I haven’t found a way to attenuate the usb output - I take it there isn’t one? I’m finding a disparity between the audio out an usb out such that the usb out seems hot as hell!
You can set the USB Audio output gain in the newly released FW 1.12. Settings -> Device Config -> USB Gain [+0, +6, +12, +18]. Defaults to max.
Pan can no be p-locked, anything in the lfo menu can.
The could have put pan inside lfo menu, so you could p-lock pan position.
Not talking about the lfo destination which I know exists, just pan setting.
I’m pretty sure that is the return gain from your daw back into the cycles? For monitoring and listening to your daw.
Edit: Not next m:c right now so can’t double check this but would be useless anyway as I’m trying to reduce the gain.
Am I the only one thinking “motor:cycles” when I read model:cycles ?
Yes.
Definitely love my M:C,
after a couple weeks of use I always find more use of it, whether it is to add a variation to a track started somewhere else or start the skelethon of something and then add meat on the bones later on in the studio.
Studio time comes and goes so it is refreshing to have M:C and M:S handy near the couch to bang out a few ideas on the go…
Thanks for the confirm, i’ll try to update with more narrow repro steps as i come to them, i’ve seen it happen a few times and just stop occurring, but i haven’t used it long enough to have any reliable trend analysis.
When you hold down a trig to parameter lock a step, and turn the level knob, what happens? The note menu comes up.
This is rather straightforward, right? Here, you can parameter lock the note, velocity, length.
Again, rather straightforward because this falls in line with the design philosophy of the instrument.
Elektron has drawn their lines about what fits into this philosophy and what drift outside of this philosophy. It would stand to reason that having to hold down two buttons (func+trig) in order to perimeter lock one perimeter which can still be modulated by the LFO, is an action that is considered to be outside of the design philosophy.
Elektron showed us that with the MS getting track length scaling and OT MK1 getting trig conditions yes… just about anything is possible. But the design philosophy argument, is entirely different. And this is why I asked which knob would you sacrifice in order to parameter lock pan. As that would be required to maintain adherence to the design philosophy.
I was kinda surprised that panning wasn’t p-lockable.
Please?
You can pan all 6 tracks.
You can p-lock it via LFO
You can modulate it via LFO.
I’d say that is a fair bit of use.
Ask me how I pan the tracks on my DR-110
It’s a shame to give up the only LFO for panning.
I guess you could always track that track separately and then do panning in the recording.
Panning isnt really needed for live.
As it is a shame to have to use it for attack too…
Not a deal breaker at $300 tho
Only for a single step, as the whole LFO Page 1 can be p-locked
I’m not sure what you mean.
With “The way it is now” I mean on a knob you can not p-lock, free that knob from pan dutties and maybe use it for attack…
It would be much useful if you could p-lock pan per step ( with out using the only lfo we have); as we can p-lock lfo parametters that pan setting could share menu with lfo…I would be easy to implement and straight forward to use
If one wants to modulate pan then you can use the lfo but I do not tend to modulate drum sounds pan, I use it more for synth.
When we say some feautures could be added or some things could be fixed we do not mean the M:C sucks…
Having attack would give more sound design possibilities, and p-lock panning improve space.
We are not asking to design new machines or add thing like a multimode filter. I can not think of anything more simple than pan p-lock or attack setting…
are you using your LFO on filter?
Well, you can choose to use it on anything else on a per step basis.
Pan, for instance.
So let’s say your default LFO settings are sine wave 8x, filter freq, depth
And you have 10 trigs on that track.
Hold down one of the 10 trigs, tap the LFO button, and you can p-lock wave/mult/dest(PAN!)/depth for that step.
The result is you just p-locked pan via the LFO, and all your steps except the PAN LFO p-locked step still get the filter LFO.
Nice
Thanks
I guess I’m not understanding why you are so adamantly doubling down on this particular feature request.
We can sit here and talk design philosophy all day, but in the end, it would be an Elektron product designer’s job to implement pan locks, should they decide its worth their time and effort.
I’ve done my part as a user; I’ve stated my feature request. Just surprised to see a mod get, by appearance, somewhat irate and defensive about what seems to be a fairly conservative request, compared to all of the other requests I’ve read.