I’m not sure. The synths are good, but they have an artificial flavor I don’t really dig. I do like the drums on the other hand. Anyway it’s not my only gripe. The workflow is quite special. I can get quick patterns but I can’t say I’m ‘fluent’ yet. There are so much shortcuts to memorize in such a small space ! Maybe I’m too old to eat another headache puzzle.
2 Likes
I’m on the (same) fence here too. It’s been a week, yes, but I’ve started to run into problems where I wish I could have more granular control over the sound engines. My main issue is still concerning the lack of flexibility in FX’s so it’s very hard to sculpt your own flavor onto the device - I’m gonna give it a little more time but then I’m probably gonna look at a trade towards a Tonverk instead.
5 Likes
Following this thread, I just want to say I appreciate the honesty. It was very hard to resist this 30% offer. In fact, I decided today I might as well jump on it (I thought it was until the 21st of August for some reason). The reason is portability is highly in favour in my situation.
My issue was not the sound itself (IMO it’s one of the better-sounding GBoxes out there, silky HiFI), but the depth of sound design. I was willing to forgive that, as the flexibility/creativity that is on hand is just incredible, cant go wrong with it …
yet after watching long workflow videos, the flow didn’t really gel with me either. A lot of jumping back and forth (but then again, so it is on the Elektrons as well (?). But I had imagined it as verz simple and surfaced … (?) is that not the case or is it just matter of getting used to the XY-operandi? I mean are Elektron and XY on par when it comes to worflow?
I keep looking at the MC-707 every time I get interested in XY; the pitch algorithms and synthesis are just top!. And it can do some Octatrack-style tricks via its Scatter: with realtime scaling of audio time and pitch, loops + scenes ect.) It might be the worst workflow? Dunno can anzone compare?
Might aswell go M:Cycels right now and cure the lust … cant go wrong with it, usable sounds, usable seq, cheap and portable… will go fine with whatever I pick up next…
…didnt mean to rant …
the basic Q is: How does the workflow stack up to Elektrons and the 707
Thx!
I had and loved the 707, its very similar imo. 8 tracks of drums, samples or synths, step sequencer, clip based, pattern chaining etc… Sounds are not as good, obviously doesn’t have the great control surface… but it’s portable which is why i made the switch. It’s 1/8th the size hence the reduced features. Thing I hated about the 707 was that you couldn’t save patches properly.
You can’t get around what op-xy is. It’s not a deep synth for proper synth nerds, it’s accessible, portable, fast, stylish. I try and see it’s limitations as what makes it unique these days. it has a sound for better or worse.
4 Likes
I would say the synth engines are definitely the weakest part. The way I tend to use it is that if I’m away from home, I use the synth engines as placeholders and then replace them later with analog synths in my studio. One of its unique strengths is that it can be used as a scratchpad anywhere, but then unlike the OP-1F you can really easily switch that track from being an internal synth to an external synth and finish the track in the studio without having to recreate everything.
The arranger and workflow are, for me, magical; I write more songs with it than any other synth I’ve owned. I also for whatever reasons get better and more interesting drum parts from it than any drum machine I’ve used (the punch-in effects help with this, as does the tape track from glitching things up).
8 Likes
Was that the only thing? …
is this not overcome via the 707 editor /librarian, I know it’s a bit outside the box but a touchscreen next to a 707 running things like stem, separation and sample chop software seams like a worthwhile solution.
How was editing on it?
Did you do allot of sampling?
Did zou make use of re-sampling; pitch sifting loops via the looper or scatter? Is assigning 4 macros to an encoder for step lock or motion record trouble free, any timing lags?
It is possible to put sample time and pitch variants on multiple stages; the looper, the DjFX and scatter are all manipulate-able sample editing buffers noone talks about this, This is Octa-Power!!
IMO it sounds better than all the other main stream boxes, although TV also has amazing pitch alsogs and FX but the sound very TV formatted. the 707 is a bit more coloerfull and the Rolands alwazs seams to have a groove to them. I prefer the 707 sound over the others under 1.5k… its hard not to just snatch one at 500 used
Not trying to be glib, but this depends a lot on what you mean by “workflow”. I own the XY, the 707, and, like, 5 Elektrons and they are all super smooth when using them as they want to be used. And really rough trying to use them for anything else 
Elektrons are trackers. They have a grid of notes that you can effect on any step. They are pattern based — which is to say the only way to change tracks is change them all at once by switching patterns. Their sound engines are pretty flexible, but limited per-box (oneshots for DT, FM for DN, Subtractive for A4, etc). All this together makes them great for quickly creating short loops of common sounds that distinguish themselves via locks, conditionals, and polymeters. This makes them quick to set up and extemporize with, so they are also commonly seen as reactive performance machines.
And I think they are probably the most open-ended of the boxes on this list. Elektrons tend to be very limited (read: focused) on the thing they do. But within those limitations, you can expect to do practically anything. There are not a lot of dead-ends with elektron boxes (Tonverk currently excepted. But it’s getting better at this all the time).
The 707 is an old-school TR sequencer. But it is clip-based, which means any track can be swapped out independently of the others. So variety is injected more by swapping in and out individual clips (like ableton) rather than looping the same clip with locks or conditions. Which is a good thing, because the 707 really prefers recording automation (“Motion" data) to a clip rather than locking values per trig. It has probably the most advanced synth engine of any groovebox, capable of everything from old school ROMpler pads, through VA synthesis, sampling, and even some FM. Sound design is deep. But also a corresponding pain in the ass. You’re not going to be crafting patches live like with the Elektrons. But that’s not really what the 707 is about, anyway. It has a very mixer-like flow. Mutes, triggering clips, a dedicated fader on every track, assignable pots, and punch-in-like scatter are how you build a performance on the 707.
But it’s very much a Roland groovebox. Some things are well thought-out. Some things are overly reliant on the way things used to work decades ago. And then some things just don’t work. There’s no fixing it. Jump in, assign some presets, put down some simple trigs, and have a great time arranging clips! Try not to think too much about what “ought” to be possible.
The XY is kind of a mix of both, but very slimmed down due to the limitations of its highly-portable shell. It tends to favor looped simple patterns with locks and “components”, but also has a very clip-like idea of sequencing (even if it’s not exactly easy to launch those clips extemporaneously in a live setting). Its instruments are macro-based to keep them simple and performable, but at the same time punch-in effects are also provided to inject live variability. It’s not as deep as any given Elektron box, and not even close to the sprawling 707, but it manages to fit a lot of variety into one very compact package. It seems to ask that you express yourself through the infinite combinations of its many capabilities. Any one of them on its own can sound rather bland, even trite. But if you taking an LFO-modulated poly string synth, locking various params per-step, bend its chords via brain or arp, while locking delay every third step, applying retrigs and skips via components, mangling it all through tape, and then tossing some live punch-in FX to taste… that’s not going to sound like what anyone else would come up with even following the exact same process. But it’s also not going to be something you can really plan ahead of time. The more parts of the XY you engage with, the more of a happy-accident machine it becomes.
And it’s just not the open-ended modular playground one might hope for to make the most of this design. LFO destinations are very limited. Synth macros are not always well considered. Only some params can be locked, while other obvious choices are impossible. Some things can be modified per-voice while others have to affect the whole track. Nothing feels broken like the 707 sometimes can. But I find myself having to remember a lot more odd “rules” with the XY than I do with an Elektron.
After all that 
The point is, I guess, it depends on you. There’s no Elektron that’s better than a 707. The 707 isn’t any better than the XY. The XY can’t be held up over any Elektron. It’s all tradeoffs and limitations. The question is which limitations bug you and which ones don’t. And the only way to learn the answer is to jump in and spend some serious time with one.
25 Likes
Well that was well focused and honest… 
.
Kind feel bad about missing out on the XY now as your description was very much how I had imagined the masking of imeted sound design… it’s a very creative box and that’s something that gets overlooked often when comparing specks on paper…
if the XY gets, time scaling sampler, Drum synth and Speak engines … I am forever going to regret not getting "when it was relatively affordable… 
thanks for the down to earth response
This is why the XY is so good with the M8 for me. The M8 is just incredible, but it’s very different to the XY. I like to come up with odd parts on the XY and record the loops into the M8 for arrangement or further chopping and so on.
I also much prefer the XY for chords, especially with the brain. It’s a real shame about the synths, but there are som nice sweet spots in there. Mostly I use samples and multisample though. Especially from @Colorsinspace1
7 Likes
For chords can you place them on a step, and then extend them?. If so how?. On the Ableton Move it’s really easy to do, so was hoping for something like that.
Extending a step is incredibly straightforward, you hold down the first step and then hit the end step.
2 Likes
Nice like a Deluge.
