Syntakt vs Maschine Plus

Elektron Gear Syntakt
#21

The thing is, I’m no longer sure that this spec sheet would qualify as an “ultimate” groovebox anymore because such a feature set will inevitably add a lot of complexity. Take the MPC as an example: it has step sequencing, a looper, probability, ratcheting, even polyphonic aftertouch. The pads are very playable, I rarely feel I miss piano keys when setting it up to a certain scale, it has plenty of plugins, plenty of synths and tons of effects. It’s really a DAW.

But therein lies the problem for me: it’s trying too much to be a DAW, to the point where some of the fun gets lost. To me it comes down to: what is the goal of hardware vs just making music on the computer? For me, it’s the immediacy, and there’s also a performance aspect of it, jamming live (see my channel for examples), etc. The MPC doesn’t naturally pull me to that kind of workflow, even though technically it could. There are people who use the MPC as a pure live instrument, playing on those pads live, and it’s perfectly doable. But to me, the design of the interface makes it a DAW, so I use it as one. While I had 18 months of great fun with it (my most productive music making period so far), I had this constant thought at the back of my head wondering, why am I not just doing this in the DAW where I don’t have to accept all these limitations?

So there’s a very practical difference in how more “focused/limited/specialized” instruments are used, and that’s the key here: the Syntakt, or the Digitakt, or let’s say the MC-101 or even the OP-Z - they’re all much less of a DAW so you won’t even try to shoehorn the entire music making process into this one single device. Instead, you tend to use them for what they’re good at, which tends to be to get the inspiration flowing, get a jam going, etc. Once you start to feel like you have a more complete song going, you won’t hesitate to carry that work over to the DAW to finish the job (if producing and releasing tracks is your thing), or if you’re a live performer, maybe the focus then is to rehearse the performance and go out and jam in front of an audience.

Again, the Machine+ and MPC could both be used in this way too, there’s nothing that stops you from just ignoring the mixing/mastering sides of the machines and just using them as instruments. It’s just that my personal experience suggests that you won’t really do this if you, like me in the past, are looking for an ultimate groovebox that replaces the laptop. Instead, if you’re like me, you will probably try to make full tracks on them, hit up against its limitations, and eventually start to wonder why you aren’t just doing the tedious arrangement and mixing work in the DAW instead.

I’m very happy with the Syntakt, btw. :slight_smile: I do wish it could sample too though. To me, the ultimate groovebox would be an Elektron box like the Syntakt, but with a few more features: polyphony, an arp, sampling, usb-c power, built-in battery. Maybe in a few years time, something like that will show up on the market, but until then, I’m busy making music on the Syntakt.

Bottom line: buying a groovebox with more deliberate limitations isn’t necessarily a bad thing. :slight_smile:

4 Likes
#22

that’s fine, because people are different, and their needs & priorities too

no way, because … see right above )

1 Like
#23

to put this comment in perspective:
the band booka shade (with over 1million monthly listeners on Spotify) have been using M+ for all of their live concerts for months now… if this thing is reliable enough for them, it will be for you too …

2 Likes
#24

I’ve been thinking more and more about what I ‘use’ instruments for recently.

My background is as a guitarist-in that ‘world’ I can play the guitar, experiment with/design sounds, write/contribute to writing songs, jam with others or play on my own-all as a ‘guitarist’. However since getting into ‘electronic music’ in the last few years it seems the label is ‘producer’.

I don’t think that fits with what I do, and it is why the MPC, M+ or my own personal choice the Akai Force work for me. I don’t think about them or use them as a DAW. I don’t use anything as a DAW as I have no interest in ‘producing’ tracks. Instead I use them to ‘perform’ in the same way I would my guitar. Basically I just play them; and some of the time I commit those ideas to ‘tape’ and they become a track, but I still don’t think of myself as a producer.

Anyway-long way of saying that if people are like me and are looking at a box to perform/jam/play on - without thinking of creating a polished song - then I think something like the M+ or MPC (or Force) works perfectly and is so versatile. I will perform/play for a few weeks at a time around a project template I’ve designed that will have 5/6 instruments/sample groups that I like. Then I’ll get bored and design a totally different template and it will be like having a new instrument. That is what I think the beauty of these things are as ‘performance tools’.

For what’s it’s worth I imagine the Syntakt is great for this as well. I am extremely tempted to add one given the current price. But I don’t think it could replace the flexibility I get from the Force.

I think the M+ would give the OP more if they want to use like I describe above, Ideally keeping the syntakt as well. If this is about producing finished tracks though then I’d follow Fins advice and give up on hardware only setups and get yourself a laptop and a DAW. Nothing will beat it.

3 Likes
#25

I ended up selling my Maschine Plus. Development is moving at a snails pace and while it’s at least mostly stable now it’s still not an experience designed for standalone.

You can’t easily convert things to audio so you have to resample, not unheard of but it’s something you can easily do in the Maschine Software (and MPC can do it as well). The audio output is bland sounding. You can’t convert things to mono. The parameters are all displayed in text rather than showing any visual representation like showing an Envelope or LFO.

It’s such a let down seeing as I love the Maschine workflow but I’m tired of Native Instruments. And considering that basically all the issues the M+ has are a result of it being standalone and the controller version is much cheaper and more powerful depending on your computer it’s better to just stick with the MK3.

I don’t have any faith that the M+ will be where it needs to be any time soon or ever. The fact that they’ve been using these two colored screens for a decade now and still have minimal graphic representation on them feels like a waste and from what it sounds like the Maschine team is pretty much a skeleton crew and the original team that worked on the M+ isn’t there, but that could just be a rumor.

Either way I’d stay far away from that thing. It’s a huge disappointment as someone who has loved the Maschine platform for over a decade.

3 Likes
#26

I’ve had both. Still have the Maschine+ Sold the ST

1 Like
#27

I think the key difference there is that as a ‘guitarist’, at least for the most part (certainly not always), you play a part of a band making a full track. You don’t have to become an expert drummer, or keyboardist, or bass player. You need to understand how you and your guitar playing contributes to the overall track, and you need to get really good at collaborating with the other musicians so the result is harmonious.

With electronic music, again, in general, you’re normally playing more than one instrument. You’re expected to build drums, bass, the melody, etc, all by yourself. This doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a producer, you can still just jam and record some tracks or parts of songs and just have fun with it.

Being a producer or not goes back to my first question to the OP: are you looking to produce finished tracks or not? If you are, then I’d say that the DAW will be a more versatile, powerful and quick tool than the M+ or the MPC.

I’d definitely agree with this. Again, these boxes can be used the way you describe, as a box to perform/jam/play on and not necessary produce on. And I think if that’s how you use them, they probably make more sense. But, Akai deliberately designed the MPC so it could function as your almost-but-not-quite-full DAW. And my point is that that design choice comes with certain compromises. One example would be the workflow, which just is a bit clunker and not as streamlined as a more focused ‘instrument’ like the Syntakt, where you have a much more limited set of options available, which leads to you being faster and more focused. At least in my experience.

I have spent more time with the MPC than any other electronic instrument besides my aging Roland W~30, so I’m definitely not suggesting that it’s not an excellent device that you can have years of fun exploring and making music on. I’ve just personally concluded that I’m much more productive when finishing tracks in the DAW instead, which negates a large part of the utility of the MPC - to me. Hope that clarifies.

2 Likes
#28

This really depends on what you want.

If you are looking for a groovebox to add to your setup? Go with the Syntakt

If you are looking for a sequencer to be the center/hub of your setup? Go with the Maschine+

#29

If you somehow want to use your Groovebox as the central piece in a hardware-setup, don’t go Maschine. While the M+ (and the Mk3 etc.) are able to send and receive MIDI, they are from being a good sequencer of external gear. Others already wrote, that Modulation is possible but not the best possible solution in the Maschine-Software (PC and Standalone), that is all you can do on the Maschine for external gear. You want to send a Program-Change to external gear? Setup your PG as Modulation Target and turn the Knob in the right moment… No joke. And it will be sent every time the playhead comes around. So dependent on the gear you are using, you will have sound and FX artefacts or even stopped sounds every time a pattern starts over.
I still don’t understand how you can release a Standalone device, that you market as something to be your main hub, and after that many years, are still not able to implement basic MIDI functionality, that every other modern groove box has since its launch.

