that confusion was amplified by the incredibly long loading times to even preview what it would sound like applied to a sample, only for it to have zero effect or an entirely unpredictable effect. that whole section of the tool could/should have been removed when they realized its limitations.
heres hoping that in the mini they at least have instant preview, at least then they could be usable for mangling stuff with intention.
ill give ya that those ones were useful, albeit those things have been implemented in better ways in other samplers. feels like they could have focused the efforts on a cleaner sample editing workflow instead of adding all the other effects in there.
I wrote this in the GAS thread but it probably fits better in here:
Right now my GAS has shifted to Polyend Tracker Mini. There’s a clear pattern of me looking for portable samplers/grooveboxes. The Digitakt wasn’t it the second time I bought it either. I want something more portable, battery power is a must, and it must support stereo samples. And the workflow needs to not be Roland because if there’s one thing I’ve learned over the years, it’s that Roland’s workflow sucks for me: my MC-101 and SP-404 MK2 experiences have all made that painfully clear and I have pledged to increase my defense against Roland GAS considerably from now on.
I absolutely love my Syntakt and it’s my primary device - but it lacks sampling, and it isn’t that portable (certainly not grab-and-stick-in-carryon-bag portable). I just got a birdcord and it’s a great improvement for my at-home use, but I’d still not consider throwing the Syntakt into a backpack - it’s just too dense and heavy for that and I’d be too afraid of damaging it. And it will never be a sampler, so there’s a real gap in my setup that it will not be able to fill.
I’ve said for a long time that I would love an MPC mini that focused on sampling primarily, was battery-powered and small, but still had its powerful sequencing and maybe with a granular synthesizer. Yet somehow didn’t feel like a DAW in a box.
The PTM looks like the answer to all of that! Super portable, built-in mic for spontaneous sampling of anything (unlike every viable competitor), built-in battery (unlike the Digitakt), usb-c powered (unlike the Digitakt), stereo sampling (unlike the Digitakt), great sounding reverb (unlike the MPC, MC-101, SP-404), can turn samples into synthesis (unlike the SP-404), and it has a granular synth engine (unlike all the others). Crucially, it’s small and comes with a carrying case so I could literally take it with me on the many European continental business trips I seem to have in front of me with my new job.
If you are looking for anti-GAS then I can make the following points to what you have outlined.
How often do you truly see yourself sampling and working on something in the open? Do you already have common regularly reoccurring situations where you have long periods of unattended travel like train/plane/bus? Do you see yourself sampling and immediately working on something, or do you prefer to focus on one element at a time? I.e when you are doing field recording, you just focus on the field recording, and everything that comes afterwards is done at home/studio anyway.
As far as portability goes, Digitakt/Digitone/Syntakt are what I would consider portable given their size. Portability for me isn’t also necessarily the ability to take something outside with me (though I do take these outside regularly), it’s hardware that I can easily move around the studio. I will often work with my digi sized boxes on the couch, but that’s not something I could do with a full sized synth.
My point to doing field recording separate & design afterwards, is already answered in my mind. The marketing is clearly to go out there and be hunter/gatherer with samples and work on your stuff. As a chef looking for ingredients, if I wanted to make a chicken soup, I wouldn’t hunt a chicken in the wild and start making that soup on the spot. I would be more comfortable bringing the bird back to my kitchen where I have everything else. Something to think about in the context of expectation vs reality. Nothing that says you can’t do things the way you want to, but I prefer to focus on one element at a time.
Sometimes it is also nice to grill outside…and enjoy the fresh air 
I talk with a lot of synth folks who mention they work in IT and they are sick of 8 hours in front of the computer. This is why they are drawn to DAWless workflows, because they have too much screen time at the desk. Question though is when replacing one screen with another becomes the same thing.
Yes, the basic manipulation is super useful. The time stretching is also handy although confusing.
It’s just the FX that are crappy
Damn these new synths can do it all!
I appreciate your input. Yeah, I also just enjoy the discussion and bring intellectually challenged. 
I’m sure I would still use it around the house 90% of the time, but even then, the convenience of a built-in battery and worry-free plastic build quality makes it more approachable. For the remaining 10%, I could definitely see myself using something this small/thin and lightweight in my carryon for use on planes, hotel rooms etc.
But it’s not just about using it outside of the house, it’s just as much about switching up the workflow and creating new neural pathways. There’s something about my Digitakt experiences (both times I’ve owned it) that just felt a bit too familiar, making me compare it against the Syntakt and missing things like portamento etc. It’s less like entering a new exciting creative world and more like just switching out the synth engine of nearly the exact same device. I don’t know, but it just makes me annoyed that the Syntakt can’t do the sampling part too since it’s all the benefits of the familiar workflow but with all the annoyances of having to cable up two separate boxes.
I like how new workflows force me to think differently - but I’m also learning about which workflows and production tricks I value more vs less. The SP workflow really didn’t work for me, I prefer samples as a way to add an organic texture to tracks, I’m not at all into full phrase sampling and committing to complex layers etc. I want to keep the door open to change stuff via a flexible sequencer. The Digitakt is way more compatible with my brain, and it’s not that far off from how trackers work.
