Well those are some very good other reasons and I agree it would be awesome to get power and data through a single cord.
(Btw I did mean the chonky non-micro almost-square USB-B.)
1 Like
I love my m:c and m:s. Extremely portable for live anywhere, powerbanks en aux JBL amd your fine… not that clickety keys so better for intimate ambient stuff - super super portable and insane sound. Guess dt and st would be more versatile in a studio setup but less direct…. Limitations will show who the masters are as a german saying goes… Wouldn’t trade mine also because the 16 sequencer lights are easy to use with polyrhytms…. It’s more than a sketchpad, really got some great sounds out of it… not lofi at all….
8 Likes
Thanks for this! I’m in the process of converting M:C patches to ST.
I’m finding some inaccuracies in this table though. I’m working on SY Tone:
- M:C Color = ST RATIO, not FDBK.
- ST doesn’t have a SWEP parameter, it’s FDBK
3 Likes
Good find!
2 Likes
Still… if for example you take the preset Bd Zazzy which can be found on both machines, the one on the MC sound somehow beefer, fuller, Much More Ballsy…
I don’t seem to be able to make it as fat on the Syntakt…
(Snare and other sounds seem weaker on Syntakt… and I’m talking about same presets)
Or am I omitting something?
1 Like
I don’t know if the BD ZAZZY parameters are 1:1 between devices (sold my M:C) but if you’re noticing audible differences between comparable patches, what @LyingDalai said is most likely the reason. That’s the main reason why two patches with “identical” settings will not sound identical.
I know it’s possible to get beefy/full/ballsy kicks and hot snares on the Syntakt. The M:C, however, seems punchier out of the gate because of the headroom and the combined gain + distortion functionality. Part of its design is that high enough gain will distort / saturate the sound. I loved dialing in kicks and bass parts on it especially. You can do that on Syntakt too, but the gain ceiling is higher - that’s why the FX track drive is so crucial on the ST.
3 Likes
I don’t know but Model Cycles is at least 3 times louder than Syntakt without going clipping in the mixer…
The sound also more round and warmer somehow. No matter how much I tweaked, Syntakt sound not the same.
2 Likes
It has less headroom and the instruments “fight” for the space inside, leading to a specific sound.
Syntakt sounds way fuller and powerful though.
1 Like
Well, in my limited experience, it feels colder and less ballsy than MC. Had both, kept MC.
Yeah, limited headroom by cheaper platform/limited real-time processing power and intentionality in tuning of gainstages and clipping, definitely some fun choices made and I really should spend more time in the context of a mix over solo use. That, or just using it as it is and developing space or “soundstage” in production with better EQ and M/S processing.
2 Likes
Despite the same machines, the design of the Cycles makes a huge difference. I’ve made hundreds of patterns on both (I have both) and there is a pretty clear characteristic to each device. M:C leads me to more quirky, bouncy stuff with more use of modulation since I can just grab a knob to assign at any time. Cycles sound is pleasing and gluey, although with less top end. With ST most tracks I seem to base around the analogue machines, FX drive and digital BD Modern and SY Tone. I get more rigid industrial, harsh, cold techno, and coldwavey arp synth stuff. Hmm I’d like to think I have at least some agency in all of this though LOL. I’m keeping both as the resale value of the M:C is not worth getting rid of it given how fun and portable it is.
2 Likes
1000% the case with me. I don’t use it a ton these days but the value/space/usability makes it a great backup and I keep wanting to throw a generator-powered party it’d be great for.
It’s distinctive, dirts up nicely, quite portable.
1 Like
Got both. Still feel the M:C or M:S is the better learning machine for someone new to the Elektron system. Syntakt can almost overwhelm you at first. What I found is it is not the learning curve that held me back on the Syntakt, is is the “liking” curve. The preset patterns demonstrating the various engines all had a tonal sameness that turned me off for quite a while. The more I dug into the available sound modifications and made use of recording those knob movement the more I started enjoying the total package. Yes, the steep curve on this machine is going from “sounds okay” to really liking what you can get out of it.
3 Likes
For me the MC was quite the disappointment - my fingers hurt badly from the awful rubber buttons and the sound was very very limited. Sold it after 2 months and never looked back
I disliked the pads, knobs, and screen of my M:C, but the person I sold mine to was so excited, and there are clearly loyal fans here and many potential ones, so if anyone is feeling less than positive about theirs, pass it on to someone who can appreciate it (even if it only gets you a small amount of money).
2 Likes
Totally agree. I’ve sold mine because bought Syntakt. In my case I’ve loved M:C, but from I’ve got Syntakt, have not used my M:C anymore, so decided to sold it even if I hadn’t got so much for it.
Sometimes missed the crunchy sound and immediate workflow from M:C… But I appreciate so much all the other stuff I’ve got on my Syntakt, so no regrets at the end.
1 Like
I really liked the M:C, it had a crunchy and cool sound. I hated the pads, but eventually sold it because soundwise it felt a little “samey” and I didn’ really manage to break out of its palette.
Despite the similarities between the two, I feel the Syntakt opens up the machines in a completely different way, and has a much wider sonic palette.