We are getting what we asked for, but is it what we need?

Bobi wrote:
I don't think it's possible to finish and polish a song in the Mpc to a commercial standard - the plugin suite is a bit limited and automation is very basic and low precision. .

kja wrote:For me it has been pretty hard to switch, also I lost some important projects too that didn't translate to 3.0 well.. I don't have the patience to go back to every detail and try to figure out why..
I just counted my losses, accept the fact projects and mutes are different now and feel slightly different. Over all though I'm a musician and I can and will adapt, just like with music.. I don't make the same music I made twenty years ago either.
I would not go as far to say it doesn't feel like a MPC anymore though.. tracks being tied to programs and mutes don't make the mpc for me, and honestly everything looks different, but everything is basically the same at the fundamental level. It still feels like a MPC to me, like a way more capable, broad, modem MPC then a DAW to me.. I hate the new mixer too, over all I love the new functions and appreciate how everything is laid out now and feels simpler with less pages.

DellAtreides wrote:Modern music doesn't need more precise automation and a huge plethora of plugins, it needs more good ideas, creativity and song writing and not have the life sucked out of it with "over production"

DellAtreides wrote:

Bobi wrote:
I don't think it's possible to finish and polish a song in the Mpc to a commercial standard - the plugin suite is a bit limited and automation is very basic and low precision. .

Ahhh this old chestnut again. If The Libertines can release "Up The Bracket" as being up to "commercial standard" then we're all fine to release something mixed off an MPC
Modern music doesn't need more precise automation and a huge plethora of plugins, it needs more good ideas, creativity and song writing and not have the life sucked out of it with "over production"

Bobi wrote:Hey everybody,

I will offer a view from my perspective of a new user.
I bought my first ever mpc (one +) just before Christmas 24. I like to make all sorts of music, often experimental but sometimes plain cheese. Not hip hop really. I wanted to get away from working on PC in a DAW as it drains me in a weird way. First I bought an Octatrack, good fun especially performing live but serious limitations, and struggled to finish any project. So I looked further and decided to give Mpc a try, as it looked like something I want - a DAW without a computer. And I love it. It's quite powerful, it samples, it has vsti, timeline, sequencer, automation(this could be greatly improved though)... It ticks a many of my boxes and I don't feel the need to look for something "better'. I am much more productive now and I'm having a lot of fun with it.

I understand some of the changes coming in mpc3 have been frustrating for some folks here who are used to the 'mpc' ways.
From my point of a newcomer - mpc3 is awesome. Sure I could find things that could be implemented better, and I will get to complaining at some point no doubt

B

jpeg wrote:

Bobi wrote:Hey everybody,

I will offer a view from my perspective of a new user.
I bought my first ever mpc (one +) just before Christmas 24. I like to make all sorts of music, often experimental but sometimes plain cheese. Not hip hop really. I wanted to get away from working on PC in a DAW as it drains me in a weird way. First I bought an Octatrack, good fun especially performing live but serious limitations, and struggled to finish any project. So I looked further and decided to give Mpc a try, as it looked like something I want - a DAW without a computer. And I love it. It's quite powerful, it samples, it has vsti, timeline, sequencer, automation(this could be greatly improved though)... It ticks a many of my boxes and I don't feel the need to look for something "better'. I am much more productive now and I'm having a lot of fun with it.

I understand some of the changes coming in mpc3 have been frustrating for some folks here who are used to the 'mpc' ways.
From my point of a newcomer - mpc3 is awesome. Sure I could find things that could be implemented better, and I will get to complaining at some point no doubt

B

Akai are catering to the likes of you; new users, youtube trend hoppers, johnny come lateleys.

While I understand the value of appealing to new audiences; it should not be done at the expense of long term supporters who are the reason why Akai have been able to stay in business for the past 30 years.

It is a mistake to alienate long term users by forcing them to change their workflow to accomodate the new users who are most likely simply trend hoppers, that may well leave and move on to a new trend at anytime.

The change of the main screen and the linking of programs to tracks was done purely to make it easier for simpleton newcomers ( not all new users are simpletons) Akai's focus on appealing to the tik tok and youtube crowd caused them to make these alterations, and disregard their legacy audience.

Bobi wrote:
I am a sucker for production. If the music is exceptional, I can somewhat tolerate 'bad' production, but in general it is a very important part of music for me. It's a part of the whole experience, music has to draw me in and it's hard when it sounds unnatural or unbalanced.
Maybe 'commercial standard ' is wrong choice of words, I don't really care about the commercial aspect of music, it's just that it tends to sound better than amateur mixes. But of course fantastic production will not save bad music. I find vast majority of modern mainstream music unlistenable despite mostly great or at least decent production.
Making music is an art. Mixing music is an art. Making great music that sounds good is art squared.
Of course all this is highly individual and
YMMV.

40Dogz wrote:I’m not gonna lie…I LAUGHED at the idea of Programs being tied to tracks….here I am…working on v3…..100% of the time…

Lampdog wrote:Yep, it’s all you and your work. THAT, is the magic.

kja wrote:For the record, lol... Akai was not in business 30 years.. especially not because they wouldn't dumb down their products or change them.. they went out of business twice and changed hands and both times had new models that were significantly cheaper and easier to use, but with more modern "features".. this is really nothing new..

jpeg wrote:

kja wrote:For the record, lol... Akai was not in business 30 years.. especially not because they wouldn't dumb down their products or change them.. they went out of business twice and changed hands and both times had new models that were significantly cheaper and easier to use, but with more modern "features".. this is really nothing new..

Was the 2500 easier to use then the 2000 or 2000XL? was the 2500 cheaper?

Akai maintained a cult following for 30 years despite going out of business multiple times; the reason why companies brought Akai was cos they saw how strong the userbase was.

So deciding to alter workflows for benefit of new users; at the expense of the legacy user base seems to be an oversight, cos the legacy users is what created the sustainability and value of the Akai brand.

There is no reason why Akai cant implement a legacy mode within 3.0; to enable legacy users to retain the same workflow they have used for 30 years.

I have seen new MPC users saying how they cant understand programs being seperate from tracks; I have also seen them complain about the orginal main screen being too retro or too 1980's.

I dont like the idea of being overly focused on new trend hoppers who watched a few mpc vids; cos lotta dem are flakey anyway.

kja wrote:same old stuff every generation..

kja wrote:The 2500 came like two years after the 1000.. the 1000 came after the company was sold to numark and it was a much cheaper build and people complained alot.. however it sold very well and have a whole new demographic a chance at owning a mpc.. same thing happened when the company was sold and the 2000 came out.. of course later models came out to fill out the line.. that wasn't my point.
Users threw a fit when the 2000 main screen looked different then the 3000, I remember that.. I remember everyone thought the 1000 was so cheap feeling compared to the 2000xl and it didn't even have a flip screen.. same old stuff every generation..