- #GROOVE AGENT 4 OUTPUTTING MIDI INSTALL#
- #GROOVE AGENT 4 OUTPUTTING MIDI UPDATE#
- #GROOVE AGENT 4 OUTPUTTING MIDI PRO#
Xo is deeper at this stage for built in sound manipulation.
#GROOVE AGENT 4 OUTPUTTING MIDI UPDATE#
Īrgonaut is working on an update true, ut i m little scared that they will clutter something that is good because of its simplicity. next step will be to test integration in maschine. I don t think this factor should be crucial, it simportant but hhe product is aimed at organising and making the use of samples easy and fun.
#GROOVE AGENT 4 OUTPUTTING MIDI PRO#
So i tried those, jantex is right, indeniably, xln has a bigger advantage, and younalso as a costuler since it s xln audio so you re sure that the product is backed by a sonic palette witch is pro level.
#GROOVE AGENT 4 OUTPUTTING MIDI INSTALL#
What do you think about this? Merci, JohanGood question, to tell the truth i even tried to not install sounds so i don t care about thiose but it won t let you use the software if you don t lol However, the sheer sound quality and also the strength of the included sounds is very important to me. Which one sounds the best? I see a lot of extra functionality in XO and that is always nice but it also seems Algonout are going to include a sequencer in the next update, which may level the playing field some more. Since you have played with XO and Atlas for a little while now. They re between 2 lines, and not enougth deep to be on one or another.
Īnd it s basicaly the market target that implies those or not, and so the basement of dev wasn t well definied imho. and even like that some classic features are missing. What i m trying to say in my usual bad english is that, they went into this to classical minded. and they implemented exactly what was akai standard aka what everybody does with not repeat even today (10 years later), i asked them "forget about that, let s go note repeat per pad, i want 32 th on hh, 16 th on claps ect. I had this issue with a brand i will not name back in dayz, i asked them note repeat during dev. the problem as alwayz is that some limitations are here stricly because dev and product manager think classic drum concepts. XO feels advanced in sole way versus atlas, the interface is more refined. I'm not in a position to demo now but I like seeing what folks are saying about it.To really know you ll have to test it. I happen to Love Atlas because it does exactly what I want - allows me to intelligently organize my samples in a way that inspires me and gets me working quickly. I'm more interested to see how well it implements the sample organization aspect. I have yet to try XO but I don't need a step sequencer.
I'm not in a position to demo now but I like seeing what folks are saying about it. organising and simplifying sample usage, it lets the rest for solutions that can handle it right. Just watched a video on atlas, it' focusing on what it is for and does it well. promising product but not mature imho, coming from an XLN afficionado !!! Not enougth control other the samples sound wise, step sequenceur useless, no resizable gui. if i need to use maschine instead of this for sequencing, then i ain't gonna pay extra money for extra features that are basically useless. Just tried this, kinda dissapointed, basically why including a step sequencer if it's poorly implemented (versus something like geist for exemple), i mean ok this is set to be simple, but if you drope something basically at first to organise your sound, if you add features keep in mind that people that have actually the need to oragnise zillion of sounds might certainly have 2 or 3 beat making solutions, so no need to propose something unless at least as powerfull. Might be user error on my side, or some bug. There is this retina 1x, 2x settings but I can't get that to work. UI that is resizable or scaled would be nice. I think they are aiming at a tool to find and edit a set of samples that sits well together and then you export to whatever tools you have for sample based percussion and midi editing. It does however have multi output when used as a plug-in in a daw and it responds to incoming midi from your DAW. I would like to love it but XO seems to me like a nice toy to get creative and it might be a great way to organize and randomize sounds, bit 179€ is a pretty ambitious pricepoint when you already have a huge and well organized drumlibrary.Yes, there is 8 samples in a kit, you can't layer stuff, there's no midi import. Only eight samples per sequence and no possibility to layer sounds ? Is it possible to build triplets, rolls and polyrythmic grooves (like geist and nerve are able to do) ? I didnt demo it yet, but by reading the posts there are some things that seem to be missing to make xo a great drumsample player/sequencer.