Unified UI on elektron machines

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.

1 Like

They’re different. Learn them. Get over it.


Lfos :: DT has 1 page for each lfo DN has 2 pages with each covering the lfos, AR is like old DT, I think it will move to current DT style

1 Like

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

1 Like

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

1 Like

They where designed in different points of time. It is called iterative product development.

The AR is older and was actually brought closer to the newer boxes in terms of UI with the mark 2.

I highly doubt it would have been feasable to bring it any closer to the newer UI’s without creating a completely new box.

1 Like

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?

1 Like

yes agree ! this is more difficult to implement than software but something to have in mind for future MK2 or MK3 products

Kudos to diversify, it keeps the main brain sharp. Keeps things interesting, Sparks ideas. But short cuts are short cuts for a reason. :))

1 Like

I just wish that LFO window on the Digitakt wouldn’t have these weird curly brackets and instead just be a regular rectangle :sob:



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).

1 Like

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 :slight_smile:


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.


There are some things that piss me off:

  • Each machine has different combinations to save (OT save part, DT and DN are equal, AR and A4 save kit and pattern…).

  • The same for reload, the Analogs have to be reloaded pushing YES before Kit or Pattern and the Digis and OT are YES after FUNC.

  • Reload sound doesn’t seem to be possible in the Analogs, only kits.

  • Track selection in the DN, what about mute mode…

  • Track selection on the AR.

  • Not trig level mutes on OT.

  • A4 not showing the sequencer position in some modes.

  • Lack of the same mute modes.

  • There are several things that can’t be done with one hand.

  • It would be great to have compressor per track on A4 and DN, and all compressors with their gain reduction bar.

  • Digis’ second filter on Analogs.

  • The most important inconsistency for me: delayed pattern change in Digis when controlled by OT :unamused:.

OFF TOPIC: It would be great to have a way to delay a command until next bar (like muting, reloading, etc.).

Those are only the things I can remember now.


Hasn’t this been solved?

Difficult when long samples are played back with amp env set to inf that have been trigged manually or with 1st trig condition/one shot trig.

1 Like

As far as I know, it isn’t.