Thanks@EASKI. Your point is fact. But I think Akai will listen and take action. Too bad it took all of this when you consulted them years ago. Much respect.👍🏿👉🏿
@@musictechworksceddmack8609doubtful Akai will change direction. I’m considering a Black Lion MPC X XB mod. However really I’m getting what I want out of the MPC X. Thanks for the comparison
If I had both of these id use the X for trap and the 60 for grimey boom bap beats. Both are the best at what they do, but it's how you apply them to your beats to achieve that sound you are striving for.
Agreed. I will do a boom bap beat next on the 60II, DJ Premier sound. Takes a while to chop but the results are undeniable when done right. Thanks for commenting @elcooljay1821!!
Yes, good point. I think they both sound good and . Every time I see people diss the sound of the modern MPCs, I'd like to point out, there's a LOT of producers out there who want that clean sound. A lot of ppl who'd complain if their music sounded like it's coming from an MPC 60 II, while they want it clean and modern. So there's market for both devices and sounds. (I have old devices like SP-1200, MPC 60 II, but also new ones, and I never have hard time making either bang, and I appreciate both aesthetics).
An X can sound like a 3000 but a 3000 would struggle and mostly fail to sound like an X. I have owned an original 60 a 3000 2000 4000 Renaissance and now an X. The X is easily the most versstile and cam give you the entire range of sound. Sample a 60s output to and X and the X sounds like a 60. The other eay around and all you get is 60. Same for the others mentioned even the Ren.
The 60 II sounds much more warmer & fuller & my ears were overjoyed when hearing the sounds vs the X SE. The X SE, didn’t really appeal at all compared to the 60II. My ears immediately leaned all the way for 60 II… Im sure that listening to the X SE on its own would have been ok not hearing the comparison…
Different game playing back to back, although, the X sounds good to me. I think the 60 is how we hear, more analog. We don’t walk around with EQ built into our ears. Great point!
Ooof the 60 is beefier and has more glue creating a stickier sound. I closed my eyes and it sounded like a punchier variation to loop when the 60 came in. The SE sounds sharper, cleaner leaning into midrange and hi fidelity. It has punch but I think the 60 has the edge imo. AKAI give us a machine with new gen work flow and old gen components!! Haha thanks for the dope video man.
Great points. I would pay for the MPC 3000 XL for sure, whatever they want to call it. It’s just a longer workflow with the older machines but the sound cannot be denied. I think it’s coming, a very special limited edition for $4999.
@@Bibblebabbler YT compression doesn't make videos like these redundent. If you can't hear "difference" here you might be bordeline deaf. Futhermore, if the compression was that bad (which it's not) there would be no point in even creating a video like this and absolutely no point in you viewing it and commenting seeing as you don't view YT videos as reliable references for audio. Super useful vid imo and confirms what I've thought for a long time; that the older components used created a spirited and energetic sound where now the budget for builds seems to be going into developing work flow / software / aesthetics (digital environments) rather than analogue hardware that lasts and colours the sonics.
My brother thank you for this video/comparison between these amazing machines. For weeks now all I'm hearing is the term sound vs workflow 😂. I got the X SE and the Live 2 and love them both and I still own a MV8800. I really enjoyed this and appreciate your honest opinion on both machines and went into deep detail on the frequencies. I would definitely love to see and hear the comparison between the X SE and the 3000. Much respect bro thank you.
They both sound very good in their own way. It's really a matter of preference and personal taste. The 60 has the grittier sound with a beefier low-end while the X SE has the cleaner tone with greater detail and clarity in the high end frequencies.
That MPCX SE had a beefier low-end in this test. I heard the difference immediately. The 60ll had less clarity, people call it Grit. But MPC X SE all the way...better workflow, more hard drive space, more sounds, could add a external hard drive, you can put Native Instruments Maschine Expansion Kits in there, you can record audio, great MIC Pre Amp to record vocals. Everything is just better
@DaMixWizard You're probably right. I was listening through my phone speakers, not with good headphones. I really wasn't hearing it accurately as a result. I imagine the sub is much better on the X SE. I have the original X and the One and both can really shine in that area with sub bass and 808 drums. One thing I can say based on what I heard is when listening on crappy speakers that don't produce bass, the lowend or low-mids are more noticeable on the 60. Maybe it's punchier as if there is an eq bump at a certain frequency perhaps. At least that's the perception I got from what I heard. I honestly prefer the sound of the X over the 60 anyday. The fidelity is much higher. You can clearly hear the difference right away when you listen to the hihat. It's night and day.
@@kvmoore1 I'm just wondering why the OG's who still have the MPC 60II, 3000, 2000XL, & the 4000 sitting in the corner collecting dust, while the MPC LIVE 2, MPCX or the new MPC X SE is sitting on their desk getting playing time? Enquiring minds want to know...especially if the older MPCs sounded so great
@DaMixWizard I can't speak for the others. However, I have an MPC X and MPC One but still have my MPC4000 as well. My newer MPCs get the most use because the features are great and the workflow is top-notch. My MPC4000 needs a new screen. My MPC2500 is still set up because I have some older beats that I haven't finished working on yet. I also have some drum kits that I haven't finished migrating to the newer MPCs yet either. So, it's a transition process. With that said, I'm still keeping my older MPCs and I can always go back to them if I want that particular sound they deliver. If I had the space, I would have all four of them set up in their own little workspace.
No doubt. The question is can the X SE achieve the vintage sound satisfactorily via emulation as opposed to needing costly hw upgrades to achieve it? Some say yes. Some say no. If it can, then it's worth it's weight in platinum. Not to mention it's has to be the illest looking MPC I've come across. In terms of cosmetics nothing can touch it...♨
First of all, thanks for taking the time to make this comparison video. When I first listened through my phones speaker the 60 had more impact. When l actually put on some decent headphones, I could hear that the perceived impact was because the 60 had a boxy sound with more lower midrange. The X Se had a more open sound, which i personally prefer. Thanks again for the comparison!!
I love modern MPC software. In fact, I never use a desktop or laptop computer for my tracks. But, I completely hear the warmer and richer harmonic tone and sonic range of the Roger Linn MPC 60. Thanks for sharing!
The overall tones of the machines are what u would expect. Both sound excellent in slightly different ways. The big difference to me is in the sequence timing...it might just be me..but the 60 sequence just sounds tighter and more glued than the X.
