Elektron Musical Instruments

I pretty much took the plunge on the MD because of the MIDI machines,
> strange as that might seem to some.  Don't get this wrong, the 
percussive
> synthesis options on the MD are mind-boggling but then again there 
is a lot
> of very nice MIDI control features buried inside that are unique 
in hardware
> step sequencers.
> 
> I think that there might be more "correct" way to look at the MIDI 
features.
> if you want more general-purpose MIDI sequencing there are other 
places to
> look, both hardware or software, both inexpensive and expensive.  
Step
> sequencers are a little less easy to come-by, especially ones that 
can do
> sixteen tracks of polyphony sequencing with complete step-by-step 
control
> over up to 24 parameters (+-), all done in real-time while the 
sequence is
> playing.
> 
> Part of the "disappointment" may be that you are not familiar with 
this
> style of sequencing.  The historical predecessor was the analog 
step
> sequencer where each of the steps had some number of knobs 
(usually three)
> each of which controlled some parameter like pitch, filter 
cutoff... you get
> the idea.  These were sequencers made as much to be played in real-
time as
> programmed.  In other words it was/is quite common for someone to 
change the
> knobs while the sequence is playing as part of the performance.  
This too is
> part of the appeal of the MD's MIDI machines (and really the entire
> instrument).  Even if it is not for a performance, be it a live or 
studio
> one, it still is an effect way to discover new music ideas and 
flesh them
> out.  For some it is a lot easier than grabbing say little colored
> rectangles in a screen and dragging them to a new position.
> 
> Most of the other step sequencers now available, like for example 
those in
> the E-Tribes series, do not offer the ease of grid-style 
programming of
> rhythm, pitch, and some number of voicing parameters.  This makes 
the MD's
> implementation fairly unique.
> 
> This is not to say that I consider the MD implementation without 
flaws.
> There are some glaring problems with the MIDI control that 
hopefully will
> one day be fix or at least improved.  But as a starting place it 
it already
> ahead of most everything else out there, with the possible 
exception of the
> beloved NOTRON which unfortunately is no longer available.
> 
> So I'd say give it another shot.  Approach programming your 
melodies and
> basslines as a more experimental "how it sounds" exercise, relying
> exclusively on your ear and not your eyes.  Work in pattern 
lengths of 16 or
> less so that you have each step instantly at your fingertips.  
Don't be
> afraid to use other "sequencing aids" after the MD output.  For 
example
> using the MD to drive the internal arpeggiator in a synth module.  
This is
> not needed of course but the combination can be can be pretty cool.
> 
> My biggest wishes (applies to all of the MD sequencing features), 
besides
> bug-fixes: independent track lengths and independent track clock 
dividers.
> With those two additions this might be the killer HW step 
sequencer!
> 

hi, very interesting post! i am going to buy a machinedrum in the 
next few weeks and plan to use it as main sequencer alongside jomox 
xbase 09 which has 3 very basic sequencer tracks. the main reason i 
just sold my rm1x is because the grid record mode did not operate 
real-time ie. without stopping & starting, this is very painful. as 
i understand the machinedrum is capable of this, is this correct? 
btw thanks for the information above - the lack of independent track 
lengths is a bit of a shock to me but perhaps we can work around 
this. also if anyone has any other info about limitations or 
features of MIDI MACHINES i would greatly appreciate your reply.
cheers gab