MPC 3 -- Let's GO!!

Will someone check if there is an option to reverse the midi note sequence of a track?
Like you take a piano, record some notes, then reverse the midi, bounce it, then reverse the audio.
Right now, I export the midi from MPC, import into Reason, reverse it, export, import into MPC, bounce to audio, then reverse audio. Would love to cut out the middle man.

Neodymium wrote:

Neodymium wrote:I only use one bank of tracks. so would a workaround be to assign my next 16 tracks from the next sequence to the next bank, so they can have their mutes set independently from the previous sequence. Then take a moment when that sequence is playing to unmute all of sequence 1 mutes, for sequence 3 to be ready, and alternate sequences through 2 banks. Or work my way through 8 sequences and 8 banks, then reset them all.

Not in the current iteration, because track mutes are global, any change made in any sequence takes effect for all sequences.

Neodymium wrote:If we don't upgrade to 3, does this mean that any new plugins released after 3 won't be available for users on 2?

But if it's global and I have Sequence 1 use Track Mute Bank A, and Sequences 2 use Track Mute Bank B, then any changes on Sequence 1 wouldn't affect Sequence 2, because globally they are assigned different Track Mute Banks. This will mean I have to move all my tracks for Sequence 2 up 16 tracks so they are affected by the Track Mute Bank B (maybe I'd have to assign some dummy filler tracks into the first 16 places to do this if they can't be empty).

Or am I still misunderstanding what you mean by 'global'

I get this as a workaround, definitely achievable, a vibe killer for me given all the extra work and back n forth. And if I wanted to change the performance order of the sequences at the show...you are mostly out of luck for this to be effective.

Neodymium wrote:I like a lot of the new features, especially the simpler audio routing and choice to rearrange FX order, but playing live is my real goal and why I got the MPC. So it currently works for that. And to be honest I have more than enough synths, so not paying for new plug-ins isn't that much of a kicker. Although missing out on the Midi bug-fix would be a frustrating, if they ever get around to it.

100 percent.

researchintospeed wrote:I get this as a workaround, definitely achievable, a vibe killer for me given all the extra work and back n forth. And if I wanted to change the performance order of the sequences at the show...you are mostly out of luck for this to be effective.

It's seems there are lots of workflow advantages (especially if the fix the midi bug) in MPC3, so I maybe sacrificing some previous workflows will result in a net gain. I'm already sick of looking for things in Audio, when I should be in Midi (and vice versa) and the send return and looks functionality looks far more intuitive.

This only addition to the workflow I can think of, is to have 2 versions of every sequence saved, one A and one B. so if you want to change the order of this last minute for a show, then it's just making sure they go ABABABABABA.

So far from what I've read there are two concerns, Track Mutes, and having more than one midi track assigned to an audio source. The former affects me more, but they both look like something Akai can resolve. It's early days.

I think it would be great if the MPC3 could use markers and a loop region in the arranger as new "scenes." It's similar to Teenage Engineering's OP-1, which allows you to perform while moving the loop region.

I believe exploring new workflows would be even more interesting.

Wow, lots of interesting opinions on this thread. Seems like Akai needs to pay attention to what the majority of what users want and impliment the old track mute method before the Final release of the 3.0 Firmware.

I think this update is going to be great for people with at least 2 MPCs, that way you can take advantage of all the new features on the new firmware while keeping the second unit on the old. For people with only one MPC, going to this firmware is going to be a very difficult decision. I get that the workflow has changed, but the majority of the key elements is still the same. Even with all the changes, I still prefer the 3.0 firmware on the MPC to Ableton for sample chopping, live performace, sequencing external synths, finger drumming, and making the basic idea of a song.

Ableton (and other DAWs) are great for finishing the arrangement, adding the Fabfilter (or whatever your favorite 3rd party plugins are) Mixing and Mastering. The MPC will get a lot closer to the final product now, and Im sure that some people will just export the MP3 of thier beat straight from the MPC with the new firmware just like they did on the old.

