looks & sounds great.
sadly it’s not for me tho, aka the guts of 2 grand 
1 Like
This looks fun, not sure I could justify it either. Would like to play it though, just to see (;
I think it looks hideous. Technic lego nightmare.
Dont care what it sounds like.
1 Like
I’m so glad this came out now and not 5/6 years ago.
@Ryan then- OMG THIS IS WHAT I NEED!
@Ryan (modern age)- eh, whats the point of this thing?
3 Likes
“The algorithmic sequencer is free from conventional limitations like the number of steps a sequence can have, specific time signatures and can use custom tuning systems.”
Really delivering on those aspects could make the PolyPulse rare or even unique among grooveboxes.
That might be interesting.
They should have focused on the sequencer and sold that 
1 Like
I don’t like the look or UI. Too bad, because the concept seems interesting.
2 Likes
It could. Its what we all wish elektron boxes could do right? But big grey box filled with chaos pads and lego buttons aint fooling no no one.
2 Likes
There’s not much information about what the sequencer is actually capable of, and how you would use it, but this video about the workflow gives some hints. It actually looks quite promising.
That’s why I mostly use an external sequencer for my electron boxes these days. But what I really like they could do is this:
You can add up to four audio effects per track. Additionally four effects can be added to the master bus.
(from their Kickstarter page)
I really wish they’d publish the manual before they put up their kickstarter page, so we could find out what is actually on offer here, instead of focusing on short videos and fancy posters.
Has anyone found out where they are based? Couldn’t find anything about that in their Kickstarter or on their website.
1 Like
Regarding the look of it, it looks so much like a crash test machine that I had assumed they would improve the esthetics before bringing it to market. They said it was final?
3 Likes
Eurgh that screen. It gets worse.
Features may be awesome but UI is awful.
this has the UI of one of those computerised lathes you get in car building factories.
1 Like
That’s what I was thinking. There’s a lot being sold on faith here for 2k up front with a minimum 1-year wait (ha!). I can’t even get a sense of the sonic range of the synths, and the drums hardly sound impressive in the demos. We waited 3 years for the Osmose, and I never flinched because I only had to put up 25% with the balance due once ready to ship.
I’d consider putting up 500 for this on an open-ended wait with the option to pull out any time, but perhaps they can’t make those economics work. And I’d need to be able to imagine more of its capabilities, so more info is required. I can’t even tell if that screen UI is awful or perhaps good/efficient for what it needs to show to complement the rest of the physical interface.
It looks as if they go for a very limited audience. 22 backers (20 machines reserved), and their target has been largely met…
I love the look, but I don’t like that they think their logo and product name is more important than screen size.
6 Likes
people saying UI is bad w/o using it (nor objecting the vids) seem to mistake the UI for the looks
UI is about interactions. and apart from the small display, I think it’s rather fantastic, if not somewhat innovative even. well-spaced knobs in blocks of 16 (!), main controls in the middle, touchpads above, keyboard/additional function below look very playable imo.
buttons may look funny to some, but small companies have to choose from mass-produced details I guess. and tactility+durability play a role, adjusting the overall aesthetics too. the point here was to deliver the most performative box I guess, and it’s just those cheapo touchpads+bland area on top which fails its overall looks, not the style itself
they could use the space better though. a slightly tighter arrangement of knobs + the wasted area on top would allow for something even more hands on — either less height, or more controls. but mainly, use two (instead of five) touchpads with selectable channels they influence which would allow to keep all the functionality. the saved space could be used for a better display.
the actual interactions with it seem quite logical from the videos, but it’s something that can only be tested hands-on, just like responsiveness and overall control quality, so it’s prematurely do discuss that…
yet for all the great UI concept here, the sound lacks imo. and I’ve not heard the sampler in use… which is of my main interest here. I guess the engine would be too simple, and the display too small for comfortable editing.
too bad then. 25% less size, double the screen and you have a winner… alas
2 Likes
that’s fair - you’re right.
This looks absolutely f*cking horrendous. Awful. And how a musical instrument looks to me does actually matter in terms of inspiring me to play it.
YMMV of course, which is cool 
1 Like
I like the idea of making sounds in a cockpit simulator.
If it were cheaper to back I’d probs by a ticket but I’ll watch this from the lounge instead for now.
1 Like
The design of the unit is part of the user interface, and it is certainly part of the user experience. Although it sometimes is subtle, colors, ornaments, layout and size of things, etc. all influence the interaction.
And one rarely sees a piece of gear that looks like shit but works like a charm.