Maybe. Yet, if they can build a replica Lamborgini Countach that uses a 375hp GM motor, someone should be able to build a newer machine with the older "sound". If Emu can put out a Anniversay Edition of its Sp12 or Sp1200, why not for a 60 or 3000? Since these machines are 20 yrs and older, there should be some kind of way to "re"-engineer them from the ground up. That is what X-base did to get its X-909. Hech I even have some schematics around of a TR-808 and a TR-606. All it takes is someone with the desire to do so. Just take a look at the Forat edition of the Linn 9000.
Another fact, time just might be starting to catch up with these machines. Since we know that the many computer languages have 16bit sound technology written in them from the compiler to the linkers, hardware has to be the only way. Since time has gotten better with the technology, it should be easier to "do it again". Many years ago, a super computer took up much of the space of one of the buildings at Univ. of Penn, now they sit on a desk. They once used tubes, now transistors, etc. Bad comparison, but the MPC has now become truly portable. Has the automobile engine changed much since its "humble" beginnings? They still use gas, hybrids to, they still have cylinders, etc. Since the 60/3000 technology has been proven to stay,I think it is now the time to give it a rebirth that is further than what the version 3 hardware / software is doing.
Using the same 40khz / 12bit path technology as its base, it is time to expand, not change or evolve, upon it capabilities to what is now the current "standards". My S-2000 has more than 5 minutes sample time @ 44.1khz. Why can't the MPC 60/3000's? Yes I know the MPC format is much more efficient that the S technology. However, it give me a base for my observations / inquiries. Think about it. Granted we now can pimp our MPCs. Yet, isn't it now time to supercharge the exisiting engine?