It took me a while to enjoy the M:S as much as the M:C but I finally did. They both have an ideal workflow. Theyâre fast, simple, fun and both sound so clear and deep. I agree when you say that Elektron succeeded in a stroke of genius with these machines. Thatâs why I donât understand why they donât follow up on them?
1 Like
none of that would be related, nah.
the model series was developed to re-use code with a cheaper platform, more simply with one knob per function. i donât think thereâd be the same scale benefit with analog over digital platforms
Yeah a shift command to adjust an attack parameter would go a long way in keeping to the fast and easy goal, using the lfo more deeply become menu divey and cumbersome, which is kind of the opposite of the goal of the device. Hard to say if an update will ever come at this point, I wouldnât write it off but I wouldnât expect the moon either. There is something to be said about feature complete devices imo, nothing wrong with getting something right from the start.
4 Likes
the only thing that ever frustrated me about the cycles was its lack of ability to preview a trig
when youâre working with machine and sound locks it becomes an almost necessary function
elektron had to have considered this- unless the device is incapable of this functionality, itâs definitely a weird omission
4 Likes
Actually adding a second lfo would absolutely be ot change any how the workflow whereas adding a shift command for attack control would break the way shift command work on the models.
Youâd access the first lfo exactly the same way and youâd access the second lfo by double taping the lfo button (2 taps + hold for lfo 2, 1 tap and hold for lfo 1).
There is nothing menu divey about using LFO on the m:c itâs as simple as holding LFO button + press/ turn the encoder of the parameter you want the lfo to target.
1 Like
The models actually came out before trig preview was on any of the devices. Fn+yes is a pretty recent thing. Without an obvious yes button Iâm not sure what they would use for it.
3 Likes
I think its pretty clear that the code has already been ported over to the Syntakt, and hence it doesnât seem believable to me that the code is in a bad state.
1 Like
I mean the lfo menu for like selecting the envelope mode, changing its multiplier, changing reset, start phase, and fade. Its not the worst in the world but its also operated with a single encoder and clicking that encoder. Some destinations can also only be reached via the menu to my knowledge like pan, punch, and gate unless I missed the short cut.
Some buttons are kind of free, like holding the machine/preset menu button and twisting knobs currently doesnât have any overlap, hold that and twisting decay to get an attack wouldnât be too complex, although youre not wrong that a 2nd lfo would probably be an equally good set and forget envelope and have greater functions, not sure about longpress double tap menuing I would probably just say hold the LFO button and hit the back button to flip between the 2.
2 Likes
What happened with the handle ??
wow i always forget how much of what i appreciate about the digi boxes came from subsequent updates
thereâs really no button you could possibly tap while holding a trig to preview it?
Long story short, they came out with these cool carry handles for the Model series that would also let you run the units off batteries. Unfortunately, they also had a critical flaw that posed a fire risk, and thus were quickly recalled.
âŚof course there were a few batchesâŚnever only oneâŚpostpandemic year zero was 21, the year, we all learned, oops, the world will never gonna be the same againâŚthat year, when they had to reconsider in total, had to let go on many of their employees, killed their brand new berlin hq right away again and changed their whole game for new concepts and marketorientation leaning more towards transatlantic measuresâŚ
letâs face itâŚno more models, no further efforts to spent developer money into themâŚtime to move onâŚ
still a chance, theyâll pick up some retro cult tracktion some day, once theyâve vanished from all shelves and somebody else suddenly embraces them in some new never seen/heard before sonically abusive fashion because soooo many former elektron fanboys got tooooo dissapointed and sold them for real lowbudget penniesâŚsince a full on plastic device was never designed that dead simple, resistant and sturdyâŚ
footnoteâŚkeep in mind, end of the day, when it comes to overall product design, the digi format metal chassis are cheaper/easier in production and assembling/servicing efforts than those models plastic embodymentsâŚtheyâre happy for too many good reasons, when all their 3 year warranty promisses had finally run outâŚ
man⌠an extra lfo, slower lfos than x1, env attack would be so so nice 
add a few new machines and these would sell like crazy
it didnât handle well
2 Likes
It could be difficult to change code, without necessarily being bad code (although that was where my post started). For instance the design/architecture might be so locked into FM that adding something different would be difficult, or it might mean adding so much more code youâd run out of memory.
On the other point, just because Syntakt has machines that sound like the m:c ones, with the same controls, doesnât necessarily mean itâs the same code, they might have re-implemented the whole thing (after first testing the concepts on the market with the m:c). Unless youâve definitely heard otherwise?
Donât they all use the same line of chips anyway? Canât be that different, or that difficult to then port the SY code to M:C
ESS did answer a lot of questions on the m:c and what could realistically be added to it and he never said that adding machines was impossible, just that it was a slow and fairly cumbersome process.
The design/architecture is absolutely not locked into FM. The chord machine is actually pure wavetable synthesis. There is nothing locked in the m:c outside of the fact itâs digital and it has 4 oscillators.
So stuff like swarm machine would not be possible as it uses way more than 4 oscillators but Bits/toy/clap and pretty much all the other digital machines that are on the syntakt could be ported to the m:c especially because the core 6 mono tracks limitation would not be changed at all.
Considering the fact the models have the same CPU as the digiboxes itâs clear that their potential is far from reaching a limit.
2 Likes
I would be happy to see the clap and toy machine imported to M:C because they would suit very well the device (there is even the punch parameter on these). The Syn Bits is imho the best machine on the Syntakt, almost a synth on itself but for me it would make no sense on M:C. Syn Bits is very raw and need to be tamed and sculpted with the two filters and the enveloppes. And finally the M:C is sold as a modern fm groovebox and syn bits is not FM at all sonically, it wouldnât be very coherent.
2 Likes
The MC already has non FM machine in the chord machine which is pure wavetable synthesis, the only definitive identity of the m:c is being digital monophonic and 6 tracks.