What Can MPC do that Maschine can't?
- Thread starter dday3212
- Start date
Bananasass
New member
The price alone really isn't all that counts here! Besides you'd have an even better deal money-wise when you'd simply use Reaper a good midi controller and a bunch of sound sources, commercial libraries, vinyl and packages similar to the Komplete series. All in all this should be possible to obtain for under one grand and then you'd have really good stuff.
All in all an MPC or MV is worth it's money when it comes to it's work flow and in-the-box functionality (it can be truly stand-alone) and to be honest I haven't been that impressed with the Maschine it's work-flow. Quite the contrary, it's messy and it screams 'software'. Whatever happened to getting that nice streamlined work-flow where speed matters and the interface instantly makes sense and guides you through in the least amount of steps?
If you use a clever setup you can use software plug-ins and midi operated sound libraries running on your PC, but with the awesome work-flow an MPC or MV would provide you with.
Even better, getting it into your DAW of choice can be as simple as just turning your PC on.
Focused
Sound Designer/Educator
Workflow is a set of dynamic human processes and procedures that change based on criteria and circumstances. The tool that you choose to use does not determine your workflow, it only sets the circumstances and rules for you to create your workflow. This means you need to learn the rules and features of your tools in order to develop a workflow that is appropriate. This workflow is based on the criteria that YOU the user has developed, not the tool. This is entirely a personal choice because everyone's criteria for quality, speed, efficiency and ease of use is different, just as everyone's concept of "clean" or "organized" differs. We place too much responsibility on the tools and miss the point that it is truly US that determines whether something is a good match for us or not. Learning the features and fixed methods/logic of your tools makes all the difference in creating a workflow for yourself.
![[F_or_DEAF]](/forums/data/avatars/m/150/150788.jpg?1611618699){kind=avatar}
[F_or_DEAF]
New member
i couldn't have said it better myself...
Inverted314
BOOM BAP OR DIE
I find saying a MPC or MV can be stand alone is a bit misleading. What are you going to do with it without other gear? At the very least your gonna need wax and a turntable and I know damn well that takes up more space then my Macbook does.
I used to be that hardware only dude when I had my MPC; but I realized SOMEWHERE along the line your gonna need a computer anyway so why avoid it in the first place. Unless you still use Portastudios and harddisk recording; but that's just silly.
jahrome
Diamond Member
This goes without saying....
Which is why I don't talk about workflow in general terms. Specifically, Maschine's sampling capabilities are not on par with the MPC 5000, 4000, or MV-8800 on any level except memory since it resides on a computer. Sample editing-wise, the MPC 2500/1000 JJ OS2 are better tools than Maschine at this task.
Adding VST support for Maschine was a good move so you don't have to be stuck with an average sampler or its average MIDI capabilities (for external gear).
NI appears to be listening to the constructive feedback which is great. Of course, NI has fan-boys that want to stall progress (claiming Maschine wasn't meant to be this or that). The fact is, it is becoming more of what an MPC should be today. OS 1.7 will allow for tighter integration with NI products..which is at or near the top of my feature request list. Personally (as an MPC fan-boy), I want Maschine to exceed what an MPC does.....this is the only reason why I write so much about it at the NI/MPC Forums...
Bananasass
New member
I disagree. I know a better pencil doesn't make you a better artist, but that's really not what this was about. You place too much responsibility on the user there, because many interfaces are limiting our workflow by their design! It has nothing to do with being clean or organized. Heck a list of a thousand objects in a single row can look very clean and organized, but still be a be-atch to go through to get to what you need!
This isn't about concepts. It's about practical use. A dedicated interface that makes sense and compliments the actions of the user as far as making music itself, instead of slowing one down at every turn.
There's a very distinct difference there. Personal preferences and experience aside, there are obvious differences between how cumbersome in use various pieces of gear are compared to each other. It really makes no sense stating it's all up to the user. Of course the user needs to know their gear, but again that's not what this was about.
In the end a lot of different brands of somewhat similar gear can give you the same results at the end of the road, but this is all about how you're getting there, which turns to take and so forth.
---------- Post added at 01:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:53 AM ----------
It's not misleading at all and you're jumping to your own conclusions there. I said it can be stand-alone if you want to, doesn't mean it has to be when you're making music and trying to get the most out of your gear!
What stand-alone essentially means is that for all those 'bedroom' producers like the most of you are on here, this can easily be the centerpiece of your music studio without the need for a computer and a truck-load of gear.
Obviously you'll get the most out of your gear when you hook it up to a decent chain of other (hardware) gear and software plug-ins certainly have become part of that these days. I'm not a true fan of software, but it certainly has it's good uses that should not be ignored.
Yes, you'll need your sample sources as that's what sampling is all about. But music production is more than just sampling alone!
Besides, who says your sounds need to be sampled from vinyl?? You can hook up a mic and get going beat-box style or sample analogue gear or the tapping of your hands, whistling and such. The stand-alone here means you do not need a computer or a serious chain of gear (separate sequencer, recorders, FX boxes, mastering tools etc.) to get the basic music production done.
Once you've got your base sounds in these machines, it really only takes your own production skills and the MV or MPC's sequencer, FX and resampling to get your music production going.
Last edited:
Inverted314
BOOM BAP OR DIE
That's a cool story and all; but I've already been there and done that. In the end there is no point in hiding from the computer. Better to embrace technology then shun it. I plan to convert my whole studio entirely to iPad based. From production to recording. Just for fun.
As a previous MPC owner I guarantee it is useless without other gear. Your being a bit ridiculous trying to justify the MPC as being standalone by saying "You can hook up a mic and get going beat-box style or sample analogue gear or the tapping of your hands, whistling and such. "
SURE, you CAN. But that fun factor will wear off quick; and how serious of a track are you really going to be making just by doing that.
I still like the MPC, especially the 2500; but it doesn't physically make sense to ME as for the money I can get Maschine and a midi keyboard and have the same effect as if I had a MPC and a Fantom years ago for 1/5 of the cost and a faster workflow.
Focused
Sound Designer/Educator
You can disagree, and I can accept that, but many of your comments are in agreement with my perspective.
'We place too much responsibility on the tools and miss the point that it is truly US that determines whether something is a good match for us or not.'
You determine whether something is too cumbersome for you to use, not the gear. This is a logical decision based on experience and analysis done by YOU. The gear/tools simply set the parameters and guidelines for you to make such an analysis. All of the tools we have available today are fully capable of getting the job done.
Bananasass
New member
You're right in that we seem to agree for the most part, but when gear poses artificial limitations on it's user that don't need to be, despite having all the features we require for our style of music production... how is that not the gear determining the cumbersomeness? You've got too much respect for gear that really could be (even) better. This is especially true for just about every software package I've ever used, but a lot of hardware could be even better as well.
You'd be surprised how many commercial songs started that way, bread and butter sounds or even stock gear sounds that served as placeholders later to be turned into straight gold. But it was of course just an example. You can use any source of sound to get creative juices going. The main point has been that you'd need only the MV or MPC to get into the music production stage. It's a sampler for sure, but once sounds are in the box you need nothing more. Hence 'stand-alone'.
Don't put words in my mouth stating I've said you can somehow quite magically get sounds into these machines without actually sampling or importing samples. That's not how it's done.
I prefer the MV over the MPC series as far as interfaces and work flow go for sure, but I definitely do not think the Maschine brings anything significantly new to the table at all. In this respect it's really very much just a midi controller doing nothing special in a software environment that doesn't quite has the same kind of dedication I'm used to from using the MV nor MPC. Even worse it feels like software from start to finish, which in my opinion really isn't a good thing for those wanting to get away from a computer.
Apart from the fact that the Maschine itself is still lacking certain features (properly layering sounds for one, good time-stretch algorithms, etc.), has lag issues in combination with a couple of software packages and ultimately is no better deal than Reaper, Reason and a good midi controller combined which would cost you less for sure.
All in all Maschine users can only hope NI will release more free updates, which is another one of those pains when software is concerned.
It's funny how some people seem to look at the Maschine as the best thing since sliced bread, when it's not.
Focused
Sound Designer/Educator
Difficulty is determined by the operator, my belief system, in that respect, is different from yours.
If I say something is difficult, it's based on my experience with other things that I have determined to be "less difficult". The difficulty is based on my personal experiences and comfort levels with certain tasks in life. Your familiarity with other tools is the basis of your concept of "cumbersome" vs "easy". You set the criteria and follow a path based on that criteria/belief system.
If I say something is difficult, it's based on my experience with other things that I have determined to be "less difficult". The difficulty is based on my personal experiences and comfort levels with certain tasks in life. Your familiarity with other tools is the basis of your concept of "cumbersome" vs "easy". You set the criteria and follow a path based on that criteria/belief system.
Bananasass
New member
I'm sorry but experience and comparative impressions do not set the actual circumstances that ultimately make or break a work-flow in a practical sense!! Whether something is 'easy' or 'difficult' simply depends on your own skill and experience and is very much an opinion indeed, but that's not at all what this is about.
