The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Which MPC is the Best for analogue, warm sound?
Old 9th September 2015
  #31
Lives for gear
 
akai612's Avatar
 

I have never worked with a MPC. However I listened to a couple of MPC60 videos on youtube and I must admit that all other MPCs type videos I came accross just dont sound the same...There's a groove about the 60....
Old 10th September 2015
  #32
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PettyCash View Post
People can and have been charging top dollar for units that are pretty much mint physically and superficially and have the card reader installed. They can get away with it Because there are so many more units floating around that are complete crap and in need of refurbishment.
I've heard talk about a Ren 2 coming out later this year, does it make sense to possibly hold off on purchasing a MPC2KXL to get the Ren 2?
Old 10th September 2015
  #33
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PettyCash View Post
Between the 1000 and 2000XL... 2000XL w/card reader update, and add some outboard processors/converters into your setup. The kind of outboard you track into will be the biggest factor in getting that strong type of analog flavor that I'm assuming you're looking for. Personally, that kind of setup was crucial for designing my own drum kits over the years. Plug-ins are fine when mixing a beat or song, but when I'm designing/layering sounds in prep for making a serious beat, I like the sort of flavour outboard processing provides me, especially when it comes to drums. Makes my job later on a whole lot easier.
What kind of outboard processing do you use? Interested to know the equipment you like to track your MPC through.
Old 10th September 2015
  #34
Ive never used an MPC, but Ive mixed on SSL's and vintage outboard gear, and my opinion is that youre not going to get an analog warm sound just from using an MPC. Its usually the combination of analog channels, analog processing, and analog summing that "warm" up your sound, and even then unless it was recorded into analog gear youre still using digital sounds. I bet if you did a shootout between a midi controller and an MPC that you wouldnt hear a noticeable difference (all other aspects being the same).
Old 10th September 2015
  #35
Lives for gear
 
tdot's Avatar
Best MPC for an analog, warm sound is the one with analog, warm samples.

Other than that, what others have said. The 60 is the only one I would consider as having an 'analog, warm' sound, though it might make more sense to get a newer MPC and just get an S950, depending what you want it for. The 3000 and up are pretty much 'what you put in is what you get out', or at least close enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PettyCash View Post
Between the 1000 and 2000XL... 2000XL w/card reader update, and add some outboard processors/converters into your setup. The kind of outboard you track into will be the biggest factor in getting that strong type of analog flavor that I'm assuming you're looking for. Personally, that kind of setup was crucial for designing my own drum kits over the years. Plug-ins are fine when mixing a beat or song, but when I'm designing/layering sounds in prep for making a serious beat, I like the sort of flavour outboard processing provides me, especially when it comes to drums. Makes my job later on a whole lot easier.
Also, this. Ever since composing through outboard before even tracking, I would personally never go back. You end up with something already half mixed, and there is no more 'should I tweak this setting? should I tweak that setting?'.
Old 11th September 2015
  #36
Yeah... The best, warmest, most analog MPC... is the one with warm, analog samples.

I'd go 2500 with JJOS. It's feature-packed, built well, and has things like:

more sampling memory than the older MPCs, USB, a Hard Drive, more features, better roll function, cd drive...

You can do much more with it than you could a 2000xl.

Best advice I can think of is: buy a turntable to go with it, and start digging through crates. That's where the "warm" lives.
Old 11th September 2015
  #37
SEED78
Guest
its def all about the samples/real tape/vintage mixing console when you are talking about golden era classics and their 'warmth' - and anything 88-90 its usually the S950 and SP1200 that is pervading the grit, not a MPC - took people a little while to pick up on the MPCs, some stayed on the SP/950 combo for ages. that combo DEF has a sound!
Old 11th September 2015
  #38
Lives for gear
 
akai612's Avatar
 

so, why is it that when I load my emax with "warm" samples they sound a trillion times better then in my akai z4, s5000, s1000, s700? z4 has the highest resultion thus it should reproduce the same groove like in a emax...given the same sample...right? naaa...sorry not happening...there are differences...dunow about the MPC60 though...telling from videos it sounds different than the rest...I'll soon find out.
Old 11th September 2015
  #39
Quote:
Originally Posted by akai612 View Post
so, why is it that when I load my emax with "warm" samples they sound a trillion times better then in my akai z4, s5000, s1000, s700? z4 has the highest resultion thus it should reproduce the same groove like in a emax...given the same sample...right? naaa...sorry not happening...there are differences...dunow about the MPC60 though...telling from videos it sounds different than the rest...I'll soon find out.
I understand the desire to have "that" sound... whatever it means to you... but the samples used will always have a much larger impact on the sound...

and do you want that sound ALL the time?

