Now that the OP-XY is here what is the future of the OP-1 Field? It’s no longer the “flagship” given that the OP-XY is more expensive. Will they consider adding the synth engines from the OP-XY to the OP-1 Field (or vice versa)? I really hope they continue to support the OP-1 Field by adding new features but I’m concerned their focus will be on the OP-XY. They are kind of in an odd place as they don’t want to cannibalize the sales for either device but at the same time they don’t want to anger their existing OP-1 Field customers.
I doubt anybody out here knows… so all we can do is look back at history…
I’d say the original OP-1 got a lot of support spread out over what… about eight years time. The OP-Z felt more like 4’ish years of support… but I don’t remember.
The OP-1 Field has been out for what 2.5-3 years… and I do feel like it still has some more potential tricks for it.
Personally I’d like to see an update to the Field series in general, that would help make sense of all the devices in several contexts… but I’m not holding my breath, by and large they all feel like separate devices… but I can dream about a future integration that could help tie them all together into a much more concise and unified way. Being able to sync loops to clock/tempo, have multiple tracks, and fancy routing options… I can dream right? 
4 Likes
I don’t see it that way. I think the op-1 is still the flagship, it just has a midi counterpart in black now.
Two different machines. I still think the op1f is the ultimate digital portable recording workstation in the electronic world (DAW) and audio based (groovebox/mini) DAW
I think the op-xy is probably the best midi sequencer and midi based groovebox (not DAW tho) ever too , as I thought the Z could never be matched until now
5 Likes
I don’t see how the o-1 can be considered the flagship when it’s cheaper. I hope they are considered to be co-flagship products.
That’s literally what i just said - The flagship remains the op1f; it now has a black midi counterpart as a twin flagship product……the op-1f is only cheaper because its MSRP was set in 2021/2 before inflation [and covid] destroyed the economy and supply chains etc….
They obviously can’t increase the price of the OP-1F so they naturally had to make the OP-XY fixed for inflation ($200 is negligible at the $2k+ price point, almost anyone in music will tell you, once you hit $2k in any arena of musical gear and instruments, you just entered “top shelf” territory…
The OP-1[F] will ALWAYS be the TE flagship……[unless they actually do make the op-2 ofc ]
1 Like
i suspect that te leaves a little headroom in their products for future improvement, fixes, features, etc - by headroom i mean cpu, memory, resources, etc. - limited amount of that - and fixing things or introducing new things without breaking something else can be tricky
the op1f since its release, aside from fixes, we got velocity sensitivity, vocoder, and terminal. ← those are pretty substantial! (personally i love terminal)
i doubt we get anything substantial in the future, probably just bug fixes, compatibility fixes, and minor improvements → which is great! this doesn’t disappoint me.
te set the bar high for themselves
maybe i’m wrong, maybe we do get some new feature or engine or effect in the future, but i’m not disappointed if we dont
hell, the og op-1 got usb audio not long ago, which is insanely cool
3 Likes
I mean if it makes you feel better to think the OP-1f is the flagship then cool. I just don’t see how you can say it is. When the OP-XY is newer, more expensive and has way more features. I doubt I will get it as I don’t think it’s for me but I still can acknowledge reality.
2 Likes
I wouldn’t be super disappointed if they don’t offer anything else but I will be a little bit disappointed.
I really want them to save all of the master settings, eq etc per tape. Right now it’s just confusing how that doesn’t get stored per tape. I would also appreciate if they add some features from the OP-XZ, like a second LFO per synth engine. If they don’t add make any more improvements then they are just abandoning the OP-1f in favor of the OP-XY which is my concern.
1 Like
It’s very easy
It doesn’t make me feel better to know I have the better product, I don’t consider the xy inferior technically but it isn’t as good on many levels, namely it doesn’t do what the op1f can do - not at all or even close. How can something that replaces the flagship NOT do what the previous product did.
