My explorations into these workflows has hit a standstill since I have a piano at my disposal all of the time. But in general I think (based on doing all DAW MIDI programming in the 90's for fun and then stopping for 20 years), its generally between step sequencer based vs. MIDI performance based and sample based sounds vs. synthesis.
I have a Rolanda MC101, which I was using when traveling on business. The main reason I chose it was not because I wanted to write loop based music, it was because I had 80/90's roland gear lying around, and I just sold all of it and replaced it with something that basically already had all of the sounds of all of my old gear. I still have some Korg gear, and there are good emulations of those so I might decide to sell also. So I intended to use the MC101 as purely a tone generator with my DAW, but then started to play around with the groovebox workflow - which makes it really easy to sketch repetitive forms yet change instrument timbres easily. I think today's music is fixated on changing musical timbres rather than the "old" way of complex musical structures and chord progressions. The former is easier to do without musical background - you can just twist a knob with today's tools.
Anyway, there are plenty of free "emulations" of the basic step sequencer workflow - I was planning on using the free MPC Beats within my DAW and making my own (3d printed, of course) arduino MPC controller. For most people, the thing that is really missing is the tactile part of the workflow. But I think any of the hardware you mentioned will do the step sequencer thing if that's what you want to try. The rest, I think is just how you pull up the sounds, modify them, and then record the "performance". Those are much more nuanced and personal preference.
Maybe you already know this stuff…
Oh, I also have a PO-33 Pocket Operator. It's basically a lo-fi MPC. Its a good gateway groovebox that can fit in your pocket. Great to use on a 13 hour plane trip.