And a second LFO, more envelope control, filters…
That would be awesome! 
Meanwhile I’m keeping on to make that by hand 
1 Like
I’ve been assuming that, for those 6 digital machines, what you get on the SYN page is pretty much that, a re-packaging of the m:c.
The “more control” just refers to the extras you get on the other pages, doesn’t it ? (And all the rest, built in analog FX, etc)
2 Likes
More control on LFOs, more control on delay and reverb too.
Adding on still…
The velocity and modwheel (also breath, aftertouch) can modulate 4 separate parameters each, as well.
Loads of “control”
3 Likes
Model series have a lot less headroom than Digi series. I think it’s part of the distorsion we hear, both per track and on the master.
1 Like
I am not a cycles owner and have never really heard much of it, but I feel like i’d be kind of let down if the much of the syntakt machines were clones of the cycle machines with a few added parameters. maybe I shouldn’t dig any deeper so I won’t find out.
1 Like
In my opinion the model:cycles sounds amazing. I’ve used so much times before syntakt, because is fun and fast to make music sketches. But I always missed the control, and UI from digis. So I’m so excited to get those machines on syntakt.
In other hand… cycles borrow 6 machines to syntakt, and you have available 24 machines more, borrowed from Rytm and some news. I’ve told about the 6 machines from cycles, I didn’t talk about the other machines. So we discussed only about 20% or so?
I guess isn’t fair judge syntakt because it has 20% from cycles. Even if it’s exciting for me. I mean, syntakt is much more 
1 Like
It’s interesting how smart Elektron is when you realize that M:S has an obvious upgrade path to Digitakt and M:C has paths to Digitone and/or Syntakt, depending on your preferences. Syntakt, of course, having more obvious connections to the M:C.
1 Like
I think this math is a little oversimplified. Syntakt has 8 digital tracks, each of which can use one of 10 machines (6 from Cycles, 4 new). Every Cycles machine is available. It has 3 analog tracks which can use one of 15 machines (all from Analog Rytm), and 1 analog track which can use one of 10 machines (all from Analog Rytm). The AR Tom machines are not on Syntakt. Plus there are MIDI and Disable machines, and noise and impluse for the analog tracks.
So Syntakt has the majority of its tracks with all of Cycles’s sounds and a bit more, a few tracks with most of Rytm’s sounds, plus analog FX, modifiers, and other increased control and audio functionality, in the Digi format. I don’t think this can be reduced to a percentage or fraction of anything. Some people will welcome the chance to expand from/over Cycles and the increment will make all the difference for them; others will be happy that Cycles offers a good chunk of what Syntakt does for less money in a more portable box.
[Edit: errors pointed out below are fixed here, because I can’t count…]
5 Likes
I don’t think that is correct, the manual states that digital tracks offer 10 machines, analog tracks have 15 machines, and the analog cymbal track has an additional 10 machines (as impulses and noise are probably identical to the other analog tracks).
It expands a lot on what the M:C has per voice, besides the 4 additional machines there is a second LFO, two full envelopes and a multimode filter.
1 Like
You’re right: 6 from cycles + a new snare, clap, toy (physical modeling) and bits (virtual analog).
Yes, I don’t think neither that 6 more tracks (2 digital + 4 analog) and all analog machines available is just “a bit more”.
1 Like
well it does sort of matter because if the Cycles offers nearly the same exactly sound then there would be no reason to spend 1000$ on the syntakt.
Note that even with just the subset of M:C based machines, the Syntakt gives you much greater control of the sources, plus all that additional sound shaping and more that you won’t find on the M:C.
Now, add some additional digital machines, plus 25 all-analog machines, 12 tracks instead of 6, fx per track (analog too), an analog fx block, full MIDI sequencing, all the cool additional control you get from a Digi box, blah blah blah …
Admittedly, I don’t own the M:C or the AR or the AH, so one could argue I’m getting some maximum value from my Syntakt, with minimal direct overlap.
But I think that the idea of an M:C owner already having most of what’s in the ST because of some machine overlap is a bit off base.
1 Like
Totally agree with you, syntakt is pretty much more than M:C.
I hear Rytm owners Syntakt analog machines sounds as good as Rytm.
So… What if I tell you Syntakt is a kind of Rytm lite? What if I tell you syntakt is too a kind of Heat lite? And what if I tell you sytakt is too a kind of Cycles extended?
So Syntakt is a kind of Rytm lite + Heat lite + Cycles extended all in one!
Does it justify the price? Imho I guess yes…
Anyway, if you have a Cycles, and you’re happy with it, and you don’t need more. Keep it, Cycles is a great machine. But not the same machine as Syntakt for sure.
1 Like
As someone who has a model:cycles, and an ARmk2, and had a Syntakt - I will say that they are similar but different. For me, personally, there was too much overlap to justify owning all three. And for whatever subjective reasons, I decided to sell the Syntakt and keep the other two. The Syntakt’s is a totally baller device, I just have enough other things that fill the various roles that it was redundant to me.
I don’t think that you can make the syntakt sound exactly like the cycles but it would probably be close enough for most people.
My personal sound preference is towards the cycles. It was almost like the difference between the Digitakt and the Rytm in terms of sound quality for me. The Syntakt felt brighter and cleaner. The cycles feels a little more rough and warm. Maybe something to do with the amplification circuit/headroom that people have noted. Again - this is totally subjective, I may just like the look and feel of cycles and have moved that feeling to my ears, who knows!
One concrete difference: the chord machine on cycles has a “chord” and a “shape” control. There’s not an analogous control for “shape” on the Syntakt (though obvs there are lots of envelope and filter parameters on the Syntakt that cycles doesn’t have - don’t @ me bro!)
5 Likes
I think the “chord” or “color” parameter on M:C’s Chord machine is “bal” on Syntakt’s Chord machine, and “shape” on M:C is “type” on Syntakt.
1 Like
Ah, they sounded pretty different to me - but you may be right! I didn’t do a rigorous comparison.
1 Like
I’m just going by the manual and what I’ve seen in demos. You’ve actually had both of them in the same physical space. I’m sure they sound different, because there are plenty of other differences in the devices, but I haven’t seen any indication that the machines ported from the M:C were altered substantially.
3 Likes
I take a very rough guess that Syntakt has three times the functionality for about three times the price. I imagine that idea flashed up on Elektron’s whiteboard when they conceived the ST.