Some request about unifying workflow so i’ll have less headaches
Discovered that there are some slight differences between every machine workflow, which doesn’t help me focusing on music
sample page on DT and AR : why aren’t they same, I personaly like the DT way better,
it’s very hard on AR to get short looping samples that turn into wavecycles, and the reverse playback isn’t so obvious. The toggle looping isn’t as good as the 4 playing mode on DTand I don’t see so much use for fine tune on AR
compressors : there are no 2 same compressors. I personally like DT better, OT being the worse
You would rather have every Elektron have the same UI as Machinedrum? While a lot of it is actually still inherited from there it also makes sense that they include new stuff in new gear.
They were designed at different times and have different capabilities. With loads of patterns sounds and projects saved by many people over the years. Changing old ui’s might distort all that work.
I fully get that but now all these machines are very mature, it looks like they were designed by different teams and that there is no one to manage UI at a brand level, this is somthing I see as a future refinement
NO I don’t want to be the guy saying it was all better backk in time, I just say that every improvement should be worked at a brand level. lately the best improvements were on DT UI, I’d like to see these improvements on DN, AR, A4 ( which I don’t have anymore) OT ( which could be difficult considering age of the machine and really specific capabilities)
for ex when they redesign Lfo pages, why only on DT ? now my mind has to adapt as old way ( AR ) and new way ( AR) + the pretty specific DN way
One thing that bugs me and my muscle memory from time to time is the position of the function button.
On OT and AR Mk1, it’s the second button counting from the bottom, on my AK, it’s the first button.
On AR MK2 it´s the upper button from three buttons.
I understand what you mean. It does make sense for there to be consistency where there is like for like functionality. This would help customers move across devices, adopt new products and maximise value - all things a product team would be interested in. Clearly this is a grey space though, wear each product has different features, development cycle, etc. Bur I think your examples make sense.
Who knows, maybe next round of AR updates will align this with the updates DT interface?
I totally agree with @Rituun: UX should be as consistent as possible, especially when it comes to the software side that can evolve (at the cost of reprogramming it, which is not for free).
Problem is that users have to reprogram theiir muscle memory if things change a lot.
As for the physical interface, it has to be designed to improve the legacy without changing old users habits, it’s more touchy ^^
For a moment, PSUs with different voltages had the same size: this is definitely a big UX mistake (repaired since).
Not 1-1 tasks (definitely not E2E) across the units, combined with having (different levels of) physical CTAs will always end up in a slightly fragmented UX for multi-device users (cross journeys), IMHO.
Brand consistency is hard even across web based consumer touchpoints, but adding complex dedicated HW with sooo many different and complex workflows - across decades of development - will certainly introduce more challenges.
I would think that they see each product line being as coherent as possible as their primary goal when it comes to the end user experience - but I’m just guessing.
In my opinion, they’ve really done a fair job overall for their pro products
Sure difficult. The Rytm needed the a third button next to the pads to select a track or they’d had to use a different approach (utilizing trig buttons or additional track select buttons for example). The pads are central for the workflow so it made sense to go for a track button.
Digis introduced a different size and different concept, again, new buttons needed.
Funny thing is, the function button on Rytm Mk1 is actually similarly positioned as on OT, yet it feels different - maybe that’s the reason they changed it on the AR Mk2…
Clearly the Analog Keys is an outlier there and it mesed up my muscle memory.
I’m ok with jumping back on forth between OT and AR Mk1, and I can adapt to using AK and OT - using all three in a jam regularly introduces problems, though. It’s just a fraction of a second, but it happens.
.