Sounds?

Ive read in other threads that the sound is ''neutral''. Unlike the 2000, that seems slightly thinner and 3000 that is slightly fatter, in my personal experiences.

Can anyone link me to any percussion sound's that they have sampled, directly from vinyl on the 2500?

Thx, 360.

I've worked with every model of MPC, own a few of them now, and I can tell you the 2500 is neutral sounding. Sorry, no vinyl sampling. You don't need vinyl to check the response curve. As a better reference test I am using the factory sounds from the 4000. When I am done with that I am going to use the factory sounds from the 2000XL for comparison. Then maybe the 1000, if I feel up to it. What I have heard out of the 2500 so far is a neutral sound much like the 1000.

I wouldn't worry about the sound of the 2500, but if you're looking for something like the older MPCs that are tuned for percussion, then you won't find it in this model. No MPC will be made like that again. The future is in a design that matches the needs of different users. The MPC isn't just a drum machine any more.

I disagree with the tuned for percussion statement.

Using the factory sounds is no way to compare these MPCs. A better way is to sample the same sound source into each to compare. Or load the same .wav file into each and compare.

I'd be interested to hear the results of either test. Not that it really matters, I'm not selling my mp's and would'nt be able to afford one of these if I did...nonetheless, still interesting.

2500 looks like a nice machine though.

jahrome wrote:I disagree with the tuned for percussion statement.

Using the factory sounds is no way to compare these MPCs. A better way is to sample the same sound source into each to compare. Or load the same .wav file into each and compare.

If you can't tell the difference between the response curve in the old MPCs and the new ones, then you never really used the old ones. The difference in punch and crispness of the old models versus the more balanced response curve of the newer ones is like night and day. The old MPCs were made primarily as drum machines.

Using factory sounds is in fact a perfect way to hear differences because these are stock sounds that everyone can use to reproduce the tests. And yes that means loading the same WAV files into each MPC. Another way is to use a Reference CD. Not everyone is going to have access to the same sound source if I choose a workstation or similar sound source. They can easily get the factory sound sets, especially the multiple MPC owners.

Hurricane Producer wrote:
If you can't tell the difference between the response curve in the old MPCs and the new ones, then you never really used the old ones. The difference in punch and crispness of the old models versus the more balanced response curve of the newer ones is like night and day. The old MPCs were made primarily as drum machines.

Using factory sounds is in fact a perfect way to hear differences because these are stock sounds that everyone can use to reproduce the tests. And yes that means loading the same WAV files into each MPC. Another way is to use a Reference CD. Not everyone is going to have access to the same sound source if I choose a workstation or similar sound source. They can easily get the factory sound sets, especially the multiple MPC owners.

The older MPCs do sound different than the newer ones. There is no disputing that. As far as the punch/crispness..that is subjective and words that are used way to often in these forums and really have no meaning. If I created two tracks..each using a different MPC..you would not be able to tell which machine I recorded it on using the gear in my set-up. This has been debated to death. Much of the commercial music you hear on the radio was created with MPCs..different MPCs. You can not tell which MPC a track was created with. What is the 'more balanced response curve' you are talking about?

With the exception of the MPC 4000...all MPCs are just sampling drum machines/sequencers. The 2500..drums, loops, and sequencing sound modules...the same as the 3000,2000, 60..

As far as collecting a bunch of MPCs to test the sound with each...lets just leave that up to you..since you already have one of each. I got plenty of time on my hands but not that much..and I have no intentions on buying anymore of the older MPCs (including the 4000). I will keep my two 2500s


So, the plan..I am guessing..is to load the same Kik drum into each MPC and give an opinion on which sounds the best??? Let me save you the time...the MPC 60 will have that 'punch' and 'grit'. The drums will hit you hard in the chest. The MPC 2000/2000XL will give you a little 'sparkle' on the highs but you will need an external compressor to 'beef; up the low end. The MPC 3000 will give you something inbetween and is more desirable. The MPC 2500 and 1000 sounds pretty much the same but the outputs of the 2500 sound much better since they are balanced unlike the 1000. The MPC 4000 is pretty sterile sounding..will capture pretty much what you put into it.. Just do a search in all the forums and cut and paste the results from the previous threads.

"The difference in punch and crispness of the old models versus the more balanced response curve of the newer ones is like night and day."

I really don't know where some of you are getting your information from. Are you talking facts that you know, or things that you heard from folks that spent big money on old used MPC's? The MPC-60 and the 3000 are good machines, but you will hear very little difference in the sound if you compared it to an MPC2000XL. People say the same thing about the SP1200 about how glorious the sound is, but when the comparison was made, most of you didn't know the difference between the 3 different models of samplers. If the difference was night and day, you'd be able to listen to a song on the radio and say, "Ohh, that's the MPC3000, or that's the SP1200!" but we don't. That's why 9th wonder got most of you baffled when you though he was using the SP or the MPC, and he was really using fruity-loops!
If you want to spend $2000+ dollars on a drum machine, then go for it, but believe me, you can do the same thing on a used MPC2000.

roxstar wrote:"The difference in punch and crispness of the old models versus the more balanced response curve of the newer ones is like night and day."

I really don't know where some of you are getting your information from. Are you talking facts that you know, or things that you heard from folks that spent big money on old used MPC's? The MPC-60 and the 3000 are good machines, but you will hear very little difference in the sound if you compared it to an MPC2000XL. People say the same thing about the SP1200 about how glorious the sound is, but when the comparison was made, most of you didn't know the difference between the 3 different models of samplers. If the difference was night and day, you'd be able to listen to a song on the radio and say, "Ohh, that's the MPC3000, or that's the SP1200!" but we don't. That's why 9th wonder got most of you baffled when you though he was using the SP or the MPC, and he was really using fruity-loops!
If you want to spend $2000+ dollars on a drum machine, then go for it, but believe me, you can do the same thing on a used MPC2000.

I have to disagree, 2000 sounds thin to me. Im not saying you cant make heat with it (Kev Brown), who uses just a 2000 with standard outboard gear. Some of his beats just sound thin to me tho.

BTW.. Im not the biggest 9th fan, he **** up many beats with crappy snares and hats that are way too loud and annoying. BUT does have good sample chops !!

360 wrote:
I have to disagree, 2000 sounds thin to me. Im not saying you cant make heat with it (Kev Brown), who uses just a 2000 with standard outboard gear. Some of his beats just sound thin to me tho.

BTW.. Im not the biggest 9th fan, he **** up many beats with crappy snares and hats that are way too loud and annoying. BUT does have good sample chops !!

1amc0eb293f3cb293

'Crappy snares and hats' you are talking about in 9th Wonder's music has nothing to do with what he uses to make music with.

'Thin' is another over used word in these forums The MPC 2000 sounds no better or worst than the XL. Using the MPC 2000, with a cheap digital mixer and 'crappy' factory samples will get you 'crappy' sounds.


As far as the MPC 2500, the first thing I did was check the sound. I posted the results in another thread. I sampled drums from the MoPhatt Rom in my Proteus 2000 into the 2500. In a blind test, you wouldn't be able to tell which drums were coming from the MPC or the Proteus. And they both sound too close to say one is better sounding than the other.

jahrome wrote:

360 wrote:
I have to disagree, 2000 sounds thin to me. Im not saying you cant make heat with it (Kev Brown), who uses just a 2000 with standard outboard gear. Some of his beats just sound thin to me tho.

BTW.. Im not the biggest 9th fan, he **** up many beats with crappy snares and hats that are way too loud and annoying. BUT does have good sample chops !!

1amc0eb293f3cb293

'Crappy snares and hats' you are talking about in 9th Wonder's music has nothing to do with what he uses to make music with.

'Thin' is another over used word in these forums The MPC 2000 sounds no better or worst than the XL. Using the MPC 2000, with a cheap digital mixer and 'crappy' factory samples will get you 'crappy' sounds.


As far as the MPC 2500, the first thing I did was check the sound. I posted the results in another thread. I sampled drums from the MoPhatt Rom in my Proteus 2000 into the 2500. In a blind test, you wouldn't be able to tell which drums were coming from the MPC or the Proteus. And they both sound too close to say one is better sounding than the other.

