I agree, this is exactly when we’ll see them 
1 Like
In the 0 to 10 evilness scale of electronic equipment companies, having Apple and inkjet printers manufactures scoring 11, I think Elektron scores a solid 0.
But that’s just me.
4 Likes
Considering the features of these devices, I totally agree… Joking about the common topic on these forums was not a good style of mine.
I love my M:C and I think the hardware is fine, given that it’s an inexpensive box and is always going to have less features than the Digi… line. That’s kinda the charm of it for me.
It would be really lovely, however, to see a firmware update with some of the features suggested on the M:C thread.
(My own being a dedicated attack stage for all machines and individual trig audition function).
There’s space within the existing buttons and knobs (and combinations) for plenty more functionality without changing the hardware.
1 Like
Not unusual these days - there seems to be a tendency to overload devices with functionality that then is (logically) suboptimally implemented… look at the MC-101, for example. Or the P-6. Or (dare I say) the newest XY.
To bring it down to the essential in a streamlined fashion is an art, maybe the most difficult. The M:C got quite close I think.
3 Likes
it’s a real shame (if) they don’t continue to develop some form of model type series. I think they were on to something, personally.
alas, they probably wont
3 Likes
I really like the models, I think they’re both great bits of kit. I’ve owned both a couple of times.
I just don’t think it’s particularly viable for Elektron to carry on pursuing them though.
The cheaper end of the gear market has become crazy competitive with gear that’s either unbelievably cheap, mass scale cloney stuff (Behringer, Donner etc.) or little boxes who’s main purpose seems to be to find out how many features you can cram into them before they become unusable (Roland, mostly).
So whatever Elektron do in this niche, they’ll either be criticised for not being cheap enough or not cramming in enough features, and Elektron has never really been about either just for the sake of it. You only have to look on about 50% of the threads on here to see that most people seem to prioritise spec count over usability, so I can see why Elektron making gear at the lower end of the market that prioritises usability and workflow might not work out too well.
Also power handle…
12 Likes
Never used the m:s but I had a m:c a couple of times. A lot of fun and I love the utilitarian hospital equipment style design. I really dont agree with this relatively modern expectation that hardware needs to be constantly receiving updates all the bloody time, I think the m:c was/is pretty fully formed as it is. Certainly for an entry level instrument there’s already a lot packed into there
7 Likes
I know what you mean, I know the whole battery handle thing was a fiasco and became a meme - but they always felt like devices that should have had an internal battery. I think I would have kept both of mine as occasional & casual “sling in a bag and commute” devices
1 Like
rip BP-1 
1 Like
…the models series were a great idea…on paper.
in reality, a music device boutique company can have the plan to bring boutique concepts into the low price massmarket, but at some point must stop all whishful thinking, catch up with the learning curve, that simple metal chassis are way cheaper to produce, way cheaper to service than futuristic plastic shells, which only make sense if u produce and sell in vast proportions, while most people feel way more comfortable with spending their money on sturdy, dead simple metal boxes and finally refocus back on what they are…a boutique company…and boutique is just not made for pleasing the masses, especially it ur model concept is indeed boutique, never the less and anyways…
the model chapter prooved, elektron can come up with great industrial designs of all sorts, even that good, it almost killed them financially…the only reason why there are still frequent new boutique devices from sweden, is because, they’ve learned that lesson the hard way…
so, nope…no further plans for further models…
if they ever want to tease a new product line aiming at the low price mass segment again, it might be their naked sequencer engine in combo with various controler surfaces…but also made of timeless and sturdy metal…
in the meantime, enjoy elektrons boutique pro quality and buy some 2nd hand device from their mid price or flagship catalogue for absolute reasonable pricetags and don’t look back…
1 Like
There is nothing that qualifies as mass segment in the groovebox market, in my opinion. And the M:C is a masterpiece, for me much better than the digitone or equivalent. Just because a manufacturer establishes segments, you don’t have to follow them - more expensive is not necessarily better, as everyone knows. I try to look at the intrinsic value of a machine for my purposes, including learning curve and complexity, then compare it to price. I am sure talented people can make music with virtually anything, metal or plastic. If you focus on durability, then that goes hand in hand with price/investment considerations, which is a forbidden discussion in every forum, by all accounts.
I wish for an M: series continuation because the balance of those boxes is just right for me - with the singular caveat that the M:S should sample!
3 Likes
if everyone that says no changes their mind and request it … then certainly there will be caus… why not, wouldn’t an updated Model Series instrument be nice and fun… I think so.
1 Like
The problem is that the market for electronic musical instruments is very small. The cheaper a device you make, the more of them you need to sell to break even. So when you are making a mass market item, you need to capture a greater percentage of the total market. And when you do that you get viewed as a “mass market company” who makes cheap things. Look at people’s view of Behringer. No one is yearning for a Behringer synth, they aren’t objects of desire. That is fine for Behringer because their strength lies in their rapidity designing hardware, and their very inexpensive production process. Elektron has neither of those strengths, with all their products being made in Europe, and being very tactical about their hardware development (Digitone 2 and Digitakt 2 use the same PCB for the brains).
Basically for a boutique manufacturer, there is very little upside to making affordable mass market devices. You make less money on every device, and you need to make a lot more of them, meaning more overhead for storage and shipping. It is just overall way riskier than making expensive devices.
1 Like
You guys are providing some really nice economic and manufacturing analysis here in generous amounts.
Thank you. I never thought about it that way.
Because of the power handle recall? I’ve read that the Models sell well. Guess the profit margin is smaller but they are considered gateway devices.
Didn’t Overbridge cost them a lot too?
Can you elaborate on this, please? What do you mean by “killing them financially”?
one of my nephews is getting a model samples for Xmas 
He loves hip hop and rap and was asking for a box with the Blinky lights. He’s only 8 but the samples is perfect. Dead simple, cheap, tough and kid proof. Should be a good one to learn on and if he takes to it can get something a bit more pricey down the line
7 Likes
The only people who know what Elektrons most popular instrument is, are the ones looking at their sales spread sheet.
Which is none of us.
Lol, that would be the ultimate irony if the first Elektron since ten years that has a synth and sample engine was a Model 
.