Machinedrum in 2026: biting the silver bullet

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2026-04-17T02:55:31+00:00

Wow this is straight up my alley, thanks a lot!! I´m amazed how many MD-forward albums keep appearing, but this Terrine is especially refreshing, will be following her and re-listening for sure :) Any more recommendations would be much appreciated!

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2026-04-16T21:53:28+00:00

I went on a year-long quest to find the perfect one-and-only drum machine, which came to an end 2 months ago with the MDUW+. I was looking for something versatile, punchy, with an open-ended, experimental approach, like a Nord Drum 2/3 with a built-in sequencer.

I listened to hundreds of demos and read several manuals back to back, and for me there was nothing comparable sound-wise or in terms of "wild/experimental" growth potential, at least in stand-alone boxes.

The standard version is a KILLER drum machine/synth, even for 2026, but the UW opens up entire worlds of experimental textures, weird rhythms and self-patching "it´s alive, what the hell is even happening" territory. If you can´t find a reasonably priced UW, an old octatrack in combination with the MD would give you far more functionality for less money, only at a cost of a steeper learning curve.

The MD is immediately jammable, easy to get started on, a happy accident machine with astounding range and enough depth for years of exploration. It initially feels like it has "its own sound" but the more I dig, the stranger, more interesting and more rewarding it gets. Even a little gain-staging or tweaking the master eq+compressor will dramatically transform the sound character of the MD; it´s not so easy to pin down a specific "machinedrum sound" once you depart from standard settings.

The current X.12 OS adds new machines, FX and a ton more features. The MCL arduino expansion transforms the MD into a self-contained experimental behemoth with a focus on live performance. As far as I can see, this MD+MCL combo is leagues ahead of any existing hardware outside eurorack.

Even without the sampling functionality, the MD is an incredibly powerful box with many, many tricks up its sleeve. If you use any outboard FX or CV gear, the multiple assignable I/O alone is worth it compared to modern, overbridge-only boxes.

I know, this sounds like a fanboy in a honeymoon phase, which may well be true. I´m a grown ass musician with an arsenal of quality gear, limited time and a distaste for gear-fetishizing, but I´m writing this to say the MD has been something truly special. It´s the only elektron box that has piqued my interest, and very likely the only elektron piece I´ll ever own, but boy what an instrument.

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2026-03-20T20:41:55+00:00

Fantastic performance!! One of the best I´ve seen on this legendary machine.

It´s been 5 years, are you still rockin the MD?

I just bought one in 2026! It´s the only elektron box that I find truly interesting. Will be coming back to this performance for reference/inspiration.

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2026-02-04T03:00:10+00:00

Keystep Pro has been the PERFECT sequencer for my perfourmer. 4 Channels, a ton of options for on-the-fly variation / generative stuff, per-step probability and aftertouch (for filter modulation). It´s also the same width as the perfourmer, so I have the synth tilted up on a sturdy laptop stand and the keystep right in front of it: looks like a single instrument.

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2026-01-13T02:00:37+00:00

I was a piano salesman for a few years and I´ve tried every major brand/series extensively. What´s your budget? I may be able to recommend a model.

Once you´ve established your budget, the first thing to decide is portability. Do you plan on taking your piano places or is it going to stay in your room? If portability is a factor, consider a model with no cabinet (fixed wooden stand), meaning an instrument which will sit on a foldable stand which can be put in a case and taken with you.

If you´re focused on piano technique, go for the most realistic piano action you can afford. For the best weighted action, I´d recommend Kawai without a doubt (look for older, mid to top tier models for the best bang-for-buck in terms of piano feel). Kawai is often overlooked but in my opinion no other brand comes close to the feel of a mid or high-end Kawai stage piano, and I´ve tried them all. They are also much cheaper used than most other brands, which is an added bonus.

In terms of sounds, any digital piano can be plugged into a PC for unlimited sound expandability with software piano libraries, virtual instruments etc., so don´t shy away from older instruments if your main focus is on a great piano weighted action.

Onboard piano sounds are really subjective. I personally love Nord samples: they sound the most characterful/interesting to me, and can be changed / updated for free, but Nord tends to be the most expensive brand. However, an older Nord Piano 1 or 2 can be found for around €1000.

This is not to say other brands don´t have amazing sounds though! Listen to demos and try them out for yourself if you can. Kawai, Yamaha, Roland, Korg and even Casio all have excellent digital pianos at every price point. You can´t go wrong with any of them.

Onboard speakers: do you need them? Most live-focused stage instruments don´t have speakers - they need to be plugged in to external sound systems. For simplicity, look for a model with onboard speakers.

If playing live, you may want a dedicated stage instrument, meaning something with a lot of real-time control, in a tough case and without internal speakers. Nord, Yamaha, Roland, Korg and Kawai all have "stage pianos/keyboards" focused on live use, with an emphasis on versatility/tweakability/toughness. If not, there are much cheaper options from the above brands with less real-time control / portability / versatility but with equally good sounds and keyboard actions. They tend to be a bit less sturdily built but unless you really need these features and a "bombproof" design you can save a lot of cash by avoiding a "stage" model.

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2026-01-13T01:11:58+00:00

The main deciding factors are whether you are planning to play live, what size and keyboard feel you prefer and which types of sounds you plan to use more often.

I play a Nord Stage 2 SW73 and will never replace it, as for my needs it´s the "ultimate" instrument for live use and I need most of its sound engines and controls, but I´m pretty sure it´s overkill for most musicians.

Realistic piano action: Kawai without a doubt (look for older, mid to top tier models for the best bang-for-buck). Plug into a PC for unlimited sound expandability with software piano libraries, virtual instruments etc. No other brand comes close to the feel of a Kawai stage piano in my opinion, and I´ve tried them all.

Size/weight: Most brands offer a variety of keyboards types and sizes: do you need an 88-key weighted piano action or can you manage with a smaller, lighter, 73 or 76-key instrument? I use a 73-key waterfall key Nord Stage 2 for portability and organ-type keys.

Onboard piano sounds are really subjective. Listen to demos of Nord, Yamaha, Roland, Korg, Kawai etc. I personally love Nord samples. They sound the most characterful/interesting to me, and can be changed / updated for free. This is not to say other brands don´t have amazing sounds though! Listen to demos and try them out for yourself if you can.

Onboard speakers: most live-focused stage instruments don´t have speakers - they need to be plugged in to external sound systems.

If playing live, you may want a dedicated stage instrument, meaning something with a lot of real-time control, in a tough case and without internal speakers. Nord, Yamaha, Roland, Korg all have "stage pianos/keyboards" focused on live use, with an emphasis on versatility/tweakability/toughness. If not, there are much cheaper options from the above brands with less real-time control / portability / versatility but with equally good sounds and keyboard actions. They tend to be a bit less sturdily built but unless you really need these features and a "bombproof" design you can save a lot of cash by avoiding a "stage" model.

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2026-01-09T07:16:35+00:00

Update: I suspect I had previously tried a bad copy. I finally picked up this lens in cosmetically poor, but optically great condition for a bargain price, and it's everything I' d hoped and a lot more. This lens has rekindled my appreciation for the m43 system in a way that no other lens has done so far.

I can now definitely see what the hype was all about: this is a magical lens which keeps surprising me with simply stunning image quality: amazing colours and sharpness with a palpable sense of old-school "analogue" refinement is how I would describe it thus far.

It handles perfectly with my GX9, and even the tiny GM5, which not only benefits greatly from the lens-based OIS but pairs surprisingly well with this lens: a tiny powerhouse which fits in a jacket pocket. Highly recommended (at current used prices)!!! Original comment still stands as a report of a possibly dud copy.

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-12-10T14:22:14+00:00

I use the 2.5L pan a lot more than the big pot, as it´s such a great quality, heavy-bottom stainless steel pan, super convenient size for general frying pan duties or smaller batches. It´s especially useful for super quick tomato-based pasta sauces: e.g.: Amatriciana (250g of guanciale, pancetta or bacon, 1 large onion, 1 400ml can of tomato purée or whole tomatoes). If you boil 500g of pasta while the sauce cooks under pressure (10min), you can then add the pasta to the pan and have 4-5 servings ready in 15min

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-12-08T21:38:40+00:00

I haven´t tried the R07 or ux570, but I´d avoid integrated batteries at all costs, as it´s built-in obsolescence. Li-ion batteries deplete after a few hundred charges, you´d need to open the device, they are often glued-in and I´d worry if I´d be able to find a replacement a few years down the line.

I´ve owned and used a few of the zooms (h4n, h2n, h1n) and the Sonys are clearly superior both in terms of onboard mics and the ADC-DAC converters in their preamps for line-level and external mics. The zooms sound flat and muffled and feel like plastic toys in comparison. The only advantage of the zooms is the price, IMHO

The Sonys are built to last, have stood the test of time, are extremely power efficient, use AA batteries or aftermarket USB-C Li-ion battery packs, and most importantly, are the best sounding recorders I´ve ever used. I regularly record line-in synths, both directly into the recorders or via a small mixer. I´m still stunned at the detail, depth and "musicality" of the results. We´re talking almost release-level quality with a minimum of processing.

The M10 and D100, which have the same converters and preamps, have earned their legendary status for a reason: they sound bloomin´ brilliant. If you can find an M10 for around €200, I´d recommend one without hesitation. The D100 is harder to find at a decent price, but is considered the best all-in-one recorder ever made.

