That’s interesting, because I’ve checked what my M:C sends, and it does send PC earlier, but within the last step (something like 60% through the step ISTR). Will explore that on MC-101/M:C before making Syntakt purchase decision.
Nice tip on the fill condition.
How do you check when the PC message is sent? I don’t know, maybe the Syntakt sends it earlier too then, I wouldn’t know. All I know is that the MC-101 doesn’t pick the change up until after it has looped its clip one last time. What happens is that the clip starts to blink, indicating that it’s received the message and is cueing up the change, and then it changes after two bars (which I guess is the default length for the clip, not sure).
I wish the timing of the PC message transmission was configurable on the Syntakt.
Cool. It could be that the MC-101 requires more of a heads up then. 
Either way, a configurable “heads up” length would be incredible helpful. Like an option between:
Interesting, so the M:C is fine for driving MC-101 clip changes. Will even select empty clips and ‘play’ them. It also works with scene changes. I wonder what makes the syntakt different ?
EDIT: I even tried messing with the scale and length and PTN versus TRK (which are known to mess up sync between M:S and M:C) and the MC-101 made sense of it and changed at the same time as the M:C.
FWIW I have had the 101 changing patterns perfectly with Elektrons. Can’t remember the exact settings but its totally possible. Be sure to use the ‘scene change’ method rather than ‘clip change’, and it should be good. You can define the play length within clips which may also help.
This is in stark contrast to the TR6S which seems to cause problems with whatever its connected to… even TR6S and MC101 together don’t always play nicely
What does this mean exactly? The Syntakt can only set a PC message, is there a setting that determines how they are interpreted on the MC-101?
Two different midi channels on the MC-101. There’s a per-track receive channel for clip changes, and ‘control channel’ for scene changes.
Exactly that. I found the scene change method to be better with Elektrons.
Great video! I agree with you to a large extent. That both devices can only be compared partially, you have mentioned several times. All in all, I think the comparison is fair from your point of view.
I myself own the MC-101 and the Digitakt. I have made the experience that the Digitakt always pushes me in a certain musical direction. At the end of the day, my results are always very “technoid” tracks.
Interestingly, this is not the case if I use the MC-101 only. Maybe because of the countless presets inside the MC-101, but also because of the special way you create/manipulate patterns when using Elektron sequencers.
Sell em both and get a 707. It’s still menudiving to edit sounds.
WIth MC-101 driving scene changes on the M:C (via midi PC, control channel) the story isn’t so good. Manual scene changes transmit fine. Automated scene changes (by setting length and chain: on) not only don’t complete the change, they put the M:C into a weird state where it looks like it’s halfway through building a chain. Need either a M:C power cycle or complete project swap to clear that.
So I can’t use the MC-101’s ‘song mode’ to drive the M:C or M:S. Shame.
Aha, that explains why that setting was there. So, using that means it will change scenes on time with the pattern change on the Syntakt? It’s a shame you have to waste another Syntakt track for it though, since there’s no way to parameter lock the midi channel. So basically you’d have to devote one of the 12 tracks just to control scene changes. Not worth it in my opinion, I’d rather just change scenes manually or parameter lock the clip changes. I just wish clip change PC messaged could be sent a little earlier so the MC-101 would pick them up in time.
Really appreciate the feedback! I really love both for different reasons, but I definitely have a favorite if I could only keep one. But fortunately I can keep both! 
I can only agree here. There’s definitely a bit of a “techno bias” built into the Elektron sequencer and the MC-101 is more open ended in that regard because it’s more about how the sound presets inspire you.
I just recorded a jam featuring both the Syntakt and the MC-101 playing together. It led to a genre I have never explored before! Will be publishing the jam this week on the channel.
I actually prefer the mc101 over the digitone 
in a groovebox context…
No wasted channels or parameter locks here. The way I anticipate using the M:C (possibly later the Syntakt) together is the PCH out channel of the M:C sending to the control channel of the MC-101 driving scene changes. Then, I accept that A01 on the M:C is always scene 1-1 of the MC-101, A02 is always scene 1-2, etc, and then set up my scenes to change to the desired clips for A01, A02 etc.
Yeah, not sure what the problem is there. Here, with M:C sending to MC-101, that works fine, MC-101 does exactly what it’s supposed to. Maybe the syntakt is different.
I’m not familiar enough with this topic, but if you’re saying that the Syntakt/M:C will send out general PC messages even if no dedicated Midi “machine/track” is set up, and that the MC-101 picks that up and interprets it as scene change messages, then that sounds great. I assumed you had to actually activate a midi machine track for the Syntakt to send those messages out, since that’s where you configure the PC messages.
Yes, the M:C and M:S at least send out PC messages for every pattern change. They are fixed numbers for each pattern. I’m pretty sure that applies to the digi boxes too.
Here’s the jam I mentioned. Perhaps it can work as proof that they play nicely together and lead to different genre explorations than techno.
Thanks for finally pulling off the protective sheet. Even though I would have liked to do this job for you. I am addicted to peeling off such foils.