Why is there NO BUG REPORTING procedure for Software/OS?

Hi community.

All devices got an OS (Firmware). They all got several OS related bugs.
That is the nature of software.

I think it is safe to say that software related issues are mostly the reason for trouble with the devices.

In the IT world it is standard procedure to have a bug reporting page.
It helps to keep track and overview for the developers and the reporters, which bugs are already registered, which are being processed for the next version, and so on. It helps a lot in collecting broad information about symptoms and potential causes. It also helps saving time to report (and handle) the same bug-reports from different users.

That would also help to prevent a lot of “is my device broken?” concerns immediately.

Yet there is no properly organized bug-reporting possibility for your devices/software.
Why Elektron?

There is a bug reporting procedure. Go to:

Pick your product. Then, scroll down to “Contact Support” and enter a ticket with a thorough description. They will enter a bug for you if it is really a bug, or let you know if one is already entered.


I guess the OP is questioning why there is no bug tracking system like bugzilla and similar in place where everyone can see the state of open/confirmed bugs.


I’m not sure elektron need /should make that type of thing public.

Fixes are in release notes.


Hi, of course I know about this, but this is just a simple e-mail form.

You even got to enter your serial number again and again with every new contact here, since the system does not fill it in or suggests it automatically despite each of the products being registered.

Most Elektron devices have got many many bugs. I just got an mk2 recently and I reported at least 5 major bugs and 2 freezes lags.

To be honest, I do not like to be the tester of a product and spend my time with making videos etc. instead of using the device for producing music. In addition I have to write about every issue also here in this forum, since there is always uncertainty, if it is a general bug or connected just to your device. The fixed bugs-list in updates do not help here at all if you got trouble with the latest firmware already.

Everybody writing wildly through an e-mail form is not a professional bug reporting page, neither is it properly traceable. So the users have to write the same over and over again potentially about the same issue and also Elektron has got to answer to each of those.

So for us customers it would make absolute sense, or do you like to pay additionally with your time to an already pro equipment price?

Of course it might be not good for sales/marketing strategies at first thought, but only if your software is a real mess. Since on the other hand, if it helps to improve the device more effectively and to save time for customers and support, it might help again to sell, right?

Being not sure is not an argument I can deal with, sorry.

Also mind: we get beta versions all the time. That should not be a routine. If you use us for testing, give us a proper bug reporting work flow please.


Participation in the beta program is voluntary. If you don’t want to be a beta tester, don’t take the betas. The betas are NOT on the firmware pages to download from Elektron directly (the same support page from above), you have to get them from the forum here and the very first post says you are agreeing to be a tester.

If your freezes are on a beta, you are a voluntary beta tester based on the agreement on the forum page for participating in the beta. Are you running 1.35B (the latest official firmware from the elektron.se page) or are you on Beta 1.36_beta2 ?

I agree, it would be nice to have something closer to Ableton’s Centercode beta bug reporting system - it is very nice. But the rules of engagement for Elektron’s firmware betas are clearly defined in the beta post’s “reporting issues” thread. It is what it is.

If you aren’t on a beta and have these freezing problems, then I agree, this is a very frustrating thing. If you are, well, you get what you paid for. You’re a voluntary beta tester.

1 Like

I’d separate the issues.

The website bug reporting and having the browser fill / suggest issues could help especially if you’ve found multiple issues on the same device.

The issue with finding hardware issues / freezes is obviously not good , you may find relevant issues already in each bug thread by searching for the most obvious term. It’s not ideal but can help a great deal.
I would suspect that on older machines most bugs have been reported , but I’m sure sending in bugs is still appreciated. Os updates are being developed primarily for overbridge but other fixes still seem to arrive

As for seeing an open bug database to judge if your issue has already been reported , I don’t think I’ve seen that sort of thing from any game dev / synth dev / Microsoft or tiny companies. They’re often full of very confidential information .

If you ever see Ea / u is off open up visibility for their big database on assassins creed / fifa etc I would be amazed.
The same with any small eurorack dev , mid size synth company or 99% of companies that use Kira/bug tracker / any form of bug database .

If it’s open source it might be different.
I understand buying new. Gear and finding issues is very annoying , especially if they’re easy to find.
This community helps a great deal.
… I don’t work for elektron in any way , the above us just my opinion , I too have previously. Been vocal about obvious issues , especially then digitakt was launched. Things have been much better on digitone.

Agreed. I know my product always has a customer support ticket/rep between the users and the bug system and users have no visibility into it except for updates when issues they’ve entered have been closed for any reason. (I work on a large product (many tens of millions of lines of code) that runs large companies for an SV company).

Even Ableton Centercode has only user reports, some of which get closed, and they transfer them into the Ableton regular internal bug system (or perhaps it is a different view on the same system - whichever) so you don’t see any of the internal work or commenting. Still, even with its limitations, it is a lot better than the Elektron system.

Basically, there is a lot of room for improvement on the user-facing side.

Thanks for your answers.

I am not a Beta tester by choice and I never saw any link or hint for being a tester. But even if so, I still think we need improvement in the bug reporting and tracking process. I don’t see any conflict there.

My latest device:
I bought a Rytm MK2, which was released more than a year ago. It was promised to be able to connect to OverBridge since release. That was not true until last week or so. Lets see, on Elektrons offical site:

Resources for Analog Rytm MKII

OS 1.40D - That one is more than a year old, way too many issues were fixed since than. Also, this one does not support OB at all.

