MPC KEY 37...?

Nutrisse wrote:

A) that would require Akai to completely rewrite most of their code for a limited single use
B) that wouldn't be an efficient use of resources
C) this would go against everything they said about maintaining a consistent experience across their product line

...

But this is Akai we're talking about, so you're probably 100% correct on that.

the mpc force software is already an example ot a limited single use; and also deviates from the consistent experince across products.

Monotremata wrote:

B-Wise wrote:To say "always" is stretching it because Akai didn't start with the MPCs you mentioned. They started with only big boxes like 60, 60mk2, 3k, 2k, 2kXL, 4k, then the little 1k in 2003 about 15 years later.

When the 60/3000/2000/2000XL were on the market, there was only ONE MPC at a time. Even the rackmount samplers only had 1 or 2 (maybe 3) different models available at a time. They all replaced one another, in constant progress to get better. It wasnt until Akai 2.0 released the 4K that they also had the 1K out at the same time. InMusic are the ones that felt the need to put out the 500/2500/5000 at the same time..

He didn't mentioned Akai 2.0.

Still I don't see what the problem is that a company has many different forms of their product that shares the same OS. The market if filled with many the different users, so why not design something for them. The problem is that buggy OS & audio interface madness. They need deal with that first. They may need to just start from scratch & use more future proof components & make thier own audio interface.

The New Akai is a Different Company from the past. Today it's all about how much Revenue they can make with minimal overhead. Right now...Small versions of the MPC dominate sales. InMusic is gonna make MINI versions of ALL their products!
Why make a Super MPC with all the Bells and Whistles for $2000 or better? That may generate a Couple Thousand units sold WORLDWIDE.
They'll create a version that's in the $500 $600 range, and sell Hundreds of Thousands units $$$$

jpeg wrote:

Nutrisse wrote:

A) that would require Akai to completely rewrite most of their code for a limited single use
B) that wouldn't be an efficient use of resources
C) this would go against everything they said about maintaining a consistent experience across their product line

...

But this is Akai we're talking about, so you're probably 100% correct on that.

the mpc force software is already an example ot a limited single use; and also deviates from the consistent experince across products.

If you don't see a difference between the ecosystem of MPC & Force and what you're suggesting with a SP404 screen (never mind the subsequent resources), then you *REALLY* are the guy in the video!

Nutrisse wrote:
If you don't see a difference between the ecosystem of MPC & Force and what you're suggesting with a SP404 screen (never mind the subsequent resources), then you *REALLY* are the guy in the video!

all speculation of course; but strange that if someone does not agree with the mpc forum narrative then ur the guy in the video, etc

jpeg wrote:

Nutrisse wrote:
If you don't see a difference between the ecosystem of MPC & Force and what you're suggesting with a SP404 screen (never mind the subsequent resources), then you *REALLY* are the guy in the video!

all speculation of course; but strange that if someone does not agree with the mpc forum narrative then ur the guy in the video, etc

That's most definitely not what the guy was saying...but your last post does make it seems like the dude may be on to something

I don't know what he'll you guys are talking about good luck you .. got a click

Certified Beatz wrote:I don't know what he'll you guys are talking about good luck you .. got a click

Sometimes typos can be so funny
Anybody know what the "he'll" this guy is talking about?

Lampdog wrote:He’ll to the naw.

Man I laugh so hard I almost died & went straight to he'll.
Now I'm the in mood to listen to DMX's album "It's Dark & He'll Is Hot"

B-Wise wrote:

Lampdog wrote:He’ll to the naw.

Man I laugh so hard I almost died & went straight to he'll.
Now I'm the in mood to listen to DMX's album "It's Dark & He'll Is Hot"

B-Wise wrote:To say "always" is stretching it because Akai didn't start with the MPCs you mentioned.

Monotremata wrote:When the 60/3000/2000/2000XL were on the market, there was only ONE MPC at a time. Even the rackmount samplers only had 1 or 2 (maybe 3) different models available at a time. They all replaced one another, in constant progress to get better. It wasnt until Akai 2.0 released the 4K that they also had the 1K out at the same time. InMusic are the ones that felt the need to put out the 500/2500/5000 at the same time..

Yes, Akai "2.0" is a different Akai than the Akai of old, but - as far as company history is concerned - it's not the first time that they had several concurrent products that ultimately did the same/similar thing, targeting different consumers and different price points. This truly has been their "modus operandi", especially if you consider Akai's consumer electronics division history. The Akai GX-series of tape decks (both open reel-to-reel as well as cassette) all did ultimately the same thing: record and playback music. But at any given time, there was dozens of different versions of the same deck on the market. Sony did this as well, not to mention virtually every consumer electronics manufacturer on the market at the time.

Just because you add "Professional" at the end the name and target music gear doesn't mean you throw that whole approach out the window.

And they didn't.

EnochLight wrote:
Yes, Akai "2.0" is a different Akai than the Akai of old, but - as far as company history is concerned - it's not the first time that they had several concurrent products that ultimately did the same/similar thing, targeting different consumers and different price points. This truly has been their "modus operandi", especially if you consider Akai's consumer electronics division history. The Akai GX-series of tape decks (both open reel-to-reel as well as cassette) all did ultimately the same thing: record and playback music. But at any given time, there was dozens of different versions of the same deck on the market. Sony did this as well, not to mention virtually every consumer electronics manufacturer on the market at the time.

Just because you add "Professional" at the end the name and target music gear doesn't mean you throw that whole approach out the window.

And they didn't.

You must of missed when I posted that jpeg didn't mention Akai 2.0. So there was no need to tell me about 2.0. But someone said the 4k/1k was still part of 1.0 before the switch so whatever & the 2500 was 2.0 first MPC.

The original Akai didn't have different "forms" of the MPC like the little 500/1k or the Keys 61 running the same OS, only big boxes & that's what we are referring to not different price points. So it wasn't in Akai 1.0 history to have multiple forms in the beginning. That was Akai 2.0 like Monotremata mentioned but even 2.0 didn't have all those different MPCs sharing one OS like current family of post-2017 MPC. This approach is new even for 2.0. Maybe we should call it Akai 3.0

Seem like Akai have a new business model that's setup for modern times. Make 1 main OS, but multiple types of models with longer support. 2.0 is pro diversity they even made the Force 5 years ago with it own OS that just been updated to 3.3.0. What will the mysterious red ninja do next?

My question was really about why is new forms/types of MPCs with the same OS designed for different types of users a problem?

You only need to have 1 or none. But now you have more choices like this potential Key-37 or whatever & some people complain.
First world problem = OMG so many choices!

B-Wise wrote:You only need to have 1 or none. But now you have more choices like this potential Key-37 or whatever & some people complain.

First world problem = OMG so many choices! :nod:

Pretty much this.

B-Wise wrote:You must of missed when I posted that jpeg didn't mention Akai 2.0. So there was no need to tell me about 2.0. .. The original Akai didn't have different "forms" of the MPC

My point is: having multiple versions of a similar product (in this case, the MPC) is not an unusual business practice taking their corporate history into context, as evidenced in my reply above. So, it's not a stretch at all.

Big company tactics are usually to start blue ocean/up market and work their way down to red ocean for product lines... and it is the internet, so anything is possible.