MPC X SE vs MPC 2500 Ultimate Audio Test...Which One Sounds Better??

[@kashdro85]

Received my MPC 1000 recently, I played sounds out of my 1000 into my MPC one just to here what type of compression the inputs provide. Definitely a flattening of dynamics. I did an A/B comparison for several minutes and to me it really is astounding how much fuller just the natural sound out of the 1000 is (to add context I was using DT 990 Pro headphones). I then performed the same test with my girlfriend who is the average music listener and she struggled to hear the difference even after I told her what to listen for. My conclusion was: producers/artists can tell the difference but, the average listener can't tell the difference and does not care what music was made on. That won't stop me from trying to get the best sound with what I've got though!

[@MS7.7]

This is what really counts what you said is any producer need to get in their head. If you want the really really good sound we are talking hans zimmer level which something very hard to reach and probably something you should start from early age or you are naturally gifted. Otherwise its a waste of time. Though I very much appreciate Bolo’s efforts to see if the myths are true and I support it. The value of these sounds are diminished IMO against any modern MPC because you literally can make it with effects/external gear/Plug-ins so I would rather be able to produce especially if you are solo. People who made great music were working with people in the studio and had alot of ears around them at the moment it’s completely different from home producers or even people living on music but not interconnected with real physical production communities.

[@darthknowl9222]

Perfectly said

[@squalley]

🫡😎

[@makesenz]

This. I was making beats on my laptop for a sec and my girl said "just fix your damn mpc cos this ain't it". When i fixed it again i was like, yeah. This is it.

[@squarelanguage]

It might be more difficult to tell any differences on studio monitors, if that is what you used? Versus listening on a phone or in the car

[@RealU-Jean]

The 2500 sounds like heaven in a box... WOW!!

[@A1MadeTheBeat]

The 2500 seems to have an untampered punch (60-90Hz). The MPC definitely has something controlling the Punch frequencies and has something lifting the Mid freqs (the distortion peaked thru a little bit cleaner/more than the 2500). The Tascam is adding a little lift to Hi-Mids...it is definintly some sort of wide Q boost on the hi-mids (around 2K) on the Tascam. I wonder what the 2500 and Tascam combo sounds like together.

[@LeeOnTheTrack]

The tascam is plugged into the mpc via usb which bypasses the mpc converters. So if there was a way to use the tascam as a converter on the 2500 it would sound exactly the same as it does with the x

[@RoomAtTheTopStudio]

@@LeeOnTheTrack The 2500 comes with eight outputs as standard. You don't USB the tracks on old MPCs, you export the audio via either the stereo or the eight outputs. That's where the converters come in, so it wouldn't sound the same. From what I've been told the individual outs on the X and X SE fall short on the unprocessed individual sounds in comparison to the 2500, but I've not done the comparison personally to confirm this.

[@ameentaylor3012]

Without the limiters, the MPC XSE bass sounded more grittier than the MPC 2500SE, but with the limiters the MPC XSE bass sounded more smoother and a little louder than the MPC 2500 SE

[@matthewgaines10]

Very scientific process. I’m good with my One, Live II, and Key 61. The outcome wasn’t going to change how I work. What I have is better than what I’ve ever had.

[@thablackkat9905]

I second that notion. I just bought my Key 61 yesterday.

[@DALOWRECORDZ]

I liked it with the limiter on it, but it's very close. It's not a big difference to me. I loved all 3 truly.

[@Aliengroover]

I think you can recognize there's a difference AND be perfectly good with what you have.

[@offTheMedsYe]

woulda been more scientific to not immediately disclose which track came from which output. maybe disclose in a second video. placebo and all that.

[@Craftmaster3]

That was never the goal of this conversation. This wasn't started to change the way you work on music it was about a group of mpc users trying to get Akai to make a different product. It was ok for the force and the mpc keys but for some reason asking for better capacitors got everyone up in arms.🎉

[@W6rr10r21]

I am/ was a heavy MPC2500 user from 2006 till last week. I had the One since 2021, bought it to slowly get familiair with this new MPC generation before deciding to do a full upgrade by getting the X which I did last week. It took me 2 years to make that decision, cause the One sounded so different to me. Not bad perse, I just couldn't get it to sound the way I wanted it to sound at first. To me the One/ Live / X has a very "open" and detailed sound. You have to work harder to shape it and make things sit well together by letting some things gel together, and other things to stand out in the mix. With the 2500 I know how to filter stuff, add some onboard compression and everything comes together more easily. At least that's the why how I experienced things. This brings me to my next point. Comparisons like these tell half the story. Again, it's definitely true they both sound different and it's a good thing to point out and be aware about, but it's also how you work and how you work the machine that is responsible for the FINAL outcome of your sound. And as someone else already mentioned, at the end of the day the average listener won't even notice the difference. Just like I can't tell wether a random picture on Instagram was taken with the newest iPhone or a 2019 model to save my life.

