and it doesn't seem like that's the direction they want to take things. In fact it's been pretty static on this front since the original MPC Software release (which was mostly based on the MPC5000 sample engine). They only need to look to their own legacy (MPC4000, S series) to see the kind of features and workflows they could start adding; this is before looking at what's now possible in modern solutions.

What's missing, are the Older Beta Testers/Engineers from the days of the MPC4000, S-Series Samplers. Let's face it...We're the last of a Dying Breed. InMusic/Akai is NOT going to bring in Extinct Dinosaurs to help them Design/Test the Golden Features of the Legacy Models.
Akai Engineering staff are 19-30year old's who are fluent in New Millennium Software Technology. They could hire Me, Tutor and Lamp to Design/Beta Test those Old Legacy Features, into the MPC 3.0 Software...BUT....We'll want to be HEAVILY COMPENSATED
That's the Last thing InMusic Accounting Division will allow lol

Monotremata wrote:

jpeg wrote:what is missing from the akai sampler and what is missing from the sequncer appart from the force arranger mode

Have you ever used a 'real' sampler before or just the janky playback machine inside the MPC? There's a whole world out there aside from just being able to play back your static drum hits and loops with some third rate effects plugins piled on. I just picked up the new Halion last week, and just like my old EMU it shits all over the 'sampler' inside the MPC..

far as I know mpc as it is currently is a real sampler; again what features do u perform on halion that cant be done on mpc?

for the most part playing back static drum hits and loops is the main thing people use mpcs for

MPC-Tutor wrote:I could spend a fair amount of time listing all the sampling features they could add, it's really lagging behind in that respect and it doesn't seem like that's the direction they want to take things. In fact it's been pretty static on this front since the original MPC Software release (which was mostly based on the MPC5000 sample engine). They only need to look to their own legacy (MPC4000, S series) to see the kind of features and workflows they could start adding; this is before looking at what's now possible in modern solutions.

If plugins are the new direction, maybe they could look at developing a kontakt clone. Obviously would prefer that they built it into the core software, but if it brings higher level sampling features I'd be happy either way.

maybe those old feature sets are no longer needed in todays production process hence why they have been omitted

jpeg wrote:
maybe those old feature sets are no longer needed in todays production process hence why they have been omitted

What you said makes no sense. They could have distributed Fabric as simple expansion yet they didn't because the current sampling engine just doesn't allow the articulations that are built in Fabric, limiting Fabric instances to 8 per project as a result, while keygroups don't have these limitations... Clearly what you deem "no longer needed" is needed by AKAI themselves. Their sampling engine doesn't even have a mod matrix and since the MPC doesn't have macros, good luck assigning any parameter of an entire key-group to a control change? needed by whom? Just not by you maybe because you are not an expansion producer or keyboard player.

mpc_fan_2022 wrote:

jpeg wrote:
maybe those old feature sets are no longer needed in todays production process hence why they have been omitted

What you said makes no sense. They could have distributed Fabric as simple expansion yet they didn't because the current sampling engine just doesn't allow the articulations that are built in Fabric, limiting Fabric instances to 8 per project as a result, while keygroups don't have these limitations... Clearly what you deem "no longer needed" is needed by AKAI themselves. Their sampling engine doesn't even have a mod matrix and since the MPC doesn't have macros, good luck assigning any parameter of an entire key-group to a control change? needed by whom? Just not by you maybe because you are not an expansion producer or keyboard player.

not sure what did not make sense; but to illustrate my point it could be that maybe they wanted fabric to be a vst instrument instead of an expansion; clearly akia is focused on devleoping virtual instruments, presumably they feel that there is more demand for instruments then for tack sampler sampler features.

maybe a sizeable amount of their mpc customer base dont use the features from the old rackmount sample era, u speak of the mod matrix in the sampler being missing, but how much of the userbase wants that functionality?

it seems that akia is putting an increased focus on the consumer/hobbyist marke;t so there is less focus on developing the archane featureset of the rack mount era; as their new target audience does not require that featureset, hence the focus on vst and sound packs.

maybe akai are using the logic that if people want deeper sampling functions then they can go and gry kontakt or halion so they see no need to add those features in mpc, or maybe those features are coming but they are a lower priority because they are not features that sell units.

If the keygroup sampler engine had enough features, it could be used to develop proper instruments by 3rd party developers. You could call the instruments "plugins" if you want.

jpeg wrote:maybe a sizeable amount of their mpc customer base dont use the features from the old rackmount sample era, u speak of the mod matrix in the sampler being missing, but how much of the userbase wants that functionality?

