one thing i have noticed lately is that sometimes there is a phasing / tempo issues with loops. i think to check if there is a problem with flex as well.
anyway, the biggest issue i have so far is when a last fragment (portion of sample) is looped - never had a luck to make it looping in sync. maybe it’s a static machine beauty as well?
sample start trick works with static but when scene / crossfader is changed new slice doesn’t play instantly. sometimes it takes a second or so…
"It MIGHT work with the static slots, but guaranteed to work with flex samples."
I think I might be having an issue related here.
I chopped a complex arrangement into a series of 24 and 8 bar sections (there’s a 4/2 phrase in the middle of those) in order to use slice grid to make slices. I made a huge arrangement in OT (A1-C6) in order to play the song through.
I had 2 static machines for playback; one for drums, one for music. About half way through the song, the slices are triggered late. If I use another static machine to handle the problem slices. they’re right on time.
Anyone have ideas what’s going on here? I’m using the stock CF, should I upgrade it?
Follow up; got faster card, no more problems.
great info! I run into this CF Card problem yesterday…
having 3 to 5 loops running from the static machined, all loops around 20 sec. to 4 minutes long… probably no surprise 
but having an external controller to change volume of all changes at the same time it made the whole OT choke and jump in bpm, resulting in running out of sync.
I’m sure this has already been discussed, so if someone can lead me to the thread that would be welcomed.
What can be done with a flex that can’t be done on a static? Not having tapped into this leaves a beautiful terrain of untapped potential just waiting to be explored(outside of recording live samples)
flex machines utilize the 80MB onboard RAM whereas the static machines stream the audio from the cf card. Therefore the static machines have much greater access/read latency than the flex machines (some modulations will not work as fast as with flex), but the static machines will not steal precious RAM from the recording buffers.
For me the choice is simple, I run out of slots on the static machines, so I’m moving on to fill the flex ones…
I’d agree, but also think the lack of editing options once a sample is assigned Static is a bigger problem to my general workflow. No idea why you can’t make destructive edits to the sample itself - that shouldn’t matter whether it’s Flex or Static.
So my understing is that theoretically the only difference between flex and static machine is that LFO modulation of sample start point (or slice selection) as well as quick manual changes applied with crossfader on the same parameters can easily be unstable with static machines. Otherwise the two machines work in the same way, including timestretching.
This way static machine can be used in the most cases and only those samples have to be loaded to the flex slot list which are intended to be used with heavy start point modulation (except parameter locking which stated to be working well with static machines, too).
Is this interpretation right?
Yes.
Good to hear that 
Thanks for your answers.
I very like this design that gives OT the possibility to have so much sampling memory that a computer can have.
Ok. You can not normalize or reverse slices on static machines, too. Some more limitations to keep in mind. But hey, these still are not features used by each and every sample
Well no, like I say above, you don’t have full editing access to a static sample like you do a flex sample. This is quite a big difference beyond playback mode,
@OHEXOH Sure, as I wrote above the slice reverse and slice normalization are neither available for static machine. Is there any other feature which are not available for static machine? I don’t find the mentioned limitations (including start point modulation) should make people always go for flex
I don’t think you can do most of the sample editing features (fade, crop, change vol etc.) I don’t fully understand why, but it’s a real pain.
One of the quirks within the beautiful machine 
The only thing I wish I could do on the STATIC machines that is not currently possible is normalize them.
I think that it is a mis/using issue. While OT provides some simple tools for editing samples in RAM (including trim, normalize, slice reverse etc.), those are present primarily for the sounds sampled directly into OT, and those samples are limited by the size of available RAM by default. Samples transferred from computer can be edited before using much more powerful tools however.
But if you want to edit a sample in OT and there’s RAM available, you can load it from CF card to RAM to edit it on OT then just save it back and use with static machine.
When playing back samples the only real different between flex and static machine is that the start point modulation is not safe, though p-locked start point changes still work well with static. So that’s why I say static machine is perfect for playing back/mangling samples in the most cases.