Mpc 3000 King Of Mpcs Yes or No and why?

firework wrote:how you end up in this **** up situation? ( momma used to say )
**** wit them boys momma warned you about ( take you time young man )
now them niccas mad and they want their money ( dont you rush the ghetto )
now you in your house trapped and you cant come out......

Que??

3000le and gear lust?

I know the itch homie. go cold turkey and save money. its 75% hype 25% legit. trust me.


just breathe in deep and move foward avoid the 3k let alone 500.oo more cuz its black.

How many times can u say the exact same thing?

the magic wok

Its 2008....

The MPC 3000, while a great sequencer, is over-rated for the price. The MPC 2500 is a better choice. Soundwise, no one in the forums could correctly identify the sound of the 2500 and 3000.

MPC 1000, which is identical to the 2500 software-wise, is also an option as long as you find one of the newer models.

MPC 2000/2000XL? Wouldn't be the first MPC I would choose if I am getting my first one because the MPC 1000 and 2500 are reasonably priced now on the second-hand market.

MPC 4000? Akai over-thought themselves. A more streamlined OS and a slightly smaller footprint would have saved this MPC which would still be sitting on the throne.

MPC 5000? The current flagship and obvious choice to sit on the throne. However...it lacks some highly sought after features. If these features are added...there will be no need to look any further.

Askia Shaheed wrote:Its 2008....
MPC 5000? The current flagship and obvious choice to sit on the throne. However...it lacks some highly sought after features. If these features are added...there will be no need to look any further.

Hmm...I wonder how much merit this will hold in 2010? The only problem I have at the moment is...I ain't hearing nothing coming from our flagship mpc these days. Actually, I've never heard anything come form this mpc yet.

Anybody got any workings from this throned machine they'd like to share with the masses?

the mpc 5000 lacks being a TRUE sampler. end of story.

Wow! u just made even less sense the Jahrome - congrats!

Now for the 5k to be throned, it must first collect enough delegates. As of now, it doesn't qualify due to it's lack of character.

We demand its ousting of the throne if it continues to stay in hiding.

I dont know, I think right now the rolland ones are closer to being on the throne then the 5000. I have a feeling that if roland distracts the market any further away from the MPCs that AKAI might have to relook at their position in the sampling market. I mean personally I dont get caught up in company loyalty as some people here do. I dont care what company made the machine or what people say about the machine if it suits my purpose and I personally find it to be a good machine. But I do like the AKAI samplers. And I do like some of rolands stuff aswell, but technologically roland has the advantage.

I guess we must give it time for the 5000 to hit. Serious music producers aren't like teenagers trying to get the latest popular pair of nike's. they want what works and they want to make money off the 3 grand they spend.

Had the 5000 launched at $1500 then it would be booming.

That's why you hear a lot of people knocking FL studio. People hate on it because they hear other people hating on it and they hear known people hating on it when their only experience was with the older fruity loops such as 3. But these days it isn't just a stupid amature game like piece of software. It has a great sequencer and has a lot of great features.

mr_debauch wrote:Serious music producers aren't like teenagers trying to get the latest popular pair of nike's. they want what works and they want to make money off the 3 grand they spend.

That's the very main reason that the 3k holds it's popularity. It does what it was design to do extremely well. Sure many newer machines have more feature, ect. but can sometimes be cumbersome or fall short on the basics.

mr_debauch wrote:That's why you hear a lot of people knocking FL studio. People hate on it because they hear other people hating on it and they hear known people hating on it when their only experience was with the older fruity loops such as 3. But these days it isn't just a stupid amature game like piece of software. It has a great sequencer and has a lot of great features.

Sure does. Personally I even liked the older version. Been down with FL since 2.5.
I viewed Fl as being allot like an MPC in that you had to prepare your own sounds, (which I do any way). Many people hated on FL in favor of Reason which I viewed to be more like a Triton in that it provided you with a library of ready made sounds.
It's all tools really. You don't see plumbers hating on the tools of a carpenter!

kneebone77 wrote:

mr_debauch wrote:Serious music producers aren't like teenagers trying to get the latest popular pair of nike's. they want what works and they want to make money off the 3 grand they spend.

