I know this is a dead horse
It needs to be hit more
Elektron has not implemented a MIDI sequencer in the Rytm
I haven’t seen the post directly from an Elektron employee, but i heard on this forum the reason was due to processing overhead not being able to do both at once
If that is the case, why not allow for people to use a “MIDI Machine” to replace an analog circuit, a la Machinedrum?
The MachineDrum did not have dedicated MIDI sequencing like the Octatrack; you would lose a drum voice to gain a sequencing channel. Also, given that many tracks share the same circuit but can have unique digital sequencing info (like closed + open hats), using the closed hats for MIDI track and open hats for analog sound seems perfectly doable and without sacrificing a voice (just making programming less convenient).
So… if the argument that MIDI cannot exist alongside eight analog voices, why not at least MIDI in sacrifice of analog voices? It has already been used in their gear, and appeases people without requiring people to crunch code
Wow, every other day one of these threads pops up, doesn’t it. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for your suggestion. But despite any apparent technical explanations, I’m afraid the real reason is… They don’t wanna.
Well, I don’t wanna buy an OT without OB support & analogue multimode filters + overdrive… So Elektron, get cracking
I wouldn’t mind buying a complementary elektron device if that’s their philosophy (ie. no overlap between instruments), but first they need to come up with one that gives me GAS for it… Hoping that the upcoming products next year will have some form of MIDI sequencing. But, it also has to have all the new goodies we’re becoming used to
To be honest, it’s a bit naïve to think that the issue is as simple as just sacrificing one of the analog voices for midi control. The analog machines havenn’t been designed for midi sequencing at all, so it would take a pretty radical software overhaul to make it work, assuming that the Processing power is even there to begin with.
There is the circuit, and then the digital control for that circuit (aka when you select what track to control digitally.) How does changing the digital control of the circuit matter? MIDI is also less demanding than the CV requirements for the circuit to function as a drum voice (its a few strands of hexadecimal.)
The digital control is freely routable. It isn’t stuck only able to do X things. And sequencing on the MDUW wasn’t complex - you’d tune the first note through semitones, chords through relation.
I sold my Rytm, but plan on getting another regardless of the situation. The change in planning - from every Elektron box having sequencing regardless of function to ditching them in the Analog chain - doesn’t make sense. And the G2M seems to be unreliable as well as monophonic.
As I said, its a dead horse but i’m still hitting it
Now I’m imagining using MIDI machines on the AR with the chromatic pads, and its really starting to hurt
I’d wager and say making useful chord progressions may be easier on the AR than the A4 or AK even, I think the chromatic pad spacing is where its at
It makes sense to not have MIDI on the A4 I guess, doesn’t make sense here
I can make super fast blasts of noise from two tracks sharing a circuit in 16th notes, but I can’t make one track sequence a bass line while the other triggers a hi hat sound every now and then?
I am not sure if its because I just sold gear and have excess money making me want to pounce on an AR right now…
…but I want voice-stealing MIDI Machines now
It is literally code that has already been made for Elektron
It would not strain the CPU, or require a re-write of the OS (I am sure it would take noticeable changes to add MIDI sequencing alongside eight voices, even if just for being able to change pages to the MIDI sequencing section)
And importantly, it does not step on the toes of the OctaTrack. I don’t want a MIDI arp, or MID LFOs like the Octa. All I want is down n dirty paraphonic MIDI note sequencing. Using the chromatic pads to plug in chords and bass lines would be a dream.
Unfortunately it seems that it won’t happen. You are beating a dead horse.
We are all convinced that it would be awesome .
Now you have different solution:
-Invest your time to find a solution (redesign the AR, alternative box…)
-Invest your excess of money in a separated sequencer.
-Forget about this issue and move forward.
-Develop terminal illness, have Make-A-Wish go public with my demands, Elektron caves due to awkwardness of situation
I love gear, but I love a “little” gear. The amount of cabling and work space needed for a standalone sequencer to add into my AR setup is more than I wanna deal with. I hate the “spaghetti” fetish of piles of cables and gear everywhere. And any portable sequencer is either unstable, limited or too large. I don’t want to get a second Elektron box to haul around, I just want the AR to have something the MDUW could do:(
And honestly, I can’t overstate this enough - I don’t care about half of what the Octa does. I’d rather build a MIDIbox SEQ. And even then, its another box on my table with a pile of cable, less power strip real estate and another thing to learn to program.
I get the A4 being CV only since it can incorporate into a modular and is targeted for that niche. I don’t get the AR not having MIDI since it seems primed to jam with a few synth modules, especially given how it handles melody sequencing better than any other box. The chromatic pads on the AR seem much better for sequencing than the blippy key buttons on the A4.
