This will be where definition files/templates will come in handy. They’re not yet implemented in Hapax… but they’re coming
1 Like
yeah, the midi definitions will be really handy for this kind of thing…
they were great on the pyramid, and the will be better on the Hapax 
note and cc definitions for controller the Octatrack will be SO useful !
all that said, as above,
I generally let the OT do its own thing… just clock it from hapax, but perhaps because I use it mainly for flex recording, and audio mangling… rather than sequencing stuff, to much.
Hello, Hapax friends! Finally playing around with the Hapax in more detail and running into some mysteries that the manual doesn’t seem to solve.
Am I missing something, or does the master-level transposition (on track 16) not stick to the assigned scale? For example, if I have a master-level scale set to C major, and then sequence the notes of the C major scale on one track, and then I master-level transpose to A, I would expect it to play the A minor scale, which is the same notes as C major; instead, it transposes out of C major and just plays the A major scale.
This wouldn’t be a dealbreaker, but the scaler MIDI effect seems super inconsistent (and often incorrect). Setting a scaler on each track to the master-level scale works in the above example, where the key is set to major, but if I were to do (e.g.) E minor, and then use the scaler, it screws up the 6th. Plus, it’s an extra step to set up a MIDI effect on every track just to lock it to the master-level scale.
Am I just missing something? Is there a way to use master-level transposition where it just locks in all the notes across all the tracks to the same scale?
1 Like
I don’t own the Hapax yet, but I would expect the Hapax to exactly act like you describe. I understand the Master-Transpose as something I would transpose everything, including the scale. If the scale is set to major, I would expect it to stay in major. Even that the notes in A minor are the same as in C major, it would change the feel of everything. On top of that, it would not be possible to stay in scale, if you are able to transpose in semi tones.
So I would not expect the transpose row as something to handle the chords progressions of the tracks while having them play the same pattern over and over again, but something to shift the full song to something different.
2 Likes
Yeah transpose is shifting everything, I also would expect it to work this way…
At least it is still possible to re-harmonise using a scaler fx on each track to glue to a scale when transposing… best of both worlds IMO
I don’t have a Hapax but can you master transpose to A Aeolian? That should keep everything locked to the same notes as C major I think.
Hey technobear have any of your beta testing compadres expressed any interest in a Hapax-S sampler version, and if so I was just curious if Squarp responded with any pos or negs?
1 Like
@jayhosking… I think of transpose tracks better to think of as ‘relative’, i.e. C3 = 0, C4 = 1 octave , D3 = 2 semis.
in fw 1.0.0, indeed you needed to put a scaler fx on a track to keep it ‘in scale’
(if you find a bug in this, obviously you should report it to Squarp via their contact page)
however with fw 1.0.2 (released a while ago) ,
- Transposed tracks are now always in-scale when pScale enabled
so, Id say this would probably be what you are hoping for.
a scale in one place, where tracks follow automatically when transposed.
tracks can ‘opt out’ of pScale.
I guess the ‘limitation’ of this is currently pScale cannot be changed automatically.
it be nice if you could change pScale per ‘Section’
(along with BPM/time sig per section, this would make a great feature request!)
also for transposition, its worth noting we can also use the Scaler FX!
this is extremely powerful as we have two options here…
a) you can specify FX parameters PER pattern… so lock your pattern to a new scale or transpose it.
b) you can automate (again per pattern) any FX.
so is this a ‘waste’ an fx slot? … I don’t think so, as it has a lot of creative potential beyond a simple transpose… also, if you start using other FX, you’ll find its a common FX to put at the end of the fx chain anyway.
so I guess, rather id say… pScale I find is a way to handle the simple use-scale quickly, and once you get into more creative areas, I move to the scaler FX.
but, again, reach out to Squarp if you have ideas on how to improve this further… they are very responsive to user feedback.
I cannot speak for others… but no, I focus on what they are delivering…
no idea, if they’d be interested in creating a sample/groove box… if they are at Superbooth I’ll ask them.
before they created Rample (eurorack) module, Id have said very unlikely… but who knows now?
so, Ive no idea - but I think its ‘unlikely’ , Squarp are a pretty small team… so they have to be focused, and I suspect Hapax (development) is going to the keep them busy for a while.
… but, never say never 
personally, I actually like having sequencers and sound modules ‘separated’ its more flexible.
but hey, I love modular so thats to be expected !