Are the synths just average?. I had an OP-1 Field and was really disappointed as the synths were just the same as the OP-1 but better sounding. So to hear people say the synths is the weakest part of the XY has me hesistant, this is beside the 1 LFO and effect issue.
They’re not like, stunning and incredible universes of cinematic glory but they’re also totally fine. The fact that they’re mostly made of macro parameters helps with the minimal LFO availability and you can parameter lock and get another parameter each of velocity and MW and PB modulation and squeeze a decent bit out of them. @VictorStar made a good point about how to use them effectively, which is that you they are good enough to write creative and good sounding music with and if you aren’t happy with how one of them works in a track it’s easy enough to set that track to sequence an external synth instead when it’s time to record.
There is also one thing that’s quite nice about the synth engines in the context of using the XY the way I feel like TE intended: it’s really fast to get a sound that’s pretty much what you wanted and since the options to sound design it further don’t really exist then you just immediately move back into composition mode. They also do not sound bad at all. I’m quite satisfied with how my all-XY compositions have come out sound-wise, I just don’t build the compositions around letting a really memorable patch do its magic as much as I would with some of my other synths. I still have managed to make some sounds I’m quite happy with on it and sometimes it’s better that it forces me to leave well enough alone and allow an already good sound to just stay the way it is instead of monkeying with it further.
4 Likes
“Average” is exactly it. I think the piano synth is really good. I quite like axis, the string one. I find myself using swarm quite a bit but only for a couple specific sounds. The “basics” one is pleasant too.
I pretty strongly dislike using most of the other synths. I either don’t like the sound (hair dryer), don’t like the parameters I have access to through the macros, or just want way more control (the prism one). Even the ones I like, there are almost always things I really wish I could automate and it really desperately needs a second lfo per track.
I find myself gravitating to a small handful of sounds on the device and not liking most other sounds I come up with or just wishing for more. The XY shines for composition and playability but the built-in synthesizers are a major weak point. They always sound good, but they simply don’t provide what I’m looking for sometimes.
Edit: I want to be clear. I really like the OPXY, even if I find it frustrating at times. I’m critical of aspects of it precisely because I adore it, it’s genuinely the most fun music thing I own and I want it to be even better. If I ever work up the effort to record the things I’ve made on it, I’ll have two albums of decently-polished material to work with.
6 Likes
Some that I was having a hard time with have gotten more interesting for me since I got some preset packs from @metropolis_border that let me look at how those were built to extract as much juice as possible from the limited tools. It helped me re-think how I approached some like prism and dissolve that were often unsatisfying for me. I agree that the piano synth and axis are pretty nice macro oscillators, I enjoy them a lot and they rarely need extensive sound design to go into a mix the way I want.
I agree with you that the hair dryer doesn’t sound great and a second LFO or the ability to use the envelopes in more ways would go far. A lot of the time I’d much rather have the filter and amp use the same envelope and use the second envelope as a mod source.
2 Likes
Send in feature requests, might not amount to anything, but the more people sending can bring attention to features that people feel are “missing”
Agree about the synths, I can’t see them ever getting drastically better unless they somehow implement insert fx per track to bring them to life.
I’ve added a micromonsta2 to my set up for when I want a beefy sounding synth and the on board ones serve well as secondary elements. Was thinking a Roland s1 might complement xy well too.
Edit: if they give us a decent fm synth though that would be brilliant
2 Likes
Well put. I’ll also add that whatever the limitations are of its internal synths, it’s an exceptional ROMpler - one of my other favorite things to do with it is to create a patch on my semi-modulars, and then multi-sample that patch on the OP-XY so it’s in my quiver for later. This is also how I plan to perform live with it, where I won’t have the luxury of access to all my studio instruments.
4 Likes
Yeah, but I mean, it’s really well built. So it might require some patience, but finding a used one in nice condition isn’t crazy hard. Especially if a lot of people are taking advantage of this sale — some of them are going to bounce off it. And used prices are pretty comparable.
And in the long run, it’s not about how much a thing costs, but about the difference in price between what you spent on it and what you eventually sell it for. The OPs (z excluded) have been really good at holding their value in this respect. So in some ways, it’s always affordable.
TL;DR: Don’t let them GAS you. It’s nice, but maybe not for you. And if it is for you, it will be there when you’re ready for it.
4 Likes
I was thinking I have the Akai MPC plugin, I could autosample my instruments and then dump them using the preset builder. But how many velocity layers can it handle?, or is it just one akin to Deluge?