Export at 24 bit, and Record at 24 bit?

Askia Shaheed wrote:

mr_debauch wrote:
How exactly is track quality supposed to be judged once it has passed through a radio signal... anyways who cares about what plays on the radio, most of it is pop rubbish anyways.

I think maybe you should ask him to list us some artists that we could check out their digital music files. It would probably be more precise.

Digital music files? You mean MP3s ? I sure you guys can listen to an MP3 and can tell if the master recording was done at 16 or 24 bit....

oh yeah askia, i meant MP3's only you could find that funny... how about wav files or are those not digital? I mean we were talking about wav files weren't we... so it was kind of obvious.

mr_debauch wrote:

Askia Shaheed wrote:

mr_debauch wrote:
How exactly is track quality supposed to be judged once it has passed through a radio signal... anyways who cares about what plays on the radio, most of it is pop rubbish anyways.

I think maybe you should ask him to list us some artists that we could check out their digital music files. It would probably be more precise.

Digital music files? You mean MP3s ? I sure you guys can listen to an MP3 and can tell if the master recording was done at 16 or 24 bit....

oh yeah askia, i meant MP3's only you could find that funny... how about wav files or are those not digital? I mean we were talking about wav files weren't we... so it was kind of obvious.

Well..we were talking about the finished product and whether consumers (or you) could tell by listening whether it was recorded at 24 or 16 bit. MP3s are relevant to the subject because that is what most consumers today are listening to...not wav files. So yes, I find this thread amusing.

For you guys going on about 24 bit....I am waiting for your reply about your favorite hardware 24 bit samplers......

quote="Askia Shaheed"]

mr_debauch wrote:

Askia Shaheed wrote:

mr_debauch wrote:
How exactly is track quality supposed to be judged once it has passed through a radio signal... anyways who cares about what plays on the radio, most of it is pop rubbish anyways.

I think maybe you should ask him to list us some artists that we could check out their digital music files. It would probably be more precise.

Digital music files? You mean MP3s ? I sure you guys can listen to an MP3 and can tell if the master recording was done at 16 or 24 bit....

oh yeah askia, i meant MP3's only you could find that funny... how about wav files or are those not digital? I mean we were talking about wav files weren't we... so it was kind of obvious.

Well..we were talking about the finished product and whether consumers (or you) could tell by listening whether it was recorded at 24 or 16 bit. MP3s are relevant to the subject because that is what most consumers today are listening to...not wav files. So yes, I find this thread amusing.

For you guys going on about 24 bit....I am waiting for your reply about your favorite hardware 24 bit samplers......[/quote]


so what, mp3's are popular, so are hondas... but we are talking about 24bit samplers and hardware that does 24 bit... which has nothing to do with mp3's since mp3's are not 24 bit wavs and I cant think of a hardware sampler that can even process mp3's. Stay on topic man..

I would also like to see a list of people's favourite 24 bit samplers, only for me it's not to prove a point but more because maybe some will be listed that I didn't know about.

mr_debauch wrote:so what, mp3's are popular, so are hondas... but we are talking about 24bit samplers and hardware that does 24 bit... which has nothing to do with mp3's since mp3's are not 24 bit wavs and I cant think of a hardware sampler that can even process mp3's. Stay on topic man..

I would also like to see a list of people's favourite 24 bit samplers, only for me it's not to prove a point but more because maybe some will be listed that I didn't know about.

MP3s are relevant because that is the format people listen to..not 24 bit wav files. You can't think of a hardware sampler that can process MP3s? Then tell us about the hardware samplers that record 24 bit samples.. The MPC 4000 was mentioned already. What about the others?

Askia Shaheed wrote:

mr_debauch wrote:so what, mp3's are popular, so are hondas... but we are talking about 24bit samplers and hardware that does 24 bit... which has nothing to do with mp3's since mp3's are not 24 bit wavs and I cant think of a hardware sampler that can even process mp3's. Stay on topic man..

I would also like to see a list of people's favourite 24 bit samplers, only for me it's not to prove a point but more because maybe some will be listed that I didn't know about.

MP3s are relevant because that is the format people listen to..not 24 bit wav files. You can't think of a hardware sampler that can process MP3s? Then tell us about the hardware samplers that record 24 bit samples.. The MPC 4000 was mentioned already. What about the others?

yeah what about others, i guess we have to wait for someone to list some.

So we should just all stay at 16 bit forever since EVERYBODY listens to mp3?
So because there is only 2 24 bit HARDWARE samplers there shouldn't be another?
Guitar players always going through those distortion amps and fx for that gritty sound so why waist time looking for a great sounding electric guitar? May as well record all distorted guitar parts at 8bit.

They should stop selling high end studio monitors because everybody listens to mp3 so there won't be much difference.

b-righteous wrote:So we should just all stay at 16 bit forever since EVERYBODY listens to mp3?
So because there is only 2 24 bit HARDWARE samplers there shouldn't be another?
Guitar players always going through those distortion amps and fx for that gritty sound so why waist time looking for a great sounding electric guitar? May as well record all distorted guitar parts at 8bit.

They should stop selling high end studio monitors because everybody listens to mp3 so there won't be much difference.

that was my thought also, but is there only two 24bit samplers? I would have thought more companies then akai would have made some aswell... however I dont know.

mr_debauch wrote:But none of that is really the point... sure, most people dont need it. However it should still be able to since there are some people who might want it and also because the previous flagship had it so they shouldn't remove the capability.

b-righteous wrote:So because there is only 2 24 bit HARDWARE samplers there shouldn't be another?
Guitar players always going through those distortion amps and fx for that gritty .

Is this 'capability' standard in today's hardware samplers? And if so, which ones? The answer to these questions may give you insight into why the new flagship has its specific set of capabilities...

Akai was clear in it specs: 16 bit. Those who bought it knew. So why discuss?
16 bit suits my needs: beat making. That's what this machine was made for.
The "all-round" workstation that "does it all" doesn't exist.
We should focus on the little failures that are still lurking under the current OS.
As soon as these are resolved, one can ponder some thought on "oh, wouldn't it be nice to have..."
First a solid OS,
then eventually expand it's possibilities...

I agree on this. It's 16 bit and that is all there is to it. We should focus more on issues bugs and workf low improvements. That ideal MPC probably won't exist anytime soon. Still, I would like for future hardware products to step it up and not keep moving backwards. On occasion it's good to express a desire for more. Otherwise these companies will keep stripping features and dumbing down the products while charging the same or higher prices.

Is this 'capability' standard in today's hardware samplers? And if so, which ones? The answer to these questions may give you insight into why the new flagship has its specific set of capabilities...

I see where your coming from. That is a good reason to not step it up.

On the flip side, that is a reason to offer it because it can give you an edge over the competition. I think they looked at the failure of Akai with the 4k and don't want to repeat. The 4k came at a time when people where leaving hardware for computers. It also had issues with bugs and slower workflow. It never got finished because that is when the old Akai got in trouble. Also, the hardware was a little expensive from a companies point of view. The prices to make an MPC like the 4k plus better are way cheaper now.

Now those same folk who left hardware are fleeing software back to hardware because they found it isn't the same. There where empty promises and issues , slow work flow etc. Now these returning hardware customers, spoiled by fast load times and high sample rates are going to turn right back around because these hardware companies are playing games and half stepping. The new products are not advancing much and in some ways are scaling back. It's all about the timing. The 4k was ahead of its time. Now the 5k and all the other workstations are behind it.

b-righteous wrote:I agree on this. It's 16 bit and that is all there is to it. We should focus more on issues bugs and workf low improvements. That ideal MPC probably won't exist anytime soon. Still, I would like for future hardware products to step it up and not keep moving backwards. On occasion it's good to express a desire for more. Otherwise these companies will keep stripping features and dumbing down the products while charging the same or higher prices.