Wow. So you hear it? Roger Linn programming. Both are at 96 PPQ. The X can do 960 pulses per quarter note. The sequencer is tight on the 60. Both have their own timing.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 The MPCX does not do 960 ppqns. This is a common misconception. The 'display resolution is 960' which is not the same. The manual even tells us this...
60 most Modef has more of a Punch, MPCXSe is cleaner....With the demands of Spatial Audio and Dolby Atomos Apple is forcing the artist to uploard there songs in the Dolby Atmos format because of Spotify. With that said the MPCXSe fits todays Trends as for the Audio and future requirements! Sonically they both sounds great. I would be happy to have both. More video's like this will help Akai to understand and hear what the producers of 80''s,90's or what ever decade want! This was so great I'm sure Akai is watching more videos like this is needed.
Definitely and thanks. With all the dirt of the 60, it would still be somewhat cleaned up in the mix to balance out with vocals and other elements of the song. The dirt is still there enough to be impactful. Listen to all those DJ Premier records. I play his Behind the Board Play List on Apple Music often. Check out DJ Toomp’s as well. This unit actually belonged to DJ Toomp. Luckily he had more than one and was able to sale this one to me. Thankful. Thanks for commenting. MPC vs X coming soon.
That 60 is the truth, now I fully understand how so many made so many hits with it. The MPC X has a more detailed sound than the 60 so it does come down to what sound you're looking for.
Good Comparison 👍 Family, What's your solution point to get the sound of the 60/3000,other than SKI,that recommended the LUNCH BOX 500????,Thanks for sharing...!!!!
It starts with the sample you use. Also, mixing in a DAW after the fact. UAD and Brainworkx make great plug ins that emulate the hardware. Truth is, if people like the track or they song, they will like it because they like it. But I use UAD plugins most of the time. Also, running through an old Mackie mixer warms it up too.
They both sound good. The older MPC sounds a bit beefier but not as crisp. Kind of like the difference between a Premier production and a Dre production. Premo got that gritty sound and Dre got that clean, crisp sound. I think the most important thing is that the sound selection and beat is dope. If the beat was wack it wouldn't matter which MPC it is. As long as the beat is dope the difference is negligible in my opinion.
BASS Was FATTer And Cleaner On The MPC SE, and The 60 Midrange Sounded Louder But Not As Clean, Yet I Liked The 60 Midrange and High's Better. So For TRAP Music, LoFi, And Hip Hop, I'd Rock With The MPC SE.
There is definitely a sonic difference between to two. I think they both sound good but different. I agree that there appeared to be more clarity with the SE. But the sound from the 60 Ii sound a bit fuller, tighter, round and warmer. I would happy with both….Thanks for the video comparison….🔥💯😎👍🏾
The X SE sounds phased for some reason. It sounds like the signal is getting duplicated somewhere on your signal path or there is bleed through from somewhere.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 Odd. Mine sounds like that if I have an issue with routing it (like if I have UA's console monitoring on AND my DAW monitoring on). It may be getting doubled on your interface and software for those particular inputs. I definitely hear some phasing issues somewhere on the signal path of that X. My X SE doesn't sound phased like that.
Only console inputs are open, no other DAW. I think I need to edit the regular kick on the X SE. it is starting sooner than the 808 sample, causing the doubling. Good ear.
I kind of prefer the cleanest of the MPC X. A lot can be done to dirty and or fatten the sound in and or out. Both sound great. It’s amazing to have lots of options these days. Use to be MPCs were way out of my price range. The MPC 3000 for excellent condition is about $4000.
the 60 is much more FULL to my ears.. the X seems to have more 'Room in the mix.. hard to tell off on example, but I hear it!! velocity? You sampled it into the X so eq might be needed.. Probably not? is it volume level?? INTERSTING!
The 60 II adds harmonic distortion due to the lower tech program and converters. The MPC X SE is more true to source because the current tech allows for cleaner sampling. I'd rather have cleaner source material and add my own saturation and distortion through processing than being confined to the sound of an old machine. That's like watching a film that's in 4k through an old dinosaur back big screen. IMO
There’s a lot of comments here so I’m not sure if its been said already - but the mpcX sounds like something is out of phase. Yes, its crisper and cleaner but it actually sounds like there is a millisecond time delay that you would get from out of phase mics, bad clocking or hearing a direct and latency signal at the same time. Are you hearing that too?
If we're being objective, and not nostalgic, the MPC X, and by extension all the new MPC's have superior audio quality. There's more extension on the highs and lows, allowing the listener to perceive more potent bass and airy highs. Also I don't perceive any resonances or compression, as opposed to the MPC 60II (and as CEDDMACK said, the 2000, the 3000 and others of that generation, by extension). I've heard it said that the 60 II or 3000 glue a tracks elements together naturally. I would likely attribute it to the innate compression on the AD/DA converters of the 60, as those are likely less precise than those of the newer generation. And the sample rate and bit depth certainly also contribute, along with adding some of the resonance I hear on the hats coming out the 60. Without contest, the sound out of the X is cleaner. Even so, there's a reason, the MPC X and its siblings can provide emulations of the classic MPCs, but not vice versa. A real creative mixing engineer would love the sound of the X for shaping sound more easily than the older gen MPCs
Facts. From the 60 to the 3000, the converters were “improved”, made clearer. So naturally, the models 35 years later would be clearer. I don’t think because the new-gen models should be deemed as sounding bad because they don’t sound dirty. Like you said, it’s in the tracking and mixing. I would also add it vegans with the samples.
No doubt. Each has its own sound. Some prefer one or the other but it depends on what’s needed. But I’ll do something crazy with the 60 anyway. 60 is warmer for sure. Sort of vibrates at your body’s frequency…
If you do one with the 3000 it would be cool if you do a blind test at first. Have people guess first. I have a feeling some people are just going with their golden era or picking the one thats modern because they're familiar with it.
Nice comparison! Is there any chance you could compare them again, but with the MPC X SE running in the MPC60 Vintage Mode? Which is in Preferences / General, at the top of the page.
Clean BoomBap beats sounds weird. It's the same if you make trap beats with an mpc 60. However, it would be nice if the MPC SE can emulate all the sound qualities.
I have the mpc X se…still haven’t used it yet. I have an Apollo that uses thunderbolt. How can I route my MPC in standalone thru the Apollo for my speakers?
