is the JJ OS 2 still worth getting if...

well basically i now use the mpc as a sequencer.

so my questions is..

i already have the JJ OS 1.

what features will the JJ OS 2 has that could make it good to get?

i mean would it really be worth getting it?

drop some knowledge.

ant?

if you're using it as a sequencer, bypass os2 and get os2xl for quantize strength and an improved DRUM GRID edit. as a whole, besides the additional sampling benefits of os2/xl, a host of sequencing benefits exist in post-os1 updates as well. yes, i think it's worth it. i could never go back to os1, even if i were just using the mpc as a sequencer and not a sampler.

get OS2 then get XL, thats my advice, Nym's quite XL biased, not an unfair comment, he's mainly a trailblazer! and has been heavily involved with developments so may have an overfamiliar take on things where new experiences go.

i say - get to grips with the two is the best solution, then decide what t use ALL the time. for the $15 difference - its hardly a difficult choice to make.

Should I get Windows 3.11, Win98 or Windows XP is basically what you are asking.
Nym is pretty much on the money about XL being the choice.
If not going to XL then stick with OS1.
Since I have other devices i look at the 1k OS on a whole not just by it's feature set, it's too easy to lost perspective when you start segmating the features.
You can easily get lost in the I like this but don't like that comparison.

Overall XL has some nice refinements that make the overall process flow more smoothly which helps you stay creative.

creativity is a matter of personality, if i cant predict the personality, i suggest the wider perspective in the hope of a user finding their own tastes are catered for. that said, the mpc's a given, theres no point in considering it as a whole.

if Valentine has budget/complication issues, i suggest seeking out the comparison chart on JJ's website, and see if there are features u can't do without, and options u would like to try out.

but if at all possible, get OS2 and XL, then play with both.

if its just as sequencer, i think XL offers those new realtime generative thingy's chord and arp, and patt?

but if its also sound design with shaping of samples etc and hands on creative sculpting, i would hint at the OS2. personally.


best of luck

Valentine

a quick thought:

though it's not at all what OP is talking about, regarding sound sculpting: for microsampling etc, even standalone, os2xl is more powerful for me than os2 simply because of crossfade and stereo crossfade. virtually every slice from a record becomes a smooth, completely controllable, endless tone, perfect for sample mangling or even more free synth creation. altloop simply doesnt cut it. this, to me, is irreplaceable by anything in os2, whose realtime qlink functions are made redundant with daw.

but as far as sequencing goes, i didn't even stop to consider chord and arpeggiator to why os2xl is a more powerful sequencer - though those are definiitely the most visible improvements. improvements in track changing while recording, quantize strength, usable drum grid, wait for note or midi, default to chromatic layout, etc etc etc - these are where i live.

Nym wrote:virtually every slice from a record becomes a smooth, completely controllable, endless tone, perfect for sample mangling or even more free synth creation.

Prove it!!!!!!!!!!! with video?

djtendo wrote:

Nym wrote:virtually every slice from a record becomes a smooth, completely controllable, endless tone, perfect for sample mangling or even more free synth creation.

Prove it!!!!!!!!!!! with video?

You could load XL and see it for yourself.

arebee wrote:creativity is a matter of personality,

True and untrue.
Many people tend to hold on to what they know and understand and never see when something is better.

Sovereign wrote:

arebee wrote:creativity is a matter of personality,

True and untrue.
Many people tend to hold on to what they know and understand and never see when something is better.

Agreed

^ hah this is why i don't have a 4000
in some cases it can be good though, like when an artist claims his new project is on some "completely different sh!t" and it turns out to be completely different...and sh!t

Nym wrote:^ hah this is why i don't have a 4000

You would be surprised at how much of the what JJ has done is similar to the 4k.
Of course the 4k does it better and to a deeper level but that's mostly because the people doing the OS worked with the people doing the hardware.

If JJ could get someone to design him a hardware box to go along with his vision as opposed to having to work inside the box Akai failed on he could do some really dramatic stuff.

Nym wrote: like when an artist claims his new project is on some "completely different sh!t" and it turns out to be completely different...and sh!t

You generally find this comes from someone who can't grasp music from a listeners point of view or they are trying to cover their lack of ability.
Sad part is with most people who post their music or links to their music people compliment them when it really just sound like garbage.
Of course if you try to give constructive feedback you are labelled as a hater so at some point you just stop listening or commenting.

primebeatz wrote:

Sovereign wrote:

arebee wrote:creativity is a matter of personality,

True and untrue.
Many people tend to hold on to what they know and understand and never see when something is better.

Agreed

better is a matter of opinion. i dont here anybody bragging on the mc-909 and it does everything that the new jjos does. and has done it for a very long time. its just a thought.

LunaticBastard wrote: better is a matter of opinion. i dont here anybody bragging on the mc-909 and it does everything that the new jjos does. and has done it for a very long time. its just a thought.

It's not so much about what something does as much as how it does it.
One of the reasons ,many 60/3k users never liked the 2k/2kxl was fewer dedicated buttons being replaced by the open window function.

JJ has greatly reduced the open window function for the 1k/2500 and made what open window functions he uses have a more logical flow.

Roland made the mc909 and mc808 and some how they felt the mc808 was an improvement.
In some ways it was but in many ways it wasn't.

i am still on os2 waiting for bugfreeness in xl but i ll get it soon,
very soon !!