MPC 2000xl vs MV 8800

[Bananasass]

@Bananasass
1. Many sample libraries now come on DVD (4 GB) vs CD (750 MB). Since the MPC is a sampler that load sounds directly, it would be a waste of time to use a PC to read the DVD and save files on another form of media just to load into an MPC.

Just like it's a waste of time to do effects in a DAW instead on a sampler... right? It's a non-argument.

2. Quite frankly, I simply prefer real hard disk tracks. Tracks that I can import or export and don't have to worry about memory limitations. That way I have plenty of GBs available to record audio tracks and the 192 MB reserved for samples and synth programs.

Right, well despite that I never ran into the 512mb limit on my MV yet, this is indeed a good argument, but I'm sure I've already said so.

3. All these machines have CD burners because that is what users want. Using the 5K to burn audio or data CDs is a great function.

I do not disgree, but as most people will use external gear in a studio... using a separate burner makes more sense for the professional users. I'm not saying I dislike the fact that there ís a burner inside all of these.

4. In the genre of music I am into, the MV is gaining no ground on any MPC. Simply do a quick internet search to see how many more producers are using MPCs.

You're way close minded here.. the internet is hardly representative of how many people own a MV versus a MPC. Besides, as said the MPC user base is bigger, I never disagreed of denied that. I do know for a fact that the MVs have been selling great lately, even despite the recession (something that has a rather small influence in this niche market, but still).

I would love to hear your arguments about why you feel the MV has a better sequencer just for kicks. The MPCs sequencer is legendary for a reason.

While I generally agree, it's not legendary at all, it just had a monopoly-like position for too long.

The Q-links are not over-rated. The 5K is a MIDI sequencer and controller. Using the Q-links to send MIDI CC messages to software like Reasons is incredible for hands on control.

Right, but controlling Reason can be done with the MV as well.

6. First...you need to actually use an MPC and try out its automation before you comment. After you do that..come back and give a report.

You really didn't have anything clever to say, did you?

7. That is funny. 95% of what the MV has is because an MPC had it first. Roland is probably paying fees for using Akai's patents.

About 50% would be way closer to the truth. I guess you're not very familiar with Roland products.. Not to mention the past influence of Roger Linn on the best part of the MPC series.

As for the synth, well perhaps in your opinion this is true, but you can't compare them. One is monophonic and meant for a different purpose, the other is a 20 voice synth. For a bass synth the MV's is very useful.

Personally I do not like the 20 voice synth on the MPC5k all that much, especially because compared to real synths it's pretty ****ty actually.

As said though, you can't compare them 1 on 1.

8. You are reading and typing so quickly that you are not paying attention. I said in a studio environment, I am not using effects in a DRUM MACHINE. In other words, I would add effects once I have the audio in my DAW. Of I would add dynamics to my drums as I am sampling them.

I'm aware of that, however so on one hand you're allergic to PCs and on the other hand you can't make music without them... Sorry, but your logic gets more and more confusing. As if there's no logic at all.

Anyway..the 5K does not skimp on Effects. As I wrote earlier, it has 4 effect busses with two effects per buss. They can all be linked if you like. The 5K has both insert and send effects. I think I counted 36 effects which includes parametric EQ, vintage compressor, chorus, distortion grimey, resampler (for dirty drums, decimator (for removing bits), filters, etc

I wasn't talking about the amount of effect busses or the amount of FX, I was talking about QUALITY of these effects.

Both machines are beautiful.

Bananasss, reveal yourself. We are all "friends" here.

Right, and I totally agree... but no, I won't reveal anything.

 

[lvngdead]

lol @ bananasss being jahromes favorite producer.

Erick Sermon???

 

[Kojak]

I do miss 24bit export on the MV when I want to go for extremely clean stuff... but apart from that the MV has the MPC line dominated as far as the FX goes.

You've yet to explain this except to say that one is "better quality". But with the MV's stereo outs you're pretty much forced to use the onboard effects, whereas with the MPC's individual outs you can use external effects units.

