Kia ora, long time listener first time caller.
Have been using MPC Live as the centre of my hardware set up for 7 years. Went with the MPC when I was considering a Pyramid and have been super happy with it, but not feeling the MPC3 firmware, and would like to stretch my brain/music with the features in the Hapax.
The base of my approach would probably be similar to how I use the MPC; one sound per track. Ie track 1 is Kick, 2 is snare etc. Then in Hapax, use the patterns in the track for the variations - with MPC I use a new track for each variation.
So I wouldn’t use drum tracks and lanes per se.
Not sure what I’d use for drums yet, but this would be a complete rebuild of my live set up so I’m not in a hurry 
Any thoughts on the track per sound approach?
Thanks!
Craig/researchintospeed
i sequence my MPC externally from Hapax, but not nearly that discretely. pretty much all my samples, whether loops, one-shots-vocals, on one Hapax Track, i.e., one MIDI channel, then other channels for plugins or keygroups. but i’m also sequencing several other pieces of outboard gear so can only afford to dedicate four Hapax tracks in total to MPC. generally it works well but the system you’re describing will eat up the 16 total Tracks per project pretty quickly if you have something close to a full drum kit, including percussion. you get another 16 tracks if you don’t mind having Proj A and Proj B going simultaneiously but then that also somewhat defeats the purpose of Hapax itself. and you can do the A/B assignments on each MIDI channel to give you more, i think
the one thing to keep in mind with MPC is the midi-note overlap bug which still has yet to be fixed. essentially, if you’re sequencing an MPC externally, regardless of how many tracks or MIDI channels the Hapax might be putting out to other gear or to different tracks within MPC itself, you can’t sequence overlapping midi notes without choking them off in the MPC. that is, if your kick sound is assigned to C-1 in MPC on MIDI channel 1, anytime you play C-1 on any other Hapax Track regardless of what MIDI channel is assigned to it, it will choke the kick drum sample on the MPC. which, as you start to sequence 16 tracks/channels of sounds, and depending on how many samples you’re triggering on the MPC, can be a giant pain in the ass to get all mapped correctly
Hey hey, sorry I definitely wasn’t clear
The MPC is gonna be replaced, I’ll go Erica synths or similar (many options) for drum modules,
It’ll be like this track wise.
Kick, snare, clap, hats, shaker, Tom’s, cymbals, percussion, bass, synth, synth, synth, synth, samples.
I came from korg and elektron before the MPC.
Really loved a lot of the way the machine drum worked, Hapax (to me) seems to have that same openness.
Cx
If I understand you correctly this is pretty much how I use the Hapax currently. I use a digitakt 2 for drums (I have similar drum kit with kick, tom, snare, clap, CH, OH, rim, ride) so a lil different there. I run both project simultaneously - DT2 tracks 1-8 are ProjA tracks 1-8; DT2 tracks 9-16 are ProjB tracks 1-8. The other tracks are various synths and modular stuff but essentially the left half of the mix/mute screen is for DT2. I use the mix/mute screen to manage mutes and like you said, I have alternate drum sequences on the other track patterns.
Dope
This helps me get my head around the possibilities with the proj A B feature…but yes this sounds how I’m thinking the work flow will be.
1 Like
i personally feel the sequencing capabilities of the current mpc line has been diminished from the classic mpc workflow and doesnt work as well for performances or live interactions. mpc 1000 and 2500 have an aftermarket os called jjos that makes these machines extremely useful as a place for drums and gives an amazingly tactile experience when muting tracks and steering the direction you want to take the sequencer. these things are great strengths as compared to hapax and newer mpcs. to have a dedicated drum sequencer that is only tempo synced to hapax is a major advantage in flexibility in my opinion and allows all of hapax to be dedicated to melody and automations that make synths more animated. also, you can develop automations and sequences on hapax and then simply record them to the sequencer in the mpc, which btw can have patterns that last as long as you need them to while hapax is limited to 32 measures. anyway im glad my drums are not handled by hapax as to me its not as developed for drums as opposed to melody. so if youve only tried the new mpc line, you havent really experienced what is special about the reputation of the classic mpc workflow. also, jjos turns the sample playback architecture into something way more flexible and deeper than the stock os with up to 4 layers per sound, many more filter choices, dedicated envelopes per amp and filter, and even an lfo. also master FX which make drums sound quite nice. also the ability to select all sounds in a program for editing at once instead of applying the same tweak to all sounds individually. limits are greatly increased as well: mpc can do up to 64 tracks with unlimited sequence length as already mentioned. its song sequencer is flexible also in that you can turn a song from a list of patterns into a pattern which can then be sent through the same process. there is also a step interface for writing/editing sequences that isnt quite as nice as hapax.
all in all i think the two machines compliment each other very well! the only thing the mpc 1000/2500 with jjos doesnt have is the current sample engine of the new mpc line, which i consider to be superior, considering all the built in fx and mixing. for this reason id love to also have an mpc one that i sequence with my mpc 1000. but this bug mentioned above is disconcerting! i have not yet experienced it for myself. i hope its addressed soon so i can use it for a midi controlled sampler. im more than certain the hapax could fill it with amazing midi control!
I’ve found the MPC live to be a great tool for writing and performing, as evidenced by having in it my set up for so long
It looks like the new MPC firmware might address the lack of sample synthesis with a new mod matrix in the keygroup, but the linear/daw workflow kills it for live performance (my use case) from my POV.
If I plan it our correctly I can reduce the size of my set up, and be inspired by new ways of working
Enjoy your day everyone 
Craig/researchintospeed