OP-1 field feature requests

Also, if that’s not possible, then multitrack out via USB should definitely be a top firmware update priority IMO

1 Like

Unless I am mistaken, all WAV files are PCM (Pulse Code Modulation.) This is true of AIFF files as well. Those pulse codes are fixed points when 16 or 24 bits, and are floating point in 32 bit.

In other words a 32-bit WAV file is always PCM encoded with 32 bit floating point values.
& a 16/24-bit WAV file is always PCM encoded with 16/24 bit fixed point values.

I think the issue with some DAWs not opening the file lies elsewhere, and that should still be fixed though. Maybe something wrong with the header where some DAWs care and some don’t? Then when you save that file in those DAWs, the file gets a new header that is accepted by the other DAWs? Just a guess, but I don’t think it has to do with the encoding itself.

2 Likes

Ahh i see, thank you for the clarification. I’m a noob when it comes to advanced file types like these lol. I just wanna be able to drag the tape files into ableton without them breaking ableton cuz it’s clipping too hard.

1 Like

I don’t mind the mixer not being linked to the tapes but I would like to see an additional mixer channel for the selectable inputs.

Use case would be having the OP-Z or another OP-1 feeding into USB for monitoring through the Field, but adding panning and NOT having to select it as sample input. This would make it able to monitor Z sequences (or external OP -1 etc) playing through but still be able to overdub new OP-1 parts onto tape.

Since the TX-6 exists, I’m sure we won’t see such a feature.

Watching various videos had shown that some of the features in my list above were actually implemented in Field already:

  1. Random LFO is routable to individual params.
  2. There is per-patch setting for patch volume. Very important feature, given how different engines can be much louder or quieter on various settings.
  3. Bend range is settable per patch.

I am surprised no one covered this in prior reviews.

1 Like

It would be extremely useful for live performances if FX section on both mixer and synth stays off when switching FX with it off.

Hi, I have an 4 channel USB mixer, that i would like the 4 Tape-tracks to be output through. Cant believe that even TX-6 cant this from what i understand, only the stereo output.

Thanks!

These were covered in a few reviews, but I can’t recall them all being in a single one which I agree would be surprising if that’s the case!

right now I feel like TE are more into the TX-6 than the op-1f. I could be wrong but that’s the vibe I’m getting. I would like to be able to monitor the input (mic or line or usb) with effects.

3 Likes

Does anyone else feel like (or fear?) that TE will enable more than 4 tracks of recording when you connect the TX-6 to the OP-1f via USB-C? I noticed they specifically call out their tape tracks on the OP-1f and tag them as “4-Track” to possibly imply that future tape styles may have more than just 4 tracks, and I assume connectivity between these two devices along with a USB-C drive may be how they accomplish this. Just a thought.

1 Like

i wouldn’t expect a bunch of additional features y’all. if you already bought or plan to buy the op1f then it should probably be because there is already something there that is worth it to you. it’s most likely to be bug fixes and maybe a thing or two here and there. but things like more tracks, undo, totally new features, etc, just isn’t likely imo. and imo shouldn’t be expected. i guess its fun to think about? but i think the chances are very very low. the op1f is a great device and is def an improvement over the og… we may just have to live with that for a while

Booo this realistic mature viewpoint sucks!
Such a buzz kill. I’m literally holding out for like 5 more synth engines, 10 effects, and three sequencers though I have no ideas for what any of them should be, oh and Bluetooth audio with no latency.

Hahah no but seriously, it’s good to take the approach you’re suggesting, though it’s also totally fair to be expecting of things because of the nature of TE’s marketing. They very much said the op-1 was a ten year platform and this is a ten year platform too. Granted those updates got fewer and further between in that timeframe, but still, I think it might be fair to put pressure on them to market accurately and deliver

3 Likes

fair enough, hear hear =)

Instabounce

Something I thought of while messing with tape. I hate bouncing stuff with ear. Too many button presses, plus you need to wait for stuff to play. How could bouncing be implemented better? Simple. You SHIFT+CUT to lift several tracks as usual, then SHIFT+PASTE to past them into the current track all mixed together. From what I see, currently SHIFT+PASTE doesn’t do anything at all.

8 Likes

Haha…just finished filming a video on feature request ideas. This should have been in it!

3 Likes

That’s a great idea and solution!

put together a few feature ideas in this video

4 Likes

Have you managed to solve your unbalanced output issue?

filled out the RMA and will send it off soon.
edit: so no, the problem persists…it sucks

1 Like

Damn, was hoping it was an overlooked setting or something. Best of luck