WHY THE MPC 2000? WHY THE MPC2000XL?

Ron wrote:I started on a 2000 it was a freinds and always wanted one. Got a 2000XL a little over a year ago. Mastered it in a few weeks. The original owner has a 4000 and was buggen over the stuff I got the XL do'en. To me this is what i always wanted. I am happy and don't need nothing else.

imagine wot u could do on the 4000?

swear there like twice as dear

Go XL. Not just my opinion but for the features. Why get the older one? You won't be sorry if you do the XL trust in that.

I have the classic 2k....the XL is the upgrade of the previous...so i think it's a better machine,more complete......

carhartt wrote:this is what im tryin to decipher over at the min

wheather to go for 2000 or the 2000xl

find it hard to get a xl cheap

cant wait still till i get either

how much cheaper? If you can find a non-xl for around $400 get it. But if its: nonxl $700 and xl $900, then get the xl. Remember: the non-xl is going to be older...

carhartt wrote:imagine wot u could do on the 4000?

swear there like twice as dear

I got a fully loaded PC. I have worked with quite a few professionals and haven't seen anything I couldn't do with my computer/MPC2KXL combo.
Now if I didn't have a computer that would be a whole different story.
4000 is tight DO NOT GET ME WRONG!

Yeah, I concur. You got a 2000 already, stick with it.
If you actually NEED timestretching for productions, you
will find that, while the algorythm is very good (ts sounds nice)
from the XL, like they said, indeed it takes FOREVER to process.
Also, what the hell are you time stretching TO? you gotta have a
mf'n calculator next to you to compute BPM numbers to percentages,
as compared to what you start with, and what you want to wnd up with.
Not very useful.
The bit splitter (resample) is rather good,
I'll say BETTER than the lo-fi plugin for protools, but no where NEAR
Sans-Amp. With some, experimenting though,
you can fake an SP1200 or an s950 sound, at least on some drums.
Playing from multiple programs is a welcomed addition as well, but the
lack of doesn't really hinder much. If you want to do everything a computer can do, only the 4000 will do, and that's a stretch too.
The XL will bring you no closer to that world than a regular 2000.

I know a dude who had a 2000, got an XL and TRADED IT BACK
for the 2000, because the OUTER WHEEL on the 2000 classic
makes cutting samples much faster than on the XL.

six of one, half dozen of another...

bboutit wrote:used it when I was READING thru the manual and learning each function.

Dammmmm, I wish everyone was like you, well not every EVERYONE. Reading is fundamental though.

The outer DIGIT DATA wheel is definitely a plus on the original 2000... as plastic as it is it's still a good function that makes moving digits easy. Besides for that the XL is equal in quality with some new improved features. But I must state for the record that I NEVER have a problem with freezing/locking up/glitching on my original 2000. I have seen posts here with XL users talking about OS having problems here and there, not common but if it was enough to be posted maybe it's something you want to consider. OS problems is what steered me away from the 4000 so far (and price I might add) but if that is something that is worked out better in the future and my budget allows I'd like to upgrade to a 4000. I think the new features and almost limitless sample capabilities should make for some very interesting potential for further experimentation if I actually choose to purchase one.

Toecutter wrote:OS problems is what steered me away from the 4000 so far (and price I might add) but if that is something that is worked out better in the future and my budget allows I'd like to upgrade to a 4000.

Took the words right outta my mouth..

everyone has excellent points.

personally...i kinda like to think that everything is different.
i'm sure many other agree.

even if it's to the TINYEST degree, even if it's subconcious, the 2000 and 2000XL give off TWO different ways of hearing/experiencing stuff.

i think having more gear, the better...you got more ingredients to work with.

if you got a 2000....keep it.
you got an XL...keep it.

you got BOTH...lucky.


_chris

They are both nice. I will say this, the 2000 was a bit less stable with an extrenal zip drive. Other than that, I was able to do everything that I wanted with it. I agree with most of the people here... whatever one you have is probably good enough.

Oh yeah, you also have to worry about frying a diode in the external SCSI connector. This is something that I read about, not experienced.

So why did they change that data wheel....

XL all Day, 'err Day.
I use shift + NV slider to get around a bad Data wheel, Believe that.

Or hit shift and use the cursor keys left or right to change the amount the bar moves with the jog wheel. Not a problem really.

XL for me too.