my chocie to go with 2500 over 4000

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Siver:
someone mentioned the 512mb v the 128mb.....has anyone ran out of room when they had the 128mb installed?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I have. Im running an hour long live set with the MPC2500 as the core and i can only load half of it in one go! Gotta have to let the MC tell some jokes or somethin for a few minutes while i load up the second half!
(or buy another one...)

Gotta say though in 2006 128mb of RAM isnt very much.

But hey its better that the 32meg on my old MPC's

I would say that the 2500 is really the perfect balance for beat making from a mpc. If u can't make a hot hit from a 2500 or even a 1000 then you shouldn't be tryin to even bother making music!!!

128 Ram ( Most hits came from a 3000 with 16meg )
CDR (Sample straight from CD and burn direct or load from CDROM)
4 Zones per pad
Resample
2 FX Processors
10 Outs
Multiple Programs
Slice features

etc

What more do you guy's need to make hits!!!!!

Forget the features and make the music

Gotta agree with Macman on this one. I use my 4000 for sequencing midi from my boards / modules. I also like the feel / shuffle of the unit for certain types of tracks over the traditional mpc feel. It just depends on the track that i work on.

In the real world, not everyone needs / wants two mpcs. IMHO the limitation of sample ram is the best part of boosting creativity. My XL only has 2mb of ram, and i use it to its max point with interesting results.

I feel the 2500 to be the best gap filler mpc, between old 'n' new. It loads fast, has some 4k features, its portable and its cheaper.

If one cannot make a quality tune using the 2500 (with perhaps a DAW), you may as well quit.

Groove66 wrote:Gotta agree with Macman on this one. I use my 4000 for sequencing midi from my boards / modules. I also like the feel / shuffle of the unit for certain types of tracks over the traditional mpc feel. It just depends on the track that i work on.

In the real world, not everyone needs / wants two mpcs. IMHO the limitation of sample ram is the best part of boosting creativity. My XL only has 2mb of ram, and i use it to its max point with interesting results.

I feel the 2500 to be the best gap filler mpc, between old 'n' new. It loads fast, has some 4k features, its portable and its cheaper.

If one cannot make a quality tune using the 2500 (with perhaps a DAW), you may as well quit.

Why do you prefer to use the 4000 to sequence midi rather than the 2500 or xl?

I prefer the 4k because of its high sequencing resolution. When you play with quantize off, you can lay down a unique feel without any suprises

The 960 ticks make alot of difference for playing free style keys, etc. Its also great for drum programming. You can shift a clap / snare pretty much anywhere, unlike with 96ppqn (where things start to sound off). Dont get me wrong, 96 ppqn is just fine for most things (like drums), but when it come to complex song writing (piano, strums, etc), it struggles.

How does the step edit of the 2500 compare to the 4000?

Complex song writing huh?

Personally, if I needed something more than the 96ppqn that the 2500 has...I would just use my software DAW. I would have the choice of recording a performance as audio or MIDI. That trumps any MPC when trying to capture your own 'unique feel'.

But to overcome this on the 2500, you can just record your performance as a continuous audio track...

jahrome wrote:Complex song writing huh?

Personally, if I needed something more than the 96ppqn that the 2500 has...I would just use my software DAW. I would have the choice of recording a performance as audio or MIDI. That trumps any MPC when trying to capture your own 'unique feel'.

But to overcome this on the 2500, you can just record your performance as a continuous audio track...

Complex within reason.....

I also prefer my DAW for main writing, but the 4k handles it pretty well in the box. When i play keys, i can hit record, and the 4k just picks up my notes in the same what it was played (just like Logic) Cannot say the same for my 2500 / XL.

Right now though, im loving the 2500. I was using it all day for programming beats and then USB'ing over to my mac into logic. Resampling back n forth, etc, no crashes..it was great.

So i got a question:

I got a 2000XL... The most sounds I can use at once are 256 with 4 Programs

From what I understand, the 1000 can use 24 Programs, on 64 pads per program, which would equal out too....1,536 of maxed out loaded sounds(im assuming), is that correct

MPC 2500 would be 24 Programs, not sure of the total amount of loaded maxed out sounds

MPC 4000: Up to 128 parts per multi....what would be the totaled maxed out sounds


So my question is, whats the total amount of maxed out sounds can you use in the MPC 2500 and also the total maxed out amount you can use it in the MPC 4000(if someone was to really ever reach this)?

find me a track that has that many sounds and samples loaded and I will answer that question

TheFirstJimBo wrote:find me a track that has that many sounds and samples loaded and I will answer that question

LET THE CHURCH SAY AMEN!!

soulscientist wrote:i would choose "writing everything without capslock" over "WRITING EVERYTHING WITH CAPSLOCK"



seriously though, i haven't tried none of the above but the 2500 seems more interesting to me too. i like simplicity and a unit with a little longer life than the 4000 (the are probably not releasing more than 1 update to the os). especially if you have other gear to work with, the 4000 seems more suiting as a standalone workstation. direct record into the 2500 seems dope, it would give me a nice workflow.

what u mean by somtin longer life than the 4000 , isnt it supposed to be better built than the 2500 ??

I think what was meant by longer life is longer support....more OS updates vs the possibility of no more OS updates....

TheFirstJimBo wrote:find me a track that has that many sounds and samples loaded and I will answer that question

So really, its dang near impossible, unless you are just trying to load every sound in ya library up for the h..ll of it?

TheFirstJimBo wrote:find me a track that has that many sounds and samples loaded and I will answer that question

hahaha... i dont think a track with that many sounds and samples would be considered music anymore.