Some thoughts after going through the process of old versus new MPC versus modern-day DAW:

* The mod matrix was cool from a sound design perspective, the bugs of the 4000 weren't

* If I want to do sound design, an MPC is the last place I want to do it versus an ultrawide monitor and flexible routing and countless pieces of software with way more possibilities and easier workflow

* The old MPCs were and still are capable machines, especially with JJOS

* A lot of people don't own computers, they just own a smartphone, hence the DAW-less fetishization and interest in standalone workflows; they're largely just hobbyists demographically speaking

* Modern MPCs are capable, but are more hobbyist-friendly and honestly much more toy-like in reliability of software; a lot more complexity with a proper Linux OS running on a SoC with drivers galore

* A groovebox-sampler doesn't need to be anything more than the absolute basics, it just needs depth rather than breadth, which is what ultimately pissed me off with Maschine and modern-day MPC

* Software-based samplers within a DAW are in a whole other league than any kind of modern "hardware" sampler (and I use that term very loosely as they're all software running on a SoC these days)

tl;dr if it works for you, it works for you. I love me a groovebox-sampler for quickly getting ideas down with muscle-memory and minimal friction, but modern-day ones leave a lot to be desired, and with the death of ReWire, a groovebox-like workflow ala Ableton Live isn't available today, hence the interest in the MPC. But it just isn't there yet for me.

I think it's a fair point that the bulk of Akai's target market these days seems to be producers looking for ready-made presets and instruments, they are unlikely to be that bothered with advanced sampling options for their own uses.

But as someone stated above, people developing sampler instruments would certainly be interested in having those features so in turn they can also develop a range of ready made instruments to add to the options offered by Akai. It's a win-win for Akai as having a huge resource of add-on instruments developed by a community of sound designers brings more desirability to the MPC eco-system without Akai having to lift a finger (beyond ensuring the supporting features are there in the MPC OS in the first place).

MPC-Tutor wrote:I think it's a fair point that the bulk of Akai's target market these days seems to be producers looking for ready-made presets and instruments, they are unlikely to be that bothered with advanced sampling options for their own uses.

But as someone stated above, people developing sampler instruments would certainly be interested in having those features so in turn they can also develop a range of ready made instruments to add to the options offered by Akai. It's a win-win for Akai as having a huge resource of add-on instruments developed by a community of sound designers brings more desirability to the MPC eco-system without Akai having to lift a finger (beyond ensuring the supporting features are there in the MPC OS in the first place).

Maybe Akai can steal another idea from Roland - in the MC-707 sound engine page there's an easy mode & "advance' mode or w/e its called so this way users can have a choice to what features they want access to.

HammyHavoc wrote:

jpeg wrote:maybe a sizeable amount of their mpc customer base dont use the features from the old rackmount sample era, u speak of the mod matrix in the sampler being missing, but how much of the userbase wants that functionality?

Some thoughts after going through the process of old versus new MPC versus modern-day DAW:

* The mod matrix was cool from a sound design perspective, the bugs of the 4000 weren't

* If I want to do sound design, an MPC is the last place I want to do it versus an ultrawide monitor and flexible routing and countless pieces of software with way more possibilities and easier workflow

* The old MPCs were and still are capable machines, especially with JJOS

* A lot of people don't own computers, they just own a smartphone, hence the DAW-less fetishization and interest in standalone workflows; they're largely just hobbyists demographically speaking

* Modern MPCs are capable, but are more hobbyist-friendly and honestly much more toy-like in reliability of software; a lot more complexity with a proper Linux OS running on a SoC with drivers galore

* A groovebox-sampler doesn't need to be anything more than the absolute basics, it just needs depth rather than breadth, which is what ultimately pissed me off with Maschine and modern-day MPC

* Software-based samplers within a DAW are in a whole other league than any kind of modern "hardware" sampler (and I use that term very loosely as they're all software running on a SoC these days)

tl;dr if it works for you, it works for you. I love me a groovebox-sampler for quickly getting ideas down with muscle-memory and minimal friction, but modern-day ones leave a lot to be desired, and with the death of ReWire, a groovebox-like workflow ala Ableton Live isn't available today, hence the interest in the MPC. But it just isn't there yet for me.

Peace bro, I was just talking to you on YT on the Dillio's video about the new MPC rumors. I'm the dude that told you about being able to record mutes in the JJOS.
Anyway like I told the guy in the comments, its sounds like the Force would be better for you. Also with a Squarp Pyramid too handle tempo changes & different time-sigs, but like I told you that can be "done" by making clips have different loop points or bar lengths. Plus a bunch of other dope features the Pyramids has.

What's currently your best Groovebox?

