Elektron Musical Instruments

Why didn't elektron opt for a digital output as well? 1 adat optical output 
would of been great. Sorry if this has been pounded into the ground but it 
just makes sense to me.

>     Why didn't elektron opt for a digital output as well? 1 adat optical
> output
>  would of been great. Sorry if this has been pounded into the ground but
> it
>  just makes sense to me.

yeah, I wish they would have done this as well.  doesn't even have to be
optical; S/PDIF would have been great.  I'm sure it wouldn't have driven
the price up *that* much more.

Also, aren't Digital outs cheaper to implement than DACs and individual sockets?

> Why didn't elektron opt for a digital output as well? 1 adat optical output 
> would of been great. Sorry if this has been pounded into the ground but it 
> just makes sense to me. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>

...there is the whole problem with who is supposed to be the clock
master etc. For digital connections to work, the whole system need to
be exactly clock synchronised, or the signal need to be resampled.
Resampling is a big theory, but basicly it takes infinite time to do
it perfectly if you don't happen to lie in a 1/x relationship (like
48/96 is 1/2 = easy).

In a normal SPDIF setup the clocks are interleaved and the receiving
unit is supposed to slave. But it's got its own crystal inside, and
you would be scared if you knew how much is solved just by "dropping"
a bit or inserting a value where one didn't arrive when expected etc.

Try looking through the internet, after delving deep enough you'll see
that a good DA-AD isn't that bad of a solution in comparison what is
usually done. Yes, global clock distribution can work, but most people
find it quite messy to work it out with all the extra cables.

Basicly - digital needs full syncronisation to be good. Some problems
popping up: what about the actual internal Da that still should work,
like the hedphone outs? The internal DA would need to be slaved to the
external clock. How would that be done? As long as you're the master,
everything is fine, but not all gear can be the master.

Sorry to not going into all details, but getting to the bottom would
be more like a class, or maybe a full semester in the subject! Just
don't be fooled by quick and easy SPDIF setups, the implementation is
generally awful.

Daniel

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Storm" <jeff@j...> wrote:
> Why didn't elektron opt for a digital output as well? 1 adat optical
output 
> would of been great. Sorry if this has been pounded into the ground
but it 
> just makes sense to me.

fair enough.  What is the internal frequency of the machinedrum/monomachine 
anyhow?


----- Original Message ----- 

From: "daniel_elektron" <daniel@...>
To: <elektron-users@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: [elektron] digital out? why not was individual outs


>
> ...there is the whole problem with who is supposed to be the clock
> master etc. For digital connections to work, the whole system need to
> be exactly clock synchronised, or the signal need to be resampled.
> Resampling is a big theory, but basicly it takes infinite time to do
> it perfectly if you don't happen to lie in a 1/x relationship (like
> 48/96 is 1/2 = easy).
>
> In a normal SPDIF setup the clocks are interleaved and the receiving
> unit is supposed to slave. But it's got its own crystal inside, and
> you would be scared if you knew how much is solved just by "dropping"
> a bit or inserting a value where one didn't arrive when expected etc.
>
> Try looking through the internet, after delving deep enough you'll see
> that a good DA-AD isn't that bad of a solution in comparison what is
> usually done. Yes, global clock distribution can work, but most people
> find it quite messy to work it out with all the extra cables.
>
> Basicly - digital needs full syncronisation to be good. Some problems
> popping up: what about the actual internal Da that still should work,
> like the hedphone outs? The internal DA would need to be slaved to the
> external clock. How would that be done? As long as you're the master,
> everything is fine, but not all gear can be the master.
>
> Sorry to not going into all details, but getting to the bottom would
> be more like a class, or maybe a full semester in the subject! Just
> don't be fooled by quick and easy SPDIF setups, the implementation is
> generally awful.
>
> Daniel
>
> --- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Storm" <jeff@j...> wrote:
>> Why didn't elektron opt for a digital output as well? 1 adat optical
> output
>> would of been great. Sorry if this has been pounded into the ground
> but it
>> just makes sense to me.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

It the same as the 24/96 debate or the whole valve thing - just
because a valve is in a box or its rated at 24/96 doesn't mean it
sounds any good - in fact a well made analogue solid state device or
even a good 16/44.1 system with high quality analogue pres and good
convertors will blow most 24/96 rigs into the weeds. I repect Elektron
for not following the marketing numbers hype and sticking with what
sounds good. Generally speaking - digital is great for maths and not
much else.....

I'm not arguing that 96k is better, I was just curious as to what the sample 
rate was.

