Elektron-Users

Ozone wrote:
Yeah Rusty I understand your frustration totally. They missed a huge trick here. I read somewhere (maybe you mentioned) that Elektron's reasoning was that excess of midi data could cause overloads & errors. This argument struggles to hold water with me for the reason listed above. P-locks are great, but beyond lfo's, there is no way to make midi data evolve & warp. Who wouldn't want to have scene control over parameters in their monomachine or Machinedrum.... would make a whole new instrument out of them, & give the OT a huge advantage as a midi sequencer alone. Agreed on the midi scenes over lfo's for useability also, or at least the option.

Yeah, I *probably* mentioned it somewhere, been whinging about it for the last year / year and a half.

MIDI note/CC message assignments for start/stop of record quick on tracks would be handy

Rusty wrote:
Ozone wrote:
Yeah Rusty I understand your frustration totally. They missed a huge trick here. I read somewhere (maybe you mentioned) that Elektron's reasoning was that excess of midi data could cause overloads & errors. This argument struggles to hold water with me for the reason listed above. P-locks are great, but beyond lfo's, there is no way to make midi data evolve & warp. Who wouldn't want to have scene control over parameters in their monomachine or Machinedrum.... would make a whole new instrument out of them, & give the OT a huge advantage as a midi sequencer alone. Agreed on the midi scenes over lfo's for useability also, or at least the option.

Yeah, I *probably* mentioned it somewhere, been whinging about it for the last year / year and a half.

I think we should start a petition!

Seriously though, I'm on the verge of selling mine, because, well, for me they just don't cut the mustard as live sequencers. Or at least what I want them to be.

If I ditch them it will hurt, because, well, a year/year and a half of wasted time and $1k lost.

Too much fucking around with the project structure, midi programming et al.

Obviously the massive benefit is the parameter locks and scene crossfader. But this is let down by (for me) the low track count, losing one to Master, losing more to inputs, midi programming etc.

I think I was happier with my RS7000... I think I might make a rant post soon

Rusty wrote:
Rusty wrote:
Ozone wrote:
Yeah Rusty I understand your frustration totally. They missed a huge trick here. I read somewhere (maybe you mentioned) that Elektron's reasoning was that excess of midi data could cause overloads & errors. This argument struggles to hold water with me for the reason listed above. P-locks are great, but beyond lfo's, there is no way to make midi data evolve & warp. Who wouldn't want to have scene control over parameters in their monomachine or Machinedrum.... would make a whole new instrument out of them, & give the OT a huge advantage as a midi sequencer alone. Agreed on the midi scenes over lfo's for useability also, or at least the option.

Yeah, I *probably* mentioned it somewhere, been whinging about it for the last year / year and a half.

I think we should start a petition!

Seriously though, I'm on the verge of selling mine, because, well, for me they just don't cut the mustard as live sequencers. Or at least what I want them to be.

If I ditch them it will hurt, because, well, a year/year and a half of wasted time and $1k lost.

Too much fucking around with the project structure, midi programming et al.

Obviously the massive benefit is the parameter locks and scene crossfader. But this is let down by (for me) the low track count, losing one to Master, losing more to inputs, midi programming etc.

I think I was happier with my RS7000... I think I might make a rant post soon

Hey,I just came up with an implementation that might work to address the MIDI cross fader issues...

What if while in MIDI sequencer mode the cross fader doesn't control scenes, but the amount of all the LFOs and note velocity applied per the selected track? Any tracks you had assigned to the crossfader on the same MIDI channel would be mutually exclusive.

So, for example if you had track 1 + 2 both assigned to MIDI channel one, while the crossfader was all the way to the left track 1's values would be at the max and track 2 would be at zero and as you moved to the right track 1's would get closer to zero and track 2's would increase to the max.

Now, it could get interesting if had 8 possible positions to place the tracks on the cross fader. So you could put track 1 on the left, track 2 in the middle and track 3 at the end.

I'm sure this would be work to implement and I'm not sure if the OT's processor can handle the morphing, but I can currently have two or more tracks sending info to the same midi channel without apparent problems.

MIDI is only 127 steps resolution, right? I think part of issue might be that MIDI morphing might just sound kinda bad and steppy, but I dunno. I do like using my joystick controller...

Rusty wrote:
I think we should start a petition!