The op-xy is great, but it’s a groovebox that is not as capable of the op1… it’s an op-z on steroids w/uprgraded hardware and engines
I honestly would rather buy another op-z than pay for an xy when they are not much different - the synth engines aside - since I have better engines on the op1f
You think cuz something is negligily more expensive than its sister model that’s what means it’s a flagship? Look into the definition
Just because it’s hard to hear doesn’t make it untrue . I have no interest in buying an XY until they drop to their appropriate price, whcih is less than $2k as most people only paid $2k no tax on debut
(Acknowledging reality requires knowing what your doing/talking about )
I don’t want the xy either but what can’t it do compared to the op-1? Other than the tape I don’t think there is anything. It has great sounding synths and effects, multi sampling and can even resample.
I really would like to believe that the op-1 field is still their flagship product where they will continue to put their development efforts into but it doesn’t seem likely.
Here is the dictionary definition of flagship:
“the finest, largest, or most important one of a group of things (such as products, stores, etc.) ”
The xy seems to meet the definition.
1 Like
“The tape” brings a lot of functionality though depending how you look at it:
- tape exclusive FX (different tape types, tape stop , slowing down / speeding up the tape , rewinding)
- Recording longer audio takes and being able to export stems and/or a full track
- Linear arranger vs pattern / scene based
Then outside of the tape:
- Subjectively more interesting FX in terms of sound design. Punch, Grid , CWO versus basics like reverb and chorus.
- Radio
- Vocoder
- More straightforward and less cluttered UX
- More comfortable sized keys
5 Likes
^ this is a great breakdown.
OP-1F feels a lot more like an instrument to me. OP-XY has been a deep dive into a specific groovebox workflow. To get the most out of it, it seems you need to embrace it all.
Whereas op-1f, I use in many different ways and it’s a lot more immediately available to me.
Sure, you can use OP-XY as just a synth, but it’s like not really built to be just that, in the same way OP-1F is.
4 Likes
Good point. Op1F is meant to played like an instrument. Your performance is key. The XY is meant to be sequenced and adjusted step by step or component for component.
Op-1f = portable DAW (tape) , synthesizer deluxe, radio/USB,3.5mm sampler, pirate radio broadcast , linear audio recording with tape fx, whcih are many and are incredible FSU FX I’ve only seen from sugarbytes, with the best fx I’ve ever heard anywhere on any platform, the pirate radio is cool, the tape itself offers a lot to guys who are coming or leaving DAWs but don’t want to abandon their workflows .(and can send stems to daws too); The op1F allows for a seamless transition from laptop or iPad to self contained all in one audio recording WITH limited midi (although the midi sequencing is unlimited when you do USB c software sequencing from iOS or pc)
Op-xy/z = midi based groovebox (not performance based or live workflow), unequivocally amazing sequencer with step components, the way the op1f can affect incoming live audio the xy Z has punch fx, the XY magic lies in the punch fx, step component triggers and ofc sequencer…the synths are upgraded from the Z but not quite on par with the op1f, but like negligible close
The op1f isn’t for everyone. I see a lot and lot of people saying “finally, I can make music on an op- series : the op-z wasn’t reliable and broke often and the op1f was too reliant on the ability to play piano or keys and I suck at playing so the op-xy lets me have field quality pro audio synths with the ability to edit my note input”
As a pianist, I shudder at the mini keys and love the op1f keys and I love performing rather than entering midi notes; others have said they hate the op1f keys and love the xy keys
So to each their own.
I still want to get the XY when it hits sale price as my Z field is as a dream deferred lol
How do you like your XY
1 Like
I agree with all of that. But will the average consumer see it this way? I think most prospective buyers will go with the OP-XZ. It has so many more features, IMO better synth engines and is the hot product.The uniqueness of tape cannot be conveyed with words. One must use it for themselves. This is why I am doubtful that the OP-1 Field is going to have much attention going forward.
At the end of the day TE is a business and I think they are going to focus on whatever is more profitable and I think that will be the OP-XZ. I think that it competes for roughly 75 % of the OP-1 field market share. If this is the case then there will be no financial reason to add more features to it.
After using the XY for a few days, i came back to OP-1f and was really surprised how bad the keyboard feels in comparison to xy. OP-1f just feels undefined and wobbly.