It's kind of an audio rule... Making stuff dirty is easy. Cleaning up dirty is much harder.

With that in mind, there is no best sounding sampler, and a clean one without 90s crap converters will be much more versatile.

There are hundreds of different ways to add warmth, grit, etc... I'd rather choose my flavor on a track by track basis.

When I need tube warmth, I run my samples through the culture vulture... when I want lo-fi, I use the d16 plugs, analog filters, the JHS Colourbox... I re-amp, use transient designer, compress, even vinyl emulation where appropriate.

Point is, cleaner = versatility. I'd pick maschine or a 2500 or mv-8800 over an emax any day.
Old 11th September 2015
  #40
Lives for gear
 
tdot's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by SEED78 View Post
its def all about the samples/real tape/vintage mixing console when you are talking about golden era classics and their 'warmth' - and anything 88-90 its usually the S950 and SP1200 that is pervading the grit, not a MPC - took people a little while to pick up on the MPCs, some stayed on the SP/950 combo for ages. that combo DEF has a sound!
I somewhat agree. I've used enough samplers to know by now it has nothing to do with the sampler. The SP1200 and S950 and related units (EMAX I/MPC60) DO have a pleasant sound that I don't believe can just be 'replicated by EQ' (especially when shifting pitch), but when set on high quality modes still to some degree play back pretty much what you put in.

There's a huge difference between loading in already processed and edited drum kit sounds which are completely clean, and chopping your own sounds off a dirty, crackling record, which often never yield a 'perfect' hit, and making them fit into a composition. It just doesn't sound the same at all. Also what I found playing with the S950 a lot to get a more 'old school' vibe is to use 'longer' samples (like a snare from a record with some verb) and play it back in NOTE OFF mode. That way depending on your timing on the pads, you can almost create a 'groove' by controlling when the hit ends, not only when it starts.

Also one thing I've noticed working analog, is that noise isn't completely bad. Smashing some unbalanced sources hard with a compressor and you have a quite noticeable amount of noise soloed, but in the track it's not noticeable, and sometimes in my opinion just sounds better (if you're going for dirty/grimy/lo-fi I guess, I'm very sure it would sound worse if you were aiming for clean). I think it was a combination of a LOT of factors that made the old school sound, not just the one unit being used.

I personally prefer the sound of the S950 for drums, but I'm just as confident I could get close enough results from the 2000XL.
Old 11th September 2015
  #41
SEED78
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by DomiBabi View Post
Point is, cleaner = versatility. I'd pick maschine or a 2500 or mv-8800 over an emax any day.
Purely from a sonic point of view I personally wouldn't, emax's sound great. Plus emax racks are becoming really difficult and expensive to buy.

They are also slightly cleaner sounding than the sp1200, so they are not lo fi or limited.
Old 11th September 2015
  #42
Gear Addict
 

...never seen so many people talking 'bout samples and warm analog sound in one breath like here...wow.

but ok, apart from the fact, there is no such thing, let's take it for granted anyway...

....12 bit means more grain, more dirt, more compression, less headroom....and could be heard as more anaolog and warm....that's the 60.....but the os is so far behind all others that came to follow....and it has an old timer cult price tag....

when akai was studio standard for brightest sampling quality, and that were the first 16 bit days, their audio engines were really clean and flexible....the mpc 3000 is sharing that converters and engine....but same problem here...
the os just does'nt offer the options you can get these days...

the 2000 and the xl sister where next generation and a bit of a downgrade in soundquality....but here we come back to the question...less soundquality all in all could also mean it sounds much better for this or that....

what so ever...those had more "flesh" than the last genration of real mpc's...the 1000 and the 2500....BUT they have jjos!!!!...and that's a game changer.....!
and they have an uptodate mass storage solution...!!!!

