XLN Audio XO - I'm not impressed, here's why.

[xphorm]

Browsing of samples is another level, that's alright and it's pretty revolutionary but there are some things that are pretty much annoying to me: rudimentary sequencer which plays nothing more complicated than A, AB or AAAB. It really lacks some customization there. Effects are pretty much also not customizable and rudimentary.

But the most annoying thing (correct me if I'm wrong) is inability to route a channel from XO to DAW with XO's master effects applied to it. You can only route separate channels without master effects, master itself with effects (which is mixed altogether) and just effects from master (but it is again mixed altogether from all channels, so it's of not much use).

I just cannot such a fundamental thing when it comes to routing is not enabled and I hope I'm wrong. Can anyone tell me something about it?

[vitocorleone123]

XO isn’t revolutionary - it came out after Atlas.

[cryophonik]

I agree that XO’s sequencer is pretty poor and I’m a much bigger fan of Atlas.

But the most annoying thing (correct me if I'm wrong) is inability to route a channel from XO to DAW with XO's master effects applied to it. You can only route separate channels without master effects, master itself with effects (which is mixed altogether) and just effects from master (but it is again mixed altogether from all channels, so it's of not much use).

I just cannot such a fundamental thing when it comes to routing is not enabled and I hope I'm wrong. Can anyone tell me something about it?

That’s how master effects work - they’re send effects that, by definition, are not channel insert effects. Are you saying you want send effects to somehow become insert effects after each channel is routed to individual outputs?

[hey212]

nvm

[xphorm]

That’s how master effects work - they’re send effects that, by definition, are not channel insert effects. Are you saying you want send effects to somehow become insert effects after each channel is routed to individual outputs?

Yes of course I want that - that would be logical if you want to continue working on individual channels in DAW, but you want to preserve effects from XO.

[Cyanide Lovesong]

I understand the frustration, but considering they're "master effects" you have to realize why it is the way it is. They can't just "do it on individual tracks" because then you don't get the cumulative effect and intermodulation distortion that happens with all the drum samples going at once.

If you want something CLOSE to the master effects, you can export the drums individually by soloing them. Since there's only 8 it's not THAT big of a deal to do that... But it wont' quite be the same when you separate the tracks because again, the master effects are level dependent and there's the intermodulation distortion which you don't get when exporting individually.

I like the effects in XO and it comes with some nice kits... But overall I think Atlas by Algonaut is a better product for a variety of reasons.

Also, XO feels like a dead product. For as much potential as it has... Why no updates? And why is it limited to kits of 8!?

[daily patcher]

XLN would have a slam dunk on their hands if they could cross pollinate AD, Life and XO. Life is incredible but would be so much better if you could leverage XOs sample indexing and browsing under the same hood, and if you wanted to get meticulous with the patterns generated you could break it out into a more robust XO style sequencer, or have access to AD2 drum kits.. I wouldn't even mind owning all three products if it meant you could use them together easily and meaningfully.

I still like XO but, I just don't really see the point when something like Triaz is on offer. Rolling out something like Life and not giving XO any love makes me sad, but I still use Life all the time. Oh well. It seems there is some curse that all good digital drum sequencers go the way of the dodo seemingly too soon.

[nusound mind]

It works for what I use it for, namely; an easy, different way of scrolling through my one shots all in one place w/out clicking through layers of folders and trying to think of which good samples I haven't used in awhile that might be fitting for what I'm working on. I can click and drag through thousands of samples on a huge, zoomable colored sample cloud.

If I have a complaint it's the loading time. As per OP, I can process each hit on it's own channel, good enough for me although I do love their 808 effect, usually go w/ that if anything.

I also think it's decent for sculpting each sample w/ the envelopes and filter cutoffs. I do agree groove wise it's pretty basic.

[pepelogu]

I think it's great apart from one thing. You can only trigger it from the lowest keys on a keyboard wich is super awkward if you are a left-handed mouse user.

[xphorm]

Cyanide, I see what you're talking about, honestly something like that haven't crossed my mind. Anyways, I do think they should have an option to route tracks with effects on them, even if it's not quite the same. So I come to conclusion that effects in XO are more or less useless if you really want separate outputs and continue mixing them in DAW.

[kraster]

I think XO is great.

Its main selling point is the indexing of samples and it does that far better than Atlas does.

Atlas has a better sequencer but those kinds of step sequencers are still pretty rudimentary and it's easy to build out a song structure in XO by doing various patterns and dragging and dropping the Midi into the DAW timeline.

I've a particular aversion to "Song modes" (Pattern chainers, sub sequencers) in drum plugins. A DAW timeline is always going to be better.

I think the paradigm with both XO and Life is the ability to get ideas down quickly and be able to get those ideas into a bigger structure. Midi (or Audio) drag and drop is fine.

I also think the FX in XO are well fine... but I much prefer to have individual outs for my own treatment.

[SamDi]

Browsing of samples is another level, that's alright and it's pretty revolutionary but there are some things that are pretty much annoying to me: rudimentary sequencer which plays nothing more complicated than A, AB or AAAB. It really lacks some customization there. Effects are pretty much also not customizable and rudimentary.

But the most annoying thing (correct me if I'm wrong) is inability to route a channel from XO to DAW with XO's master effects applied to it. You can only route separate channels without master effects, master itself with effects (which is mixed altogether) and just effects from master (but it is again mixed altogether from all channels, so it's of not much use).

I just cannot such a fundamental thing when it comes to routing is not enabled and I hope I'm wrong. Can anyone tell me something about it?

I think your critics is not justified, because I can not rememebr of any drum plugn, where routing to individual channels includes the master effects. Also technically it makes no sense at all because as the name suggests the master Fx exists as one instance getting the mixed channels as a sum. Having this applied on each channel would mean that you would need one instance per channel. Furthermore it wouldn't sound the same because all non-linear Fx like compressor, limiter, distortion would sound different, if applied on each channel seperately instead of the sum.

I think XO (and also ATLAS) are great tools for organizing and finding samples. The drum machine part is more like a nice add-on. For beeing a serioos drum-machine tool there are better more-to-that-dedicated tools IMHO.

[oobesan]

I love XO, because how good the organization architecture is. It is incredibly fast to get something down that sounds very good. But, yeah there are quite few issues. I've emailed the team a very long list of requests, and then responded positively and said that XO is not done. 8 sequence lanes is not enough. A, AB, and AAAB is just laughable. Lack of individual sequence length (prohibiting polyrhythms) is nonsensical. And individual sequence lane MIDI export is completely broken. What I don't have a problem with is the effects or the routing. Those are both fine. It's nice to have effects, but you really should consider using your DAW effects anyway. I don't understand why anyone would go to the trouble of setting XO up to route each track lane out as individual MIDI channels, and still play the Master channel? I have Triaz and Playbeat as well.

[machinesworking]

Atlas is better. The only thing XO has going for it is FX but as people have mentioned send the audio to your DAW and you have any effect you own.

[zvenx]

XO handles a large database of samples significantly better than Atlas.
rsp