Answer from Vermona:
Indeed, that’s just missing in the manual, not in the
drumDING. The manual will be updated soon.
So you can indeed sequence the analog voice from a track lane. Let’s hope there is a quick way to swap the voice for the sampled version while keeping the sequence going and moving on to the next track! Keeping one track live, allowing you to play with the voice parameters seems like a fun way to perform!
I’m not familiar with the DRM lineage specifics but with this being a single, broad voice, they are giving you more of a playground for percussive sound design rather than a tightly controlled set of parameters per voice geared towards shaping a kick, for instance.
It just lends itself to a more unique and diverse palette at the potential expense of that “ah, that’s a DRM sound, I’d recognize it anywhere” quality.
The FX and general nature of sampling and the subsequent parameters available there add a whole extra layer of sound design levers the user can steer towards their tastes.
It may have an inherent character and sonic signature but it’s much more likely to be the kind of box where no two owners drumdings would sound the same, which is a rad direction to me.
E: extending the ramble because this subject interests me a lot.
Components, raw electronics and choices like having a little pcm transient blip always on a kick absolutely affect the resultant sound but the biggest sign of a makers touch in a piece of hardware, in my view, is the controls and parameter ranges given to the user.
You cannot exceed the pitch bend range or tuning given to you and it’s in setting that floor and ceiling that a design begins to shape the sound of a box. An X0X voice is decidedly more on the rails then an equivalent Rytm analog voice.
This may be built from the exact same building blocks as many of the individual voices across the DRM lineup but it’s a clear choice to open up the scope of potential noises a user can make with a single voice.
Like I alluded to earlier, this could lead to a diminished sense of a unifying identity (like X0X or DRM) and there may be a lot of range that’s less usable to you but you gain a lot of freedom for carving out your own sound. That typically excites me more but I appreciate the entire sliding scale between those instrument archetypes 
If anyone else is interested in this topic of “Controls” and their impact on the feel of an instrument, a worthwhile experiment is to boot up something like Ableton Operator and make a handful of individual drum voices by setting up macros. No sound shaping. Just set yourself up 8 macros with carefully curated parameter ranges with the intention of being able to hide the Operator interface and make a given sound only using those 8 macros. (While an awesome start, this is just a taste because the macros are linear while true control systems can ramp exponentially and dynamically to shape an intended experience for the end user.)
No, I’ve owned a DRM and this sounds recognisably Vermona, with its punchy, dynamic sound.
As I’ve suggested before, a DT and a sound module or two would be a viable, cheaper and more flexible alternative. Volca Drum, DRM, Nord drum or the MAM, for instance.
I guess you would be losing the sampling-on-the-fly workflow, and thus some of the immediacy? I feel that’s a cornerstone of the dDing concept.
Replacing the DT with an Octatrack would solve that though.
That’s my feeling as well. Despite the relative simplicity of the sample processing tools, it felt really flexible in practical use.
True, but it looks like you can’t properly sequence the analogue voice on the drum ding without a workaround.
With a DT or OT you can sequence an external drum voice. You can get close to sampling on the fly with the DT too.
Okay, now we’re talking. This potentially changes everything. Let’s hope they’ve done it right, just like you suggested. 
No. Judging from what i’ve heard it sounds quite like the DRM-1 i had. Except the FX of course.
That fits well with what Vermona said at Superbooth: