Elektron Musical Instruments

Hi all I am seeking honest advice as I have no access to either
Radical Technologies or Elektron...

I really would prefer an all in one box that will let me do strange
new sounds and cool editable beats ie Autechre off kilter beats...I am
not interested in 909/303,trance strings, I want to make new exciting
sounds.

I have read reviews and heard all the demos on both companies, one day
I am in favour of the Spectralis next Elektron...

I would like to sample sounds too as I have a Serge modular and a EMS
Synthi AKS, so would be great to be able to import them into the boxes
and fuq up even more :-).

anyone own both or have used both?
TIA

I don't own both, but for what it's worth Autechre used I believe 2 MachineDrums on the last tour (and it's in heavy use on their last album.)

c.

On Friday, April 27, 2007, at 09:07PM, "cray5656" <amnesia@...> wrote:
>Hi all I am seeking honest advice as I have no access to either
>Radical Technologies or Elektron...
>
>I really would prefer an all in one box that will let me do strange
>new sounds and cool editable beats ie Autechre off kilter beats...I am
>not interested in 909/303,trance strings, I want to make new exciting
>sounds.
>
>I have read reviews and heard all the demos on both companies, one day
>I am in favour of the Spectralis next Elektron...
>
>I would like to sample sounds too as I have a Serge modular and a EMS
>Synthi AKS, so would be great to be able to import them into the boxes
>and fuq up even more :-).
>
>anyone own both or have used both?
>TIA 
>
>

Sorry,
  I've wanted the same bit of kit. There are a couple of holdups
though. I was ready to buy the Spectralis, but when I played with it
at Namm I was left unconvinced. The knobs(encoders) left something to
be desired. And, I don't like to do detailed parameter editing through
a tiny screen. In fairness, the capabilities of the machine are quite
powerful. If only the interface could be more accommodating.

As for the user wave elektron, what ever became of the internal timing
issue? Some people on the forums were complaining of noticeable clock
jitter. Hard to believe as A.E. have really precise timing. But then
again, it seems like their equipment was slaved to a laptop running
D.P.(which could of been chained to an antelope). Performer contained
all of the midi data for the live show. It's all conjecture until
someone runs the appropriate tests. Those ram samplers sound pretty
wicked though.

It sounds like you've got the sound sources pretty much sussed, so why
not get an MPC2500? Or a laptop running Kontakt2, Emu's X2? Then all
you need is a KP3, and do a continual loop(resampling) as your
committing tracks. Kinda like D.P.'s polar.

Anyways, I've got a headache from too much Kona.
I hope clavia release a G3 with the capabilities of the Wave thrown
in(rack format). That's what I'm waiting for. I'll be blue soon.

Honestly, any piece of kit will work. It really doesnt matter. Fuck
it-get an ASR-X, I regret selling it.



ehdyn

On 4/28/07, Corey Appleby <digitalwank@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  I don't own both, but for what it's worth Autechre used I believe 2
> MachineDrums on the last tour (and it's in heavy use on their last album.)
>
>  c.
>
>  On Friday, April 27, 2007, at 09:07PM, "cray5656"
> <amnesia@...> wrote:
>  >Hi all I am seeking honest advice as I have no access to either
>  >Radical Technologies or Elektron...
>  >
>  >I really would prefer an all in one box that will let me do strange
>  >new sounds and cool editable beats ie Autechre off kilter beats...I am
>  >not interested in 909/303,trance strings, I want to make new exciting
>  >sounds.
>  >
>  >I have read reviews and heard all the demos on both companies, one day
>  >I am in favour of the Spectralis next Elektron...
>  >
>  >I would like to sample sounds too as I have a Serge modular and a EMS
>  >Synthi AKS, so would be great to be able to import them into the boxes
>  >and fuq up even more :-).
>  >
>  >anyone own both or have used both?
>  >TIA
>  >
>  >
>

I only own Elektron instruments, too, so other than saying the
Spectralis looks like a really useful piece of kit, I got nuthin'.

And, in the first question in his interview with Elektron, Sean Booth
reveals their whole setup for their recent live work:::

http://elektron.se/stories/?y=2007&p=2&t=5&s=1#talk

As far as sampling, the MD-UW is made more for short(er) samples, and
plays them at 12-bits. The main attraction is that you can manipulate
the samples through the Machinedrum's architecture. ...and then there
are the RAM machines!

Best,
Wendell.

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, Corey Appleby <digitalwank@...>
wrote:
>
> 
> I don't own both, but for what it's worth Autechre used I believe 2
MachineDrums on the last tour (and it's in heavy use on their last album.)

> 
> c.
>  
> On Friday, April 27, 2007, at 09:07PM, "cray5656" <amnesia@...> wrote:
> >Hi all I am seeking honest advice as I have no access to either
> >Radical Technologies or Elektron...
> >
> >I really would prefer an all in one box that will let me do strange
> >new sounds and cool editable beats ie Autechre off kilter beats...I am
> >not interested in 909/303,trance strings, I want to make new exciting
> >sounds.
> >
> >I have read reviews and heard all the demos on both companies, one day
> >I am in favour of the Spectralis next Elektron...
> >
> >I would like to sample sounds too as I have a Serge modular and a EMS
> >Synthi AKS, so would be great to be able to import them into the boxes
> >and fuq up even more :-).
> >
> >anyone own both or have used both?
> >TIA 
> >
> >
>

You can get IDM beats from either machine, and both will
sound great.  The Spectralis is closer to a sampler in the
typical sense, while the MD is more of a one-shot playback
and processing tool.  The RAM machines let you do some
pretty great things with samples; it's like having an EPS
16+ as a drum machine.

Knowing this, you have to decide which actually _sounds_
better to your ears, and how much work you're willing to put
it to making your music.  The Elektrons' UIs are
well-conceived, easily grokked and rarely get in your way.
My experience with the Spectralis was that it had an
embarrassment of sequencing, processing and synthesis
options, but was almost impossible to navigate quickly.
Conversations with people who own the Spectralis indicate
that that much has not changed.

For my part, I've entertained the notion of trading in my
Elektrons for a Spectralis, and dismissed the idea within
minutes.  I make good jams, and I make them quickly on the
Elektrons.  What more do I need?

-- 
Yours,
Niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
Aleph Null.                             A Simple Insinuation Around Silence.
http://aleph-null.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 02:46:45PM -0700, Niall Munnelly wrote:
> 
> The Spectralis is closer to a sampler in the
> typical sense, while the MD is more of a one-shot playback
> and processing tool.

Edit, I'm only comparing the sampling implementations, here.
Both machines are more and less than "samplers".

-- 
Yours,
Niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
Aleph Null.                             A Simple Insinuation Around Silence.
http://aleph-null.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

Yep, what Niall said. The Speckie is great but layers deep and not as well implemented as could be. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, ehdyn81@... wrote:


> As for the user wave elektron, what ever became of the internal timing
> issue? Some people on the forums were complaining of noticeable clock
> jitter. Hard to believe as A.E. have really precise timing. But then
> again,

I've always claimed that the Machinedrum is dead tight if you run it
on its internal sequencer, and I don't want to back of.

People have measured sample delays on individual hits, which is not
what I meant. There are some "magic" put into the timing of the
Elektron instruments, can't disclose all, but I suggested in the
thread to do a listening test and see what feels tighter.

Not always your ear want to hear the most dead spot on note, the ear
is more complex than that. Many of the legendary beat boxes have a
special grove to it, and I think that people would feel a hard-to-tell
lack of something if we made everything sample tight.

When we designed our own magic we went through all legendary drum
machines , especially the MPC-60 to get an idea of the "magic swing".
It's not a swing per as, but some notes we noticed where perceived as
more catchy if put a few samples forward or, most often before in
time. That's what people have been measuring. I don't want to go in
detail as we put a lot of effort into this other that to say - do
listening tests. Try a sample tight (computer sequencer) and take some
of your favorite beat boxes and see which result you prefer real life.

It was a big thread and I just had time for one post to state our view
on this, so it can easily get lost.

If you want rigidity, computer is the way to go, but we want to do
something more.

Note also that there is no delay between patterns, so the tempo is
kept dead tight over time. As a matter of fact we've had it run
alongside Protool for hours with any delays.

What you prefer is always individual, but there are reasons behind the
small, _almost_ unnoticeable timing of the different notes in the
16:th and 32 note realm.

Note that the MIDI clock out is always exact on the spot and when
running the internal sequencer (as well as standard MIDI can do it),
and that the internal "magic" (that's our view of it at least, I
respect others that prefer exact sample accuracy) is only applied when
you run on internal clock on the internal sequencer and is/can not be
applied to incoming MIDI triggering data.

Daniel, Elektron

Happy to hear tht people get more than skin deep when it comes to
features vs interface to access them. Over the years there have been a
multitude of suggestion to additions to improvement, option, special
menus and so for our machines.

A lot has made it in, but I've kept a straight guideline that all
functions as well as possible should not interfere with the interface.
For me the whole reason with hardware instruments these days _is_ the
interface and what it lets you do nice and easily with getting in your
way. We've really tried to keep the MD and Mono that way, with too
deep menues that you have to enter to find all those tasty parameters.
As much as possible should be at your hand when you want it.

That was the main reason I got into synthesizer design. I loved music
machines, but as soon as they became too complex and the engineers
(they and the marketing wizards love to pack as much as possible
inside, value for money I think they call it) without looking at the
full picture.

The the MD and the MONO the goal has been that you should grasp the
basic idea within a few minutes, especially if you have someone
guiding you, and then after a day or two you can start Making Music.
All looking around for the right parameter really takes at least my
inspiration away, and instead of the times are flying and I end up
with something really cool and useful, I could still be fighting with
that parameter that doesn't activate unless I enter some other magv
menu etc. :)

There are many fantastic instruments out there that I really love. The
Moog Voyager I don't think anything can beat in terms of a monophonic
supersonic monster as well as the lushest little lamb. V-syth is
actually another favorite, although it's not 100% intuitive it's fun
to play around with.

Just tried the Spectralis briefly so I should not say anything about
it, especially as people are thinking about buying either an Elektron
or Spectralis. But let's just say that the demo showed potential
(although a bit standard for my taste) I couln't really get anywhere
with the actual machine. I hoped there would be a rapid develop in OS,
but I found it hard to see how He (Jürgen right?) would get it the way
I wanted. Wide and direct rather than dirt deep. There is no doubt it
has a lot of powerful stuff under the hood, but I'm not the man to
delve down. And my view is also that all instruments should be ready
to take live. Even if you don't I like the workflow where you just add
and remove elements in the mix and evolve and maybe suddenly finds the
essence of your song. All with having fun  - creativity is sprung out
fun imho!

Anyway, you should probably ignore my comments and look for someone
else who has unbiased first hand experience with both. It's to quite
different instruments you are looking at even though they might seem
similar at face level.

Best,

Daniel, Elektron

--- In elektron-users@...m, ehdyn81@... wrote:

>
> Sorry,
>   I've wanted the same bit of kit. There are a couple of holdups
> though. I was ready to buy the Spectralis, but when I played with it
> at Namm I was left unconvinced. The knobs(encoders) left something to
> be desired. And, I don't like to do detailed parameter editing through
> a tiny screen. In fairness, the capabilities of the machine are quite
> powerful. If only the interface could be more accommodating.
> 
> As for the user wave elektron, what ever became of the internal timing
> issue? Some people on the forums were complaining of noticeable clock
> jitter. Hard to believe as A.E. have really precise timing. But then
> again, it seems like their equipment was slaved to a laptop running
> D.P.(which could of been chained to an antelope). Performer contained
> all of the midi data for the live show. It's all conjecture until
> someone runs the appropriate tests. Those ram samplers sound pretty
> wicked though.
> 
> It sounds like you've got the sound sources pretty much sussed, so why
> not get an MPC2500? Or a laptop running Kontakt2, Emu's X2? Then all
> you need is a KP3, and do a continual loop(resampling) as your
> committing tracks. Kinda like D.P.'s polar.
> 
> Anyways, I've got a headache from too much Kona.
> I hope clavia release a G3 with the capabilities of the Wave thrown
> in(rack format). That's what I'm waiting for. I'll be blue soon.
> 
> Honestly, any piece of kit will work. It really doesnt matter. Fuck
> it-get an ASR-X, I regret selling it.
> 
> 
> 
> ehdyn
>

Interesting statement...
I expected the timing not to be a random phenomen..it
indeed sounds catchy...The elektrons defently have a
groove..
Only problem i got with that is to get exact cue
points on editing...
Usually i use the kick of my main drum machine as
refference...
With the MD\ufffds microtiming this can cause problems...
at least you just cant cut blocks without checking the
cut points afterwards.. or determining the tempo is a
difficult task when you have used the MD as clock
master.. 120 bpm in the MD are not the same as 120 bpm
in protools... its something like 119,9875 bpm on the
protools... to get such a number is a lot of work when
you dont have another refference than the MD...

So solution for this is to record another instrument
with a tight click together with the MD to get your
edit points..the easiest solution...
And..a clicktrack can come handy anyway..
But..
It might be an idea to have a clicktrack machine in
the MD aswell..
one that is 100% tight for refference purposes...
when you need it you can record that on a seperate
track as editing refference or to determine the
original tempo..

--- daniel_elektron <daniel@...> schrieb:

> --- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, ehdyn81@...
> wrote:
> 
> 
> > As for the user wave elektron, what ever became of
> the internal timing
> > issue? Some people on the forums were complaining
> of noticeable clock
> > jitter. Hard to believe as A.E. have really
> precise timing. But then
> > again,
> 
> I've always claimed that the Machinedrum is dead
> tight if you run it
> on its internal sequencer, and I don't want to back
> of.
> 
> People have measured sample delays on individual
> hits, which is not
> what I meant. There are some "magic" put into the
> timing of the
> Elektron instruments, can't disclose all, but I
> suggested in the
> thread to do a listening test and see what feels
> tighter.
> 
> Not always your ear want to hear the most dead spot
> on note, the ear
> is more complex than that. Many of the legendary
> beat boxes have a
> special grove to it, and I think that people would
> feel a hard-to-tell
> lack of something if we made everything sample
> tight.
> 
> When we designed our own magic we went through all
> legendary drum
> machines , especially the MPC-60 to get an idea of
> the "magic swing".
> It's not a swing per as, but some notes we noticed
> where perceived as
> more catchy if put a few samples forward or, most
> often before in
> time. That's what people have been measuring. I
> don't want to go in
> detail as we put a lot of effort into this other
> that to say - do
> listening tests. Try a sample tight (computer
> sequencer) and take some
> of your favorite beat boxes and see which result you
> prefer real life.
> 
> It was a big thread and I just had time for one post
> to state our view
> on this, so it can easily get lost.
> 
> If you want rigidity, computer is the way to go, but
> we want to do
> something more.
> 
> Note also that there is no delay between patterns,
> so the tempo is
> kept dead tight over time. As a matter of fact we've
> had it run
> alongside Protool for hours with any delays.
> 
> What you prefer is always individual, but there are
> reasons behind the
> small, _almost_ unnoticeable timing of the different
> notes in the
> 16:th and 32 note realm.
> 
> Note that the MIDI clock out is always exact on the
> spot and when
> running the internal sequencer (as well as standard
> MIDI can do it),
> and that the internal "magic" (that's our view of it
> at least, I
> respect others that prefer exact sample accuracy) is
> only applied when
> you run on internal clock on the internal sequencer
> and is/can not be
> applied to incoming MIDI triggering data.
> 
> Daniel, Elektron
> 
> 



       __________________________________ Yahoo! Clever - Der einfachste Weg, Fragen zu stellen und Wissenswertes mit Anderen zu teilen. www.yahoo.de/clever

Also a very interesting statement..
Because i also see the userinterface more important
than features..
when i want maximum fetures i go reaktor or alike...
fetures unlimited when you want them..you can create
them...
As can be seen in some monster synth ensembles..

but..  a real hardware monophon still brings more
money on ebay than reaktor... the price of reaktor is
a tripple what it was a few years ago..
The hardware kept its value...
Why? nothing can beat a good userinterface in the
creativ interacting process...
A simple single oscilator design gives better results
than a 32 osc poly monster synth...
features are nothing when they are not accesible..
And to improvise you must allow your hands to do
things you havent ordered them to do...
A mouse is a really bad medium for this game...

Anyway.. i cant talk about the monomachine..
But regarding the MD the whole sound engine is very
accesible and direct while safe routines and copy
procedres can be a real show stopper...
So its not the direct userinterface related functions
that are a problem but some infrastructional points
that could be more refined and spontanious usable..

For example
-each pattern should have a dedicated kit and a
pattern copy should copy kit and pattern in one go
- no kit related sample dump on the UW

I also would like to see the arrow up/down keys
brought to a better use..
In ideal user definable hot toggle keys...

i would use the arrow down to jump direct to the mute
page for example and the arrow up key to jump directly
to the kit edit page...

On another global setup i might define the arrow up
key to jum to kit load instead..or the master fx
page...

User definable hot keys would be cool...
But in any case you should give this 2 buttons on a
machine that dont has many more reason than scroll
thru secondary menus...


This would be  just in the sense of your previous
posting :-)
And more spontanious fun ...

Anyway..thanx for constantly developing your
products..the MD i ve now is much better than the one
i got one year ago  just by 3! updates in that short
time..

This is the best update performance i ve ever seen
from any company...


--- daniel_elektron <daniel@...> schrieb:

> 
> Happy to hear tht people get more than skin deep
> when it comes to
> features vs interface to access them. Over the years
> there have been a
> multitude of suggestion to additions to improvement,
> option, special
> menus and so for our machines.
> 
> A lot has made it in, but I've kept a straight
> guideline that all
> functions as well as possible should not interfere
> with the interface.
> For me the whole reason with hardware instruments
> these days _is_ the
> interface and what it lets you do nice and easily
> with getting in your
> way. We've really tried to keep the MD and Mono that
> way, with too
> deep menues that you have to enter to find all those
> tasty parameters.
> As much as possible should be at your hand when you
> want it.
> 
> That was the main reason I got into synthesizer
> design. I loved music
> machines, but as soon as they became too complex and
> the engineers
> (they and the marketing wizards love to pack as much
> as possible
> inside, value for money I think they call it)
> without looking at the
> full picture.
> 
> The the MD and the MONO the goal has been that you
> should grasp the
> basic idea within a few minutes, especially if you
> have someone
> guiding you, and then after a day or two you can
> start Making Music.
> All looking around for the right parameter really
> takes at least my
> inspiration away, and instead of the times are
> flying and I end up
> with something really cool and useful, I could still
> be fighting with
> that parameter that doesn't activate unless I enter
> some other magv
> menu etc. :)
> 
> There are many fantastic instruments out there that
> I really love. The
> Moog Voyager I don't think anything can beat in
> terms of a monophonic
> supersonic monster as well as the lushest little
> lamb. V-syth is
> actually another favorite, although it's not 100%
> intuitive it's fun
> to play around with.
> 
> Just tried the Spectralis briefly so I should not
> say anything about
> it, especially as people are thinking about buying
> either an Elektron
> or Spectralis. But let's just say that the demo
> showed potential
> (although a bit standard for my taste) I couln't
> really get anywhere
> with the actual machine. I hoped there would be a
> rapid develop in OS,
> but I found it hard to see how He (J\ufffdrgen right?)
> would get it the way
> I wanted. Wide and direct rather than dirt deep.
> There is no doubt it
> has a lot of powerful stuff under the hood, but I'm
> not the man to
> delve down. And my view is also that all instruments
> should be ready
> to take live. Even if you don't I like the workflow
> where you just add
> and remove elements in the mix and evolve and maybe
> suddenly finds the
> essence of your song. All with having fun  -
> creativity is sprung out
> fun imho!
> 
> Anyway, you should probably ignore my comments and
> look for someone
> else who has unbiased first hand experience with
> both. It's to quite
> different instruments you are looking at even though
> they might seem
> similar at face level.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Daniel, Elektron
> 
> --- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, ehdyn81@...
> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry,
> >   I've wanted the same bit of kit. There are a
> couple of holdups
> > though. I was ready to buy the Spectralis, but
> when I played with it
> > at Namm I was left unconvinced. The
> knobs(encoders) left something to
> > be desired. And, I don't like to do detailed
> parameter editing through
> > a tiny screen. In fairness, the capabilities of
> the machine are quite
> > powerful. If only the interface could be more
> accommodating.
> > 
> > As for the user wave elektron, what ever became of
> the internal timing
> > issue? Some people on the forums were complaining
> of noticeable clock
> > jitter. Hard to believe as A.E. have really
> precise timing. But then
> > again, it seems like their equipment was slaved to
> a laptop running
> > D.P.(which could of been chained to an antelope).
> Performer contained
> > all of the midi data for the live show. It's all
> conjecture until
> > someone runs the appropriate tests. Those ram
> samplers sound pretty
> > wicked though.
> > 
> > It sounds like you've got the sound sources pretty
> much sussed, so why
> > not get an MPC2500? Or a laptop running Kontakt2,
> Emu's X2? Then all
> > you need is a KP3, and do a continual
> loop(resampling) as your
> > committing tracks. Kinda like D.P.'s polar.
> > 
> > Anyways, I've got a headache from too much Kona.
> > I hope clavia release a G3 with the capabilities
> of the Wave thrown
> > in(rack format). That's what I'm waiting for. I'll
> be blue soon.
> > 
> > Honestly, any piece of kit will work. It really
> doesnt matter. Fuck
> > it-get an ASR-X, I regret selling it.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ehdyn
> > 
> 
> 
> 



      Heute schon einen Blick in die Zukunft von E-Mails wagen? Versuchen Sie\ufffds mit dem neuen Yahoo! Mail. www.yahoo.de/mail

Thanks everyone for you replies..

I have done the laptop thing for years , released records etc and am
tring to get away from computers..That is the reason for getting the
EMS Synthi and Serge modular , to touch, patch n play again.....now I
want to make beats again and new sounds ( after having 10 years away
from beat music).
check  http://www.virb.com/rolandoberheim for my old tunes( I no
longer own any of the instruments that allowed me to make these tunes)

I like the idea of the Monomachine (though cant get my head around
there not being any preset sounds in the box? ) but I like what I read
in reviews, shame I live in Australia as no one has one here to try....

what is D.P?

I thought Autechre used Mono and MD with Nord G3 and Akai MPC sampler
live lately no laptops

On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:20:13PM -0000, cray5656 wrote:
> 
> I like the idea of the Monomachine (though cant get my head around
> there not being any preset sounds in the box? )

There are, in the machines' default configurations.  There's
no patch management, as in other synths, though - the lowest
level of management is kit {essentially a multi} or pattern.
Management is my only serious gripe with Elektron kit.
Buying them was the best decision I ever made.


-- 
Yours,
Niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
Aleph Null.                             A Simple Insinuation Around Silence.
http://aleph-null.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

Laptop as sequencer for mono + md... G3 is not out yet ;)

----Original Message----

From: amnesia@...

Date: 04/30/2007 6:09 

To: 

Subj: Re: [elektron] advice Monomachine and Machine Drum or Spectralis
















  


    
            
what is D.P?



I thought Autechre used Mono and MD with Nord G3 and Akai MPC sampler

live lately no laptops




      

    
    

















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

D.P.= Digital Performer. was used for the Untilted tour. I'm not sure if
it's necessary, but D.P. used to have an option to tap the comp's crystal
directly for timing.

On 4/30/07, cray5656 <amnesia@...> wrote:
>
>   what is D.P?
>
> I thought Autechre used Mono and MD with Nord G3 and Akai MPC sampler
> live lately no laptops
>
> 
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, "cray5656" <amnesia@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks everyone for you replies..
> 
> I have done the laptop thing for years , released records etc and am
> tring to get away from computers..That is the reason for getting the
> EMS Synthi and Serge modular , to touch, patch n play again.....now I
> want to make beats again and new sounds ( after having 10 years away
> from beat music).
> check  http://www.virb.com/rolandoberheim for my old tunes( I no
> longer own any of the instruments that allowed me to make these tunes)
> 
> I like the idea of the Monomachine (though cant get my head around
> there not being any preset sounds in the box? ) but I like what I read
> in reviews, shame I live in Australia as no one has one here to try....
>

hi,
you can demo the monomachine at AWAVE in Burke rd Camberwell in case
you are in Victoria.
cheers

Thanks for the response Daniel - it's a very tough issue and you have 
made your point clear enough although I disagree on a number of 
fundamental points though all the same and because I initiated the 
timing thread I felt it only fair that I respond after so much 
healthy and, at times, heated debate.

I don't think there is any 'magic' beat box feel - vintage or 
contemporary. What gives any rhythmic pattern 'feel' is how we 
anticipate where sounds fall in time and because every individual 
hears subjectively it makes practical analysis and criticism of 
timing performance in sequencers very difficult. This I well 
understand.

What I do feel strongly is that adding any random element to 
step/event placement in any sequencing device does not create feel. 
All it serves to do is blur the edges of the groove. 

The exact opposite applies when deliberate Push/Pull placement of 
steps/events against a strict quantised tempo grid is used to 
customise feel - pushed hats, late snares and of course shuffle/swing.

You use rigidity as a way of describing the interest many musicians 
have in tighter event timing and suggest using computers for such 
tasks. The term rigidity has negative connotations for most musicians 
but I must stress again that a desire for precision and consistency 
in sequencing is not about rigidity or stiffness at all. Quite the 
reverse in fact.

Feel is all about rhythmic anticipation – and that very human 
anticipation demands that if a snare is deliberately placed 5 ticks 
late it must always sound 5 ticks late to faithfully maintain the 
groove. The potential feel in any rhythm becomes less focused when 
the snares fall 3 ticks late sometimes and 7 ticks late other times 
in a pattern or loop when the timing variation is of a random nature. 

This is not human feel. It is not feel in any sense because the 
timing variation is random – this is simply software and hardware not 
keeping time.

Remember that my initial tests were not analytical to begin with – I 
could hear things shifting around which made me look closer. This was 
something I could hear.

If you had implemented a secret 'groove template' in the SPS-1 I 
could appreciate that to a point although I would have liked an 
option to switch it off. What leaves me unconvinced is the random 
nature of the push/pull. If it was a deliberate process to add 
a 'feel template' - wouldn't the step push/pull variation be 
consistent across a complete pattern? 

I guess I am a little disappointed as I love what the MD can do and 
had hoped the timing could be straightened out a little.

At the end of the day – it's a very beautiful machine and makes 
beautiful music. That was never in any doubt. I just asked the 
question to see if it could be tightened up a little.

Regards and deep respect as always,

David.

Bankrupted myself buying an M.D last week and have to say I'm  
impressed with the soundto say the least.
After making some patterns etc I've tried to put together a 'song'
I set up all the reverb, lfo, delay settings on the patterns.
After saving the song and returning to it, all my effect settings  
etc. seem to reset?
I'm sure there's a simple explanation?!

cheers and hello!

Luke
On 2 May 2007, at 10:41, innerclock2004 wrote:

> Thanks for the response Daniel - it's a very tough issue and you have
> made your point clear enough although I disagree on a number of
> fundamental points though all the same and because I initiated the
> timing thread I felt it only fair that I respond after so much
> healthy and, at times, heated debate.
>
> I don't think there is any 'magic' beat box feel - vintage or
> contemporary. What gives any rhythmic pattern 'feel' is how we
> anticipate where sounds fall in time and because every individual
> hears subjectively it makes practical analysis and criticism of
> timing performance in sequencers very difficult. This I well
> understand.
>
> What I do feel strongly is that adding any random element to
> step/event placement in any sequencing device does not create feel.
> All it serves to do is blur the edges of the groove.
>
> The exact opposite applies when deliberate Push/Pull placement of
> steps/events against a strict quantised tempo grid is used to
> customise feel - pushed hats, late snares and of course shuffle/swing.
>
> You use rigidity as a way of describing the interest many musicians
> have in tighter event timing and suggest using computers for such
> tasks. The term rigidity has negative connotations for most musicians
> but I must stress again that a desire for precision and consistency
> in sequencing is not about rigidity or stiffness at all. Quite the
> reverse in fact.
>
> Feel is all about rhythmic anticipation � and that very human
> anticipation demands that if a snare is deliberately placed 5 ticks
> late it must always sound 5 ticks late to faithfully maintain the
> groove. The potential feel in any rhythm becomes less focused when
> the snares fall 3 ticks late sometimes and 7 ticks late other times
> in a pattern or loop when the timing variation is of a random nature.
>
> This is not human feel. It is not feel in any sense because the
> timing variation is random � this is simply software and hardware not
> keeping time.
>
> Remember that my initial tests were not analytical to begin with � I
> could hear things shifting around which made me look closer. This was
> something I could hear.
>
> If you had implemented a secret 'groove template' in the SPS-1 I
> could appreciate that to a point although I would have liked an
> option to switch it off. What leaves me unconvinced is the random
> nature of the push/pull. If it was a deliberate process to add
> a 'feel template' - wouldn't the step push/pull variation be
> consistent across a complete pattern?
>
> I guess I am a little disappointed as I love what the MD can do and
> had hoped the timing could be straightened out a little.
>
> At the end of the day � it's a very beautiful machine and makes
> beautiful music. That was never in any doubt. I just asked the
> question to see if it could be tightened up a little.
>
> Regards and deep respect as always,
>
> David.
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

the settings must be saved with the kit!

> Bankrupted myself buying an M.D last week and have to say I'm  
> impressed with the soundto say the least.
> After making some patterns etc I've tried to put together a 'song'
> I set up all the reverb, lfo, delay settings on the patterns.
> After saving the song and returning to it, all my effect settings  
> etc. seem to reset?
> I'm sure there's a simple explanation?!

> cheers and hello!

> Luke
> On 2 May 2007, at 10:41, innerclock2004 wrote:

>> Thanks for the response Daniel - it's a very tough issue and you have
>> made your point clear enough although I disagree on a number of
>> fundamental points though all the same and because I initiated the
>> timing thread I felt it only fair that I respond after so much
>> healthy and, at times, heated debate.
>>
>> I don't think there is any 'magic' beat box feel - vintage or
>> contemporary. What gives any rhythmic pattern 'feel' is how we
>> anticipate where sounds fall in time and because every individual
>> hears subjectively it makes practical analysis and criticism of
>> timing performance in sequencers very difficult. This I well
>> understand.
>>
>> What I do feel strongly is that adding any random element to
>> step/event placement in any sequencing device does not create feel.
>> All it serves to do is blur the edges of the groove.
>>
>> The exact opposite applies when deliberate Push/Pull placement of
>> steps/events against a strict quantised tempo grid is used to
>> customise feel - pushed hats, late snares and of course shuffle/swing.
>>
>> You use rigidity as a way of describing the interest many musicians
>> have in tighter event timing and suggest using computers for such
>> tasks. The term rigidity has negative connotations for most musicians
>> but I must stress again that a desire for precision and consistency
>> in sequencing is not about rigidity or stiffness at all. Quite the
>> reverse in fact.
>>
>> Feel is all about rhythmic anticipation – and that very human
>> anticipation demands that if a snare is deliberately placed 5 ticks
>> late it must always sound 5 ticks late to faithfully maintain the
>> groove. The potential feel in any rhythm becomes less focused when
>> the snares fall 3 ticks late sometimes and 7 ticks late other times
>> in a pattern or loop when the timing variation is of a random nature.
>>
>> This is not human feel. It is not feel in any sense because the
>> timing variation is random – this is simply software and hardware not
>> keeping time.
>>
>> Remember that my initial tests were not analytical to begin with – I
>> could hear things shifting around which made me look closer. This was
>> something I could hear.
>>
>> If you had implemented a secret 'groove template' in the SPS-1 I
>> could appreciate that to a point although I would have liked an
>> option to switch it off. What leaves me unconvinced is the random
>> nature of the push/pull. If it was a deliberate process to add
>> a 'feel template' - wouldn't the step push/pull variation be
>> consistent across a complete pattern?
>>
>> I guess I am a little disappointed as I love what the MD can do and
>> had hoped the timing could be straightened out a little.
>>
>> At the end of the day – it's a very beautiful machine and makes
>> beautiful music. That was never in any doubt. I just asked the
>> question to see if it could be tightened up a little.
>>
>> Regards and deep respect as always,
>>
>> David.
>>
>>
>> 



> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links

duh! Cheers, these are the mistakes you only make once!
On 2 May 2007, at 13:02, verstaerker wrote:

> the settings must be saved with the kit!
>
> > Bankrupted myself buying an M.D last week and have to say I'm
> > impressed with the soundto say the least.
> > After making some patterns etc I've tried to put together a 'song'
> > I set up all the reverb, lfo, delay settings on the patterns.
> > After saving the song and returning to it, all my effect settings
> > etc. seem to reset?
> > I'm sure there's a simple explanation?!
>
> > cheers and hello!
>
> > Luke
> > On 2 May 2007, at 10:41, innerclock2004 wrote:
>
> >> Thanks for the response Daniel - it's a very tough issue and you  
> have
> >> made your point clear enough although I disagree on a number of
> >> fundamental points though all the same and because I initiated the
> >> timing thread I felt it only fair that I respond after so much
> >> healthy and, at times, heated debate.
> >>
> >> I don't think there is any 'magic' beat box feel - vintage or
> >> contemporary. What gives any rhythmic pattern 'feel' is how we
> >> anticipate where sounds fall in time and because every individual
> >> hears subjectively it makes practical analysis and criticism of
> >> timing performance in sequencers very difficult. This I well
> >> understand.
> >>
> >> What I do feel strongly is that adding any random element to
> >> step/event placement in any sequencing device does not create feel.
> >> All it serves to do is blur the edges of the groove.
> >>
> >> The exact opposite applies when deliberate Push/Pull placement of
> >> steps/events against a strict quantised tempo grid is used to
> >> customise feel - pushed hats, late snares and of course shuffle/ 
> swing.
> >>
> >> You use rigidity as a way of describing the interest many musicians
> >> have in tighter event timing and suggest using computers for such
> >> tasks. The term rigidity has negative connotations for most  
> musicians
> >> but I must stress again that a desire for precision and consistency
> >> in sequencing is not about rigidity or stiffness at all. Quite the
> >> reverse in fact.
> >>
> >> Feel is all about rhythmic anticipation � and that very human
> >> anticipation demands that if a snare is deliberately placed 5 ticks
> >> late it must always sound 5 ticks late to faithfully maintain the
> >> groove. The potential feel in any rhythm becomes less focused when
> >> the snares fall 3 ticks late sometimes and 7 ticks late other times
> >> in a pattern or loop when the timing variation is of a random  
> nature.
> >>
> >> This is not human feel. It is not feel in any sense because the
> >> timing variation is random � this is simply software and  
> hardware not
> >> keeping time.
> >>
> >> Remember that my initial tests were not analytical to begin with  
> � I
> >> could hear things shifting around which made me look closer.  
> This was
> >> something I could hear.
> >>
> >> If you had implemented a secret 'groove template' in the SPS-1 I
> >> could appreciate that to a point although I would have liked an
> >> option to switch it off. What leaves me unconvinced is the random
> >> nature of the push/pull. If it was a deliberate process to add
> >> a 'feel template' - wouldn't the step push/pull variation be
> >> consistent across a complete pattern?
> >>
> >> I guess I am a little disappointed as I love what the MD can do and
> >> had hoped the timing could be straightened out a little.
> >>
> >> At the end of the day � it's a very beautiful machine and makes
> >> beautiful music. That was never in any doubt. I just asked the
> >> question to see if it could be tightened up a little.
> >>
> >> Regards and deep respect as always,
> >>
> >> David.
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:04:23PM +0100, Luke Sanger wrote:
>
> After making some patterns etc I've tried to put together a 'song'
> I set up all the reverb, lfo, delay settings on the patterns.
> After saving the song and returning to it, all my effect settings  
> etc. seem to reset?
> I'm sure there's a simple explanation?!

On the patterns, or on the kits?  You have to save changes
to the kits, and pattern changes {like parameter locks} are
written live.  If you meam kits, remember to save them.  If
you mean patterns, perhaps you have inadvertently toggled
the classic/pattern button - "classic" ignores parameter
locks.