Thanks for doing this comparison, especially in light of the whole Akai/E-A-Ski fracas. I will say that they both DEFINITELY sound different: as you said, the X SE is much cleaner and clearer, while the 60 sounds more glued together, but for it has less detail and clarity. Interestingly, I feel that it would be easier to get a song to sound "finished" on a 60 because it seems to glue the sounds together with greater ease-but, again, you're losing some detail in the process. This shouldn't be a surprise: the 60 samples at 12 bits (couldn't find the sampling specs of the X SE, but I'd bet that it samples at higher than 12 bits.) So I think that, like others have said: the 60 is really well suited for Boom Bap and other classic genres, whereas the X SE could definitely do the same-with a bit more effort and finesing-but could also do more modern, clean-sounding work much easier.
The 60ii wins for me. I have 2 of them and a MPC X. Once I got the MPC software Ive stopped using my X and just use the 2 60's. If I need modern vibes I just use my 60 as a controller with the Beats software. Honestly the software is the best part of the new MPC era. I just use my old machines to control it now.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 most of the club bangers are made on vintage machines. That's not to say that some aren't made on software and they sound good but the ones made on hardware have a fuller sound to them while the software tracks are mainly loud. Well that's what I've noticed among the producers I know who make tracks that get played in clubs and released by large independent labels
I think the real question... Is the extra bump in sound worth spending $3k+ for a USED 60 with only a handful of drum sounds (meaning you will absolutely need sound modules or samples which means more money), rather than spending half or less for a new modern MPC loaded with all kinds of instrument sounds and effects, a larger display and composition tools (pad perform)?
My ears must not have the years of experience necessary to really tell the difference in sound, but I am sure there is. Once, Malo Beats did a test between the 2000Xl and the MPC One and I also couldn't tell any difference in the sound, either.
Oh, that’s most of the listening audience of music, so you’re not alone. It’s us producers and engineers who hear this stuff. The 2000XL definitely sounds different than the MPC One/New-Gen MPC’s. The One is more than capable of delivering a great sound. Everyone is not an audiophile head. Most just like good music. No matter what was made to create it.
Def hear the difference (the first video where I can) and it really is up to preference.. the biggest difference are the hi hats sound cleaner on the x... the 808 is more gritty on the 60 along with the overall sound but the x def has a cleaner more clear sound
My MPC X has the Black Line Audio Mod on the converters and I send it digital into my SSL Big Six, like it more than the Tascam Model 24. I am convinced that there are other converters and processing tools we could all add later to reach MPC60 status and beyond. Expert Sleepers makes class compliant interface with modular level converters which also has 8 channel ADAT in/out. I heard the newer RME converters are very punchy and high end. Not vintage though. You could then run that into a Vermona Retro Lancet, a Super high-end analog filter with a BALLS knob that can thicken the hell out of anything. Just listen to Vermona's other gear. The Kick Lancet has the same balls know and that kick sounds damn heavier than anything. The Pulsar 23 has high quality inputs and analog processing. That will be my next buy. I plan to process the X. I have a Behringer Model D. I know it sound less than a real model d but let me tell you something. You can make a large variety of thick and complex drum and percussion sounds on that. You can buy this Eurorack module called Manikk Outbreak. You can trigger 24 modules total. 3 moduals at one with each pad on a drum machine plus a VCA with MIDI velocity. So your making each drum sound with up to three or 4 modules. Some drum modules have a velocity input. I like the sound of the 60 more than the X's stock converters that is no longer a limitation with the X, really. However I will say that I injoy drum programming with my Boss DR-660 a lot more. I use it, start and stop the MPC X with my 660!
We need to connect. I like your thinking. So is there a significant difference? I am considering the Black Lion Mod. I also got the Model D clone from Behringer. Looking to get deeper into it. Great info. Saving your post!👍🏿
I would say there is a significant difference even though I have never heard the stock converters in person. I have listened to so many tests online. I had the MPC 4000 with an Akai DPS24 DAW. The converters on the 24 were pretty thick heavy sounding. More than my moded X I would say. The Black Line Audio Mod on my X sounds hi-end and full, big, rich. I am going for the new X soon. Not sure if I can or if I will get the mod this time. I'm happy with the sound of Big Six converters and with more outs. But I am planning on upgrading to RME or Prism in the future. The 2 mixers that are a step up from the Big Six are the API THE BOX and The Heritage Audio MCM-20.4. They are summing mixers with AUX sends. So you need to add some preamps/eqs but I am not going to get this level of sound quality any other way under $50,000 if I want to mix outside the box. MPC 60 has a thick punch while the stock converters on the X are clearer with more low end because of the higher sample rate. Just not as much punch or thickness on the output. That's why it's hard to pick one over the other. And the 3000 has less punch than the 60 but more lows. But for uncompromised authentically classic lo-fi sounds it would just be best to use the 60, SP1200 or S612 with multiple out into a high end mixer with hi-end processing through the AUX sends. Then try to master it at the same time going into the MPC-X or whatever. Second best would be to resample the output of old samplers into the X with high end converters attached. I personally can live without older MPC. You can still get more of a modern low-fi sound with just the X and outboard effects. So many effects choices in modular but there is a decent amount in non-modular as well. Expensive! The BLA is definitely better, but if you plan on doing any mixing or channel processing outside the box, I recommend putting a hi-end filter like the Retroverb Lancet and buss compressor. or something like a Furman Overstayer which has both. Or maybe an expensive tube preamp. Those things will breathe life back into a sample performance. JCF Audio makes an 8-channel DA converter with real tube-tape electronics on the output for around $7,000. It might be like going back to the late 70s with your MPC-X to mix a record. I'm on Facebook. Jared Harrison from Lytle Creek California.
Listening in my living room with a sub. The the X has a much wider frequency response than the 60. The bass reaches further and booms more. Also the X seems to capture more high frequencies. This gives the 60 the impression of more punch since the mid range seems to jump out more. The 60 will probably shine more when slightly overdriving the inputs when sampling at 45 or 78rpm then pitched back down.
More modern with the X. The older units not being as high fi give them a special character, although the converters are not as advanced. Both generations of MPCs are being used these days.
The 808 on the X has the transients and it seems like a wider image. The 60 has less transients and the image is more center probably better for lows. Also more highs. I always noticed the low transients with bolos stuff...nobody to really compare it to though.