What information are you working from that makes you believe this?
Or is this all just based on assumptions which are only informed by your own desires?
Have you thought this through to its logical conclusion?
What about the physical cues of the face plate? How do I know how to get to the Midi page by looking at the unit itself (like I do with Monomachine or Octatrack?) Even the MD has M1 - M4 tracks.
And once I get there, which pages do what?
The absence of these visual cues goes against Elektron’s (and many other manufacturer’s) own design principles.
If you’re taking digital information from the UI, you always can transform it to MIDI. I know every program is different (I’m myself the coder of a few apps and some know vsts), but it doesn’t matter how different is, if you have the digital information, you always can bridge it. In fact the AR is sending some MIDI messages.
I would like to see just one midi track, even if that mean sacrifing 2 analog voices and no CC locks. Why? because is easy sync different gear, and create hardware setups with it.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, I believe this is due to the sequencer being completely separate from the midi output. Simply no possible way to route from seq to midi. Midi to seq works because it can process incoming and record to a digital format for seq. Outgoing does not work because it was not built with that in mind. I’m happy with this answer and still love my keys.
Even if it was possible…it won’t happen. Deal with it.
I was like you few months ago…raging against the lack of midi external sequencing…crying on the floor… then I moved on. Now I spend my days helping other people with the same issues!
The pills help too.
You just explained everything I was referring to.
There are no design cues in the AR for separate MIDI, where replacing a voice with a MIDI machine is capable without conflicting with the current AR design.
And the M1-M4 was always a suggestion, using that as proof it couldn’t work is a STRETCH. I could load every voice in the MachineDrum with physical modelling shakers, nothing makes me use voice one as a bass drum. In fact, no voice on the MachineDrum even denotes itself as the “physical modelling shaker” track, I can still use it though
Thanks for replying.
But you ignored my first questions regarding the technical OS implications,
What information are you working from that makes you believe this?
Or is this all just based on assumptions which are only informed by your own desires?
I am someone who is 1) not an idiot 2) has built programming code 3) knows the processing requirements of MIDI
MIDI was designed to be a stable platform of information exchange in the early 80s. Nothing has been done to change the MIDI standards since it has been debuted (although serious talks about shifting towards a backwards-compatible HD MIDI has been discussed recently by the MMA.) There is NOTHING that leads me to believe generating the code needed for a MIDI machine sequencer - exactly the one used in the MachineDrum - has developed a processor strain such that it would not be possible in the Rytm. How can an incredibly minimal amount of code that is backwards compatible for 30+ year old digital processors tax a modern processor?
I am not advocating for sequencing alongside the AR’s twelve voices of CV/eight circuits. There would be no need to redesign the OS. As pointed out, the sequencer sends out MIDI data already (it is why STROM works).
Why I don’t talk to Elektron - multiple people from Elektron obviously read this forum. Seeing discourse and exchange develop in front of them has much more dynamic growth than sending in a question and getting a curt answer from their online support staff. Whoever would answer my question would not be the one capable of making the changes; someone from Elektron reading this post probably would.
So all of this because you can’t be arsed to add one more piece of gear to your setup of other midi capable gear? Because cables are ugly?
Beatstep Pros are $249 and it won’t cost you a single Rytm voice. You’ll still get micro timing, up to 64 steps, and polyrhythms, and even other fun sequencer stuff that Elektrons can’t do.
Well, the BSP is a pain in the ass if you’re like Elektron workflow. Reason: too much micromanaging, no parts/kits. And no “song” mode or similar.
MIDI Out is very useful to match Rytm with any other synth/groovebox that do not undestand the same language that Rytm (Program Changes). As example, my TB3 changes its current sounds with Program Changes insteand changing the pattern. My x0xb0x changes nothing, it need notes from C1 to C9 to play/change the pattern.
Of course those are machines that have its own sequencer, and you may manually change their pattern, but, since you only have to hands, it’s better only change the pattern in one machine and focus your hands into playing the AR performance
That’s why MIDI Out is very important. Without MIDI Out, the Rytm is an awesome machine, but a lonely one. You cannot match it with the 99% of the gear, unless you want to play manually the other gear, which means do not perform in your other equipment.
And MIDI Out is possible in Rytm. Rytm saves the pattern information in its memory and +Drive. That means that Rytm has it digitallized, so it has been processed and it can be bridged, in the same way MIDI Clock and Pattern changes are.
If Rytm would have MIDI Out I would purchase it instantly, meanwhile I’m thinking more in other solutions more friendly with third party hardware, like Engine or Pyramid with a DrumStation.
