No Sample Locks on Model:Samples : Discuss [implemented version 1.02]


Sorry but could somebody explain me ‘‘the sample lock’’.
And the comparaison with the DT engine…Please

For the difference between the two models is
Digitakt can sample on direct way with his input
The Model:sample can’t sample because you must transfert your sample

That what i know

Thanks you very much


“Sample locking” is the ability to take a track, that already has a sample assigned to it, and parameter lock different samples for different triggers assigned to that track. It allows a single track to play multiple samples instead of only being able to play one sample.

People are discussing a work around by using “sample chains.” “Sample chains” are samples created by chaining a bunch of smaller samples together into one longer sample; the different samples can then be selected by using the sample start parameter. FYI, when using “sample chains,” they must be arranged in a manner for the 120 subdivisions (of the sample start parameter) to line up with each sample’s beginning.


thanks you very much !
i undestand the difference now.

we could esperate an upgrade for this thing.
I know that the digitakt make sample lock as well
I always use this capability and it’s really cool


We talking about the definition of the sample wave if it can not make chain sample ??


Not sure. Just a bunch of discrete samples separated by gaps of silence, but all contained in one wav file.


I wish you could lock the LFO to integers fo rthe sample start parameter. Randomized samples from chains would be amazing.

Model:Samples Feature Requests Thread

But isn’t the sample start parameter an integer value itself, so setting it with a real number (as the LFO) gets truncated to a whole number?


It plays in between samples on my 120 sample chains :frowning:


That would be a surprise to me too if the samples are all identical length(or equispaced such that any two samples could be swapped over and the chain would index start points identically) and there are in fact 120 in total

On the AR (or OTwith 128) this would not happen, it cannot land in between those integers the way it can on the higher 14bit(approximated in decimal in UI) resolution DT afaik


Ugh, I just assumed this was already possible; didn’t even take into account the possibility that the LFO isn’t capable of modulating by integers.

To take it a step further, it would be extra amazing if you could choose the length of the modulation “units” to be even more than one integer. That way, if you wanted to use a sample chain that only had 6 samples, you could set the size of the “units” to be 20.


Ahh that would be nice as you could use chains besides 120 chains.

I am a little worried as the floating point LFO is ideal for literally every other use case.

The randomized / LFO sample selection would be amazing with the ctl all feature. I have seen a few really amazing performance systems using randomized sample selection banks.


To be honest, I’m surprised randomized sample selection hasn’t become standardized in samplers by now. Having a few randomly selected round-robin hi-hat samples as opposed to using only one sample can add a lot of life imo.

As for the M:S, I definitely wouldn’t mind one extra hidden parameter someplace to adjust the unit size for the LFO modulation.


I can live without sample locks but would be reasonable to have a way to choke hihat samples without messing with sample chains


I opened a ticket to because I miss Sample Lock too!


Use an open-hat sample and lock a shorter Decay on the closed-hat steps. I’ve gotten mixed results with this method depending on the sample, some sound more convincing than others. But there are so many cheap drum machines out there that do “realistic” drums, I use the M:S when I want something more synthetic sounding or unpredictable.


Need choke option for sure.


I do not understand why the thread requires a sample lock.
the controller is designed to looper sounds already prepared.
This is the model sample !

It is easier to play the Chain sample with a digitakt or an octatrack.
It is necessary to exploit the workflow, to try the diversity on other machine elektron.

The magic of the mix will be great.
Do not understand why ask for updates that are already wokflow on other system!


I don’t get it either… Folks buy the device that doesn’t have the functionality they want when there’s two tiers of devices above it that have more and more and more… No offense anyone I’m sure your great people but I don’t understand the purchasing descion of buy something with X functionality then moan about not having XX functionality when XX and XXX already exist… I’m not trying to be rude it just seems like folks would be happier if they made wise purchasing decisions, read the manuals beforehand, watch videos, etc… Do weeks to months of research beforehand and get something that does what you want it to do… :slight_smile:


I guess people are asking for it because it’s on the other machines. It’s a handy feature that would be well worth having on a device that only has 6 tracks. Every other parameter can be locked per step, so why not the Sample?

We all understand why Elektron deliberately didn’t add it as a feature, but I don’t see the problem with discussing why it would be a good addition to this particular machine. It’s not like anyone’s going on hunger strike demanding it - it’s just a thread on a forum.


Personally I have no problem with requesting it, and folks should send an email to if they want it to be official. It’s just it’s a crap shoot if you’ll get it or not so if someone knows it doesn’t have it and then buys it that’s where your at, it doesn’t have it and you’ll be lucky if you get it… :slight_smile: