Will there be a MK III? >Feature Requests<

If the Mk3 could only have one new feature, A4 style patch organization (and thus a sound pool with sound locks) is the one feature I want.
Having to copy and paste things around to load a single patch to a single track feels beyond archaic.

I have to say though, I appreciate that the current method stops me from being lazy with sound design when composing new patterns!

more advanced FM

12 track sequencer internal + 12 track midi sequencer
True idependent LFOā€™s for the midi tracks
Implementation of the the same sequencer as in the OT with true independent pattern length and time signature / clock division per track
Note retrig per track with clock divisor for ratcheting styled effects
MIDI harmonize
MIDI delay
The ability to have reverse, ping pong, bidirectional and random play modes per track
Probability retrig of neighbour tracks
Higher polyphony count
Able to use both poly and mono mode as needed
Vocoder with formant sampler
Sample import for a granular playback engine
Include a selection of MD based drum modelling kits
Formant Filter
Comb Filter
Octarack Fx style implementation per track
SD sample card slot for storage
4 Op TX816 styled FM engine
More advanced and custom wave table synthesis engine.

Would pretty much be it for me.

:+1: If they implement this - It will be my next purchase ! ( + Microtiming )

since i have the a4, there a few things that iā€™d like to see on the mnm III as well:

  1. select the number of voices you want instead of jumping right into full poly.
  2. effect send for each track (cho, del, rev)
  3. microtiming.
  4. overbridge.
  5. vector synthesis (maybe pop in a joystick)
  6. a bread and butter rompler kind of thing.
  7. female voice in the vo-6 engine.
  8. better vo-6 engine.

ā€¦ thatā€™s pretty much it. :heart: mnm.

:+1: If they implement this - It will be my next purchase ! ( + Microtiming )[/quote]
analog this, analog that. keep the mnm blatantly digital. cover all bases.

2 Likes

:+1: If they implement this - It will be my next purchase ! ( + Microtiming )[/quote]
analog this, analog that. keep the mnm blatantly digital. cover all bases.[/quote]
I agree.
plus, an MnM and an A4 plumbed into each others inputs is soooooo poweful and weird and imaginative.
Get both!

:+1: If they implement this - It will be my next purchase ! ( + Microtiming )[/quote]
analog this, analog that. keep the mnm blatantly digital. cover all bases.[/quote]
Iā€™d like to understand. Whatā€™s the advantage of digital filters for you ?

That is a fucking cracking idea !!

:+1: If they implement this - It will be my next purchase ! ( + Microtiming )[/quote]
analog this, analog that. keep the mnm blatantly digital. cover all bases.[/quote]
Iā€™d like to understand. Whatā€™s the advantage of digital filters for you ?[/quote]
digital filters donā€™t sound different to you?

Iā€™d like to see more modulation options.
MM is effectively a modular with regards to signal flow. Complete the puzzle with modulation sources and destinations. Make it more of a true modular.
Allow the sum of track oneā€™s DDRW waves to modulate the compressor on track 4ā€™s bass lineā€¦ Frequency dividersā€¦ All that.

1 Like

:+1: If they implement this - It will be my next purchase ! ( + Microtiming )[/quote]
analog this, analog that. keep the mnm blatantly digital. cover all bases.[/quote]
Iā€™d like to understand. Whatā€™s the advantage of digital filters for you ?[/quote]
digital filters donā€™t sound different to you?[/quote]
Ofcoarse , i just wondered what you like about the digital filters. - are they colder ? Or maybe there is another reason for you ?. What Adam Jay mentioned is actually very interesting - get both - and maybe run 1 tru another sometimes. I only know the Mm from internet - never had the chance to test it myself - and Iā€™m pretty impressed with what I heard until now. So maybe my request is rather stupid as it would maybe change the overall - caracter of the machine ?
Im actually thinking of buying one but I would like to test it myself and because I donā€™t find the occasion any info is welcome and much appriciatedā€¦ So iā€™d like to now where the difference is for you. why you like it that way;
The only really important change Iā€™d like to see is micro-timing.
I can understand with you guys opinions - this is to keep all machines apart - specialized in what theyā€™re good at instead of putting more and more different caracters in 1 instrument.

That is a fucking cracking idea !! [/quote]
you know the tempest has that?
play list
not fully developed or that well implemented of course

I might be weird but I love MMā€™s filters. It might be my favorite aspect of the machine.
No they arenā€™t analog and they donā€™t try to be. Theyā€™re like ice picks with serated sides. They cut and leave big marks, in a very distinct way.
Using them both is not like using a band pass, either. Itā€™s better, different, weird, exciting.
When I listen to my favorite MM recordings, they each contain heavy extreme filter use.

Fortunately, MM has 6 assignable outs and an extra set of main outs via the headphone jack. A MAM Warp-9 or Waldorf 2 Pole are great affordable solutions if you intend to smear the sci-fi around to a different dimension. Or, maybe just grab a DSI Evolver for that hybrid sound.

1 Like

You talk so well of this, mate.

Thanx for explaining :joy:

1 Like

This, pretty much. Iā€™ve yet to use an analog filter with my MnM (I could probably chuck it through my Microbrute if I wanted), but really I kinda just love the digital filter as-is. Itā€™s weird and ridiculous and never reacts in a way I expect (yetā€”Iā€™ve only had it for a few months!) but itā€™s always interesting.

Right! Never once I have felt like ā€œif only the MMā€™s filters were more ________ā€

ooh, I thought of another one. Note retrigs for all machines, not just BBOX. And the ability to set the retrig to trigger LFO/envelopes. I guess it could be done with the ARP but thereā€™s not a lot of control that way.