Jahrome, My opinion on 9th is about his music NOT his FL set-up. I didn't mention his set-up, did I?


2000 and XL are really the same thing, give or take some features. I have owned a XL but not the 1st one. As far as factory sounds, I only sample from vinyl.. so I wouldn't know about that. I know Kev doesn't use them stock sounds either.

So whats your piont about the 2000/XL?!

Back to 2500, i think

360 wrote:
Jahrome, My opinion on 9th is about his music NOT his FL set-up. I didn't mention his set-up, did I?


2000 and XL are really the same thing, give or take some features. I have owned a XL but not the 1st one. As far as factory sounds, I only sample from vinyl.. so I wouldn't know about that. I know Kev doesn't use them stock sounds either.

So whats your piont about the 2000/XL?!

Back to 2500, i think

You didn't have to mention 9th Wonder's set-up. It was mentioned already and you replied that he has 'crappy' snares. So from the context of this thread, it can imply that FL sounds like 'crap'. I just brought it back to focus that you can get the sound you want using anything.

As far as the 2000/2000XL...it relates back to the 'sound'...hold it was stated that the 2000 'sounds thin'. Alot of the commerical music you have heard in the past 5 years was created with a 2000XL or 2000. If you got 'thin' sounds out of the 2000..it may have been due to user error/technique I hope people are not thinking they can record crappy sounding samples into an MPC or any other tool, and hope that they can shape the sound so that it comes out hot. Garbage in=Garbage out.

^^ I have to disagree. I have worked with actual producers and the ones that have one only use the 2000/XL as a sequencer. They tend to use racks or keyboards for sounds, due to the quality of "sound". I used to use the 3000, until recently messing around with XL and not overjoyed with the sound of the percussion samples. Im sure many of the big producers use a 3000, rather than a 2000/XL. Like Dre (has like 4), Scratch, Dilla, etc.

May buy a 2500 tho..

jahrome wrote: The 2500..drums, loops, and sequencing sound modules...the same as the 3000,2000, 60..

The MPC 2500 and 1000 sounds pretty much the same but the outputs of the 2500 sound much better since they are balanced unlike the 1000. The MPC 4000 is pretty sterile sounding..will capture pretty much what you put into it.. Just do a search in all the forums and cut and paste the results from the previous threads.

Dude, your analysis is completed flawed. The sound of the 2500 can't be determined by just reading old posts about the 60, 2000/2000XL, 3000, and 4000 and making a wild guess as you are obviously doing. It takes real WORK, actually loading reference samples into a 2500 for comparison.

These things are recorders, they have a character but what you record makes a big difference as well, it takes hearing the sample before sampling and after on various materials before you get what is going on. The XL has a sound that compared to many other samplers is a bit on the weak side, but that doesn;t mean that everything you sample into it will be weak, , it takes a special ear and experience to hear the difference and even care about it, most people don't care.

The 1000 sounds OK to me, better than the 2000's IMO, but it has it's own shade of the akai (lack of) character.

"Garbage in=Garbage out."

That sums up the whole argument up right there. Sure, if you sample with a lower sample rate you lose quality, but the little bit of extra warmth that the 3000 produces can be duplicated on any cheap mixer. People talk and rave about the old gear, but very few seem to remember that the old school music was primarely made up from drum loops that they SAMPLED FROM WAX.. If sampled the same loop on any sampler you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference. I read about how many of you don't even like to sample drums, or you want to buy samples!! What kind of mystical magic do you expect any sampler to do to this? Now, don't get me wrong, I like ALL mpc's, but the difference in sound is SO minimal. The only people that rave about how much better the 3000 is are the ones that own them, and I bet you would have a good reason to justify spending 2 grand also!
If you want your MPC1000/2000(XL) to sound like the mpc-60/3000, just buy the equivelant rackmound sampler, and transfer the sounds. I can almost guarentee, after you do all that transfering for a few months/years, you will finally agree that the slight difference in sound isn't worth the time.
MPC1000, Yamaha SU700, SP-202, or whatever kind of sampler you can think of can sound good. If you have a preference, then great, but don't let that be a excuse or reason why your beats ain't bangin.