That's the very main reason that the 3k holds it's popularity. It does what it was design to do extremely well. Sure many newer machines have more feature, ect. but can sometimes be cumbersome or fall short on the basics.

mr_debauch wrote:That's why you hear a lot of people knocking FL studio. People hate on it because they hear other people hating on it and they hear known people hating on it when their only experience was with the older fruity loops such as 3. But these days it isn't just a stupid amature game like piece of software. It has a great sequencer and has a lot of great features.

Sure does. Personally I even liked the older version. Been down with FL since 2.5.
I viewed Fl as being allot like an MPC in that you had to prepare your own sounds, (which I do any way). Many people hated on FL in favor of Reason which I viewed to be more like a Triton in that it provided you with a library of ready made sounds.
It's all tools really. You don't see plumbers hating on the tools of a carpenter!

I completely agree with you there.

I used to play with the older fruity loops for fun. then when I started taking music more seriously the newer versions were out. I do a lot of recording with a zoom h4 out in places such as train yards, abandoned buildings, in the subway, in factories and warehouses, all over. I often use reason to make some short synth leads, and sometimes some basic drum beats and I often use fl studio to sequence and arrange clips I recorded on the H4. The thing I like is that it has a parametric eq with built in spectrum analizer and it has a not bad reverb also.

I have this theory that people diss fl studio because of the samples it comes with are not so great, when people shouldn't even be using those anyways.

mr_debauch wrote:I have this theory that people diss fl studio because of the samples it comes with are not so great, when people shouldn't even be using those anyways.

I agree with that statement 100%...

We can debate MPCs all day...but the fact is the MPC 3000 is a dinosaur. It does nothing special. The MPC 2500 is the machine to get for someone thinking they need an MPC 3000. The MPC 3000 doesn't really do much: limited memory, no graphic waveform editing, not timestretch/pitch shift functions, no audio tracks, no hard drive, not CF card drive, no resampling, no q-link sliders/knobs, poor effects, limited use of multiple programs, no grid edit, no automation, no recording track mutes, no chop shop, no patched phrase, no auto-chromatic assignment of samples, limited filters/envelopes/LFOs, no global program editing, input thru, no sample layers, etc. So why get an MPC 3000 today?

The MPC 5000 is almost exactly what I was looking for in an MPC because it expands on what the 2500 does. Simply look at the old MPC 2500 Feature Request threads. The almost look like the specs of the MPC 5K.

In 2010, I will be banging on the MPC 6000 perhaps. But until then, the MPC 5000 is the hottest machine of the block and at less than $2500 maxed out, it is actually cheaper than the MPC 2500 when it was released. The best part of the MPC 5K is that it is on its first/second OS release and it is an amazing machine. But I expect even more excitement around Winter Namm or at the latest Summer Namm for the MPC5K.

Askia Shaheed wrote:We can debate MPCs all day...but the fact is the MPC 3000 is a dinosaur. It does nothing special. The MPC 2500 is the machine to get for someone thinking they need an MPC 3000. The MPC 3000 doesn't really do much: limited memory, no graphic waveform editing, not timestretch/pitch shift functions, no audio tracks, no hard drive, not CF card drive, no resampling, no q-link sliders/knobs, poor effects, limited use of multiple programs, no grid edit, no automation, no recording track mutes, no chop shop, no patched phrase, no auto-chromatic assignment of samples, limited filters/envelopes/LFOs, no global program editing, input thru, no sample layers, etc. So why get an MPC 3000 today?

The MPC 5000 is almost exactly what I was looking for in an MPC because it expands on what the 2500 does. Simply look at the old MPC 2500 Feature Request threads. The almost look like the specs of the MPC 5K.

In 2010, I will be banging on the MPC 6000 perhaps. But until then, the MPC 5000 is the hottest machine of the block and at less than $2500 maxed out, it is actually cheaper than the MPC 2500 when it was released. The best part of the MPC 5K is that it is on its first/second OS release and it is an amazing machine. But I expect even more excitement around Winter Namm or at the latest Summer Namm for the MPC5K.

Well basically everything you said is your opinion in what you are looking for in a machine. The next MPC will be the 7500 it goes in sequence hence why he 5000 was the 3500 before they changed it before AES to go in sequence with everything that was already out there.