a discussion of crippled Q-LINK behavior in OS 2XL

i just hope he adds quantise strength to os2, and not just xl.

it's nice to have the choice.

feature set of xl makes it (will make it) way more useful for me than os2
any one feature set won't be perfect for everyone, that's for sure
and you'll hear less from happy people than those who are bummed that an os has strayed from their ideal setup.

Sooty, the only thing I'll say is to keep in mind that this isn't the first time JJ has said something is impossible and yet the feature has come back. Perhaps it is impossible as implemented, but I wouldn't rule it out as gone for good quite yet either.

Here's to keeping fingers crossed and hopes up right?

sooty_g,

i'm with u 100% on this qlink issue,

i for one really valued the editing/creating of the q-real data in the q-real/grid edit pages, and i heavily used the combination q-real/note of dual q-link controlling simultaneously in recordings. as in your example - it was the heaviest 'sound sculpting tool' i'd found in the MPC period.

any erroneous takes could be tweaked either in step or grid edits, and was a very easy to follow route to getting lots done - with hardly any hassle.

in short - to lose functionality of the two sliders is MPC Heresey....in my view of a live/manual actions-recording context.

im just glad that active track was put into OS2 before JJ canned that os for this new XL.

probably will continue to get my best work done in OS2, im not an arp/pat type of guy, im not into the sober kinds of results i get with them, i'm more of a q-linked-vortex-curve-melt-dub-mosh- -erm -'ite.

so not many other benefits for me here in OS2XL just yet.

cc, cc, cc, vst vst vst! way more than qlinks - even recordable ADSR envelope control via cc. only downside is it requires a daw.

Nym wrote:cc, cc, cc, vst vst vst! way more than qlinks - even recordable ADSR envelope control via cc. only downside is it requires a daw.

or off board hardware. waiting for my virus to show up... but then it has knobs already for most everything you need so I guess I still wouldn't use the q-links much as they are :/.

Nym wrote:cc, cc, cc, vst vst vst!

or even better than vst is an external synth that also processes sound, and i already have a very powerful one. i definitely use the CC abilities in the MPC. but i don't use the SLIDERS for that, per se. i have a keyboard midi controller dedicated to tweaking the synth live.

but what i want (& had in OS 2) is direct control over the samples in the MPC. no vst is gonna help you modulate the sample start & end times, chop, etc... in the MPC. combine that with the filters and the way you have the sample looped... and you have some very powerful and unique ways of twisting samples right in the box. much more powerful and unique than just adding a second filter. with all the sound twisting available in OS 2 i didn't miss that second filter at all.

...and taking a laptop out live is just out of the question for me. vibration / heat / moisture / crashes... forget it.

like i said, OS 2Xl just sort of dropped without warning. i really think JJ should have consulted with us ahead of time regarding what features were going to be pulled/added. you wouldn't have gotten anything unanimous but maybe something close to a consensus. for example, i think A LOT of people would be willing to give up FILTER 2 and EQ HI & EQ LOW to get the mixer automation back.

like arebee, i think i might end up going back to 2. for now i'm pushing hard with bug reports and feature requests for OS 2XL to try to make it as good as possible. i want my voice to be heard to help shape the OS. but if it doesn't shape up with some significant new powers or a way to get some of the old functionality back then it will be a no-brainer for me to go back to OS 2.

but i think the least JJ could do would be to put a few of the new little OS 2XL features in OS 2 before abandoning it. just little stuff like the customized NUMERIC key and the reversed colors in the TRACK MUTE page. maybe SS level in the MAIN screen. i mean damn, i already paid him for OS 2XL ...

Here's some more crippling talk-- Not sure if this was mentioned yet.

Is there no longer a way to record panning movement in OS2XL? It seems like pan is no longer an option for the Q-Links, and of course we can't record the panning into the mixer automation any more...

That is NOT very XL if you ask me...

elevated wrote:Here's some more crippling talk-- Not sure if this was mentioned yet.

Is there no longer a way to record panning movement in OS2XL? It seems like pan is no longer an option for the Q-Links, and of course we can't record the panning into the mixer automation any more...

nope. this functionality was killed along with the mixer automation.

see, i just don't get it. this is BASIC stuff he is pulling.

let's say you want to do something very simple:
automate the fade in or fade out of a sample over the length of a sequence.

there is NO way to do this in OS 2XL !
this is even more elemental than the Q-LINK stuff!

i mean... for a new & supposedly more powerful OS i want MORE stuff able to be automated, not less.

I agree with most of your points here, Sooty. OS2XL aint for everybody, bottom line. I actually use Q Link more than I ever have. Almost seems like JJ made an OS just for me.

This basically leaves you with a single realtime controller for anything useful. 3 of the 4 sliders on my 2500 are useless with OS XL.

i could do without chord, arp, simult seq and pad to have a second slider.

I thought with OS XL you could manipulate the tune, s.start, s.end, and lpf at the same time and make some glitchy weirdness... 1 slider is a bit boring.

+1 for bringing the sliders back.

this isn't cool........ but the XL is still great in my opinon

Nah, Os2xl is heavy and buggy. If you make something advanced the sequencer will start to lack and you will get glitchy sounds. I love OS2 but miss some of the neat features of JJOS2XL.

eimer wrote:Nah, Os2xl is heavy and buggy. If you make something advanced the sequencer will start to lack and you will get glitchy sounds. I love OS2 but miss some of the neat features of JJOS2XL.

You are speaking from an mpc1000 user's perspective. I've had no problems with JJOS2XL on the mpc 2500. It sounds like there are differences between the 1000 and 2500 versions.

froze my mpc2500se with osxl ver.1.29