XLN Audio - XO - Improvement, Pros, Cons
-
- KVRAF
- 5573 posts since 30 May, 2006 from Hollow Earth
ABEFLGMOPPRRST 
-
machinesworking machinesworking https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8505
- KVRAF
- 8015 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle
Personally I went from Spark to XO to Atlas to the MPC Live II. I still use XO as a sample browser, but that will probably stop soon as I purchase Sononym and start using that for all audio file searches.
XO just feels incomplete, like an almost ran. The cloud based searching is great though.
XO just feels incomplete, like an almost ran. The cloud based searching is great though.
-
- KVRAF
- 5913 posts since 25 Jan, 2007
It’s quite inexplicable, isn’t it? They’ve done all the hard stuff, wowed everyone, and then failed to do any fairly bog-standard consolidation. That’s over a few years now, and they are watching their user base drift away because of it. I’m still there, but always on the lookout for something clearly and demonstrably better, sorta waiting for the titan that doesn’t really exist yet.machinesworking wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 6:57 amXO just feels incomplete, like an almost ran. The cloud based searching is great though.
http://www.guyrowland.co.uk
http://www.sound-on-screen.com
W11, Ryzen 7900, 64gb RAM, RME Babyface, 1050ti, PT 2024 Ultimate, Cubase Pro 14
Macbook Air M2 OSX 10.15
http://www.sound-on-screen.com
W11, Ryzen 7900, 64gb RAM, RME Babyface, 1050ti, PT 2024 Ultimate, Cubase Pro 14
Macbook Air M2 OSX 10.15
-
machinesworking machinesworking https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8505
- KVRAF
- 8015 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle
Probably the same problem we face all the time with plugins, the developer that worked on XO is gone on to greener pastures. So XLN don't want to spend the time to reverse engineer it and improve it.noiseboyuk wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 7:16 amIt’s quite inexplicable, isn’t it? They’ve done all the hard stuff, wowed everyone, and then failed to do any fairly bog-standard consolidation. That’s over a few years now, and they are watching their user base drift away because of it. I’m still there, but always on the lookout for something clearly and demonstrably better, sorta waiting for the titan that doesn’t really exist yet.machinesworking wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 6:57 amXO just feels incomplete, like an almost ran. The cloud based searching is great though.
-
- KVRAF
- 3157 posts since 10 Jan, 2005
Well, then xln has no more developers it seems because they haven't been releasing new stuff for quite a while now... However they often update their plugins, at least somebody is able to work on them (I understand maintaining is different than evolving...)machinesworking wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 3:14 pmProbably the same problem we face all the time with plugins, the developer that worked on XO is gone on to greener pastures. So XLN don't want to spend the time to reverse engineer it and improve it.noiseboyuk wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 7:16 amIt’s quite inexplicable, isn’t it? They’ve done all the hard stuff, wowed everyone, and then failed to do any fairly bog-standard consolidation. That’s over a few years now, and they are watching their user base drift away because of it. I’m still there, but always on the lookout for something clearly and demonstrably better, sorta waiting for the titan that doesn’t really exist yet.machinesworking wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 6:57 amXO just feels incomplete, like an almost ran. The cloud based searching is great though.
-
machinesworking machinesworking https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8505
- KVRAF
- 8015 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle
Yeah, it's how it is when we have no real answers though, XLN isn't saying what happened to XO but we can surmise that the company doesn't see it as worth investing in.mabian wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 4:31 pm Well, then xln has no more developers it seems because they haven't been releasing new stuff for quite a while now... However they often update their plugins, at least somebody is able to work on them (I understand maintaining is different than evolving...)
Last edited by machinesworking on Sun Aug 20, 2023 6:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Hewitt Huntwork Hewitt Huntwork https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7460
- KVRAF
- 1645 posts since 2 Jun, 2003
When EZD2 was announced (like ten years ago!), XLN was right on their tail with AD2. This time? Crickets.
If every KVR member wrote one review a year we'd have 1340 reviews each day!
-
Echoes in the Attic Echoes in the Attic https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=180417
- KVRAF
- 12029 posts since 12 May, 2008
They did quietly update everything to vst3 last year though. Some companies make a big deal of that and work it into major updates. Did they do m1 updates too? I'm not on Mac so not sure.
If I recall correctly they didn't really add features to AD1, just maintained. And then did a big feature update for v2. Maybe it will be the same for XO.
If I recall correctly they didn't really add features to AD1, just maintained. And then did a big feature update for v2. Maybe it will be the same for XO.
-
machinesworking machinesworking https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8505
- KVRAF
- 8015 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle
They updated XO for M1, just no new features for years now.
-
- KVRian
- 1450 posts since 9 Feb, 2007 from San Ramon, California
I have both XO and Atlas now and am still learning. I bought each on sale; Atlas most recently just a few days ago. The sequencer for Atlas seems more fully-featured but neither of the plugins have layering/mixing/velocity switching of samples per pad on a kit.
Atlas gave me what I think is a better classification of samples with more separation of melodics than XO did. Both programs spent a bit of time chewing on my sample library folder.
Atlas gave me what I think is a better classification of samples with more separation of melodics than XO did. Both programs spent a bit of time chewing on my sample library folder.
------------------------------------------
Gribs
Gribs
-
- KVRist
- 86 posts since 13 Sep, 2022
-
- KVRAF
- 1894 posts since 8 Jan, 2022
In some respects Atlas is better in other respects XO is better.
I find XO is better at sorting samples and has more refined searching.
In most other respects Atlas is better but the searching and sorting is kind of a big deal.
-
machinesworking machinesworking https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8505
- KVRAF
- 8015 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle
Atlas has a better sequencer, XO has a better AI cloud.kraster wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 3:20 amIn some respects Atlas is better in other respects XO is better.
I find XO is better at sorting samples and has more refined searching.
In most other respects Atlas is better but the searching and sorting is kind of a big deal.
-
- KVRAF
- 1894 posts since 8 Jan, 2022
It basically scans through the sample folders you add and sorts them all out for you based on various characteristic like tonal character, pitch, noisiness, length, name, type etc.
Both Atlas and XO have a "cloud" made up of coloured dots.
Each dot represents a sample and the neighbouring samples tend to be similar. Different colours represent different drum types.
On XO if you select one of the dots it further refines searches by presenting a selection of alternatives that are very close to your selected sample.
You can also use a "smart" search to narrow down the selection in the cloud.
Very quick and intuitive and beats slogging through folders of samples.