-- 
Yours,
Niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
Aleph Null.                             A Simple Insinuation Around Silence.
http://aleph-null.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

Nobody could have said it better... :-)


--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, "innerclock2004" <david@...> wrote:

>
> Thanks for the response Daniel - it's a very tough issue and you have 
> made your point clear enough although I disagree on a number of 
> fundamental points though all the same and because I initiated the 
> timing thread I felt it only fair that I respond after so much 
> healthy and, at times, heated debate.
> 
> I don't think there is any 'magic' beat box feel - vintage or 
> contemporary. What gives any rhythmic pattern 'feel' is how we 
> anticipate where sounds fall in time and because every individual 
> hears subjectively it makes practical analysis and criticism of 
> timing performance in sequencers very difficult. This I well 
> understand.
> 
> What I do feel strongly is that adding any random element to 
> step/event placement in any sequencing device does not create feel. 
> All it serves to do is blur the edges of the groove. 
> 
> The exact opposite applies when deliberate Push/Pull placement of 
> steps/events against a strict quantised tempo grid is used to 
> customise feel - pushed hats, late snares and of course shuffle/swing.
> 
> You use rigidity as a way of describing the interest many musicians 
> have in tighter event timing and suggest using computers for such 
> tasks. The term rigidity has negative connotations for most musicians 
> but I must stress again that a desire for precision and consistency 
> in sequencing is not about rigidity or stiffness at all. Quite the 
> reverse in fact.
> 
> Feel is all about rhythmic anticipation – and that very human 
> anticipation demands that if a snare is deliberately placed 5 ticks 
> late it must always sound 5 ticks late to faithfully maintain the 
> groove. The potential feel in any rhythm becomes less focused when 
> the snares fall 3 ticks late sometimes and 7 ticks late other times 
> in a pattern or loop when the timing variation is of a random nature. 
> 
> This is not human feel. It is not feel in any sense because the 
> timing variation is random – this is simply software and hardware not 
> keeping time.
> 
> Remember that my initial tests were not analytical to begin with – I 
> could hear things shifting around which made me look closer. This was 
> something I could hear.
> 
> If you had implemented a secret 'groove template' in the SPS-1 I 
> could appreciate that to a point although I would have liked an 
> option to switch it off. What leaves me unconvinced is the random 
> nature of the push/pull. If it was a deliberate process to add 
> a 'feel template' - wouldn't the step push/pull variation be 
> consistent across a complete pattern? 
> 
> I guess I am a little disappointed as I love what the MD can do and 
> had hoped the timing could be straightened out a little.
> 
> At the end of the day – it's a very beautiful machine and makes 
> beautiful music. That was never in any doubt. I just asked the 
> question to see if it could be tightened up a little.
> 
> Regards and deep respect as always,
> 
> David.
>

hey, thanks for the response.

when you say parameter changes etc. are written live, can they be  
recorded live and replayed back in song mode?

cheers,
Luke
On 2 May 2007, at 13:12, Niall Munnelly wrote:

> On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:04:23PM +0100, Luke Sanger wrote:
> >
> > After making some patterns etc I've tried to put together a 'song'
> > I set up all the reverb, lfo, delay settings on the patterns.
> > After saving the song and returning to it, all my effect settings
> > etc. seem to reset?
> > I'm sure there's a simple explanation?!
>
> On the patterns, or on the kits? You have to save changes
> to the kits, and pattern changes {like parameter locks} are
> written live. If you meam kits, remember to save them. If
> you mean patterns, perhaps you have inadvertently toggled
> the classic/pattern button - "classic" ignores parameter
> locks.
>
> -- 
> Yours,
> Niall.
> .. . . . . . . . . .
> Aleph Null. A Simple Insinuation Around Silence.
> http://aleph-null.net
> .. .. gpg public key - http://aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 01:16:43PM +0100, Luke Sanger wrote:
> hey, thanks for the response.
> 
> when you say parameter changes etc. are written live, can they be  
> recorded live and replayed back in song mode?

Absolutely.  Record + play.

-- 
Yours,
Niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
Aleph Null.                             A Simple Insinuation Around Silence.
http://aleph-null.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

yes - press record and play together - it records then the changes u make - i don't know if this works in songmode too

>
hey, thanks for the response.

when you say parameter changes etc. are written live, can they be 
recorded live and replayed back in song mode?

cheers,
Luke
On 2 May 2007, at 13:12, Niall Munnelly wrote:

> On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:04:23PM +0100, Luke Sanger wrote:
> >
> > After making some patterns etc I've tried to put together a 'song'
> > I set up all the reverb, lfo, delay settings on the patterns.
> > After saving the song and returning to it, all my effect settings
> > etc. seem to reset?
> > I'm sure there's a simple explanation?!
>
> On the patterns, or on the kits? You have to save changes
> to the kits, and pattern changes {like parameter locks} are
> written live. If you meam kits, remember to save them. If
> you mean patterns, perhaps you have inadvertently toggled
> the classic/pattern button - "classic" ignores parameter
> locks.
>
> -- 
> Yours,
> Niall.
> .. . . . . . . . . .
> Aleph Null. A Simple Insinuation Around Silence.
> http://aleph-null.net
> .. .. gpg public key - http://aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..
>
> 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 





-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
verstaerker
mailto:verstaerker@...