Just wondering what people’s experiences are here when coming from a DT to a TV. Very different machines, of course, but given they’re both samplers.
The lack of time stretch and pitch change is a tough pill to swallow (likely to be remedied) but apart from that:
How do the filters compare? From what I read on the Elektron product page, there’s a base-width filter per track but other filters are considered effects?
Is sample editing (for main tracks) on a par with the DT i.e. all the usual controls (play mode, start/end/loop point, etc. etc.)
There’s individual pattern length per track like the DT, but what about playback speed per track?
Any other glaring omissions/differences you’re finding that are jarring?
I’m not trying to make TV what it’s not, merely curious how much it has the DT covered.
Nothing jarring. More lowend. Not as straight forward because more menus and fx. More bugs.
I sent mine back because the price went down 100 bucks which is enough for me. I might get another one but not right away. Don’t really need the fx and polyphony as much as i thought. The only thing i’ll miss on my OG DT is stereo samples.
I’m a long time user of OG DT and I consider the DT to be the best Elektron box until now.
The TV can do everything the DT do, it’s like a super DT with lot more flexibility.
Some people want to compare TV to OT, but I find it lot more comparable to DT.
So yeah, everything you expect to find when coming from DT is in TV + very natural feature like sample polyphony, bus, send fx…
You can also embed a mini DT in each subtrack… you can have like 8 (mini) DT in the same box.
I’ve only played with my TV for 2 days and it’s been years since I’ve owned a Digitakt—Syntakt was the last Elektron machine I owned. Everything sounds different/better to me. The filters, reverb, and DACs sound better to me. I’m surprised people don’t hear a difference.
I really wish people would stop saying the subtracks are “a mini digitakt”.
You don’t have independent effect sends or insert effects on the subtracks, so unless you want your kick to have the same reverb as your snare, you’re out of luck.
It’s closer to think of it as a single track that you can set up 8 “slices” of discrete audio.
So while yes, you can make “kits” of 8 drum samples using the godawful (at present) sample management, you’re snapped out of flow the second to want to add some reverb.
Cannot emphasize enough that it’s easier to bend the digitakt into being a production machine than it is to bend this into a drum machine (while using other tracks)
For me the big leaps with the TV are - polyphony (really surprisingly ‘gamechanger’ level if you compose that way), FX, buses, and you can connect simply to the TV like an OT via USB and send files back n forth which I really like. Transfer always annoyed me a bit, like using iTunes rather than your desktop explorer.
I also psychologically think of the TV as more of a longform composition device, but I might just be projecting and the DT II would be just as good if you use it for that purpose. However the de-emphasis on drum programming (the simpler sub track hits) to me means it is more about mixing stems/FX, evolutions and atmospheres than intricate drum programming. But there is plenty there for you if you want to make drum masterpieces in a different way, the FX in particular means you can ‘fake’ a lot of DT programmed sophistication.
If it makes sense, TV seems like a longer timeframe paradigm than the DT in terms of source material you put in. I still have a lot of learning to do though to make a true comparison.
Yeah I’ve heard a few people refer to the TV as a compositional device - which suits me entirely, as I’m really not about performing on devices. I just want to program them and then they should do what I programmed.
The point about not being able to give different sub-tracks different effects is definitely an interesting decision. Like, yeah, why woul I want the same reverb on my snare as on my kick. Which sort of suggests sub-tracks are intended for some other use. It’s surprising there isn’t a way to white/black-list one sub-track from an effect send (if I’m understanding right.)
(This is a sidetrack, but those who perform on things like the DT always amaze me. Like, how do you remember everything? And don’t you ever forget to revert the track to its previous saved state, given that during-performance changes are mutative?)
Depends on what kind of music you make, but having been through DT OG and DT2, I’m finding the TV to be exactly what I’ve been looking for. They have some how made a sequencer based box that lets you feel free of the grid. Feels easier to make sprawling, endless morphing creations. I love the DT, but as a song writer, I’ve always found it a bit ridged.
TV’s routing options tickle my brain in just the right way and make working on it feel unbounded. Sending out tracks to guitar pedals and back in again to a sequenced bus is bonkers fun. I’ve had the OT and loved it, but it felt cumbersome compared to TV.