I would like to give my opinion, I'd say the older does sound wayyyyy better right off the bat, but i believe with the right tweaking on the EQ on the X will make it sound like the older . But thats just my thinking . The 808 sounds alot smoother and more of that punch, and the newer X is more like a softer type bass touch feel. Great video!
O 1 more thing.And mind you EA-Ski has all of these so thats why he been knowing the older machines hit harder and are fatter and warmer thats why he’s been so confident in what he been saying and i been agreeing with him. He has all these machines and prollly a/b them a thousand times over…
The difference is very clear to me. The X is cleaner, but the 60 is fuller. It is like the X is centered in front of me and the 60 is surrounding me with the sound. It is like CD vs Vinyl. Pick your preference.
There sounds like phasing is happening here, like the X SE is on the speakers and bleeding back into the mic. Something isnt right here. My newer MPCs don’t sound phased like that.
The mic was not on so no phasing is happening. Or even possible. People hear things differently, some have no critiques, others micro analyze everything. I own every MPC ever made and have been engineering for over 30 years. I’ll go back and triple check the audio again. Thanks for your thoughts.
Going back to listen, I hear what you mean. It’s the kick and 808 tone on the X. They themselves are not starting at the same time. A quick sample edit move and that’s fix. No other sounds are “phasing”. I also think the fidelity of the 808 tone really clear. So good ear. I’ve done other videos after this and may revisit. I think people should just create with what they got. I will focus more on the songwriting, producing process of songs. It was a hot topic while it was hot. Make great music. That is what really matters.
Just out of curiosity, since in the MPC software you can set the output to emulate the sound of some legacy MPCs I was wondering if the software on the SE supports that as well and if so how that would stack up to the originals.
All the newer gen MPCs have the emulations built in. If you have one, just go over to Preferences and under General, you'll have the Vintage Mode option with 4 different values: MPC3000, MPC60, SP1200, SP1200 RING. I don't own the 60, 3000, or SP1200, so I can't confirm whether those are true to form or just really close, but still, I'm assuming they are good as a quick fix, if it's needed.
Vintage mode is there. It sounds different from the default settings but not like the real units. I will demo that next. Actually, I do in the next video dropping tomorrow at 11am EST.
You prove my point my brother. 🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿
Maaaaan Ski” You GOT EM 👊🏿 and thanks for the exposing of them … Akai Dolphins 🐬
Thanks@EASKI. Your point is fact. But I think Akai will listen and take action. Too bad it took all of this when you consulted them years ago. Much respect.👍🏿👉🏿
@@musictechworksceddmack8609doubtful Akai will change direction. I’m considering a Black Lion MPC X XB mod. However really I’m getting what I want out of the MPC X. Thanks for the comparison
Lol since the MPC X is my first MPC i didn't know what the hell you were talking about...now I know!!
LOL! All good!!!
The low end in the 60 II....❤❤
If I had both of these id use the X for trap and the 60 for grimey boom bap beats. Both are the best at what they do, but it's how you apply them to your beats to achieve that sound you are striving for.
Agreed. I will do a boom bap beat next on the 60II, DJ Premier sound. Takes a while to chop but the results are undeniable when done right. Thanks for commenting @elcooljay1821!!
Just use the 60 for all drums and most basslines
Great answer to that fasho !!!!
Yes, good point. I think they both sound good and . Every time I see people diss the sound of the modern MPCs, I'd like to point out, there's a LOT of producers out there who want that clean sound. A lot of ppl who'd complain if their music sounded like it's coming from an MPC 60 II, while they want it clean and modern. So there's market for both devices and sounds. (I have old devices like SP-1200, MPC 60 II, but also new ones, and I never have hard time making either bang, and I appreciate both aesthetics).
I think that a lot of us here are definitely interested in hearing the 3000 vs X SE … I’m looking forward to the comparison.
Oh , that’s coming for sure…..😁
Yes. The 3000 vs the X-SE is the main event.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 do it before someone else does
Agreed
An X can sound like a 3000 but a 3000 would struggle and mostly fail to sound like an X. I have owned an original 60 a 3000 2000 4000 Renaissance and now an X. The X is easily the most versstile and cam give you the entire range of sound. Sample a 60s output to and X and the X sounds like a 60. The other eay around and all you get is 60. Same for the others mentioned even the Ren.
The 60 is punchier and has that old school grit to it.
The X is crispy and clean.
They both sound great though!!!
Dope video…. We needed this!
Thanks!!! More coming.
Raleigh Simmons coached by Fred Tex Winter, Soundcloud "HEBREW I AM" REAL TALK, the MPC 60II is hitting harder. WOW!!!
The 60 II sounds much more warmer & fuller & my ears were overjoyed when hearing the sounds vs the X SE. The X SE, didn’t really appeal at all compared to the 60II. My ears immediately leaned all the way for 60 II…
Im sure that listening to the X SE on its own would have been ok not hearing the comparison…
Different game playing back to back, although, the X sounds good to me. I think the 60 is how we hear, more analog. We don’t walk around with EQ built into our ears. Great point!
Ooof the 60 is beefier and has more glue creating a stickier sound. I closed my eyes and it sounded like a punchier variation to loop when the 60 came in. The SE sounds sharper, cleaner leaning into midrange and hi fidelity. It has punch but I think the 60 has the edge imo. AKAI give us a machine with new gen work flow and old gen components!! Haha thanks for the dope video man.
Over UA-cam and how it compresses the audio😂
People and sound lol 😂😂😂😂😂I hear the difference. Come on man.😂😂😂😂
@@Bibblebabbler If you can’t hear a difference between these two machines just say that! 😂
Great points. I would pay for the MPC 3000 XL for sure, whatever they want to call it. It’s just a longer workflow with the older machines but the sound cannot be denied. I think it’s coming, a very special limited edition for $4999.
@@j.gonsalves it’s tainted by UA-cam compression meatball. Smarten up Leroy
@@Bibblebabbler YT compression doesn't make videos like these redundent. If you can't hear "difference" here you might be bordeline deaf. Futhermore, if the compression was that bad (which it's not) there would be no point in even creating a video like this and absolutely no point in you viewing it and commenting seeing as you don't view YT videos as reliable references for audio. Super useful vid imo and confirms what I've thought for a long time; that the older components used created a spirited and energetic sound where now the budget for builds seems to be going into developing work flow / software / aesthetics (digital environments) rather than analogue hardware that lasts and colours the sonics.
