they made it very very clear that they were only ever going to get very bare bones midi note support - it’s not a reflection of ticket price, it’s just not what they conceived the device to be - the late midi addition was after much arm twisting, the prospect of any deeper midi control out from the analog big boxes is low imho
Oh, I didn’t even know that elektron mentioned it before. Yes, that can be anything and it would simply be a great feature for the large, expensive devices.
It could be but if the software architecture was never conceived/designed to have that feature from the beginning, any later addition will suffer from increased complexity in the code, not only to make it work but also to not break any feature that is already there.
I refer you to this recent thread to see how something that looks “simple” or “should be” sometimes are not simple or easy at all to be added later in the design: "It should be simple to code"
2 Likes
yes, all machines have their advantages and disadvantages, so buy them all - that’s probably the philosophy behind it. 
maybe one day elektron will build a monster box that can do everything + all sorts of features.
i respectfully disagree - they are providing focus
kinda like the OT which has a horrible UX imho - they threw the kitchen-sink at that and it suffers (by comparison to the devices which followed)
nonetheless - there are Feature Request topics for stuff like this - keep in mind that greater Midi functionality is infinitely more doable (although very unlikely imho) compared to having stereo/panned individual tracks (restricted by hardware layout)
Each time they make something, they aim to make the best version for its market position - i don’t think it’s driven by any of the arguments used to explain perceived shortcomings - that’s my take
sounds awfully like an awful computer to my tastes - each to their own
1 Like
I sometimes wonder if I come across as sarcastic with what I write. As I said, English is not my mother tongue.
I have absolute respect for elektron and am still enthusiastic about their work. to be honest, it’s actually one of my favorite hardware devices.
it would just be a nice feature for the big boxes and i’m pretty sure it would be possible.
Doesn’t DN still has panning in OB?
I don’t think you are coming of as sarcastic so no worries. I just believe you haven’t internalised some of the comments here, for example:
Yes, it could be a nice feature but every single product you use is designed, the design will be based on some requirements and a vision of what the product should be, how it should become that, how it will be interacted with, etc. The design of these boxes didn’t account for that, it was not part of the “brief”, it was not something to be thought and considered to be implemented from the get-go, so to add it later creates complexities.
And yes, it “would be possible” but… At what cost? Not only financially but cost in UI/UX trade-offs, someone has to go through the design process to figure out how it could work from an user’s perspective, how to make it easy and usable. If the hardware is not capable to do it then it’s physically impossible with the current hardware, if you are wishing this to exist in a future hardware: what financial cost would this entail? Is it worth to pursue this feature or are there others that could be implemented and would be more aligned to the product’s vision?
I think that’s the issue you are not internalising, in software a WHOLE LOT can be done but everything, every single choice has a cost and a trade-off, you have to balance all of this to come up with a complete product. It’s possible but most of the times not simple nor easy, nor cheap.
1 Like