Synth Site: Akai: MPC3000: User reviews Add review
Average rating: 4.7 out of 5
page 13 of 23:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21 
                          22  23  >>>
XL a professional user from USA writes:
I must disagree with the previous reviewer. Obviously, this person is the 'new-school' type of musician and believes in making music with his eyes rather than his ears. I've used both 2000 and 3000 and still got the 3000. It's just sounds better and has better beat! 2000 has more visual features, but cheap is cheap and you can always feel it when working with 2000. So even if the 3000 is a symbol, it's a symbol for a reason. Just like a Fairlight or Synclavier are still considered best sounding digital synths/samplers, so is MPC3000 when it comes to the MPC line of sequencer/drum machines. The 2000 is just a cheap imitation of the 3000 with just a few bells and whistles added, most of which are useless anyway....

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Wednesday-Nov-28-2001 at 12:55
MS a professional user from Boston writes:
Well, I have to say I am disappointed with the MPC3000.

I have been using a MPC2000XL and thought the MPC3000 would be better option to make records and I find it just holds me up writing tracks.

The MPC3000 is a bit weird to get around compared to the ease of use with the 2000XL. The 2000XL enables you to resample at a low Frequency rate and enables you to edit graphically. Editing a sample on the MPC3000 takes more time, and can be frustrating when you can not see the waveform. But if your not new to sampling this is really no big deal, and perhaps this should only be considered by a new schooler.

Obviously the MPC2000XL has more features since it is new and it is also cheaper. I agree it is not made as well as a MPC3000 ( the bottom of the XL is cheap tin). But it has cheaper memory and options and it is esay to work the hell out of the machine.

Quite frankly, go with a MPC2000Xl if you want to get things done and save money.

It seems that the MPC3000 was cool at one time but maybe its a ridiculous status symbol. What matters is what your record sounds like and not what you used on it.

Rating: 2 out of 5 posted Wednesday-Nov-28-2001 at 12:41
Mable a professional user from Iceland writes:
Ok hear i go again. I have all the stuff a man can dream of 15 synt´s 3 Samplera The big ones Mac with Protool´s mix plus Pc with Pulsar etx and tons of softsynt´s running from Cubase AND MPC3000 I first got the mpc because I hated the timing on the PC and I got Protool´s so the Audio wood no be a Problem it always is on PC but I have been doing some cd´s and vinyl on the pc ( Midi ) and I am proud of them but last night I set up my Mpc and I did some beat , some Piano ( I meak House & Dub Music ) I after 5 minutes I starting saying to my self way I’m I not using the Mpc as my main sequencer every thing just work’s no Asio problems no timing problems it just works but then I look at my PC and I thing to my self then I can not use the rewire and other things , do somebody know what I mean . Maybe I will just go to a A. A meting and talk about it . Mable

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Tuesday-Oct-30-2001 at 12:28
MPCUSER a professional user writes:
I fully agree with Cee-Lo. MPC3000 is the pro unit, MPC2000 is for hobbyist.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Wednesday-Sep-05-2001 at 16:16
anthony e a hobbyist user from philadelphia, usa writes:
I think the mpc3000 is the bomb and i have a studio 440. so if its anyone out there that whats to give up there mpc3k i'll gladly trade you.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Tuesday-Sep-04-2001 at 18:29
page 13 of 23:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21 
                          22  23  >>>