anyone know of a comprehensive comparison of Hapax and OXI One?
I only know @verstaerker that has both, shared this picture:
He may have some insight.
Yes with a (long, sorry) but. First, each track in Multitrack has independent MIDI channels, so you can use the rest for another 4 mono instruments or sample triggering. Each track has independent length, time division, playback direction, etc.
More conceptually speaking, you wonāt use Multitrack to make chords (you can ofc), you would use Chord or Poly mode that you can load in any of the 4 slots or in several at once. The reason is mostly because the workflow is much better suited for that end, and you have the same amount of voices out that in Multitrack, just more cleverly linked/presented (plus the keyboard and arp voices on top, independent for each sequencer so you can play (hold) 4 arpeggios at the same time). Additionally Chord mode has an independent MIDI channel for the root note (1 or 2 oct down), being able to run another instrument using only one sequencer. Multitrack is best suited for drums, sample launch or several mono voices with Euclid, a ton of randomisation and MI Grids engine under the hood.
The sequencer mode thing is quite unique because each mode is very focused in certain tasks to make the best out of it, and they overlap more general features with the other modes so nothing goes missing, this way you choose what your 4 sequencers do. Instead of forcing a fixed architecture it becomes modular to best fit your setup. Stochastic mode is not for you? thatās ok, you wonāt see it in the UI other than in a list of modes, itās virtually non existent in your machine. You enjoy Multitrack? letās add 3 of them.
This is also a misconception. I canāt judge directly because I know the workflow and how it evolved since the beginning, but new users are saying that itās very accessible, but an improvable manual.
True that some donāt click that fast with the workflow, but I know a few donāt even read the manual.
Any new instrument requires certain expertise (Iād say itās a couple of days), specially with performative and feature deep ones. Loopop review is not a current reference, 1 year from that prototype and lots of updates made a huge difference.
3 Likes
Yes I hear you, but I donāt think this is a misconception as much as an opinion. If youāve ever owned a grid sequencer you will maybe have experienced that feeling of āshit what page am I on and what does that light there mean again and where am I again in the loop, at which octave?ā ā to me itās just a matter of the amount of information represented simultaneously in any grid sequencer really that make them a risky proposition.
The OxiOne has the mode buttons which give direct access to those, which is cool, but after that it MUST get cramped, given the lovely feature set alone and the lack of more physical buttons & a bigger screen. I get it, it enables the form factor, but Iām pretty sure it takes a good amount of practice to not get lost on the device at times, at least Iām almost certain it would do so for me.
The Hapax has the two screens, one serving almost exclusively the purpose of giving orientation and facilitating informed navigation across the grid within any of the modes (though eg chord mode I think is not that well thought out in that regard). The Hapax is also less modular in regard to what each of its modes do, which is a plus to me in fact (in terms of usability / workflow).
The Hapax will be the center piece of my space ship setup, but as I said, an Oxi might be in the cards down the line as well, since I love midi sequencers and its form factor alone to me should be worth the price of admission.
4 Likes
Youāre completely right!
It doesnāt, honestly. Kind of hard to explain workflow to a person without the machine in front of them, even less via textā¦
Itās true thereāre a few combos with shift, most of them intuitive, and a couple that arenāt (just 3 IMO). At the same time this implies menu diving is removed almost completely, except for global system parameters (set once and forget), scrolling though CC numbers or renaming patterns. Immediacy and performability had priority.
All the mode buttons are a constant between sequencer modes, meaning that you only need to see which number is active 1 to 4, and what mode button is lit to know where you are, not even the screen is needed for that. In regards of the grid itself, thereāre 5 layouts: piano roll, keyboard and MOD lanes (exclusive per sequencer), save/load/arranger (it looks the same) and CV out configuration shared between all sequencers.
Whatever, itās better to check for yourself or read from people owning both. I encourage you to try it given the chance. I can only speak regarding OXI unfortunately, Iām dying to try Hapax too 
2 Likes
a friend of mine has had an Oxi One for a while nowā¦ and is a big fan.