I do not know what your definition of 'simple' automation is, but with the MV you can do just about everything. From stutter effects, to recording effect automation, pattern muting, track muting and so on... I know the MPC series have basic automation features too, but not the same.

Yes, actually they have the exact same automation features, including everything you mentioned.

I could easily write about why I think the sequencer on the MV is superior for hours, but I'm going to pass on that as I've got things to do.

Like what? All you do is spend hours on here bashing MPC's. Explain why you think it's better.
I think they are both great machines, they're different, but they great machines. You however come in every thread stating that the MV is superior without having anything specific to back it up, only things you've completely made up.

 

[Bananasass]

lol @ bananasss being jahromes favorite producer.

Erick Sermon???

LOL, I wouldn't know. Don't know what music he's into, but I'm sure he has heard of me and listened to some of my music. But really that's not the "issue" here, even though in my opinion there isn't really an issue so much anyways.

You've yet to explain this except to say that one is "better quality". But with the MV's stereo outs you're pretty much forced to use the onboard effects, whereas with the MPC's individual outs you can use external effects units.

No, this is not true at all, you're not forced to use anything. In fact, using sound modules, effects modules and so on together with the MV is easy. You can run plugins remember? All your freaking favorite plugins... You should read up on that dog. Its the **** right there.

Like what? All you do is spend hours on here bashing MPC's. Explain why you think it's better.

I can type and read very fast.. surely it weren't that many hours. I wasn't bashing either.. just complaining. That's different.

You however come in every thread stating that the MV is superior without having anything specific to back it up, only things you've completely made up.

Right, except I'm usually stating how in my opinion the MV is better. I never made stuff up, those are your words.

In fact, ... prove that I made things up here, 'cause you're only repeating Jahrome or whatever his name is.

 

[Kojak]

No, this is not true at all, you're not forced to use anything. In fact, using sound modules, effects modules and so on together with the MV is easy. You can run plugins remember? All your freaking favorite plugins... You should read up on that dog. Its the **** right there.

That's just plain made up. Niether MV supports VST effects in box. If you wanted to use external effects, you are forced to bounce tracks one by one externally. With an MPC I can up to 10 seperatechannels that can be individually routed through any sort of external effects and multitracked outside the box. The MV's, without the expansion, only have two stereo outputs.

Right, except I'm usually stating how in my opinion the MV is better. I never made stuff up, those are your words.

In fact, ... prove that I made things up here, 'cause you're only repeating Jahrome or whatever his name is.

Sure.

The MV has grid editing, step-recording, realtime recording and so on, what more could you possibly want? Also, it's a bit more advanced than on the MPC.

This implies that the MPC does not have these features, it does.

 

[moyphee]

That's just plain made up. Niether MV supports VST effects in box.

It doesn't run them them but they can be slaved via MIDI. The output of the PC/Mac is routed back into the MV. If you have the MV8-OP1 the digital In can be used. That's what he's getting at. He never said the MV was a actual VSTi host. As far "reading up on it" , the routing diagram is in the Workshop Docs on Roland's site.

 

[Kojak]

It doesn't run them them but they can be slaved via MIDI.

Well sh*t, a casio keyboard can do that. If you actually wanted to run your MV through some external effects unit you would have to track out each channel and bounce it down individually. With an MPC you can route each channel to an individual output and listen to it through the effect in real time, as well as mix and eq each part individually through a mixer. I was just trying to point out that what is gained with in-box effects on an MV is plenty cancelled out by flexibility and integration possibilities with outboard effects, mixers, and multitrackers.

 

[moyphee]

Well sh*t, a casio keyboard can do that..... I was just trying to point out that what is gained with in-box effects on an MV is plenty canceled out by flexibility and integration possibilities with outboard effects, mixers, and multitrackers.

Not quite, the MV as master can send MMC and serve as the Master clock - mention sending CC messages to the slaved VST.


Your second point applies the MPC as well . Neither series has a true send/return. The primary difference is that the MV requires you to buy the output option. Every sampler is equally crippled in this respect.

The MV has a trick up it's sleeve that the MPCs can't fully duplicate.
______________________________________________
You can do it but you need to have the output expansion installed.

The MV has 4 fully routable Auxes at the main Mixer page. You can send the Output to any single multi out or a Stereo pair. The MVs FX can also be sent to it's own Aux to treated by and return using outboard gear. If the FX unit is slaved to the MV's clock the LFOs and other time parameters can be synced. Different from any MPCs, the Auxes can actually contain a full blown EQ'd and automated submix going to the outboard gear.

Route the Part 1-16 to an Aux on the Mixer >>>
Route the Aux to a Multi Out with the out going to your outboard FX >>>
Bring the FX output into the MV via analog/Digital In. >>>

Control the effected signal with the input fader

You can then mix it or Resample the finished product

Thanks to NNITRED over at MVation for this routing scheme for using realtime outboard FX. The above paste is from the email.

______________________________________________




I think a digital send and return would be great but it makes too much sense. I doubt this will show up in MVs, MPC's or any other sampler/workstation.

 

[Kojak]

Your second point applies the MPC as well . Neither series has a true send/return.

It doesn't need a return, it's a sampler, not a multitrack.

Every sampler is equally crippled in this respect.

Multiple outputs come standard on 1000/2500/3000/60's.

Route the Part 1-16 to an Aux on the Mixer >>>
Route the Aux to a Multi Out with the out going to your outboard FX >>>
Bring the FX output into the MV via analog/Digital In. >>>

Control the effected signal with the input fader

You can then mix it or Resample the finished product

You could do the exact same thing with an MPC

 

[moyphee]

You could do the exact same thing with an MPC

No you can not! As I stated : The MV has a trick up it's sleeve that the MPCs can't fully duplicate. The MPCs can only do some of what offered by the MV in this respect. To match the MV completely the MPC needs features it simply doen't have.

The reason are as follows:

1. The MV's actual MFX itself can be routed a 1 of the 4 Auxes. This means the the MV's Bass Synth can be sent out for further processing.

2. The MV has a 3 band Parametric EQ on every Instrument and Audio Channel. No MPC has this feature.

3. No MPC has automated and EQ'd Auxes at the mixer completely independent of the FX engine and it's signal path.

4. The MV can complete this routing ( using all 4 mixer auxes )and still send to both a fully independent Stereo Chorus/Delay and Stereo Reverb at the same time.


5. The MV has a dedicated mixer channel w/metering on the mixer for the Input and the mix can be automated throughout a sequence/song just like any other channel on the MV.
Note : In the Input THRU mode, you cannot record the moving
of Q-Link in the sequence.- Akai MPC 2500 Manual

The degree of flexibility the MV has in this instance far surpasses the MPC in every regard.

It doesn't need a return, it's a sampler, not a multitrack.

It does if you want a FX loop without any trickery/hassle and being a multitrack recorder has absolutely nothing to do with it.
FTR - Except 5000, MPCs don't have linear audio tracks.

Multiple outputs come standard on 1000/2500/3000/60's.

I wasn't talking about Multi outs. The reference to the following:
"Neither series has a true send/return." That's just a fact and there is no getting around it.

 

[jahrome]

@bananasss
1. The MV can't use popular sound libraries on DVDs. You will have to put the DVD in your PC, and copy them to several CDs in order to load them into the MV. This is not the case with a 5K. No PC needed.

I have no idea of what you are trying to say about effects in a DAW vs a sampler. But to be clear what I meant...I prefer to use effects in a DAW which are far superior that what these drum machines have. However, the MPC 5000 does has numerous effects that are great...4 busses and two effects per buss and all linkable. Does the MV do this? As far as Roland effects..I own the Fantom with the same technology. I am not that impressed.