Everything sounds better on TV to me - and I think the DT sounds great.
Once we get slicing and stretch, it will be even more exciting. The prospect of hosting a usb c interface to increase inputs keeps me awake at night (I hope it’s possible).
It’s still early for me to really say but I’m used to my DT2 and now have had a few hours with TV. They are similar but DT2 is more streamlined and better suited for percussion and drums. I intend to keep DT2 on perc duty since part of what I was after was to separate perc/the rest. TV can make beats better than many boxes out there but the FX routing is a step above the rest which invites melodic/harmonic writing and also a good workshop for folie and ambient.
A simple way to use the lowest hanging fruit would be to play around with the mutes in DT2 over some drummy patterns with TV swapping between a multi sample being played via a keyboard and sub tracks fired manually where each has sample that is a full phrase or stems.
Interested to hear the various opinions here as a long-term Digitakt fence sitter. When buying, the Tonverk won for me by a nose not because it was new, but because I like messing with atmospheres in my DAW work, and Digitakt seems (as other are saying here) excellent at rhythm, whether that’s applied to melody or percussive elements. I couldn’t see a way to get long, ambient layers with it, which is solved by the proper loop/fade parameters and polyphony. Digitakt seemed just as valid a choice due to its directness, but my hunch was Tonverk hit the mark so I went that way.
I guess the additional polyphony of the Tonverk makes it easier to spread out the tracks in different ways. I found there was room to have kick on one track, clap/snare/whack another, open and closed hats on another and percs on another. These could be condensed but it does open up processing each individually still with 4 poly tracks to do whatever with. I’m sure you could trade down from 4 tracks for drums to less if wanting more melodic layers.
Side note: I did see a guy from Elektron talk about a workaround for this where he mentioned using the a filter on the sub-track fx to make sure that the kick isn’t processed by the reverb for example. (Timestamped walkthrough.)
My immediate response when getting it (as I say, it’s my first one) is exactly this. Elektron is marketing it as a textural machine for sonic exploration, but tbh it just feels like a brilliant sample based groovebox that’s a studio centrepiece for making full songs on. I’d love to have the luxury of a Digitakt and to sortof bounce audio between them. Maybe chop and dice on the Digitakt, then resample into Tonverk for example. But given the choice of one, the polyphony, extra tracks and effects on the Tonverk won me over.
To me the TV feels way slower than the DT atm. The DT has this magic where in like 60 seconds, an idea can form - feels more like an instrument in that way. But I also wanted a single box I could sketch whole songs on, and TV seems way better for that. I even just like how all the buttons are laid out in a line, it just feels more intuitive when arranging patterns. Maybe if Elektron improve performance and I get more used to the interface it could match the DT in speed but idk.
That’s the same thing that drew me to it! Agree that it’s possible to have a four track drum set up (kick, snare+rim, hats, percussion) but as far as I know you can’t save that as a kit for quick reference in the future right?
And yeah the lack of speed on TV compared to DT is nuts. I guess if I need two samplers to adequately cover this, I don’t understand the argument for TV vs a Push 3 in that scenario, as you’re already giving up workflow speed and requiring a second box.
TV have 8 tracks, DT have 8 tracks. I have made full song on DT with like 3 - 4 tracks for drums and the other for melodic. I don’t see why you won’t use 3 or 4 tracks for drums in the TV if you want different FX for each drum. As mentionned you can do 3 subtrack with different family of sound and you avoid the headhache to Plock sample slot.
Also I used a lot of internal resampling on the DT (loosing stereo). You can do the same with TV without loosing stereo. You can use the 8 tracks with one drum sample on each to craft your perfect drum loop, resample it and assign it in one track. Play some magic tricks with sample start plock and you have a cool drum beat + 7 free track and 63 free voice of polyphony.
It maybe a bit slower to compose a drum pattern than on DT (it’s really that long to make a drum pattern ?)
I’m not sure to be fair as I haven’t got as far as saving kits! And with those couple of fw updates coming it might be worth holding on to commit and see if anything changes.
