First thoughts - Rename projects, multi-tweaks, mod sequencer

Khidr

Disclaimer, I work in software as part of my job, and every time I get a customer request (or dream up a new feature) I think about how many weeks of a full-time effort it’ll be, and know that you have to plan your sprints way in advance and prioritize based on what’s going to have the most impact and usually that’s fixing bugs. So this is just aspirational QOL thoughts.

Expand multitrack tracks. Starting with my least important, I get that multitrack is basically like 8 elektron-style tracks, and note values are dialed in, but it would be swell do use that giant grid we have to blow it up into a mono-like track to quickly write a melodic sequence. I don’t think they need to be fully blown mono tracks, as the balance there are the additional features in mono vs. the additional tracks in multi. Which brings me to…
Export a multi-track track to a mono sequencer via some copy and paste. Maybe you’ve written a killer melody or bassline, but realize it’s worth giving it its own sequencer to add additional control. Similar to the above, doing this in a reverse and only retaining what we can hold in a multi track would be cool too.
CC paging. 4 cc’s is a tiny bit limiting, 8 would be nice, MOAR would be better. Another way to handle this would be a sequencer type that is JUST mods and can be pointing anywhere. This would roll up a few ideas that have been kicked around, including different timing for mod lanes against sequences. Something that looks like a multitrack sequencer but gives four lanes of mod for each of 8 tracks and can be sent to any midi channel would be great and benefit from some of the independence of those tracks.
Naming / Renaming projects. Even if just with the desktop app, nothing breaks when I rename them on my desktop, but obviously the names are ignored when getting put to slots. 1. My awesome jam, 2. don’t let anyone hear this!!! 3. This will get me my EGOT, is just much easier to keep track of. And nobody wants to accidentally select “2” when entertaining.
Arrangement mode: This is so close to perfect, and much better than clip and scene launching. The use of the screen to visualize the repeats is great, but it still can be trial and error to figure out how long a sequence is to try to match up the playhead. One idea would be to extend the sequence view beyond the first page and have a more linear representation (yeah a bit like the deluge, it’s their one killer feature), but there’s beauty in having your whole arrangement on one page. Another approach could be more clearly representing the size of the pattern on the screen, so instead of showing the play speed, showing pages from 1 to 8 and showing the size differences in line like:
2[—][—][—][—]
4[—][—]

Anyhow, didn’t want to throw all of these as separate feature requests, because my head would explode if I received a whole bunch of FRs like that all at once, and I really don’t think any of this should jump in some of the really excellent ideas other folks are throwing around, but wanted to give my initial thoughts on a device I’m now a rabid fan of.

Keep up the great work! You could change nothing and this would still be part of my daily workflow.

Carlos

Khidr Some comments on things that are currently possible.

1, 2. You can compose in a Mono sequencer and paste it on a single track in Multi, the opposite is not currently possible.

CCs can be linked or independent from the sequencer (init/end points, time div).
This is currently possible on OXI itself.

Khidr

Great to know about the mono sequencer to multi. I was trying to do the opposite, so admittedly, my research was one-sided.

3, I saw, and have used that a bit to get some development with delay levels over a few loops of the underlying pattern, that’s kind of what got me thinking about this. The other benefits in addition to wholly different pattern controls would be sequencing it independently in arranger, and if it’s 8X4, just getting a whole bucketload of cc’s.

Got it. Saving that project to desktop and putting it back will force it back to “project 1”, so it’s temporary until the project is backed up. Great step in this direction, and sorry I missed the piece that was already there, it was hard to find in the manual even once pointed out.

Awesome all around. The best FR is the one that’s been there the whole time. But then you should promise “we can look at it in our next sprint, might be hard to implement” and then “overdeliver” 🙃

Carlos

Khidr Didn’t comment on the rest of your ideas, they’re nice. I think both Multi and Chord can’t get more CCs due to hw limitations (flash storage), and honestly the current modes would make hard to add more CCs without making an UI mess. A dedicated mode would be the way.

Khidr Saving that project to desktop and putting it back will force it back to “project 1”

Oops, informed already.

Khidr The best FR is the one that’s been there the whole time

It’s fun reading non users comment on possible features to discover almost all of them are already implemented somehow, happened a lot in the Modwiggler thread.

Khidr

Even better for non users. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve demoed my one saas and been asked “can it do this?” And been tempted to say “well if you commit to a year I will commit to building that in the next two weeks”. I’m too honest to do it, so I just enjoy the moment of wonder when I show the feature. The hardest part sometimes is documenting the ideas you’ve implemented in a way for a new user to immediately get. (Like me with some of these, even with the manual and the Oxi in front of me)! Still, you’ve done an amazing job on a ux that gets you going right away but still leaves room for growth without getting lost in a sea of crazy button combos.

Uija

I love the idea of a separate Modulation Sequencer. when I read about the „independent modulation lanes“ I thought they were exactly that. Not only time devision and start/end but also midi port/channel. 1CC per Multitrack lane is often not enough, but I don’t need modulation on every Multitrack-Lane and I don’t always need 4 on the other sequencers. would be awesome to be more flexible on that without sacrificing a full multitrack-lane.

Carlos

Uija Well, independent MIDI channel may be a nice feature suggestion, only for unlinked CCs of course.
I bet it’s not hard to implement and there’s place for it on the CC settings list. I’ll write it down.