Feelings about OS2

yeah man

i say just install the demo alongside os1, and create an os2 folder titled "zzz os2" on your mpc

keep os1 as your main but whenever you get bored or hit a snag, boot os2, load a couple inst programs, and play around just for fun/something different.

Nym wrote:yeah man

i say just install the demo alongside os1, and create an os2 folder titled "zzz os2" on your mpc

keep os1 as your main but whenever you get bored or hit a snag, boot os2, load a couple inst programs, and play around just for fun/something different.

I agree with Nym. It's worth it to keep up with all the new features of OS2, so that if you decide to buy it, you'll know your way around it. That's what I've been doing, since I decided to wait until March when it's more stable and "ready for prime-time". But I gotta admit that I'm tempted to buy it sooner.

i voted for undecided. i don't like the fact that jj is removing essential features, no matter how many new trendy ones he adds. the fact that os2 has keygroups does matter a lot though.

I f___in' love it!
To me, the OS2 is already stable enough. Never had it crash and the workflow has increased a LOT of the os1. Just remember to save every now and then so you wont loose much if it crashes, remember how often the akai os2 used to crash. haha, and this JJ2 isn't even on a beta-level

I can't even imagine how buggyfull the new 5000 will be with those new things that most of them JJ has already added to the 1K.

I guess it's just the headspace you are in.

At the moment I am happy to be distracted by new features, putting together libraries etc but there comes a time when you just have to say, 'that's it, I am getting on with the music with the stuff that I have as is'

Later on, you are happy to be distracted again...

sorry i posted this in the wrong thread...

hoosdat wrote:i voted for undecided. i don't like the fact that jj is removing essential features, no matter how many new trendy ones he adds. the fact that os2 has keygroups does matter a lot though.

what features has he removed?

formantuk wrote:

hoosdat wrote:i voted for undecided. i don't like the fact that jj is removing essential features, no matter how many new trendy ones he adds. the fact that os2 has keygroups does matter a lot though.

what features has he removed?

from jj's website...

The function which exists in OS1 and does not exist in OS2.
1. Sample layer 4
2. AMP Velocity =>Attack
3. AMP Velocity =>START
4. PITCH Velocity =>Pitch
5. FILTER2
6. Filter Time
7. Filter Amount
8. Filter Velocity =>Time
9. Filter Velocity =>Amount
10. Filter Velocity =>Frequncy

There are not a save in the internal memory of a program and a sample and loading

this is to clarify - about half of these functions were taken out because they exist otherwise.

1. Sample layer 4

SIMULT pad allow up to 15 sample layers to be triggered with one pad (original pad + up to 4 simulted pads)

6. Filter Time
7. Filter Amount
8. Filter Velocity =>Time
9. Filter Velocity =>Amount
10. Filter Velocity =>Frequncy

exist differently (in FILTER ADSR screen of os2)

the only functions that are gone gone are these (and many are qlink accessible):

2. AMP Velocity =>Attack
3. AMP Velocity =>START
4. PITCH Velocity =>Pitch
5. FILTER2

i see - so jj has removed stuff that has been replaced by the new ADSR
and doe's a better job.

as for the removal of filter 2, he has just fattened up the main filter in os2
just like you do when you link the two filters in os1.

i wonder what pole the os1 filters were.... probably 4 pole each

so the new os2 filter could be 8 pole ... by the sound of it.

... think i'll boot up later os1 to compare the filters...

please do. the filter is different but i don't know enough about it to really be able to say what it is

biggest way to note difference: res 100 on os1 sounds VERY different from the high pitched noise generated with res 100 on os2

There is a slight learning curve, but its OS1 and then some. I can still do the same stuff.

Nym wrote:please do. the filter is different but i don't know enough about it to really be able to say what it is

biggest way to note difference: res 100 on os1 sounds VERY different from the high pitched noise generated with res 100 on os2

I just double checked what's up with the Low Pass filter, and here's what I noticed...

OS1:
1. Low Pass is a 2 pole filter
2. Low Pass 2 is a 4 pole filter (that's why you hear more resonanace)

OS2:
Low Pass Filter is 4 pole. The amount of resonance is the same as the Low Pass Filter 2 on JJ OS1.
Since a 4 pole Lowpass filter is more flexible than the 2 pole, I can see why it makes sense to remove the 2 pole filter.

I never liked the 2 pole filter due to it's limitations.
The 4 pole is clearly superior.

just been playing with the os1 filter - then back to the os2 filter...

having two filters in os1 is cool but ...
without doubt the adsr blows os1 out of the water - it's a lot less complex and more flexible/intuitive to get the sound your looking for.

the os2 filter sounds very much like the os1 filter when it's linked.

have not tried it yet.

soon though