The one to one track workflow definitely has some clear disadvantages so hopefully Akai will adjust acorrdingly.

robleighton22 wrote:Likewise. Gutted about this change. Everything else in the update makes sense but this change is a showstopper.

its def not a show stopper; u def making a mountain out of a molehile, but yes its an inconvenine with workarounds; also its something that Akai can easily restore/remedy

pedro_oliveira1993 wrote:So we're lookin at an MPC that's not exactly an MPC anymore. It does so much shit it almost feels like a DAW. And it's something I purchased to get away from a DAW. So I might as well use a DAW because it's faster that this pseudo daw with a touch screen.

Is this it?

Also u dont have to use the arranger view if it goes against ur MPC ethos;


I dont know why people get triggered by new features, simply use the features that fit ur workflow and ignore the rest, very simple.

jpeg wrote:
It's definitely not a show stopper; you are definitely making a mountain out of a mole hill, but yes its an inconvenience with workarounds. Also it's something that Akai can easily restore/remedy.

Well for your workflow it may not be a showstopper, but the inconvenience caused even with workarounds, may make something worthwhile to change for the advantages, so for others it could be a showstopper. I'm also not seeing many workaround being suggested so far. No need to belittle other peoples concerns with accusations of overreacting with idioms about mole hills. I think it would be more constructive to let people air their concerns, in light of a major change that has yet to make a release, and hope Akai take them a little more seriously upon release.

If it can is restored or remedied, then great, but until then, the situation is for some, that this upgrade is not worth it.


Let's all be on the same team.

Remember with the new macros you can set track mutes to them & record them as automation in the Arranger.

B-Wise wrote:Remember with the new macros you can set track mutes to them & record them as automation in the Arranger.

I'm thinking from the perspective of performing tracks live, as opposed to creating arrangements. So I don't want to be recording the automation.

That's to the q-links isn't it, or to pads as well?

I apologise for the massive post but I want to give as much info on two hot topics as possible to prepare you before you get the beta in your hands.


To give a couple more details regarding the hot topic of sequences, I had a quick play with os 3 this morning and here is what I found.

Regarding the track mute thing the best workaround as of now is to record the automation live by using track mutes then fine tune them in the automation window of the arranger. Personally I was always a "delete data instead of mute data" guy so that change in the workflow did very little to me.
There's also the option of drawing the track mutes in the automation but where's the fun in that.

****************************************
Now the feature that will probably piss most people off is the way mpc 3 handles programs.

Let's take for example the workflow of having multiple tracks sending notes to a program. In a standard mpc you just create separate tracks for hat - kick etc , assign the program and have eveything on its own track.

If you want to do the same in mpc 3 you will have to create midi tracks that send that said note data to a program. The problem tho is that midi tracks appear as note data in a piano roll and not as individual hits per pad in a program (pretty much like the spreadsheet where every pad has its name assigned and you can see hits). This completely throws off the overview of your drum hits.

2) The midi tracks start from C-1 afair, something that doesn't match the notes that each pad listens to. So you have to manually transpose of change the way that notes are laid on the pads, something that adds extra steps to get everything right and breaks the flow of quick beatmaking.

3) The pads retain the lights and colours of piano mode when in midi tracks. This means that if you have created a program that each pad has a different colour YOU CAN"T see that in a midi track.

4) All per pad automation data has to happen on the track that the program is tied to. That means you have to create your note data in the HiHat track for example but if you want to add an automation to that sample you can only do it on the Program assigned track, That as a result has you jumping between tracks and creates a disconnection between midi and automation data.

5) Track explode will ruin your program organisation. ... Having your entire arrangement in the Program / track and exploding that track so you can edit in the arranger will create a program for each track that contains only the pad that is being assigned to. This a huge mess in the end with several single sample programs. . So kiss your quick program pad settings adjustments goodbye

Sory for my Tedx talk but there are some things that left a bitter taste. It is pretty obvious that some parts in the UI are shoehorned to the force UI and hopefully these issues will be ironed out in a future release.

MGoolas wrote:I apologise for the massive post but I want to give as much info on two hot topics as possible to prepare you before you get the beta in your hands.


To give a couple more details regarding the hot topic of sequences, I had a quick play with os 3 this morning and here is what I found.

The "workaround" of having multiple sequences is to extend track lengths and use arranger markers to jump between your chorus, bridge etc. Each sequence is an entire new song now and I have not found a way to lets say combine multiple sequences. I have too look more in song mode to see if there is still the option to combine all the sequences into a large one.

