I recently picked up an NL3 (and a Wave), the interfaces are fantastic, much preferred to the Virus it replaced. The Virus was great of course, but I never enjoyed sound designing on it, although of all my synths, it was the one that was most capable.
Still trying to figure out gain staging on the Wave, it seems really easy to get it to clip, even with the tube drive off and resonance low.
1 Like
I have a Nord Stage 3, you have to use shift button a lot and you only have a single set of knobs, even when using two synths simultaneously. Itâs a nice all-rounder and not menu-divey like some workstations, but itâs not really knob-per-function either.
I think if youâd compare stage to other stage keyboards itâs as knob per function as you can get, agreed that lead and wave are easier to control, because they are much simpler interfaces for much simpler instruments, still imho Nords are the most underrated instruments by synth enthusiasts ÂŻ_(ă)_/ÂŻ
3 Likes
Two aspects of this question are occupying my mind.
First aspect: Anyone wanting to tweak parameters in a real-time performance might prefer knob-per-function, and anyone âcomposingâ on a box might be more tolerant of menus.
Second aspect: Too much menu diving is confusing and hard retain in memory. IMO, this is NOT the case with my beloved OG Digitone. For all its complexity, the menu structure of the DN is still pretty shallow.
I used Finale score writer for a couple years before moving to LilyPond. I created only a modest number of projects in Finale. Each function in Finale was hiding in some nested drop-down menu. If I went a few months between projects, I forgot the location of the drop-down items I was looking for (by contrast, LilyPond, for all its complexity and its steep learning curve, was effectively self-documenting, because of the explicitly written input file). So, I would say that FInale was very menu driven. Compared to that, the Digitone is hardly menu-ey at all.
My own style is to focus on one aspect of sound/composition at a time, so being in a particular menu to the exclusion of other menusâŚis not really a problem for me. And, while there are a few functions I wish could be put on the same page, it is hardly worth it for me to go down the rabbit hole of external MIDI controllers with the goal of trying to achieve knob-per-function. YMMV.
2 Likes
I have the OG DT/DN/ST setup as my main rig. For my personal tastes, these boxes strike a great balance of immediacy and depth. I think what also helps is that all three are mostly unified in terms of UI. My brain doesnât hurt going back and forth between them.
That being said, I still like to break out something like my Circuit Mono Station once in a while for that knob-per-function fun.
Honestly though, the takt/tone boxes are in a sweet spot for me where the menus arenât TOO deep and I can still tweak and twiddle in real-time without much fuss.
Tonverk is triggering my usually non-existent GAS though. 
4 Likes
doesnt it weight almost 10 kgs and bulky as F?
1 Like
I would never sell my Elektrons.
For me itâs not a question of one âorâ the other, but rather âandâ,
and I enjoy screen less time on the vintage Rolands and Perkons 
Cheers!
this
The âandâ approach is interesting.
If you think about other creative pursuits, for example the visual arts, there is usually 2 sides of the coin when it comes to making stuff. Many visual creatives constantly carry a sketchbook and pen, and that lo-fi approach hasnât changed for hundreds of years. When it comes time to make something fully fledged, they used to do it analogue style, but now thereâs a computer and deep software.
I mentioned the Circuits before, but budget gear often falls into that category of looking a bit useless until you think âahh but itâs cool to not have to navigate a single menu/screen.â
So it can be fun to have set of cheap boxes that are there to jam maybe to create some loops and source material, rather than getting into the weeds. Plus a second set of some deeper gear (or just a laptop/computer) for more advanced work? One is your sketchbook, the other is your more advanced place to go finish stuff. They can crossover a bit, but it might help to think of them in that way.
2 Likes
yes i wonder if circuit rhythm would be a good sketch pad for my octatrack - bacically i use mostly my own samples and loops generated over years of dawless jams to populate octa for deeper arranging etc thanks for your thoughtful response
1 Like
Yeah thatâs it.
For me, the challenge hasnât been so much downsizing hardware, but making the hardware I have fit with different use cases. Itâs like if you buy one car, youâll probably get something mid-range thatâs not the base model but not the top of the range. But if I said you could buy 2 you might buy something powerful for long trips and an EV for around town.
1 Like
the dream is to have a two seater for fun and the suv for the family but things being as they are its two suvs and no fun!
2 Likes
One (simple) drum machine + 303 Clone + delay and reverb = done!
You can go for entire sets and wonât get lost in sound design.
I like this approach a lot!
5 Likes
yeah totally feel this, xoxbox 303 clone, tick, drum machine is perkons, but i have a fucked up tr606 which could do it, but otherwise could just forget drums and link the xoxbox to the mc202 and tb303 for harmony or groovy melodic tom and kick sounds
3 Likes
303 + 606 is supercool!!
For easy and relaxing stuff, Iâd keep myself limited to two devices and tried to go for longer continuous sets - the original DNA of techno 
And maybe itâs not about the question of having a screen, a menu or whatever -
but rather of overthinking (like I do usually): Chord progressions, polyphonic stuff, scales - instead if going for percussive , monophonic BOOOM
6 Likes