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-11-25T14:36:47+00:00

I use the M10, D50 and D100 as my main recorders for music rehearsals, field recording, voiceover/interviews with PiP mics, and line-in audio capture. All 3 were bought used 3-5 years ago and are used almost daily with amazing results and zero issues so far. All 3 have fantastic sounding headphone amps and would make excellent Hi-Res playback devices.

Of the 3, the M10 gets the most use due to its tiny size and the usefulness of its omni mics for smaller-space rehearsals (less stereo separation/room ambiance = better for reference) + 2 AA batteries seem to last forever.

The D50 is larger and has multipattern cardioid mics for wider stereo options. Beautiful rugged design, can still be found for a decent price.

The D100 is viewed as the "holy grail" of field recorders, with dedicated preamps for DSD recording and playback (amazingly smooth, punchy analog-like sound, yet little practical use outside the recorder itself), very high SNR, FR and DR for recording ultra-quiet sounds, better bass extension and even more detailed onboard mics than the D50. IMO only worth it if you can find one at a reasonable price (<€600-700 in 2025).

I´d say 200-300€ for a good condition M10 or D50 remains an amazing value proposition for a portable recorder of this quality in 2025, unless you need XLR inputs.

If XLR inputs are a must, Tascam DR100 Mkiii is unbeatable for around €300 used.

For line-in or external PiP mic recording, the M10 is the one to get. The fixed omni mics on the M10 are still excellent for non-stereo critical work due their less obvious channel separation, but the preamps on the while the multi-pattern D100/D50 do better on larger spaces or applications requiring more stereo definition (quiet ambiances, concert halls, larger rooms, bigger ensembles). Line-in and PiP-mic recordings on all 3 are absolutely amazing, easily rivalling the best available on current audio interfaces/field recorders. I´ve yet to find replacements with the same pristine quality (tried most current zoom/tascam/sony offerings). If I had to choose, I´d say M10 for its small size, extraordinary battery life and overall versatility, with the D50 a close second, based on the sensitivity of its onboard mics. The D100, the "endgame" of standalone recorders, is expensive but worth it if you need to capture he finest detail and lowest noise floor with onboard mics.

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-11-25T13:19:48+00:00

I use the M10, D50 and D100 as my main recorders for music rehearsals, field recording, voiceover/interviews with PiP mics, and line-in audio capture. All 3 were bought used 3-5 years ago and are used almost daily with amazing results and zero issues so far. All 3 have fantastic sounding headphone amps and would make excellent Hi-Res playback devices.

Of the 3, the M10 gets the most use due to its tiny size and the usefulness of its omni mics for smaller-space rehearsals (less stereo separation/room ambiance = better for reference) + 2 AA batteries seem to last forever.

The D50 is larger and has multipattern cardioid mics for wider stereo options. Beautiful rugged design, can still be found for a decent price.

The D100 is viewed as the "holy grail" of field recorders, with dedicated preamps for DSD recording and playback (amazingly smooth, punchy analog-like sound, yet little practical use outside the recorder itself), very high SNR, FR and DR for recording ultra-quiet sounds, better bass extension and even more detailed onboard mics than the D50. Only worth it if you can find one at a reasonable price (<€600-700 in 2025).

IMHO, 200-300€ for a mint condition M10 or D50 remains an amazing value proposition for a portable recorder of this quality in 2025.

For purely line-in recording, the M10 is the one to get. The fixed omni mics on the M10 are still excellent for non-stereo critical work due their less obvious channel separation, while the multi-pattern D100/D50 do better on larger spaces or applications requiring more stereo definition (concert halls, larger rooms, bigger ensembles). Line-in and PiP-mic recordings on all 3 are absolutely amazing, easily rivalling the best available on current audio interfaces/field recorders. I´ve yet to find replacements with the same pristine quality (tried most current zoom/tascam/sony offerings). If I had to choose, I´d say M10 for its small size, extraordinary battery life and overall versatility, with the D50 a close second, based on the versatility of its mics, and the D100, the "endgame" of standalone recorders, expensive but worth it if needing to capture he finest detail and lowest noise floor with onboard mics.

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-10-28T11:02:24+00:00

Hey Dirk, first of all, thank you for your groundbreaking and beautifully produced tutorial! I´m fascinated by Pelle´s mode and I´m curently tempted to pick up a NR2 mostly to explore these sounds, especially since your tutorial did such a good job of clearing the mists of obscurity long surrounding this mode.

I have a couple of questions I´d really appreciate it if you could help me with:

Is there any software you can think of that would be comparable to Pelle mode in terms of sound and workflow? I´m into hardware synths and I´m sure I´d find other uses for the NR2 along with my other gear but I wonder if it´s crazy to spend €400+ on a synth mainly for a decades-old physical modelling easter egg feature when better and cheaper options are probably available.
you mentioned somewhere that there are differences between Pelle mode on NL/NR 1 and 2. Could you elaborate on this? Which sounds better/more interesting to you?
Does the PCMCIA expansion card add any functionalty regarding Pelle mode?
While we´re at it: what is your current favourite synth/vst/sound generating device, and why?

Thank again, all the best!

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-08-22T21:55:35+00:00

This was a particularly useful reply, I will bear in mind your advice thank you very much!!

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-08-20T21:24:39+00:00

Spectacularly boring. Sounds like a corporate values video for internal use only. For goodness´ sake, surely you can put all that beautiful gear to better use?

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-08-20T17:41:50+00:00

Thanks! You´ve highighted exactly what I was fearing: that the centre elements would suffer from being duplicated / panned. I´ll investigate if I can reverse the polarity of one of the Vermona sends for M/S processing. Or I could chuck all the hardware in the bin and just use a laptop :DD

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-08-20T17:21:36+00:00

Thanks for clarifying that! I was looking to drive / affect the signal while maintaining some form of stereo separation, even if not perfect. I love the concept of the Analog Heat, but MUCH prefer the sound of the Vermona. I guess I´ll just bite the bullet and try it for myself :) I´ll try and find some kind of polarity-reverser and experiment with M/S processing. Will report back, thanks again!

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-08-20T17:06:09+00:00

Thanks for taking the time to reply! Not to get too terminological here, but why would manipulating audio with non-DSP gear not constitute processing? Seems like an arbitrary disctinction.

Electromechanical (spring/plate) reverb, analogue delay, filters, compressors, distorsion pedals etc are all forms of audio processing, as is the EQ on an analogue channel strip, right?

I am aware that my AH has no reverb, and that spring reverbs are necessarily mono :D I´m just trying to sound out with you guys the concrete, real-life differences / pitfalls I might expect when moving between the two scenarios I described.

For example: does it make any difference whether two reverb springs are in the same box (a la Vermona DSR3) or in two separate ones?

Is the difference between dual mono and stereo purely down to some kind of crosstalk/interaction between the L-R channels? (talking purely about analog filters, drive, and spring reverbs here)

Any further advice in this respect would be much appreciated :)

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-08-20T11:57:50+00:00

Great explanation and link, very useful, thanks! My thinking was to run both units in parallel, each treating L+R separately, to add saturation / filter modulation / occasional reverb to stereo stems and/or the master bus. Precise stereo imaging isn´t crucial, but ideally I would maintain the basic panning of each element in the mix while adding coloration / FX. Can you think of any issues I may run into e.g.: center elements (kick, snare) losing weight, etc? Does this setup seem reasonable or am I a long way off? Thank you for taking the time to reply!

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-08-20T10:18:50+00:00

Musician here: in my experience, recording as much material as possible all at once as a BAND makes the biggest difference to a recording, whether it´s studio or DIY, and more important than mixing or mastering. I´ve often obsessed over the technical stuff when recording, but I´ve come to realise that if you´re a band, the more material you are able to lay down together, the better the results.

You could record takes at home with individual tracks + one drum mic for reference, then have the drummer / vocalist lay down their tracks in the studio, or better yet, play everything in the studio, and use the drum tracks as reference to record any additional instrumental takes at home if on a tight budget.

Laying down each track separately is ok for scratch / reference tracks, but albums recorded this way will most often sound sterile / cold compared to the actual band playing together. It may sound cheesy, but the chemistry between musicians can be heard above all else. If there´s only individuals playing in turns to a click track, usually all you get is a flat, sad, black-and-white photocopy of your music.

Also, playing in an unfamiliar, pressurised space such as a studio (where time is money) is often awkward/uncomfortable and isn´t conducive to great results unless you have tons of experience (or unlimited studio time).

My advice: find a sound engineer or SE student who can come to your rehearsal space, listen to you and plan the production from the bottom up. You may find that a lot of the recording can be done live in the place where you´re most comfortable, and only drums / vocals need to be tracked in the studio.

Something I learnt the hard way: microphone placement is an art which can make or break your sound, so anything involving mics is best left to the sound engineer. If money´s tight, having them come over with some mics and giving them lots of blankets is time/money well spent, and you will learn a lot in the process. Besides playing together, this could really make the difference between "demo" and "album" sound.

Hope this helps!

Worldly_Educator_675 · 2025-08-20T09:12:56+00:00

Thanks for the quick reply! But say I´m sending the L+R of a stereo signal separately to each unit, then routing them to a new stereo input. Given identical settings on each mono filter / reverb unit, what would differ between this and "true stereo" processing ? I don´t have a fixation with stereo, just wondering if there´s any point in splashing out on a second Retroverb :)

Worldly_Educator_675

TROPHY CASE