Wasn’t hard to convince you apparently…
Spanish / Italian thing? 
3 Likes
Yeah, I already had it in my cart and just had a moment where I had some second thoughts 
LOL - No, I just never typed it before. OT is better
Embarrassing that I purchased one, and didn’t know how to spell it.
2 Likes
Don’t worry, many people call it Octotrack even after buying it.
(I’m afraid I’ll be autocorrected by my smartphone with Octotrack now! 
)
1 Like
The title of my next full length album will be La Ottatraccia
3 Likes
you’ll need a preamp if you want to record scratch vocal bits (or sample off a mic). my most lightweight setup is a Cloud Lifter being powered by a 48v phantom power supply run to my mic.
i used to be an MPC guy a long time ago, but the OT is the center of my studio and songwriting process. the new MPCs have some amazing workflow improvements (roughly chopping samples etc) that is faster than an OT, but the performance side is dominated by the OT.
1 Like
I’m currently deep diving into a MPC One, a very capable machine, actually better than I expected, my last MPC was the 2500 (w JJ) which I did not enjoy as much as the 2000xl.
A lot of the MPC frustrations are still present, lots of menu diving, lots of undocumented shortcuts, poor manual, some daft limitations, lots of workarounds.* However if you don’t want to use a computer DAW then the current crop of MPCs might be worth a look.
Very quick to come up with ideas, after you have set up your programs (which makes setting tracks up on OT look quick and easy)
The sequencer is very basic, nothing wrong with it though, similar to any older sequencer like Cubase on the Atari for example. But no stuff like trig conditions, different meters etc, editing sequences at single event level is nowhere near as fast as Elektron.
But, it does have some great sequence editing for things like removing just a particular event across a range of bars etc. The step sequencer is ok, a bit long winded to do parameter automation, you first have to menu dive down a few layers to add an assignment for example, god forbid if you want a few lanes of automation using this method. You can do it in the regular sequencer in realtime, then edit in the step sequencer though, which saves a bit of the hassle.
The touchscreen is pretty bad, a bit like a ATM, but does get better with use, and for a lot of things you can just poke it the adjust with the value dial or q-links.
I think that for people who want to get right under the hood the MPC offers quite a bit, it seems that most MPC users just want to chop up some loops, lay them across the pads and have that quick classic MPC workflow, I think if that were me I’d go for an older MPC, which is more limited but also more focussed. Not to say in the least that you can’t use the modern ones like this though.
I think the Octatrack once mastered is more direct, more limited, involves the use of workarounds* also, is far more hands on. Sound quality is great on both, no real difference although I think OT filter and eq’s are better for me, MPC does have some interesting and nice fx, and a lot of not so great ones.
Also consider the free MPC beats software, it takes a bit of getting used to but offers pretty much most of the stuff the MPC hardware does but with a bit more precision for editing sequences using the mouse, that coupled with the OT offers the best of both worlds I think, you can easily export samples between them and use the MPC beats to record OT into.
All in all though I think the MPC One is very good value for money, if you like lots of built in sounds (I personally don’t, but they are easy enough to ignore) then you will probably be very happy with it.
15 Likes
concur on much of that, however if what you’re into is the sample content or plugins I’d buy something else… those are the only things on the mpc I don’t use… but if you wanna get hands on and have 4 different layers of a break assigned to different velocities under each pad , there’s a lot of creative fun to be had in triggering stuff like that in various ways… just so many ways to do things on them.
I am not a fan of the FX, but when you can stack them in different ways and freeze them I can’t complain too much, that feature alone is worth buying a beatmachine for… but I run the mpc through a plethora of pedals and you can still stack and freeze…
1 Like
Surprised that you think the MPC One sequencer is “very basic”. I think that it is a lot more powerful than the Elektron sequencers and it can definitely do do different meters, simply change the time signature.
Basic in the sense that it has no more modern things like scale division, trig conditions, percentage etc. Yeah it can do different time signatures and so on, and you can fake trig conditions by using programs with layers/empty samples etc, it isn’t a big negative IMHO but something to be aware of if coming from an Elektron sequencer - which of course have their own limitations also.
1 Like
Well, in comparison to Elektron sequencers the MPC One sequencer offers:
More tracks with 7 different track types.
Track length can be anywhere between 1 beat and 999 bars long
Much higher resolution (96 trigs per bar).
Variable grid size (scale division?) and support for different time signatures.
The play-head can be freely moved and a loop can be set between any two bars
Allows punch-in, punch-out and over dub recording.
Bars can be freely deleted, copied and inserted
Grid, piano roll and list editors
Patterns can be imported and exported.
A range of timing correct options.
Tracks can be grouped, exploded and bounced to sample or an audio track.
Events can be split, pitch quantized, humanized and randomly generated.
Track mute and solo events can be recorded.
8 Likes
Different time signatures are awkwardly implemented in the Mpc. You have to set them in the global settings and every new project will have these settings.
The only way i have found to change the time signature in an existing project is by inserting new bars in a sequence.
In contrast, the Octatrack can change time signature easily by shortening the pattern lenght.
1 Like
Yeah, I’m not criticising it but just pointing out the differences in the scope of this topic, it is more DAW/Computer sequencer like for sure, no disputing that.
My use of the word basic was really only in terms of the features not present compared to the Octatrack, but you are right that it does offer a lot more of the traditional sequencing functions not present on the Octatrack.
Both have their place, and I like them both, for different things.
Edit: Also some of the items you listed can be done on OT.
3 Likes
hey just out of curiosity what is the thing that makes you guys think of the mpc as daw like, and is it just the latest mpcs or did you feel that way going all the way back to the mpc60? I’m asking because the core workflow since the 60 has been so similar and of course this was before daws her a household name like they are now? … not that opcode etc… weren’t popular but you get my gist.
It’s such an interesting instrument imho with an interesting legacy and yet it’s so historically polarizing , like so many people think it’s only for rap music even though it wasn’t made for rap music, so many think it’s just for finger drummers I always hear that now days, and of course many feel it’s like a daw etc…
Not sure that shortening pattern lengths is an easy way to change the time signature.
Say I want to go from 4/4 to 5/4, I think that would be a bit of a PITA on the OT.
3 Likes
As someone who has owned an OT, (plus a Monomachine, A4 and Digitone), I am reasonably confident that Elektron sequencers are unable to do any of the things I listed except for minimum track lenght which can be 16th on Elektron sequencers.
Set the pattern lenght to 10 = 5/4 signature.
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but thats how I do it.
Sure? OT can do these.
No you would have to set your pattern length to 24 and then you would be left with just 1 bar per pattern.
Edit meant to write 20 not 24.
Pattern lenght should be 20 or 40 for 5/4 and because you can chain patterns the shortened lenght should not be a problem.
1 Like