So yeah, just wondering what the elektronauts think of this decision.
I just couldn’t stand the 64 steps limit anymore and i didn’t really use the sampling side of it. I loved it and i mastered it in a really short time but now i’m looking at making my own drum sounds with the Tempest, while triggering longer sequences of it and of the blofeld with the mpc (jjos2xl).
cheers to everybody.
hmmm sounds like a good deal at first sight
If you’re not using the sampling side of it, and have no intention of doing so then you don’t really need it. What it does to samples is amazing. If you love random sounds and like to make music out of non traditional sounds there’s no better piece of gear. I like to take nonmusical sounds and turn them into songs. So there is no universe where I would get rid of mine. But if you don’t have that love nor care for sampling you SHOULD sell yours
I recommend giving the sampling a try, though. Input a random recording and challenge yourself to make a track just kit of that recording. After you do this, and you still want to get rid of it. Then you probably should
Well, i should make myself clear.
I used it with generic samples transformed in unconventional ways but i never really found a place for them in my tracks (https://soundcloud.com/paulsantangelo/carter-and-the-fuck-i-give) and in the end i realized that what i was doing could be achieved with an mpc for half the price. Another thing is that during this past month i found myself bored of the drum samples i have and i use (808-909-cr78-casio stuff-linndrum ecc…) The thing is that i never really sampled WHITHIN the octatrack, except for some vocals and some sounds of my synths, and that’s where i really see the capabilities of the octa.
I like random sounds.coffee cups, bells, music boxes, along with the challenge I can present myself with various sounds(I made a track solely with the sound of a fart) if that pure manipulation of any available audio doesn’t compell you to keep it. Then you should sell it(also I think you’re crazy ;D )
If you want longer times you can chain various patterns together also. A little less feasible, but capable
well the arranger and the pattern chaining options are some pretty good tools for tracks creation but even using them i found myself in a sort of 64 step’s prison as far as melodic parts are concerned.
Did you ever mess with chaining patterns? I regularly chain 2 patterns together because Im much more familiar with 2 bar loops. Its pretty flawless in my experience. You can chain them together beforehand and then go into live recording mode and it works fine. Its a little bit funky to keep up with, but not a huge deal. Ive been dealing with step sequencers for a while tho. I tend to prefer them over the linear style.
But if its not your style, then Id say move on. The thing that works “best” is whatever works best for you. Thats the only thing thats important. Fuck everything else.
Yeah, i messed with it and it’s great for drums variations, though that still does not give me the degree of dynamic i’m looking for. Not being limited by “cages” while producing is probably what i’m looking after. I’m aware that with a bit of planification you can get a lot more than just 64 steps blocks but it doesn’t seem to me, after 1 year and a half and a ton of tracks done with it, that the process is fluid enough to not distract me from the fun of creation. And you’re right, it’s a subjective thing: what works for me might not work for you and viceversa. 
Cheers though, theese inputs are what i’m looking after!
Yeah man, the octatrack is sure a lot of fun! I learned a lot of things whit it so i’m kinda sad to let it go, also as it was the center of my setup. Will see, maybe right now i just need to let it go and find what’s the best approach to music production for me! 
I tried it at my friend’s place and i found it pretty straightforward as far as the sequencing of internal and external sounds are concerned, though what i loved the most were the pads and the rithmic possibilities with them. I’ll get one in a week so i’ll have some time to see what it really can do.
Man, MPC and octatrack together are where it’s at, don’t sell it, get the MPC hook up the outs of the MPC to the ins of the octatrack and voila the best 2 sampling groove boxes on the market working together.
Leads basses and weird sounds from the octatrack in mono
Drums, pads polyphonic stuff from MPC! And just load the shit out of the MPC with analog drum samples.
Yeah, i guess that’s what i was aiming for when i first contacted the mpc’s guy. I’ll take a week to spend some time with the two, if not satisfatied with the combo i’ll let the octa go.
Cheers guys , at least you instilled in me some doubts.
Make sure you got jjos2xl, new pads, or better thick pads, and get the hard drive!
Oh sorry one more thing, an other reason to keep the octatrack, the effects on both your other 2 options suck, so the octatrack shines there!
Maybe this is where your other box(es)/instruments compliment and play longer melodies. I play my tanbur over Octatrack sequences and loops, manipulate through manual trigging/stopping of tracks, rerecord over pickup loopers by making the gain parameter turn it into a slow delay, etc. YMMV, but it’s pretty easy (many ways) to escape the 64step limit.
I have an OT and a MPC. Two very different machines to approach sampling.
Generally speaking there is some common ground, recording samples, slicing samples, time-stretching samples, apply effects etc., but if it comes to sequencing and performing, there is a lot of difference.
Performing
To play the OT note by note or to perform some live finger drumming style is not where it is really good at. There are options, but for those tasks I resort to my MPC. If the performance is more like the job of conductor, samples shall be mangled in varius ways, loops have to be made on the fly, scenes have to be switched or moved in between, that’s best done with an OT.
Sequencing
If pure step-sequencing is sufficient, both units are IMHO on par. But if more is required, because we need more notes per bar or variable note lenghts and positions to form funky grooves, then the MPC is the better choice. Tracks with flexible and more then 4 bars, many more notes per bar are possible, okay, limited by the 96 ppqn of a MPC 1000 or 960 ppqn for a MPC 4000/5000.
But if sound mangling on a step by step basis, aka p-locking, is demanded, the OT outperforms (like all other Elektrons) a MPC. It’s possible with the MPC to a degree, but not as simple and natural.
At the end it almost only depends on what an artist want’s to achieve, what musical style or sound he wants to create, and what work flow he prefers. This said, for me the decision was, I want to use both … for different tasks 
This 100%
Get all three and be happy! They are all complementary devices IMO
For me the OT is a live looper/mangler box with a nice step seq for MIDI. The MPC is a sampler with a linear seq for MIDI. And the tempest is an analog synth powerhouse. Very little overlap.
Maybe trade it for a RYTM then? Tempest is worse than RYTM
I’m new to this but isnt the mpc way harder than the octatrack to use from what i’ve seen.
I have an mpc 1000 for a week and used it like 8hours with jjos2xl and it’s a pain in the ass to use so far.
If anyone have other advice tho i’m open. (even if it’s not my thread,…)
Is the rytm + mpc killer combo ?
I should probably take a lot of time to get into it but my workflow with the push 2 and ableton is so easy that i have some pain to move away from it.
the octatrack from the 2hours i spent with it seems way easier to use than the mpc and jjos2xl