2000 or 2000xl

DIGGADIGGADIGGADIGGA 456 Posts
edited April 2008 in Strut Central
thinkin bout gettin an mpc.what the difference?heard the 1000 always crash,havnt heard anything bout 500 thou....help
«1

  Comments


  • Personally i would choose the 2000 over the 2000xl. It sounds a bit better IMO. Don't know about the newer ones, sorry.

  • cool.but why he 2000 over da xl.does the xl hav the chop function

  • SwayzeSwayze 14,705 Posts
    the XL has time stretching and resampling. the 2000 doesn't.

  • xl has the auto zone chop and assign and i think time stretch that the 2000 does not have, could be wrong have only used my friends xl.

  • xl has the auto zone chop and assign and i think time stretch that the 2000 does not have, could be wrong have only used my friends xl.


    the auto zone chop feature of the XL is worth it's weight in gold. Its like having a copy of recycle in the MPC. This alone makes it a better decision than purchasing a MPC2000. It just allows you to work faster inside the machine.

    I have heard both the 2000 and 2000XL and i like the sound of the 2000xl better if there is a difference.

  • coolthanks 4 the input

  • catalistcatalist 1,373 Posts
    the 2000xl feels cheap to me , I choose the 2000 without a doubt. And I have heard both and I prefer the 2000 , although the differences are subtle.

    If you want to chop stuff quicker, do what I do:

    Sample into MAC, chop with Recycle , put slices on USB ZIP disc , transfer to MPC 2000(via SCSI ZIP). done.

    or use MPC program maker (google that shit) for the xtra quicknezz.

    I want a Microtech (or comparable) Compact flash reader though... ZIP discs kinda suck balls.

  • ericeric 155 Posts
    Sampler is the same in the 2000 and the 2000xl.
    Xl got what's lacking on the 2000.
    Time stretch,resample,track mute screen,zone chop,you can add fx card with reverb,delay,etc.., 8 out's card.
    Work flow is easier and you don't have to load your o.s each time you want to run it.

    2000 is pain in the ass compare to the 2000xl.

    my 2 cent's

    eric

  • Controller_7Controller_7 4,052 Posts
    the 2000xl feels cheap to me , I choose the 2000 without a doubt. And I have heard both and I prefer the 2000 , although the differences are subtle.

    I'd pick a 2000, but that's because I have one. I know people dislike the 2000 because it was the first run without Roger Linn, but that's a whole different argument. I've never owned an XL, but have seen many people use them and have messed around with them. My first impression was that it always seemed flimsy compared to the 2000. The 2000 is flimsy compared to a 3000 or a 60, but the XL seems like it's got even more plastic and is light weight. That jog wheel is straight garbage on the XL. It's so cheap looking and feeling.

    The time stretch, resample stuff would be useful, but most of those features are pretty archaic these days compared to what you could do on a computer. The time stretch is pretty "ringy."

    If the mpc is the only thing you'll be using then maybe it's worth it, but if you're going to be using some sort of other program like pro tools or any sort of software than don't even worry about the bonuses the XL comes with.

    It probably won't matter which one you get, especially since you'll probably pay around the same amount, so just get whichever is a better deal.

    I've had my 2000 since about 1998 or so and it does what I need it to do. Making beats on a machine like this is limiting, but that's kind of the point. It creates a certain sound. If you weren't interested in the "limitations" and feel it produces than you should just use a computer, which (in theory) should give you more options.

    So, there's no difference. My main beef is that shitty plastic jog wheel.

  • UnherdUnherd 1,880 Posts
    My main beef is that shitty plastic jog wheel.

    Yeah mine sucked for a while, tech guy gave me some lore and i got it working again by nudging it out a bit. But its a pretty minor complaint.

    I don't even use them that often, but I think the chop and timestretch functions are well worth the price of admission as they come in real handy sometimes.

    Only used the 2000 a couple times, but I do know that units like the 60 are built like a tank in comparison to the xl. The 2000 seems like worst of both worlds if you're not going for the Linn units. Buying the 2000 based on supposed sound differences or marginally cheaper components doesnt make sense to me.....

