Samples Mk 2 Dreaming Of

Elektron Gear Model:Samples
#22

I understand what you’re saying but I think it’s such a non-problem. Let users make their own mistakes and allow the many of us that would really like to use stereo sounds for our music. If you take your example of someone trying to make a reference mix it’s as simple as either: Using mono samples or importing/recording in mono. And having a simple toggle option for each sample/track to use L/R or the sum of the channels.

Not being able to properly and easily utilise a unique stereo sound because mono has been effectively enforced on me is a much bigger problem than sometimes needing to do some channel management. I wonder if a lot of this disagreement comes from differences in music tastes and production styles, I think if you like to work very additively then starting from mono samples is great, but for myself I often like to start with a more dense wide soundscape and kind of alternately subtract and build up. More of an ambient style thing perhaps.

#23

I don’t need it „to do“ pads . Just play them back.

Don’t want to start quoting all parts but
„ accommodating all possibilities “
Seriously ? You consider stereo as something that is part of „all possibilities „ ?

As to the how music consists of many mono parts…… No I did not know it. Thank you. I always thought that a drum set consists of stereo sounds and two singers are stereo.

For me stereo in 2023 is not a serious argument on „raising the cost“.
It is simply short sighted design.
It has a stereo output for the fx already . Also there are similar priced competitors that can do it.

Whatever. I think this is the perfect situation to use an all time favorite „let’s agree to disagree“

Have a nice day

#24

Yeah, being able to playback stereo samples in ram is a different thing to the circuitry required to produce a stereo output.

2 Likes
#25

Octatrack MK1 prices in the US are right around $700. An new M:S is $399. Would adding inputs and stereo playback be worth $300 to you?

3 Likes
#27

The m:s way of handling sample scrolling and names is confusing by itself I don’t think adding stereo sampling would make it much worse. The model:samples simply fails at being nearly as fast and direct as the cycles.

Having the option to directly sample into it may have changed that, but that’s a little too late for this now.

#30

Just speaking for myself I’m not making any judgements about whether it would be “good for business” or not, to me that’s always a secondary concern to companies making really good instruments in the first place (M:S is fantastic for those unhindered by the limitations of course). As a user I’m voicing my disappointment about the lack of a basic feature, which has alienated me from the product to large degree, and that alienation of a % of potential users might be relevant info to a company interested in selling their product.

If a device would cost say $20 more (again no idea what the actual cost would be, so we can’t make a strong judgement about it for something like the M:S either way), but would have stereo instead of mono sampling then it would be a no brainer for me.

I think this whole stereo vs mono sampler topic should probably go in its own thread tbh, though I’m honestly disappointed that there even needs to be a debate about it in 2023.

I guess the answer why we still have mono samplers is clear from these responses though; enough people aren’t put off enough by it to not buy, or just don’t even see a problem. So saving the $$ on it = more profit.

#31

You’re expressing what I want to say much better.very nice.

Regarding that cost factor.
Now it costs 390 euros. I personally would
Happily pay 450-500 for it if it would support stereo playback.
Some people mentioned the octatrack as a replacement. However, again for me personally, the octatrack is a complete overkill because I love the samples for the simplicity of use. So if I use the cycles for some drums and the samples for well samples, then I have two machines, and still no ability to play a simple stereo file.

But as you very well said, if there was more interest and more people put off by “only mono” , and it would’ve happened, I guess.
I have nothing against mono.
You could still have a function on a stereo machine called „easy mode“ that plays back everything in mono. This way everybody would be happy.
you cannot, however do it the other way around unfortunately

#32

The topic has been discussed in countless threads over the years, and to this day people are disappointed by the fact the Digitakt for example doesn’t offer stereo sample playback. In the end, a product is defined as much by what it can’t do as by what it can, whether that’s a sampler that plays all samples in mono, to a car that’s only available in four-wheel drive. And in the end, we can debate until the cows come home but it isn’t going to result in the Model: Samples supporting stereo samples. It was never designed to play stereo samples.

All microphones are monophonic - all drum mics, vocal mics, instrument mics… Every microphone outputs a single audio channel. You can record with as many mics as you want, but it will still be a collection of ‘monophonic’ audio recordings. There are stereo microphone arrays found on items such as audio recorders, for capturing ambient sounds and such, but those are not usually used to capture a drum kit or a vocalist in the studio. A typical drum kit in a studio may have 3-6 mics strategically placed to capture each part of the kit, and often others for capturing everything together. Two singers would not be stereo, typically they would be generally be recorded with one microphone each.

7 Likes
#33

I think a large part of the problem stems from the mistaken belief that stereo is always better than mono, which it isn’t.

12 Likes
#34

They need to make DT MKII that can use long stereo samples. I think that’s what they are working on now.

1 Like
#35

It was meant as a harmless ironic joke. I literally work with microphones all day long for a living. In discussions like this “lost in translation” and “lost context” are bound to happen I guess :slight_smile:

Regarding “ And in the end, we can debate until the cows come home but it isn’t going to result in the Model: Samples supporting stereo samples. It was never designed to play stereo samples.”
It does not matter. In a nutshell it is only user feedback. Depending of the weighting of opinions , this might influence future policy.
I don’t think anyone expects that Elektron will start drilling holes into the Samples and give it extra outputs etc (metaphorically speaking. )

However I much appreciate your kind way and patience in explaining because if not me, then at least others will surely profit by the information

Cheers

2 Likes
#36

Like has been said a number of times, there’s no downside to a device being stereo sample capable. You can still use mono samples as much as you want and it will do you no harm. The stereo/mono production and mixing opinion thing is not actually relevant here despite appearances.

