What if the parameter push buttons could save a value that you could recall onto another voice. To save time dialing in values across multiple voices or to return from an improvised setting?
Or maybe stepped values for incremental adjustments while the encoder is held down?
It sounds like right now the main interface knobs are potentiometers not encoders, but its not set in stone. I think Elektron has done a really good job with their encoders and holding them down for faster turning, so that’s my vote 
If they were encoders, then would you want them to be detended or not? (clicky feel as you turn them)
Generally I like detented for menu items but not for dialing in fine controls like filters and envelopes.
Some of my synths have detented coarse and pot with centre detent for fine which is nice.
2 Likes
My vote is for completely non clicky as well, except for maybe pitch knobs. I’ve found some synths let you turn the clicky menu encoder when not in a menu to fine-adjust the last parameter edited, and that handles the case where its hard to dial in exactly.
Just adding a request: can the push encoders send MIDI cc (and the rest of the buttons for that matter)? This would be an amazing feature for me to use Caladan as a secondary controller for my Yamaha A5K (not too many controllers with push buttons available).
I was watching some of the Parva videos, and noticed that the parameter knobs were pots with “passthrough” mode, where you have to turn the pot to catch the parameter value before it starts modifying the value. This wouldn’t be my preferred setup because it quickly becomes tiresome to twist knobs back & forth before they start acting on a parameter.
My vote would be for smooth endless encoders that immediately act upon the parameter value (which is indicated on the ring LEDs).
The magnitude of the parameter change should be tied to the encoder rotation velocity:
Example: Low/High rotation velocity => Small/Large parameter value change.
And obviously, no need for position indicator arrow on the encoder knobs.
Depends. I like detents in my encoders, but only if they’re selecting discrete values and not modeling velocity sensitivity or something. So I love the detents on the t|so T-1 and love the lack of detents on Elektron boxes.
I imagine, given the unknowability of what Caladan encoders will be tasked with controlling, they’ll want to be a flexible as possible. That, to me, says “encoder, no detent”.
3 Likes
Agree 100% 
2 Likes
are you actually something to do with platipus?
That was my favourite label coming up as a teenager.
2 Likes
No afraid not 
One of my favourite labels too, hence why I voted for the 303 card 
They are barely active today unfortunately.
I generally hate detended encoders when a continuous parameter is edited.
I also have the Torso T-1 but without the detends, so much better!
For descrete parameters detended ones would be best, but for the Caladan case, please no 
2 Likes