If you think that the “stable” verions got less bugs to report, just look at what has been fixed since that version. Bugs are not just freezes but many things can be e.g. a live-act killer. So just an example from the bugs that have been fixed since:

[MKII] When sufficiently warm, some units would exhibit random user interface related errors, such as phantom key strokes, when the pads were played.

and the list goes on for two pages…

OS 1.45B - This one is also already over 9 months old (and full of bugs). It is the first and only official release to feature the dual VCO engine on Elektrons website (no Beta agreement). But it still does NOT support OB connectivity.

All right, so there is a new OB release, for that you indeed (standard procedure for downloading OverBridge) have to go to the Elektronauts forum.
This OB release REQUIRES an OS 1.46 Beta1 (whatever “1” means here) for the Rytm MK2 which you can download only there. Of course they write “This beta release requires you to have the listed firmware installed on respective units. These are beta OSs and are not guaranteed to work in any other setup.”

If you want to use your device with full functionality, as promised and expected on buying, you just have to take this one and only version. But hey, 1.45 was Beta too, so does it matter in this case at all? Bugs are bugs and I would like to have it easier for stuff I PAY for.

I do not really understand your motivation for arguing so harshly against such a system which could be def. much improved in a lot of ways to save time and confusion. That is indeed so and it would benefit YOU AND ELEKTRON, as you also write later. But then why do you have to tell me “its your own fault, don’t test beta if you don’t like freezes.” with such self esteem? As if it was that simple…

I d not really understand you, here you write:

Even Ableton Centercode has only user reports, some of which get closed, and they transfer them into the Ableton regular internal bug system (or perhaps it is a different view on the same system - whichever) so you don’t see any of the internal work or commenting. Still, even with its limitations, it is a lot better than the Elektron system.

Basically, there is a lot of room for improvement on the user-facing side.

Well then why do you write against such a system or improvement?

I wasn’t writing against improvement if you read my writing carefully. I was simply pointing out that carefully reading all of Elektron’s info on the beta program tells you how bug reporting works right now, and also they tell you that running betas will probably give you more issues than not running betas.

I too would like a better system, sure.

I was simply pointing out there is a system. You said there wasn’t one in your first post. You have since said (to paraphrase), that ok, there is one, but it isn’t good. I agree, there is a lot of room for improvement.

So we are all in agreement here now that I understand you know there is a system for this, however disappointing.

My other point was that they originally spelled it out what you get in the beta, which is an unstable release. As a software developer myself, betas are almost always more unstable than the released products (even if the released product is buggy too). The page where we can download beta firmware has this clear disclaimer (I bolded the stability point as it wasn’t originally bolded):

This is a public beta, as opposed to a stable release. As a result, we encourage you to submit any queries or issues to our support channels. The public beta will continue until we are in a position to release a stable version. Make sure you read the manual, the topic How to report issues and the section below with Known Issues.

What I really don’t like is that disclaimer is NOT on the current beta firmware page, only the original one from April. So that is not ok either.

Okay, I will phrase shorter, since I wrote this already:

  1. There is a contact form to report any kind of issue, but no bug reporting system as such. But call it what you want, it is far from being systematical the way it is possible with the Internet in 2019 and the many years of development experience with software.

  2. I don’t have much of a choice than to use Beta. Sure, I can use an OS more than one year old, also full of bugs (like triggering random notes) and missing features like OB-integration or the dual VCO.

  3. Even stable releases are far from being bug free. So a System would be still needed even for stable versions.

Lets move on though to suggestions. Because what you wrote so far is not saving me any trouble unfortunately.

1 Like

Cc @Olle

1 Like

That’s simply not true. Just because the version is named 1.45B does NOT imply it is a beta version (it’s not). Elektron just uses letters to mark minor releases. From the release notes you can see the OS version progression: 1.45 -> 1.45A -> 1.45B

The only BETA versions available are the versions required for Overbridge (which itself is still BETA and not finished yet).


Thanks for pointing that out, very misleading indeed.

My point is still valid that all versions have bugs and cause freezes, lags, etc. despite being beta or not.

And still I do not have a choice than to use 1.46 Beta1, if I want to have the OverBridge integration.

So what does it all matter for being able to report them bugs properly with less effort, more effectively for all?

I am sure btw. this can be done without being indiscreet about user information of any kind. An “already reported bugs” list would be already most helpful. Pair it with a specialized form for systematical bug reporting including fill out aids (like suggesting the serial numbers of your devices, firmware versions etc.) and an e-mail notification system, and most of the time and confusion is saved.

1 Like

The answer is that closed-source hardware that likely incorporates proprietary DSP license is materially different than FOSS browser design and product management, so there may be less transparency about specific code being used or at fault as compared to fully software product which receives a benefit from having multiple teams of individuals contrivuting.

Why there’s no better Zendesk-like private system for managing individual bugs I cannot say.

1 Like

Yes, software integration requires associated support in hardware firmware.

I can think of plenty of improvements that could be made to transparency or customer support to not necessarily set expectations but make the complaints feel more listened to… but I’m not sure what you’re asking here that would actually make for a better product.

but I’m not sure what you’re asking here that would actually make for a better product.

A better bug reporting procedure that saves time and confusion would be enough as I formulated already many times here.

1 Like