Login / Register
 
MPC 2000,2000XL,3000,4000,2500. Whats the best one?
New Reply
Subscribe
#31
18th April 2006
Old 18th April 2006
  #31
Lives for gear
 
cynic one's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: san jose, califas
Posts: 2,608

cynic one is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checkmate Muzik
my engineer is sayin the output sound quality is not that great on those. he recommends other ones.
M2E
#32
19th April 2006
Old 19th April 2006
  #32
M2E
Lives for gear
 
M2E's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: In A Galaxy Far Far Away
Posts: 2,099

M2E is offline
What up B,

Yo, I've had the MPC60, MPC60II, MPC3000, and worked on the MPC2000. I love the MPC3k without question yo. I really don't know about all the new ones but, I know from talking to a new friend of mine that works on all of them as well as customizes'em including the 2500 and 4k is that Akai does not have the techs to work on them anymore. They fired all the MPC techs. There giving all the work to outside companies and that's not a good sign at all!!!! It is not a good time to buy a 2500/4000 right now. Trust me on that.
I think he mentioned also that Dre uses 8 MPC3000's and also uses his old LinnDrum(Before the MPC-but same maker-Roger Linn)
If your worried about 16bit don't. Mostly all Rackmounts are 16bit and mostly any sound coming out any keyboard is 16bit wave files. The effects in the keyboard maybe 24bit but, not the sound which is part of the wave. You'll still get the punch you need as well as the sound from a 3k. I wouldn't sweat that at all.
Man, Timbo/Pharrell still use a ASR10 yo- I think that's 12bit if not 16bit. It's all how you use it and mix it at the end. Bump a lil 39hz, 50hz, 100hz you'll be alright.

M2E...1ne
__________________
"Marc Ellus"

http://soundcloud.com/marc-ellus

Sorry in advance for any misspelled words, phrases or not using the right meaning/s at the right times. So get over it and back to the post at hand!!! Thanx....
Checkmate Muzik
Thread Starter
#33
19th April 2006
Old 19th April 2006
  #33
Gear addict
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 415

Thread Starter
Checkmate Muzik is offline
werd. good info.


how is the sequencers on these machines? i be using keyboard for programming so far but i heard all of the MPC's got pretty good sequencers.
M2E
#34
19th April 2006
Old 19th April 2006
  #34
M2E
Lives for gear
 
M2E's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: In A Galaxy Far Far Away
Posts: 2,099

M2E is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checkmate Muzik
werd. good info.


how is the sequencers on these machines? i be using keyboard for programming so far but i heard all of the MPC's got pretty good sequencers.

Tha seq. on tha MPC3k's are very simple and easy to learn. You have to have someone show you though so that you can master it a lot faster.
Once you get it you always got it. Tha timing is the best out of every DAW/SEQ/Keyboard Seq...etc. That's why everyone use's it. Pete Rock use to use the SP1200 which has tha bomb timing and now use's the MPC. Not sure which version but, all that to say that it has the best natural drummer timing/quantizing. You can also take it off of quantize and do everything free from quantizing which I do alot on bass/hihat/chords...etc.
Once you get it fast you will be able to put down a track in like 5min, if that sometimes. I'm very fast at it. I also play wit tha quantize alot. It has this thing where you can offset the percent of a quantize. So I quantize at 16th note and layback the kick and maybe bass if I quantize it and tha hihats to give it that DeAngelo/Pete Rock feel somewhat. I lay it back maybe 54 to 58%. You can also make somebeats early as well. It's crazy when you get into it fully.
I guarantee that once you know it you'll be searching for me with a flashlight in the day time trying to thank me for telling you to get the MPC3k. You'll also be myspaceing me to def about tips and tricks on the mpc which is cool wit me.
Everywhere I go, from Kakalaka to NY to London all major studios have a MPC3 or some type of MPC.
I own two of them as of now. You can check out some tracks from myspace below that I did the drums/all music really with the MPC.

Hope this helps

M2E
#35
19th April 2006
Old 19th April 2006
  #35
Lives for gear
 
illynoise's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,691

illynoise is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by shikawkee
I still have my MPC 2000 from 10-12 years ago and it's one of
the best purchases I ever made. I don't sample but it's been
indespensible. Never saw a reason to upgrade (plus, I've got
a huge library of floppy's now).
12 years ago? You must have made the first one!

Yeah there's a reason why you still see 2000's everytime you see a produce poppin off a beat on DVD's nowadays. They last. The timing is tight(er) than the latter ones and they have the s2000 s3000 sound, which is their best sounding units.

For something to come out 10 years and it's still 700 dollars, there you go.

BaseJase
Illynoise
Checkmate Muzik
Thread Starter
#36
19th April 2006
Old 19th April 2006
  #36
Gear addict
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 415

Thread Starter
Checkmate Muzik is offline
M2E how good it is for sequencing songs that are not sampled?

i play everything from scratch. Bass, drums, other instumrents in the song. is it good for that as well? or more targeted towards the samplin producers?
#37
19th April 2006
Old 19th April 2006
  #37
Lives for gear
 
WideawakE's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 979

WideawakE is offline
they should be good for all of your sequencing needs..2 midi in's and 4 midi outs and plenty of tracks and options...
M2E
#38
19th April 2006
Old 19th April 2006
  #38
M2E
Lives for gear
 
M2E's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: In A Galaxy Far Far Away
Posts: 2,099

M2E is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checkmate Muzik
M2E how good it is for sequencing songs that are not sampled?

i play everything from scratch. Bass, drums, other instumrents in the song. is it good for that as well? or more targeted towards the samplin producers?
I play everything as well. I rarely sample myself unless it's really called for. All the songs on my site's are played. So yes, it's very good for starting at point A and playing everything until you get to Point Z.
Also if you divide up your Triton's favorite sounds into midi ch you could control them as the MPC can control all 16 midi channels. Plus the pads give you a great playing feel for drums which I love.

Hope this helps...

M2E
#39
27th July 2006
Old 27th July 2006
  #39
Gear interested
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2

phazemega is offline
MPC 1000 sucks

I say that because the step edit function is different than the 2000 or 2000xl.

And that was really fustrating.

Don't forget about the step edit...

yo, don't get the 1000, thats a buncha shit. It's for beginners.

Get atleast a 2000xl...... trust me.
#40
27th July 2006
Old 27th July 2006
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,161

quincyg is offline
i can't tell the diff between the 1000 and 2000 sound or groove wise. the tech specs are pretty much identical. 1000 has usb and compact flas which is real nice,
TTB
#41
27th July 2006
Old 27th July 2006
  #41
TTB
Gear maniac
 
TTB's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 187

TTB is offline
Im Rockin the MPC60 with the whole 3000 upgrade, brand new pads, and new stereo outputs. I love this This thing for Sequencing and Drums. The Sequencer is mad easy to use. When I first sequenced on it, right away I could tell the diffrence......The thing GROOVES and Punches. Iwould like to get my hands on a 3000 and 2000xl. The downside of the 60 is the Memory. But for Doing Drums...it works Swell! and the best part about it is I got it....Free!

-T
Dor
#42
28th July 2006
Old 28th July 2006
  #42
Dor
Lives for gear
 
Dor's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 1,796
My Recordings/Credits

Dor is offline
Free is always good. Did your 60 fall off the back of a truck or something?