2. The MV has 8 RAM-based audio tracks. With 512 MB of RAM, you can record 6 minutes of stereo audio on each track. However..when it comes to saving and loading 512 MB of samples??? No thanks. That is where the 5K comes in with its 80GB hard drive whose audio doesn't need to be loaded into RAM. Got recorded vocal tracks? No problem. Throw them on a DVD or CF card and import them into the 5Ks hard disk tracks. MV? Not quite a reality.......

3. So what is the purpose of burners in a workstation? To use the onboard recording. mixing, 'faux' mastering, and burning to an audio CD. The 5K takes it a step further by also creating Data CDs. So you have the option of a CF card or cheap CD media to share your favorite files with others. So you have the option of doing this quickly onboard instead of turning on your computer. If these workstations didn't have CD burners...I see no point of having mixing and mastering features. As far as professional users?? I am sure there must be some professionals that use an MV....but can you name some that I have actually heard of? Just for the sake of arguments...

4. I guess that statement went over your head. I didn't say that the internet "forums" is an accurate representation of how many people use an MPC vs an MV..although I believe it is pretty darn close. What I meant is that if you use the internet to look up info on your favorite producers, you will find that most of those that use drum machines/samplers all own/use MPCs...not MVs. Remember the short lived Scratch Magazine? I have all the issues. 95% of the producers featured used MPCs over MVs. I wonder why? MPCs are like Pro Tools. Regardless of what you say may be equal to or better...they are the standards. An MV is just an MPC-clone and nothing more. But this clone doesn't have the level of control the MPC 5K has with external instruments. The Q-links are unmatched. I am still waiting for you to use the MPC 5Ks automation and then compare it with the MV. Based on your comments in this forum, you have done no such thing which is why you always talk in generals...no specifics. (Damn...I am starting to sound like old azz McCain)

7. The MV has copied practically everything the MPC line has already done and added the same technology Roland has used in all its products. Do you actually own an MV? If so, how can you deny this? This one is a waste of time debating.

As far as the synth in the 5K and the MV?? Again...you do not own a 5K. The 5K synth is a beast and not like the lame attempt at a synth like the MV. If you had a 5K, you would know this. The 5Ks synth is switchable between MONO or POLY...while the MV is MONO according to you. The 5Ks synth has 20 voices. Yes, I can pretty much bet that Akai/Numark/Alesis took a look at that MPC-clone and decided to up the ante by adding a better synth. A much better synth. Again...if you are going to continue trying to debate something you don't own or use...at least read the manual and pretend like you know what you are talking about.

Additionally...I have to add that the MV is on version 3.5? While the 5K is on 1.02? This conversation will be getting very interesting (at least for MPC users) over the next year.


@moyphee
I didn't know the MV has a 3-band parametric EQ on the mixer channels. A parametric EQ has 3 controls (frequency, Q, gain) for each band. Also, I wouldn't waste my time trying to create an effects loop with the MV and a PC. And if a PC is involved, I certainly would not try mixing onboard the MV. I would much rather use the MPCs 10 analog outputs and/or its 8 channels of digital audio via ADAT (all without an expansion board) to record into a DAW and leave it there...or simply do everything onboard the MPC...5K that is.


...today, I have started trying to find a reasonably priced MV-8800...$1500 seems to be the going average price but I am looking for something close to $1000. Then I will do a head to head compare/contrast thread on both units.

 

[Bananasass]

Moyphee is of course spot on.

If the one that jumped the gun would have read my post less trigger happy by the way, that they would know that I did not say it runs the effects 'in box'. This wasn't the point either.. but instead some of you people said it couldn't handle external FX 'n ish.

 

[jahrome]

Moyphee is of course spot on.

If the one that jumped the gun would have read my post less trigger happy by the way, that they would know that I did not say it runs the effects 'in box'. This wasn't the point either.. but instead some of you people said it couldn't handle external FX 'n ish.

And you are talking about jumping the gun??

You don't own a 5K but have been telling people that you do own and have used one months ago before the OS 1.01 was released...and then to be found out as a liar when you starting talking about the 5Ks synth vs the MVs....

For the record...I seriously doubt I have heard or listen to your music....