[@dopesnare]

What I got out of this is that the Tascam is a good mixer lol

[@makesenz]

I've been rocking with the 1000 (since it came out) and also used the 2500 when my 1000 was being fixed. They're the same indeed. Every old mpc has their own signature sound (i was blown away when i touched the 3000/2000, the sound is very thick and dynamic). When my friend bought the ren and the mpc live, i was like, what in the hell, where are my drums? why are they sounding way more flat and thin? but workflow wise, yeah...it works like a charm. But soundwise? nah i'm good, i rather spend a few minutes on mixing than to mess around for hours to not be happy about the sound lol. I must say the se sounds pretty cool though.

[@THEKINGOCAESAR]

They all hitting to me but after watching mad videos on this I do agree that the classic make the sound warmer and less harsh on the highs. Even when working in daws I find myself having to eq bad frequencies out mostly with things like hi hats crashes, some Percs so it isn’t so harsh on the ear or filters. That’s my take on it.

[@BumpyTheGreat]

Great work bro I was listening on my phone and only really heard a difference with the Tascam. Akai knew the differences when they originally dropped the X n live 1 - assuming why the put the 3000 and 60 plugins for the masterbuss and while they do change the sonics and sound, they are not “converters”

[@LeeOnTheTrack]

putting the vintage plugin on the master bus does add some slight saturation and roll off but when you turn on vintage mode in the settings instead of inserting as a plugin the converters are driven harder.

[@BumpyTheGreat]

@@LeeOnTheTrack oh word I’ve never even thought about doing that .. good looks on the heads up Gonna add it to my workflow

[@micro1603]

The MPC 2500 has a little more volume it seems to me but will the average listener notice? There is a KZbinr by the K Magnet that change the capacitors on the MPC LIVE II to give the MPC a little more bump.

[@BoloDaProducer]

Yeah I seen his videos💪🏾

[@BeatsByGemsmiff]

Im aware of this too i wish he’d do a clean comparison like this

[@bjamminsincebirth3494]

The 2500 sounds better to my ears. Nothing wrong with the other options

[@atleastsixfigures]

Prime example of Today it’s very important to become a super engineer. Stop being lazy and running to vintage equipment for a warmup. Turn the fire on with this new technology. Boss up!

[@iknNR]

Maybe Roger Linn or even Dave Rossum would be happy to participate on making a class compliant usb audio interface with that vintage warm sound characteristics we all want, which would be able to connect directly to the usb of the mpc’s. Wouldn’t be cheap, but… 🔥

[@Yhuntermusic]

Bro that 2500 is TALKING SHEEEESHH!!!! I hear the dynamic difference for sure!! Thanks for this video fr fr!!

[@krugdotson]

What I really noticed is the Hi-hat's sound much better on the 2500 and the SE didn't handle the snares as good, so it must be something with the Mid to High Freq's

[@koncretebeats]

2500 1st pick, and running through the tascam if I had the X SE imo

[@oaliel8122]

I really Believe that the 2500 and the MPCX SE we’re hitting about the same

[@Bashanvibe]

Was thinking the same thing but then I thought I need to hear this in my studio

[@mooklane]

Yes for me too with headphones....with tascame you can hear the difference. With limiter on you can hear subtle differences between 2500 and the Se ...but with the tascam you definitely hear the difference like it went through a clipper.

[@JayDB81]

Right, rarely no difference between the two.

[@larrymyers5989]

How much is real sound vs KZbin adding their own eq? Not sure if that matters. Just always wondered

[@fantaztikbeatz]

​@@larrymyers5989 I literally was about to say the same thing!!!

[@wutsupg]

They almost sound identical, however, i found the red tracks to be a bit more punchy on the low end.... i have no idea machine it was from, but the red one stood out a bit more to me.

[@BoloDaProducer]

It’s the 2500

[@wutsupg]

@@BoloDaProducer Hey Bolo, what happens if you enable the emulation on the Akai MPC X SE? For example, how does it sound if you have the output emulate a MPC 2000XL or older box? If you plan on conducting that experiment, let me know and I will definately watch.

[@kvmoore1]

There's really not a lot of difference in the tone between the MPC X and the MPC2500 in this example. I did notice the hihat is a little softer on the 2500 but that's about it. Soundwise, I don't think it really matters that much between these two. They both hit hard in the sub bass department. In this case, I'd just go with the one that has the most features. However, I already have both (except I have the regular X, not the SE version), so that's a moot point. Thanks for doing this comparison.

[@justonbrazda3846]

Yes. I just left a comment on you and was ski to do this. Couple hours later this video is posted. Perfect.

[@kahlilsmith5243]

I can hear noticeable differences in the sound. I wouldn't categorize any one particular outputs of sound as "better" but I do hear a difference. I'm glad Bolo included the USB class compliant device as an output option in this scenario as that was an aspect I knew was being left out of the conversation. With all this talk about "sonics", "dynamics" and "sound quality" to me, having the option to choose from a wide range of output stages is golden. When it comes to the 2500 vs the new Gen MPC's, to me the differences are not drastic enough to warrant sacrificing your preferred workflow for a "sound", especially when both of these MPC's have immense sound shaping capabilities that allow the user to truly cultivate they're own sound. I have owned several iterations of the MPC throughout my time, (the 60, 3000, 2000, 2000xl, 1000 and the Renaissance), and to tell you the truth like anyone, I too have my "favorite" and at the same time I never met an MPC that I didn't like.

[@CMedia87]

People were comparing the sound lacking to that of the 3000. In this test though, they were very close, so much so, that it was hard to tell. The 3000 would be the better test because it seems to be what everyone wants the sound to be like. The other vintage units are somewhat sonically achievable/matched with the mpc x se IMO. The newer ones just lack the warmth and tightness just a bit, but it ain't nothing that some capacitors and resistors can't fix. Akai needs to first get the sound right dry sonically, then do all the algorithm stuff that maintains the frequencies balance, phasing, etc.

[@MiriAstro]

2500 definitely sounds the best but this test shows you can get similar results with some tweaking. Thanks Bolo!

[@FreeThinkingStraightBlackMan]

yeah that's a fact you couldn't deny the 2500 w limiter was just a lil more spicy even tho the same sound base was the same that punch is undeniable

[@oaliel8122]

When you hook the MPCX special edition out of the class compliant task cam, it hit a little harder

[@JakeSweeper]

Did hear a slight difference in the no filter run between the snares; like the decay was set faster in the 2nd set than the first or there was something filtering out the tail end of it.

[@nilespeshay1734]

a. Wouldn't a spectrum analyzer (with a pure sine wave?) be ideal for this sort of comparison? b. That Tascam mixer is pretty as hell.

[@RoomAtTheTopStudio]

There's not really much of a difference to what I hear in this comparison. It's just a case of what you prefer to use. I love the sound of my old MPCs over the sound of Maschine so I suppose that's why I'm dubious of the new MPCs. I'm happy using the old Roger Linn 3000 and the 2000XL. They sound good in my studio and I'm happy with the final product. I can't say the same with Maschine or Reason although I have released tracks with them and they have done well. The X SE sounds good here in this comparison. I'm good with the old school workflow though so I'm sticking with my old MPCs.

[@VST2323]

yea there is some sort of compression/limiter or maximizer going on in real time. hopefully somebody can figure out how to take it off

[@BoloDaProducer]

That would be dope

[@VST2323]

@@BoloDaProducer yes it would hopefully its not embedded into the machine because thats dumb.

[@RodneyD]

Ea Ski… been saying it!! In fact he’s been talking about it long before the SE.

[@TheLerenz28]

It comes down to preference at this point. They both sound good! Same quality but different levels to me.

[@atleastsixfigures]

Lots of Vintage Stick riders 😂😂😂. The X Se Tascam is Supreme Commander 🔥🔥 . In the 90s you wanted to sound 2020s. Now we here you want 90s. I’m in my 40s. We here in the future now. Get over it and create new memories. X SE all day. Especially with the Model 12. Stop fiddling with yourself and Figuring it out in the Future equipment!

[@itswiz4785]

On my laptop speakers, I can barely hear a difference between them all. The Tascam does sound a tiny bit cleaner to me.

[@famosguider205]

1st thanks for doing this comparison. All to my ears eyes closed seemed close. If you didn’t say there was a difference I really believe most wouldn’t notice. The waveforms don’t lie but I believe they still were only slight differences. That isn’t worth to me than an easier workflow when I know I can get the sound I want from my MPCX SE vs my 1000 or any other past MPC. We all have the choice to bypass the MPC converters by connecting USB 3.0 controller mode and using our audio interface to produce the sound! Which for me is the RME UCX. It’s transparent so I can add whatever flavor I want for the project. This is more useful to me than past MPCs adding frequencies I may filter,or EQ anyway. From the history of the MPC, I’ve learned each iteration was supposed to produce a cleaner honest sound rather than it’s original colored sound. I believe we have the best of both worlds in the current MPC lineup, because we have feature rich and intuitive workflow with a clean sound from the inputs and outputs or leveling up using our audio interface. Peace and Blessings Bolo.

[@fantaztikbeatz]

Yes slight difference between the two

[@jasoncolbey83]

The mpc 2500 has the most "transparent" sound, especially running through the limiter. IMO, the others sound a little more saturated with drive, aka "pushed". It's a subtle difference, but it can definitely be heard. I think the biggest thing with the gen 1 mpc's and their sound is their electronics. I think the gen 1's had much better, more sought after, hard to get electronic components, hence giving the output a nicer more analogue driven sound as opposed to the newer gen 2's with lesser grade electronic components. All this can be altered with decent outboard gear, but it is nice to have the classic analogue sound directly out of the box. All in all I think they all sound decent enough for a good source recording. Mixing is where you'll make these devices shine. Thanks for your vids Bruhv. I love your content.✊🏼💯

[@djtrippd]

I'm listening on 8" studio monitors and I can def say I hear the difference but cannot say one is better. I have a 1000 and feel like the sound out of that and the 2500 is the same which I really like. With any newer MPC I think its gonna depend which audio interface you use for the outputs, Tascam board probably has almost the same parts since they're both inmusic products.

[@makesenz]

When i bought the mpc1000 i was hooked, same sound as the 2500 and portable

[@terencetso1025]

Tascam is not InMusic - you might be thinking of Alesis.

[@dilliot2k]

Good, content that demonstrates what's being spoken about.

[@f.nf.n7689]

Love youre channel man! So damn talented! 15 +years later!!❤🙏

[@xlrgbeats]

I can't say either is better, I agree the sound is very subjective. I can tell the difference when listening for the bass, kicks, and hihats. There's a big difference. Although when listening for the snare, the differences are less apparent. What I notice about the MPC X SE is that it seems to register those high and upper mid frequencies a little bit more, so the hihats stand out a little bit more. I think overall the MPC 2500 has a natural nostalgia in the way it colors the sounds - it just feels like it's from an earlier era. While the X SE feels like it came out today, where the sounds are "brighter" for lack of a better word.

[@hakeemmuhammad9701]

There's Definitely A Difference Between All Of Them, The 2500 Sounded More Muddy On The Low End.

[@camblackofficial]

Nice video. We should get to the bottom of why there appears to be clipping/limiting on the MPC X. I wonder if that is done in software? May be worth asking AKAI if they are willing to talk about it.

[@gabrieldonl2311]

Thats an output stage comparison, you are not comparing the SOUND of the machines IMO. The output stage is just ONE and not the most important contributor to the sound of a machine. With no processing on 16bit/44.1khz all pro machines in the world will sound fairly similar. You gotta really use it to hear the difference. Pitch shift, filter, pan stuff, layer. Even tho you cant do it exactly the same to do a perfect exact comparison, it would be more helpful. The choice will be subjective anyway. If wasnt for the pitch shift of the SP1200 it probably wouldnt be the legend it is for example.

[@fakshen1973]

The DAC (digital audio converters) are going to be different between the two models. My thought on the difference might be due to some sort of DC filtering on the D-A converters preventing ultra-low signals from being passed along. You're not going to be able to hear those ultra, ultra lows. But they are going to affect what's going on. The second thing is going to be bit-depth, sample rate, and DSP. The MPC 2500 is almost 20 years old in design. The 2500 works at a straight 16 bit. The MPC X works at 24 bits. ANYTHING you do in the digital realm, like change the volume level, add an EQ, etc etc is going to cause rounding errors. All DSP does. The MPC X is going to handle this better as it's dealing with more bits. Even under the hood it's probably working at a higher floating bit rate before it converts back down to 24 bits. The MPC 2500 isn't going to do that. While the MPC X is theoretically better, it's going to sound cleaner... but cleaner might not be what you want. The SP1200 is only working at 12 bits and people often prefer that classic sound because it hits different than 16 bits, which if four orders of magnitude "better." You might be able to dirty up the sound once it's in the DAW by using a plug-in that down converters the bit-depth to 12 bits as an effect. Alright... that's my taped-up-glasses hot-take on what might be going on. I'd say that each model has its own legit sound and to use the one that makes the music sound like you like. You may need extra processing to make the newer stuff sound "old" the same way you might use a vinyl simulator to make something sound like it came off a record. Do you. But people aren't crazy for having a preference either which way. I'm not an MPC user so I can only use conjecture and my limited knowledge. But there's a reason why retro gear goes for top dollar.

[@gwsound]

OK, I got the Tascam 12 as well but this is a full digital mixer with poor AD converters. And there is a compressor on the input van the Tascam channels that you can dail in. And yes I agree with you that there is something on output 1and2 of the X. I can hear that in my own studio as well.

[@PorchBass]

I notice it all the time when I load more loud programs into a project and get too hot. The live doesn't clip like the old school MPCS where you would have to drop the mixer level -6db with a lot of loud programs into the master.

[@grehikallarakkal-memorieso8482]

Mpc 2500 song files can be used in MPC X SE without any changes

[@futureworldmachines4407]

If this was a blind test, I doubt people would be able to tell the difference between the 2500 and the X SE. And don't forget this is KZbin, and they apply their own compression and limiting to anything that's uploaded. If you heard both machines live in a studio you would undoubtedly hear a difference, whether one machine sounds better than the other is down to personal taste.

[@BoloDaProducer]

Yes very true with KZbin compression. I intentionally left limiter off full video so I could get the closest sound 💪🏾

[@nilespeshay1734]

"And don't forget this is KZbin, and they apply their own compression and limiting to anything that's uploaded. " - super duper important fact.

[@illyph9963]

The 2500 makes the drums a tiny bit punchier, but we’re talkin like barely noticeable difference, I really think this is irrelevant issue if your using modern processed drums and sounds, even samples from like splice I wouldn’t think it makes much difference either, the only situation where I would see it really making difference, is if your truly making beats, and sampling, the way we did in early 90’s, and like actually sampling old vinyl, and making your own drums, and sounds, that way, in THAT specific situation, I would think the circuitry in the old machines def add to that punch and sound and “crust” that’s expected with that style, but if your like “downloading” digital samples made by someone, and using sound packs, virtual synths, drums, etc., then I really don’t think this makes a noticeable difference at all n people worry way to much about it for nothing lol

[@intricateinc8566]

*Music is subjective yes, but quality is quality to the trained ears,* 😎

[@nilespeshay1734]

Perhaps I'm wrong but it seems like the 'debate' is between "transparent" (X SE) and "colored" (3000) tones. I don't know that one is 'objectively' better than the other.

[@intricateinc8566]

@@nilespeshay1734 My comment is in response to what Bolo said, not the debate on hardware.

[@v3zMedia]

Here's my input as a mix engineer. Though the MPC2500 sounds better out of the box the waveform you're seeing from the MPC SE has way more head room to mix later. It gives you more room to shape your sound. This is great for people who want to tweak their beats to death. However, most beat makers just want things to sound a specific way immediately and move on to the next track. To keep it simple both have pros and cons. Pick your poison.

[@snubdawg1386]

what's the problem with just turn down the volume of the exported stems to increase headroom?

[@rburton5731]

Listening here in the studio. You can tell that the Tascam has a big impact on the sounds. Just picked up an MPC x last week.

[@MGoolas]

Listening this on a pair of MT50x and I can't tell any audible difference between the 2500 and X but the Tascam interface does take the cake on how it handles the transients. At least the snare is much more pronounced from what I can hear. Almost like the signal from the tascam is louder by 2-3db but in the end they all sound 99.5% the same.

[@teashea1]

You are so correct - It is very subjective. Interesting comparison. Comparing the wave forms is very interesting. As a side note, the MPC X SE is so popular and has sold so well that it is sold out at Zzounds, Sweetwater, Guitar Center, Musician's Friend etc etc. They will not be back in stock at these stores until August. PS - I received my MPC X SE yesterday ------ what a machine.

[@Blacksonaudio]

that's because of the EA Ski vs AVE "beef"... Lol!!

[@bybreal225]

The Tascam, in my opinion, was a little bit louder then the others. The MPC 2500 definitely have more presents in the dynamics, and to me, the MPC X SE has it's characteristics with it, but it sounds damn good. Judging my ears tho, I think that the Tascam is a little bit louder using the MPC X SE, but as a producer, It's all about what's your preference.

[@FTropper]

Over KZbin it sounds pretty close. The 2500 sounds the best - but would I notice if I didn't know?! Not sure. However, I would argue it should be pretty easy for AKAI to make them sound identical. And it would be nice if they give the end user the option.

[@ProdbyGrimeyred]

Without limiter whats in red is way lounder and punchier. With the limiter the blue sounds more distorted. The green seems pretty consistent with the sound.

[@nrgskillmedia]

Dope, thanks for sharing. Transients sound more clean in the 2500 but the frequency balance seems identical. Def not much of a difference for mixing.

[@atleastsixfigures]

The 2500 sounds great but a little Hollow. The x Se sounds ggreat but thicker. The model 12 widened it up and popped it out like a stripper. 😂😂😂😂. Tascam was twerking on that track! 🎉🎉🎉🎉

[@CWealthMusic]

There wasn't a "huge" difference but the 2500 definetly had a bit more openness and clarity. The X sounded slightly less clear, like a sheet of paper or plastic wrap was put over it. The dry tascam X sounded a bit louder than dry X but they both sounded similar with the limiter on. 2500 still had a slightly better sound with limiting.

[@paynestreet01]

Try running it in UA Luna with Neve summing

[@SonicVibe]

All about the sound of the 2000 xl or 3000

[@soniccatalogrecordings1718]

So, its all about perspective. One one hand, from @bolodaproducer's demo, the output difference is negligible though obvious (if necessary, output on any DAW/drum machine can be boosted). On the other hand, the mix output should have dynamics before volume is boosted & before mastering, in any case. If a mix is too loud, that isn't a good thing anyway, so a balance needs to be struck, The use of gain staging will never get old so this should be where the focus should be and where any discussion should always begin at, regardless of kit/gear. Always gotta start with the human (knowledge/know how) before the machine, from my POV at least. Peace y'all.

[@WillieFourMilli]

on some dt770 it’s like the new mpc hits harder with more decay on the 808 and grit, but the older one had more bounce and almost like the hats have less attack, less trappy, and the tascam sounded like that snare came in tough,

[@LeoKnightas]

They hit about the same, however looking at the waveforms there is a definite difference. The 2500's waveform show more dynamic range, meaning it was not compressed or limited. Even when the digital output from the SE was used, it was slightly compressed, so the compression is "baked in". Some may feel this is a good thing, some bad. They wanted the SE to sound "good" whether used by a novice or professional. Good work showing us these findings.

[@RIP_Milhouse]

Through the Tascam sounded best.

[@manatee_flips6811]

As soon as I export my tracks on the MPCx as a mo3, Wav or AIFF, it sounds like a second generation of my original vision, so something is happening on the way out. Honestly, I would never release a track commercially straight from any MPC, regardless of make or model. Let’s not forget about mastering.

[@BigBrotherMotown]

The only difference I could tell was when it was coming through the tascam, otherwise the difference was miniscule. I remember my first keyboard workstation was Roland XP-80. It had nice fat analog sounds... but when I started using the Roland Fantom X6, the sounds were more digital (sterile) sounding. So I started doing things like stacking kick drums and snares.... and doubling up bass sounds to compensate. The bottom line is, WE are responsible for the sound of our productions, not Akai. If a piece of gear doesn't do what you need it to simply move on and purchase something else. Show your disapproval by giving you hard earned money to someone else and these companies will either listen and do better or go broke.

[@RSotoBeatz]

thats what ive been trying to see these people understand. this other dude acting all mad because he says it sounds different is crazy. if he likes the old sound just keep working with it. but he instead be complaining like they have to make the product for him. ahahahah this is crazy

[@electrowayne2918]

Disclaimer: there were no Roger Lynn mpcs used in this demonstration. However even this 2500 still has a little more punch. The 60 and 3000 are the ones with the real clear differences in punch and sonic character… mainly the 60. That being said … would it really cost akai that much to fix this ??? The answer is NO Good comparison video

[@MixWorkRecordings]

When you use pre processed electronic drums with minimal dynamics to start; you’ll end up hearing very little difference in the audio conversion. Especially when the samplers are 16bit or higher. This is the reason why Sweetwater use natural acoustic drum kits to demo compressors & etc; So we can actually hear the sonic change in dynamics of the source material. But if you think you hear a difference, I’d say mix some other Instruments on top of those loops. Then come back and tell me you hear a difference. If not, let’s just move on from this topic. This shit has become lame due to the fact nobody really gives damn!!!

[@Ast3rixMusic]

I would like to hear tests of the mpc x se with the emulations that are built into the software turned on. If you go to the preferences area there is an area that allows you to switch the sound of the machine to emulate a few of the older machines. I have not seen anyone do any testing with the emulations turned on. In my opinion that is a better test. If the emulation doesn't sound close to the original then that's something that can be improved. I think we need to accept that most things now a days can be done via a software fix. I know this can be done on the force under the general settings area there is a pull down tab marked as vintage. The emulations offered are 3000, 60, sp1200, and sp1200 ring. You can also change your bit depth from 24 to 16 so that should make things sound very crunchy with those two fixes. The bit depth would change things being recorded into the machine. I had to look at the manual it is on page 83: Vintage Mode: This determines the type of emulation applied to the audio output. You can apply the particular sonic qualities of, for example, the MPC3000 or MPC60, or of course no emulation (None). Page 82 in the manual: Record/Export The settings on this screen determine the settings for recording and exporting. Recording Bit Depth: This determines the bit depth of recorded audio.

[@TannerByTheSea]

Man Bolo - we’re rocking the same way, bro! MPC to Tascam to the Apollo - Thaswasup I’m running six on the top six! Like Lake Worth, Florida! On the top six! 😝

[@timmiller5975]

Bolo! Both machines sounds the same I use to own a mpc 4000 and a 2500 and they were cool for it’s time but the thing everyone is missing is you still have to run through effects and compressors were as the mpc x is the ultimate one stop shop for p,uninstalled and everything ….

[@Blacksonaudio]

The SE sounds exactly you said, Listening through my DT770 Pros. The 2500 HITS... The SE sounds like they brought out the mid fundamentals. Yes there's something added on the output like a soundgoodizer on SE. I'd see people with the older gear using the SE and cutting on the mid lows.

[@coreywallace8147]

I grabbed the Buffs soundpack already making bangers Bolo!

[@X-101]

a) did you sample it in or just throw a wav file into the machine? b) how do they compare the the source sound, show us the waveform of the source compared to the mpc's output

[@MontaeMontana]

To me it sounded like the 2500 had a crispier low end. The kicks and 808s just had a certain fatness to em. Still good with my Live though, I know how to make em jump like that.

[@campar1043]

mpc x with a tascam is the winner

[@Craftmaster3]

God bless you for doing this, I don't have the patience to make content like this lol

[@ernieg]

What is the link to the Mpc X versus the Mpc 3000 link is it? I don’t see it but then again I am blind, so can you guide me? Thank you sir.

[@blackmetaphortv]

Don’t forget to change ur kick from stereo to L+R for extra knock in the 2500. That’s the code guys

[@ming-artoflight2761]

Thanks for the comparison and your effort. What about if you bounce Wave (stems or master) and import it into for an example LUNA. I have the impression that the sound has more dynamic. So I do not go out the master output through audio interface and mixer etc…in LUNA you can add Pultec EQ or Studer tape Maschine and warm it up.

[@powderedtoastman3093]

The 2500 was not a Linn model so is it not a comparison failure ? 2500 on the audio test was different beast though

[@DreadinNY]

So Numark vs Numark

[@Drrolfski]

It's probably me but I didn't really hear any difference between the two, except when hooked on the Tascam. I'm monitoring on a Sennheiser HD 25 btw. The comparison with the MPC 3000 LE in the other video was a shocker for me tough and not in a good way. When directly comparing the kicks the MPC 3000 LE sounded horribly distorted and very unnatural. Not sure what the fuzz is all about with this machine. But then again, that's probably me.

[@Chyuuch]

Had this banging in the car and it sounded like one long cohesive track. At no point did I feel like anything changed 🤷🏾‍♂️

[@nilespeshay1734]

even with the limiter? I'm listening with pretty crappy speakers and the limited signal was significantly different.

[@Chyuuch]

@@nilespeshay1734 bruh I wasn’t looking at the screen just listening a riding. Pretty much on max volume with a Bose speaker system in my Cadillac It all sounded the same Even when he stopped and played again I couldn’t tell the difference The 808 and drums was smacking Beginning to end That’s all I know bro 🤷🏾‍♂️

[@thesaturnsound]

feel like they all sounded identical however maybe the tascam added a little bit of 12Khz

[@SerdanDaProducer]

The next MPC will have incorporated, integrated in it, hardware, Analog Stereo Master Processor, physical not vst... And it will have something like Summing Mixer with level meters with needles

[@GITS88.]

The TASCAM will inherently change the sound……. Kinda defeats the purpose of the test. Correct me if I’m wrong but it converts to Analog? The truth is they are very different “out of the box” notice I said different not better or worse. Why? Well the Sound engine: The older MPC used a 16-bit sampler, which some people argue has a warmer, more organic sound than the 24-bit samplers used in newer models. Additionally, the old MPCs sound engine has a unique sound that is different from other samplers of the time, due to the particular digital-to-analog converters (DACs) that were used.

