Multiple destinations for lfos.
So you can choose 2 parameters at once. 2 synth parameters or a synth and fx…
I’d like the Random LFO to have the same speed and depth controls as the Value LFO, so you could have BPM synchronised randomisation
What I would really like is for TE to open-source the whole thing once they are done updating it. I heard somewhere that the OP1 is reaching its final form as far as TE is concerned, so it would be great if the community could implement all of this stuff we are talking about.
Yeah that would be crazy… Like what JJos did to the mpc1000/2500
how bout an easier way to mix tracks instead of recording to album and then back to tape?
You can use the ‘ear’ function to bounce tracks down, although it won’t capture tape FX 
I think a community-driven OP-1 would lack the stability (yes, really) and efficiency of the TE form. Now, if they open-sourced the intellectual property of the original design and concept, and suggested that a firm could develop a new motherboard with more memory, more recent/powerful processors, new features… that would be very interesting. OP-1 reloaded. What fascinates me with it is that when it came out the iPad was still a very limited tool. Now, the OP-1 is still the same machine, but an iPad has moved on significantly in terms of RAM, CPU performance and so forth. It would be nice if the OP could evolve in the same way without losing the efficiency of the TE concept.
Now, the OP-1 is still the same machine, but an iPad has moved on significantly in terms of RAM, CPU performance and so forth. It would be nice if the OP could evolve in the same way without losing the efficiency of the TE concept.
Apple left behind an incredible number of people annoyed by the built-in obsolescence in products such as the underpowered iPad 1, or the placeholder iPad 3. If you look through the specs you can see the iPad 2 has only half a gig of ram which, in overly complex iOS 8 terms, is nothing. The complete iPad 1->Air2 journey would have cost you $3000 for the baseline 16GB model.
We’d be discussing OP5 if TE did that.
If TE had some more will and capacity, a modular OS that can be compiled via the website or via some software app, would turn the OP1 into a powerful platform. That also has the risk of people reverse-engineering the guts enough so that it can be hacked to add new modules, in a way the device escaping from their hands and potentially hurting any future sales. They are maybe smart to stay away from that, but it’s disappointing not to see them invest more manpower into evolving a product in need of basics such as access to the full side of the record, or mix drop to tape, or a drum compressor (shift+drum key is unused), or fixes like loop click or take sliding.
+1 @anomalous Dfilter.I would like to hear that on samples/everything.
@molotov ear does record master FX no?
Now, the OP-1 is still the same machine, but an iPad has moved on significantly in terms of RAM, CPU performance and so forth. It would be nice if the OP could evolve in the same way without losing the efficiency of the TE concept.Apple left behind an incredible number of people annoyed by the built-in obsolescence in products such as the underpowered iPad 1
I’m a former iPad 1 owner, and what annoyed me wasn’t that the latest OS ceased supporting the machine, but that the apps, as they were updated, no longer supported it when they had previously. However, as I also had pretty much every tablet going at that time, I think it’s extremely unfair to say the iPad had ‘built-in obsolescence’ any more than the Apple Lisa or even the original Mac did. It had the hardware applicable for the time - it was outclassed by newer demands and OS, but it managed 3 years without being hideously outdated.
Technology progresses. Sometimes - like where we are with desktop machines now - the power available becomes so silly that future upgrades are just vanity. I’m still using a 2008 computer in 2015; using a 1998 computer in 2005 was laughable, using a 1988 computer in 1995 an anachronism (FWIW I kept on using an Apple //e and IIgs well into the '90s; my IIgs was networked via AppleTalk and TCP/IP over localtalk to a Workgroup Server running IPNR and bridge, so it could talk to my G5 as a fileserver to fetch disks downloaded, could netboot from the WGS (as could my //e!) and I could go on IRC on the IIgs - I am no stranger to making old stuff work, right now I’m using another Swedish invention to transmit files. Hasselblad Dixel 2000, Image Basket and Image Tuner, a 1988 Electronic Picture Desk system that cost around £140,000 when new and was wiped out - as were competing systems from AP, Reuters etc. - by the arrival of worldwide internet, digital cameras and so forth in less than 5 years. Now it’s incredible to look at an iPhone and think how much more it can do for worldwide news gathering. My Hasselblad system is probably sending the first colour image to be transmitted by traditional CCITT FM wirephoto in decades, purely because I want to see how it all works!).
The OP-1 is not a powerful platform. It is about as powerful as a mid-2000s consumer digital camera in processing terms. TE have squeezed something incredible from it - and like the iPad 1, if you just left it at that and didn’t develop it, that’s fine. Nevertheless, the OP-1 is now a few years old, and the form factor could contain a much more powerful engine, allowing the faster graphics, or better audio resolution, or longer tapes, or better multitasking engines/sequencers. If TE were to take that route it would be a new instrument, not an upgrade, because you can’t buy third-party apps, you aren’t at the whim of random developers to make your machine useful. That’s where the iPad 1 obsolescence comes from - the third party support, or lack thereof. OP-1 could exist alongside OP-2, should such a beast exist, because the capabilities would be different even if the tools were very similar.
> I'm a former iPad 1 owner, and what annoyed me wasn't that the latest OS ceased supporting the machine, but that the apps, as they were updated, no longer supported it when they had previously.
This has a lot to do with the way Apple's system software development works. Both iOS and OSX are in constant flux, and are a snug fit only to whatever is currently in the Apple stores. Everything else is left out in the cold regarding bugfixes, and often necessities - all software development is shifted to the _next_ version of the framework/OS/device. Very rarely, unless it's a mission critical or a security fix, would Apple themselves commit a bugfix to a "previous" OS. The Apple store sometimes forces moving to new APIs on the developers. Except for those instances, we live in a world of workarounds.
You wouldn't want the above from a musical instrument, I assume? I'd personally prefer an immediate, predictable, robust experience from the OP1. It somehow manages that, despite a few bugs and idiosyncrasies.
You may have noticed Apple's fanbase being a bit disappointed with their software lately.
Hence me saying "built-in" rather than "planned". Here we are, debating the OP1's capabilities, 4 years after its release date. If it was dragging the way an iPhone 4s+iOS8 drags (4s released in 2011), nobody would buy it. So there's half the problem there - how to carefully update the OS. Then there's details - if a new synth engine ends up shortening the battery life by 5-10% that's a ticking time bomb there.> However, as I also had pretty much every tablet going at that time, I think it's extremely unfair to say the iPad had 'built-in obsolescence' any more than the Apple Lisa or even the original Mac did.
That has been valid from day 1. Of course, it depends on what one expects from updates. Going back to the thread's topic, an OP-1 OS update has a lot of room for fixes and for additions that are not cpu-expensive. If anything, memory might be a worse bottleneck than the Blackfin dsp, which somehow you're implying might be underpowered for these tasks. On one side the battery life justifies that for me, anyone's OP1 ever get hot? On the other, I simply refuse to accept that a specialised DSP chip has no cycles left to squeeze.> Nevertheless, the OP-1 is now a few years old, and the form factor could contain a much more powerful engine, allowing the faster graphics, or better audio resolution, or longer tapes, or better multitasking engines/sequencers.
> If TE were to take that route it would be a new instrument, not an upgrade, because you can't buy third-party apps, you aren't at the whim of random developers to make your machine useful. That's where the iPad 1 obsolescence comes from - the third party support, or lack thereof. OP-1 could exist alongside OP-2, should such a beast exist, because the capabilities would be different even if the tools were very similar.
The reason I replied in the first place was because I believe TE should not pull Apple’s tricks. An OP2 is fine but an Apple-like schedule would have got us to an OP3 if not OP5 by now, accumulating discontent as a side product (the OP1 is thin on value in comparison to an iPad). Having witnessed enough demoscene code, I am convinced there is enough CPU power and RAM in the OP1 to see worthy additions (or fixes) over more than one OS future update. The problem is updates tend to come for free so are difficult to fund. This is what Apple are being ruthless about. Maybe people wouldn’t mind paying for OP1 updates, who knows.
Almost all halo product manufacturers have been acquired by their low-cost-wider-market peers. I doubt TE would want to only be associated with the 1%.
In my view the OP1 needs polish, not new guts. A portion of it’s UI sits unused and that gets mentioned more often than anything? (* clicks knob *)
Loved the Apple//e btw, my first computer was a clone.
The iPad 1 app issue is not so much that the API moved on, but that if you restored an iPad 1 that had been holding previous generations of apps that worked fine - simply not updating them - it would lose those apps if the newer versions ceased supporting it. And yes, Apple’s software has gone really wrong in the last couple of updates - Yosemite is awful for UI behaviour, stealing focus, opening unwanted Spaces…
I do feel that the OP1 CPU is an area that can be improved upon; but when I say OP1 engine, I mean the whole thing - memory, battery, CPU. Remember they said that some animations could not be sustained with the current processor so they had to drop frames…
The click, yes, definitely!
As a relatively new user who’s really into drum programming the primary feature request that is really troublesome to me…
PLEASE GIVE US SOMEWAY TO CHOKE DRUMS/SAMPLES.
I really can’t get my groove on so far (the swing is really nice though, far better and funkier than I expected). Fingers crossed.
So when in your drums, sampler, or dbox, for each key i think its the orange knob that will make the sound for that key play the entire sound, or play the sound as long as you hold the key down. So it kinda gives you that choke feature if you are finger drumming. You can also use the sketch sequence and program how long a sound should play a bit more than you can with the pattern or finger sequencers.
@kingof9x - thanks man.
Yeah I have been messing with similar styles as you describe. Def I can get an approximation of choke effect, alas the amount of thought/effort it takes as opposed to the immediacy of a machine like an MPC or SP1200 kinda chokes me up (shitty pun intended).
I think the combo of no velocity / accent and no choke is kinda a buzz kill for my style.
I agree, mute groups would totally bring the op to a new level. seriously. Even just a single mute group that you turn on or off per part would be super useful. I find myself sampling to my Ipad way too often just to access that feature.
+100 on mute groups and should not add much space if any. Could probably be the easiest thing to add in the new update but TE probably has no idea of.
This has to be added, especially for when sampling musical loops, we need to beable to cut of other sample. Just like and mpc. Maybe A mono sequencer with parameter locks???
Even a mono option in the drums could be a work around? I compiled a list of features and emailed TE. Maybe we could compline a big one and secs it to TE or even email them the link to this thread?
So now that the oplab has been officially updated…
How long till the op-1 gets an update?
+1000 for choke groups
+1 for the “OP-1 Factory” mentioned earlier by RTK. That’s a great idea.
My wish if this 2015 update happens: I would like to have the possibility to “fill” the endless sequencer with an external keyboard. I don’t think one can do that yet, correct ?