Time to release your inner creative genius!
3 Likes
Iām the opposite, I wanted to like the OP-Z but canāt get into it at all. Need to try again I guess. I primarily start by noodling on keys, so thatās obviously a lot more possible on OP-1 (f).
Anybody knows, why I donāt get any audio out of my MacBook Pro speakers when connecting my field and selecting OP-1 Field as audio input on the mac and selecting MacBook Pro speakers as output on the mac?
It record fine on the MacBook - But no monitoring?
Which daw are you using?
[edit] i believe you still have to launch a daw to monitor the input.
I donāt use a daw. 
Would you care elaborating on your set-up?
How did you set everything up in the AudioMidi app? Where/how do you record? Howās everything plugged in?
The more infos, the better the troubleshooting.
USB-C to USB-C, one end in OP-1 Field the other end in MacBook Pro (m1 max).
In system settings on the MacBook Pro, under sound, I have chosen OP-1 Field as input device and MacBook Pro speakers as the output. I see the meter for incoming audio indicating the audio is going into the MacBook Pro. But no sound is coming out of the speakers in the MacBook Pro.
You canāt directly monitor macOSās input like that, you are just setting your default input device (the same used for videocalls applications, etc.) as the OP-1. To hear the outputs youāll need something that can listen to the input device and output it to the speakers.
You can use something like Rogue Amoebaās Audio Hijack in play-thru mode: Rogue Amoeba | Audio play-thru of input devices
I really like Rogue Amoebaās audio stuff, I use Audio Hijack for sampling videos I play through the computer, for example 
3 Likes
QuickTime Player can be used to select a new Audio Recording and there youāll find a monitoring option.
I guess people tend to use GarageBand as a first encounter for things like that
1 Like
GarageBand will certainly work. Free and built in. You donāt have to use the daw stuff if you donāt want to. GarageBand does audio in and out, but only midi in because it has its own sounds. Thatās its main major limit as a daw, no midi output to external gear, only to plugins.
1 Like
New OP-1F user here. Iāve got an admission to make: Iāve spent thousands on gear that I have used precisely once. (Several times the cost of an OP-1F, I suspect.) I have also purchased gear that I have never used (much smaller number but still a good downpayment on the OP-1F).
In that sense, the OP-1F has been one of the least frivolous gear purchases Iāve made, because the barrier to using it is so low. Youāre not home? No problem, great battery. Family complaining you āarenāt present?ā Be in the same room as them, but with the OP-1F! You had to sell your other synths due to an obscure tax law? No problem, thereās plenty of sounds to play with and a competent sampler. Just the basics of getting sound into and out of the OP-1? No problem.
Even some seemingly impractical but very much real edge cases are catered for. Forgot your theremin at home? Got a gyroscope. Your FM-radio powered vocoder is broken? Got you covered mate. Need to attach your instrument to a paraglider or camel with hook-and-loop fasteners? That too.
Some of these problems areā¦ infrequent. They are still all problems posed by reality, which seems to be the prime force affecting musical output globally. (Another word for reality would be entropy, I suppose.)
I said to myself that the OP-1F is the most āreality-basedā electronic musical instruments Iāve tried. Maybe youāll build that 168hp modular system? No you wonāt. Will you have the energy to turn on your gear after an extremely long day? Sometimes but often no. Maybe youāll start playing shows again? Yeah maybe, but if you keep getting ratfucked by reality (and sometimes gear that is not reality-based) you wonāt.
I play this thing every day and there is very little stopping me from doing so. (I could whip it out right now! I carry it everywhere.) Once reality starts to bend to my will a bit more, and I start to feel like a musician again, I may try adding another little synth, something small and USB-powered, but if I start to stop making music because of it Iām going back to just the OP-1.
EDIT: I should also be very clear. The OP-1Fās firmware seems terribly half-baked. This is not an advertisement. I understand and largely agree with every decision made in the design of the original instrument and therefore this one. Designing based on an āidealā firmware would result in an unusable hardware interface and vice versa.