 

[moyphee]

1. The MV can't use popular sound libraries on DVDs. You will have to put the DVD in your PC, and copy them to several CDs in order to load them into the MV. This is not the case with a 5K. No PC needed.

Not true the standard CD burner can be replaced. I"m running a DVD drive in my 8800 right now and it reads without issue. The MV also imports more formats than the MPC including S-1000/3000 which the 5000 does not support. Couple this wth the fact that the MV can import any WAV of any sample and/or bit depth.

2. The MV has 8 RAM-based audio tracks. With 512 MB of RAM, you can record 6 minutes of stereo audio on each track

Yes it does have RAM and the 6 minute limit is pure rubbish. You should stop spreading such false rumors. Where exactly is this limit documented? HD recording suffers from diminished performance as the drive fills. Latency, corruption and fatigue/crash are common when the same drive for recording is used for storage, which the 5000 does. There's a damn good reason pro studios don't practice this. So the recording capacity of the 5000 is highly inconsistant from user to user. The MV gives 512MB and you can use as much of it want for stereo ZERO latency audio tracks or Audio Phrases!

I see no point of having mixing and mastering features.

That's because the 5000 doesn't have them. There is no point in making a machine billed as a complete production machine and not being able to produce a finished work. for example When the MV was the only machine that burned CD's or had any type of audio tracks, everyone cried about the MV doing too much. When these features made there way to MPC users they went quiet. As far "faux mastering" goes , the MV sports the same mastering engine as the VS-2480 which is highly respected. In fact the templates are deigned by top mastering engineers. Roland posted the list back when the 2480 was released.

An MV is just an MPC-clone and nothing more. But this clone doesn't have the level of control the MPC 5K has with external instruments.

That is complete BS. There is NOTHING that 5000 can do in terms of MIDI control that the MV cannot.

7. The MV has copied practically everything the MPC line has already done and added the same technology Roland has used in all its products.

Actually the 5000 is playing catch-up to the MV. In fact it really nothing than a suped up 2500 and old Alesis Fusion technology that got crushed in the marketplace.

As far as the synth in the 5K and the MV?? Again...you do not own a 5K. The 5K synth is a beast and not like the lame attempt at a synth like the MV

The synth was designed to provide Bass sounds. But if you really want match synths why put the mighty 5000 against another recording workstation in it's price class- the Fantom G or X. After all it's a Fusion at it's heart anyway.

The 5000 still isn't selling well. Selling out when a store only gets 3 machine/month doesn't say much. In fact 2500 sales have increased since it's lackluster release. Just Blaze gave it death sentence IMO and Numark won't revover from such a harsh review. Everyday that blog gets new life and the word spread.

Also, I wouldn't waste my time trying to create an effects loop with the MV and a PC.

The method was to incorpate hardware FX into the signal path and works without a hitch. Mixing on the MV works pretty good -for me. The racks synths are piped right in and everything else is handle by the MV. No PC dependancy.


*The MV comes stock with 128MB and maxes officially at 512MB and 1GB unoffically using standar inexpensive RAM. The MPC-5000 maxes at 192 with a pricey upgrade. The exact same obsolete and very cheap memory cards that found in Sharp and Xansco inventory base machines. The 2500 and 1000 max at 128MB.

** CD is standard on the MV. The MPC makes you buy an upgrade kit which is nothing more than OEM laptop drive.

*** The MV currently works flawlessly and even in it's infancy the upgrades were primarily adding features more so than fixing bugs. The MPC was rushed and is still plagued with bugs with new ones being found everyday. Every MV OS improvement brought new feature that raised the level of the machine and improved it overall. The MPC is still trying get to "Retail Ready" stage. The threads at MPC Forums support this statement. Many die hard MPC users simply won't touch the 5000 because it's still very buggy. Other have swithed to the MV -like myself. Even more have abondoned the MPC and went to software.

**** Roland supports it's product and customers. Numark couldn't care less after the cash changes hands.

 

[Bananasass]

And you are talking about jumping the gun??