D
__________________
Dor
www.boomspot.com

Follow me @boomspot
#43
28th July 2006
Old 28th July 2006
  #43
Gear Head
 
pympwell's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Location: D.C.
Posts: 62

Send a message via AIM to pympwell
pympwell is offline
You'll def wanna cop a Roger Linn model eventually after u rock one a few times. Can't put a finger on why the groove is better.....less machine and more [dare i say?] human(ized). The 60II a'int a bad look either. It's a reason Dre has a harem of 3000'z. Is he up to 8 now?
#44
1st December 2006
Old 1st December 2006
  #44
Gear Head
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 47

xavier7 is offline
ive been using MPCs for 5 years now and their hardly any difference in sound between any of them (sum guy was saying the mpc60 git more puch thats bs). Dont let sum of these guys on here gass u up saying they got major differences in sound and ting like its a microphone .theyre only as good as the samples you put in them. think befo u get the 1000 cus it aint got timestretch (which is a major fukup u need that) and that swing feature on it is ass plus it looks lame. Id reccomend the mpc2000xl its my favourite piece of equipment ever. period. I got all the upgrades (efex board, analogue out ) without the upgrades its a bit bland.
bless
#45
1st December 2006
Old 1st December 2006
  #45
Gear Head
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 47

xavier7 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by pympwell View Post
Can't put a finger on why the groove is better.....less machine and more [dare i say?] human(ized). The 60II a'int a bad look either. It's a reason Dre has a harem of 3000'z. Is he up to 8 now?
The groove
is as human as umake it, whether its a 2000xl, 60, 4000 whatever. u want it too sound more human put the sample it a bit more early or late (add or take away sound before it) its as simple as that dont complicate shit. sorry no offense Dre is on the back cover of chronic 2001 standin next to a 2000xl(maybe its a 2000 forgot), RZA uses it, Primo uses it i cud spout of for days how many hip hop cats use it. Its what you do with it that makes the difference.
sum cat earlier sed the 4000 sounds thin, u mean to tell youve put the exact same sample in on the 4000, 2000xl, 60, 1000 and found the 4000 to be the thinnest thats ass. think befo u speak family. Ive heaqrd the fattest beats made on a 4000(jus blaze until 3months ago wen he stoped usin MPs) if the sample is fat its gon sound fat if the sample is thin its gon sound thin. gota use discrimination for what alot of cats say, take everything with a pinch of salt on these forums.\

oh yeah ive been told the new OS for the mpc1000 gives it the ability to timestretch plus in realtime so it makes it alot easier. so maybe u shud chek the 1000 afterall. only thing u gota gety past is the shitty colour.
#46
2nd December 2006
Old 2nd December 2006
  #46
Gear interested
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 4

Soniclabsaudio is offline
Ok first lets do some myth busting here. 1000 and 2500 have the same ad/da converters in them so they both have the same sound. Second if you need mtc and more for 30 bucks you can have it all with the new os

http://translate.google.com/translat...XA:en%26sa%3DN

I have been using it on my mpc 1k since it dropped and never had issuses. I have a 1k and 2000xl both are good for diffrent reasons. Sounds to me like you need to go with a 2000xl if all you are going to be doing is seq and such on it. Best bang for your buck. You will not use all the features on the 4k and the older models will drive you crazy if you have never used a mpc and are used to modern gear. Also your eng. must not know what hes talking about because the sound quality on the 1k/2500 is 16 bit and its cd quality. Im not here to talk down on your boy but i dont think he has a clue about the mpc sound. Anyway 2000xl would do you fine. As mentioned earlier hop on over to the mpc-forums if you want to talk more. Peace.
#47
4th December 2006
Old 4th December 2006
  #47
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 665

khameln is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by xavier7 View Post
sum cat earlier sed the 4000 sounds thin, u mean to tell youve put the exact same sample in on the 4000, 2000xl, 60, 1000 and found the 4000 to be the thinnest thats ass. think befo u speak family. Ive heaqrd the fattest beats made on a 4000(jus blaze until 3months ago wen he stoped usin MPs) if the sample is fat its gon sound fat if the sample is thin its gon sound thin. gota use discrimination for what alot of cats say, take everything with a pinch of salt on these forums..
Uh no, there really is a sonic difference between the units. And the 4000 really is not as fat, it uses the engine as the Z4 which I own, which is pretty much just straightforward "clean" sampling and doesn't add that extra 'bump'.

