Mpc 3000 King Of Mpcs Yes or No and why?

xabiton wrote:

personal_rock wrote:i am by no means any expert on MPC's, but as a new user I bought the 2500 as my first MPC. I love the records made by 3000 users and SP1200 users cuz their sounds are amaziing, especially on drums (as yous well know) but for me, comming from 2 years of computers and software production and needing the workflow of an MPC, although the sounds of vintage gear is quality I didn't see the point in going backwards (in terms of features, memory, capabilities, compatiblity) just for the sound, so i decided a modern machine would be more worth my while. Although the sound is quite clean on the 2500, you can still get good results with the right EQing and tweeks here and there, and as it was said before it depends on your records.
Mind you, if i had the money to waste (which i most certainly don't) i would buy an old school machine just for the sound, but thats mostly cuz of the buzz you get from the classic machines...the cool factor. For me though, it's just not very practical.

everybody's different though...

i dont see how u would be burning money on a old machine. A lot of the time they cost the same if not less than the newer ones. Features vs sound I can understand but isn't music all about sound. Its kind of strange that you would ignore it simply because something else is easier. Just my 2 pennies

yes, music is all about sound, but to be honest, at the time i didn't pay too much attention about the new machine vs the classic sound. I just wanted an up to date machine that offered the workflow of an MPC that i was craving. I feel i got that in the 2500 and i am very happy with it, and as i said i came from 2 years of computer based production and i feel that if i got an old school machine i would feel like it was lacking in terms of features and compatability.
It is only now though after i have owned my first MPC that I have become a serious user if you will and look into everything in more detail (ie, the old school sound) and as I said before, if I had the money now I would most certainly look into the 3000 because i have learned since buying my first machine and i now know just why my favourite tracks drums sound so good (for example) cuz they were made on a certain machine.
I was a new user and didn't really know any better when i bought the 2500, but I got a really good deal on a second hand one in my area and i've learned alot from it and i don't regret buying it one bit.

As for the build quality of the 2500, it's actually very good. Very tough with a great weight to it and great pads. Only problem seems to be the jog wheel, but although it's not the toughest one i've ever felt i've never had any problems with it.

for me the best mpc is the mpc 60 version 1 with the latest os (3.1) and with the scsi option.Now let me explain......

before i buy my mpc 60 i was in a dilemma which one :mpc 60 or mpc 3000 (all the other mpc i believe they some how can't rich these 2 )

Anyway if you think about it ,the 3k has more sampling time but you don't really need it, when you can get one sampler for less then 250$

Also the 3k has a better computer so it can produce more complex sequences than the 60 but i don't believe that you are going ever to make something so complex so that's also something that you are not going need.

Finally the 3k has 16bit sound where the mpc 60 has 12 but thats the reason YOU ARE GOING TO BUY THE MPC 60 BECAUSE OF THIS :CRUNK SOUND QUALITY, OLD SCHOOL STUFF ....THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN'T CHANGE ,EITHER YOU HAVE IT EITHER YOU DON'T NO MATTER WHAT OTHER EQUIPMENT YOU BUY THAT UNBELIEVABLE SOUND YOU CAN'T REPRODUCE IT.

that's why mpc 60 is the best of the best

MPC 60 IS THE MPC....

THE 4K CAN PRODUCE 12BIT SAMPLES AS WELL SO I GUESS ITS KING

its not the same.

SURE IT IS

xabiton wrote:

dabmeister wrote:The 4000 is the undisputed king of all mpc's.

why is this? I havent ever used a 4000 but everything Ive heard from it has been entirely too clean sounding. Feature wise I don't think it can be touched tho

There's no such thing as too clean. If you chose to , you dirty up the sound of a sample in a million different ways, but you can never extract machine imposed dirt.. The 4000 is the ultimate MPC if you do more with a sampler than sample vynil. If you actually play you'll appreciate the fact that the 4000 can handle the best sound libraries . Something indeed lost with the 3000 or 2500 inferior D/A converters. There is no such thing as a crisp and truly realistic sounding piano coming out of a 3000. It simply sounds manufactured. Brass is even worse IMO. The ancient 96ppqn from the ASQ-10 doesn't help the sub 4000 family members any.

AWW_NAWW wrote:THE 4K CAN PRODUCE 12BIT SAMPLES AS WELL SO I GUESS ITS KING

how ?

konc3pt wrote:

AWW_NAWW wrote:THE 4K CAN PRODUCE 12BIT SAMPLES AS WELL SO I GUESS ITS KING

how ?

Via AKSYS and your favorite editor.

Countless hits made with every model. The general listener couldn't tell the difference or care less. I'm currently
On the 3000 and loving it although the update 3.50 would be nice. The end result is king!!!!! The 4k offers the most features but most were useless IMO.

deegood wrote:Countless hits made with every model. The general listener couldn't tell the difference or care less.

That typically applies all musical gear so it's not really anything the 3000 can hang it's hat on. It comes down to the man behind the machine.

dabmeister wrote:

konc3pt wrote:

AWW_NAWW wrote:THE 4K CAN PRODUCE 12BIT SAMPLES AS WELL SO I GUESS ITS KING

how ?

Via AKSYS and your favorite editor.

I gotta look into that outta curiosity. Once on accident I loaded different bit rate audio files in the 2500 and it wouldnt play it back. Havent tried it the 4k yet.

konc3pt wrote:

dabmeister wrote:

konc3pt wrote:

AWW_NAWW wrote:THE 4K CAN PRODUCE 12BIT SAMPLES AS WELL SO I GUESS ITS KING

how ?

Via AKSYS and your favorite editor.

I gotta look into that outta curiosity. Once on accident I loaded different bit rate audio files in the 2500 and it wouldnt play it back. Havent tried it the 4k yet.

HA HA HOLD ON TO YOUR HAT!!!

3000 is mf'ing king!!! Why? Cause the good doctor said so!!!

i love the way the 60-I looks.

i love the way the newer mpc's can handle lots of programs and some useful effects, so you can shoot from the hip for any sort of production and really can switch off that computer screen! just take your mpc to a good studio for a final mix from all outputs. i tried a 1000 in a shop for hours and i think even the 1000 is a sort of sweet machine using more than 4 programs at the same time, even though a bit boxy sounding. i cant say anything about reliability but it seems the xl is more reliable.

but, after all, i think getting a small selection of good sounds on a top class sampler with some effort can get your own sound fingerprint along a long way. i think nothing is harder to achieve than good noise. . the 60 it is for me. it takes some patience but once you have your bass and drumkit plus some fav instruments, it's payoff time big time and you can lay down trax that sound like you. you could also take a cheap s950 or other sampler and sample back into your xl (I i dont like midi because i am spoilt by timing inside the mpc's) but resampling this way might get a little tedious maybe? (by the way, i dont see any s950 any more on ebay or so...)

also: if you are able to get your crunchy sounds that punch throug right in the first place, you save time actually and dont have to rely on (un)fixing things in an expensive studio for ages. and it might give you a better sense of achievement

if you have the money, i would get a 60 plus an XL, so you dont get bogged down should the 60s sequencer be testing your patience when creating songs. so you could do your crunch beats from the 60 and the all the other lovely crazy 16 level tuning stuff and voccals etc on the xl. you can also sample live instruments into the xl while the 60 is playing, use it as a phrase multitracker (provided you have 32meg) also remember that the 60 has some lovely options regarding ins and outs (e.g. send and return for a single stereo compressor or other fx, or you can run your xl through your 60!!!, useful if you dont want tons of mixing equipment gear around...) You can also use a shitty old 4 track cassette and hook it up via smpte, for super lofi multi tracking and resampling (usin some gates or a behringer noise reduction can kill too much hiss but retain the good analogue crappiness)

i think all that would make a nice little studio without a computer setup, maybe even cheaper and more creative????

there is also another main reason why i love the WHOLE mpc range: you have the sounds on pads and you are not bound by a keyboard's white and black keys telling you what to hit. you can come up with basslines etc that are far more error prone happy accidental than using a keyboard while at the same time more pads are more responsive to rhythm. also: using the cheap but cheerful (and fast) autochromatic tuning gives you programs that are far more in the realm of old style sampling where you get all that crunchy lofi stuff in the outer reaches of the sample.

you can spend hours and hours infront of an mpc without backstrain, especially the 60 with the nice armrest from your drumworkout. i hate my computer for music, the monitor burns out my eyes and the hum of the fan (evn though supposedly 'silent fan design') is like water torture. i am fine writing and browsing on the computer but when it comes to creativety or having to really concentrate, no thanks (and i have tried!)

i think the one area that requires all my discipline is the song arrangement in the mps, the step from having a good time in the track mute window to translating it into the final sequence but practice seems to make it quicker for me now....

so the winner for me: 60 plus xl

60 + XL = NO FILTERS LIKE THE 3000 WHEN LAYERING -