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "innerclock2004" <david@...>
To: <elektron-users@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: [elektron] digital out? why not was individual outs


> It the same as the 24/96 debate or the whole valve thing - just
> because a valve is in a box or its rated at 24/96 doesn't mean it
> sounds any good - in fact a well made analogue solid state device or
> even a good 16/44.1 system with high quality analogue pres and good
> convertors will blow most 24/96 rigs into the weeds. I repect Elektron
> for not following the marketing numbers hype and sticking with what
> sounds good. Generally speaking - digital is great for maths and not
> much else.....
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Storm" <jeff@j...> wrote:
> fair enough.  What is the internal frequency of the
machinedrum/monomachine 
> anyhow?

We're running at 44.1kHz as the base frequency. 96kHz would be good,
but not because of getting those bat frequencies out, but to get more
space for the filters to work at. Still, we oversample certain parts
internally to 2x and 4x  to get good sounding filters and sample rate
conversions (the issues are connected).

When we have discussed internally, 64kHz as the general base frequency
would be a good trade off between using DSP cycles efficiently and
have enough headroom for filters. 44.1 makes cutoff filter design a
bit tough, they need to be steep to cut somewhere around 20kHz without
audible alias.

...but this is quite advanced theory... High sample rates in our
opinion are good for internal calculations (filters especially), not
to store the non-audible frequencies as is the general accepted truth
I guess.

The best is to not look at specs but use your ears!

Daniel

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, jmelnyk@c... wrote:
> >     Why didn't elektron opt for a digital output as well? 1 adat optical
> > output
> >  would of been great. Sorry if this has been pounded into the ground but
> > it
> >  just makes sense to me.
> 
> yeah, I wish they would have done this as well.  doesn't even have to be
> optical; S/PDIF would have been great.  I'm sure it wouldn't have driven
> the price up *that* much more.

spdif is a waste of time to me.. personally.  a couple adat i/o would be a gold mine. you 
could have an individual out for every sound.  oh to dream.  i guess the math and 
practicality of it would be dificult judging by the info in the other relevant posts.  doesn't 
adat derive it's sync from the signal though?

yes but the internal components wouldn't so you would get sync errors.

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "dayjob111" <dayjob111@...>
To: <elektron-users@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: [elektron] digital out? why not was individual outs


> --- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, jmelnyk@c... wrote:
>> >     Why didn't elektron opt for a digital output as well? 1 adat 
>> > optical
>> > output
>> >  would of been great. Sorry if this has been pounded into the ground 
>> > but
>> > it
>> >  just makes sense to me.
>>
>> yeah, I wish they would have done this as well.  doesn't even have to be
>> optical; S/PDIF would have been great.  I'm sure it wouldn't have driven
>> the price up *that* much more.
>
> spdif is a waste of time to me.. personally.  a couple adat i/o would be a 
> gold mine. you
> could have an individual out for every sound.  oh to dream.  i guess the 
> math and
> practicality of it would be dificult judging by the info in the other 
> relevant posts.  doesn't
> adat derive it's sync from the signal though?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

i figured it was something like that.  hey the MD and MM are great. nothing's perfect.

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Storm" <jeff@j...> wrote:

> yes but the internal components wouldn't so you would get sync errors.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "dayjob111" <dayjob111@y...>
> To: <elektron-users@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 5:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [elektron] digital out? why not was individual outs
> 
> 
> > --- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, jmelnyk@c... wrote:
> >> >     Why didn't elektron opt for a digital output as well? 1 adat 
> >> > optical
> >> > output
> >> >  would of been great. Sorry if this has been pounded into the ground 
> >> > but
> >> > it
> >> >  just makes sense to me.
> >>
> >> yeah, I wish they would have done this as well.  doesn't even have to be
> >> optical; S/PDIF would have been great.  I'm sure it wouldn't have driven
> >> the price up *that* much more.
> >
> > spdif is a waste of time to me.. personally.  a couple adat i/o would be a 
> > gold mine. you
> > could have an individual out for every sound.  oh to dream.  i guess the 
> > math and
> > practicality of it would be dificult judging by the info in the other 
> > relevant posts.  doesn't
> > adat derive it's sync from the signal though?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

full situational disclosure requires the continued admission that digital
isn't "perfect" either.

