This linked example down below is why I’d love to be able to slice up my loops on the TV without having to rely on a) doing it by ear or b) setting one start point to a multiple of 128.
Plus, the TV has no zoom feature for samples. I make house and techno and so some of this has be fairly quantized. An automatic slicer would make this process smooth, efficient, and accurate.
Like I said above, I’m resampling long sequences ran through a bunch of fx on the TV. I want to cut them up to make glitches and thing just like Gabe is doing with his computer and MPC in this video. I want to cut out the computer and MPC and just use my TV. And I believe the TV is more than capable of doing that with the processing power it has under the hood.
I’m not really surprised that Tonverk can’t chop/timestretch, nor do I expect these features to be added (because Digitakt 2), but not being able to zoom in on a sample for editing/pseudo chopping seems like a huge miss.
Exactly my experience after two months. Everytime I grab the TV, I get a feeling of adventure. Real gusto to experiment and just go with the flow. I tried my Push 3 after a long time again this week. My god, that felt clunky and overcomplicated compared to the TV.
Slicing came late to the Digitakt 2, and while I agree features present on one box need not come to another, the subtrack architecture almost screams a demand for integration with slicing (e.g. export option to subtrack destination that automaps the resulting first 8 slices accordingly). Subtracks seem to be better suited to slices of the same sample than the distinct drum hits Elektron is marketing the feature for given the shared FX.
I initially dismissed the feature too, and honestly I am not in the camp of people demanding it, but for the price of this unit I can appreciate why many would expect it. If Elektron didn’t market the Tonverk as a beat machine I’d be more inclined to not expect it.
I agree, slicing 8 chops to a subtrack seem intuitive. It would then become easy to resample a bar loop and chop it to the subtrack to instant creativity.
Actually, I’m using subtrack for one type of sound, I have subtrack for kick, snare and hihat. It work better to layer and add variation than putying everything in one subtrack.
Yeah, I feel the same about the expectations for additional features. I honestly bought Tonverk as I thought Elektron was sort of marketing it as an all in one groovebox. Although, after using it for a couple months, I really get the feeling that it was designed to be a unique take on a sampling instrument, not a groovebox (reminiscent of Roland claiming SH-4D not being a groovebox), and seemingly omitting features on purpose, in order to strengthen that position.
In ways, I think that Elektron did Tonverk a disservice releasing it alongside MPC Live 3, as the timing and price point sort of had people comparing the two.
The TV is much less like an MPC than it is a super-powered MC707. With the exception of slicing, I’d say the TV does pretty much everything the 707 does, but better
If that’s all there is to it, then I think the Tonverk allows for everything save the oscillator section, but even here you can approximate it via single cycle waveforms.
True, no cross mod or multi oscillator sync / tuning. Still, it can do a decent approximation of a synth voice, and with the right base sample and FX might even be able to approximate some of those missing features.
No question it isn’t 1:1, but maybe it’s good enough?
actually i’ve been having gas for the polyend synth also because of the dwa engine wich is exactly that 2 samples and different way to interact : wavefold , ring modulation etc. also with single cycles i always miss something like a synth actually you can detune oscillators etc… so simple and yet so creative
I actually think the most logical synth engine would probably be wavetable — similar to the Bento: two wavetable oscillators plus a sub oscillator.
You could also detune the wavetable oscillators in cents…
I really hope Elektron is working on something like that behind the scenes, because I don’t really see a classic VA — but who knows what’s going on in the minds of the Tonverk development team.
Midi and timing have been gradually improved. I sold and repurchased for sync issues that were resolved and can confirm. Even the stuck midi notes issue I haven’t been able to reproduce in my recent sessions.
My own theory about Tonverk synths is that FM is one logical way to go, since Elektron already has a proven FM engine from the Digitone. FM is computationally efficient, providing a lot of bang for the buck. About the only reason I can think of for not trying that is concern it might affect sales of Digitone II.
I don’t know much about other Elektron devices, decided to do a little reading now, and see that while the original Digitone was FM only, the Digitone II has 4 synth types and is not limited to FM. So (in my opinion), since Digitone II can do so much more, it wouldn’t hurt sales too much to add FM to Tonverk.
I bought the Tonverk right after it’s release. And I must say it completely changed the way I approach my livesets.(In a good way!!!) Having so much tracks because of the subtrack function allows me to play a liveset of an hour just on a single pattern in the tonverk. In this case drums is coming from rytm and Pulsar. they go both to their own busses in the tonverk with their own processing. All melodies, pads, bass and other sounds are going through the two other busses with different volume ducking parameter locked in. All of this being controlled by a faderfox 12. Here is the link: maybe you like it or the approach will give you inspiration in how to use the tonverk:) Stream Oliv Oliv live at Meltingpot 19-02-2026 by Oliv Oliv | Listen online for free on SoundCloud