XLN Audio - XO - Improvement, Pros, Cons

[evilantal]

This has probably been mentioned a lot already, so consider this a +1...
- Euclidian rhythm generator
- Odd time signatures 5/4, 9/8, 7/8 etc

[Biome_Digital]

Nice little update of small improvements. It's getting better!

[SLiC]

Yes, very welcome, but I think may of us are still waiting for it to have more options with the sequencer (more pattern variations, longer patterns etc)

[NWSM]

just over 2.4Tb.

In some cases producers have too much stuff/ samples...this size is realy huge.
i have a soundpool of 40 GB, and i use maybe around 10-20 % of it.
just think about it ^^,

[NWSM]

Yes, features of sequencers should be enhanced. Drum computer from Sugarbyte would be a nice inspiration to XLN Audio.

Yes that would be the biggest and relative easy improvement, to unlock the pattern combiner section or improve sound/sample modifications and more possibilities in rhythms.

sugarbytes drumcomputer works basically not with samples, it uses synthesis.
but a bit synthesis in XO would be awesome but is it possible?

I think that a focus of coding is stability, if the coders can add any of our ideas is just a question...

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

My FR's for this would be:

1. Really expand the sequencer options. Put it on it's own page, with the ability to create and sequence lots of patterns. So more patterns, a song mode, etc.

2. Make the "lock sample" function actually lock the damn sample! The lock shouldn't be ignored when I change presets. I might want the Kick from Preset A with the Snare from Preset B and the Hats and Pattern from Preset C. If Locking actually worked like I think most users would expect, you could build it up this way. Right now, changing presets changes samples regardless of the Lock Sample state.

[LoveEnigma18]

2. Make the "lock sample" function actually lock the damn sample! The lock shouldn't be ignored when I change presets. I might want the Kick from Preset A with the Snare from Preset B and the Hats and Pattern from Preset C. If Locking actually worked like I think most users would expect, you could build it up this way. Right now, changing presets changes samples regardless of the Lock Sample state.

Are you using the latest version 1.2? Because if I understand correctly, this is not the case in 1.2. It works as expected.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

2. Make the "lock sample" function actually lock the damn sample! The lock shouldn't be ignored when I change presets. I might want the Kick from Preset A with the Snare from Preset B and the Hats and Pattern from Preset C. If Locking actually worked like I think most users would expect, you could build it up this way. Right now, changing presets changes samples regardless of the Lock Sample state.

Are you using the latest version 1.2? Because if I understand correctly, this is not the case in 1.2. It works as expected.

Yeah, me too. But nope! Using 1.2.

Do this.

1. Load the Steady State preset
2. Go to the EDIT page
3. Lock EVERY sample
4. Click the down arrow in the preset selection window

Result: the sample changes, the lock comes off.

It looks like the lock is designed from accidentally preventing you from changing the sample within the same preset. Not locking the same in place as you change presets. Don't love the design choice.

[LoveEnigma18]

2. Make the "lock sample" function actually lock the damn sample! The lock shouldn't be ignored when I change presets. I might want the Kick from Preset A with the Snare from Preset B and the Hats and Pattern from Preset C. If Locking actually worked like I think most users would expect, you could build it up this way. Right now, changing presets changes samples regardless of the Lock Sample state.

Are you using the latest version 1.2? Because if I understand correctly, this is not the case in 1.2. It works as expected.

Yeah, me too. But nope! Using 1.2.

Do this.

1. Load the Steady State preset
2. Go to the EDIT page
3. Lock EVERY sample
4. Click the down arrow in the preset selection window

Result: the sample changes, the lock comes off.

It looks like the lock is designed from accidentally preventing you from changing the sample within the same preset. Not locking the same in place as you change presets. Don't love the design choice.

Ah, got it now. You are right. But I think it is exactly how it should be, because when you change presets you are changing the associated sounds, which means the lock has to go off.

The lock is meant to be used when you like a certain pattern, but want to lock a particular sample.

So instead of changing preset, try changing the sounds from left bottom and the lock will stay in its place. This means that if, for example, you locked your Kick, you can keep changing the samples of others until you have everything that sounds great together.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Yeah whereas my expectation is the lock would be global. Lock is locked is locked. Like U-he or Synapse synths or reverbs with Mix Lock. You change presets and any locked parameters remain the same.

[LoveEnigma18]

I understand your point, but not sure if the same would be best for something like XO.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

The idea would be "hey, I like this kick and snare but let me experiment with different ancillary elements and patterns."

It wouldn't change the existing lock function, just expand where it applies.

Can you load patterns from different presets without changing the samples? This doesn't seem like an uncommon feature in a drum sampler. Maybe you can do it and I'm missing an obvious way to do that. Wouldn't be the same thing as having a persistent lock, but would allow for some mix and matching.

[LoveEnigma18]

I think they could add it as an extension.

Yes, that's what Beat Combiner is for. You can randomize patterns with the same samples.

[m-ac]

Starting with an empty preset, is there a way of filling the available slots with random samples from your library?

[JiggSaw]

Starting with an empty preset, is there a way of filling the available slots with random samples from your library?

Nope.. even though I think that should be an obvious add. Pretty sure others have mentioned this as well. A randomizer while also using the lock feature seems like a no brainer.