Regarding the track mute thing the best workaround as of now is to record the automation live by using track mutes then fine tune them in the automation window of the arranger. Personally I was always a "delete data instead of mute data" guy so that change in the workflow did very little to me.
There's also the option of drawing the track mutes in the automation but where's the fun in that.

****************************************
Now the feature that will probably piss most people off is the way mpc 3 handles programs.

Let's take for example the workflow of having multiple tracks sending notes to a program. In a standard mpc you just create separate tracks for hat - kick etc , assign the program and have eveything on its own track.

If you want to do the same in mpc 3 you will have to create midi tracks that send that said note data to a program. The problem tho is that midi tracks appear as note data in a piano roll and not as individual hits per pad in a program (pretty much like the spreadsheet where every pad has its name assigned and you can see hits). This completely throws off the overview of your drum hits.

2) The midi tracks start from C-1 afair, something that doesn't match the notes that each pad listens to. So you have to manually transpose of change the way that notes are laid on the pads, something that adds extra steps to get everything right and breaks the flow of quick beatmaking.

3) The pads retain the lights and colours of piano mode when in midi tracks. This means that if you have created a program that each pad has a different colour YOU CAN"T see that in a midi track.

4) All per pad automation data has to happen on the track that the program is tied to. That means you have to create your note data in the HiHat track for example but if you want to add an automation to that sample you can only do it on the Program assigned track, That as a result has you jumping between tracks and creates a disconnection between midi and automation data.

5) Track explode will ruin your program organisation. ... Having your entire arrangement in the Program / track and exploding that track so you can edit in the arranger will create a program for each track that contains only the pad that is being assigned to. This a huge mess in the end with several single sample programs. . So kiss your quick program pad settings adjustments goodbye

Sory for my Tedx talk but there are some things that left a bitter taste. It is pretty obvious that some parts in the UI are shoehorned to the force UI and hopefully these issues will be ironed out in a future release.

Thanks for all this. Definitely things to consider before upgrading. Thats alarming abiut the track explode function, I use that feature a lot when bouncing to stems.

to me its kind of obvious that there are two kinds of customers, those who use the machine extensively and developed a flow, and those who just collect gear for gears sake.
The former are unhappy, of course, when you take the flow away and break a thing they thought they had bought and owned, the latter are happy when they get new features and specs even though theyll never going to use them.
Its always been like that. Companys often cater to the latter cause thats where the money is.

For me its a show stopper though if it really turns out to be broken.
I mean, 8 round robins. ok. great. on paper. in practice, hardly anybody had ever hit the limit, let alone sampled anything with 4 round robins per key to begin with. Some did, of course.
Most did not.
Lets just be honest with these things. There are improvements and a lot of work went into the update, for sure. Screen design is also on an other level now, for instance.
Nice. But we did not ask for that. we asked for other things... you can read it up, right here in the forum...
But lets see. They still have the chance to keep their actual users...

Personally, if it turns out to be broken, Ill toss my machine on the market again, and thats it.
Cause I am a bit worried about the thermal design and longlivety of the machines anyway. But lets see. Ive only watched one of the vids so far, too early to tell for me.

Thanks for the detailed insight @MGoolas

Neodymium wrote:

B-Wise wrote:Remember with the new macros you can set track mutes to them & record them as automation in the Arranger.

I'm thinking from the perspective of performing tracks live, as opposed to creating arrangements. So I don't want to be recording the automation.

That's to the q-links isn't it, or to pads as well?

Q-links on the MPC. On the Force there's 64 pad macros that I use as mutes. Hopefully the MPC will get these later. But I also have 1 of the 16 knobs as a mute knob in the track macro section: https://youtube.com/shorts/DVkXYS_mfZc? ... pIXtAzx42E

As a live thing if you know what you commonly want to mute, you can set the 32 project macro knobs as mute groups. Each knob can have up to 128 parameter (I think that's the max, but I never tried to add more) assigned to it. So you can have different knobs with a set of different tracks as mutes & you can set them to be off/on or temporary.

moonlake wrote:to me its kind of obvious that there are two kinds of customers, those who use the machine extensively and developed a flow, and those who just collect gear for gears sake.

Quite wrong, there's more than jus your "black n white" view of things, honestly.