Companion synth for A4

Elektron Gear Analog Keys/Four
#21

Probably not what you want to hear, but hear me out…
.
This solution has

  1. No Analog
  2. 4 CV/trigger inputs
  3. Not the kind of bass you’re thinking of
  4. Support for both patch storage and midi program change.
    .
    Here’s how I look at it…
    A4 can make great, powerful, deep, and full basses. It is definitely not the weak point, or even a weak point. It’s all there. It just takes some time and experience on how to get that low end working.
    FM capabilities of A4 are far weaker than its bass capabilities.
    .
    With that in mind, if you’re looking to expand on your A4 via CV, and get the most capability out of its 4 internal voices, FX, and its 4 CV outputs, Nord Drum 1 or Nord Drum 2 should be seriously considered.
    This is not to imply that A4/AK is weak on the drum front. Not at all. Drums are a strength, even. But using the 4 CV outs in trigger mode going to a drum synth with trigger inputs means 4 more voices. That’s 8 voices between the synth voices and ND, as you can trigger all, or none (or any number in between) of the ND voices with each step of the CV track. Imagine polyphonic trigger locks per step, that’s kind of how the CV track can work with the ND.
    .
    While you cannot transmit midi notes out of the A4, you can transmit midi program change. So when you change programs on A4, while triggering ND via CV, the ND changes programs as well. I do this, and it works wonderfully.
    Running ND back in to the A4’s FX track means you can p-lock FX sends per note, and panning as well.
    .
    Lately, my A4+ND1 tracks have been Kick + Hat on an A4 track , Bass on a 2nd A4 track. 2 A4 tracks for synths and various soundlock flourishes and such, and then the CV track kicking out triggers for 4 synthesized drum sounds on the Nord Drum. This has been a very powerful combo, made more powerful with a few cheap pedals to go between ND1’s output and A4’s input. And if it weren’t for Rytm’s sample play-back capabilities, I would sell the Rytm to buy a 2nd A4/ND setup for the stage.
    .
    Just something to consider.
    One thing to consider if you are swayed by this testimonial. ND1 will only give you 99 patches. So you’ll only be able to get correlative program change from A4 patterns A01-G04. Most of G and H pattern banks won’t react. But those patterns could be used creatively when you don’t want or need a program change.[/quote]
    Never thought of the Nord Drum, but what a great idea. It could applied to any Drum module. Very cool
#22

Is the PLUS the one with CV-ins ??? I’m searching this one sinds I use the A4 - Haven’t seen one yet :sob: … very rare :disappointed: …
but I won’t give up ---- they should have made the new Pulse wiht CV-ins. :rage:

#23

It seems to be an interesting synth - but only 1 CV-IN - Do you know how that can be useful ? Do you have one ? If so it would be very nice of you to explain around here how you use it …

#24

It seems to be an interesting synth - but only 1 CV-IN - Do you know how that can be useful ? Do you have one ? If so it would be very nice of you to explain around here how you use it …[/quote]
Yes I owned one but never used it with the A4 cv’s. I sold it to fund the DSI pro 2 but it was a really cool synth.

#25

i can imagine the Waldorf Pulse II

[ul]
[li]balls in the bass-department and other stuff[/li]
[li]midi-capabilities[/li]
[li]cv-outs[/li]
[li]audio-in[/li]
[li]different filtertypes[/li]
[/ul]

and, it´s quite new… the format of thy synth is great for transport

#26

or they should have made the A4/Keys with midi sequencing out… :imp:

#27

or they should have made the A4/Keys with midi sequencing out… :imp:[/quote]
It would be nowhere as tight as cv-sequencing - so >>> PULSE cv-in for me !!! :imp:

#28

Sorry but that’s absolute nonsense - I used to own the original pulse (not plus) and sequenced it with midi and it was tight as hell. Why do you think they were/are used so much for basslines?

#29

Sorry but that’s absolute nonsense - I used to own the original pulse (not plus) and sequenced it with midi and it was tight as hell. Why do you think they were/are used so much for basslines?[/quote]
You cant’t deny that all info passing thru midi is one by one ( sereal is the word ??? ) So the more notes or modulation passing by midi - the sloppyer it becomes

#30

We’re not discussing that though are we, we’re talking about sending single notes plus a couple of CCs to an analog monosynth - the rough equivalent to using cv/gate. How much time does it take to send a note via midi - less than a millisecond isn’t it? Maybe a couple more with CCs? That’s negligable compared to other factors, snappyness of envelopes, synth processing speed etc.

CV control is useful principally for drum layering and for sequencing old pre-midi synths. Otherwise midi is fine.

#31

Is the PLUS the one with CV-ins ??? I’m searching this one sinds I use the A4 - Haven’t seen one yet :sob: …

…[/quote]
[url=“http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/1996_articles/feb96/waldorfpulse.html”]
Link to review of Waldorf Pulse

Link to review of Waldorf Pulse+

#32

It seems to be an interesting synth - but only 1 CV-IN - Do you know how that can be useful ? Do you have one ? If so it would be very nice of you to explain around here how you use it …[/quote]
Yes I owned one but never used it with the A4 cv’s. I sold it to fund the DSI pro 2 but it was a really cool synth.[/quote]
I haven’t herad about the Xenophone until now. It does look like a very interesting synth and I just watch the demo you created which was very informative.
@vos: Looking at the Quick Start Manual for the synth, it looks like you can use a insert/splitter cable like the A4 for CV/Gate.

#33

Futureretro XS? Quite an aggressive synth though, and has some superfast envelopes. It’s the punk of subtractive monosynths!

