Yes that´s true… Octatrack wins in that regard!
2 Likes
Yeah, I think, especially for a drum machine, it makes a lot of sense but creating kits should be made outside of creating patterns, like putting your kit sound designer hat on and only create kits (with some common rules between them). Then it can be very powerful. But kits should not be a side effects of creating patterns, they should be created first.
But…
I mean…
I’m lazy 
2 Likes
This whole kit vs no kit continues to drive home the fact that the digis need something like “record performance” since kit machines have songmode and part machines have the arranger. The whole clip playfree thing is a pipe dream haha
But I really loved how quick you can set up the mute groups on the OPz. Super straightforward
There’s also one thing that kits hold: macro performances settings. Virtually we could copy the exact same kit and just change all the macro performances, that’s quite a number of variations here. And it’s not something the Digis have to store so the streamline version is easier to grasp.
Macros on the A4 are a bit of a pain to set because it’s menu divy heavy(A4 mk1. There’s perhaps a shortcut on the mk2). On the AR, it’s a breeze to do so I use them more “instinctively”.
Anyway, kits are more work but their management could be improved by being a bit of both Digi/Analog world:
- all projects store one non-writable default kit
- New patterns always load the default kit saved as “kit [pattern name]”
I’m pretty sure that’s what they are doing behind the scene on the Digis. If we could get access to the saved kits list that could open new possibilities without having to manage them actively. The best of both worlds.
Now song mode is something totally different but the OT Arranger with a few new tricks (live record your performance and edit afterward if necessary) would be more than welcome.
2 Likes
Kits are extremely powerful if you have the time. I need to actually sit down and go through the pain on my A4. You have motivated me haha
Agreed on recording performances. Sometimes you do that one thing just right… never to be able to do it again (or too scary to do live).
2 Likes
Agree. Kits aren’t limiting at all. If you enjoy the Each Pattern Is Unique DigiBox-approach, just let each pattern have its own kit.
The only bad thing about kits is that Elektron’s implementation is confusing. The basic idea is great.
It’s substantially better implemented in say Toraiz SP-16, where they just cleared away some of the confusing parts and stuck to the core idea - to let multiple patterns fetch their sound from one source, to make mixes between patterns consistent if you write a song that spans over more than one pattern.
Since the Digi boxes have individual mute modes, that combined with a straight-forward version of the kit system would go a long way to allow more coherent work to be done.
1 Like
Ok
I just assign a new kit to each pattern as I go, I’ve never really had to manage the kits at all. I give them random names, occasionally I’ll load a different kit but otherwise it’s kind of in the background for me. This is on the AK, btw.
2 Likes
Not exactly song mode but perhaps the MCL way of handling tracks on the MD could be a good add-on as you can load individual tracks from any patterns (no idea how this is implemented visually… don’t own a MCL/MD…) that could be fun to mix and match tracks from totally different patterns easily.
try setting up a template kit (if you use the same/mostly same macros on your kits), then load in new sounds and save it as another kit in the list. then you can go back and tweak the macros a bit without having to start from zero each time. I saw someone suggest that on here a while back.
This part is just a general response to the thread, not specifically you:
a lot of the problems we face have a solution on these boxes, but it just takes time and knowing what we want. it’s easy to miss some features. like yeah an arpeggiator would be nice on DT/ST/etc. but its possible to get the results we want another way.
i hated jamming with model:samples because it didn’t have a song mode so playing another instrument was a pain, but i got a MIDI footswitch and started arranging my patterns, pattern length/change differently. it’s not perfect, but it got me beyond wishing for a software update.
2 Likes
Someone like Vlad at Soma can put up abstract artists’ statements about their instruments because they are more conceptual in design.
I don’t doubt that internal statements of philosophy do or would help drive Elektron’s functional choices, but I don’t think presenting them to the public will be helpful to them or the public.
What you see as helpful others might see as authoritarian, aggressive, patronizing, or a personal attack .
Sometimes setting expectations is helpful to all parties, but with online forums more communication can often lead to more problems and less understanding 
I do sometimes wish there was a sort of SDK but I totally understand why there isn’t one.
Thanks to @circuitghost now all I want is run free clips 🥲
1 Like
It’s all in the tuning, no? You can abstract away a great deal but still leave room for “weird but deep and cool”.
Boutique “grooveboxes” like the Spazedrum probably offer more opportunities to “fail” creatively in that sense.
What sort of items do you dig in the sense you’re not finding here? (Full products I mean, not just individual missing features.)
1 Like
CG said this above, but other people seem to be confused, maybe me lol.
DT and DN have effective per pattern mute groups. It’s pretty much the same functionality as the OP-Z.
(Off topic, but maybe someone can answer this because it’s driving me crazy. I can’t seem to copy individual tracks and paste them into other patterns on the op-z. That seems broken).
Just speed read this whole thread 
I guess it might be kind of cool if elektron boxes had 4 track loopers like the Liven 8-bit Warps. Recording length set by bars or step length. Then you could essentially write a “song” with the 4 tracks and perform on top if you wanted. The bars recordable would need to go up to 999 or something basically unlimited.
Or just buy a 4 track recorder, whatever, what are we talking about?
Ah yeah, opinions are opinions but I’m quite happy with the DN Keys
And I’ve heard nothing but good things about the Dirtywave! I am avoiding it because I don’t need to toss anything more into my flow this year dangit.
Sorry man 
but it’s a bliss so I can’t blame you.
A Digitakt sample can be free running, kind of. Set it to loop and never retrigger anything on that track in any pattern, and the sample keeps looping across pattern switches, to interesting effect.
1 Like
I know what you mean, i do it like this: I change only one track in the next pattern, then copy / paste, change another thing. I limit myself to 5 to 10 minutes per pattern, then i move on, also when its not perfect, i roll with it and try to find a solution in the next copy paste pattern. After 16 pattern i do a rhearsal and try to fix things. Target is to have change, but not to many inconsistencys.
I would also suggest that we get variations / sequencer lines, clips… we have fills, why not a 2nd , 3rd Trig page to setup alternative sequencer trigs, that could be triggerd with fill 1,2,3 etc
I stumbled over a Circuit Rhythm yesterday and it made me decide to take a break from Elektron (again, haha :). Not because I’m going Circuit now or because I don’t like Elektron - I love them - but the Circuit made me realise just how important the presence of even just a few rudimentary song writing tools are for me. My brain’s not wired to work with such live-focused stuff, at least not right now. I get stuck in the pattern. With the Circuit, I wrote a song in the store where I tried it in less than an hour. A pretty bad song, but a song nonetheless.
3 Likes