what's left is the 5000 with it's built in alesis synth...hmmmm...same engine as the 1000 and 2500....no jjos...and a pretty left alone os status....mom's long forgotten and left behind daughter, really....

and the 4000...which is a monster in handling, but definitly the one, with the most will inside to be the most perfect mpc of all....very decent sound engine and after all the hi end one....in stand alone os, no jjos here, too, which is always a pity, and the best back and forth audio converters of all....

but as the that ssl guy said before...that all makes no real analog warmth....that comes with summing up single signals in single channels....

and the best mpc for warm analog sound is the one, that gives the best options to get good results....
so we come back to os....and mass storage....that is 1000 and 2500...they're the biggest bamg for the buck these days...and the last generation pf REAL mpc's out there....

because the ren.....is NO SUCH THING AT ALL...you hear me?....get a real mpc...it's brutally old school in these itb days...,but it's always worth it....
the ren, or even waiting for a ren 2 is a stupid idea, really....the renaisance mode is nothing but bit resolution and eq twist arounds, you can achieve in many other ways.....and the rest is a never really up to date compatible plug in and just some pads that are blinking instead of feeling like good old mpc pads...
Old 12th September 2015
  #43
Lives for gear
 

The 4000 is unreal for pitch and filter resolution ect.Plus the down sampling is intense.Warm it up through a desk/pre amp ectectect.But yeah...if you want the warmth even the 2000 is straight out the box got the edge.I can even imagine the mpc 3k has more depth in this regard.Sometimes these distinctions can only really be made comparing side by side with same samples and good headphones.
Old 12th August 2019
  #44
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by akai612 View Post
so, why is it that when I load my emax with "warm" samples they sound a trillion times better then in my akai z4, s5000, s1000, s700? z4 has the highest resultion thus it should reproduce the same groove like in a emax...given the same sample...right? naaa...sorry not happening...there are differences...dunow about the MPC60 though...telling from videos it sounds different than the rest...I'll soon find out.
Here's the way my tech explained it to me.

The reason everyone is gaga for 12-bit digital stuff is that due to aliasing and other digital anomalies, 12-bit digital gear actually have analog filtering built into their signal path at different points.

I asked why my DX7 mrk 1 was awesome and the DX7 mrk 2 is garbage, and that's what he told me, he said its true of all 12-bit gear, but when they went 16-bit they thought "Oh, now we've gotten things RIGHT" and the analog filtering was dropped.

These aren't filters that were considered "Features" just a functional part of the signal path, but that would still cause harmonic variance and randomness, two things the human ear are VERY attracted to.

So yes, 16 but SUCKS, always has...Your take doesn't surprise me at all.
Old 12th August 2019
  #45
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by terrible.dee View Post
Here's the way my tech explained it to me.

The reason everyone is gaga for 12-bit digital stuff is that due to aliasing and other digital anomalies, 12-bit digital gear actually have analog filtering built into their signal path at different points.

I asked why my DX7 mrk 1 was awesome and the DX7 mrk 2 is garbage, and that's what he told me, he said its true of all 12-bit gear, but when they went 16-bit they thought "Oh, now we've gotten things RIGHT" and the analog filtering was dropped.

These aren't filters that were considered "Features" just a functional part of the signal path, but that would still cause harmonic variance and randomness, two things the human ear are VERY attracted to.

So yes, 16 but SUCKS, always has...Your take doesn't surprise me at all.
Yeah this is the case, but only because they are used as anti aliasing filters, so for instance an SP has a lowpass at exactly half the sample rate, something you can do with a couple of plugins and get extremely close to that portion of the sound.
The rest can be faked with an EQ curve and some saturation.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #46
I recommend the 2000XL. I feel like drum samples somehow always sound better through a 2000 or 2000xl. I just picked up a 2000 classic and love it, but the XL has time stretching and track mute by pad and those are both extremely useful. The 2000 classic looks better, but has a lot less features.

[Mod delete]

Last edited by Bender412; 1 week ago at 12:33 AM.. Reason: Not allowed
Old 2 weeks ago
  #47
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by strongocho View Post
I recommend the 2000XL. I feel like drum samples somehow always sound better through a 2000 or 2000xl. I just picked up a 2000 classic and love it, but the XL has time stretching and track mute by pad and those are both extremely useful. The 2000 classic looks better, but has a lot less features.
Can you tell any difference between the 2000 OG and XL?Generally soundwise.I know there very similar.