> i figured it was something like that.  hey the MD and MM are great.
> nothing's perfect.
>
> --- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Storm" <jeff@j...> wrote:
>> yes but the internal components wouldn't so you would get sync errors.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "dayjob111" <dayjob111@y...>
>> To: <elektron-users@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 5:41 PM
>> Subject: Re: [elektron] digital out? why not was individual outs
>>
>>
>> > --- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, jmelnyk@c... wrote:
>> >> >     Why didn't elektron opt for a digital output as well? 1 adat
>> >> > optical
>> >> > output
>> >> >  would of been great. Sorry if this has been pounded into the
>> ground
>> >> > but
>> >> > it
>> >> >  just makes sense to me.
>> >>
>> >> yeah, I wish they would have done this as well.  doesn't even have to
>> be
>> >> optical; S/PDIF would have been great.  I'm sure it wouldn't have
>> driven
>> >> the price up *that* much more.
>> >
>> > spdif is a waste of time to me.. personally.  a couple adat i/o would
>> be a
>> > gold mine. you
>> > could have an individual out for every sound.  oh to dream.  i guess
>> the
>> > math and
>> > practicality of it would be dificult judging by the info in the other
>> > relevant posts.  doesn't
>> > adat derive it's sync from the signal though?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> spdif is a waste of time to me.. personally.  a couple adat i/o 
would be a gold mine.

Optical usually (and perhaps inherently?) got more jitter than an 
electrical connection, AFAIK. Word clocking everything sort of works, 
but then you have the problem finding a decent master clock. Devices 
like apogees big ben or rosendahls nanoclock costs silly amounts of 
money! And you still got the problem with phase locked loops tracking 
the word clock input on the actual devices. 

The outputs of the elektron gear is a big part of the sound. Guess the 
machines wouldn't have the same appeal if users went trashing the 
sound through a lousy sound card, which is bound to happen if there 
was digital connections! Better to leave it to the user to sample it 
as best as they can than to risk the nice sound being ruined by a 
sound blaster. 


Oh, and BTW, speaking of connections: most gear operate unbalanced 
internally. Adding balancing stages on the output (and input of the 
next device) would probably make matters worse than not having it 
there in the first place. Balanced works great for long connections 
and the theory is a good one. In actual applications with most gear 
being unbalanced internally, it only adds a layer of unecesarry 
components. 


Cheers, 

Andreas

what about mLan?
seems the perfect solution  - although it's not really common.

On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 05:27:11PM +0200, Federico Ciapi wrote:
> what about mLan?
> seems the perfect solution  - although it's not really common.

it would've taken off and been great, if not for yamaha's
exorbitant licensing fees.

-- 
yours,
niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
aleph null.                             a simple insinuation around silence.
http://syncretism.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://www.aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

...and their failure to implement it into most of their own products, except
as a couple of $$$ add-on cards.

cheers
ripe

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "niall munnelly" <aleph@...>
To: <elektron-users@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: [elektron] digital out? why not was individual outs


> On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 05:27:11PM +0200, Federico Ciapi wrote:
> > what about mLan?
> > seems the perfect solution  - although it's not really common.
>
> it would've taken off and been great, if not for yamaha's
> exorbitant licensing fees.
>
> -- 
> yours,
> niall.
> .. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
> aleph null.                             a simple insinuation around
silence.

> http://syncretism.net
> .. .. gpg public key - http://www.aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, niall munnelly <aleph@a...> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 05:27:11PM +0200, Federico Ciapi wrote:
> > what about mLan?
> > seems the perfect solution  - although it's not really common.
> 
> it would've taken off and been great, if not for yamaha's
> exorbitant licensing fees.

...which I believe from my meetings with Yamaha is zero and nil?

The problem has been that their MLAN chips have been very very
expensive (in class of an expensive DSP), and that other manufacturers
have been slow in offering MLAN compatible chips.

As I see it there are two main reasons MLAN is not taking off. 

The first is that Yamaha themselves are taking so long in developing
the stuff. I mean it's just recently that we have reliable both Mac
and Win drivers!

The second is that the customers have not demanded the (in my eyes
brilliant) functionality. They are happy just to connect the sound
card to their PC/Mac, and for that standard Firewire (or worst case
USB/2) is enough and will always be cheaper. But the versability of
MLAN is very interesting, making also non-computer-centric setups
possible, and bringing the promise of a little less
computer-driver-depending world.

Daniel

On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 04:08:26PM -0000, daniel_elektron wrote:
> 
> > it would've taken off and been great, if not for yamaha's
> > exorbitant licensing fees.
> 
> ...which I believe from my meetings with Yamaha is zero and nil?

really!  that wasn't always the case, but i'll concede that
i haven't followed the drama since mlan 1.

apologies for the outdated, incorrect information.

daniel,  please stick around, it's a lively list with you
here.

-- 
yours,
niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
aleph null.                             a simple insinuation around silence.
http://syncretism.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://www.aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

> As I see it there are two main reasons MLAN is not taking off.
>
> The first is that Yamaha themselves are taking so long in developing
> the stuff. I mean it's just recently that we have reliable both Mac
> and Win drivers!


That's true.
I had a Yamaha 01X, I sold it because their development was too slow,  
I had to discover and learn a lot of workarounds to work reliably;  
and finally I thought that an external mixer was only adding an other  
layer that I didn't want to mess with (I use a DAW to mix and compose).
They should make it simpler, cheaper, reliable and market it as a  
better kind of digital audio/midi networking when compared to Adat  
and the likes, but still that simple. That would sell IMHO.

http://www.elektron.se/support.php

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, marc s davidson <psi@p...> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.elektron.se/support.php

Cool, so if I understand (as a computer novice) this program takes samples from your 
audio editor and enables me to load them into the UW.  Now if any Mac users have any 
recomendations for an audio editing program they are using or know of that would be 
appreciated.  My UW is in for the upgrade and it would be nice to get a program, I think I 
have everything to get started except a program for sample editing.  Thanks, -Scott

On Jun 2, 2005, at 7:59 PM, izfunky wrote:

> Cool, so if I understand (as a computer novice) this program takes  
> samples from your
> audio editor and enables me to load them into the UW.  Now if any  
> Mac users have any
> recomendations for an audio editing program they are using or know  
> of that would be
> appreciated.  My UW is in for the upgrade and it would be nice to  
> get a program, I think I
> have everything to get started except a program for sample  
> editing.  Thanks, -Scott

well the best one would prolly be DSP-Quattro (I love it, at least!):
http://www.i3net.it/Products/dspQuattro/Asp/Index_EN.asp?Language=EN

but it's $150.  however, it does render the C6 tool useless, since  
you can transfer
samples via MIDI dump with it.  I'm sure you'll find some other uses  
for it other than
just sample dumps.

anyway, you can also try Audacity: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
it's free, but it doesn't do nearly as much or do it as well/easily.   
but it should
give you everything you need for simple sample editing.

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, Joseph Melnyk <jmelnyk@c...> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2005, at 7:59 PM, izfunky wrote:
> 
> > Cool, so if I understand (as a computer novice) this program takes  
> > samples from your
> > audio editor and enables me to load them into the UW.  Now if any  
> > Mac users have any
> > recomendations for an audio editing program they are using or know  
> > of that would be
> > appreciated.  My UW is in for the upgrade and it would be nice to  
> > get a program, I think I
> > have everything to get started except a program for sample  
> > editing.  Thanks, -Scott
> 
> well the best one would prolly be DSP-Quattro (I love it, at least!):
> http://www.i3net.it/Products/dspQuattro/Asp/Index_EN.asp?Language=EN
> 
> but it's $150.  however, it does render the C6 tool useless, since  
> you can transfer
> samples via MIDI dump with it.  I'm sure you'll find some other uses  
> for it other than
> just sample dumps.
> 
> anyway, you can also try Audacity: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
> it's free, but it doesn't do nearly as much or do it as well/easily.   
> but it should
> give you everything you need for simple sample editing.

Thanks a bunch Joe, I will check 'em out.  I am crossing the new frontier (for me) from 
hardware to software, very cool!  Also, if I may ask, what is your preferred Midi interface?   
Thanks again, -Scott

On Jun 2, 2005, at 9:51 PM, izfunky wrote:

> Thanks a bunch Joe, I will check 'em out.  I am crossing the new  
> frontier (for me) from
> hardware to software, very cool!  Also, if I may ask, what is your  
> preferred Midi interface?
> Thanks again, -Scott

well, I use the interface on my MOTU 828 MkII the most, since it's  
also my soundcard.
but for simple tasks, if need be, I use the M-Audio Uno.  I think it  
costs about $40 so it's
very good when you're just getting started with this sort of thing  
(which is where I was
when I bought it).

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, Joseph Melnyk <jmelnyk@c...> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2005, at 9:51 PM, izfunky wrote:
> 
> > Thanks a bunch Joe, I will check 'em out.  I am crossing the new  
> > frontier (for me) from
> > hardware to software, very cool!  Also, if I may ask, what is your  
> > preferred Midi interface?
> > Thanks again, -Scott
> 
> well, I use the interface on my MOTU 828 MkII the most, since it's  
> also my soundcard.
> but for simple tasks, if need be, I use the M-Audio Uno.  I think it  
> costs about $40 so it's
> very good when you're just getting started with this sort of thing  
> (which is where I was
> when I bought it).

The M-Audio sounds like what I need at this point, thanks so much!

-Scott