Hello,
I discover that fantastic project. As a G2 lover I’ve got a lot of questions. How does MM compare to Nord G2, Axoloti or micro modular in terms of CPU? Can it run several poly synth + drum machine, and FX processing at the same time?
Is there anay way to process incoming MIDI and send it to other synth ? Can patch be changed by Midi incoming CC or PC?
Do CV use limited bandwith? Are they fast enough?
Thank you very much
i can’t speak for how mm compares directly to a nord g2 or axoloti (maybe others here can?) as i don’t own those, but i can say it can do some pretty powerful things. there are certainly cpu limits but the mm’s audio rate can be turned down to as low as 24khz to help with more complex patches. here are some posts to examples of some complicated patch examples:
the mm’s cv resolution should be whatever the audio rate is to on the mm (24khz, 32,48,96)
and the mm can most definitely process incoming midi and send it out to other synths. you would maybe need a usb-c→din adapter. there’s quite a few of them listed here
sadly patches can’t be changed yet by incoming midi but that’s been requested here - i hope to see that feature in there at some point
It’s a lot more powerful CPU that axoloti, which has a single core
the MM 2 cores for dsp, and 2nd mcu dedicated to io.
I’ve never owned a G2 (only used a few times) , and it used a proprietary chipset, which was powerful at the time, but things have come on quite a bit… so I doubt raw power is close to the MM.
however, at the end of the day, it doesn’t come down to specs.
any of these (including MM) can do poly synths and fx at the same time.
but all of the platforms are limited compare to your desktop, so we patch according to capabilities.
a good example would be reverbs, lots of algos for reverbs, so you’d use a much lighter one on an axoloti / g2, than say the MM (or your desktop).
this also highlights an approach , when you say…
”Can it run several poly synth + drum machine, and FX processing at the same time?”
yes, but not in the same way your (modern) laptop can, i.e. where you don’t even need to think about it.
if you want to do many (heavy) things at once, you may have to choose ‘lighter’ dsp modules, you as the patcher, get to choose those tradeoffs. this becomes esp important in polyphonics setups.
Sounds like you are a G2 user?
if so, Id say main difference you will feel is not so much processing power, you’ll have lots - but rather the control surface, the G2 has a lot of encoders 
Axoloti, is kind of different, really its more aimed at DIY enthusiasts, kind of a musical Arduino.
so main advantage is it was easy to create your own instrument, by soldering pots/buttons and encoders to it… also it has incredibly low latency, again aimed at instrument bulding.
the modern equivalent would be daisy. though that needs a bit more coding experience.
all have their advantages, and there is no doubt… the G2/Axoloti modules were highly optimised to their hardware, so what they achieved with the limitations is amazin.
Thank you,
Very interesting
As a current owner of both a Meta module and a Nord G2 (and a Axoloti I never really used), I can say that the G2 is a lot faster to program, and can switch between completely different patches much quicker than the Meta module can. But the Meta module is a growing system and has new modules added all the time. Whereas the Nord is stagnant. The Nord has plenty of DSP in it. I have the expanded board in mine, which adds four more ,giving a total of eight DSP’s. This allows for larger polyphony, but it doesn’t add anything to the complexity of the available patching. I think the GUI is much better on the G2 - more knobs etc, but the MM has more available I/O and is more configurable.
Basically they are really two different machines. Hard to compare them.
Thank you very much. Your advice is important for me. It so difficult to find the dream virtual modular system that caould replace the G2 (with its so many accessible controllers with great modulators abilities, a very easy and intuitive way of patching and playing). I based nearly all my electronic life on the G2. Everytime I use something else… I finish with the G2. But, you konw… no arm compatibility, no ram for samples, no hope for new devices, slow midi traffic, and several oddities…
I had huge hopes in Axoloti, that requires a little more engineer abilities, or in Bitwig, that requires more gear to play live. To see @TheTechnobear here in this forum gave me confidence because he already helped everybody in Axoloti forum.
I think MM has the look of a dream machine, with its compatibility, form factor, encoders and IO. Price target is certainly justified but it is of course more in the luxe market than Axoloti, So informations are very helpful.
Look into the Expert Sleepers Disting NT too. The NT is similar in that it has a ton of “modules” and a lot of I/O. The developer, Oz, is making updates all the time. The major difference between the MM and the NT is that the NT can also act as an audio interface, accepting and producing digital audio that can be routed to computers via USB-C.
Also remember that these machines can be controlled via MIDI CC commands, so a decent MIDI controller can add more knobs to them. The G2 can also output MIDI CC so you can make it into a dedicated controller and use module names to label the knobs and switches.
That soundcard capability is certainly something interesting to implement in MM, and a way to extend CPU power thanks to host processor or computer.
Yes of course G2 is still a great MIDI controller, it lacks auto import name of focused parameters (that is probably not supported in MM). So working with G2 and MM won’t allow as much direct fexibility as for example Bitwig and Melbourne.
Yes that is true, but if you name the modules that feed the MIDI CC output module used to send the CC to the external module, that name will appear over there associated knob. I typically use a CtrllSend module, assign a knob to the value control, and name the module what it is controlling via MIDI. If you use an another module inputting to the CtrlSend, just name that module the parameter you want to control. Now as far as getting the dial graphics to follow external changes, you can use the Automate module, which is similar to the CtrlSend module, but supports MIDI Talkback (automatically monitor the MIDI IN connector for the reception of the CC# in the set channel and adjust itself accordingly). Doesn’t do label names though. (check out page 260 of the owners manual)