You know it… i didnt like it at first until i gave it the time it deserved
1 Like
sorry if this was already posted somewhere…
8 Likes
Looking at the DT manual, it seems that OT is worlds above it for actual sampling. The DT appears to have one sample buffer limited to 33 sec, no track sampling just internal audio as a whole, no automated sampling, and you must press several buttons when your done to have it appear in a track. OT 8 sample buffers limited only by ram, per track internal sampling, automated sampling, even when manual sampling has settings to run a certain length and appear on a track immediately, midi control of sampling, dedicate looper machines w/overdub, multiple ways to approach sampling, and other customization options… 8 recorders with per step recording and playback is the big one…
6 Likes
They sound the same. If there is any difference not big. Strange, listening to first videos I tought DT sounds better. But that is probably because of the hype and maybe FX difernce
They sound similar at first, but I hear a bit more high-end on the DT towards the end of the demo, as they add more tracks in the mix.
1 Like
Sounds like a tiiiiny bit of the highs are lost on OT?Or theres a little more mids. Can hear it in the hi-hats but only listening on phone. That’s fine by me, I normally make those kind of EQ (but more severe) adjustments in mastering or via cassette anyway…
Something for people in to clean/transparent to maybe consider tho I guess…
I’m more curious in hearing the different distortion and filter applied to the same samples on both units.
1 Like
I’m not interested in getting DT atm but would love to see this added, for DT owners and also as i guess it would mean it also getting added to my AK 
I’m on holidays in Venice atm and the sun is shining 
I secretly wish I was home where my DT is waiting for me tho 
I’m nearly home DT, just a few more days 
1 Like
I’m an elektron fan boy so I don’t have any pioneer or akai gear.
Seems like the tom on the DT has the sample start on a non zero crossing as it is clickier on the attack than the OT, other than that they sound very similar.
3 Likes
I’m over the comparison now. They have almost zero in common besides p-locks. Everyone seems happy with their choices so all cool 
Only thing bugging me now is that DT seems riddled with bugs, and we aren’t even at the OB stage yet, so it’s probably going to make the next ‘big’ box even longer to materialise while Elektron work on ironing out the problems 
Hopefully they can fix it up pretty quick and move on…
I was very tempted to pull the trigger on a launch DT, aside from the AR and MD I have bought every Elektron machine either on or before launch, I do not need the DT but I reckon that it has enough differences from the AR and OT to justify me owning one. I like the apparent speed of the UI, and after owning one for a while I might decide that it covers enough of the things relevant to me, that the OT and/or the AR cover.
But being an early adopter is not right for me at this time, I will wait until the OS matures and possibly any hardware quirks have been ironed out. Same with the new MPCs, I do not really need one, so I’m happy to see how they develop, then decide.
6 Likes
After first seeing the DT specs a while back, I thought that comparing them was silly. But considering that some folks will now decide if they are to get an OT or DT, and some might want to see if they can let go of OT for DT, some comparison is necessary to be able to make such decisions even if it’s obvious the OT does more…
6 Likes
isn’t it possible that the recent DT demos have been made with better quality audio recording/processing etc? they sound more immediate and compressed to my ears… as if there’s eq and compression going on–to make it sound crisp n ‘hot’
Yeah that makes sense I was just saying that the ‘vs’ comparison is tired. They’re so dissimilar that it’s just down to user workflow dictating which is ‘best’. Not the boxes themselves. It’s not like they both do the same things and it’s a choice of which one does them best. They don’t do the same things at all really so it’s just down to whatever the individual needs… The ‘vs’ thing doesn’t really exist any more than the ‘DT vs MPC’ thing exists Forum has just gone haywire past couple of months
1 Like
Of course, can’t compare other demos with this one, because the recordings and processing could be quite different; but that demo with A-B between OT and DT does show some small diffs in the high end.
1 Like
IMHO this sound comparison shoulda also compared how the samps sound when pitched up/down. These are sampling mangling boxes after all.
Now, all I hear is that the tom track and the pad track sound different between the machines. No idea why though. To my ears the pad envelope sounds very different between the two?
Oh how I loved the video presentation of the MD…
I think it’s more important to hear the same sounds played back after they’ve been sampled by both units. The video does not show the difference between the AD converters of both units.
3 Likes
I think OT is more complete and offers more possibilities, at least this is what I deduce from what I have read/seen about DT. DT is not an improved version of OT, is another thing, in my opinion is a machine with more simplified options, at least for my workflow. Wait and see.