Atlas 2 or XO?

[Greenstorm33]

I use XO exclusively for managing my enormous drum sample library (I don't use the sequencer at all, I just find samples I like and drag them into my project) and for this purpose it's excellent. Some killer features:

• Click and drag across the map to rapidly audition a ton of samples. I don't know what kind of witchcraft they put into this thing but samples have no discernible load time.
• History of samples you've auditioned in case you found one you liked but accidentally auditioned another one.
• Selecting a sample gets you a list of samples that XO thinks are similar. You can pick one of these and set it as the root sample to then get samples XO thinks are similar to that one. It's an interesting way to look through samples.
• Super fast map generation
• Text search that filters not only on sample names but folder names. If I search "Leviathan" I get the map filtered to all three of my Black Octopus Leviathan packs and can look through just those samples. Then, when I find one I like, I can remove the filter. This refreshes the similar samples list (which was previously Leviathan samples only) with all the samples in the map. So basically I am able to pull a sample from a specific pack that I know fits the vibe I'm going for and then ask for similar samples across everything I own. Crazy.

[cryophonik]

I think the thing that is the real deal breaker for me is the 8-pad limitation in XO. I mean, who the hell designed this thing? I'm ashamed to admit that I bought XO on impulse at the end of a sale and just assumed that it was comparable to virtually every other drum sampler on the planet. Seems llke the butt rockers at XLN didn't bother to even listen to other styles or consult with people who would likely buy XO (e.g., dance, EDM, rap producers). I think my drum approach is similar to many making electronica/dance music and a typical kit usually includes, at a minimum, one or two kick drums, some combination of 1-3 snares and/or 1-3 claps, open HH, closed HH, shaker (or 2, or 3), at least 4 various percussion elements, sometimes a ride, and several crashes/impacts. Even if I'm not using all of those sounds in the final creation, I want those extra slots to try various elements without having to replace other elements that I may ultimately want to keep. That would require at least two XO instances, meaning that patterns couldn't be created in one sequencer. Admittedly, there could be benefits to breaking up the workflow into separate instances, but I think most people would want to work in one instance and it would be nice to have the option to stay in one instance. If there ever is an XO2, I would hope that doubling the sample slots would be front and center in the new features.

Personally, the limitations in XO's pattern sequencer don't bother me too much because I generally prefer to use Logic's step sequencer anyway, but I do like Atlas' sequencer and do use it when sketching out patterns, or when I'm working in other DAWs (e.g., Studio One).

I do agree with machinesworking's comment re: the AI algorithm in XO being arguably better. I find that Atlas does not always tend to put similar samples in close proximity and sometimes I'll find almost identical sounding samples on opposite ends of the category in "space". XO seemed better in that regard. I have sorta split feelings on that. One one hand, if I'm swapping out a sample (e.g., a kick) using the randomizer, I'm usually looking to cast a fairly broad net and hear how some pretty different samples would fit into the kit. The problem comes in when I find something that's close and I want to get a little closer using the samples immediately around the chosen sample in the map. Generally speaking, I can find what I want quickly and use the sample editing tools to take it the rest of the way, but sometimes the samples that are immediately adjacent are not very similar at all. It certainly improved from Atlas v1 to v2, though.

As for map creation, yeah, it definitely takes a long time to build the big maps in Atlas. I just made the first big map before I watched a hockey game, and the second big one just before I went to bed, so I don't actually know how long it took to make them, but I wouldn't try making a huge one during a creative session.

[inkwarp]

So I've been trying out Atlas today and I can't seem to get my head around the sequence. More specifically, you only seem to be able to work with one pattern at a time. It's very confusing. I like XO a lot but, again, the sequencer is limited in that also. I know you can drag and drop patterns but I would ideally like to be able to chain patterns similar to the way Microtonic does. Why is such a feature so poorly implimented?

[StrangeSatellite]

I demoed both and went with XO. My primary reason for buying XO was because I had thousands of drum sounds and found it very difficult to dig through the pile to find the right one for a song. For that, it is absolutely amazing and beats anything else on the market. Finding kit pieces that work and then auditioning similar sounds on the fly is ridiculously easy now. THAT is why I bought it, and I couldn't be more satisfied with the result. I got it on sale for around $60 during Black Friday, and I feel that is a very fair price to solve this problem. The full price ($129) is a bit high, IMO.

As for the complaints about the sequencer, I really don't get it. Make your beats in your DAW's sequencer/piano roll. Why would you want to build the beats inside of a plugin? I think the sequencer in XO was just put there for ease of demoing sounds and building a kit, not as a serious sequencer. It's not a problem at all for me.

