Especially if you use bog standard off-the-shelve button caps.
Oh, wait…
The Mk1 boxes and the AK don’t use the full speed available on their USB 2.0 ports because this caused too much noise to leak into their analogue circuitry.
The Mk2 and Digi boxes have better physical separation between the analogue and digital sections, don’t suffer from that noise issue, and can thus use full USB 2.0 speeds.
3 Likes
correct, mk I analogs are limited to USB 1.1 speeds 
The hardware itself is USB 2.0 but runs at 1.1 speeds because otherwise the USB line noise would infect the analog components and we’d get nasty hums/buzzing/etc
i think in a sonic state interview it was mentioned that digitone has an extra dsp in it compared to digitakt,
but polyphony doesnt equate to cpu power so easily.
when you load up the sequencer , with many many plocks , probability , effects etc it eats up cpu power.
and while changing all those parameters it needs to keep rock solid timing while the user if flipping through menus and using ctrl-all on parameters.
all the different systems could be on other processors/threads or whatever (i dont know how the architecture is setup)…
so its got quite a lot to deal with. old modules might have more notes but the interface are often slow , things slow down when throwing a lot of cc at them…
but in some respects… the monomachine is quite old and it had similer sequencer, more notes , fx etc…
Hate to say it but the USB limitation on mk1 units is a schoolboy error which concerns me, I’m far from being a electronics expert, but it is well known that high data rate digital signals running around circuit boards can cause interference on adjacent analog circuits, yet it is fairly simple at the design stage to solve, using galvanic isolation or filtering. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_isolation
Given that the mkI units were built with Overbridge in mind it should have been apparent at the prototype stage that high speed USB would be an issue, and the appropriate steps taken to eliminate the interference.
Still, does not bother me as I don’t use Overbridge.
3 Likes
Actualy its ‘good enough’ for me… even the six tracks is six times more than anything else. 
the signal coming true is top-notch and in a perfect sweetspot db wise. Also I`m not sure that OB was a thing at all (I might be wrong) when they started to develop the mk1 series…
although I didn’t know about the 1.1 bandwidth neither
As I said I don’t use OB so have no idea if the performance is an issue running at USB1.0 speeds (12mbps iirc) so in theory quite enough for plenty of multi channel audio and (presumably) midi at turbo speed, however USB2.0 (480mpbs iirc) has been commonplace for years now, so it seems odd that the problem ever saw the light of day. I guess once you start having multiple mkI units there might be some bottle necking at USB1.0 speeds? Maybe not?
Maybe Overbridge wasn’t in mind when the mkI’s were first designed, but they all have USB ports so I still find it odd that USB2.0 interference wasn’t picked up upon.
I don’t think that p-locks and sound locks are particularly processor intensive when compared to things like reverb on these kind of platforms, however I do think that in my experience with using Elektron gear I have come to appreciate the elegance and seamless way in which they are integrated, and the mostly bullet proof performance of the machines, to me this speaks of (possibly, only guessing here) certain routines such and housekeeping and monitoring in background and foreground to ensure that everything is scheduled and running correctly. I mean for example take the midi clock and timing integrity of Elektron machines, really quite impressive given all the other things that they are doing at the same time. It is one thing to make a standalone midi or analog sequencer or standalone clock box have great timing, but an entirely trickier proposition when also generating sounds and effects, and realtime user input like an Elektron machine is, only a few companies have ever managed to pull it off, and even then not always.
6 Likes
although I`m a developer (only web/unity/processing) not sure what costs the most in audio programming(reverb is probably one of them but that is also depends on the reverb. i was able to create semi-decent stuff w. webaudio and that is a shitty platform)… one thing i’m sure that you definitely need to have the overhead for ‘worst case possible’ even if you never reach that. I can’t imagine otherwise… would be nice to know for real though. Its kinda weird to guess these things without knowing the specs (like what the actual DSP/ overall memory size). Also I didn’t mean the p-locks itself but the sudden changes that may occur by them when you are running crazy. I mean it has to be a reason for the p-lock limitations/track.
1 Like
I must say after my pseudo rant about why the Digitone has only one digital engine instead of many like the MnM, I had thought about it and I think it is nice that elektron applied the “deep per parameter editing” ethos present in the A4 to a digital machine.
3 Likes
The only thing I cant get my head around is , why no parameter slides?
5 Likes
They also manufacture DSP chips alongside microprocessors (Coldfire)
Freescale DSPB56721AG is used in the octatrack, I wouldn’t be surprised to find a similar variant of DSP chip inside the new DN.
But saying that, I wonder if they decided to run the DN using the same Coldfire microprocessor found in the DT hence the low polyphony and track count, basically keep the costs down and maximise profits.
I just want to add one thing in regards to cost and DSP… The Novation Circuit is actually a 16 voice unit (2 x 6 polyphony synth and 4 x sample playback engines) and to my ears, the synthesis sounds pretty amazing at the fraction of the cost and sure, sequencer capabilities of a DN but all of this goes back to my point, why skimp on processing power in 2018?
5 Likes
@glitched Gave a pretty clear and accurate answer. There really isn’t more to it.
Well, I’m off to inhale some more chem trails (you can buy em in bottles these days, at least in Sweden).
Edit: Oh I’m just poking a bit of fun at all the Elektron conspiracy theories/theorists. 
the ones with the purple labels are the most potent, save me a couple of sniffs
With Elektrons brilliant sequencer there’s not really a need for huge polyphony unless of course you want some unison mania going.
1 Like
Yeah i guess you’re right, I think I’ll head back to using Renoise and cripple my workflow by limiting the amount of tracks and keep a low polyphonic note count because hey, it’s retro.
For a real authentic experience I may also dig out my commodore amiga 500+ from the attic and load up Protracker while I’m at it.
Nothing like amputeeing your thumbs to get the creative juices of every day life flowing
1 Like
No offense but IMO the circuit sounds meh compared to elektrons, no matter what the poly. The circuit has a distinctive sonic signature that is brittle somehow… not running internally @96k I guess either? needs some class A nonlin to shine, like some tube amp processing etc
3 Likes
I think the feature limit is about spot on, much better for me personally than the digitak, ar and a4.
I’m realky liking the digitone.
, just got it yesterday
2 Likes
Just responding to this regardless of other people’s opinions/requirements, simply stating mine…
A band musicians perspective:
That is, coming from playing guitar at bar gigs and house parties on and off for maybe 15 years before getting into electronics, as a band we were each one “track” with one voice or maybe some more by using fx or if we had a synth player at the time… Often there was 4 of us, sometimes more, but sometimes just 3 even…
Sure I could play by myself or with one other person but with 3 you got a “power trio” which if you all went for it could make a big full sound… Drums, bass, guitar…
With 4 I always felt completely free as I wouldn’t have to hold down rhythm so much and could play more sporadic and differently. Drums, bass, guitar, keys(my preference as #4)…
Adding more for me wasn’t always better. I move around on guitar a lot so I always have to do much less with a second guitar player to kind of conform to what they are doing too. Adding horns or violin or percussion was always welcome… But yeah a second guitar was even too much for me and never did we think about getting a second synth player…
I did play in an 8 piece band for quite some time, but while making the sound bigger it also limited what each of us could do at any moment… I would feel more free to just do my thing with a 4 or 5 piece…
Basically, from a band musicians perspective 4 tracks is about all you ever need to play hundreds and hundreds of hours of music… 5 and you really got some serious room to explore, more and you start having to conform to each other more again…
(Sure, use a few more with electronic music, and I understand there becomes a different way to create with much more tracks with less happening on them, but I’m just saying as a minimum)
Currently operating an OT and a Rytm, almost never have all the tracks going, usually just 2 to 4 on OT, maybe more on Rytm but I just run stereo out into OT so it’s almost just like one “drum track”.
I’m not saying that you “shouldn’t” use more tracks, I’m only saying that from a traditional musicians perspective they are not necessary to make good music, and might not even cross our mind as any kind of limitation… I haven’t even mentioned plocks and soundlocks which can basically pseudo-multiply your track count if using Elektron gear…
It’s also OK for us if we want to just play the same acoustic guitar dry on a bunch of songs, listeners don’t even think twice that it’s the same “voice”, it just matters what we do with it…
Again this is just my story from where I come from, take something from it or not, it’s up to you…
Agree, Disagree, matters not to me, just offering a perspective… 
23 Likes