B-Wise wrote:

HammyHavoc wrote:Some thoughts after going through the process of old versus new MPC versus modern-day DAW:

* The mod matrix was cool from a sound design perspective, the bugs of the 4000 weren't

* If I want to do sound design, an MPC is the last place I want to do it versus an ultrawide monitor and flexible routing and countless pieces of software with way more possibilities and easier workflow

* The old MPCs were and still are capable machines, especially with JJOS

* A lot of people don't own computers, they just own a smartphone, hence the DAW-less fetishization and interest in standalone workflows; they're largely just hobbyists demographically speaking

* Modern MPCs are capable, but are more hobbyist-friendly and honestly much more toy-like in reliability of software; a lot more complexity with a proper Linux OS running on a SoC with drivers galore

* A groovebox-sampler doesn't need to be anything more than the absolute basics, it just needs depth rather than breadth, which is what ultimately pissed me off with Maschine and modern-day MPC

* Software-based samplers within a DAW are in a whole other league than any kind of modern "hardware" sampler (and I use that term very loosely as they're all software running on a SoC these days)

tl;dr if it works for you, it works for you. I love me a groovebox-sampler for quickly getting ideas down with muscle-memory and minimal friction, but modern-day ones leave a lot to be desired, and with the death of ReWire, a groovebox-like workflow ala Ableton Live isn't available today, hence the interest in the MPC. But it just isn't there yet for me.

Peace bro, I was just talking to you on YT on the Dillio's video about the new MPC rumors. I'm the dude that told you about being able to record mutes in the JJOS.
Anyway like I told the guy in the comments, its sounds like the Force would be better for you. Also with a Squarp Pyramid too handle tempo changes & different time-sigs, but like I told you that can be "done" by making clips have different loop points or bar lengths. Plus a bunch of other dope features the Pyramids has.

What's currently your best Groovebox?

Hi mate!

Whilst I really like the Force conceptually (huge fan of the Live-like Session/clips concept), it's missing a companion VSTi to get consistent sample-accurate sync with the DAW, and overcome the limitations of the hardware (Maschine and MPC shine here), which on anything beyond a single song, is a big deal. There's other shortcomings too where modern MPCs and even old ones with JJOS are superior. (no pleasing people like me huh!)

One of the things the older MPCs had going for them was SMPTE, that's one thing that would be great in lieu of ReWire and Ableton Live if things aren't going to have companion desktop VSTi to work with them as controllers with sample-accurate sync.

In terms of new MPCs, I'll clarify a little for others in terms of what I mean by a lot of breadth but not much depth (ala Maschine). The looper is my favourite example of this on the modern MPC, it should be superior to what can be done in JJOS, but the max 16 bar loop length and workflow is really lacklustre versus Maschine, especially with how it then handles your recorded loops. In the same breath, Maschine can't even record mutes, and there's plenty of other places it falls down versus the modern MPC workflow. Both have pros and cons that are so basic with what I'd expect out of a modern groovebox versus legacy MPCs.

The pinnacle of the groovebox workflow for me is Ableton Live's Session view, that's without even getting into stuff like Push or other controllers, it just worked beautifully via ReWire, and gave sample-accurate sync. Unfortunately, whilst people hope for Ableton Link in all the major linear DAWs, this won't be suitable for me because by its very nature, has jitter/drifting clock, that's how it stays in sync over time, which when working with picture is bad for consistent playback with getting things to land where you expect them. Also doesn't give positional information, nor audio or MIDI. ReWire was in a league of its own for an incredibly niche and specific workflow. I'm honestly a bit lost without it.

Whilst I could "freeze" the system in time using old software, that doesn't let me stay up to date with the latest developments and bug fixes, and with new processor architectures creeping in, that's inevitably going to become more and more of a problem with software updates going forward.

Is modern-day Akai likely to cater to niche use cases like these? Probably not. Even NI with a user base of composers who work to picture didn't care about low-hanging fruit in terms of features that would be a huge boon in terms of workflow efficiency.

I was messing around in the Audio tab on my L2 and Was into how you can slice and move around the chops with your fingers.

Would like Akai to add this to sample edit.

Say you have 16 chops and find a pattern you like lets say its 2,7,9 Id like to be able to drag chop 2 to 1, 7 to 2 , and 9 to 3 then convert to new program ready to play.

I know the previous example is simple but if you go all ultra Micro Chopping getting higher in the pad banks like 64 slices. (to hide from these sample snitching bots)

You could re-arrange by dragging all the best ones to the first 16 then create your program.

Only way I know how to do this now is in a program with a bunch of tedious Pad Copying.
Yall got a mo betta solution?

Juxx wrote:Only way I know how to do this now is in a program with a bunch of tedious Pad Copying.
Yall got a mo betta solution?

Do it the way it's always been done. Program your beat on a track, bounce that to a new loop/sample. That's one of the areas the MPC is actually good hah.

There's two ways to 'slice' an audio file. One uses 'markers' to reference the points in the original file, or like the MPC's 'pad parameters' where it maps each slice by start/end point on each pad.

Or there's the destructive way, you actually slice it up into individual samples. The only way to rearrange the loop is to either use MIDI to play your new beat, or slice it up into samples and cut/paste those together by hand.