What key features are still missing for LIVE use of the MPC

eLuSiVeMiTe wrote:make double tapping main bring up the matrix.

On MPC One, I've settled on Menu+Pad12 as the shortcut to the Clip Matrix. I find it just as quick and one-handed as double-tapping a button, and much quicker than putting the Clip Matrix menu icon in the left sidebar.

I'm also using the MPC live - all the things mentioned above would be great but also the ability to have different time signatures within a song! I know 3.6 finally allows time signature other than 4/4 but you have to specify at project level

Yeah, I have to say that the RE-add of time signatures was a big fat "just let them change the overall TS, to buy us some time". I am fine with that, but just like tempo, time signatures do change, albeit not often, but they are definitely a fundamental building block to music and to basic sequencers.

However, as intended, I am happy to at least be able to use different time signatures without needing to "rig" something. I actually started a new project in 12/8 so it's fun!

It may as well have a d*ck if its gonna f**ck us for our $$$.

A mixer which actually follows the hardware (like it used to) would be useful. So that if you’ve got a rake of samples on, say, pad bank B, and you switch to the mixer, you’re actually shown the mixer for pad bank B…! I honestly don’t know how anyone can mix on 3.x quickly. The mixers are so counter-intuitive.

sparky wrote:A mixer which actually follows the hardware (like it used to) would be useful. So that if you’ve got a rake of samples on, say, pad bank B, and you switch to the mixer, you’re actually shown the mixer for pad bank B…! I honestly don’t know how anyone can mix on 3.x quickly. The mixers are so counter-intuitive.

Isn't there an option to only show you the tracks in the mixer that have data on it?
I'll look for it later.

Pad Mixer? I thought we have that

I’m surprised we didn’t get warp markers yet.

B-Wise wrote:

sparky wrote:A mixer which actually follows the hardware (like it used to) would be useful. So that if you’ve got a rake of samples on, say, pad bank B, and you switch to the mixer, you’re actually shown the mixer for pad bank B…! I honestly don’t know how anyone can mix on 3.x quickly. The mixers are so counter-intuitive.

Isn't there an option to only show you the tracks in the mixer that have data on it?
I'll look for it later.

Yeah, thanks, there is that setting in the cogwheel on the mixer page - but even with events filtered the mixer is still non-navigable for my purposes. It used to be effortless when it corresponded with the pad layout. And unless i’ve missed this, it still doesn’t give you the sample name in the pad mixer, just the pad number

Lampdog wrote:Nope, just the pad # as far as I can tell.

Hopeless, isn’t it! It’s a good thing i always name my samples catchy things like ‘Pad B12’, ‘Pad A06’, Pad G15’ etc, so they’re really easy to find as long as i assign them correctly

sparky wrote:Yeah, thanks, there is that setting in the cogwheel on the mixer page - but even with events filtered the mixer is still non-navigable for my purposes. It used to be effortless when it corresponded with the pad layout. And unless i’ve missed this, it still doesn’t give you the sample name in the pad mixer, just the pad number

Oh, you wanna see the sample names all in 1 screen/section. That's one thing I don't like about how they got things set up. Some sample names get cut off so I had to rename things in ways I wouldn't normally want.

B-Wise wrote:

sparky wrote:Yeah, thanks, there is that setting in the cogwheel on the mixer page - but even with events filtered the mixer is still non-navigable for my purposes. It used to be effortless when it corresponded with the pad layout. And unless i’ve missed this, it still doesn’t give you the sample name in the pad mixer, just the pad number

Oh, you wanna see the sample names all in 1 screen/section. That's one thing I don't like about how they got things set up. Some sample names get cut off so I had to rename things in ways I wouldn't normally want.

No, that’s not what I’m talking about, I’m talking about the names being visible AT ALL in the pad mixer instead of just their bank and number. Although what you’re referring to - being able to see a bank of sample names all at once - was a bonus of the old mixer. There still is a way to see them all in one go - I think in the sample assign page. But not having direct control at that point makes no sense to me.

I forgot about this topic and started a new one about the exact same matter. So I'll add my lengthy post here and remove my other topic to avoid duplicates

The content of my other topic (now removed):

So the current MPC Live 3.x firmware is clearly not aiming for live use of the devices. And this raises some questions on how people are actually using their devices.

As mentioned before. There is simply not enough rage about the existing "non-live issues" for me to conclude that we, who actually are looking for using the MPC Lives "live", belong to a very small minority of the user base. But rest assure, we who see our compositions/songs as organic and changing from day to day, are here and very eager to be able to utilize our MPCs better and more.

But currently I feel very mislead by the fact that Akai has chosen to have (and also keep) the Live part in the name. Why didn't they call the MPC Live 3 something else for example? If there clearly is no intention to get the firmware up to a "live performance able state", why keep the legacy name going?

There are a few extremely important key issues making the MPC Live very limited for live use (as mentioned before in other topics...):

1. Not being able to utilize program changes properly.
You cannot send different program changes per track per sequence. One track can send only one program change per project. And you cannot use program changes to change internal plugin presets (I mean common'...) currently.

Note: using one project per song is not at all suitable for live use. For this to be a suitable in a live setting projects needs to load basically instantly and also keep midi sync with other gear, or at the very very least be able to change projects with program changes. Both are not possible currently.

And also using the list edit as a workaround is not suitable since there is the "bug/omission" where there will always be an unremovable program change added at event 0, no matter what.

2. Not being able to hold chords over sequence changes
This is a huge one for live use. If you want to play internal plugins and/or external gear through the MPC Live. You cannot hold chords/leads over sequence changes. No matter what your held notes will cut off on sequence changes. Either you need to be a robot and hit the same chord/note again exactly on sequence change to have the chord/note being still playing, or you need to not actually use this at all in your live performances. And I'm not a robot and also currently often utilize holding a chord or melody over sequence changes/parts of a song.

3. Clips and arranger markers cannot be accessed/changed using program changes
So using clips with external gear is also not suitable, and even if markers would be accessible with program changes, then 6 markers is simply too few to be utilized in a live setting. If markers in the arranger would be accessible through program changes and there would be more markers, then the number 2 issue of held notes cutting off could be worked around using the arranger.
The markers in the arranger could be seen as "Sequences" in this scenario, and removing the need to use traditional sequence changes for different parts of songs.

Sorry for the long post, I know this has been discussed in different topics already. But I thought it would be good to have a separate topic on the subject, to help us who are desperately waiting for the "live" parts of the MPC Lives to become reality.

jaymack wrote:does this need its own thread?

For me this 100% needs its own topic since quite a few of us users are desperately waiting for the live part of the Live to be fulfilled.

I even accidentally created a new topic because the need of a separate topic on the matter.