OS2 or OS2XL

I am still learning OS 1 ( 4.99)
but consiedering upgrading to OS2 or OS2XL....

a bit confused readin about all the new features...

witch one has better realtime timestretching a and a better workflow over OS 4.99?

how useful are the audio tracks.... do u use it.... ?

what do u miss about OS 4.99 if anything?

elektrofone wrote:I am still learning OS 1 ( 4.99)
but consiedering upgrading to OS2 or OS2XL....

a bit confused readin about all the new features...

witch one has better realtime timestretching a and a better workflow over OS 4.99?

The timestretching is the same, the workflow is better in JJOS2 (You can't automize pan and volume on 2xl, and the sliders is f*ckd up)

elektrofone wrote:how useful are the audio tracks.... do u use it.... ?

I use it for vocal recording and BPM finding (select a loop and twist the bpm until the waveform fits into the whole screen)

elektrofone wrote:what do u miss about OS 4.99 if anything?

Nothing really. Try it out!!

The timestretching is the same, the workflow is better in JJOS2 (You can't automize pan and volume on 2xl, and the sliders is f*ckd up)

i am stil struggling to b able to record the realtime pitch shift with Qlinks siders .. cant figure out how to do it.. totally lost

you've mentioned earlier that sliders have probs in OS2XL ...
whats wrong with them?

since there is now volume and panning automation on OSXL,
how do you get around that- switch back and forth between OS2XL to OS2 or OS1?
is it practical?

elektrofone wrote:you've mentioned earlier that sliders have probs in OS2XL ...
whats wrong with them?

http://www.mpc-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=107060

since there is no volume and panning automation on OSXL,
how do you get around that-

easy, use OS 2.

rarara wrote:while in os2xl it looks like you can't read the os2 file (i had to go to an even earlier version first), so it makes swapping between versions a bit of a pain

I've encountered this as well. It creates an astounding inconvenience. Choose wisely which OS you will use before producing.

Sooty_G wrote:

elektrofone wrote:you've mentioned earlier that sliders have probs in OS2XL ...
whats wrong with them?

http://www.mpc-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=107060

since there is no volume and panning automation on OSXL,
how do you get around that-

easy, use OS 2.

hmmm, that's wat I was afraid of... I'm just 'bout to scrutch the surface of OS1 4.99
and I leave mpc on for days without any glitches or a crush yet( fingers crossed)
wouldn't love to much to break the workflow by betatesting and erase-reinstall OS1-OS2-OS2XL-OS1, etc routine
but stillcurious 'bout the 2XL/2 features...

could maybe I try to install them in demo mode to try all the fancy new features first?
how easy it is to go back to OS 1?

sugoisounds wrote:

Sooty_G wrote:os 2 has XOX style programming in grid edit. (step seq'ing?)
os 2 has more features in pad pattern mode (tune).
os 2 has a better filter behavior with the qlinks (relative adjust instead of absolute).

If you can be eff'ed, could you explain what these do?

xox programming: http://www.mpc-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=126654

pad pattern mode: http://www7a.biglobe.ne.jp/~mpc1000/os2/grid_lem.htm
(os 2 has the TUNE field, os 2xl doesn't.)

qlink filter behavior: ok. this will take some explaining...

lets say your sequence has 3 different filter settings on 3 different drum parts:
a kick drum with a LPF set at 20
a snare drum with a BPF set at 50
and a high hat with a HPF set at 70

now you assign a qlink to control FILTER and start to tweak it.

in os 2: all the filter settings will increase/decrease relative to how you tweak the qlink.

so if you take the qlink and lower it from the center (0) by a value of 10:
your kick will now be LPF at 10
your snare will be BPF at 40
your high hat will be HPF at 60

everything keeps its setting - they just drop by a value of 10. simple.


now, in os 2xl, if you do the same thing (lower the qlink by 10), all the filter values will immediately jump to the same value (the value of the qlink) regardless of how they were set individually in the first place.

and what's WORSE... is that all your filtered drum parts will also jump to the same filter TYPE. in os 2xl, there is no generic FILTER qlink setting like in os 2, there is only LOW PASS CUTOFF, BAND PASS CUTOFF, and HIGH PASS CUTOFF.

so turn on LOW PASS CUTOFF in the qlinks and set it to 10, and you will get this in os 2xl:
your kick will now be LPF at 10
your snare will be LPF at 10
your high hat will be LPF at 10

see what happens? your snare & high hat lose their BPF & HPF settings and everything becomes a LPF. you can only get one filter type & setting & it's applied to everything on the track simultaneously. the only way around this is to put everything on it's own track and set up a different qlink setting for each track, but that's time consuming - and even then you can only tweak one track/sound at a time (that's how the qlinks work).

i found this whole implementation of the qlinks to be really messed up in 2xl so that's why i don't use it. you have a lot more control in os 2.

Sooty_G wrote:

sugoisounds wrote:

Sooty_G wrote:

now, in os 2xl, if you do the same thing (lower the qlink by 10), all the filter values will immediately jump to the same value (the value of the qlink) regardless of how they were set individually in the first place.

and what's WORSE... is that all your filtered drum parts will also jump to the same filter TYPE. in os 2xl, there is no generic FILTER qlink setting like in os 2, there is only LOW PASS CUTOFF, BAND PASS CUTOFF, and HIGH PASS CUTOFF.

Thank you this is what I've been trying to figure out!....... JJOS2 here I come!!

is this only the case if all drum hits are on the same track?

rarara wrote:is this only the case if all drum hits are on the same track?

yep. i mentioned this in my post:

the only way around this is to put everything on it's own track and set up a different qlink setting for each track, but that's time consuming - and even then you can only tweak one track/sound at a time (that's how the qlinks work).

I don't see any benefit to having multiple sounds on single tracks, as I wouldn't track out like that, so I don't produce that way either.

I'd personally like better qlink implementation in XL, but automating an average sounding filter (as an example) isn't that important to me. Quantize strength (as a better example) is stunning in XL, and much more important to me in how I create beats.

Sooty_G wrote:

sugoisounds wrote:

Sooty_G wrote:os 2 has XOX style programming in grid edit. (step seq'ing?)
os 2 has more features in pad pattern mode (tune).
os 2 has a better filter behavior with the qlinks (relative adjust instead of absolute).

i found this whole implementation of the qlinks to be really messed up in 2xl so that's why i don't use it. you have a lot more control in os 2.

Thanks for the reply.

Reading between the lines, XOX and pad pattern look good for doing very quantized stuff quickly eg. house/techno hats n kicks? (i need to play with this on XL)

I understand what you are saying about q-links, but does the recording of q-links work the same in 2 and 2XL (what I really like about 2XL over 1 is that you can overwrite/overdub really easily - in 1 you have to record the q-link moves right first take - does this make sense?)

The difficult thing here is, I think, a few of us here are trying to compare and learn about different OS's when when don't know any one OS inside out...

Coz wrote:I don't see any benefit to having multiple sounds on single tracks, as I wouldn't track out like that, so I don't produce that way either.

I'd personally like better qlink implementation in XL, but automating an average sounding filter (as an example) isn't that important to me. Quantize strength (as a better example) is stunning in XL, and much more important to me in how I create beats.

could u please give an example of how do u use qiantize strength
or maybe a link to a better description?

i challenge anyone to make a video that shows the importance of quantize strength - with nice clear audio so i can hear what it is doing and the difference between before and after it's use. it just sounds like the most anal, fiddly little feature and i have never understood while so many people requested it and apparently use it. if i have a problem with the timing of my hits i just re-record them or move them around in GRID EDIT. just as easy to do with and more controllable.

but hey, if someone can show me why this is a great feature, i'm willing to listen!

I understand what you are saying about q-links, but does the recording of q-links work the same in 2 and 2XL (what I really like about 2XL over 1 is that you can overwrite/overdub really easily - in 1 you have to record the q-link moves right first take - does this make sense?)

the qlinks are the same in os 1 & 2. os 2xl messed it up. you can redo/overdub your qlinks just as easy in 1, 2, and 2xl. i'm not sure what this qlink recording weakness in os 1 is that you are referring to. definitely nothing was improved about the process in 2xl. all JJ did was remove the ability to record/playback 2 qlinks simultaneously.

read the link i posted. that's as in depth analysis as i can give:
http://www.mpc-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=107060