No Sample Locks on Model:Samples : Discuss


I can totally agree. 576 samples and no sample locks, with only six tracks at a time… this is self defeating.

I’ve been rockin the M/SAMPLES now for over a week since I got it, and I’m telling you it’s TIGHT.
Plus the portability of it is great, and other features that are great, that said if sample locks is implemented this thing will freakin rock times ten.
I don’t believe it will cannibalize any of it’s bigger cousins. I think it could be that they maybe rushed it, i don’t know. Because they are working on other things like overbridge and other stuff.

I was visiting their HQ office place in sweden once and they told me that they were working on new stuff. They are super nice people and have a helpful attitude, if you have an old machine, they try their best to revive it. Some do care for sustainability of their machines. They are some people working at Elektron that I think really do care about the ever evolving culture and their supporters and fanbase us the users.

They are not like fucking Apple. They are far from it and I hope it stays that way.
No offense to apple users.




I’ve been as excited for the model samples as any of my more high end Elektron boxes. I love jamming and I love immediate fun, and as much as I love the A4, rytm, takt tone etc. this one seems like it’ll be jam city population me! It gets here Saturday and I can’t wait!

I really hope sample locks is possible via update though. I can imagine how much of a game changer that would be!

Always nice to hear when people working at a company are nice and care about the customers.


Please dont buy it thinking sample per step will be added, its about as likely as stereo samples being added to the Digitakt.


defo send a request to anyway. might as well let em know it’s a popular feature request.


Fully agree, sample locks would be crazy. Now I get by with the classic sample chains :slight_smile:



Futile though. The manual is very clear about it. It was no accident they didn’t add it.


regardless of if there’s no chance of an update I think its always worth it to let em know how you feel about their products via the official channel.


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