My brother thank you for this video/comparison between these amazing machines. For weeks now all I'm hearing is the term sound vs workflow 😂. I got the X SE and the Live 2 and love them both and I still own a MV8800. I really enjoyed this and appreciate your honest opinion on both machines and went into deep detail on the frequencies. I would definitely love to see and hear the comparison between the X SE and the 3000. Much respect bro thank you.
The mv8800 has a sound that I can definitely appreciate. Samples through that unit sound phat and warm from what I remember.
Thank you for the kind word. The 3000 is coming up….
They both sound very good in their own way. It's really a matter of preference and personal taste. The 60 has the grittier sound with a beefier low-end while the X SE has the cleaner tone with greater detail and clarity in the high end frequencies.
That MPCX SE had a beefier low-end in this test. I heard the difference immediately. The 60ll had less clarity, people call it Grit. But MPC X SE all the way...better workflow, more hard drive space, more sounds, could add a external hard drive, you can put Native Instruments Maschine Expansion Kits in there, you can record audio, great MIC Pre Amp to record vocals. Everything is just better
@DaMixWizard You're probably right. I was listening through my phone speakers, not with good headphones. I really wasn't hearing it accurately as a result. I imagine the sub is much better on the X SE. I have the original X and the One and both can really shine in that area with sub bass and 808 drums.
One thing I can say based on what I heard is when listening on crappy speakers that don't produce bass, the lowend or low-mids are more noticeable on the 60. Maybe it's punchier as if there is an eq bump at a certain frequency perhaps. At least that's the perception I got from what I heard.
I honestly prefer the sound of the X over the 60 anyday. The fidelity is much higher. You can clearly hear the difference right away when you listen to the hihat. It's night and day.
@@kvmoore1 I'm just wondering why the OG's who still have the MPC 60II, 3000, 2000XL, & the 4000 sitting in the corner collecting dust, while the MPC LIVE 2, MPCX or the new MPC X SE is sitting on their desk getting playing time? Enquiring minds want to know...especially if the older MPCs sounded so great
@DaMixWizard I can't speak for the others. However, I have an MPC X and MPC One but still have my MPC4000 as well. My newer MPCs get the most use because the features are great and the workflow is top-notch. My MPC4000 needs a new screen. My MPC2500 is still set up because I have some older beats that I haven't finished working on yet. I also have some drum kits that I haven't finished migrating to the newer MPCs yet either. So, it's a transition process. With that said, I'm still keeping my older MPCs and I can always go back to them if I want that particular sound they deliver. If I had the space, I would have all four of them set up in their own little workspace.
No doubt. The question is can the X SE achieve the vintage sound satisfactorily via emulation as opposed to needing costly hw upgrades to achieve it? Some say yes. Some say no. If it can, then it's worth it's weight in platinum. Not to mention it's has to be the illest looking MPC I've come across. In terms of cosmetics nothing can touch it...♨
Perfect way to stop the talk by proving the original point of the Almighty EASki salute and keep banging
thank you!!!!🎉
First of all, thanks for taking the time to make this comparison video. When I first listened through my phones speaker the 60 had more impact. When l actually put on some decent headphones, I could hear that the perceived impact was because the 60 had a boxy sound with more lower midrange. The X Se had a more open sound, which i personally prefer.
Thanks again for the comparison!!
No doubt!
Both sounds great!!!! I look at both applications that’s good to whatever you’ll want to apply em to.
Excellent side by side and commentary. Many thanks...♨
I love modern MPC software. In fact, I never use a desktop or laptop computer for my tracks. But, I completely hear the warmer and richer harmonic tone and sonic range of the Roger Linn MPC 60. Thanks for sharing!
bravo my bro did his thing with this one oh yeah lets get it. MPC X SE and that 60 are both beast lol!
Thanks, great tools and widely used for a reason. Stay tuned for the next battle with the MPC 2500….
The overall tones of the machines are what u would expect. Both sound excellent in slightly different ways. The big difference to me is in the sequence timing...it might just be me..but the 60 sequence just sounds tighter and more glued than the X.
Wow. So you hear it? Roger Linn programming. Both are at 96 PPQ. The X can do 960 pulses per quarter note. The sequencer is tight on the 60. Both have their own timing.
I was going to say the same thing…that’s the part that I felt was missing the most from the X.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 The MPCX does not do 960 ppqns. This is a common misconception. The 'display resolution is 960' which is not the same. The manual even tells us this...
Salute CeddMack! Both units sound good, I prefer the sound of the 60, the sounds seem more beefy.
60 most Modef has more of a Punch, MPCXSe is cleaner....With the demands of Spatial Audio and Dolby Atomos Apple is forcing the artist to uploard there songs in the Dolby Atmos format because of Spotify. With that said the MPCXSe fits todays Trends as for the Audio and future requirements! Sonically they both sounds great. I would be happy to have both. More video's like this will help Akai to understand and hear what the producers of 80''s,90's or what ever decade want! This was so great I'm sure Akai is watching more videos like this is needed.
Thank you. And goodnight
There is something about that mpc 60 💣💥
Very informative I would love to hear the MPC 3000 versus the MPC x Also I would like to hear the MPC 4000 in comparison also.
The X is much brighter and 60 has a more warm saturated sound. They both sound good.
You can clearly hear the Bit Depth on both MPC's when it comes to the drums.... #GreatVidBro!!!🎥🎬🎥
Definitely and thanks. With all the dirt of the 60, it would still be somewhat cleaned up in the mix to balance out with vocals and other elements of the song. The dirt is still there enough to be impactful. Listen to all those DJ Premier records. I play his Behind the Board Play List on Apple Music often. Check out DJ Toomp’s as well. This unit actually belonged to DJ Toomp. Luckily he had more than one and was able to sale this one to me. Thankful. Thanks for commenting. MPC vs X coming soon.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609Why i thought i Toomp when seeing your 60😳😳😳…Classic machine
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 No Doubt!!! #Salute...👑✨👑
1:39 yo that kick is nice
That 60 is the truth, now I fully understand how so many made so many hits with it. The MPC X has a more detailed sound than the 60 so it does come down to what sound you're looking for.
The truth 😂 love it
Yesterday I ordered a MPC X SE from Amazon...... I am looking forward to it.
You will be pleased.
That old mpc definitely sounds better!!
Good Comparison 👍 Family, What's your solution point to get the sound of the 60/3000,other than SKI,that recommended the LUNCH BOX 500????,Thanks for sharing...!!!!
It starts with the sample you use. Also, mixing in a DAW after the fact. UAD and Brainworkx make great plug ins that emulate the hardware. Truth is, if people like the track or they song, they will like it because they like it. But I use UAD plugins most of the time. Also, running through an old Mackie mixer warms it up too.
They both sound good. The older MPC sounds a bit beefier but not as crisp. Kind of like the difference between a Premier production and a Dre production. Premo got that gritty sound and Dre got that clean, crisp sound. I think the most important thing is that the sound selection and beat is dope. If the beat was wack it wouldn't matter which MPC it is. As long as the beat is dope the difference is negligible in my opinion.
BASS Was FATTer And Cleaner On The MPC SE, and The 60 Midrange Sounded Louder But Not As Clean, Yet I Liked The 60 Midrange and High's Better. So For TRAP Music, LoFi, And Hip Hop, I'd Rock With The MPC SE.
There is definitely a sonic difference between to two. I think they both sound good but different. I agree that there appeared to be more clarity with the SE. But the sound from the 60 Ii sound a bit fuller, tighter, round and warmer. I would happy with both….Thanks for the video comparison….🔥💯😎👍🏾
The X sound good af!!! More surround sounding but the 60 punch 🥊 harder
60 is still the center!!!! Need that real lowfi 💁🏾♂️
🔥🚀🔥🚀 X IS KING
The X se is a girl that likes you , and the MPC 60II is a woman that loves you .
Good analogy!
Subbing, because instead of talking he demonstrated.
Thanks boss! More to come.
The X SE sounds phased for some reason. It sounds like the signal is getting duplicated somewhere on your signal path or there is bleed through from somewhere.
No bleeding, straight to the interface. They both are connected the same way.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 Odd. Mine sounds like that if I have an issue with routing it (like if I have UA's console monitoring on AND my DAW monitoring on). It may be getting doubled on your interface and software for those particular inputs. I definitely hear some phasing issues somewhere on the signal path of that X. My X SE doesn't sound phased like that.
Only console inputs are open, no other DAW. I think I need to edit the regular kick on the X SE. it is starting sooner than the 808 sample, causing the doubling. Good ear.
I kind of prefer the cleanest of the MPC X. A lot can be done to dirty and or fatten the sound in and or out. Both sound great.
It’s amazing to have lots of options these days. Use to be MPCs were way out of my price range. The MPC 3000 for excellent condition is about $4000.
the 60 is much more FULL to my ears.. the X seems to have more 'Room in the mix.. hard to tell off on example, but I hear it!! velocity? You sampled it into the X so eq might be needed.. Probably not? is it volume level?? INTERSTING!
The 60 II adds harmonic distortion due to the lower tech program and converters. The MPC X SE is more true to source because the current tech allows for cleaner sampling. I'd rather have cleaner source material and add my own saturation and distortion through processing than being confined to the sound of an old machine. That's like watching a film that's in 4k through an old dinosaur back big screen. IMO
I agree
Lol no you dont..
@@Darie2006exactly what I thought 😂😂
great comparison. thanks
I agree. X is cleaner and 60 is warmer. I'd like to work on a 60. The 2KXL was my 1st.
Nice. 2000XL video next week. 3000 video tomorrow!
Do another comparison with the vintage modes
It sounds more glued together on the 60 but both sound good
Interesting video - well done
Thanks!
There’s a lot of comments here so I’m not sure if its been said already - but the mpcX sounds like something is out of phase. Yes, its crisper and cleaner but it actually sounds like there is a millisecond time delay that you would get from out of phase mics, bad clocking or hearing a direct and latency signal at the same time. Are you hearing that too?
Yes absolutely, my first impression was some type of phasing issue on the mpc x.
If we're being objective, and not nostalgic, the MPC X, and by extension all the new MPC's have superior audio quality. There's more extension on the highs and lows, allowing the listener to perceive more potent bass and airy highs. Also I don't perceive any resonances or compression, as opposed to the MPC 60II (and as CEDDMACK said, the 2000, the 3000 and others of that generation, by extension).
I've heard it said that the 60 II or 3000 glue a tracks elements together naturally. I would likely attribute it to the innate compression on the AD/DA converters of the 60, as those are likely less precise than those of the newer generation. And the sample rate and bit depth certainly also contribute, along with adding some of the resonance I hear on the hats coming out the 60. Without contest, the sound out of the X is cleaner. Even so, there's a reason, the MPC X and its siblings can provide emulations of the classic MPCs, but not vice versa.
A real creative mixing engineer would love the sound of the X for shaping sound more easily than the older gen MPCs
Facts. From the 60 to the 3000, the converters were “improved”, made clearer. So naturally, the models 35 years later would be clearer. I don’t think because the new-gen models should be deemed as sounding bad because they don’t sound dirty. Like you said, it’s in the tracking and mixing. I would also add it vegans with the samples.
the mpc x se is clear and very thin, our ears think clear means thick. mpc 60 sounds like a monster.
Facts!
Both sound great!! 60 real warm…
No doubt. Each has its own sound. Some prefer one or the other but it depends on what’s needed. But I’ll do something crazy with the 60 anyway. 60 is warmer for sure. Sort of vibrates at your body’s frequency…
If you do one with the 3000 it would be cool if you do a blind test at first. Have people guess first. I have a feeling some people are just going with their golden era or picking the one thats modern because they're familiar with it.
I can do that.
Nice comparison! Is there any chance you could compare them again, but with the MPC X SE running in the MPC60 Vintage Mode? Which is in Preferences / General, at the top of the page.
Yes. I actually did that on another video. But I will use the same track. I’ll upload it tonight.
They both sound good to my ears. I think the X sounds better!
Loving the new MPC SEX 😉 but I do wish it had that extra bit of sauce from the early era. Clearly audible difference, even via UA-cam.
When sampling Hi hats in the 60, Its best to sample them with less gain. I can hear the distortion in that hat. lol Good work on the caparison!
Yes, great tip. Sometimes, that’s the point. Distorting the sound. Facts.
I Can hear the difference CLEARLY
Mpc X is like Home sound. Mpc 60 is like vinyl sound.
Why did you say you’re NOT going to do the 3000??? Please do sir!!!
LOL, I will.
Clean BoomBap beats sounds weird. It's the same if you make trap beats with an mpc 60. However, it would be nice if the MPC SE can emulate all the sound qualities.
It tries, I’m loading the video going through the vintage modes vs the MPC 3000. I see what you’re saying. Great point.
Blew that new thang out the water.
Both sound good
I have the mpc X se…still haven’t used it yet. I have an Apollo that uses thunderbolt. How can I route my MPC in standalone thru the Apollo for my speakers?
Out of Main output of the X SE to a pair of the analog inputs on the Apollo. Use really good cables if possible. Quarter inch TRS cables are best.
Is the SE sampled in stereo? There was some phasing issues.
Mono drums. I’ll take another listen to see if I can treat the phasing. I didn’t hear it.
That 60 is hitting.
mpc60 all day on this one.
The 60 sounds way better then the mpc x se damn it’s true the ears don’t lie
Thanks for doing this comparison, especially in light of the whole Akai/E-A-Ski fracas.
I will say that they both DEFINITELY sound different: as you said, the X SE is much cleaner and clearer, while the 60 sounds more glued together, but for it has less detail and clarity. Interestingly, I feel that it would be easier to get a song to sound "finished" on a 60 because it seems to glue the sounds together with greater ease-but, again, you're losing some detail in the process.
This shouldn't be a surprise: the 60 samples at 12 bits (couldn't find the sampling specs of the X SE, but I'd bet that it samples at higher than 12 bits.)
So I think that, like others have said: the 60 is really well suited for Boom Bap and other classic genres, whereas the X SE could definitely do the same-with a bit more effort and finesing-but could also do more modern, clean-sounding work much easier.
Thanks for watching and commenting. Everything you said…
The 60ii wins for me. I have 2 of them and a MPC X. Once I got the MPC software Ive stopped using my X and just use the 2 60's. If I need modern vibes I just use my 60 as a controller with the Beats software. Honestly the software is the best part of the new MPC era. I just use my old machines to control it now.
Nice!
60 sounds nice but SE sounds ready for todays music.
I’m happy with a product suited for 2023👑👑AKAI is awesome.
Yes. Can be creative. You’ll be surprised at how much music is out there made with the vintage machines.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 most of the club bangers are made on vintage machines. That's not to say that some aren't made on software and they sound good but the ones made on hardware have a fuller sound to them while the software tracks are mainly loud. Well that's what I've noticed among the producers I know who make tracks that get played in clubs and released by large independent labels
Hard beat either way!✊🏽🫡
Thanks!
I think the real question...
Is the extra bump in sound worth spending $3k+ for a USED 60 with only a handful of drum sounds (meaning you will absolutely need sound modules or samples which means more money), rather than spending half or less for a new modern MPC loaded with all kinds of instrument sounds and effects, a larger display and composition tools (pad perform)?
Great question…hmmm… have to be creative with the 60. 13.1 seconds of sampling time, 26.2 if memory is expanded.
X all day!
A lot of work with the 60…. But will sound great. I think the X sounds good too.
MPC X is clean. Honestly back then the goal was to clean up. Listen to the 4000 atill hit hard but its cleaner
My ears must not have the years of experience necessary to really tell the difference in sound, but I am sure there is. Once, Malo Beats did a test between the 2000Xl and the MPC One and I also couldn't tell any difference in the sound, either.
Oh, that’s most of the listening audience of music, so you’re not alone. It’s us producers and engineers who hear this stuff. The 2000XL definitely sounds different than the MPC One/New-Gen MPC’s. The One is more than capable of delivering a great sound. Everyone is not an audiophile head. Most just like good music. No matter what was made to create it.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 👊
Def hear the difference (the first video where I can) and it really is up to preference.. the biggest difference are the hi hats sound cleaner on the x... the 808 is more gritty on the 60 along with the overall sound but the x def has a cleaner more clear sound
Is that the Mpc keys 61? If so it woulda been nice to include that! 👍🏿😎
Yes. The MPC Key 61 sounds just like the MPC X.
My MPC X has the Black Line Audio Mod on the converters and I send it digital into my SSL Big Six, like it more than the Tascam Model 24. I am convinced that there are other converters and processing tools we could all add later to reach MPC60 status and beyond. Expert Sleepers makes class compliant interface with modular level converters which also has 8 channel ADAT in/out. I heard the newer RME converters are very punchy and high end. Not vintage though. You could then run that into a Vermona Retro Lancet, a Super high-end analog filter with a BALLS knob that can thicken the hell out of anything. Just listen to Vermona's other gear. The Kick Lancet has the same balls know and that kick sounds damn heavier than anything. The Pulsar 23 has high quality inputs and analog processing. That will be my next buy. I plan to process the X. I have a Behringer Model D. I know it sound less than a real model d but let me tell you something. You can make a large variety of thick and complex drum and percussion sounds on that. You can buy this Eurorack module called Manikk Outbreak. You can trigger 24 modules total. 3 moduals at one with each pad on a drum machine plus a VCA with MIDI velocity. So your making each drum sound with up to three or 4 modules. Some drum modules have a velocity input. I like the sound of the 60 more than the X's stock converters that is no longer a limitation with the X, really. However I will say that I injoy drum programming with my Boss DR-660 a lot more. I use it, start and stop the MPC X with my 660!
