NEW JJ OS V2!!!

all are great ideas, of course, but not what we're gonna see just yet.

perhaps if there is continued interest, cult following, and continued prominence of the 2500 and 1000, we may see something like that someday.

yeah though it is very important for folks to realize that we're not just talking about memory space here. we're talking about CPU usage. and, of course, when we're talking about any of that stuff, we're waaay out of our element.

this isn't namm. there are rules.

If your in to chopping drums from records, the ADSR inconjuntion with the alternate loop is going to be heavy. I chop most of my drums now in my mpc but i used to do everything on my esi-32 (chop a drum and paste in a reverse section to make it last longer) the ADSR was great, especially for controlling the level of the sustain part of a chopped drum. Alternate loop was one of my favorite JJ features, but with just alternate loop&duration i find i often get too much or too little atmosphere to the end of a drum hit...i personally cannot wait for ADSR control....as i can see it im happy with the trade off, i might still use 4.9x but im more than looking forward to OS2.

As far as the "mpc should be a sampler not a synth" argument: most samplers have ADSR, and the benefit of using a sampler over a synth for synth jobs is not for the speed of playing with preset synth patches but for the fact that you can use any waveform to create your patch.

Im also hoping qlink will be expanded to control ADSR fully, portamento would be nice too, but i can wait til march before i start pestering the J man.

i'd completely forgotten about portamento...now that we have keygroups, we're a lot closer to that, aren't we?

damn sons.

ADSR and alternate loop IS going to be incredible, on drum samples as well as note-by-note chopped samples... as of .58, however, NDC only allows 1 alternate loop per SAMPLE, not per chop. this will have to be addressed before we can take full advantage of ADSR+altloop on drum samples.

mikolo i'm digging the way you're thinking

I think sometimes people forget that coders have creative vision too. Not all things must revolve around the user. Sometimes you have to go against the grain to demonstrate new concepts and ideas.

NDC only allows 1 alternate loop per SAMPLE

Hey Nym,
Will we have an option to use either NDC or the Current Chopping method, or is it all NDC in OS2 at the moment?

i'm digging the way you're thinking

Yeah, i definitely get the impression we have a similiar approach.
I can't explain how much time JJ OS has saved me: Gpe, Chop mode, Alternate Loop.. i can't believe i used to do all of this with like 300+ individual hits!

on .58, you could only do NDC, not DC. that may have just been a symptom of the unfinished nature of the os. i believe either jj will implement the option to do either (preferable, because i will always prefer to DC my drum breaks) or set it up so multiple AL points will be used in NDC (still good).

mikolo, i don't remember, were you around back in the days of 1.07?
even in os 4.94, i spend hours building and tweaking my programs, using all efficiency tools i can muster, including the whole button and other selective tricks. if i were to try to do that on 1.07, i do indeed think my eyeballs would explode, or i'd wear my fingerprints off.

i look forward to bombing your PM box with questions when os2 is released and properly tested.

arebee wrote:ok, understood....

CPU heavy filter2 is replaced with ADSR, aftertouch, and other new features

i just wanted to see the direct trades...and why.

i mean if its CPU use thats the key to this, and not just memory space on chip........then u got me thinking further,

its a shame this os cant be more modular or cpu dynamic, ie: any feature u need u can "switch on" and others remain "greyed out" as it were...(even a check list at startup that saves the last set of configs used - but 'shift' startup shows the list of elements or choices available - before the os fully loads)

so in practice - say in the GPE a flt2 might be seen in the grid of parameters, but not actually being made available for use, untill say the adsr is switched to "classic or simple mode", then users may activate facets of the os's they love so much.

Bless JJ if this could happen

damn, i just sit down and read this topic, and after that i finally took the time to look at all the screenshots on JJ pages and understand the new functions that OS2 is going to have..

i'm beginning to think that some people could better get some coding lessons and make their own OS or they maybe should(again...) read the following

OS2 is not the upgrade version of OS1.
OS2 is brand-new os.
OS2 coexists with os1.
Although it cannot be used simultaneously, it can be used by turns.
Please use os1 to use the function of os1.
Please use os2 to use the function of os2.

i'm pretty amazed that some people really use the effects of the MP.. i rarely use any of them.. i use the mpc as the startup production for a song, and when it's ready, i track it out and do some evil work with some heavy vst plugs that sounds waaaaaaaaaaaaaay better then some crappy internal fx... anyway, the FX aren't going to be removed, so what is the fuzz about, or did i miss something?

Idea for the lost filter ; assign the same sound on 2 pads, simult them, use your different filters, happy hanukkah...

nym: 3 questions regarding the new os -

1. can you give us a list of what is currently controllable via aftertouch?

2. has jj implemented non-destructive reverse sample playback (both looped & 1-shot)?

3. can you play individual non-destructive chops in reverse (for example, play chop 1 forward, chop 2 in reverse, etc.) ?


thanks.

good questions. i'm not at the mpc right now so i'll give you more in depth answers tonight when i test the os more.

1 - pitch, filter, level, LFO. that much i know for sure.
2 - there is no non destructive reverse sample playback. there is AL+qlink-sample start, a cool technique found by another forum member, but that's the closest you can get for now.
3 - no. not without copying the entire sample and creating new ND slicepoints.

as of now, NDC offers some new possibilities, but is not as flexible as DC, which is why i hope both will be an option in the future. NDC doesn't yet allow individual loop points/aloop points.

I'm going to go to the beginning and read this whole thing when I get a chance but I have been reading the last several pages and some things have occured to me.

now i'm not as much of an experienced user as the rest of you all so please take what I say with a grain of salt.

Nym I read that comment that jj (bless him) made regarding what might be necessary or not for hiphop and your comment about showing him, it was cool of you to say that, alot of people still don't think hiphop composition can be forward thinking but what that did show was kind of what jjs mindstate is. and by all means this is not jj bashing, my concern though is that it's the hiphop faction of mpc users who mostly have been funding jj. of course not everybody who uses an mpc/jj os makes hiphop, but most do make hiphop or at least make hiphop along with other stuff ie breaks techno whatever, and there is a huge live realtime mpc user consortium as well.

what's my point?..... it's just this, since there are going to be two os, then in my opinion at least one of them should be based solely on the original strengths of the machines design. I don't remember who it was but someone posted earlier in this thread that they wish jj would give the mpc more features like the roland mv or other groove boxes, maybe even ableton live and I couldn't agree more. Imho the mpc is about sampling, chopping, and sequencing first and foremost, if at least os 1 stayed true to that mandate then os 2 would not look so troubling to people. for instance apparently we will be able to have both os loaded on one machine which is great, but something that is absolutely not great is the fact that we'll have to boot into os 2 use non-destructive editing, and boot back into os 1 if we don't use the more non-sample-centric features of os 2. You seem to have jjs ear and have been so helpful to everyone on the forum but i think the most helpful thing you could do is help jj clarify the 2 different cultures of os 1 and os 2.

and you yourself are the best example, you are 100% ready to dive in to the new os but how many people here on the forum are like you, sure everyone here knows much more than I do but still most of the people here hardly ever know what you're talking about, your methods, tricks, and work arounds give us alot to chew on and learn and thats great but you have to understand there is another culture of user as well, if the new os is going to be the best os for users like you, then the least jj could do is make os 1 the best for the other type of user.
the User who needs the MPC for Live usage and sample chopping looping abilities, see on these fronts the mpc hasn't reached it's full potential in the least and there is alot of work seemingly left to do.

the looping needs to be looked into seriously
we need multiple loop points and good settings for our live shows
the triggering needs to be looked at
we need easy single cycle loops to be possible
we need muting advancements or corrections, this is incredibly important for live playing as well as studio production
we need the sequencing and songmode to be worked out
i wish we had exploding seq tracks (jj said we can't in os 1)

there are so many more things but this rant is already too long my point is that one of the OS's needs to focus on pushing the boundries and capatalizing on what the mpc core is all about, sampling, chopping, triggering, and sequencing, while the other os could be more for synthesis or whatever.
I don't know jj so i don't know how much into hiphop he is but it would be great if all the people who are drawn to the mv, sp, ableton, and such could turn to the mpc 1000 because it had reached it's potential in it's original concept.

there's gonna be a lot of quoting, and this response is going to probably only be read by you and me, so if you want, we can most definitely continue this discussion via email or pm (my cell is busted)

since there are going to be two os, then in my opinion at least one of them should be based solely on the original strengths of the machines design.

and which would be the inspiration from that? the 3000? 2000xl? or is it the 4000? because all the new features implemented into os2 are also found in the 4000. both os1 and 2 are based solely on the original strength of the machines' design. and who is the authority on that, anyway? akai, or jj? i say the latter.

I don't remember who it was but someone posted earlier in this thread that they wish jj would give the mpc more features like the roland mv or other groove boxes, maybe even ableton live and I couldn't agree more.

not to be rude but i think you've contradicted yourself. you said first that you want the mpc code to focus on the original strengths of the mpc design, but then you want more features from fundamentally different designs? do you see the flaw here?