In the realm of samplers, yes stereo capability is always better than mono, not taking into account cost or file size which hypothetically shouldn’t be a big deal these days.

2 Likes
#37

Amen to that my friend

1 Like
#39

Do you really know enough about Elektrons business (parts, redesign, QA etc, etc, etc) to figure that out ?

2 Likes
#40

t o t a l g u e s s

2 Likes
#41

okay maybe this is dumb, but…

listen i’d understand if the models boxes or the digitakt didn’t have panning and stereo effects… but they do?

it’s the same in a DAW or on anything: just having stereo files isn’t what makes a mix wide, it’s what you do with your mix. panning placement and choosing what is or isn’t in the stereo field is what gives mixes width.

I want stereo samples as much as the next person but it’s not like these devices aren’t still stereo despite only having mono samples, you still have to pan certain parts and move stuff around in the stereo field, make use of the stereo effects tastefully, and give everything a place in the mix. that’s what makes a wide mix wide.

still want stereo samples tho LOL

8 Likes
#42

I want a mono octatrack.
I mean its 2023, come on!

3 Likes
#43

What you are saying is not dumb.
It’s well structured.
In my experience , you can’t simply replicate a good stereo audio file by throwing a bunch of effects on a mono track and also by panning 6 elements. Unless you mainly don’t need a kick drum in the center but pan it right in order to gain width which in 99,9% of the time nobody does. etc but that’s a different story. It’s not the same. It’s not always a synth or some percussion one is wanting to playback.
Same as using
The Haas effect and other deeper processing like Leapwings Stage One and any enhancer I’ve used. It always sounds artificial after a point and before this point it never sounds like stereo. Only to a “basic stereo“ level.
Also

  1. the device does simply not have enough fx to do any wonders in stereoizing. It will always be a “symmetrical predictable and after a while , boring stereoizing”.
    It is not a sound design weapon.
  2. you have 6 tracks. Exactly how many tracks can you pan here and there before…we’ll you run out of tracks?
    While you could simply be using one stereo track that you would otherwise need 3 Model Samples devices in order to “replicate it.
    To your remark “ just having stereo files isn’t what makes a mix wide,”
    I would say
    “Yes, unless that stereo file is a wide mix you created earlier or you found and want to use. Then While it won’t make a mix wide, it is wide already. So in the end you can use a wide stereo sample and a mono hi hat and you already have a wide mix. Using two elements only (emphasized hyperbolic example to make a point)”

I am impressed however by how many people talk almost as if stereo and mono are not that big of a difference and try to convince others “nah. Not that big of a deal. You need to learn how to pan” without knowing who they are talking to.
(I am not referring to you, I speak in general.)
Trying to convince others that what they wish for as a future update in a product (or its successor) is “not that important”.
It’s really impressive.
Makes me think that people who spend hours and years in recording field recordings in stereo and simply want to … We’ll play it back in stereo (Stereo as in something most devices like tape walkmans , cd players , vinyl the list goes on for many decades now ), is not possible without the cost of an octatrack when there are examples that it is indeed possible.
So in the end let’s use mono field recordings and throw a stereo effect over it. Who will notice? (again not referring to you my friend).

Like telling a cook “oh gee. I can’t put salt in the water but will make it up with extra plenty Parmesan cheese”

But I guess we all express our thoughts based on our personal needs and wishes and vice Versa .
That’s why it’s a never ending story. There are so many of us

Forgive my “rant”.
Had a long long day at work
It is not meant as an attack on anybody.
You just made me think out loud for a second
Cheers

1 Like
#44

Gonna be called Mock-a-track probably

#45

Point is, M:C isn’t really designed for playing back big stereo files or field recordings, it’s mostly designed as a basic one shot sample player and sequencer.

If Elektron make it stereo, all of a sudden people will start thinking about filling it up with all their nice big stereo files and field recordings, then they’ll start moaning about the lack of storage and RAM for storing and playing back their nice big stereo files and field recordings, and how they can’t play them polyphonically or use multisamples. Then they’ll be all pissed off that they can’t just record straight into it and they have to lug around their field recorder as well, because there isn’t enough room on the M:S. And then they’ll remember they have to bring their laptop to transport all their nice big stereo files onto it and then they’ll remember there’s no attack parameter, which makes it all but useless for what they wanted to do with all their nice big stereo files.
And then it’ll dawn on them that it’s pointless filling up the tiny little hard drive with their nice big stereo files if they can’t chop them up or look at the waveform to change start and end points.

And then they’ll come on Elektronauts and talk about how something that has the ability to manage stereo samples should at least be able to store more than 12/play them polyphonically/sample slice.

Making cheap and streamlined gear is about limiting expectations to avoid creating expectations that can’t be accommodated within that gear’s budget/remit.

Sure, the M:C isn’t perfect (there’s a lot about it that pisses me off) but I can totally understand why it only allows mono samples. It’s mostly to avoid it being bought by people who want to use stereo samples, I guess.

10 Likes