You don't own a 5K but have been telling people that you do own and have used one months ago before the OS 1.01 was released...and then to be found out as a liar when you starting talking about the 5Ks synth vs the MVs....

You are twisting my words... I never said I owned the mpc5k months before the update come out. I only said I owned my mpc5k before it came out. Quite a difference, especially as your story about how 'every' mpc5k apparently was shipped with 1.01 was plain wrong.

For the record...I seriously doubt I have heard or listen to your music....

You may not actually own a CD, but I bet you've heard it as it's been on the radio stations for ages. Worldwide domination, anyways.. don't take my word for it, I don't care. I know these words are empty without me revealing who I am here. Which I still won't.

 

[Hellsinki Boom]

Mv-8000 can be upgraded with 1gb memory? word?

 

[Bananasass]

Mv-8000 can be upgraded with 1gb memory? word?

Technically and unofficially yes, however when working with projects of over 512mb ram I sometimes am having issues. Not all the time, so yeah, it's possible, but there's the occasional risk of getting a reboot or freeze. Only when going over the 512mb limit though.

In other words... I would not really recommend going over the advised limits here, but yeah it's sort of possible.

 

[Hellsinki Boom]

Good to know, thanks!

 

[jahrome]

You are twisting my words... I never said I owned the mpc5k months before the update come out. I only said I owned my mpc5k before it came out. Quite a difference, especially as your story about how 'every' mpc5k apparently was shipped with 1.01 was plain wrong.

You may not actually own a CD, but I bet you've heard it as it's been on the radio stations for ages. Worldwide domination, anyways.. don't take my word for it, I don't care. I know these words are empty without me revealing who I am here. Which I still won't.

How can you charge me with twisting your words when you don't give specifics?

You said you had the 5K WAY before OS 1.01 was released. But the truth is that the first 5K didn't come out until May. And you became a member of this forum when? Sorry no one believes you. Then your lies caught up with you when you talked about the 5Ks synth. What's your explanation? I am sure you can come up with a good one.

Don't care about your music...I really don't. It will not change my opinion on you or using the MV.

 

[Kojak]

The MV's actual MFX itself can be routed a 1 of the 4 Auxes. This means the the MV's Bass Synth can be sent out for further processing.

Yes, one at a time.

No MPC has automated and EQ'd Auxes at the mixer completely independent of the FX engine and it's signal path.

It does, the individual outputs. These are aux mixes, and the MPC has 8 of them which can be directly sent individually to external hardware. Unless you have the expansion (which is very hard to come by) the MV is not able to do this.

The MV has a dedicated mixer channel w/metering on the mixer for the Input and the mix can be automated throughout a sequence/song just like any other channel on the MV.
Note : In the Input THRU mode, you cannot record the moving
of Q-Link in the sequence.- Akai MPC 2500 Manual

The MPC can do that, it can't do it input thru mode, which is a feature that isn't availble on MV's, but in the standard mode you are perfectly able to record and modulate parameters.

It does if you want a FX loop without any trickery/hassle and being a multitrack recorder has absolutely nothing to do with it.

I was pointing out that you are talking about features that are useful in a multitrack, not a sequencer. A multitrack needs eq on every channel, it needs linear audio tracks, it needs effects sends. I didn't buy a sequencer to do that stuff, my multitrack already does it way better than my sequencer could ever try to.

As I've said before they're both great machines, but they're designed for different things. The MV is designed to be more of an all-in-one sampler, sequencer, synth, multitrack. The MPC <5000 are designed to be just a sampler/sequencer as a part of a larger studio. It isn't designed to be a multi-track, chances are you probably already have one. I chose the MPC because I needed just a very power sampler/sequencer that would integrate well with my other gear, and with 2/4 midi connections and 2/10 audio connections, it is more than able to do that. Now if I had a smaller studio and less external gear, I definately would have gone with the MV as it provides me with multitracking and mastering tools, but these are useless to me as I already have a much more powerful devoted multitrack and mastering suite.