Have I got this right ?
- Euclidean Rhythms is a term defined in 2005. As defined in the original paper, this is not at all the same thing as Polyrhythm because it’s all about “distributing [k] beats within [n] time steps”.
- More recently than that, some polyrhythm implementations have been mis-described (if you take into account the 2005 definition) as ‘Euclidean’.
If I’m right about the timing of those two things, the Elektron (and Torso) description of Euclidean is more correct (prior claim to the term), and any sequencing algorithm that places notes OFF the equally divided beats in a bar may or may not be polyrhythmic, but certainly is not Euclidean.
Is that fair ?