No DAW Setup, MPC ONE + ??????

[borg]

you got a point with the limitations/creativity/inspiration mantra.
Was about to order the Midas mixer, but read just too many reports of failing parts (mainly faders) after only a few months of use, but, as long as it lasted, a beautiful sound.
What can you expect from a 250€ 16ch. mixer? I fear that segment of the market will only bring disappointment in the long run.

[Markus Wolf]

The soundcraft line is pretty solid. I believe void owned one a couple years back from what I remember and it had good reviews. They are built pretty good, but no frills....

[borg]

Yeah, I had almost bought a Signature 12MTK once. But then I started working ITB again, thinking maybe a bigger mixer for the studio and a real small one for around the house and on the go, then not really needing it, uncertain times. It is never gonna be a perfect mixer for a modest price. I guess the Soundcraft is still one of the better choices, and if the USB connection is fast/clean, that could be jolly nice!

[Ben Kohonays]

Any advice on routing or better ways to save money on the FX section anybody? This setup is slowly climbing in price LOL

A lot of people seem impressed with the Zoom MS70 and MS50 units, haven't tried them personally.

I do have a Line 6 M5 which is good value for money. On the upside it has 100 built in effects some of which are pretty good. On the downside you can only use one at a time.

[Lost to the Void]

Spend the extra 100 jib and get an MPC live.
After reading all the compromises they made it seems silly compared to the MPC Live.

[Markus Wolf]

Any advice on routing or better ways to save money on the FX section anybody? This setup is slowly climbing in price LOL

A lot of people seem impressed with the Zoom MS70 and MS50 units, haven't tried them personally.

I do have a Line 6 M5 which is good value for money. On the upside it has 100 built in effects some of which are pretty good. On the downside you can only use one at a time.

Thanks for the recommendation. Im really interested in pedals ATM. Eventide rack would be my dream.

[Markus Wolf]

Spend the extra 100 jib and get an MPC live.
After reading all the compromises they made it seems silly compared to the MPC Live.

Interesting. I looked it up allot of other features I dont need like battery and built in speaker. The one function I do want would be the multiple outs. This way I can route the outs to a mixer channels and use my pedals for processing but other than that im not sure what the advantage is? Its about $600 more here for the MPC LIVE 2 vs the MPC One. Are there major differences with the OS. I mean besides the hardware differences? I know the storage space is bigger ETC.

[Lost to the Void]

Spend the extra 100 jib and get an MPC live.
After reading all the compromises they made it seems silly compared to the MPC Live.

Interesting. I looked it up allot of other features I dont need like battery and built in speaker. The one function I do want would be the multiple outs. This way I can route the outs to a mixer channels and use my pedals for processing but other than that im not sure what the advantage is? Its about $600 more here for the MPC LIVE 2 vs the MPC One. Are there major differences with the OS. I mean besides the hardware differences? I know the storage space is bigger ETC.

Original MPC live has no built in speaker. So just get the V1.
Internal hard drive is also super handy, I installed one in mine. Extra outputs are a must.

The MPC One seems like a very weird hobbling of good kit.

[Boiled Egg]

Spend the extra 100 jib and get an MPC live.
After reading all the compromises they made it seems silly compared to the MPC Live.

Interesting. I looked it up allot of other features I dont need like battery and built in speaker. The one function I do want would be the multiple outs. This way I can route the outs to a mixer channels and use my pedals for processing but other than that im not sure what the advantage is? Its about $600 more here for the MPC LIVE 2 vs the MPC One. Are there major differences with the OS. I mean besides the hardware differences? I know the storage space is bigger ETC.

Original MPC live has no built in speaker. So just get the V1.
Internal hard drive is also super handy, I installed one in mine. Extra outputs are a must.

The MPC One seems like a very weird hobbling of good kit.

Can someone explain why I might want a sampler? I mean, I actually quite fancy getting one but I'm thinking it might be more out of intrigue than practical reasons. A DAW is essentially a big sampler afterall.

I was looking at the MPC One as a way of sequencing sound modules - sequencers are quite expensive and don't really do anything else. But what about the actual sampling part of?

I was thinking that 2 outputs would be fine if using in conjunction with a DAW, or just to jam with. Or is this a naive view from someone who has never used a hardware sampler? I guess what methods of file transfer are available between computer and sampler can be important here.

Is it a case of the more outputs the better, or is a minimum number going to do for most purposes?

[Ben Kohonays]

Can someone explain why I might want a sampler? I mean, I actually quite fancy getting one but I'm thinking it might be more out of intrigue than practical reasons. A DAW is essentially a big sampler afterall.

I'm going to assume here that you already do sampling/use samples in the DAW. Correct me if i'm wrong.

I was looking at the MPC One as a way of sequencing sound modules - sequencers are quite expensive and don't really do anything else. But what about the actual sampling part of?

A lot of samplers don't really do anything that you can't do ITB. Some people like them for there particular 'sound' (fat/crunchy/insert other esoteric description here) e.g. EMU SP1200 or Akai S950 - which is more to do with the technology available at the time they were made, converters used etc. That's why an S950 could cost you upwards of £500 but an S2000 can be had for less than £100 - the S2000 is vanilla and doesn't have a 'sound' to it. There are ways to do this ITB now fairly successfully.

The other side of this is with things like the Octatrack, which people like for it's performance and resampling abilities. It has that crossfader for morphing between 'scenes'. The downside is the fairly steep learning curve/cryptic Elektron method of doing things.

There's also the situation of playing live or liking the process of using hardware instead of a computer for some people.

I was thinking that 2 outputs would be fine if using in conjunction with a DAW, or just to jam with. Or is this a naive view from someone who has never used a hardware sampler? I guess what methods of file transfer are available between computer and sampler can be important here.

Is it a case of the more outputs the better, or is a minimum number going to do for most purposes?

More audio outputs allows for better mixing practices as you can separate each individual sound on it's own channel, so it depends how many/what type of samples you'll be using at the same time.

File transfer is a separate issue and can be done in many different ways.

[Boiled Egg]

Can someone explain why I might want a sampler? I mean, I actually quite fancy getting one but I'm thinking it might be more out of intrigue than practical reasons. A DAW is essentially a big sampler afterall.

I'm going to assume here that you already do sampling/use samples in the DAW. Correct me if i'm wrong.

I was looking at the MPC One as a way of sequencing sound modules - sequencers are quite expensive and don't really do anything else. But what about the actual sampling part of?

A lot of samplers don't really do anything that you can't do ITB. Some people like them for there particular 'sound' (fat/crunchy/insert other esoteric description here) e.g. EMU SP1200 or Akai S950 - which is more to do with the technology available at the time they were made, converters used etc. That's why an S950 could cost you upwards of £500 but an S2000 can be had for less than £100 - the S2000 is vanilla and doesn't have a 'sound' to it. There are ways to do this ITB now fairly successfully.

The other side of this is with things like the Octatrack, which people like for it's performance and resampling abilities. It has that crossfader for morphing between 'scenes'. The downside is the fairly steep learning curve/cryptic Elektron method of doing things.

There's also the situation of playing live or liking the process of using hardware instead of a computer for some people.

I was thinking that 2 outputs would be fine if using in conjunction with a DAW, or just to jam with. Or is this a naive view from someone who has never used a hardware sampler? I guess what methods of file transfer are available between computer and sampler can be important here.

Is it a case of the more outputs the better, or is a minimum number going to do for most purposes?

More audio outputs allows for better mixing practices as you can separate each individual sound on it's own channel, so it depends how many/what type of samples you'll be using at the same time.

File transfer is a separate issue and can be done in many different ways.

In hindsight not the best questions, I admit. I was essentially asking what the point of hardware is, which is not particularly constructive.

I suppose the number of outputs would be very important if running all your drums live from an MPC into a mixer with your other hardware. But I guess this could be mitigated to some degree with the plugins available within the MPCs themselves, which I assume would allow for some fairly comprehensive mixing and sound design to be done within the sampler.

Correct me if I'm wrong but can't the MPC transfer files 'drag n drop' stright in to the DAW using the MPC software as a VST? This would allow for sound selection, tuning, patterns, groove and whatnot to be done in the MPC then transferred to the DAW for further mixing, without requiring a single audio output. Whilst I accept that this wouldn't be the best way to work for everyone in every occassion I think there is still a lot of mileage to be had here and reduces the need for multiple outputs in these circumstances. Once working with sounds which aren't drums then a stereo output seems more than adequate.

If I'm missing the point then do tell me. I am seriously considering buying the MPC One. I don't have the sapce for a mixer so it will be used mostly with Cubase or for jamming live when I don't want to boot up the computer and I feel that a stereo out is a resonable compromise in this instance.

[Lost to the Void]

I can't see any point of using the MPC One with Cubase.
They are both essentially DAWs.
Cuba's, even though I can't stand it, will be a better user experience, in terms of flexibility and speed of working, capacity. Just about everything.