I bent his arm to try the Hapax at Superbooth,
he came out the tent swearing ā¦ āwhy did I listenā¦ now I seriously want a Hapaxā 
anyway, I believe he will be getting a Hapax for reviewā¦ so thatāll be a good head to head. (not quite sure when thatāll happen)
he still proudly demoād the Oxi too me the next day,
and, as Ive said all along Oxi is cool, I really do like āthe pipeā, its portability, and there are some features on the Oxi that the Hapax does not have (currently?!)
similarly, there are things the Hapax has the Oxi does notā¦ (currently ?! )
but they are also quite different in a few ways, and trying different approaches.
really, best thing is to try them both (or watch some YouTube videos if not possible) and see which gels with you more.
whatāll be even more interesting is to see how they both evolve over the coming months, as both have plenty of scope for further development.
4 Likes
Im sure the oxi one is great but it doesnāt appeal to me like the hapax as an ableton live and elektron user. Proper polyphony per track and push style keyboard and all. Lots of talk of the oxi on this for some reason 
wondering why
4 Likes
My thoughts too. My hapax has replaced my cirklon in everyday use, especially when I just want to jam out quickly. The cirklon is built like a tank and perfect for minimal techno vibes but not so much when you stray into more structured and chord heavy territory.
6 Likes
Really appreciate you sharing your experience. The consistency in shift/mod functions across the board is a big one, not self evident that it would be that way. After your first response I read the Oxiās manual, it felt cramped just reading that but thatās not necessarily an indicator of the actual user experience with the device.
I def will try one down the line, Iām imagining it for eg a mobile setup. At itās price point itās not a huge āriskā to take anyway
Now Iām super excited about the Hapax arriving hopefully in Juneā¦only issue is that ā with the polyphonic limitations I had accepted in my sequencing setup before removed ā I now also want an Iridium 
EDIT: @CarlosUnch do you know if the OxiOne is class compliant? Iām imagining that with an iPad could be a killer travel comboā¦.oh boy, what have you done?!
it has BT, so class compliance is not so much an issue, i hope. have one arriving today or tomorrow, will know more 
2 Likes
Weāve moved past comparing features to talking exclusively about the Oxi and how to use it. Thereās a whole big popular thread just for that. Please take your Oxi-related questions and answers over there. This will make it easier for interested parties to find them.
7 Likes
Iād love to try a Hapax. Iād be willing to bring my Oxi One to a place where thereās a Hapax for tests! Need to check out Elevator Sounds to see if they have a Hapax I can try out.
2 Likes
Oxi just came and Hapax coming at the end of June. I am going to figure out by myself what is the one that fits my workflow better. I will post a pros/cons after that.
11 Likes
I hope you have space for both! From specs alone you can seen how much they shine on different territories!
1 Like
Hey there, did you come to a conclusion? Would love to see your pros and cons, am debating between these two and just canāt decide.
The Hapax from June got delayed and hasnāt shipped yet. The OXI is fantastic and the firmware updates seem at a faster pace. I have been enjoying the fact that it has BLE connectivity with my synths. Battery powered and lightweight it is perfect to move it around.
5 Likes
Anyone got any new opinions here? The oxi looks like more fun to play with but perhaps the hapax is a better solution for creating more complete songs.
i waited for Hapax over Oxi since day one because more (polyphonic) tracks and the dual project architecture and am happy with the choice. as much as i loved Pyramid once i got past the learning curve, the great thing about Hapax is the learning curve now is exponentially shorter. iāve gotten farther in three weeks with Hapax than i did in five or six months with Pyramid.
main featureās iām missing as of OS 1.13: (1) 8 pattern limit per track, which i understand if you believe the 8-row grid fixes the number of patterns going top to bottom; but there is scrolling up/down in all other modes so no reason there couldnāt be more patters afaik; (2) lack of an arranger in Song mode, which really is still chaining sections of mute states for Patterns/Tracks a la Pyramid. itās more efficient than Pyramidās Sequence mode but ultimately not ideal for building sections of the song from the 8 patterns.
1 Like
I have both and this is a good description. I use OXI for generative and chord / arp duties (I think it does those better than hapax) and Hapax for more complete song structures and its great midi effects. Theyāre actually quite fun midi synced together. If I could only choose one it would be hapax, but I would miss the OXI.
2 Likes
How do you use them together? Clock syncing and then controlling different devices serperately?