I prefer to sample in the moment within the context of the song I’m making. The built-in mic is by no means a dealbreaker, but it’s a very nice feature to have. I could see myself building out a baseline melody and composition and then just “holding a finger up in the air” to fill in some blanks through sampling. I use resampling in the same way, taking a piece of the song embryo and messing it up some more halfway through a track production. I’ve tried the route of walking around with my Zoom H1 in standalone but didn’t find that to be particularly fun at all.
For in-house portability, I tend to agree (although I’m going to try to velcro my birdcord+powerbank to its underside to further enhance it), but I would never consider packing my Syntakt in a carryon bag. I don’t know, but it feels like the Syntakt would get all dinged up and it would feel weird to pull that up on an economy seat tray. Holding a PTE in my hands wouldn’t feel weird at all, comparable to a Nintendo Switch.
I’m like @djst where I’m wanting a specific type of device and I personally find it really surprising that more companies don’t build portable devices. People seem to want them. I know I do.
The mini fits the sampling niche, and I know I love the PE Tracker workflow and sequencing. Now I want the same form factor and screen size for synthesis 
If you want a groove box box you can grill on you need a Syntakt
Small devices are harder to build than. Big ones. Market is small so really big companies who could afford that, don’t mess with those small numbers.
Small devices have Limitation in power. But ppl want „unlimited“ tracks of stereo samples with high end effects, but please insert effects. And sampling during playback of all those.
There limitations in hardware. The smaller you go, the bigger those limitations will be.
As long as the expectations of the customers are so much off from what is possible for a reasonable price to be able to sell them, why should a company ruin its reputation with that?
There are reasons, why those small devices have limitations. Those are mostly in memory. SD cards are slow. Of you play a sample one octave higher, you need to read the sample in double speed. SD cards cannot deliver 8 simultaneous stereo samples in high resolution and with that kind of latency we need for audioplayback, we’re prebuffering is not an option.
Tim from dietywaves did Tests with a lot of cards, only a very very few are even able to deliver 8 voice playback without you getting issues from time to time.
There are a ton of reasons why companies don’t build what ppl on the internet want.
PE is not loading samples into memory without a reason for example.
And for those who always come around with „but XY can do it“: if XY could do that, you wouldn’t ask for a device that doesn’t exist. And there are people earning millions in a lot genres of music. Why aren’t you one of them, because it’s obviously possible 
A lot of hardware is past the point of size being the limiting factor. My 4 year old smartphone can do more in FL Studio Mobile than most hardware at 10X the volume (and twice the price). I think if it as building a thoughtful casing around a mid-end smartphone. Not saying it’s exactly like that, but it’s not like this is particularly hard in 2023. And besides, there’s the M8 and now PTM to prove that it’s possible at a reasonable price point. I agree more with you around the market size, which is probably the more significant reason. That said, there’s a clear trend of going smaller and I’m sure we will see many manufacturers surfing in that trend within the next few years.
I disagree there. You cannot compare development and prices of products in a market where your target group is more or less every person on the planet where a lot of them buy the following product in that line after “a few month” to handheld samplers/grooveboxes where you can be happy, when you sell a few thousands.
And yes, the M8 is powerful, but as people are asking why noone builds what the “market is asking for”, it seems. that the M8 is not what they are looking for.
What Tim is getting out of that cpu (that is one of the most powerful available in that segment) is very impressive, but there isn’t much room left. One of the main reasons for some with PE over M8 is the screen. I don’t know for sure, but I guess, that if M8 would have the PE screen, Tim would have to strip features, because more resolution needs more Memory and more processing, and as there isn’t much less, something would have to go.
Thats what I mean with limitations. I really believe, that the M8 is the most you can get out of what is available to small makers, and it is not cheap. And I am quite sure Tim isn’t swimming in money from building, selling and supporting them. I don’t know, if a company with a few people (As far as I know, Tim is alone) would be able to build that product for that price.
If it were that easy to just put a case a round a smartphone, write a simple app and add some additional IO hardware, I am pretty sure, you could buy them already!
tbh that sounds like the mobile pc space right now. its possible to make portable, powerful things with cellphone hardware but they do come with a price tag. maybe we need GPD to develop a powerful opensource handheld designed with production in mind for people to build on
The OG PT MK1 has a 180MHz processor the M8 and PT Mini have a 600MHz processor.
This is my favorite way as well. I usually have a small zoom recorder in my pocket. It’s easy to bust out and record an environment without it getting in the way.
It also looks like the tracker mini’s mic is mono, which wouldn’t work well for me for field recordings.
Synthstrom are very upfront and transparent.
They really come across as they actually care about their customers/users.
I’m sure you’re right about many of your points, particularly about the economy of scale parts. I’m not sure I entirely understand the size challenges though. The MPC One can do pretty much all of it. Could that not be shrunk down to a handheld format (minus all the pads and knobs and of course with a much smaller screen and less smaller i/o? Or would that bring up the prices that much? My point is that these devices already exist at the right price points. The M8 shows that they can be made small and great (too small screen for me though, I don’t mind the resolution), and the MPC One shows that it can have a number of insert effects per track. The Polyend Tracker Mini shows what looks like the perfect compromise to me, but I’m told that the effects suck and I guess it has no insert effects, and it’s obviously limited to 8 monotonic tracks just like the Digitakt. But still, it’s the closest one to my idea of a sweet spot so far.
I’m clearly no expert at the costs of these components though, maybe a handheld MPC would have been much more expensive.