#4

I was in the same boat. An MPC 2000 was my first serious piece of gear and I always get excited when a new version comes out. But Akai just isn’t the same anymore and I’m not too big on touch screens.

Maschine runs very stable, at least for me. And the inputs are just super handy. Together with the new screens it feels pretty much like a hardware-only workflow.

Also, Maschine is a fantastic VST controller. I took the time and mapped all my favourite effects and synths. Now I can control most of them without looking at the computer at all. If only the Madrona routings were patchable via midi :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#5

Perera Elsewhere and Olof Dreijer are also both active (and advertised!) users of Native Instruments, it really is supported by a very broad range of artists. I’m only dipping my to into their stuff lately, but it really is deep and powerful stuff. I’m considering buying their hardware at some point, I’m just no sure when yet as it’s a bit pricey.

1 Like
#6

At the moment I’m torn between the Maschine and Push 2… :thinking:

…the integrated audio/midi interface on the mk3 its tempting (Now much more that I’m only with 2 ports on my MacBook Pro :sweat_smile: )
But it’s not a full fledged daw…

Ableton and Push it’s definitely a much more versatile combo but…

I cannot decide if
Logic + Maschine
or
Ableton + Push 2

Gotta say that I never manage to learn a daw so I’m a beginner in this scenario.

#7

Cannot help you since the choice is so personal
For me the choice is either Maschine or MPC 1000

If I get a good price I’d be happy with either one

1 Like
#8

Do you have Push?

As I said I find the Ableton’s controller more powerful and versatile,
but Maschine it’s probably more bang for your buck.

Anyone uses Ableton and Maschine?

How is the integration between the two?

#9

No

Curently have ableton and a 128 which should be enough to handle sampling control within the daw.

Anyway…I think you’re right about Push, it is quite versatile (and capable of beats/chopping) but I’d rather have something more focused. I prefer the size and layout of the Maschine pads too

1 Like
#10

It’s probably a topic for another discussion. But in actual use, Push and Maschine are very different. One is a controller that (greatly) helps you to play a DAW. The other is a hardware interface of an instrument. Sure, they can do similar things. But the way to these things is different. If you want an MPC like workflow, go with Maschine. If you want a great controller for Ableton, get Push.

3 Likes
#11

This is on topic imo

To your point…that confirms what I gathered in my research. I might change my mind but after tinkering with ableton (sans push) a straightforward sampler is more appealing knowing my style and preferences

#12

Yeah Push VS Maschine is always a big discussion so I guess we can have it here. What I take out of it is : people should not forget Ableton without Push is already a very well built and versatile thing (monome and some controller is enough to exploit a lot of it), and the beauty I see in Maschine is that you can actually add that as a specialized tool TO ableton, when Push is basically useless to use NI stuff. So basically Maschine + Ableton is a pretty cool thing. Push + NI softwares alone is more of a crippled combo (and I often feel frustrated not to be able to exploit it fully). That’s my take on what makes Maschine attractive to a live user with an extensive use for NI softwares.

2 Likes
#13

Does Mk3 support individual track lengths, polyrhythmic patterns, or changing time signatures? I liked Maschine mkI but felt like everything had to be locked into a strict time signature or BPM.

#14

That’s more of a function of the software than the controller. They don’t support polyrhythmic patterns yet, but it’s on the roadmap.

1 Like
#15

I own an MPC500 and I love its sound, indeed, I use it to sample and reproduce the samples instead of DAW. And the MPC500’s DACs are not so good as 2000. Every time I considered to buy a Maschine my mind dived into an MPC60 dream :smiley:

1 Like
#16

the difference is the Sound

#17

Old MPCs are great but besides the 60 or 3000 I would not buy one for their sound. Rather the overall (stable) workflow.

#18

Interesting. You resample though the MPC500? I’ve always liked my MPC500, especially the hands-on MPC workflow. I also like the sound but think the outputs are a bit noisy.

#19

…sometime my sounds (e.g. from Nord Modular G2 or monomachine) pass though a Sherman Filterbank, in flat mode, to became bigger and “analog” as I want. :slight_smile:

#20

I still use the first generation Maschine Mikro. I would probably upgrade to the Mk3 if it existed… but I still get tons of use out of my old one. Maschine works especially well as a VST or AU plugin in Ableton. You can actually switch back and forth from controlling the NI software and controlling Ableton (MIDI mode), although customizing the MIDI setup is a bit limited.

1 Like
#21

So, I owned one of these and it lacked “soul.” I’ve always been a fan for Roger Linn’s MPC, but Akai has been going downhill, for me at least. To be honest, the best MPC out there is the 2000XL. I have a 3000 as well and it’s amazing, but the 2000XL keeps up with the times in terms of hardware.

1 Like
#22

Yeah I can see why you’d say that but I think I could work around the limitations of the machince to make decent funk

Will glance at the used market for an MK3 from time to time but couldnt refuse a great deal on an MPC I found over the weekend (2K XL)

Having a standalone beatbox with 8 output jacks was too irresistible. Outweighed even the benefits of the newer smaller mpc devices

1 Like
#23

Nice! The tilted screen is such an advantage over the 1000. Have fun :slight_smile:

1 Like