People seem to confuse good "sound quality" with good "hip-hop sound"... Of course the newer units have higher sound quality, but the older units have a grittier, punchier sound... If I was doing smooth jazz maybe I'd get a 2500 or a 1000, but if you're into hip-hop and R&B "clean" and "high-quality" usually isn't what you're looking for in a drum machine. I don't know why you'd want to get an overpriced box with shiny, crystal-clear sound that's equivalent to what your software sequencer does anyway... Yes the workflow is better, but for that price you should be getting something more than just improved workflow :D

It's like a DBX 160... You buy it for the knock, not the name... If they came out with a "DBX 560" that had all of the same knobs and controls and added some fancy digital features, but didn't add that 'DBX punch' to the audio, why in the world would you want to buy it?

I think a lot of people are buying 2500's and 1000's just to "get an MPC" without realizing that all MPCs are not made alike... They are doing it more for the name than sound/feel. Waste of money in my opinion.

If you're going to pay for one, you may as well get one that has the mpc 'character' that made it famous.
#48
4th December 2006
Old 4th December 2006
  #48
Gear nut
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 92

WhyBe is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checkmate Muzik View Post
i feel you on that. i like to work with shit thats straight to the point. some of the features are not even needed sometimes.

you think mpc 2500 is worth the money? i never owned or used a mpc before. like i said, i only need it to program drums. when you load the sounds in the motif sampler, there is no memory left to upload drums at the same time. so thats why i am lookin into it.
Why not just expand the memory of the Motif?
no ssl yet
#49
5th December 2006
Old 5th December 2006
  #49
no ssl yet
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Quote:
Originally Posted by khameln View Post
Uh no, there really is a sonic difference between the units. And the 4000 really is not as fat, it uses the engine as the Z4 which I own, which is pretty much just straightforward "clean" sampling and doesn't add that extra 'bump'.

People seem to confuse good "sound quality" with good "hip-hop sound"... Of course the newer units have higher sound quality, but the older units have a grittier, punchier sound... If I was doing smooth jazz maybe I'd get a 2500 or a 1000, but if you're into hip-hop and R&B "clean" and "high-quality" usually isn't what you're looking for in a drum machine. I don't know why you'd want to get an overpriced box with shiny, crystal-clear sound that's equivalent to what your software sequencer does anyway... Yes the workflow is better, but for that price you should be getting something more than just improved workflow :D

It's like a DBX 160... You buy it for the knock, not the name... If they came out with a "DBX 560" that had all of the same knobs and controls and added some fancy digital features, but didn't add that 'DBX punch' to the audio, why in the world would you want to buy it?

I think a lot of people are buying 2500's and 1000's just to "get an MPC" without realizing that all MPCs are not made alike... They are doing it more for the name than sound/feel. Waste of money in my opinion.

If you're going to pay for one, you may as well get one that has the mpc 'character' that made it famous.
I guess different strokes apply here. I like the 4K BECAUSE it is more true to source than my 2k or 3k used to be. For YEARS, I have collected drums/dats from sessions of my own, and of every engineer I've ever worked with (Usually from songs using older MPCs). These drums have been worked to sound how I want them to sound, Once I put them in one of the older machines, it changes from where I want them to be).

I think the Api pre/converter thing going spdif into a 4k with a pair of 550a/dbx160xt will give you whatever drum sound you are looking for.

WHen I want the 4k to sound like one of the old machines, I feed them into the 4k and sample.

Wouldnt dare expect the old units to work in the reverse situation.

I think the converters on the 4k DO thin the bass when compared to the same file in ptools (SLIGHTLY), but this should go away when you bypass the converters. (And when I tested it was unfair because ptools went through Apogees, while the 4k used internal pres)

My only gripe real gripe with the 4k is that it lowers the signal level of your audio a bit when fed a digital signal. I wish it didn't.
#50
6th December 2006
Old 6th December 2006
  #50
Gear Head
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 47

xavier7 is offline
fam normally the samples i use are coloured. why do want grit from youre machine?. You want the machine to faithfully recreate what youre puttin in to it. Its not a mic its a sampler. The mpc4000 are as "punchy"(as u sed- as the samples you put in em). Theyre transparent they play what u put in em. I have heard the fattest sounding beats ever made on 2000xls and 4000s (public service announcemt- just blaze/jay-z is 1 example, i cud give u a 1000 examples). Basically whaever you find is good for you adn helps you focus youre creativity is good. For me i find the 2000xl sounds amazing and work just like i want it 2 and is as fat and punchy as possible. for you maybe its the 3000. id like to c u do the sound test looping 2 breaks, one on the mpc2000xl and one on the 3000 and compare them. Both will be as punchy as the break is.
#51
28th October 2010
Old 28th October 2010
  #51
Gear interested
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3

noraKat is offline
What I don't like about the MPC-4000 (and I owned the 3000) is that each new sample loaded by default is made to play only the duration you hold the key. If you want it to play till the end, even for just a tap, which was the default for the 3000, then you have to dig into the menu's to find the setting and change it for every new sound you load. It is not in a very convenient place to change it.

Anyone know how to change the defaults so every sample will play to it's end?
#52
29th October 2010
Old 29th October 2010
  #52
Lives for gear
 
s12512's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Location: MD
Posts: 824

Send a message via AIM to s12512
s12512 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by C Heat View Post
1000
huh?
#53
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #53
Lives for gear
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,553

elan is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by xavier7 View Post
Theyre transparent they play what u put in em.
Actually the 2500, which is newer, isn't transparent at all.. a bit sterile probably yes, but transparent no.. lows are hipassed (like at 30/40 hz..) and sound more "mono note bass" "boombox" then the original sample

Just to add a thing
__________________
Obviously everything I said is my opinion, considering I'm a human being.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Honest communication is always unique and original. (Bob Olhsson)

I think the growing availability of presets in synths started to make musicians lazy: they were so amazed at what they could use, they stopped thinking if they should.
(andychamp)

"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep"
--Scott Adams
#54
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #54
Gear maniac
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 250

MattmaN is online now
Wow everyone's opinion about sound quality is all over the board.
More or less makes it look like it means jack squat what mpc you use, which is probably true.
Psychoacoustics for sure with the newer mpc's.
One guy say's the 2500 is the worst sounding, another says it sounds better than the 1000, and someone else says the 500/1000/2500/5000 all sound the same.
I say don't worry about the sound quality of whatever mpc your looking at. It can't possibly matter with such inconclusive evidence.
They all pretty much are only as good as the samples you feed them anyway.
#55
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #55
Gear maniac
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 250

MattmaN is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by elan View Post
Actually the 2500, which is newer, isn't transparent at all.. a bit sterile probably yes, but transparent no.. lows are hipassed (like at 30/40 hz..) and sound more "mono note bass" "boombox" then the original sample

Just to add a thing
Will a waveform show this?
This to me is mostly psychoacoustics, unless I can be shown otherwise.
#56
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #56
Lives for gear
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,553

elan is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattmaN View Post
Wow everyone's opinion about sound quality is all over the board.
More or less makes it look like it means jack squat what mpc you use, which is probably true.
Psychoacoustics for sure with the newer mpc's.
One guy say's the 2500 is the worst sounding, another says it sounds better than the 1000, and someone else says the 500/1000/2500/5000 all sound the same.
I say don't worry about the sound quality of whatever mpc your looking at. It can't possibly matter with such inconclusive evidence.
They all pretty much are only as good as the samples you feed them anyway.
What I told you about the 2500 can be measured. Not an opinion.

The point is that everyone taste is different, so some one notice one thing he likes of a certain model and don't hear other things because are not important for him

If you want deep clean subs (and I'm not talking lows because the 2500 seems to actually have more lows than the original sample) the 2500 isn't the right tool...

Maybe the 2000xl is a bit better (if you pitch shift a kick down will have deeper subs) but maybe it will also sound thinner because the 2500 tend to have a build up that gives you the idea there are more lows.. while the 2000xl has a build up probably higher.. in the low mids, which makes it sound "warmer"..

Then there are the highs which are another totally different chapter.. and again it is matter of taste.

Then, to me (so that's an opinion), the 2500 tend to sound sterile while the 1000 and 500 I tried (near the 2500 and all three using the same headphones which I use since 2003) didn't sound sterile, not even colored (maybe the 500 had a bit of problems at higher volumes..)

All this doesn't mean there are no differences, just that we have different tastes and different ways to describe things, we use different words and we have a different interpretation of what those words means
#57
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #57
Gear maniac
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 250

MattmaN is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by elan View Post
What I told you about the 2500 can be measured. Not an opinion.

The point is that everyone taste is different, so some one notice one thing he likes of a certain model and don't hear other things because are not important for him

If you want deep clean subs (and I'm not talking lows because the 2500 seems to actually have more lows than the original sample) the 2500 isn't the right tool...

Maybe the 2000xl is a bit better (if you pitch shift a kick down will have deeper subs) but maybe it will also sound thinner because the 2500 tend to have a build up that gives you the idea there are more lows.. while the 2000xl has a build up probably higher.. in the low mids, which makes it sound "warmer"..

Then there are the highs which are another totally different chapter.. and again it is matter of taste.

Then, to me (so that's an opinion), the 2500 tend to sound sterile while the 1000 and 500 I tried (near the 2500 and all three using the same headphones which I use since 2003) didn't sound sterile, not even colored (maybe the 500 had a bit of problems at higher volumes..)

All this doesn't mean there are no differences, just that we have different tastes and different ways to describe things, we use different words and we have a different interpretation of what those words means
Ok cool. my experience with mpc's is limited to the 2000, and 500, years apart, not side by side. If I had to say there was a difference maybe the 500 is shade brighter?
Nobody agrees consistently for whatever reason about these things though, and it always led me to think there must be some element of psycho acoustics at play in many cases?
#58
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #58
Lives for gear
 
Goa-Dubs's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3,049

Goa-Dubs is offline
Just to clarify there is default eq and compression settings on the 500,1000,2500 and 5000.So any critic would have to be with those turned off.
#59
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #59
Lives for gear
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,553

elan is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattmaN View Post
Ok cool. my experience with mpc's is limited to the 2000, and 500, years apart, not side by side. If I had to say there was a difference maybe the 500 is shade brighter?
Nobody agrees consistently for whatever reason about these things though, and it always led me to think there must be some element of psycho acoustics at play in many cases?
I don't know I haven't compared the 500 to the 2000xl side by side, when I used it it seemed more hi fi sounding, but I preferred the 2000xl because sounds more "woody" and more harmonically rich if that makes any sense.. not scooped.. and for example.. a TR808 hh sounded more metallic (in a positive sense, like you feel it is made of metal), while the 500 sounded, to my hears, very good (for that little box) but a bit more fake and can be a bit "collapsed" (also the 2000xl can sound collapsed if monitored through the L-R outs, but more in a "glued" way then in a "I can't reproduce all these sound together.. please take something out" way :P)

To Goa: just to clarify.. I never used any EQ on any MPC :P Always turned everything off, so what I said doesn't depend to that
#60
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #60
Lives for gear
 
Goa-Dubs's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3,049

Goa-Dubs is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by elan View Post

To Goa: just to clarify.. I never used any EQ on any MPC :P Always turned everything off, so what I said doesn't depend to that
Cool.I gathered that you knew what you were doing.Just added that for anyone else who might not realise.good descriptions of sound btw.
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
WideawakE / Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production
41
themaestro / Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production
7
rolo / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0
MACHINE / Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production
2
RIZ Records / Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production
3

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.