  • Personally i would choose the 2000 over the 2000xl. It sounds a bit better IMO. Don't know about the newer ones, sorry.
    I am going to have to put it out there and say that this statement is fairly delusional. there is no sound difference between the 2000 and 2000xl the 60 and the 3000 had a certain color to the their respective sounds but the later models don't have that quality. That being said, I was on the good ole 2000 for a hefty minute and I loved it and hated it. I sold it copped a 1000(i know, I know) with the jj os and I am enjoying it much more. I have not heard anything about this weird crashing nor have i experienced it. the effects on the mpc's are generally garbage but the 1000 does have the ability to filter on the high, low, and band which is cream if your making beats that way.

    for the people that think it is the machine before the man; you folks make bad music.

  • verb606verb606 2,518 Posts
    If anyone's in the Chicago area and is looking to cop a nicely-equipped 2000, I might be willing to part with mine. I keep thinking I'm going to dig it out and use it again, but since I went PC I don't know if I ever will.

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    unless you really like the 2000(xl) pads, i would get a 1000; especially if you are going to be using a computer with it.

  • spelunkspelunk 3,400 Posts
    neither. 3000 or 60 is the only decision.

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    neither. 3000 or 60 is the only decision.
    well yeah but some people don't want to fuck around with disks

  • kwalitykwality 620 Posts
    ^^^^^
    Well those people can holla at me and get a scsi hard drive. Just get an external case off ebay (cheap as chips) and you're laughing. 1 gig is a hell of a lot of space for a 60/3000.

    I flipped a 60 for a 2500 and while I miss the sound and build quality, I'm stoked with it's speed and functions, especially when I'm not just making straigh hip hop. I've been using it live, which would be next to impossible with the older versions.

  • GambleGamble 844 Posts
    seriously, don't waste your time. Using these machines to make tracks nowa-days is backwards. You can mak emusic so much more fluidly and easily on a mac or pc. You will have FAR more creative options and you can buy a midi keyboard and pads if you need the hands on feel. That mpcs have some sort of sound quality edge over a computer is a total myth, aswell.


    two cents, sir.

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    seriously, don't waste your time. Using these machines to make tracks nowa-days is backwards. You can mak emusic so much more fluidly and easily on a mac or pc. You will have FAR more creative options and you can buy a midi keyboard and pads if you need the hands on feel. That mpcs have some sort of sound quality edge over a computer is a total myth, aswell.


    two cents, sir.
    oh wow

  • HamHam 872 Posts
    seriously, don't waste your time. Using these machines to make tracks nowa-days is backwards. You can mak emusic so much more fluidly and easily on a mac or pc. You will have FAR more creative options and you can buy a midi keyboard and pads if you need the hands on feel. That mpcs have some sort of sound quality edge over a computer is a total myth, aswell.


    two cents, sir.
    oh wow

    for real, i've been making music on a PC since i was 14. backwards for most of yall, i've just recently bought an MPC 60. i feel like with the computer, i can make whatever i want, VSTs, and all that, whatever. but the limitations of the MPC 60 is kind of nice, its limiting and in the end you take out the unncecessary stuff, wich in the end i have always thought was a great thing creatively. my advice would be, don't worry about it, you could always trade it out later on. i don't think there's a shortage of dudes selling their mpcs

  • the_dLthe_dL 1,531 Posts
    Personally i would choose the 2000 over the 2000xl. It sounds a bit better IMO. Don't know about the newer ones, sorry.

    agreed, the XL just does not have the sound
    btw i have used the 1000 for quite a while now with out it once ever crashing, i think the 1000 gets a bad rep because it sounds like crap if you sample directly into it, i know a couple of people who made the decision to go with the 2000 for that reason, but if you sample into a decent soundcard, get the sound you like then drop it via USB into the 1000 you get that sound.
    i hear the 4000 is the way to go if you got the loot

  • DIGGADIGGADIGGADIGGA 456 Posts
    k,solid info,im going to evaluate and let you guys kno.grassyass

  • UnconSciUnconSci 824 Posts
    Its freedom through limitation with the MPC. I use it for some stuff and get a certain sound. Other stuff I like to chop in protools.


    Anyone know where i can get a compact flash joint for my 2000xl?

    I dont want an external... so does it have to be IDE?

  • Its freedom through limitation with the MPC. I use it for some stuff and get a certain sound. Other stuff I like to chop in protools.


    Anyone know where i can get a compact flash joint for my 2000xl?

    I dont want an external... so does it have to be IDE?

    Forat had them for a second.

  • ToeFunkToeFunk 90 Posts
    I got both a 60 with OS 3.10 and an XL with extras I'd like to get rid of. Hit me on the PMs.

  • bobbydeebobbydee 849 Posts
    for real, i've been making music on a PC since i was 14. backwards for most of yall, i've just recently bought an MPC 60. i feel like with the computer, i can make whatever i want, VSTs, and all that, whatever. but the limitations of the MPC 60 is kind of nice, its limiting and in the end you take out the unncecessary stuff, wich in the end i have always thought was a great thing creatively. my advice would be, don't worry about it, you could always trade it out later on. i don't think there's a shortage of dudes selling their mpcs



    The limitations are quite freeing (odd I know).

    I started on computer and then moved to an XL, purely because I had played with a freinds alot and was comfortable with it. Didn't know much about gear then, but i'm happy with the old girl.

    Just to reiterate so know one has to mention the 2000 "having a better sound" again-
    THEY HAVE THE SAME CONVERTERS - THEY SOUND THE SAME!

    Hit up the MPC forums, there are some severely homophobic dudes on there, and alot of shit talking, but look between it and there is alot to be learned, from some really nice people.

  • djsheepdjsheep 3,640 Posts
    yeah 2000 and 2000xl. same sound. people are TRIPPIN' when they try say there's a big difference.

    And I like the wheel on the 2000 better, it's got the outer ring and it feels sturdy when winding back and forth... the XL feels all wobbly...

  • MjukisMjukis 1,675 Posts
    i have used the 1000 for quite a while now with out it once ever crashing

    Same here - don't know where that comes from.

  • UnherdUnherd 1,880 Posts
    yeah 2000 and 2000xl. same sound. people are TRIPPIN' when they try say there's a big difference.

    And I like the wheel on the 2000 better, it's got the outer ring and it feels sturdy when winding back and forth... the XL feels all wobbly...




    All of this is true. These are computers, i'd like to see someone discern the sound of the 2000 vs the xl in a blind pepsi challenge.

    I guess it comes down to quality of the wheel vs sample-chop feature and time stretch. Easy choice for me....

  • Controller_7Controller_7 4,052 Posts
    There was some clip from a long time ago of Evil Dee saying "the mpc sounds mad corny." In my experience using a 2000 for about 10 years now, it does not sound mad corny. It sounds exactly like the sounds I put into it. It sounds mad corny when dudes crank up the resonator to 15 and everything rings.

    The lower bit earlier models provide some punch, but the 16 bit ones sound pretty true to the original sound (at least the 2000 does for me). The corny sound comes from people over using the filters and time stretch. If you leave things dry it should sound like what you recorded. The main advantage of using an mpc is the pads and the sequencer. If you can't figure out how to record into it and make it sound decent then you've probably got a wonky set up.

  • HamHam 872 Posts
    There was some clip from a long time ago of Evil Dee saying "the mpc sounds mad corny." In my experience using a 2000 for about 10 years now, it does not sound mad corny. It sounds exactly like the sounds I put into it. It sounds mad corny when dudes crank up the resonator to 15 and everything rings.

    The lower bit earlier models provide some punch, but the 16 bit ones sound pretty true to the original sound (at least the 2000 does for me). The corny sound comes from people over using the filters and time stretch. If you leave things dry it should sound like what you recorded. The main advantage of using an mpc is the pads and the sequencer. If you can't figure out how to record into it and make it sound decent then you've probably got a wonky set up.



    How about 60 sequencer vs. 2000 sequencer? I know that in different computer sequencers, one bar is often too short. Its hard to explain, but the loop starts over too soon, like the fourth beat is too short and it doesn't sound great, i do not have this problem on the 60. maybe you don't hear it if you haven't been made aware of it, but how is this on the 2000/xl?
Sign In or Register to comment.