I own a Tonverk—this is my second time owning one, and I’m enjoying it much more after the latest updates so I don’t have much to complain about anymore.
I have no issue with other Tonverk owners voicing their frustrations about whatever they care about—be it the lack of slicing/timestretch, or other features that seem basic to them. If the post isn’t directly insulting another forum member, I don’t see a problem.
Over the weekend, I finished my personal multi-library. 1.45 GB of mainly rompler sounds. Including lots of cheesy stuff, just the way I like it.
It’s so much fun to use an Elektron device with sounds and possibilities that you didn’t have before with Elektron gear. My initial frustration has turned into pure joy.
Thats the spirit!
Anybody having trouble getting the pumping / gated effect via AMP/ENV to work properly on BUS1? It’s working fine on BUS2 through BUS4. Tested on multiple Patterns
Is it just me or is it rather strange that you can’t loop tails of multisamples in a machine that has an obvious ambient “feel”/utility? Is there any logical reason why this hasn’t been implemented or shouldn’t be an obvious feature in an immediate update? I mean, not to get into the whole cannibalization debate, but it’s such a core feature in a sampler and has been forever. To an extent that it’s a stretch to consider the Tonverk a sampler without it. It would be more correct to call it a sample player. With that said, I love almost everything else about it. Just bring it up to a basic sampler level, please.
Tonerk serves its purpose, and all features are well-documented in the user manual (Yeah, the bugs…). However, it’s unclear whether Tonverk was specifically designed for ambient sounds. It seems like Elektron created it with the intention of giving users the freedom to make music however they wish. Within limits. Think of it as an instrument, not a DAW. A piano sounds like a piano. Should it be able to sound like an organ just because both instruments have keys? Limitations create character and personality. Think of the 303, 909, AR
The statement that it’s “well-suited for ambient” is reasonable, but the claim of an “obvious ambient feel/utility” feels more like an interpretation rather than a concrete fact.
For more effective communication, it would be better to be more composed and precise in wording, clearly separating facts from evaluations. The tone might come across as somewhat emotional or argumentative, which could reduce its overall persuasiveness. If you’re looking to make a feature request, the “Tonverk Feature Request” section is the appropriate place for that.
Looking at today’s product landscape, not every sampler necessarily needs to cover every loop scenario to be considered a “sampler.” A sampler is simply a device that records and plays back audio, while a sample player is just that— a sample player. The Korg Volca Sample, for example, is a sample player, while Tonverk is a sampler. The Digitakt 1 was straightforward, but also quite complex. The Elektribe 2S is a good example of a simple sampler. As for multisamples, the last time I used those was with the Akai S6000— a great machine, though it was pretty large and had a fan.
Edit:
Another aspect: we are talking about multisamples here—that is, many samples. Several can also be played simultaneously.
Start and end points for loops must be generated for each sample—and they must all be the same length so as not to cause interference. And they must begin and end at a zero point. And ideally, they should be editable live. That is a big task.
Mmm. I didn’t say it was specifically designed for ambient sounds, just that it has an “obvious ambient feel/utility.” But maybe that was not sufficiently clear. Imo looping multisample tails is not one of many possible looping scenarios, but a core feature of a serious sampler that offers multisampling. Slicing could probably be considered a little more “fringe” despite having been around for 10-15 years. But multisampling, say, a piano with various velocity layers and then not being able to continue the sound for the length of a sustain pedal without making incredibly huge files to compensate for not being able to sustain the notes for 10-20 seconds, seems an obvious “missing” feature to me. And it would make the Tonverk seem more or less “finished”, at least for my needs. As far as being a sample player vs sampler, the Tonverk in its current state lets you trigger samples/play them backwards in various pitches and then lets you apply fx. In my world that is what a sample player does. But mentioning this on this particular thread is possibly the wrong address…I just figured we were discussing upgrades & updates, not necessarily strictly in past tense. 
I assume it’s because to loop a sample typically you’d want to find some smooth zero crossing points, but the UX of how one would do that on a multisampler with a small screen probably needs a lot of careful design.
Each sample probably needs to support having its own loop point (afaik the file format and playback engine does already), but the question is, what the the workflow one would want to expose to users in order to set these?
The MPC Live does this, and has done it for many years (the ability to apply loop points on all multisamples). For the sake of experimentation I sampled a single sample of a piano on the Tonverk in single sample mode, and once it is done with initial attack, you can relatively easily find the right spots to loop with zero-crossing, despite Tonverks screen size. So with a 4-5 second sample, you’re pretty much good to go. Not so in the multi sample engine…Though you may have a point that looping an entire multi sample of a piano might get a little glitchy because of the decay behavior at various tones. But not having the option, just seems odd to me.
Yes, after the update from 1.1.0 to 1.2.0 bus shape amp env works incorrectly on my current project on any of the buses. Made a new project and it works as it should.
The .elmulti format already supports loop points in multi-samples. Some of the factory content even uses them. You just can’t edit the them without using an external editor on a PC.
Thanks for this tip. New to multisamples and this is helpful.
I’m recently Tonverk-curious and have seen rumblings about latency on the external inputs, but having trouble finding a clear answer on whether that has been addressed with the recent OS updates.
Ideally I’d like to use TV as master clock and a mixer for a small setup. TV on drums and pads, and then a synth or two on the inputs with some insert FX. Would that work as expected now? Any insight would be appreciated!
I play guitar into mine and don’t notice any latency. Some fx add latency if used 100% wet, like the pitch fx, but that’s to be expected I think.
There’s always going to be some latency, since it’s DSP, but some folks are saying it’s around 10ms and that that’s a problem. In my experience so far, if it is around 10ms, that’s not enough to bother me when I feed my bass in to a bus and apply a couple of effects. If anyone’s expecting zero latency when processing external audio, that’s totally unrealistic.
PS Chrono Pitch works on a “window” of sound, set with the WIN control. The larger the WIN setting, the higher the latency on what comes out. This is a natural consequence of how it works. It’s not trying to be a real time pitch shifter as found in an Eventide Harmonizer or a POG.
I have no problem editing the loop points in .elmulti files with a text editor, but … what values to use? They’re just numbers, you can’t tell how the results are going to sound based on the numbers alone.
So I’m leaning towards using external audio tools to set loops in the WAV files themselves, and get them sounding good before transferring to the Tonverk. I have some old (> 10y) samples where the loop points were set in the files, and the Tonverk just played them correctly. It’s going to take some work - I can’t expect to just set some random loop points and expect it to sound good.