We need to connect. I like your thinking. So is there a significant difference? I am considering the Black Lion Mod. I also got the Model D clone from Behringer. Looking to get deeper into it. Great info. Saving your post!👍🏿
I would say there is a significant difference even though I have never heard the stock converters in person. I have listened to so many tests online. I had the MPC 4000 with an Akai DPS24 DAW. The converters on the 24 were pretty thick heavy sounding. More than my moded X I would say. The Black Line Audio Mod on my X sounds hi-end and full, big, rich. I am going for the new X soon. Not sure if I can or if I will get the mod this time. I'm happy with the sound of Big Six converters and with more outs. But I am planning on upgrading to RME or Prism in the future. The 2 mixers that are a step up from the Big Six are the API THE BOX and The Heritage Audio MCM-20.4. They are summing mixers with AUX sends. So you need to add some preamps/eqs but I am not going to get this level of sound quality any other way under $50,000 if I want to mix outside the box. MPC 60 has a thick punch while the stock converters on the X are clearer with more low end because of the higher sample rate. Just not as much punch or thickness on the output. That's why it's hard to pick one over the other. And the 3000 has less punch than the 60 but more lows. But for uncompromised authentically classic lo-fi sounds it would just be best to use the 60, SP1200 or S612 with multiple out into a high end mixer with hi-end processing through the AUX sends. Then try to master it at the same time going into the MPC-X or whatever. Second best would be to resample the output of old samplers into the X with high end converters attached. I personally can live without older MPC. You can still get more of a modern low-fi sound with just the X and outboard effects. So many effects choices in modular but there is a decent amount in non-modular as well. Expensive! The BLA is definitely better, but if you plan on doing any mixing or channel processing outside the box, I recommend putting a hi-end filter like the Retroverb Lancet and buss compressor. or something like a Furman Overstayer which has both. Or maybe an expensive tube preamp. Those things will breathe life back into a sample performance. JCF Audio makes an 8-channel DA converter with real tube-tape electronics on the output for around $7,000. It might be like going back to the late 70s with your MPC-X to mix a record. I'm on Facebook. Jared Harrison from Lytle Creek California.
👍
I rewatched this joint just for the beat. 😂. It’s a vibe.
Thanks! LOL! I saved it. Which version should I go in on? The X or the 60? Or do both and switch up for a lofi effect?
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 stop man you know the 60 man. It’s got that knock!!
Listening in my living room with a sub. The the X has a much wider frequency response than the 60.
The bass reaches further and booms more. Also the X seems to capture more high frequencies.
This gives the 60 the impression of more punch since the mid range seems to jump out more.
The 60 will probably shine more when slightly overdriving the inputs when sampling at 45 or 78rpm then pitched back down.
More modern with the X. The older units not being as high fi give them a special character, although the converters are not as advanced. Both generations of MPCs are being used these days.
The 808 on the X has the transients and it seems like a wider image. The 60 has less transients and the image is more center probably better for lows. Also more highs. I always noticed the low transients with bolos stuff...nobody to really compare it to though.
I preffer the old model, feels more glued together
The hihats sound strikingly different, it's almost as of the 3000 has a limiter over the top of it. Either way, the old model sound better to me,
@@davidcache what 3000?? 😂... where?
@@titsticklerthompson981 the 60*, mah bad
Good vid man
Thanks boss!
I would like to give my opinion, I'd say the older does sound wayyyyy better right off the bat, but i believe with the right tweaking on the EQ on the X will make it sound like the older . But thats just my thinking . The 808 sounds alot smoother and more of that punch, and the newer X is more like a softer type bass touch feel. Great video!
Makes sense. Thanks!
Yep….. that 60 knock!
u should put the Mpc 60 effect on in the se and play them against each other to see how they sound then.
Will do in the future. For sure. Thanks!
And after you compare the 3000, let's hear the 2500[JJOS] vs. The X se.. if you please.😊
jjos doesnt effect the sound at all
This is the next video actually. 2500 LE JJOS. Sunday night!
So the closed hat was telling and the 808
Bring the MPC 3000 😀
Exactly 😂
For sure!
On the way!!
O 1 more thing.And mind you EA-Ski has all of these so thats why he been knowing the older machines hit harder and are fatter and warmer thats why he’s been so confident in what he been saying and i been agreeing with him.
He has all these machines and prollly a/b them a thousand times over…
True. Everybody does not have that luxury. My thing is that because something sounds clearer, that doesn’t make it sound bad. Sound can be shaped.
@@musictechworksceddmack8609 I agree with that as well king🫡🫡🫡
The difference is very clear to me. The X is cleaner, but the 60 is fuller. It is like the X is centered in front of me and the 60 is surrounding me with the sound. It is like CD vs Vinyl. Pick your preference.
There sounds like phasing is happening here, like the X SE is on the speakers and bleeding back into the mic. Something isnt right here. My newer MPCs don’t sound phased like that.
The mic was not on so no phasing is happening. Or even possible. People hear things differently, some have no critiques, others micro analyze everything. I own every MPC ever made and have been engineering for over 30 years. I’ll go back and triple check the audio again. Thanks for your thoughts.
Going back to listen, I hear what you mean. It’s the kick and 808 tone on the X. They themselves are not starting at the same time. A quick sample edit move and that’s fix. No other sounds are “phasing”. I also think the fidelity of the 808 tone really clear. So good ear. I’ve done other videos after this and may revisit. I think people should just create with what they got. I will focus more on the songwriting, producing process of songs. It was a hot topic while it was hot. Make great music. That is what really matters.
60 is 12 bit.. more punchy and gritty. Sounds better to my ears
Just out of curiosity, since in the MPC software you can set the output to emulate the sound of some legacy MPCs I was wondering if the software on the SE supports that as well and if so how that would stack up to the originals.
All the newer gen MPCs have the emulations built in. If you have one, just go over to Preferences and under General, you'll have the Vintage Mode option with 4 different values: MPC3000, MPC60, SP1200, SP1200 RING.
I don't own the 60, 3000, or SP1200, so I can't confirm whether those are true to form or just really close, but still, I'm assuming they are good as a quick fix, if it's needed.
They do, but they're pretty well useless and not at all accurate.
Vintage mode is there. It sounds different from the default settings but not like the real units. I will demo that next. Actually, I do in the next video dropping tomorrow at 11am EST.
Mpc x has phase in the sound. Did you loop the sound back within the mpcx?
Nope. Just came out that way.
But did you put the mpc x into 16 bit or 12 bit mode?
I did switch to vintage mode in one of these videos. I’ll have to review to see which one. Thanks for watching. I’ll reply here.
Are you running the SE in vintage mode?
I switched back and forth. See the text on the screen as the X SE plays.
wow you can really hear the difference
Crunchy 3000. Clean heavy X SE. depends on whatcha want…
The X Sounds Cleaner And Brighter and actually hits harder. Finally debate closed
The beat sounds better on mpc x se. But the sounds solo sound better on mpc 60.😮
I prefer the drums on the 60 and the melodie on de X.
Yeap, I can sequence the 60 with the X, speeding up the workflow with that vintage 12Bit sound on the drums.