Malekko Manther, Mr. D, and BFF Grooveboxes


#107

yes to all , though now theyre competing with other desktop devices and how that market has developed i dont think its unreasonable for some of the recent requests , many are not ‘quirky odd’ requests , they’re pretty standard … considering theyre lining up another few devices i hope theyre on a steep learning curve to ensure those are successful.

i dont recall having an issue with the mc202 though it was 20 years ago and i bought a kenton box for midi.

the avalon has a lot more options under the hud which makes it a little tricky with many key combo buttons , the screen on the manther should help , assuming it was going to show all the info (which is doesnt at the moment)… but when you try setting up a specific filter value , slide length , gate time on the avalong it takes a little while to get to grips with it … personally i never mess with some of it , just kept it simple with filter offset and some global tweaks).

there is a small but important difference with manther to much of the elektron machines.
e.g.
with probability , you select the probability you would like , THEN press the steps to apply it onto.
you dont select the steps (either singularly or individually) and THEN … select the probability.

this can be the same with gate length , delay , repeats … you select the value with an encoder and then press the steps you want that value on.

and glide is another method , you can record it in , i think hold the step and dial it in , but you cant select it as a step parameter (e.g. making step length longer than 100% to extend into the next step). I’d love them to add it to the menu system for each to have a graphical way to edit them (glide , morph , delay time , regen , depth).

and finally the quirky thing for me was.
if you record automation on a parameter , the entire sequence becomes fixed to that value , and if you want any changes you have to record those in.
its not like elektron in which you might ‘lock’ in values on a specific step but on the others theyre still responsive to parameter movements… this was as instant ‘that weird … ok … i guess’

in some terms its simple too , you dont have patches , you just have whats in the sequence , you can load sequence A01 and then select a bass patch … if you have a nice sound and you want another sequence , you’ll need to copy it to another location and add the new set of notes that you want.

minor point for me is the how of moving around the menu system , i’d like them to add the option of ‘back to main sub menu’ by pressing the value button too , its minor but the current workflow is unintuitive sometimes… dial i in a value and while you hand is also on that encoder press it to go back to the menu , instead of swapping to the other button to go back… i know this is very much my brain getting into ui/ux designer mode and not something 99%+ of people care about or would consider being wrong.

so in general I’m kind of glad that others are reaching similar conclusions , either we’re all a bit mad , or I’m actually alright…

as mentioned too , i may just sequence with elektron , seems a shame theyve done all that work when maybe a sound module mightbe been easier for them to do in terms of getting into newer synth territory.
interesting to find something where you think ’ elektron are still ahead of the game’ with sequencing , despite all the calls for song mode etc etc etc (thats for another thread).

it should be way easier to learn than a 202 , that was 30 years ago , on a tiny 8 bit digital screen , saving to cassette tape … if anyone used that as a marketing tagline , it’d be laughed out of the synth pool (or wherever synth people hang out)


#108

hah! well I didn’t say they marketed it that way. it’s just my point of view: “hey look, a 202 that doesn’t look like a total mystery to program!”


#109

I was not a fan of programming the sequencer for the MC-202 when I owned one many many years ago. I was also not a fan of the OG 303’s sequencer either, but liked it better than the MC-202’s. I consider the sequencers on both machines as happy-accidents sequencers.


#110

i did have to get the manual out to program the sh01a and those manuals are terrible …
but once i got it done and triggering the steps from another box for quirkyness , its all good.

if they put ‘hey , new sequencer thats better than a 202!!’ , it would’ve been funny at least…
i still think , in the recesses of my brain , i should just give up and get a proper 101 and 202 , at least i know what i’m getting and not getting … and theres no waiting round for bug fixes.
those prices though :frowning:
(ive got sh01a , manther , system1 with 101 plugout and system 1m for my near 101 emulations , how many more do i ‘need’ ) and lush + other vst/au/ios plugins.


#111

Yeah, I have to agree. Super easy to sequence and use generally. A few menu pages, a few shift features…all easy to find and intuitive. I do wish there were some more save features like saving a particular sound(patch) and then using that in a new sequence. Found a few bugs too but I’m aware there’s a firmware update soon so haven’t reported anything yet. Fantastic synth - I’m having tonnes of fun with it.


#112

In a fight for the snappiest envelop and closest 101 sound, who would win? Atlantis or manther?


#113

sh101 will always win the closest sound to a 101.

if you mean sh01a and Manther , right now i’d say sh01a.
unless you want to buy my Manther … then its the Manther ‘with an upcoming firmware’ although i cant guarantee it will do what you want either.

the wavefolder and parameter / step thing is quite a key thing to the manther but i couldnt in good faith say that there are no issues with manther at the moment … as i said … waiting for firmware update…


#114

actually , if you want to buy it pm me.
as new condition , psu , leaflet , no original box. £425 plus shipping.


#115

Oops I am an idiot. …
I wanted to say Atlantis vs Manther
(I have edited my original question)


#116

in that case i have no idea , youd need to dig into youtube / muffwigglers for more info.
i’d guess atlantis right now , i think the firmware update is due to add more envelope options for manther.


#117

I’ve got my beloved 202 on eBay right now, 450 free postage so get over there!!!
https://m.ebay.co.uk/itm/Roland-MC-202-MICRO-COMPOSER-Analog-Synthesizer-Sequencer-MC202-Great-condition/123307644327?hash=item1cb5b555a7:g:DhoAAOSwb1JbcI1A


#118

Has anyone any updates on the BFF or Mr.D lately?


#119

Finally got some time with manther this evening and found it very inspiring after a bit of farting about. Synced up with a dfam, with a Lyra 8 for pads, all very hands on. What I liked most about manther
Sounds good
Very versatile for sound manipulation
Easy to play with sequence

Less liked
Slight lag on sliders but got used to it
Some sliders have relatively small sweet spot

Overall it works for me as someone who just starts everything and experiments. As usual didn’t bother to press record.


#120

Check you’ve got the Morph knob right down at zero. otherwise this will affect slider lag


#121

and clear it also , just in case you’ve recorded it into the sequencer but have no way of finding out as theres no indication of it.


#122

Good points, I never got to the motion recording much, but did find taking gate out to dfam ext in did some interesting stuff. Had everything going into mixer with stereo reverb on Lyra sitting underneath everything - sound somewhere between a string section, vocal choir, or pack of wolves. Manther and dfam doing quite punchy rhythmic stuff. Nice blend of sounds.
Will get to the morph and glide ce soir. Cheers


#123

So maybe it’s obvious but when I tried to slave the manther to tr8, I couldn’t get it to send analogue clock to dfam. Only worked with tr8 slaved to manther. This is ok except it means manther has to be master for any setup. Still, the manther dfam combo works well.


#124

when you change the manther to the right midi setting i did a reset just hit the power and back on . then it worked fine and still dose.


#125

Yes that was a good tip, and fine if Manther is slaved. My experience though is that if you do that, then Manther doesn’t send clock via patch cables - ie slaved to tr8 I couldn’t get it to send clock to the advance step input on DFAM. When I made manther master then it was fine - tr8 slaved with clock to dfam and a wonderful time was had by all. I see problems with this when I intend to use OT as master.
At any rate the manther has really grown on me after a quiet start.


#126

There is lot of negativity over at muff wiggler forum about manther, my is on its way, i am happy some one likes it :slight_smile: