<![CDATA[ChipMusic.org - Nanoloop 1 vs Nanoloop 2]]> https://chipmusic.org/forums/topic/16402/nanoloop-1-vs-nanoloop-2/ Tue, 14 Apr 2015 00:01:40 +0000 PunBB <![CDATA[Re: Nanoloop 1 vs Nanoloop 2]]> https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228777/#p228777 an0va says:

There are a lot of more other random quicks between the two as well, many of which aren't in the manual

like two has the ability to mute and solo on the file menu, but one doesnt...WHY?????? lol

everyone seems to gravitate towards nanoloop two but one really has huge potential that hasn't really been tapped yet IMO. the "soft pulse" addition in the new version is really something special for example https://soundcloud.com/nanoloop-test/na … se-example

]]> Tue, 14 Apr 2015 00:01:40 +0000 https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228777/#p228777 <![CDATA[Re: Nanoloop 1 vs Nanoloop 2]]> https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228769/#p228769 1-Down says:

Ah ha I see, thanks guys. Polyphony is definitely nice to have...so 2.x.x it is then

]]> Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:24:46 +0000 https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228769/#p228769 <![CDATA[Re: Nanoloop 1 vs Nanoloop 2]]> https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228734/#p228734 b4by f4c3 says:

I've only really messed around on a 2 but would love to get my hands onna 1 to see the differences/ see zee feel on the dmg :3

]]> Mon, 13 Apr 2015 11:14:46 +0000 https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228734/#p228734 <![CDATA[Re: Nanoloop 1 vs Nanoloop 2]]> https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228733/#p228733 pselodux says:

No wave tables, and the arp is just fixed speed, 4 notes (with rests and one-shot mode). I might actually pick up a 1 cartridge at some point—I'm getting a DMG this week so it'd be cool to sync 1 and 2!

]]> Mon, 13 Apr 2015 11:11:09 +0000 https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228733/#p228733 <![CDATA[Re: Nanoloop 1 vs Nanoloop 2]]> https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228732/#p228732 egr says:

Has 2.x got the arp and wave tables like 1.7.1 yet? That's a significant change for the 1.x series.

]]> Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:58:09 +0000 https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228732/#p228732 <![CDATA[Re: Nanoloop 1 vs Nanoloop 2]]> https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228731/#p228731 donotrunwithpixels says:

The channel controls are somewhat more basic in One, and the S channel doesn't have proper polyphony.

If you want a traditional chip sound, go for one, a lot of people prefer the noise channel on it.

If you want polyphony, go for 2, a lot of people prefer the S channel and it can sound like a pretty refined digital polysynth.

Alternatively if you can't hear the difference the buy one because it's cheaper!

]]> Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:56:18 +0000 https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228731/#p228731 <![CDATA[Re: Nanoloop 1 vs Nanoloop 2]]> https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228728/#p228728 pselodux says:

I haven't played with 1 much, but I think I prefer 2; it can sound a lot more 'creamy'/less typically chippy, cf.:
https://soundcloud.com/pselodux/setrs-tk1

]]> Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:17:56 +0000 https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228728/#p228728 <![CDATA[Nanoloop 1 vs Nanoloop 2]]> https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228724/#p228724 1-Down says:

Sup, looked for a while, but didn't really find anything. Also, played the demos, but didn't notice anything different in particular.

Are there any functional differences between Nanoloop 1 and 2 other than the systems they're played on? (I did just think of the R L toggles up top on GBA)

Signed up for the 2 list, but missed out on the 1 release last week hmm

]]> Mon, 13 Apr 2015 09:00:40 +0000 https://chipmusic.org/forums/post/228724/#p228724