Is this 'capability' standard in today's hardware samplers? And if so, which ones? The answer to these questions may give you insight into why the new flagship has its specific set of capabilities...

I see where your coming from. That is a good reason to not step it up.

On the flip side, that is a reason to offer it because it can give you an edge over the competition. I think they looked at the failure of Akai with the 4k and don't want to repeat. The 4k came at a time when people where leaving hardware for computers. It also had issues with bugs and slower workflow. It never got finished because that is when the old Akai got in trouble. Also, the hardware was a little expensive from a companies point of view. The prices to make an MPC like the 4k plus better are way cheaper now.

Now those same folk who left hardware are fleeing software back to hardware because they found it isn't the same. There where empty promises and issues , slow work flow etc. Now these returning hardware customers, spoiled by fast load times and high sample rates are going to turn right back around because these hardware companies are playing games and half stepping. The new products are not advancing much and in some ways are scaling back. It's all about the timing. the 4k was ahead of its time. Now the 5k and all the other workstations are behind it.

I agree with that, good post. I just would have thought that they would have out-spec-ed the 4k out of principal... i mean why did they put 24bit in the 4k if it is such a useless feature... especially back when it was made.

I will add that I agree the 4k was slightly too complicated for the target market. I had no problem with the general direction of the 5k. Personally, I don't look for keygroups or multies from an MPC because I don't look at it as an all in one box. But from a hardware drum machine/phrase sampler/ sequencer it should be the very best in those areas even compared to the 4k or JJ. I just think they dumbed it down too much. It doesn't need all the 120+ features in the request thread. But it needs most of what is in OS 2 plus maybe about 20 more. The OS should be rock solid and reliable too.

Other than the 24 bit thing, The hardware should have had much faster load times and a better data wheel and softer pads. Maybe 512 mb RAM plus 16 adat outs and that is about it. It would have sold better even in this economy if they would have delivered more.

Anyway, I hope they do more with what they have. It still seems to be a really good MPC if they add just a few more features after OS2 and fix all the bugs.

Whatever way you look at it, the lack of 24 bit in a 'cutting edge' flagship sampler is lame. The best sample libraries (for those that use them) are produced in 24bit, and the added sonic benefits are obvious and real. People need to stop defending Akai over the 16 bit limitation as it is a backward step.

buying a 16 bit machine and then complaining that it should have been a 24 bit, like the old one?...
when i buy a cheeseburger at macdonalds, i don't expect it to be a "doublewhopper"
the 5K launch price was half the price of the 4K, so stop whining...

b-righteous wrote:I will add that I agree the 4k was slightly too complicated for the target market. I had no problem with the general direction of the 5k. Personally, I don't look for keygroups or multies from an MPC because I don't look at it as an all in one box. But from a hardware drum machine/phrase sampler/ sequencer it should be the very best in those areas even compared to the 4k or JJ. I just think they dumbed it down too much. It doesn't need all the 120+ features in the request thread. But it needs most of what is in OS 2 plus maybe about 20 more. The OS should be rock solid and reliable too.

Other than the 24 bit thing, The hardware should have had much faster load times and a better data wheel and softer pads. Maybe 512 mb RAM plus 16 adat outs and that is about it. It would have sold better even in this economy if they would have delivered more.

Anyway, I hope they do more with what they have. It still seems to be a really good MPC if they add just a few more features after OS2 and fix all the bugs.

Dumbed it down? Do you have any idea of the number of features that the MPC 5000 has that the MPC 4000 doesn't? If not, do a quick search.

You say that it doesn't need the 120 features in the request thread? But then you say it needs most of what is in OS 2(when you don't know exactly what is OS 2 yet) and 20 more functions. What 20 more functions are you talking about?

The MPC 4000 is still available if people want one expecially with them being almost half the price of a new MPC 4000. But I will go out on a limb and say the MPC 5K current OS is as stable as the MPC 4000s current OS based off of feedback in the forums.