The worst thing TE could do would be to overdo it. But the more they refine the metaphors they are already working with, the more this instrument feels like the finished article. I want sound engines, sequencers, and tape. Thatās it. Everything else is in the āquality of lifeā details.
27 Likes
I resonate with that ^
I love the Field. Switching between OP-Z and OP-1 Field, there are things about the OP-Z that I really like, dual effects bus, filter per track, step components and just the power of the sequencer in general. That said, I always desire using the OP-1 Field, I feel like the little bit of screen that I do get along with the Tape centers my experience, velocity sensitivity of the keys and inputting into the sequencer is a nice plus too! I donāt actually enjoy (so far) using both together.
I do feel like bringing up again that Iām yearning for some kind of OP-Z style sequencer in the Field.
I just think plugging notes into steps is faster and more fun in the OP-Z style than say the Pattern or Finger sequencers. I donāt think itās something TE will work on because the button labelling wouldnāt really vibe with theirā¦ vibe? But every time I think and say something like this iām reminded of how the Finger, Pattern and Endless sequencers in the Field are pretty damn powerful, useful and awesome.
Iād like to get the OP-Z EP engine, or something along those lines though.
Iāve been using samples which is great, but does lack expressiveness at times.
Iāve tried a couple workarounds but iām open to hearing if anyone has other ideas.
Iāve tried:
- velocity controls lfo controlling the Spring effect to try to get more bite with harder velocity
- using FM engine and having velocity affect FM amount to emulate an EP attack with velocity
but overall it would just be nice to have a responsive Electric Piano model that doesnāt need a work around so I can use the LFO for tremolo, and I can use an effect to actually effect the sound.
In a similar vein, I think itās time for some new stereo effects! I would love a chorus, stereo widener like the Spread/stereo effect built into Dimension. Ping-Pong Delay could be fun too.
All of which can all be worked-around to achieve these results though, I think thatās the beauty of the OP-1 Field, itās all pretty much already there, you just have to get creative.
4 Likes
Oddly, I find that when I connect the Field with anything else than something that processes stuff Iāve already recorded, something breaks with my workflow. I canāt even sequence the damn thing with the OP-Z without ending up in a stop motion experience.
The Field really is its own creature when it comes to pure flow.
2 Likes
What mode do you guys use for clean recordings? Studio or Minidisc mode? I canāt tell the difference between the two and I want as clean as possible, to have an unspoiled recording before I go into further processing with external gear.
1 Like
Iād say Studio is the cleanest. Minidisc does something grainy in the higher frequencies (I think)
6 Likes
Yeah, I canāt quite pick it up, but thereās just something with the MD tape I donāt like.
I tend to stick to Studio for clean recordings and imprint later, any tape-like artefacts Iād like, mostly with other kits. Itād be great if the tape effects werenāt actually rendered onto the recordings but added as an extra fx bus.
2 Likes
Minidisc aliases the recordingsā¦ try recording something high pitched and then drop the tape speed down and youĀ“ll hear it clear as day.
It can be really cool at times imo.
5 Likes
I too donāt know what to do with my op-1f! 
With any other piece of gear i have or had i immediately knew what to do with, having at least general ideas how to proceed with the arrangement, had even unconscious thoughts that would materialize before my eyes without understanding the process at the moment but would only later realize that was beyond my conscious control and that it was a combination of the machine and my unconscious self; magical
With the OP I always stuck, canāt find the right flow, it just misses damn normal sequencers (wft TE! Already! Cmon!), and the hierarchical system is totally counterintuitive to my brain, it just glitches my miiiiinddd d
Even something arcade like Mnm was like drinking a glass of milk compared to the Op! And i proved to myself that i can make quite complicated growing arrangements and modulations, tracks with thousands of notes (literally) with Mnm so in my eyes itās not me, itās Op
To me at the moment the Op is only good for making lo-q lullabies 
1 Like
Agree, this is my one pet peeve with this synth
1 Like
Would someone please be able to explain to me exactly how to use the OP-Z sequencer to sequence things on the O-1F?