Its always these smaller channels, were any actual unbiased discussion takes place. Love your content, it really helped me get a grip of bitwig coming from ableton!
I'm team Atlas. The developer is extremely helpful and responsive and they're the OG. The developer has also said that they plan to have per note modulation (decoupled from velocity). That would really make it incredible for me.
Atlas all the way. It’s more intuitive and the sequencer is very handy while XO’s sequencer feels limited even with all the options. Atlas has kit sizes like 4x4 to, I think a Ableton Push layout. Nice easy access browser for saved kits, simple sample editing and quick and smooth drag and drop. I do like XO’galaxy better and the ability to go backwards if you clicked though a sample you like but with 30,000 drum samples, I just auto-generate kits anyway, save favorites or manually change a drum here and there.
I love this! I'm thinking Atlas 2 because 1) I'm ADHD and I have been looking for tools to get me making music FAST. I don't want to sit there assigning things and customizing. I want to quickly find good sounds and send them to a channel, and then have preset side-chains I made in some other hyper-focus session that I can tack-on as a preset. haha
For me, I simply use these as a browser, I don't touch any of the sequencers or sample editing, I use atlas as a means to find samples faster, then drag them straight out into the daw. when researching these two, I found XO requires you to hold option when you drag to timeline, where atlas allows you to simply drag straight over. It's tiny, but given I'm using them as JUST a browser, I picked the one that lets you drag with one click. I also like Atlas's grid view better than constellation, you can actually use your arrow keys to navigate Atlas, which can even be a fun way to live jam some percussion but more importantly makes finding samples just a bit easier . one thing to consider about the velocity, on XO it looks like you can only adjust one velocity at a time you get access to every track's velocity at once, but can only adjust one note at a time where in atlas you can draw across the track, adjusting the velocity of each step as you draw, making articulations like velocity ramps faster it just depends which workflow you like better. On an admittedly pedantic note, atlas is specifically capable of polymeters, which is a type of polyrhythm. The main difference is that polymeters retain the same step length, and thus shift alignment as they loop, where a typical polyrhythm always lines up on the one, with each track having different step lengths.
Kudos for the comparison! It helped me a lot. Some remarks about Atlas (which seems to be my preference) When opening the sequencer in Atlas full screen you can edit all velocities without having to open a channel with a separate click. And I find the Atlas browser more than 'not a big deal' as it's very detailed. I can even drag separate channels from a loop into other loops and I see the notes in every individual loop graphically displayed in the browser when unfolding the tree and can drag individual samples from a sequence. But I agree with you that personal preference plays an important part when choosing one of the two, as the interfaces differ quite a lot.
one thing I’m really missing in XO is triplets! the random kit feature is what made me want to try both of these, just so I can use midi pads to quickly try out a whole bunch of sounds from a certain category. for general sample browsing through big libraries I think sononym or samplism are more suitable
@@infektdubstep Oh, I'm such a derp! I overlooked XO and thought you meant Atlas! Well, this is embarrassing, to say the least. Reviving a comment from the grave out of stupidity. Classic me! I'm sorry!
I use Atlas 2 in tandem with an MPC Live 2 and it is amazing to make kits this quickly and get to playing and staying creative. I can make many kits in a few minutes, transfer them over with Kit Maker and boom banger songs haha. So fun. The main use for me also is for indexing my sample library which is just over 350 gb at the moment 😂.
great video🎉🏳️🌈 I have both and I do think XO is a bit more sophisticated in terms of sequencing, but it has no undo button! Its not very inviting for randomisation stuff. Atlas is a bit more encouraging in that regard
I am definitely thinking I"ll switch to Atlas for primary use because the sequencer is so much better. Especially cool to be able to do polyrythms. Although I do like how in XO you don't have to click to preview a sound...Just in case anybody knows for sure, I take it there's no way to load the core XO samples in Atlas?
Hard to believe, but XO can't send MIDI out. Atlas can. If Atlas had the XO sequencer, or maybe even improved on it, it'd be a winner for me. Now that the problem of generating drum kits is solved, it would be nice if either implemented a "smart random" track/pattern generation that understands how certain drum sounds are generally played. Maybe even let us edit a number of these drum type patters that it would "randomly" pull from.
9:10 "You can set your bar length all the way to 16". Well... no. It looks like you can choose 4, 8 or 16. What about those of us who work in unusual time signatures? This is the reason I didn't buy XO, and it looks as if I won't be buying Atlas either. Sigh...
