jcnnr78 wrote:eLuSiVeMiTe wrote:Plenty of people. Your not alone.
I knew within the first hour of the beta I wouldn't be making the move to 3.4
I just hope that suitable updates are rolled out for both.
Especially the CV stuff.
Majority of the "improvements" are of little use to me. Dislike the new mixers. No need of disk streaming. The new UI is garish and cluttered for the little information it actually displays.
I was pretty miffed at first but no longer care. I don't want a substandard Daw in a box so 2.? Is for me.
There will be many people like you say, but I'm still waiting to read a comment from someone who uses it exactly as i do, I've already communicated my suggestions to Akai, but i guess they won't listen, since i'm a "vast minority", and what i'm suggesting would mean throwing MPC3 into the trash.
For me, the perfect MPC3 would have been to add the new mixer to MPC2, as well as some improvements in Timestretch and slice editing, and in the Clip Programs tool, to have more flexibility when triggering audio loops in Live
I'm with you on that, i prefer an "old-fashioned" machine that does what i need, to a nice box that no longer does what it should.
I hope your requests are met, the CV part is perhaps the one I've tested the least, since i only have a semi-modular synth, which i don't use in Live.
I think i read in a previous post that the new feature of unifying the sequence tracks is the price to pay for having Disk Streaming and Arranger mode.
I really don't understand how people can need Disk Streaming to not take up all the RAM memory, I have a project with more than 60 sequences/patterns, without any relation between them, with Drum Programs, and at least 4 audio loops of 4 and 8 bars long, and the 2GB of RAM of my MPC One supports it without problem.
If you only use the MPC to make one song per project, 2GB of RAM is more than enough.
well, the kind of live use you say is very similar to the one i use, and has been explained by many users both here and on social media.
i make different genres but this kind of use is very key to my jungle\breakbeat livesets, where i very often use the same set of instruments on four or five sequences then gradually change some of them in a number of "transition" sequences until i have a totally different set of sounds that goes on for some other sequences then again etc...
not only that, in each sequences i usually have multiple tracks going to the same program, example: drums, so i can have different variations of a pattern inside the same sequence and switch between them via track mute, often i also mix the different ones to "build" complexity.
this is ALL GONE in 3.x and i think it will not come back because i fear we are a minority, especially if you look at demographics, i think in general the ones using this kind of workflow are older type of guys that learnt their mpc tricks on older machines in order to fully exploit the very little RAM we had at the time, while new users tend to want a DAW like approach because they are digital natives and they usually don't know the old hardware tricks (i'm saying generally, i'm sure there is a lot of new blood who comes out with really cool techniques, don't get me wrong).
so i don't think the backlash is strong enough to convince inmusic that this is really a bad move for the mpc platform.... i hope to be proven wrong.