Imho the mpc is about sampling, chopping, and sequencing first and foremost

adsr and all functions so far mentioned in os2 IS about sampling, chopping and sequencing. adsr is fundamental to all three. ask any mpc4000 user. ask any other user of anything besides mpc1000s, 2000xls, 2500s...ADSR has been SORELY lacking from all of these models since day one. ADSR is VITAL to chopping/sampling/sequencing. not to mention, os1 handles sampling, chopping, and sequencing better than the 2000, 2000xl, and 3000, and arguably the 4000. os1 HAS stayed true to the mandate you speak of, and os2 stays even truer to it. you claim features of os2 are non-samplecentric, but i'm sorry--this is an incorrect statement. these are not synth-features. these are SAMPLE features.

os1 and os2 will not have 2 separate cultures, they will have 2 separate classes. os2 is going to be a more function-laden os. there will be more to do, be it edit samples, chop samples, sequence samples, or create completely new sounds from samples.

most of the people here hardly ever know what you're talking about, your methods, tricks, and work arounds give us alot to chew on and learn and thats great but you have to understand there is another culture of user as well, if the new os is going to be the best os for users like you, then the least jj could do is make os 1 the best for the other type of user.

i think you give me too much credit. any technique i write here is very easily done at home. anyone who gives them a shot can attest - there's nothing hard about it, it's just doing it! os2 is going to be better for a user like me, but then again os2 is going to be better for nearly every/any type of user who isn't 100% dead set in their ways.

the looping needs to be looked into seriously
we need multiple loop points and good settings for our live shows
the triggering needs to be looked at
we need easy single cycle loops to be possible
we need muting advancements or corrections, this is incredibly important for live playing as well as studio production
we need the sequencing and songmode to be worked out
i wish we had exploding seq tracks (jj said we can't in os 1)

a lot of these requests are very vague and lack the type of vision that is necessary for implementation. frankly, though, if you're having so much trouble with the mpc1000, is there ANY other mpc that will work as you want? it really sounds like you're dying for a dream machine.

really, you have a poor conception of what os2 is featuring. maybe you also don't understand what's been removed, so you're worried about that due to all the chicken little sht going on in here.

fact is, you have os1, which is a more functional, fully realized os. fk, man, it pushed itself to the walls of its functional capability. it grew til there was no more room to grow. if you're upset with your home, move to a bigger one. os2 can be that bigger home.

-antonym have you spoke about the real time pitch shift (mixer mode) and is future in all boths os?
i still never use it...

-did you asked JJ about the different sounding filter you've checked?(the reasons?)

-do you know if there will be more effects possible backup settings (actually limited to 20 which is really ridiculous)

-has he explained to you more about midi cc in? (multitimbral/which parameters(filter, mixer, pitch etc.../ sysex?)

-you said in a previous post that aftertouch could modify the lfo's settings (so as the filters etc...).which lfo parameters are accesible?(depth, speed, delay, waveform...) does it means that if you've got a long samples you can modify during the play of it the X parameters and you will hear it?
does this mean that we know have true lfo's not envelloppes mode lfo (which starts each time you play or sequence a sample)?

-do you think it will be possible to keep the sequence playing even after the end of it when you've recorded on audio tracks (which wil have new names...)

thanks for the replies

not to mention, os1 handles sampling, chopping, and sequencing better than the 2000, 2000xl

i have to disagree. chopping and sequencing is better on the 2000xl than it is on the 2500 and 1000.

chopping is better on the 2000xl because of velocity sensitive scrolling. i could chop a sample 100 times faster on the 2000xl than i can on the 2500. and to play a sound in the trim screen, you don't have to hold the pad down, the sound was played one-shot mono.

step edit sequencing was easier on the 2000xl as well. you can step edit from the main screen. also, in the step edit screen, you had the option of making each step a different page that would only show the notes for the current step rather than showing a huge list of all notes regardless of step.


and i see what duke was sayin about the issues that need to be looked at.

1) sequences don't loop properly. when you set first bar = 2 and last bar = end in the loop window and you hit playstart, the sequence should start at bar 1, go to the end, and then loop bar 2 to the end. currently, it will start at bar 2 and just loop bar 2 to the end.

2) track muting has got to be fixed. if you have mute/stop set to immediate, it has to continue triggering and playing the samples just with no volume so that you can unmute and have the sound back immediately.

3) audio tracks need to be improved or removed in favor of Direct Record the Akai way. i have someone comin over on saturday to play guitar so i'll need to load up the akai OS in order to use Direct Record because i need the beat to keep looping and the sample to keep recording as it the loops. JJ needs to realize that Audio tracks aren't even comparible to Direct Record on the Akai OS for the 2500.

i seriously wish i had the source code for the 2500... i'd have it workin just the way i need it.