It looks like you didn’t finish the video 😅 there’s a slider on the right that let’s you reduce the steps depending on how many divisions you have. So if you have 16 you can drag it to 15,14,9,7, whatever is in between. Xo does not have this feature
@@Alckemy Oh, that is good news! I actually watched the second half of the video, but at high speed because I knew I had to stop for work shortly - I must have missed that part. My apologies!
Atlas 8x8 pad is the way to go. You can load 3x the samples. And here is the real difference between the both. The loading time, Atlas is quicker to load, and one last little perk that atlas provide, is LED feed back.
It was easy for me - Atlas' kits & rhythms are designed more for the house & beats / hiphop genres, whereas XO is more general and is an awesome source of top loops (to complement existing kick in my tracks).
If you use Atlas or XO for the kits/rhythms, You are already failing.. I see a lot of comments by people online who aren't pro but talk and comment as such. All those times you were bashing me and others in bitwig kvr who had legitimate problems, you insisted on being correct and we were haters, trolls, uneducated.. You came from a place of absolutely no knowledge, just your Ego right?
@@joeysaturday3420 And also you're delusional because I'm not on KvR for at least a year (probably two), so whoever is criticising you is probably doing a good job, but that's not me :)
@@Artek604 I must be delusional that some guy Antic604 who doesn't know his Ass from his Elbow always seems to comment a Contrarian comment everywhere online.
Atlas has random pitch and other sound movement settings possiblity. XO has the accentuator variations. Once when one of them will have both, will be the winner for me.
I'd like to see you give your thoughts on the vst called playbeat by audiomodern, maybe wait till they release ver. 4.0 maybe 4.01 if there are any extremely frustrating bugs with 4.0 that make really giving them a chance to get a fair and reasonable opinion on it from you possible.
@@Alckemy what they've talked about when replying to suggestions for improvements I really think I personally would like to wait to hear your impression until they release the next big update. It sounds like the improvements will almost completely address any functionality one can think of when it comes to what is possible with other drum sequencers. Honestly most of its "AI" functionality for me isn't extremely necessary, but the way it allows you to independently set the step length and the time division of each tracks sequence are things I find extremely compelling with the way it works.
You can also lock individual tracks and then basically do an initialization of the sequencer but it leaves the tracks that you lock down in tact which I find adds kind of a way to build presets that you can save and reuse to make the process of laying down drums take less time and effort, so you can get on with the ideas the drums are there to support quicker. If they added a similar approach to sample management to the two VST's here that would be a drastic change to the way it's currently handled. I don't personally care about that too much though. My sample management structure has been massively influenced by the file structure of the sp404mk2 and that has completely shifted how I manage everything these days. I'll say that before I didn't really organize stuff very well, but now I have everything organized within a sub folder structure starting at the top with the company or brand who made all the packs, and then my own sub folder structure for stuff that I either created from scratch or went through music and clipped intentionally. I do need to get around to starting a favorites substructure too though although for the most part in its current state going through subfolders isn't too foreboding because most packs on the market put out packs with specific genres or concepts in mind. Everything I have besides the NI maschine expansion packs are free stuff I've found mostly from sample pack brands that I see ads for on Facebook. Lol
late reply, I have only seen a few things on triaz but it’s a very different kind of drum machine triaz has a few more sculpting options but atlas has is a fast track to zipping through you sample library to find the right kit
why is nobody talking about the overall volume from XO being like 12 db lower than the actual sample.Please for the love of god do not comment with stuff like ow did you check the other amplitude parameters because I'll lose my marbles,everything is 0'ed out and still a huge difference.
In that capacity I’m curious which you prefer. I'm more interested in these to provide a good overview of my drum hits, but will likely drag the resulting content (perhaps from randomisation) elsewhere. Cheers!
Great review. Atlas is way better. 3 years ago that ‘cloud’ sample browser in XO was all the hype, but only 8 lanes? Sucks? Only 32 step sequencer? Sucks! I was using XO to browse samples, then drag them into Logic Drum Machine Designer to have more than 16 samples in a kit, then use Logic Step Sequencer for 64 steps! Crazy/….Lately, I’m aware of the preset kits and patterns 100+ in XO, 100+ in Atlas, 400+ in Logic DMD, 500+ in Logic Ultrabeat, 200+ in Playbeat 3…..what possible rationale is there for building your own kit? Can’t find the right sounding kit among the 2,000+ delivered preset kits? You thinking you’re a better drum kit designer than the talent from these vendors?
I actually like xo’s sequencer better! It has less tracks but a lot more control over offsetting and swingy things. I personally just use these to toss a weird perc loop into the daw and mangle that loop anyway but that’s a niche use case
Oh and yes, definitely. I make very specific drums a very specific way. It’s not about being better but rather finding a sound that fits the aesthetic. These kits are great starting points but they try to cater to as wide of an audience as possible. Most of the people in my circle all make their own drums because, well, the stock stuff doesn’t hit hard enough 😅
This is true, Sadly. And the buyout happened right after I upgraded to version 2. I still use it because I made many kits in it and it's a part of my workflow. I also use XO because of the ease of browsing and the limitations of it's sequencer. You can make a full song in Geist...can't do that in XO.
Its always these smaller channels, were any actual unbiased discussion takes place. Love your content, it really helped me get a grip of bitwig coming from ableton!
I'm team Atlas. The developer is extremely helpful and responsive and they're the OG.
The developer has also said that they plan to have per note modulation (decoupled from velocity). That would really make it incredible for me.
Atlas all the way. It’s more intuitive and the sequencer is very handy while XO’s sequencer feels limited even with all the options. Atlas has kit sizes like 4x4 to, I think a Ableton Push layout. Nice easy access browser for saved kits, simple sample editing and quick and smooth drag and drop. I do like XO’galaxy better and the ability to go backwards if you clicked though a sample you like but with 30,000 drum samples, I just auto-generate kits anyway, save favorites or manually change a drum here and there.
I love this! I'm thinking Atlas 2 because 1) I'm ADHD and I have been looking for tools to get me making music FAST. I don't want to sit there assigning things and customizing. I want to quickly find good sounds and send them to a channel, and then have preset side-chains I made in some other hyper-focus session that I can tack-on as a preset. haha
For me, I simply use these as a browser, I don't touch any of the sequencers or sample editing, I use atlas as a means to find samples faster, then drag them straight out into the daw.
when researching these two, I found XO requires you to hold option when you drag to timeline, where atlas allows you to simply drag straight over. It's tiny, but given I'm using them as JUST a browser, I picked the one that lets you drag with one click.
I also like Atlas's grid view better than constellation, you can actually use your arrow keys to navigate Atlas, which can even be a fun way to live jam some percussion
but more importantly makes finding samples just a bit easier
.
one thing to consider about the velocity, on XO it looks like you can only adjust one velocity at a time
you get access to every track's velocity at once, but can only adjust one note at a time
where in atlas you can draw across the track, adjusting the velocity of each step as you draw, making articulations like velocity ramps faster
it just depends which workflow you like better.
On an admittedly pedantic note, atlas is specifically capable of polymeters, which is a type of polyrhythm. The main difference is that polymeters retain the same step length, and thus shift alignment as they loop, where a typical polyrhythm always lines up on the one, with each track having different step lengths.
thank you for the clarification!
Kudos for the comparison! It helped me a lot. Some remarks about Atlas (which seems to be my preference) When opening the sequencer in Atlas full screen you can edit all velocities without having to open a channel with a separate click.
And I find the Atlas browser more than 'not a big deal' as it's very detailed. I can even drag separate channels from a loop into other loops and I see the notes in every individual loop graphically displayed in the browser when unfolding the tree and can drag individual samples from a sequence. But I agree with you that personal preference plays an important part when choosing one of the two, as the interfaces differ quite a lot.
one thing I’m really missing in XO is triplets!
the random kit feature is what made me want to try both of these, just so I can use midi pads to quickly try out a whole bunch of sounds from a certain category.
for general sample browsing through big libraries I think sononym or samplism are more suitable
Perfect swing is actually triplets! It doesn’t show it on the sequencer but it is definitely in there
A little late, but it does have triplets! Just change the step size to 16t or 8t.
@@sevenfifteen where do you see this option? I can't find any step size option in XO
@@infektdubstep Oh, I'm such a derp! I overlooked XO and thought you meant Atlas! Well, this is embarrassing, to say the least. Reviving a comment from the grave out of stupidity. Classic me! I'm sorry!
ohhh no worries! that’s one thing I like about atlas for sure!
This was helpful, thanks!
Love your work man!
I appreciate that!
I use Atlas 2 in tandem with an MPC Live 2 and it is amazing to make kits this quickly and get to playing and staying creative. I can make many kits in a few minutes, transfer them over with Kit Maker and boom banger songs haha. So fun. The main use for me also is for indexing my sample library which is just over 350 gb at the moment 😂.
Playbeat 3 hooked up to XO is all I use now.
great video🎉🏳️🌈
I have both and I do think XO is a bit more sophisticated in terms of sequencing, but it has no undo button! Its not very inviting for randomisation stuff. Atlas is a bit more encouraging in that regard
Totally. That’s why it’s not an easy choice to make!
Also, having watched more, I love the loop feature in Atlas. That looks like you could make some really nice math beats
I am definitely thinking I"ll switch to Atlas for primary use because the sequencer is so much better. Especially cool to be able to do polyrythms. Although I do like how in XO you don't have to click to preview a sound...Just in case anybody knows for sure, I take it there's no way to load the core XO samples in Atlas?
.....no one needs both....and in my case, XO speeded up/eased/changed my workflow forever...never looking back....
Hard to believe, but XO can't send MIDI out. Atlas can. If Atlas had the XO sequencer, or maybe even improved on it, it'd be a winner for me.
Now that the problem of generating drum kits is solved, it would be nice if either implemented a "smart random" track/pattern generation that understands how certain drum sounds are generally played. Maybe even let us edit a number of these drum type patters that it would "randomly" pull from.
That’s a feature on the wishlist for future updates. Imagine a learning ai
@@Alckemy nice - sign me up for beta!
I prefer XO but always pick Atlas because it has better randomization
9:10 "You can set your bar length all the way to 16". Well... no. It looks like you can choose 4, 8 or 16. What about those of us who work in unusual time signatures? This is the reason I didn't buy XO, and it looks as if I won't be buying Atlas either. Sigh...
It looks like you didn’t finish the video 😅 there’s a slider on the right that let’s you reduce the steps depending on how many divisions you have. So if you have 16 you can drag it to 15,14,9,7, whatever is in between.
Xo does not have this feature
@@Alckemy Oh, that is good news! I actually watched the second half of the video, but at high speed because I knew I had to stop for work shortly - I must have missed that part. My apologies!
Atlas 8x8 pad is the way to go. You can load 3x the samples. And here is the real difference between the both. The loading time, Atlas is quicker to load, and one last little perk that atlas provide, is LED feed back.
What kind of LED feedback? On Hardware?
@@gregsilver_official on any led pad
@@gregsilver_official yes, on hardware pads that have LED
@@azeedogz i didn't know that... time to get a pad controller then...
@@gregsilver_official ruclips.net/video/Lff7MN5kgxE/видео.htmlsi=bMcsmriv4oUsGmyu
It was easy for me - Atlas' kits & rhythms are designed more for the house & beats / hiphop genres, whereas XO is more general and is an awesome source of top loops (to complement existing kick in my tracks).
Antic, have you ever made a Track ever in your life on a legit label, played a rave, festival, club?
are you in the Industry??
@@joeysaturday3420 No. What made you ask this particular question?
If you use Atlas or XO for the kits/rhythms, You are already failing..
I see a lot of comments by people online who aren't pro but talk and comment as such.
All those times you were bashing me and others in bitwig kvr who had legitimate problems, you insisted on being correct and we were haters, trolls, uneducated..
You came from a place of absolutely no knowledge, just your Ego right?
@@joeysaturday3420 And also you're delusional because I'm not on KvR for at least a year (probably two), so whoever is criticising you is probably doing a good job, but that's not me :)
@@Artek604 I must be delusional that some guy Antic604 who doesn't know his Ass from his Elbow always seems to comment a Contrarian comment everywhere online.
Atlas has random pitch and other sound movement settings possiblity. XO has the accentuator variations. Once when one of them will have both, will be the winner for me.
XO is missing the modulation part like atlas seem to have, otherwise would be cool
I'd like to see you give your thoughts on the vst called playbeat by audiomodern, maybe wait till they release ver. 4.0 maybe 4.01 if there are any extremely frustrating bugs with 4.0 that make really giving them a chance to get a fair and reasonable opinion on it from you possible.
I think I technically own that but couldn’t get the registration down or something. I may see if I can demo it sometime
@@Alckemy what they've talked about when replying to suggestions for improvements I really think I personally would like to wait to hear your impression until they release the next big update. It sounds like the improvements will almost completely address any functionality one can think of when it comes to what is possible with other drum sequencers.