2 Likes
Well, give me the Sequencer + Analog Rytm + Virus 2 in the size of the Hapax or something, and I would be a one-device-guy! Tried Deluge, but was not my workflow 
1 Like
get a laptop if you want all in one
seriously though, doesn’t make a huge amount of sense from the product design side.
a) manufactures/developers specialise , have certain skills.
the fact that you mention brands, shows you appreciate this…
you didnt just want a synth, drum machine - you wanted something specific !
so many of these grooveboxes have an ‘ok’ synth/sampler… jack of all trades , master of none.
b) UX
an instrument is not a list of functions with tick boxes… (partly goes back to (a)! )
the best thing about my Virus , is its a hands-on synth, most controls have important controls have a dedicated knob… the Rythm has decent drum pads. The Hapax has quite alot of buttons dedicated to sequencing functions.
how big would an instrument have to be to retain all of these?
otherwise we are doomed to menu diving with encoders… at which point why not move to a laptop and controller?
I think for many the appeal of hardware IS the UX… the fact we have a dedicated and focused UI.
c) user preference
sure, you may love the Analog Rythm or the Virus, but others would prefer different synths/drum engines…
d) cost/price
in the digital world, the hardware is NOT that much of the cost.
a huge part of the cost of a digital product (which this most certainly would be) is the software development costs… so developing a sequencer / synth / drum machine is STILL three products.
so, sure , user might save a bit of money on hardware costs (even then… you’ll probably need more expensive displays/encoders) … but that underlying cost is not going to drop that much.
unless, of course we go back to (a) and start producing an ‘average’ synth/drum machine
of course, there is a market for all-in-one boxes, either for small setups or for portability (incl live gig setups).
But I think once you start getting into more specialised gear, like Hapax, Virus and Rythm… it makes sense for them to be separate!
besides… whilst I love my Virus, one day I might switch it out for something like the Summit, so ‘modular’ means I dont also loose my sequencer
2 Likes
I have a very good laptop but i find it so damn un-inspiring to use it
and yes, I know that it does not make sense to put everything in one box. I more or less tried them all, and the only one that I use is the M8.
Yeah, I am quite specific with it. that’s why it will never happen
1 Like
yup, thats the thing… what why UI/UX is so critical on these things… even the look n’ feel plays a part.
if not, things like Laptop + Push2/Maschine would have taken over completely.
power of a general purpose computer with a ‘matched’ physical interfaces… but reality is whilst its a great pairing, they alway lack something.
yeah, things like M8 work due to the portability factor… people accept alot of compromises for this ‘immediacy’.
(even there, I suspect give it 12 months after general availability, and you’ll start to see people moving them on… as they realise they don’t use it quite as much as they thought - unthinkable now, as they are so hip, but lets see! )
Definitively. Most of us get bored with stuff way too fast. The thing with the M8 is: I spend a lot of time with/in our camper. i have 12v to whatever I need converters for more or less every device I own, but setting it up is a pain. Or it works, but I miss power or sound. The M8 has me „locked“ because of its size and the UI that is unbelievable for its size.
The problem with laptop for me is mainly the sloppy midi timing when sequencing external gear… there are clunky solutions, but those are not ideal for live performances.
I understand the sentiment for specialized gear for the reasons expressed here, however I believe that a Hapax phrase sampler would be a phenomenal piece of gear going by how impressive the Hapax is, and a Phrase sampler is a very specialized piece of gear. It’s been decades and people have not moved on from mpcs yet nor does it seem like they will anytime soon… a groove box is very much it’s own kind of instrument and a sequencer paired with a sampler does not a groove box make… Anyway forgive me for going off topic I just wanted to know if anyone close to squarps ears had expressed the desire to apply all of this Hapax goodness to samples as well… thanks for your insights
1 Like
yeah… anyway, drifting a bit off-topic.
my real point was simply… I dont think its necessarily a ‘natural progression’ for Squarp (a smallish company) to feel it has to turn Hapax into a full blown groovebox… they are quite different products.
but who knows?
as I say, they created the Rample module which was kind of ‘out of the blue’… probably just because as musicians thats what they felt they needed/wanted
(thats the thing about small companies, sometimes , you can just suddenly do something that you want to do… or have an interest in… so you never know!)
@captain8, Im sure they have heard the desire for it to be groovebox…
there was huge speculation during thier teaser campaign about it being a sequencer/sampler.
so they will have no doubt read that…
anyway for now, as Id say they have their hands full with Hapax feature requests
1 Like
Is it June yet?
7 Likes
Yes! Hurry up indeed!
HapaxOS 1.03 is out!
Lots of bugfixes and a few minor workflow improvements. Will update tonight!
3 Likes
Waiting on my hapax to arrive… I sold most my gear to buy a computer so I’m down to a Novation peak, mpc live 2 and sub phatty…
Thinking could sell the peak and mpc to purchase an access virus ti2 for the 16 channel multi timbral… what is good to go with this sequencer besides the virus ???
Getting a syntakt too but that will be used standalone lol
2 Likes