yeah, I’ve felt this at times too… having multiple sequencers can be fun, but also alot of overhead.
personally, I moved over to having two ‘setups’…
one which is focused around Ableton/Push.
the other is a standalone setup.
I use a mioXM, so that synths/modular can stay be used in either mode without ‘re-configuring’.
so the Hapax is on the standalone setup, as is my Octatrack.
Hermod kind of sits in both camps… though in 2 different roles.
when Im using the modular on its own, I use it as a sequencer.
when Im using Live (or the Hapax), then its primarily a midi ↔ cv interface.
but for sure, its easy to end up with duplication of roles, and this used to give me choice paradox, which is why I tried to work out, how each would fullful a role in different context.
btw: in Live, you can use instrument racks (with macros) in a similar way to instrument definitions for some use-cases.
as for Hapax dev… Im not concerned, over the years, Ive found that Squarp tend to take a more considered / conservative approach. I think they learnt this from the early experiences (in dev) of the pyramid. so Im happy they will get there,
but more important to me, is Ive faith they will keep the products stable and also have a. decent and consistent UI/workflow… rather than just keep chucking new features in that overload the UI.
but I can understand why some feel differently, esp. if you feel there is a feature missing that you need.
( I do have some things Id like to see, e.g. MPE editing, but nothing thats holding me back!)