This thread is tiresome.
I couldn’t care less about the default sounds and demos of a synth.
Syntakt has independent Volume, Level and Overdrive each track. Plus Distortion on the FX block.
M:C has 7 control knobs for the sounds. Syntakt has 9 control knobs for the sounds.
…
But anyway, the war of Elektron vs. Elektron users shows that the M:C is definitely not obsolete 
In other words, you CAN do latched retrig on the Syntakt, using the Modifier retrig 
Yes and no. The retrig modifier allows a “type” of latched retrig. For example, you cannot play the retrigs when you open the keyboard. You can do this on the M:C. It allows for interesting and versatile playability. The retrig modifier on the Syntakt is basic retrig firing. It serves its purpose but it’s different than the latched retrig on the M:C.
I purchased a M:C just days after receiving the Syntakt, and strictly because of the similarities to my ears. As my Syntakt is Vesa-mounted, I’ve now got a mobile version in my hands which I traveled out of the country with recently. Of course there are big differences but I’m taking advantage of the similarities.
The Syntakt is going to render its engine at a higher rate than the M:C, though. The grittiness compared to the Digitone was due to less fidelity, lower headroom…
The Cycles isn’t going to run on greater processing power but less, which is one of its charms. You’ll have a wider sound palette with the Syntakt but working within limitations has its charms.
I disagree.
Depending on how hard you hit the input of the drive in the analog FX block, the Syntakt can definitely range from subtle enhancement Ala Heat to high gain distortion Ala Heat.
Add to that the routing flexibility, two LFOs on that parameter, all on top of (for the most part) per track overdrive, a peaking filter, p-lockable with EG to boost or filter the distorted frequencies… loads of space to get creative.
Sure you can get creative with Syntakt too and I had fun during the week I owned it
I was saying that I personally get more creative and have more fun with the Cycle
I don’t think the Cycles is obsolete, there is a huge chunk that liked this machine.
I am thinking they’d do some other product for these other machines, which is out of my hands.
Obsolete, schmobsolete.
For $300 you get a lightweight, portable box with the quickest workflow in the Elektron line and a surprisingly flexible sound engine controlled by 6 tracks, WITH preset-locking.
And the track-selection buttons don’t do double duty as the trig buttons.
yeah I know right, not much to me is difference, because I already have parts of the Syntakt.
What bugged me most about the model:cycles was that a lot of little things seemed like they were missing just so that it would not cannibalize sales of other elektron devices. Like the attack part of the envelope. And things like portamento and scales are not there. And why doesn’t the step sequencer send parameter values via midi as well as just velocity, duration, and note value when a step is parameter locked? I mean, parameter CCs can already be sent out through manual knob movement. But this sort of purposeful limitation to make room for sales of other similar devices seems to be the elektron way nowadays… someone once said that the model:cycles feels like the result of a board meeting about optimizing profits and I felt the same way and ended up selling it.
Maybe this and not Syntakt was the point at which “Elektron lost its focus as a company”. 
OK, but besides jokes, M:C does seem like a very dumbed down version. I already sold mine by the way.
it is kind of hard trying to release an affordable product, especially since the sequencer is the main thing out of Elektron, I don’t blame you, wish I would make the Cycles have an envelope like Attack/Decay instead, it could make the models more of a go to.
I plan on picking a cycles up asap since they are on the cheap now, just waiting for one to pop up on CL. I love the texture of my M:S and what I’ve heard done on the cycles.
I first thought about purchasing a Syntakt, but then I felt some kind of g.a.s. and thought, well, I first should try all I can do with the M:C before buying anything else.
Currently I’m very happy about my decision. Beeing more or less totally unexperienced with all electronic music production I love the directness of the m:c and all of it’s knobs and buttons. It is limited, missing filters, different envelopes, more lfos, but yesterday I first came across using it as a midi controller additionally to the onboard sound machines.
Where else do you get a 6 track sequencer with 12 knobs and two toggle buttons for each of these 6 tracks? If connected to other instruments, virtual or not, gives you a rich selection of additional sound creation possibilities. I e.g. plan to connect my craft synth 2.0 to one track, it’s mono anyway, and then I have the choice to put my Zoom MS-70 in chain and get any rich effect out of it on a seperate audio output to bring it it together in my (passive) mixer afterwards.
So many possibilities. And, at last, the M:C is light and does not pull 2A of power (and stays cool). It runs endless connected to my powerbank, together with my Arturia Keystep 37. So much fun and experimenting.
Btw, Hello! This is my first post here. 
You mean the difference between the Digitakt and the Model:Samples, right?
@HBIII I’m so glad that I don’t have a more advanced box, just the M:C. So I can’t feel what I’m missing. 
I had the same thoughts some years ago, I wanted a DT but I preferred to start with a M:S
DT never came, M:S still here 
Models are more simple than their big brothers, but they are way less menu diving, and that can be an important thing
However, in the concrete case of M:C I think that simplicity may be a handicap in sound design. M:S covers that better, as being a sample player it has infinite sound possibilities
Not syntakt to mc but I used to have a digitakt and I have to say the MC is definitely more immediate by its simplicity and number of knobs. Velocity pads are also quite a lot of fun, with the retrig modulation for example.
I’ve moved from the digitatk to the OT, and now the OT + MC is pretty dope… lots and lots of possible connections and modulation!
That’s funny, I thought it the other way round – The M:C being much more immediate than the Samples, because of not being sticked to specific set of samples: Every sound can immediately be generated, no intermediate actions required.
In the end with sampling the palette of sounds itself is much more open, for sure. How do you work? Do you have a couple of sound you love on it or is it more experimenting? How easy is it to bring new samples on it?