Last edited by Bender412; 1 week ago at 12:33 AM..
Old 2 weeks ago
  #48
I can't, but I am no expert. I have heard some people say the 2000 classic sounds better but I doubt it. I think they are pretty much the exact same machine but the XL has a few extra features and a better drive. The only disadvantage I see is the lack of timestretch in the 2000 and the lack of track mute on the pads. I have another sampler I use for actual samples and only use the MPC to sequence MIDI and play drums or short stabs so the floppy disk is no big deal to me. I can fit plenty of drums and patterns on a floppy.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #49
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by strongocho View Post
I can't, but I am no expert. I have heard some people say the 2000 classic sounds better but I doubt it. I think they are pretty much the exact same machine but the XL has a few extra features and a better drive. The only disadvantage I see is the lack of timestretch in the 2000 and the lack of track mute on the pads. I have another sampler I use for actual samples and only use the MPC to sequence MIDI and play drums or short stabs so the floppy disk is no big deal to me. I can fit plenty of drums and patterns on a floppy.
There's a few out there who prefer the OG tonewise.I would put money on its something to do with the pre amp depending on how you hit it!!! Ive had both and own the 2000 and am more than happy with the sound.Yeah you can do the pad mute-On main screen outline the pad on/off and hit open window

Your beats sound nice and crisp btw.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #50
omg, I am so glad you showed me that. I am about to have so much more flexibility now that I can actually turn tracks on/off with the pads. I thought that was a 2000xl only feature, I am still learning this machine. idk if you could tell from the videos, but I was muting tracks by scrolling through with the jog wheel and hitting "turn off". That first beat took 2 takes because when the snare and hats come in, I have to turn them on seperately and really fast. That is not easy with the jog wheel and f key hahahaha. Thanks for the heads up and checking out my beats
Old 1 week ago
  #51
Here for the gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by apricotkilla View Post
I want to add an MPC into my music production for the warm, colored sound. I've been using plugins to get that analogue sound but it's just not doing it for me.

I've been eyeing the MPC1000 (with JJOS, updated pads) as it seems it will be the best for my needs but wanted to get other opinions on this. Does the 2000 XL have a significantly higher analogue sound and maybe should I eye that one instead? I do want it to be user friendly, have longevity and somewhat easy to get sounds onto it.
Perfect thread for my first post! I'm a 2000XL user and while I have no experience using a 60, 3000 or any of the newer models I can tell you that most of the analogue warmth isn't just down to the MPC. Bear in mind that the sample source routed through a nice console and compressors and onto tape would be more responsible for the analogue warmth as others have also mentioned. You won't get the same warmth from raw digitally created drum sample set out of an MPC.

The 60 is grittier but depending on what you're looking for a 2000XL probably offers all the features you need - a 3000 would possibly be better but a whole lot more expensive and a 60 in good condition will be expensive plus you need to be willing to maintain a vintage machine although 2000 and 3000 are getting that way also. 2000 or an XL are cheapest good option in my opinion if you're unsure and maybe in the position of selling on if you don't get on with it. I actually don't really use the resample, auto chop or time stretch functions so the 2000 would probably do me just as well but the XL was the up to date model at the time I purchased mine.

I have spent more time repairing the buttons of my friend's MPC's of later models than early ones so if anything they don't seem to be built as well as the old ones. The workflow is a love it or hate it affair for most people. I personally love it but that's possibly down to 20 years of using it and not doing anything in a DAW. Hope that helps your thoughts.
Old 1 week ago
  #52
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrfantastic View Post
The workflow is a love it or hate it affair for most people. I personally love it but that's possibly down to 20 years of using it and not doing anything in a DAW. Hope that helps your thoughts.
as someone who uses it mostly to sequence MIDI, I am absolutely in love with the workflow. I keep it right above my MIDI controller and have basically a dawless daw at arms reach. The transport buttons on the 2000 are perfect and it is lighting fast to record, undo, and change tracks. The only thing slightly annoying at first was having to load everything from floppies each time I turn on the machine, but I am actually learning to love the fact that every time I turn on my MPC I am starting from a perfectly clean slate.
Attached Thumbnails
Which MPC is the Best for analogue, warm sound?-1lrhklu.jpg  
Old 1 week ago
  #53
Lives for gear
 