This is about what could be done to improve the work-flow in a much more objective and practical sense. It's not about features or the lack thereof, but about their implementation and what that means for the entire work-flow. It's a very tangible thing and I could easily give you a dozen examples.
Nope, not at all true. If you wish to take basically the shortest route to a target, but are forced to climb a small hill to get there (or take a slight detour no matter what) that's slowing you down quite significantly, how would that not be cumbersome in the most objective possible way? In comparison if there would be a tunnel through that same hill or a different route altogether, it wouldn't have to slow you down at all. This has nothing to do with whether or not it's actually easy to climb said hill or easy to take that detour route! Nor does it have anything to do with my experience with tunnels or other detours, it's simply the difference between that hill or detour being there or not being there. It's not even about the extra time it takes, but rather about how comfortable the journey turns out to be.
I'm not arguing with people that like to climb hills whenever there's an opportunity. ;-)
Last edited:
so to clarify on the original topic mpc CAN have it's own tempo changes (maschine needs to be hosted in a DAW to do this)
mpc has 2 midi in and out (well technically maschine has 16 midi in and out this depends on what sort of sound card/midi interface you have)
mpc can time stretch maschine needs to use a vst to do this (or you can time stretch with the grain effects in maschine but to get it on point is hard)
mpc has a dedicated song mode where you can turn multiple sequences into one long song. maschine doesn't work that way
mpc has better pad linking maschines pad linking is tied to basically a midi duplication
mpc has play from after and before X feature in sample edit window maschine does not
this is all I can think of right now
I'm not going to even begin to get into the crazy long list of things maschine can do that the mpc can not do though. lol. I have both. my mpc collects dust now. (I have been a long time mpc user and lover)y
mpc has 2 midi in and out (well technically maschine has 16 midi in and out this depends on what sort of sound card/midi interface you have)
mpc can time stretch maschine needs to use a vst to do this (or you can time stretch with the grain effects in maschine but to get it on point is hard)
mpc has a dedicated song mode where you can turn multiple sequences into one long song. maschine doesn't work that way
mpc has better pad linking maschines pad linking is tied to basically a midi duplication
mpc has play from after and before X feature in sample edit window maschine does not
this is all I can think of right now
I'm not going to even begin to get into the crazy long list of things maschine can do that the mpc can not do though. lol. I have both. my mpc collects dust now. (I have been a long time mpc user and lover)y
Bananasass
New member
Humor me and do provide us with a list that isn't bound to any software you'd use in conjunction with the Maschine, as you would when using any other kind of midi controller.
Spoken like a member of Akai's MPC5000 beta testing team.
jahrome
Diamond Member
Maschine is a disappointment to me because it attempts to me an MPC and a software sampler all in one. As a software sampler, it is one of the most "limited" ones available. It doesn't have nearly the sample editing tools of other software samplers. It doesn't have near the number of program parameters of other samplers. NI has other samplers like Battery and Kontakt which are way more powerful. I just expect much more from a software sampler.
Maschine's sequencer can't compete with any of the leading MPCs in my opinion. MPCs timing is better, quantization and swing is better. It does everything you need a hardware sequencer to do. Maschine's sequencer is ok. Not bad. Not exceptionally good.
Now word on the streets is the OS 1.7 will have tighter integration with NI products. This may be a time where I dust off Maschine. If Maschine can fully integrate Battery and/or Kontakt, it may be worth considering. But as of now, it does nothing that will make be forgo an MPC or a keyboard workstation....
Maschine's sequencer can't compete with any of the leading MPCs in my opinion. MPCs timing is better, quantization and swing is better. It does everything you need a hardware sequencer to do. Maschine's sequencer is ok. Not bad. Not exceptionally good.
Now word on the streets is the OS 1.7 will have tighter integration with NI products. This may be a time where I dust off Maschine. If Maschine can fully integrate Battery and/or Kontakt, it may be worth considering. But as of now, it does nothing that will make be forgo an MPC or a keyboard workstation....
BIGpun4EVER
New member
Hahaha this nigga, lol
Inverted314
BOOM BAP OR DIE
Why is the MPC 5000 so large? I was messing with it at Guitar Center it's so fat.
For $2000 I would be looking at a Macbook Pro with Reason/Record and a midi keyboard. Or a MBP + Maschine.
Still waiting for Maschine with keys. NI has so many resources they need to just make a complete workstation integrated like Maschine. Something where you can make polished, mixed songs all in one box.
For $2000 I would be looking at a Macbook Pro with Reason/Record and a midi keyboard. Or a MBP + Maschine.
Still waiting for Maschine with keys. NI has so many resources they need to just make a complete workstation integrated like Maschine. Something where you can make polished, mixed songs all in one box.