The other complaint seems to be the fact that there's "only" 8 drum slots. I also don't get this one, but I guess it depends on your workflow. XO is for short, percussive, one-shot drum sounds. It's not for triggering long SFX elements, percussion loops, etc. I build a kit for the basic drum sounds in XO, for which 8 slots is more than enough. Then I have a separate track with a drum rack (working in Ableton) that holds all of the detail oriented percussive elements which I trigger throughout the song. It works great for me, and it helps separate the basic beat that makes up the song's rhythm and the detail elements that are used to embellish that rhythm.

Anyway, that's my two cents. XO was far more inspiring than Atlas. Making music is all about getting the obstacles and work out of the way so that you can get your idea's out quickly. That's where XO's value is.

[killmaster]

I demoed both and went with XO. My primary reason for buying XO was because I had thousands of drum sounds and found it very difficult to dig through the pile to find the right one for a song. For that, it is absolutely amazing and beats anything else on the market. Finding kit pieces that work and then auditioning similar sounds on the fly is ridiculously easy now. THAT is why I bought it, and I couldn't be more satisfied with the result. I got it on sale for around $60 during Black Friday, and I feel that is a very fair price to solve this problem. The full price ($129) is a bit high, IMO.

As for the complaints about the sequencer, I really don't get it. Make your beats in your DAW's sequencer/piano roll. Why would you want to build the beats inside of a plugin? I think the sequencer in XO was just put there for ease of demoing sounds and building a kit, not as a serious sequencer. It's not a problem at all for me.

The other complaint seems to be the fact that there's "only" 8 drum slots. I also don't get this one, but I guess it depends on your workflow. XO is for short, percussive, one-shot drum sounds. It's not for triggering long SFX elements, percussion loops, etc. I build a kit for the basic drum sounds in XO, for which 8 slots is more than enough. Then I have a separate track with a drum rack (working in Ableton) that holds all of the detail oriented percussive elements which I trigger throughout the song. It works great for me, and it helps separate the basic beat that makes up the song's rhythm and the detail elements that are used to embellish that rhythm.

Anyway, that's my two cents. XO was far more inspiring than Atlas. Making music is all about getting the obstacles and work out of the way so that you can get your idea's out quickly. That's where XO's value is.

Thanks! And so glad to read this cause I've spent quite a bit of time today with the Atlas 2 demo and I have to say that I'm definitely leaning away from it. I didn't care for the randomization stuff that much. May be a good algorithm but I just wasn't getting stuff I really loved. I did love the way you can move samples around in the different grid position and it swaps automatically. I was able to coax some good sounding rhythm timbers that way. The scanning did seem to take WAY longer than XO. All in all, I was kinda surprised how basic Atlas felt in a way and I've come to feel I can get more out of XO. Ideally, it would be fun to have both but I think I'll start with XO. So if anyone has a copy they want to sell

[noiseboyuk]

I haven’t tried Atlas, but I’m not minded to leave the XO fold despite its shortcomings. All the basics that make it work so brilliantly (and be so fun) over-ride everything else. The speed is phenomenal, it’s responsive, the algorithms feel so crazy-good they’re witchcraft.

Wild speculation, but the lack of development in XO might be because they’re putting resources into XO2.

[perpetual3]

Atlas is very fast once you get to know it. The sequencer is actually pretty good, using the variation engine. One thing I’ll do is use Bitwigs midi tools to generate some thing interesting, record it in Atlas, add some shuffle, nudge a few tracks, then export all the midi stems back into Bitwig. Workflow is very fast. I can’t imagine not using Atlas to sequence ITB anymore.

[Hewitt Huntwork]

Here a comparison I wrote on Sunday, June 13th 2021 in another thread:

I have both Atlas 2 (nice update!) and XO. I don't use the sequencer in either.

Right out of the gate, I prefer the 16 pads of Atlas. I create drum midi elsewhere, and the 8 pads of XO just aren't enough for three hats, two toms, two crashes, ride, bell, side stick, etc.

I also like the randomization of pitch and velocity in the advanced tab. I set them each to 5% per pad to humanize the kit. I do wish those parameters could be applied to the whole kit in addition to per pad, or that those settings could be locked so I'm not always resetting them. Messing with the timing -even as little as 10MS, seemed to pull me out of the groove. Could be psychosomatic!

