Sorry if this came across as frustration or a ran, that wasn’t my intention. I genuinely struggle to understand why some basic features are still missing while new functionality is being introduced, often alongside new critical bugs. In my view, a more solid approach would be to focus on getting the fundamentals right first and then build on top of that.
I see a lot of potential here, but to me it still needs a few small refinements. I also see people asking for more advanced features, such as slicing and time-stretching, and I understand that perspective as well. However, I believe the basics need to be in place first, and I would argue that many of these foundational improvements should not require a disproportionate amount of effort.
After reading your post, I do not think you are being absurd for wanting to express yourself given your explanation of what had caused the thoughts.
The member who quoted you need not have labelled others as entitled while being the same stating one “also cannot imagine” and saying “would be interesting to learn why they were initially omitted”, which is a contradiction by itself.
To explain, how is acceptability measured, when one mentioned the lack of something, it’s because of a sense of entitlement while another mentioned the lack of something, it’s because of a lack of imagination.
Members should stay polite and keep positive to form a backbone of a cohesive forum/community but language correction over the expression of others must be done sensitively; and only if one can maintain moral high grounds at all times or has the official role of a moderator.
I think a lot of us are just really tired of people complaining about things lacking in a specific language. It often sounds more like „I can’t believe they‘re so stupid to not implement this aspect that should be so easy to do and everybody needs“ when it is in fact very subjective what users expect/need and often harder to implement than we imagine.
While the post that triggered @DaveMech was surely not among the worst of these, I totally agree that the forum would be a lot more fun if we as a community agree on some basic rules of how to complain or ask for features/improvements. Likewise, I personally would find it very nice if some members started to accept that criticism is important and valuable.
Voicing criticism in a more constructive way and language like @DaveMech proposed would go a long way, so that we have less of these heated fights between faction „I can’t believe they didn’t integrate XY only to sell us another machine on top“ and „the feature you’re asking for is totally unnecessary because I don’t use it“.
I don’t really want to enter a debate as people can say what they like but I find the wording: It is absurd that these are missing to be pretty negative.
If this was said to the team in person it would be rude.
My take on TV in general is that the bugs/subjective omissions stand out more than all the hard work poured into this box on release. Despite it being a bit bumpy, they must have worked so damn hard to get something this powerful together, it’s a true feat imo, so I feel the hard work hasn’t received due appreciation.
If you bought a Porsche 911 and said it is absurd it only has two seats instead of four, is Porsche at fault, or you because you didn’t buy the correct thing for functions you wanted?
They’re wonderful. I bought within 10 minutes of the launch video, knowing that it would be perhaps a bumpy ride and embracing the fun of that. There’s been scarcely a day since it arrived when it’s been possible for me to use it, and I haven’t used it.
Saddens me to see the attempts to turn Elektronauts into Elektroreddit…Meanwhile, two pretty huge updates in like 3 weeks? I for sure have a list of things I hope happen, like page loop for example, but I’ll have to wait a bit it seems. Love this machine and grateful for the updates so far
Took delivery of a Tonverk a few days ago, basically starting off at 1.2, and have been absolutely floored by it. Had reserved expectations based on all the criticism but couldn’t shake interest in it given that the Octatrack has been my primary instrument since it’s release and the Tonverk seemed to expand on some of the ways i like to use OT. thought they would pair well and they do in my case.
little refinements that seem a branch directly from OT. For example, with OT, for years I’ve grumbled about having only two lists, static and flex, for samples loaded into the project from memory for an entire project and all its banks and patterns to draw from. It turns into a mess really quickly if you use smaller samples or keyboard mode: slot. with a vertical list of one shot and long samples mixed together randomly as each time you sample it just gets piled on. would constantly create fresh projects just to have a clean “space” to work.
On the Tonverk they solved this in the most elegant way by allowing multiple tabs organized alphabetically left to right, List A, list B, list C and so on. simply pressing left or right switches, so you can actually finally organize your samples however you like within the project itself, with a page for each type. It’s such a small detail, but feels like a thoughtful and meaningful update to the original OT workflow.
That’s totally fine and reasonable. The discussion here was about tone and entitlement, though. Just because you paid a lot of money doesn’t make you entitled to claim missing features are absurd, imo. If a function is so crucial to you, that leaving it off of a product seems absurd to you, it seems even more absurd in my eyes to spend 1000+ bucks on it anyway without doing proper research on it’s functions first.
The thing with the TV is a special case, as it is an instrument that covers so much ground. It’s a sampler, a synth, a multi FX processor, a midi sequencer, and so on. Everyone is going to have different expectations on what it’s supposed to do.
“A sampler without slicing? Come on, it’s 2025!”
“A synth without a velocity mod? This is a basic function that is absolutely required for a synth! What kind of idiot would buy this?”
“An FX processor without a parametric EQ? How dare they?!”
You get my point. Nobody here claims putting in feature requests is wrong. Elektron have great track record of turning feature requests into new functions on their instruments, that’s all good. But how these things are voiced is important, imho. This is just a very nice community, a wonderful place to discuss about music and instruments. But (long term) users have been observing a shift to a less respectful tone here. Posting here from a perspective of entitlement is not the right approach, imo.
It feels absurd to him that those features are missing. He is entitled to voice that opinion. It is useful information to Elektron. They are all successful engineers and designers, I’m sure their feelings aren’t hurt. It’s not a big deal.