As a previous post wrote, the "magic" in old gear is really low-quality DA converters. Don't get me wrong, I love it too. Though, I sold my MPC500 and S2000 because a DAW provides me a lot better workflow. However, I did capture the sound of both so I have my own drum samples that was recorded using them.
Old 1 week ago
  #54
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 47radAR View Post
I don't know how a digital sampler can be associated with "warm, analog" sound. While the older units DO have a character (I own one - played with a few others) when it comes to the sound, it has more to do with flawed digital to analog converters. The sound does have an appeal but it's definitely not the analog part of it that's responsible - at least not as much as you think.

If you want warm analog, that has more to do with what you track and/or mix with and, sometimes, to (tape, for example).
Bollocks. The sound of these thngs is just as much in their analog parts as in the converters. Try pushing a sound hot through an S1000 without sampling (i.e. zero converter involvment) and see how much that makes out of the box's entire character.

This 'it's all in the converters' mantra is getting old. Even now it's never just in the converters, as interfaces with the same conversion chips sound entirely different due to their different analog signal paths.
Old 1 week ago
  #55
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
Bollocks. The sound of these thngs is just as much in their analog parts as in the converters. Try pushing a sound hot through an S1000 without sampling (i.e. zero converter involvment) and see how much that makes out of the box's entire character.

This 'it's all in the converters' mantra is getting old. Even now it's never just in the converters, as interfaces with the same conversion chips sound entirely different due to their different analog signal paths.
What signal path are you talking about? It is a pretty simple thing. While we are talking about "chips", there is digital "signal" (not even a signal, but data). Once it is a signal (sound), it went through a converter.

Maybe it's,"getting old", but it is simple fact.

After the DA, there is a preamp maybe that is what can add or change the sound. Nothing else.

Quote:
. Try pushing a sound hot through an S1000 without sampling (i.e. zero converter involvment) and see how much that makes out of the box's entire character.
Not sure what you mean but when you play the sample it still go through the output converter.
Old 6 days ago
  #56
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thysta View Post
What signal path are you talking about? It is a pretty simple thing. While we are talking about "chips", there is digital "signal" (not even a signal, but data). Once it is a signal (sound), it went through a converter.

Maybe it's,"getting old", but it is simple fact.

After the DA, there is a preamp maybe that is what can add or change the sound. Nothing else.



Not sure what you mean but when you play the sample it still go through the output converter.
When you merely run a sound through the sampler without sampling it, it does not get converted. All that happens is analog. Nothing that you hear is anything to do with the converter sound. Until you sample. And there are characteristics occurring even without sampling, especially when you run it hot. It distorts in a very specific way, basically the way the analog stages of THAT sampler sound like when you distort them.

To put down the sound of hardware samplers ONLY to the conversion is simply ridiculous and ignorant. Yes, the conversion is part of it. But the analog stages are, too. In a big way.
Old 6 days ago
  #57
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
When you merely run a sound through the sampler without sampling it, it does not get converted. All that happens is analog. Nothing that you hear is anything to do with the converter sound. Until you sample. And there are characteristics occurring even without sampling, especially when you run it hot. It distorts in a very specific way, basically the way the analog stages of THAT sampler sound like when you distort them.

To put down the sound of hardware samplers ONLY to the conversion is simply ridiculous and ignorant. Yes, the conversion is part of it. But the analog stages are, too. In a big way.
Sorry but you have not much idea about how this works.
Old 6 days ago
  #58
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thysta View Post
Sorry but you have not much idea about how this works.
lol. Ok.
Old 6 days ago
  #59
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
lol. Ok.
Quote:
When you merely run a sound through the sampler without sampling it, it does not get converted.
How can you run a sound through a sampler without sampling it?
Old 6 days ago
  #60
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thysta View Post
How can you run a sound through a sampler without sampling it?
You plug something into the inputs and plug the outputs into your monitoring, and see to the sampler being set to monitor the input, i.e. let the sound straight through. No conversion taking place. Just analog stages/line amps/chips affecting your sound then. Have you ever used a sampler?
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump