Nym wrote:i believe that informed use of these additional features will result in better music, simple example = the differnece in my drum programs from 1 to 2. the addition of adsr gives you FAR more shaping capability than you had before, and to be able to do this SOONER rather than in daw allows you much earlier control/access over your layering, resulting in a better conceptualized/closer to perfect track to work on in daw.
in short, implementation of ADSR and alternate loop result in being able to use a variety of samples in both a broader and more specific sense.
as for the computer>mpc thing, i agree with cheaper, but i cannot agree with faster or better for Just Plain Midi Sequencing.
currently, no program (not even guru, which would be the closest competitor) would allow me to be program or sequence drums with the speed, groove and elegance with which i feel like i experience in jjos2. to me the workflow, small screen, compact features, both hands in use > peering across the vast sequencer of a DAW program for deep editing and TC off recording of realtime pad-playing. if this was not the case, i certainly not be here, i'd be off on the Logic or Cubase boards,
FX, yes, hands down DAW beats the MPC
multitracking/macrosampling/audio tracks, HELL yes, DAW beats MPC
lots of things, DAW beats mpc, and that has its place
but once you've recorded your sample track and tracked it out into daw, it's often too late for individual applications of different ADSR settings per slice unless you want to REslice it and put it into yet another sampler.
Don't get me wrong I see where you are coming from, its just that for example, I have several ADSRs, and always have since my second sampler: a Roland S-550 back in 97 (before that it was my mentor's SP-12). So its not like its some new thing and 'wow JJ put an ADSR in the 1K woohoo where do I sign!' Personally, if I need one, I use one. Takes two seconds for me to throw the sample into Battery 3 or even resample it into my EMAX. Not having one in the 1k doesn't hinder me in any way, and actually it results in a faster workflow for me. For me.
Anyway I seriously doubt that you have the authority to say that anyone besides yourself would make better music if they make "informed use" of the new features in OS2. That relies on several assumptions that you can't make about other people's equipment, and their knowledge in the use and application of that equipment. If the use of OS2 helps you make better music, or make your music faster or whatever, then that's supercool. But that doesn't mean it will do the same for anyone else.
I had a problem with the 1k LPF on kick drums. So ok fine, that's a need. So I went and got a Peavey Spectrum Analog Filter. Problem solved. Now I just gotta figure out how to use it. But that's cool because its a need. OS2 to me is just another learning curve that I don't need, and I completely understand other people feeling that way.
Nym wrote:as dvs said, too, improvements in lesser thought of areas (menus, browsing, shortcuts...hell, the sample list!!!) are often overlooked for how helpful/efficient they are.
There I agree. The Logic 8 upgrade focused almost solely on workflow. A lot of people feel that, besides the price drop and the loss of the dongle, that upgrade was wack. But for me, that was the best upgrade they put out since I bought it back in 2001. I would have paid $200 for a usability upgrade at any point and been totally happy with it.
I don't feel I have a deficit in usability with OS1 right now... Maybe I will feel it at some point, but until then I'm content.
