The Art of Live PA.

[SlavikSvensk]

my point was not that it is as good as an mpc, but that you could use it as an mpc, if you chose to. that is, if you think hardware makes the PA, then there you go. if you don't, then there you go in another direction.

[The_Laughing_Man]

my point was not that it is as good as an mpc, but that you could use it as an mpc, if you chose to. that is, if you think hardware makes the PA, then there you go. if you don't, then there you go in another direction.

It`s better than an mpc.
ever used an mpc?
Rubbish sequencing. Tiny interface, very few features of actual manipulation.
It was a loop player essentially.
1 fader, 2 knobs.

You just can`t compare them in both the internal sequencing system and the external control method.

[SlavikSvensk]

It`s better than an mpc.
ever used an mpc?
Rubbish sequencing. Tiny interface, very few features of actual manipulation.
It was a loop player essentially.
1 fader, 2 knobs.

You just can`t compare them in both the internal sequencing system and the external control method.

yeah had an mpc for 6 years. was fun but yes, tedious.

think you're still missing my point, though. not a question of being as good as an mpc, but that you could exactly emulate an mpc-based live PA if you wanted to. you wouldn't have to, by any means. but you could, if you were one of those "hardware only" types. so it's not a case of "different means," which is what i've always thought was the point of the "hardware not software" argument.

from that, you can extrapolate that "if you can do exactly what you did with hardware, but also this other stuff, then what's the advantage of hardware supposed to be again?"