MPC 3 - Is The “1-Sequence Only” Workflow a deal breaker?

JJ would need the current gen source code to make it a new JJOS. That would be amazing!

one thing that strikes me is the more embedded Air instruments etc. become part of the ecosystem the more having multiple programs assignable to the same track becomes a RAM and CPU killer. These things are efficient, not powerful computers.

machinesworking wrote:one thing that strikes me is the more embedded Air instruments etc. become part of the ecosystem the more having multiple programs assignable to the same track becomes a RAM and CPU killer. These things are efficient, not powerful computers.

The decision to lock programs to tracks still baffles me. Soon as I saw the first video drop I knew it was going to be a major issue for me.

An easy solve would be clone tracks linked to a parent track.

eLuSiVeMiTe wrote:An easy solve would be clone tracks linked to a parent track.

That would be nice to have as an option, but it only takes a few seconds to make a dummy drum track & MIDI send it to the parent track. Then to save time make copies of the dummy track that already is being pointed to the parent for other tracks you need. Some of this could be set up as a template.

B-Wise wrote:

eLuSiVeMiTe wrote:An easy solve would be clone tracks linked to a parent track.

That would be nice to have as an option, but it only takes a few seconds to make a dummy drum track & MIDI send it to the parent track. Then to save time make copies of the dummy track that already is being pointed to the parent for other tracks you need. Some of this could be set up as a template.

But none of the shortcuts work? Or automation.
A clone tracks should be able to forward all these so it's just like duplicating programs

eLuSiVeMiTe wrote:But none of the shortcuts work? Or automation.
A clone tracks should be able to forward all these so it's just like duplicating programs

Are you asking me or telling me?

Yeah the lack of automation not being able to be easily copied is strange. Their was a workaround but I can't what is was. I just recorded the track to a external seq & then recorded that back. I wonder if we can send the int MIDI out back into the device? I'll try it later.

eLuSiVeMiTe wrote:An easy solve would be clone tracks linked to a parent track.

To me the bigger issue with programs tied to tracks is the other way around, the same Track could have 6-12 different drum Programs in each different Sequence, or the same record enabled Track with Jura could have Tube on the Next Sequence. You could make an entire set with multiple different setups in each Sequence that was in itself an entire song, and it would not have to include every Program on it's own separate Track with a huge mess to scroll like it seems to be now. Discloser, I've never done this, but it seems like a legit way to set up a live set.

One sequence workflow all the way: start with a 16-32 bar drum loops --> double the bars a few times --> lay down other melodies/components --> arrange with mute groups

I've only skipped through a few videos on mpc3, and from what I can tell they are appealing to DAW users

Sense-A wrote:I'm still rocking JJOS2XL on MPC 1000 which i can take with me in a laptop bag.

Not sure why you guys keep causing yourself headaches because you are brainwashed to have the "NEWEST THING" so akai will release a new MPC every two years so that you keep wage slaving for the newest thing like a zombie consumer.

The old MPCs work just fine. I never understand what I am missing out on? Stems? AI doing the work for me and filter passing specific layers of a track?

If it's not broke, don't fix it. If my old 40 year old truck still runs great and i have no truck payments, why should i get a new one? To have bluetooth? No thanks. I'm all for innovation but you have to show me innovation instead of gimmicks and bugs and obsolecence.

I agree. If something does what you need it to do, why create obstacles for oneself.

Too many times, I notice people reminisce about the past. Personally, I think this is a waste, albeit not always avoidable, of course. Gear that simply don't survive the test of time, is unfortunate. However, lots of equipment from the past were built like tanks and still operate just fine.

An example, I still use a digital mixer from Yamaha (24-channels) that is old (in terms of modernities) and it worked like an old honker. Turned out, that if I replaced the "hard drive" with an SSD... it's lightning fast now. This one I use all the time.

Another example, actually... I also have a Q700 (Yamaha) that I haven't used in a long time, but since I like to tinker about, I replaced the floppy disc on it, with a USB stick "floppy maker" (it looks like a floppy drive and make the USB memory stick act like 999 floppies). I figured, someday someone is going to be looking for one.

While I love change, generally speaking, I do prefer a modular way, which by nature often supports many kinds of change. Unfortunately, much business tends to go the opposite way, trying to lock the consumers in. Although some do live on the edge. I love that! Go Akai!

