Definitely agree with āpage per functionā and being the least knob-per-function since the encoders are shared across pages. But in my opinion, the Syntakt is the least menu divey synth Iāve ever used. Even the Minilogue XD is more dependent on its confusing menu laid out across a grid of trigs. And yeah, definitely agree that more knobs isnāt necessarily the recipe for intuitive control. In fact, arguably an interface with endless encoders and a shared set of knobs for the filter and amp envelope sections would be more, not less, intuitive (assuming it had a little display showing the current values).
Roland often struggles with this. On the MC-101, to edit a standard tone parameter, you hit Shift+Sound and scroll to SETTING and push the value knob. Then scroll with the value knob to find the parameter you want to change, push the value knob, and then scroll to dial in the value, and push the value knob again to confirm, then push Exit twice to get back to the main screen again. Or if you want to change the EQ of a track, hold Shift and press the track number, scroll to the EQ switch, push and scroll to switch it on, push again, then scroll further to the EQ parameters, push, scroll, etc etc, Exit, Exit. Itās hard to fathom how much simpler these things are on a Syntakt unless youāve experienced both first hand.
What Elektron has truly mastered is making careful considerations of which parameters are going to be tweaked frequently and in live performance situations, and which parameters are more set-and-forget kind of things. The velocity/AT macro screen is a good example of something you arenāt going to go back and change much once itās programmed, whereas the filter cutoff is always just a button press away and you can do it blindfolded. This goes to show how far theyāve pushed it and this is why I often compare it with video games like SSFII where you have to learn some complex buttom combos, but once you do, youāll fly through the game like a pro.
Some might even argue that theyāve pushed things a little too far on the Syntakt because the synth engines have been simplified as a consequence of their design goals to make it more immediate. (The Digitone is more ātraditionalā in the sense that it offers multiple pages of parameters and as such can feel a bit less intuitive.) The Syntakt is so quick and intuitive to use that I almost never bother to browser for presets - itās faster to just dial in the sound I want because it typically takes less than ten seconds to get into the ballpark.
Indeed, Roland has gotten better at this and the SH-4d is a good example of it. Instead of the above MC-101 workflow, you press Shift+Tone and have clear access to all the parameters you want right there. The screen makes a massive difference here of course. Still though, the decision to use knobs instead of endless encoders on a multi-timbral synth is an odd choice that is bound to get confusing/frustrating when performing on it. It would be interesting to hear their rationale for it and learn more about their design philosophies. Iām guessing that they view the SH-4d primarily as a studio equipment, with live performance being more of a secondary use case. But then again, their promotional videos seem to suggest otherwise. Maybe itās a flirt with the past, or the idea is, like on the SP-404 MK2, that youāre supposed to get so fluent with it that you can dial a knob blindfolded and āfeelā where it is. Or maybe theyāre just a bit conservative or think that their target audience is? But I suppose itās also a question of which price point a piece of hardware is targeted at. The Hydrasynth is an example of an interface with endless encoders that also shows the current values via its ring LEDs. I think anyone would agree that thatās superior to not having the ring LEDs, but itās a question of how much people are willing to pay for it. If ASM designed the SH-4d, Iām sure they would have opted for that interface rather than knobs with physical endpoints.
One sign of where Roland is definitely getting better at UX design: although the MC-101ās brand new Partial Editor that shipped with the 1.8 firmware has to be one of the most complex and deep additions to this undersized little groovebox, itās surprisingly one of the most intuitive interfaces of the entire device. Fun? No, but easy to learn and with practice get pretty quick with? Definitely.
This I agree with 100%. In fact, this should be the primary consideration if youāre doing hardware for the fun of it. If itās not fun, itās not for you. I can live with parts of the UI being less fun, but if the primary workflow - the stuff you do over and over on it - isnāt fun, then itās not worth keeping it.
The trend with more āfunā screens is clear with Syntakt leading the way, followed by the Minifreak launch late last year, and now this SH-4d. It would be a safe prediction that there are many more devices with screens like that to come in 2023.