[@boutstaxx]

Without limiter 2500 slight more bump with limiter they all sound identical

[@terencetso1025]

Thx so much for doing this. So annoyed at that other video floating around where the vintage MPC is record at a much high level as "proof" that the new MPCs have terrible sound. I can definitely hear a difference between the three but it's so subtle that it's pretty non-existent - especially once you add other elements in the mix. I'm still convinced that the people who say the X sounds like "shit" compared to the older MPCs are just clipping their recordings and outputs and that the older gear are just more forgiving for clipped signals due to some analog circuitry in the boxes.

[@snubdawg1386]

i guess some would argue that's exactly the reason why they prefer the older mpcs because you can drive them hotter to get a certain sound

[@terencetso1025]

@@snubdawg1386 i mean, you can run your digital mpc through an analog preamp or board and get similar results (or even use emulation plugins), but i think it comes down to a fundamental ignorance to how digital signals work.

[@jizzyb1572]

I’m getting the new x it sounds just fine

[@SuperALBSURE]

One thing that’s confusing me about all this is that when I had a 2000 and an XL about 20 odd years ago I wanted to use the 8 outs. The reason being that when I wanted to mix it down I wanted the separation for eq’ing compression etc. if I used the stereo outs and wanted to track it I had to x amount of passes to the daw. And with midi’s tendency to drift and also latency of sound cards back in the day it was always just a huge hassle lining things up. So when you could make drum sounds in the actual DAW itself, it was a wrap for most of us. We just went to Logic or pro tools etc.. and didn’t look back. The individual outputs always sounded way different to the stereo outs because you were getting maximum power out of each sound. So why is everyone in 2023 comparing the stereo outs? They were always a compromise. And why isn’t anyone factoring in the downsides of tracking from a drum machine in terms of additional noise, timing issues and latency if using stereo? It’s just all so weird this discussion. It feels like after 25 yrs of audio no one has learnt how any of this stuff works. It’s like we are literally complaining about modern convertors forgetting that it’s the LACK of fidelity in the mpc3000/60 that makes them sound the way they do. They are not BETTER convertors than modern sound cards and instruments. If akai put them back in all your hifi string instruments and synths would sound terrible. Such a weird world now..

[@awon_9385]

What’s good Bolo I enjoy all of your content. Idk if u knew this but there is a setting within the New MPC programming as well as the newer MpCs that allows u to change the bit rate used for processing the sound output I believe. I forget the name exactly but it’s a setting within the preferences. U can change the bit rate to match the older processing of the older model MPCs or increase it for more modern processing. This is not vintage mode by the way. I think this setting is the reason why the MPC X waveforms may looked compressed or pushed through a limiter.

[@awon_9385]

It’s called Audio Warp Go to Preferences > General. The Audio Warp setting may be automatically set to Pro Ten

[@jackcotner8783]

sounds like the kick tuning is all over the place for the diff samples

[@xiahbu]

I own both and I can say the Mpc 2500 sounds better but workflow is better on the x ..I'm using x for new style beats and boom bap I do on the Mpc 2500

[@analogrich]

To me the x se has more dynamic range and the bass seems to push more. That’s on AirPods via Bluetooth off a Sony TV. I need to check it out in my studio when I’m in my studio.

[@argee-s3y]

Test should have also included vinyl sampling of drumbreaks and samples. I recently got a 2500, and have used the Live from 2017, and I feel like the 2500 can handle hotter signals and even sampling from my iphone sounded a little better. Only thing I’d miss from my Live is the track explode feature for mixing in DAW

[@LeeOnTheTrack]

on the x turn on vintage mode in the settings and set it to 3000 and the differences become barely noticeable

[@kenzoblytheproducertv4934]

Most will not hear this but the 2500 sounded more natural than the X SE either dry or thru X SE usb. Thereforw the 2500 to my ears sounded better but they all sounded good.

[@TannerByTheSea]

Bro🤨 that’s crazy… On that track four- now for signal flow I’ve been utilizing the Tascam preamps… Because I’m getting my signal juicy - I make music Although… That’s really interesting as far as the USB component as far as the MPC tied into the unit… I know this does not pertain to everybody else… And yes, I guess I’m being selfish… But I totally understand your saga, Mr. Bolo

[@TannerByTheSea]

My brain is venturing into the signal flow in the endless possibilities… With these two units… I’m old-school sorry. I remember when I couldn’t work computer to save my life! I had to go into the green screen! That was my life.

[@babufits1584]

2500 def thump harder...BUT what I really want to know is how much of a difference if any the built in fx/coloring does make on the mpcx se.

[@NateHendrix]

2500 sounds great!