MPC5000 = Alesis Fusion

Hey, i am also in the 5k game since yesterday.

First impressions are very good.
It reminds me ALOT of the Alesis Fusion (which i owned for a few months):

-IMHO same synthengine (so it should be nearly the same the alesis ion synth)
-same display
-same ram size
-same harddiskrecording
-same fx
and even in the manual there is a alesis fusion connected to the mpc5k

so people, you should not compare the 5k with the 4k.
the 5k is a alesis fusion w/o a keyboard plus pads....
the 4k is the z-series from akai
so they must be different!

...when you want to know how the 5k sounds check also the fusion

btw: i liked the fusion, one of the most underrated synth/keyboards for a cheap price!

Interesting! Is it really the same exact screen? The whole Numark thing may actually be working out after all.

I'm not trying to bash any machines here, but doesn't the Fusion offer more sound design and synthesis options than the 5k?

I think Living Dead is right - although the 5K seems to have inheirited the Fusion technolgy as far as multitrack recording and display etc., the synthesis engine is probably still he old MPC one. The Fusion had up to 4 oscillators that could reference 1 Multisample each, which had a a modular envelop/LFO settings.

If the 5K had that, it would be an INCREDIBLE step up, but Akai's lit doesn't mention anything about the synth engine being upgraded. They certainly would have done so otherwise.

I would think that the physical modeling stuff got pushed in, but not in the sampling engine though.

Good observation though - it does seem that the Fusion stuff lives on in some form.

chickeneps, good to see you are looking at the 5k.

It does appear that they only borrowed what was needed from the Fusion instead of trying to port the Fusion into a MPC.
Still so far what they did borrow seems pretty comfortable.
What I'm hoping is that they did in a way that will allow them to be able to take more from the Fusion later on if necessary.

Cool, that's good to hear.

I recently discovered the Fusion 128MB memory expansion, it's exactly the same as the one used for the 5K.
So I suspect the motherboard of the 5K with it's processing units to be the same as the one used in the fusion. The big difference then is the OS.
Big advantage: the engineering crew that was programming the fusion OS should be able to do amazing stuff for the 5K, as the underlying hardware is the same!!! Hopefully OS2 won't be the end of this beautiful story! Keep on posting those wish list things! And dream already of OS3!!!

How do you explain the huge price difference between the two if they're pretty much the same? Not doubting anyone, just wondering why it was done in the first place (aside for excess profit)?

I compared the motherboards: they aren't the same, sorry...
The 128MB modules are the same, though...
Nevertheless, I am quite optimistic about the future OS development, as there should be more "manpower" behind it

acoustiventure wrote:I recently discovered the Fusion 128MB memory expansion, it's exactly the same as the one used for the 5K.
So I suspect the motherboard of the 5K with it's processing units to be the same as the one used in the fusion. The big difference then is the OS.
Big advantage: the engineering crew that was programming the fusion OS should be able to do amazing stuff for the 5K, as the underlying hardware is the same!!! Hopefully OS2 won't be the end of this beautiful story! Keep on posting those wish list things! And dream already of OS3!!!

bedouin wrote:How do you explain the huge price difference between the two if they're pretty much the same? Not doubting anyone, just wondering why it was done in the first place (aside for excess profit)?

Marketing??
Why does a Skoda cost half the price of an equally motorised Volkswagen?
Same motorisation, different user interface, different imago, different clientele = different price setting...

The price of the Fusion was originally over $2000 if I am not mistaken. For what ever reason...it is no under $1000. I here it was because of the OS development. But I think it was the way it looks. Roland appears to have the keyboard workstation market on lock..which is probably the reson why that are taking their time with the Fantom G's OS.

I prefer the motif xs's sound. But I like roland's concept.

Askia Shaheed wrote:The price of the Fusion was originally over $2000 if I am not mistaken. For what ever reason...it is no under $1000. I here it was because of the OS development. But I think it was the way it looks. Roland appears to have the keyboard workstation market on lock..which is probably the reson why that are taking their time with the Fantom G's OS.

The Fusions failure is probably the best thing that could have happened.
If you have ever messed with one you know that if a company other Alesis would have had it, it would have probably survived.
This failure allowed for the resource sharing that came from it for the 5k.
Also I have to agree with you Jahrome the Fantom can really grow on you.
I think Roland is doing the same for the G as Akai is for the 5k, looking to make it a more desirable machine.
Since we didn't see a new MV it lends itself to thinking maybe they are puttinng resources in the G's OS and we'll see another OS release during the summer.

Part of this is me saying this, part of it is hard industry info...

The Motif really has the "lock" on the workstation market, although the Triton has a certain amount of market share. Fantom may come after that. There is no real "winner" but if had to chose one (as an observer), it would be Motif (which includes the S80, MO6, and other Motif-clones that get sold to different markets).

I'm not commenting on features or personal preference really (actually I prefer the Motif, the Fantom's just fall short as far as sounds go), just how many get sold and what the popularity factor is across the board.

I'm really glad I have a Fusion though, it sounds and does things none of the others do.

Garth I understand what you are saying but I was speaking of the M3, Fantom G and the XS, not their family products, that just distorts things too much for me.
It was more the perspective of what the Fantom G has going on compared to those 2.

I have loved the Triton since it's release because of the touch screen.
Hated the Motif and ES because of those little screens.
Liked a lot about the Fantom X.
The XS finally improved the Motif interface to a more useful point but the M3 doesn't come off like a replacement for the Triton.
While the Fantom G took a nice feature set and interface and expanded it.

As you say it's preference.