Another thing i love on XY are the synth engines and its snappy envelopes.
On OP-1f it’s impossible to get snappy filter sounds. When using LFO to get envelopes on the dimension cutoff, there is always some of attack time and never gets zero.
That makes me think that OP-1f really needs some FW updates and improvements to be able to compete with XY.
1 Like
Not sure about sales but i think the existence of both will at least lead to less people buying the op1f and ending up frustrated which seems common enough. Those people would’ve sold their op1f for a digitakt or something anyway or let it collect dust.
For the people that do buy the op1f now instead of the xy , the videos and specs on both devices are out there — it’ll be more likely they got exactly what they wanted and use it for its strengths
Also the market for beat sequencers was already vastly popular even before the xy, considering how many direct competitors there are in the space. I think the xy more directly competes with things like mpc , digitakt , etc. vs the op1f which is just something else altogether imo.
To your point i wonder if TE will do anything special to differentiate the 2 or make it more clear to the average consumer. Then again I’m not sure if people who get these devices are average consumers. The electronic music hw market is already pretty niche. You’re right that some differences may only be uncovered after use but some big ones, i think ,are immediately clear (recording audio and exporting a full track / stems, FX)
You are correct that the devices are pretty different (one is oriented around recording audio/the other around sequencing) but I still think they directly compete with each other given the price point and the fact that they are both mobile standalone music production devices.
I hope I’m wrong and these two products are different enough and target a different type of consumer but I’m thinking that, for the most part, they don’t.
Here’s a question: If you didn’t own any of these devices, which one would you be learning towards? I really like the OP-1f, but I’d be lying if I said I wouldn’t pick the OP-XY over it if I had to choose one. And then if I bought the OP-XZ I doubt I could justify spending another 2k on the version that had a four track tape recorder but was more limited (intentionally or not) in almost every other way.
the op1f and opxy have a very different history, and as devices a very different architecture. they’ve converged a lot because they are both on the “op” platform, but they are super different. different enough imo to not compete much with one another. the op1f is centered around audio and tape recording, and the opxy is centered around midi and sequencing. they look similar because they are on the “op” platform but functionally they are very different.
i already own an op1f but im partial to the op1f over the opxy because sequencing isn’t nearly my thing as much as audio recording. i have an opz that itself is way more feature rich than i need which i pair with the op1f occasionally, but quite often the sequencers in the op1f are enough for me. the biggest caveat i can highlight to my opinion here is that the music i make is very modeled after smaller ensemble acoustic music, e.g. with one drummer who has 4 limbs to work with.
in this track here for example, im just using finger drumming with LFOs on panning and velocity/pitch, and the monkey sequencer. its inspired by steve gadd grooves. link doesn’t seem to work with timestamp but i tried to link it to 1min24sec into the recording for the groove example.
4 Likes
It depends…
If starting with absolutely zero gear I’d lean towards the xy at first but I’d also be comparing to stuff outside the op1f. Not sure I’d even put the 1f in the race. I’d probably end up with a mpc or ko2
If i had other gear I’d probably consider swapping some for the xy but end up not doing that due to lack of sample slicing and other sample editing options which are critical for the music i make.
I was actually in almost the exact scenario you’re describing by choice - at first i was only allowing myself to have 1 of the 2 devices. I’m on my 2nd field after owning and selling previously. And I’m still in the return window. So i can really just swap almost even with the discounts available.
But now that i think about it , they don’t serve the same purpose so picking between the 2 wouldn’t even make sense. And now my thought is that even though i could have both, i don’t even want the xy. Also it’s not the op1f that I’ll use instead for the same purpose, but the ko2
To your point , owning a op1f now probably helped me realize this quicker , but i think I’d get here eventually anyway. The things i use the field for mainly are simply not available on the xy
2 Likes
I hope TE sees this the same way as you. If these are co flagship devices then they should not be concerned that improving either will impact the sales of the other. I would like to see the two borrow from each other, effects, synth engines etc but maybe this is expecting too much from them?
1 Like