[Boiled Egg]

I can't see any point of using the MPC One with Cubase.
They are both essentially DAWs.
Cuba's, even though I can't stand it, will be a better user experience, in terms of flexibility and speed of working, capacity. Just about everything.

Sure, I get where you're coming from. But the sequencing possibilities are something that is probably more appealing than the sampling. I may wait a few months and pick one up on the used market so don't lose out if it doesn't work out. When considering a beatstep pro is £200 and only sequences 2 mono parts, or a Pioneer Squid is £550 amd is only a sequencer, £600 for the MPC One seems like a much better deal.

I'm looking at picking up a few sound modules in the coming weeks so may just see how I get by sequencing from cubase for the time being. I tend to get stuck in loop mode when starting straight into cubase rather than getting an idea going out of the box. Will just have to be disciplined I suppose.

[Lost to the Void]

I can't see any point of using the MPC One with Cubase.
They are both essentially DAWs.
Cuba's, even though I can't stand it, will be a better user experience, in terms of flexibility and speed of working, capacity. Just about everything.

Sure, I get where you're coming from. But the sequencing possibilities are something that is probably more appealing than the sampling. I may wait a few months and pick one up on the used market so don't lose out if it doesn't work out. When considering a beatstep pro is £200 and only sequences 2 mono parts, or a Pioneer Squid is £550 amd is only a sequencer, £600 for the MPC One seems like a much better deal.

I'm looking at picking up a few sound modules in the coming weeks so may just see how I get by sequencing from cubase for the time being. I tend to get stuck in loop mode when starting straight into cubase rather than getting an idea going out of the box. Will just have to be disciplined I suppose.

What sequencing possibilities?
Whilst the new MPC line are great, they don't offer any sequencing you cant do in a DAW. They are, in terms of sequencing hardware, great, as you have more options than your typical hardware sequencer.
But compared to a DAW it is still more of a fiddle and a compromised experience in comparison.

[Boiled Egg]

[/quote]

What sequencing possibilities?
Whilst the new MPC line are great, they don't offer any sequencing you cant do in a DAW. They are, in terms of sequencing hardware, great, as you have more options than your typical hardware sequencer.
But compared to a DAW it is still more of a fiddle and a compromised experience in comparison.
[/quote]

The sequencing possiblities I speak of are those you state yourself are great, particularly when compared to other instruments that can sequence machines, like a digitone, for example, which is good but limited to 4 midi tracks.

However, you make a good point in that a DAW is more flexible and easier to manage. I've just been checking out the Loopop review/demo and the MPC is essentially a portable DAW, albeit with limitatons. Whilst it is flexible for a standalone device I guess it doesn't really offer the immediacy of dedicated sequencer. I suppose it's great for playing live sets but not the ideal solution for just quickly bashing out some jams and generating ideas quickly, which is what I'd be looking for when stepping out of the DAW.

On reflection, probably not the device I am looking for.

[Lost to the Void]

What sequencing possibilities?
Whilst the new MPC line are great, they don't offer any sequencing you cant do in a DAW. They are, in terms of sequencing hardware, great, as you have more options than your typical hardware sequencer.
But compared to a DAW it is still more of a fiddle and a compromised experience in comparison.
[/quote]

The sequencing possiblities I speak of are those you state yourself are great, particularly when compared to other instruments that can sequence machines, like a digitone, for example, which is good but limited to 4 midi tracks.

However, you make a good point in that a DAW is more flexible and easier to manage. I've just been checking out the Loopop review/demo and the MPC is essentially a portable DAW, albeit with limitatons. Whilst it is flexible for a standalone device I guess it doesn't really offer the immediacy of dedicated sequencer. I suppose it's great for playing live sets but not the ideal solution for just quickly bashing out some jams and generating ideas quickly, which is what I'd be looking for when stepping out of the DAW.

On reflection, probably not the device I am looking for.
[/quote]


Well, it is and it isn`t. You can basically tailor it to how you want to work. You can just x0x sequence with it, step sequence, piano roll, whatever, it has everything. So you can use it hard and fast like a traditional MPC or you can get into deeper sequencing that would be really difficult on conventional hardware sequencers.

But my point is that if you are just using it with a DAW then it is a sort of pointless experience. Maschine or Push or whatever (I don`t know if Cubase has anything like these things) will allow you to use your DAW in the same way.

However if you are going to be using it as a hardware sequencer to drive other hardware, then the Live offers you something that is hard to compete with in hardware land. You get all the benefits of a DAW and can also drive your hardware with it, but you bypass the possible problems of interfacing a DAW with hardware. (and you can use the MPC live software inside your DAW too).

I`ve sold mine now. I`m not absolutely sure I made the right decision, I`ll have to see how the new Live PA takes shape with the new kit.

[Markus Wolf]

What sequencing possibilities?
Whilst the new MPC line are great, they don't offer any sequencing you cant do in a DAW. They are, in terms of sequencing hardware, great, as you have more options than your typical hardware sequencer.
But compared to a DAW it is still more of a fiddle and a compromised experience in comparison.
[/quote]

The sequencing possiblities I speak of are those you state yourself are great, particularly when compared to other instruments that can sequence machines, like a digitone, for example, which is good but limited to 4 midi tracks.

However, you make a good point in that a DAW is more flexible and easier to manage. I've just been checking out the Loopop review/demo and the MPC is essentially a portable DAW, albeit with limitatons. Whilst it is flexible for a standalone device I guess it doesn't really offer the immediacy of dedicated sequencer. I suppose it's great for playing live sets but not the ideal solution for just quickly bashing out some jams and generating ideas quickly, which is what I'd be looking for when stepping out of the DAW.

On reflection, probably not the device I am looking for.
[/quote]

On the contrary if you are familiar with the MPC you can bash out ideas quite quickly. Its very underestimated. So much great dance music has been made with MPC's. Im talking recent music also BTW. "It's not the instrument thats the problem" like the musician blaming the instrument for him not knowing how to make it sound good. Its actual some of its limitations that are attracting me to it as an option. Less polished more RAW. Less plugins more doing it and printing WAV and committing to a sound and moving on for better or worse if that makes any sense. Anybody can download Ableton for free if they wanted but I think its more about just doing it than as much as what you are doing it with. This is a stretch but I think you get my gist.

[Markus Wolf]

What sequencing possibilities?
Whilst the new MPC line are great, they don't offer any sequencing you cant do in a DAW. They are, in terms of sequencing hardware, great, as you have more options than your typical hardware sequencer.
But compared to a DAW it is still more of a fiddle and a compromised experience in comparison.

The sequencing possiblities I speak of are those you state yourself are great, particularly when compared to other instruments that can sequence machines, like a digitone, for example, which is good but limited to 4 midi tracks.

However, you make a good point in that a DAW is more flexible and easier to manage. I've just been checking out the Loopop review/demo and the MPC is essentially a portable DAW, albeit with limitatons. Whilst it is flexible for a standalone device I guess it doesn't really offer the immediacy of dedicated sequencer. I suppose it's great for playing live sets but not the ideal solution for just quickly bashing out some jams and generating ideas quickly, which is what I'd be looking for when stepping out of the DAW.

On reflection, probably not the device I am looking for.
[/quote]


Well, it is and it isn`t. You can basically tailor it to how you want to work. You can just x0x sequence with it, step sequence, piano roll, whatever, it has everything. So you can use it hard and fast like a traditional MPC or you can get into deeper sequencing that would be really difficult on conventional hardware sequencers.

But my point is that if you are just using it with a DAW then it is a sort of pointless experience. Maschine or Push or whatever (I don`t know if Cubase has anything like these things) will allow you to use your DAW in the same way.

However if you are going to be using it as a hardware sequencer to drive other hardware, then the Live offers you something that is hard to compete with in hardware land. You get all the benefits of a DAW and can also drive your hardware with it, but you bypass the possible problems of interfacing a DAW with hardware. (and you can use the MPC live software inside your DAW too).

I`ve sold mine now. I`m not absolutely sure I made the right decision, I`ll have to see how the new Live PA takes shape with the new kit.
[/quote]

Im slowly wanting to transition to a hardware only type setup. The MPC will be the brain. Im quite excited to leave the computer turned off for the next little while.....

[Lost to the Void]

Im slowly wanting to transition to a hardware only type setup. The MPC will be the brain. Im quite excited to leave the computer turned off for the next little while.....

The MPC is a computer. The only real difference is that it has a midi controller built in, a small screen, and it is portable.

That being said, it`s a great way to drive your hardware and act as a hub, and it has the advantages of software when it comes to fx chains etc.... to an extent.

I think one of the things I learned from having one, as I believed it was my perfect solution. Is that to make the kind of music I make is extremely difficult, space consuming, and expensive to try to do in hardware land. And ultimately trying to use hardware to do it, is a very sluggish experience, and I need immediacy.