Seriously though, I'm on the verge of selling mine, because, well, for me they just don't cut the mustard as live sequencers. Or at least what I want them to be.

If I ditch them it will hurt, because, well, a year/year and a half of wasted time and $1k lost.

Too much fucking around with the project structure, midi programming et al.

Obviously the massive benefit is the parameter locks and scene crossfader. But this is let down by (for me) the low track count, losing one to Master, losing more to inputs, midi programming etc.

I think I was happier with my RS7000... I think I might make a rant post soon

+1 on midi scene petition idea... like many on this site, I've invested a lot in elektron machines, so as much as I can recommend them, I also feel entitled to speak honestly on issues & possible improvements. This is request #1 for me.

Along with the OT midi scene issue, a step backwards from the Monomachine & MD midi sequencers is the inability to sequence & p-lock program changes within a pattern. The P-CH message is locked per part & removed from the step sequencer, & is also buggy with changes to my Nord Modular & also plays up with bank changes on a MicroQ & Z1, along with the delayed pattern change issue to MM/MD (there are 2 workarounds but there shouldn't have to be), so not confident in it (yet).

I remember the rs7x midi play fx & powerful swing functions were next level, just had a bad experience with the chicklet keys dying, along with suspect midi timing when switching patterns internally. & felt it could have been sturdier & less bulky. Definitely has some midi power though, & the structural layout was quite clever but I never loved it enough to get the muscle memory locked in. Seems the Cirklon could be a suitable alternative? Or a QY70/100 for portability? Also used a QY700 years ago.... that had some midi grunt, & is 15 years old now.

@Jonah... sounds better than the midi scene desert that currently exists!

@Jonah : I haven't had enough coffee yet for my brain to process that all properly just yet. Will have to have another read (again) later

@Ozone : Going to have to bite on this...

Ozone wrote:
along with suspect midi timing when switching patterns internally[/b]

Actually... the "suspect midi timing when switching patterns internally" scenario boils down to a setting in "Midi Setup -> Voice Setup to TG" (TG = Tone Generator)

Basically, every "Phrase" in the RS7000 has the patch information embedded in it. If the above setting is on, everytime you change a pattern, it tries to reload all the patches every time, thus the midi-jitter symptom.

Turn it off, and the Tone Generator will not automatically be updated. Change patches via inserting Bank Change / Program Change commands.

Ozone wrote:
& felt it could have been sturdier & less bulky.

I'm actually looking for a spare one in this thread for the sole purposes of modding to try and make it more lightweight... A mate has one for me, but in great condition, and I'd probably only kill it

Ozone wrote:
Definitely has some midi power though, & the structural layout was quite clever but I never loved it enough to get the muscle memory locked in.

Pity. It does have a steep learning curve, but has some serious power under the hood, but horses for courses, no?

Aye horses for courses. Good luck with the Franken7000stein, sounds like a solid idea.
Anyway I just popped my HQ request in for the above discussed issue again.
Will see what bounces back.

One other thing I'd like to see implemented is a function from my favorite sw seq, Numerology. Hard Sync. Right now we can have polyrhythmic patterns by turning on the per track settings in the pattern and switching the master to INF in the scale setup. What I'd like to see is the option to have a master per track. That way you could have, for example, a kick pattern of 16 beats playing against a snare pattern of 25 beats that restarts every 4 bars playing against a triplet high hat pattern of 11 beats that restarts every 2 bars and so on. Sounds complex, I know, but once you use it in a sequencer you really miss it when it's not there, trust me. I'm sure any Numerology user on the board can attest to how useful this function is.

My number one request is definitely transient detection and autoslicing to transient grid. It would be amazing for live sampling, especially of other musicians in a nonmidi environment.

A couple other (probably repeat) ideas:

Unison machine: playback page is like a midi track - control pitch of up to three slave machines per trig. Amp, LFO, FX could have some kind of creative control linking options.

ENF filter mode - envelope follower. Controls could work similarly to the follower on the Oto Biscuit.

ryandfl wrote:
A couple thoughts -

- Option to assign track mutes to be saved to a pattern. As in when switching patters tracks will mute and unmute automatically. This seems so obvious - am I just missing it somehow?
.

my main issue with the OT.
PLEASE , mute and level settings per pattern.

its so obvious. The octa is MUCH MORE than just a drummachine !
make it personalizable.


+1 on midi scenelocks. How cool would that be ! next level !