I loved the Pads of the Maschine. I loved the Flexibility of Routing and using FXI think that it is the DAW-In-A-Box with the best sounding and most flexible Sound Engines on the Market (Not counting Elektron here, because they are not DAW-In-A-Box boxes, but have the focus on being mostly a sequenced sound source), but if you want to do more than selecting prebuilt Presets that you are able to change a little bit, go somewhere else. If you want to build big and complex sound scapes: While the Plugins used in the M+ are great for it, the CPU and Memory-Headroom on the M+ is not. If you want to sequence external gear: M+ is not the best solution.

2 Likes
#30

Maybe you should try asking the very same question on the Native Instruments forum. You’ll get very different answers…
Both the Syntakt and the Maschine+ are excellent machines with a completely different purpose.
If you seriously plan on buying a Maschine+, you’re gonna have to try one first as well as the fantastic NI ecosystem and maybe you should think of getting an MK3 instead if you don’t mind working with a computer.

1 Like
#31

I don’t have maschine+ but I have a MPC Live and syntakt and lots of Elektron.

The track I made on MPC contain everything I need for a full track recording one or two device controlled by midi : hardware synth mostly, or Elektron box.
All done in the box.
I generate my wav file directly on my MPC live.

The track I made on syntakt sound like pattern based music. And can completely be transformed later in a real track if I take the time to record them in a DAW and add more layering. I have never try to record 2 or 3 Elektron at the same time in the DAW, I suppose it works but it require skills that I don’t have, maybe never :sweat_smile:

After years of working with Elektron and MPC, I know I need a DAW working with Elektron to finish things. Which is not always the case working with MPC.

I think it might apply to Maschine+ which is quite the same device from another manufacturer.

1 Like
#32

Yeah, I think this is accurate. With Elektron, you will need to embrace a hybrid workflow and finish the job in the DAW. With an MPC, you don’t necessarily have to, depending on your mixing requirements.

2 Likes
#33

looks like the mk3 to me.

#34

This is almost identical to my experience. At one point, I had the MPC Live because it was a bit of an “everything” box. I had hoped it would indefinitely solve most of my portable electronic music woes, but as time went on, I was feeling less and less creative with it, not more.

Tried out a Digitone because I was still getting such groovy satisfaction from my Circuit Mono Station and thought an Elektron with 4 tracks and 8 voices might give me more of that. It did and then some.

The rest is history, and I’m now rockin the DT/DN/ST Trinity, and the MPC was sold long ago. You nailed it, talking about the inspiring focus of the Elektrons.

1 Like
#35

Totally depends on user and workflow.
For creating songs, I prefer maschine mk3 over every elektron I used. I prefer the workflow, playing the pads, using the arranger.
Maschine plus only would make sense for me if I would use it live, otherwise I would use it like a mk3 with laptop anyway, since I want to make use of third party nks software.

But then, for livesets, I think maschine is a bit stale and maybe too feature packed. The elektrons are a bit more jammable and performance friendly in my opinion

#36

Why, other than price mk3 over push2?

#37

Maschine over push 2?.. no way

#38

better pads, better layout. The software was made for the controller and not the other way around, which makes if feel much more standalone. You can pretty much do everything from the controller, while push only really supports session view. I prefer browsing on maschine. I like the maschine arranger, I can arrange tracks easily on the hardware, not really doable with push

2 Likes
#39

don’t forget built in audio interface for sketching on the go, graphical representation of instruments, unlimited macros for plugin/hardware mapping, USB power works on every single laptop regardless of bus power limitations and more.

I was a maschine user for a long time. Jumped to the Force for a long while, so I gave the push a go. The push is solid and def great for someone using a lot of built in plugins for ableton. I cannot fault it, for it is great at being what it is. I just prefer the freedom of maschine. Not being locked to Ableton, and being able to drop it into any DAW is great for working on collabs too.

1 Like