Like others already pointed out though, the bottom line is that our current world of business is mostly about revenue and growth. Common sense is often absent.

So anyways, is the "1-Sequence Only" workflow a deal breaker? Well, obviously for some.

However, as MPC Tutor quoted from Dan Gill... "this is probably our #1 request". That apparently drove a lot!

Do I think it's a deal breaker? No, the change makes sense in the current flow of things. Does that statement make sense to traditional MPC workflow peeps? Obviously not.

Just remember, it's not deal breaker to stay on the last traditional-workflow version, because if it works for you, it's still a good tool. I used the MPC X for many years with the old flow, wanting a more linear tool, but it worked for all those years. This change for me, is awesome!!!

This is where we find ourselves. (My intent was not to rub-in or instigate anything. Just my view of the situation.)

MPC-Tutor wrote:I do wonder if the people involved in the MPC3 development process were perhaps not familiar with this type of workflow so it never occurred to them that it would be an issue. If you are focused on what I feel was always the implied 'intended' use of a project (i.e. a single composition), then the new system mostly seems to make sense. But for anyone who sees a project as something that can involve multiple compositions, or even somewhere to work on multiple rough sketches around a theme, clearly this system is no longer ideal.

I whole heartedly agree with the latter part! Nicely put.

About the development, and I stated this previously (sorry), I think Akai went with what people were mostly requesting (as you quoted from Dan Gill) and that they also took the opportunity to make their products into a more "familiar" (as in a DAW) tool to more people.

MPC-Tutor wrote:They have likely made a mis-step with the unified track system as they misjudged how many people relied on aspects of the old system, but there's still time to remedy this while MPC3 is in beta.

I don't think so (made any missteps with the unified track system).

I think lots of people saw a "regular" sequencer the way they projected the MPC X (many years back and in my case). This is why there was so much argument around it for a long time. The DAW line of people saw a DAW, bought it and it wasn't. On to the forums!

Now we're on the other side of the fence, and others see the traditional ways change. (I am not judging in any way, just stating the bleeding obvious.)

At this time, the development towards the "1-to-1 tracks" is so deeply invested that unless there is a way to make it appear like the traditional, they're not going back. That's just not happening. I am biased here, of course, but from a business perspective that would not make any sense whatsoever.

It may be possible for them to release their old v2 into the public domain, in some way. For many solutions in v2 it's not possible, I get that, but the general v2 core could perhaps go that route.

They made the changes, so all of us people playing live will need 2 MPC's

https://www.facebook.com/1005278216/videos/1206279400476443

renegadebliss wrote:They made the changes, so all of us people playing live will need 2 MPC's

No doubt about that

A solution simple solution for the problem could be to increase the amount of submixes to 16 and to make them appear in the track mute/solo screen. More of a workaround but it offers another way to mute audio live.

A more versatile solution is to get a new track type "summing". It will never create any sound by itself and has no FX section. But it is a new target for the output of regular tracks.

The idea is that you create a bunch of summing tracks and route those tracks into them that are in use in different sections. If you order the tracks nicely you can manage them from the mute/solo screen.

It might be somewhat off topic but it is related:
I am not experimenting with the v3 beta. I am still using my MPC Live 2 with v2.15.
It does a great job.
I originally bought it because I can [in amongst other things] use it in gig situations to sequence external synths. The ‘live’ aspect is very much dependent on my use of Clip Tracks to launch prepared audio loops and one shots in an improvisational manner. [I know that I can put audio into Drum Tracks and trigger with notes on the sequencer grid but Drum Tracks don’t have the facility for quantised manual launching afaik]
Is this a thing with anyone else?
It seems a great loss [to me at least] if Akai are determined to ditch the Clip Track permanently.
I have emailed them with my thoughts but I wondered if there was a way to make them aware of the numbers of users for which the loss of clip tracks would be a backward step. I am no coder but I would have thought that it might be doable in MPC v3 to have clips associated with the audio tracks – just as in the Force – simply map them to the pads as they are in MPC v2.
Yes, I can stick with 2.15 but I worry that at some future point Akai might make it increasingly more difficult to maintain that practise as updates and activation requirements change. It will be a lot of hard work down the pan if I have to move to v3 with no Clip Track.
Let your thoughts be known.
Is there a way to instigate some sort of poll of members that the Akai team could be made aware of?