I was missing XO's effects. Especially the fuzz and soft clipper. They just bring everything to life. Fortunately, I was able to tweak a preset on Baby Audio's Parallel Agressor to get the same vibe.

After Atlas 1 came out, I did request a feature to be able to change the midi note for each pad. That way, if you use midi generated by Toontrack or Addictive Drums or the like, you could just reassign the pads instead of changing the notes in your DAW. Impact XT has this, I think. It's handy for me. I'd be interested to know if anyone else would find it useful.

XO has a really cool velocity feature, where the sample plays back from a later point at lower velocities and the user can adjust it. IT'S SO COOL. You can get convincing ghost notes from a single one shot sample. It is mention-how-cool-it-is-again cool.

I love that Atlas lets you make as many maps is you want. I put all my Bollywood Sounds samples in one, and all my Rhythm Labs vinyl samples in another, etc, so my maps have a cohesion as broad or as specific as I like. So far the algorithm is not as strong as XLN's. Even when XLN misses it's in the ballpark. With Atlas I've gotten hi hats that get mapped as snares, crashes and rides mapped as hats. That can be part of the fun but for a user like me I'd like to see improvement there.

Atlas's ability to refresh each pad is so nice. XO's method of loading a new sound is one of the more counterintuitive things I've seen. I'd like to see an undo button next to the refresh button on each pad in Atlas.

The last thing that surprises me about Atlas is that hitting the refresh button seems to cycle between the same sounds for each pad much more quickly than I'd want. You have to dive into the map to find sounds that hitting refresh will not get you to.

Great update (Atlas 2), an absolute steal at $19. Looking forward to seeing what's next!

[cryophonik]

No doubt they’re both excellent. Maybe it’s just me, but they seem like game changers and I won’t be one bit surprised when other developers follow suit (Battery 5….in 2028?)

[Dirtgrain]

In Live, would grouping two instances of XO get around the limitation? Is there a way to assign what cc is for each instance? Still maybe not ideal.

[codec_spurt]

hj

[cryophonik]

Get both.

Finally, the voice of reason.

[Synthack]

.......

[machinesworking]

In Live, would grouping two instances of XO get around the limitation? Is there a way to assign what cc is for each instance? Still maybe not ideal.

Yeah this could be done in a Rack, but it's not ideal.

[machinesworking]

As for the complaints about the sequencer, I really don't get it. Make your beats in your DAW's sequencer/piano roll. Why would you want to build the beats inside of a plugin? I think the sequencer in XO was just put there for ease of demoing sounds and building a kit, not as a serious sequencer. It's not a problem at all for me.

Sure, but the sequencer in Atlas is good enough to use as a scratch pad. You obviously haven't used drum machines and DAWs ran in conjunction without getting frustrated etc. I generally find dedicated drum sequencers a more enjoyable experience to write on than the piano roll in a DAW. I'm using Atlas with Beatstep Pro and really enjoy the combination.

The other complaint seems to be the fact that there's "only" 8 drum slots. I also don't get this one, but I guess it depends on your workflow. XO is for short, percussive, one-shot drum sounds. It's not for triggering long SFX elements, percussion loops, etc. I build a kit for the basic drum sounds in XO, for which 8 slots is more than enough. Then I have a separate track with a drum rack (working in Ableton) that holds all of the detail oriented percussive elements which I trigger throughout the song. It works great for me, and it helps separate the basic beat that makes up the song's rhythm and the detail elements that are used to embellish that rhythm.

OK figured you used Ableton, I have Push2 and when using Live I don't bother with step sequencers in that DAW what with the Drum Rack. In Logic, Reaper and DP I appreciate the step sequencer that can do odd time signatures in Atlas. It's also super quick clip based percussion if you're more focused on a melodic line or bass you're working out. The fact that XO can't do odd time signatures in it's step sequencer is a total workflow destroyer here, since I like to use drum machines as complex metronome etc. Plus XO does not accommodate hardware, whereas Atlas has 4x4, 2x8, 8x8 configurations that match Push, Beatstep Pro, MPC's etc. Using hardware controllers with Atlas you do want to put longer FX that are part of the percussive realm in your kit, at least I do.

Anyway, that's my two cents. XO was far more inspiring than Atlas. Making music is all about getting the obstacles and work out of the way so that you can get your idea's out quickly. That's where XO's value is.

That's the biggest one, if you can't get used to Atlas, don't feel comfortable in it's workflow and XO serves you better of course that's all good.

I have both, until I'm satisfied with Atlas completely I'm keeping XO around, I think it's obvious where each's strong points are.