Honestly most of its "AI" functionality for me isn't extremely necessary, but the way it allows you to independently set the step length and the time division of each tracks sequence are things I find extremely compelling with the way it works.
You can also lock individual tracks and then basically do an initialization of the sequencer but it leaves the tracks that you lock down in tact which I find adds kind of a way to build presets that you can save and reuse to make the process of laying down drums take less time and effort, so you can get on with the ideas the drums are there to support quicker. If they added a similar approach to sample management to the two VST's here that would be a drastic change to the way it's currently handled. I don't personally care about that too much though. My sample management structure has been massively influenced by the file structure of the sp404mk2 and that has completely shifted how I manage everything these days. I'll say that before I didn't really organize stuff very well, but now I have everything organized within a sub folder structure starting at the top with the company or brand who made all the packs, and then my own sub folder structure for stuff that I either created from scratch or went through music and clipped intentionally. I do need to get around to starting a favorites substructure too though although for the most part in its current state going through subfolders isn't too foreboding because most packs on the market put out packs with specific genres or concepts in mind. Everything I have besides the NI maschine expansion packs are free stuff I've found mostly from sample pack brands that I see ads for on Facebook. Lol
I agree on the potential of atlas over xo. needs a touch more work.
My personal pro argument for Atlas: Native Linux support!
Point taken!
Of course, it's an easy choice, Atlas all the way. If only for the updates.
I don't think they compete. Perhaps both plug-ins are necessary.
finally tackling the serious issues lol
Curious, 3 months later, which you’ve ended up gravitating to the most…if either.
Cheers!
I still do everything from scratch xD
@@Alckemy Guess I should’ve known Cheers
Triaz vs Atlas ?
late reply, I have only seen a few things on triaz but it’s a very different kind of drum machine
triaz has a few more sculpting options but atlas has is a fast track to zipping through you sample library to find the right kit
why is nobody talking about the overall volume from XO being like 12 db lower than the actual sample.Please for the love of god do not comment with stuff like ow did you check the other amplitude parameters because I'll lose my marbles,everything is 0'ed out and still a huge difference.
It’s annoying but atlas, superior drummer, addictive drums, drum computer all do it too. Just clip it and turn it up.
Great browsers but both feel incomplete / short of their potential.
They're both much better file organizers than sequencers.
In that capacity I’m curious which you prefer. I'm more interested in these to provide a good overview of my drum hits, but will likely drag the resulting content (perhaps from randomisation) elsewhere.
Cheers!
get addictive drum 2 instead, do you own sound with it. XO is fun tho, i haven't tried atlas
Great review. Atlas is way better. 3 years ago that ‘cloud’ sample browser in XO was all the hype, but only 8 lanes? Sucks? Only 32 step sequencer? Sucks! I was using XO to browse samples, then drag them into Logic Drum Machine Designer to have more than 16 samples in a kit, then use Logic Step Sequencer for 64 steps! Crazy/….Lately, I’m aware of the preset kits and patterns 100+ in XO, 100+ in Atlas, 400+ in Logic DMD, 500+ in Logic Ultrabeat, 200+ in Playbeat 3…..what possible rationale is there for building your own kit? Can’t find the right sounding kit among the 2,000+ delivered preset kits? You thinking you’re a better drum kit designer than the talent from these vendors?
I actually like xo’s sequencer better! It has less tracks but a lot more control over offsetting and swingy things. I personally just use these to toss a weird perc loop into the daw and mangle that loop anyway but that’s a niche use case
Oh and yes, definitely. I make very specific drums a very specific way. It’s not about being better but rather finding a sound that fits the aesthetic. These kits are great starting points but they try to cater to as wide of an audience as possible. Most of the people in my circle all make their own drums because, well, the stock stuff doesn’t hit hard enough 😅
@@Alckemy I admire that.
Try Geist2
Geist2 have no "galaxy" for finding samples but in term of making beats Geist2 gonna blast Atlas and XO out of the water
But Geist 2 is dead (sorry for the wordplay, geist = ghost 😁), the developement of geist is abandoned after fxpansion was bought by ROLI.
This is true, Sadly. And the buyout happened right after I upgraded to version 2. I still use it because I made many kits in it and it's a part of my workflow. I also use XO because of the ease of browsing and the limitations of it's sequencer. You can make a full song in Geist...can't do that in XO.