#34

We’re not discussing that though are we, we’re talking about sending single notes plus a couple of CCs to an analog monosynth - the rough equivalent to using cv/gate. How much time does it take to send a note via midi - less than a millisecond isn’t it? Maybe a couple more with CCs? That’s negligable compared to other factors, snappyness of envelopes, synth processing speed etc.

CV control is useful principally for drum layering and for sequencing old pre-midi synths. Otherwise midi is fine.[/quote]
Whatever makes you happy !!! :wink: that’s wat’s important :heart:
We don’t nessecarely shear the same needs .
But facts are facts - And I didn’t invent them – BUT they only matter if they are of importance or useful for you.

Here is an interesting story :
a muisician did some researtch by comparing music made on PC and macks and hardware instruments(midi ).
He made some compositions first on hardware (midi à sequencers ).
Than he sampled all tracks and and imported them into different DAWS.
He invited a few Professional dancers and asked them to shake-away on his music - not telling them if it where the hardware or the DAW-versions. They all preferred the hardware versions - not knowng that there where 2 versions of every track .
This fascinated him - he started this experiment because he noticed he allways enjoyed playing hardwaresynths more than software.
He wasn’t shure but he had the feeling it was because of latency - and here he found proof. still not satisfied he started to measure the inner-clocks ( midi +? ) of the PC’s and macks he used. At his surprise he noticed that even the strongest-fullfeatured macks showed an unstable clock L. the dansers didn’t hear the difference , but their bodys felt it.
Turns out that midi clocks in hardware are mutch more stable - he explained thhis >>> The clocks have less to do in hardware ( in my way of understanding ) computers have to do to many things
I’ts ashame this guy didn’t compare midi to CV-sequencers.
But it’s years sinds I’m making dance-music sometimes, and I’m not just feeling the difference - I CAN HEAR IT FOR God’s sake !!!
Already in the box !! Now I never worked with midi-base Elektron gear so I can’t compare them. But I have a Kurzweil 2500 and I can assure u it has one of the best sequencers that exists - very tight - still there’s a difference - AND it can only work in blocks of 2000 kb memory if I’m correct. ( this is for 16 tracks of midi ) .so for big songs you need blocks of sequences that are loaded one after the other . Ones u start to add modulation this memory flys out of the door.
( Humans notice différences of 1000/ms as we can see more than 60 million colors - ask most people how many colors they know and they’ll tell u 8 or 9 at the max ) :alien:
So not only did he discover that minimal tempochanges are noticed - if it’s only ona subconsient level ) he knew from this moment on why it’s so importand to have no lantecy while playing
Not being a technician it seems but log1cal to me that CV-systhems are the tightest of all - do you know at what speed elektricity travels ? :confused:

#35

Yeah but that story’s specifically about midi clock isn’t it which the A4/keys sends anyway?

We’re talking about midi notes going to an analog monosynth like a Waldorf Pulse for basslines. I’m saying that the minimal delay (1-3ms) introduced by using midi is negligible compared to other delaying factors like envelope/processor speeds plus midi has other benefits over cv/gate such as velocity.

If you’re into dance music as you say I guarantee you’ve danced to a ton of tunes over the years that have had tight midi sequenced basslines and you won’t have given a toss :slight_smile:

#36

Because groove is all in extreme timing? :slight_smile:
Note that in your computer the hardware timer interrupts 1000 times a second, and the OS will switch between processes giving time to each. It does have more things to do, but it seems unlikely to me that MIDI will have better precision especially if you have many devices connected together.

#37

Future Retro XS? Micro-brute? Or perhaps something from Mutable Instruments.

#38

Yeah but that story’s specifically about midi clock isn’t it which the A4/keys sends anyway?

We’re talking about midi notes going to an analog monosynth like a Waldorf Pulse for basslines. I’m saying that the minimal delay (1-3ms) introduced by using midi is negligible compared to other delaying factors like envelope/processor speeds plus midi has other benefits over cv/gate such as velocity.

If you’re into dance music as you say I guarantee you’ve danced to a ton of tunes over the years that have had tight midi sequenced basslines and you won’t have given a toss :slight_smile:[/quote]
:wink: And you can be damn shure I won’t say no if they add a midi - sequencer … BUT! it better be a good one… :imp:

#39

Nobody’s saying midi does have better precision though are they and yeah, if you sequence a load of different midi synths from 1 midi port and send loads of notes/CCs/PCs etc of course you’re going to notice problems but again, that’s not what’s being discussed.

I’m saying, in a mix, you will not notice the difference between:

Waldorf Pulse + bassline played by cv/gate by the A4
Waldorf Pulse bassline played by midi by the OT

Actually, no, you will notice a difference. You’ll notice that the midi one sounds better and funkier as it can also include subtle velocity differences and sequenced changes to the filter res (or whatever) that you couldn’t do with cv/gate :wink:

#40

Nobody’s saying midi does have better precision though are they and yeah, if you sequence a load of different midi synths from 1 midi port and send loads of notes/CCs/PCs etc of course you’re going to notice problems but again, that’s not what’s being discussed.

I’m saying, in a mix, you will not notice the difference between:

Waldorf Pulse + bassline played by cv/gate by the A4
Waldorf Pulse bassline played by midi by the OT

Actually, no, you will notice a difference. You’ll notice that the midi one sounds better and funkier as it can also include subtle velocity differences and sequenced changes to the filter res (or whatever) that you couldn’t do with cv/gate :wink:[/quote]
Have you checked this ?