Actually surprised nobody is saying Digitakt
Is very fluid and flexible
Also being the top seller is for a reason imo
But yeah I think MD (UW) is probably it, ignoring the tiny sample memory but is massive sample memory even expected on a pure groovebox? And on the fence as to if MCL counts.
It kinda does yeah but itâll take a lot of preparation to set up. You have something called instrument racks. Here you can combine multiple instruments into one rack and map multiple parameters to macro knobs. Kinda similar to the performance knobs of the analog four. You can even set the range per paramater that the macro should control.
With this you could in fact create aomething similar to control all. You need to build this yourself first though ;). Itâs not exactly the same but push offers multiple ways of creating worlds where unexpired things can happen. You can create instrument racks and in those instrument racks you can have effect racks within effect racks within effect racks within effect racks etc. Etc. All with macros controlling multiple things at a time plus lfos, envelope followers etc. And you can record this âcontrol allâ as automation 
Iâm still scratching the surface but Iâve already have been experimenting with this and itâs quite insane. It wonât be as immediate as the fixed architecture that is control all but the plan is to create a bunch of template structures that will give that instant experimental feeling.
So in short: yes, sort of. But in a different way and not ready to go unless you download templates from others or Ableton packs. I really love control all as well though. Itâs indeed an infinite pool of ideas 
I wouldâve said Digitakt 7 months ago probably. It is my all time favorite. But syntakt is just so incredibly quick to work with and offers a few things that really blow my mind sometimes.
so, the mc909 is the first roland groovebox to include a sampler, rolling out in 2002. do we figure roland invented the groovebox thus that is the first groovebox with a sampler? or does an mpc constitute a groovebox? is it a drum machine? just trying to find the missing link between sampler and groovebox because digitakt and a modern mpc are most certainly grooveboxes, but a pure groovebox is a synthesis engine, a drum machine, an arranger, and at a certain point effects, midi controller and sampler all in one non keyboard desktop format. there has to be an Australopithecus between man and ape otherwise evolution would have never occurred (if you subscribe to science as a marker for change and development).
Let me preface this by saying I love the machinedrum. Itâs one of my top pieces of gear if all time. My time with it was alwaysâŚjust wonderfulâŚit was the Breath of the Wild of pieces of gear.
But, I would heavily argue that its a drum machine that had features that could be used as a groove box more than a legitimate groovebox.
My absolute, #1, argument for why itâs NOT a groovebox: the pitch settings/intervals
Even with the X firmware?
IIRC Roland used the marketing term âGrooveboxâ for the first time with the MC303. Which didnât have any sampling capabilities, and its synth engine was very, very rudimentary (compressed PCM samples with very limited editing options).
definitely, but at this point itâs more than a roland proprietary term (although at that point it absolutely was) so Iâm just thinking by living definition of the term groovebox, does the roland 909 constitute the first groovebox to include sampling or is there something else which would supercede that as the link between groovebox and sampler? Like Iâm pretty sure the yamaha rm1x from 1999 has samples, but not a sampler and thatâs without a doubt a groovebox although yamaha didnât call it that by name.
korg es1? also from 1999 or 2000? it came before the mc909, but is it more of a sampler sequencer like an mpc, than it is a groovebox? rhythm production station with sampler doesnât necessarily constitute groovebox.
Of course, nowadays groovebox is a generic term. This thread contributions show how different the interpretations of the original concept and meaning can be.
The MC909 definitely wasnât the first groovebox with sampling capabilities. For example, the ASR X came out in 1997.
asr x is a sampler sequencer.
With a synth engine and powerful fx. Like the MC909.
So thatâs the first groovebox with a sampler, would that be the tentative link?
I knew a dude with an asr x around y2k and he must have not known how to use the synth engine because all it every got used for was sampling and drums.
I donât think so, unless youâre saying asrx isnât a groovebox with sampling, Iâm asking should that be considered the missing link?
If it had sampler sequencer synth and effects processing, Iâd say thatâs very much a groovebox. I donât think itâs a roland proprietary term at this point.
I guess we have a different opinion about what a groovebox is. 
This is why I donât think the MPC One still qualifies as a groovebox. I have one, but for me itâs a DAW in a box. Touch Screen controls and (for me) not well designed UI somehow killed it for me.
May also be the reason why there will never be a clear winner here, because it depends so much on personal preference and workflow.
Iâm not 100% sure the ASR X was the first âgrooveboxâ with sampling capabilities.
Itâs the closest we can come probably until someone else has other conflicting info, I canât think of a similarly defined desktop unit that has the same capabilities as defined by sampling groovebox.
No hate from me! Just donât enjoy their workflow, thatâs all. Great to hear itâs working for you.
At one point, my setup consisted of a Roland MC303 (first time Iâd seen the word Groovebox used) and an Ensoniq ASR-X. Had so much fun and was so productive with less kit before GAS kicked in 
G
I always thought of a groovebox as anything that lets you make and manipulate loops that can include both percussion and chromatics. If itâs just percussion then itâs a drum machine. If itâs just chromatics then itâs a synth.