you were absolutely right. I’ve had Oxi One for nearly a year and it’s already getting quite overloaded. Some of the new features are a UI nightmare… which is why I’m here looking for reasons to go Hapax lol
Speaking as someone who owns both the Oxi One and the Hapax, for me it’s Hapax all the way. The biggest advantage the Oxi One has over the Hapax is portability. It’s easy to throw the Oxi One into a suitcase without taking up too much space. Other differences to consider would be the Stochastic and Matriceal sequencers on the Oxi One. Personally, I never use either of those sequencers much even though I appreciate them both. But it’s not a deal breaker when it comes to deciding which of the two I prefer. Hapax is due for a big update soon so I’m expecting it to have some features that could rival the Oxi One. Ever since getting the Hapax I hardly ever touch my Oxi One, so it’s likely I’ll be selling it soon. They are both great sequencers, but I just connect with the Hapax more.
5 Likes
Oxi One is so much fun, which is a huge part to connect with a sequencer/synth… But Hapax experience is also great, and has (for me) some things that are key:
-Number of MIDI outs: you have 4, and can connect up to 32 devices simultaneously. As some devices “spend” several channels, for me this is crucial. Oxi CAN have 3 via DIN and yes, doing some “tricks” you can get up to 32 channels, but it’s not as confortable as Hapax.
-Instrument definitions: this is absolutely a Hapax win. Being able to have files made by the community with al the CCs and params is something great. Oxi has some devices hard-coded, but not so many.
Among that, Oxi is a GREAT sequencer, solid as tank, made in Spain 
and it’s team is constantly evolving it, at least “faster” than Square is doing with Hapax (remember the time prior to the 2.0 update).
With the HAPAX you can play all kinds of tuplets (triplets, duplets, quintuplets…). And of course 16 tracks, UI, …