EG nodes with Koala ? Or even just koala ?
Mabye not a groovebox? More like a whole studio in a pocket format. The Woovebox is still evolving and get new updates frequently!
The Woovebox - a tiny and cheap but ridiculously powerful groovebox
Ok, it is a little cramped, takes a while to get used to “one encoder for everyting”, the sampling engine is “lofi” but it is incredible what is in that package. Just recently @Woovebox added support for live sampling to the device via microphone.
Edit: Can it acid?
1 Like
Initially I thought song modes are not the point because grooveboxes are live performance tools, but
-
many people like song mode
-
grooveboxes used to have them
-
song mode was a very popular request for Digis
-
grooveboxes are used also for production and tinkering.
So maybe yeah, maybe grooveboxes should just have them, like they should have midi thru jacks. Personally, I don’t even use multiple patterns usually, but that’s just me.
Agree, go modular is the way. There is no one app/device fit it all solution.
Depends if you only do clips, jamming, and/or songs. Drambo and EG Nodes has step limitation per pattern. Sure you can chain patterns but with Loppy Pro you just don’t have to care how many bars/steps/patterns to go. It “also” makes songs and it’s a good thing imo.
Part of the reason I started with nodes was to get round that. One node at 16 steps, one node at 32 steps. Sure, not perfect, but better than koala on its own, and it works for me at least.
Fully agree, I also own 1 groovebox Sonicware Liven 8bit warps which is the only standalone hardware I have.
Each groovebox should has its own tailor made features/interface/workflow, some well designed that drive excellent user experience. A groovebox doesn’t have to beat my iPad + mapped controller. A groovebox just have to be “execellent” on what’s it is limited to and designed for. Few boxes made it. Most are rubblish with tons of features but poorly designed interface.
People really have to know themselves well enough to make their proper hardware purchasing decisions.
I’m a proud EG Nodes supporter here haha 
it’s a great groovebox app with fresh design.
Groovebox - Tailor made selected features
MPC - very close to full feature
It’s a trade off. Just a song can be made without full features I guess. That’s why well designed Grooveboxes have their market value.
I actually think the Elektron Digi series does have a very thoughtful way of laying out a full song structure. I’m struggling to think of how I’d make it much better. Of course, some visual way of seeing the song structure would be nice, and it would be nice to not have to resort to math to know how long the song is. But the list view works.
What I really like about the Digi approach is the concept of independent patterns. This opens up for so much creativity that is hard to replicate in a daw or in other grooveboxes. The MPC for example has a similar concept (they call it Sequences) but that’s more like the Kits feature in the DT2 (I think?) in that it only alters the sequencing data, not the underlying sounds.
The patterns of Digis, on the other hand, let you transform the sounds too. You can go as wild as you want and create strong contrasts between sections and use those different patterns as building blocks to figure out how to stitch them together to a cohesive song.
An analogy that might get this point across is to think about a band and their note sheets. On the MPC, DAWs, Roland grooveboxes etc, different sections are more like different note sheets for the same orchestra. You can of course use automatation lanes to alter sounds and choose which members of the band play in each part, but they’re the same band. On the Digi grooveboxes, patterns are effectively like changing the band too, not just the note sheets.
This song was made with that workflow and the intro, outro and break all have different sounds (different band) than the main sections of the song. At least of all the grooveboxes I’ve had the opportunity of using, there’s nothing that compares to this workflow.
You basically make a copy of a pattern, then you morph it into something very different through ctrl+all and/or different sequencing. I don’t know of a good way of doing that on, say, the a Push 3. There you’re still bound to the same sounds/kits you chose, unless of course you create a lot of copies of them. Since that device has nearly endless possibilities, I guess that’s the way you’d do it. But it’s not as quick and easy to me at least.
Bottom line: Digi patterns being independent of each other opens up to so much creative exploration, and that leads to better song arrangement and more interesting ideas.
2 Likes
This youtube video tried listing Portable Grooveboxes under $500 with a song mode.
On the description the youtuber said “No DAWless users were harmed in the making of this video.” 
Haven’t watched and will do on traffic. Not sure if the below list on the description are all models he covered that checked the song mode requirement.
Teenage Engineering OP-Z
Novation Circuit Tracks
Novation Circuit Rhythm
Yamaha Seqtrak
Polyend Play
Sonicware Smpltrek
Enjoy~
edit: I missed the link…
I feel you! This is exactly why I mostly use Loopy Pro on iPad for crafting songs. Every clips/loops/sequence is independent.
Not an Elektron owner but seems their entry boxes like Model:Cycle/Sample can do the same with their 6 tracks?
Enjoying your video now
1 Like
One of the reasons i gave up on the Isla S2400 for the Rossum SP1200. Workflow is king. I haven’t found a better one yet.
2 Likes
When you consider the limits of the architecture – each pattern containing sound and sequence data for all available tracks – there is not much more you can do to improve song mode.
However, a more versatile architecture that would separate sound and sequence data, would allow for independent patterns with different lengths for each instrument, for multiple patterns per instrument, and for sound selection per part per section of the song. A section of a song in such an architecture is simply the combination of patterns, sound selection (or lack thereof, if you want to keep a sound as it is), and mutes for all tracks.
Incidentally, that’s how you’d work with a midi sequencer (Cirklon, Pyramid, Ableton, etc.) and a setup of hardware synths, and that is the simplest way for creating complex structures with the least amount of data duplication.
That gives you the same creative freedom you describe, plus a lot more.
IIRC, other grooveboxes that do this are Toraiz SP-16, Sh-04d, Korg Electribes, and Polyend Tracker.
1 Like
I actually find the Circuits to have an excellent “song mode”, when they are used in isolation. Meaning not when using both the Tracks and Rhythm at the same time. Especially when you make use of Projects, in Novation speak, to make rudimentary Locks (in NI Maschine speak).
But using song mode with both Tracks and Rhythm at the same time is a massive pain, unless you have three hands!
They really need to implement a way to control the Scenes centrally, like you can with Project syncing.
This along with the lack of multi track USB Audio, is what is making me look long and hard at Maschine plus.
1 Like
I absolutely agree. They might have my favorite song mode. In addition to everything you mentioned, the fact that you can assign specific mutes for the same pattern and change the step length for each pattern used, even when using the same pattern multiple times. It’s all decouple and is extremely flexible.
Here is a shameless plug for my cover of a Voidz song on Syntakt, which I was working on when Song mode dropped. I didn’t know how I was going to pull it off and this made it so seamless.
2 Likes
whats the big difference?
I had the S2400 and then the Rossum
Workflow difference is night and day. The Rossum feels like a proper machine - you punch in buttons, get hands on with the faders - its tactile and super quick. The workflow on the S2400 was a lot slower - menu diving, samples going missing or turning up as white noise and you had to work for that crunchy sound.
Just to add the difference is the plethora of bloatware i would never use in the menu. Which meant a lot more scrolling and encoder pressing(hate that encoder). The pads are as cheap as chips as ive already mentioned, WHY OH WHY!!. Nothing like a proper button press. I lose inspiration very quickly so these sort of thing affect my workflow which needs to be as simple as possible.
wow this post from 2023 is still relevant. here’s a workflow I followed for my latest project on my circuit tracks. once all the parts and pieces (short loops) were done I recorded a spontaneous performance creating a on-the-fly arrangement using the CTs two onboard synths and the two midi channels feeding 2 external synths. I also had sampled loops which could be played on one or two of the CTs drum channels. the recorded session consults of manually selecting loops within a voice or muting a voice on the mixer. step one was listening back for things that worked. step two is actually creating songs that can be chained for a final tune.
1 Like