I think the octatracks weakest link in production is that it cant save files on its own. This is time consuming stuff importing to a daw. You can attach it to a mixer individual tracks but your mixer might be already overloaded with other instruments. You can produce a lot of stuff that can go into tracks but as a producer it would be slow as molasses.
2 Likes
Bpm per pattern available in arranger mode. Unless I’m reading the manual incorrectly.
4 Likes
thank you, this is vital1
OT is up next for me.
3 Likes
I had a mixed relationship with mine. I have an extremely Ableton-based workflow and loved some of the things the OT offered me, but ultimately found it redundant for my work at large. I loved sitting on the couch or on the table downstairs and jamming out on it hard but when integrated into my full workflow it didn’t really get a heap of use. The death blow for me was the A4 update that allowed me to send the seq out via MIDI, which had become the main thing I was using the OT for by the end. Now my A4 sequences Samplers in Ableton and I feel pretty much covered.
Maybe try something similar with your DN? Send the MIDI out to your DAW and harness it’s sequencing power in there? It has saved me transferring files across (I hated doing that, it felt redundant from day 1, like I was double handling stuff) and allowed me to use a much wider range of higher quality FX with a deeper range of automation and control etc than the OT ever did.
Just my two cents though. I know some people love them to death and they form an incredible brain for a live set up.
1 Like
I really hope elektron machines one day will follow DAW sequencers.
so then you can restart the sequence and compose on OT and then register on your daw.
I think elektron machines have so much power that people keep the paternism syndrom, only playing with one or just some patterns, it’s what I do, I use some midi translation to make midi evolve, but I’ve some difficulty to just work on a second pattern , and it’s why I’m now trying to work with a DAW.
It’s really important when you want to be a producer (I think) to have a DAW visibility over what you do.
Elektron is so amazing, I started with Octatrack, But I want and need now more visibility on what I can do.
I hope the DAW + OT “in time” sync will exist.
All conditional trig and functions are amazing, but I think production has to have a perfectly clear direction, and so a DAW visibility, in time. recording, “one step after the other.”
Anyway, OT is good for producing.
Really.
2 Likes
Yes, as @Microtribe already wrote, you can have stored BPM for patterns or even parts of patterns by using the arranger. The Arranger in the OT is quite mighty. You just need to get into the habit to utilize it at least for pattern changes. It’s easy to jump into Arranger mode and out of it again.
5 Likes
I would just say no, it isn’t. I guess it depends what you produce (techno? edm? house?) but as someone who “produces” I often found myself frustrated with the Octatrack and thought “I could literally do this in a DAW far more efficiently and with far more flexibility.” Things that you don’t give a second thought about in a DAW (naming things, file organization, recording audio seamlessly, chopping up samples at transients, limitless FX) end up being minor headaches at best and utter pains in the ass at worst when working with the Octatrack.
I mean, even having an 8-bar chord progression becomes tricky on the Octatrack. Okay so the workaround is per-track scaling and having the pattern with the chords be 1/2–that’s not so bad. But then you always have to start on bar 1. So if you want to change a chord that happens on bar 6 or 7 well…hope you like hearing it over and over.
The octatrack for me is a very fun tool that will take you places you would never go if you keep your mind open. I have made music and sounds that I never would have thought possible in a DAW setting.
It’s just not for producing.
2 Likes
I’ve learned a lot about OT in the last 20 hours. It’s so hard to decide I might end up getting a Deluge. Just kidding.
2 Likes
I watched a Q&A with Ian Pooley last night, in it he talks about his use of the MPC-3000 which he has used for years, he explains that in the early 2000’s when all his peers were switching over from hardware to ITB he was reluctant to do so, and he kept all his hardware. He mentioned that whilst it might take a bit longer to do things with hardware the process has its own benefits over using a computer.
He does use a DAW but much later in the creation process, he also mentions why he doesn’t mind a bit of noise in his recordings.
Anyway it is an interesting watch, a lot of what he was saying is exactly how I feel about music making, I also happen to like his music so it was quite refreshing to see that a lot of his approaches and methods buck the trend of 100% DAW made music.
8 Likes
yeah you can change bpm per pattern in arranger mode, but otherwise manually
1 Like
I would say get a digitakt to start. It is such a great little box. For me it was the gateway to an octatrack and a digitone. So far I really like the digitakt/octatrack combo. Digitakt for short mono samples and octatrack for anything stereo or longer tracks. Really you could probably get by with just an octatrack though. It is a hard question and after owning both I would hate to have to decide on one or the other.
2 Likes
Since we’re all here I’ll ask for some other time. I think I’m gonna consider one of the analog machines in the future. I see a lot of love for A4 and not so much for Rytm. As I understand A4 is quite good for drums, but I find Rytm more up my alley conceptually. Is Rytm really not that reliable?
dude, build your own opinion with experience. you’ll never be completely happy if you just want to have the machines that everybody loves because there aren’t any. you can do anything on everything if you are motivated enough. buy something, see if it works out - if not sell it, buy another. the best option is to have a shop with good return policy.
4 Likes
Sure, it’s the only way, but I find different (and in case of this forum very articulated) opinions and perspectives educational and useful. I’ve got many good advices in this thread for my potential use of both machines.
1 Like
Couldn’t justify keeping the OT, but I’m sure I’ll get another one when finances allow it. It all depends what you’re trying to do. For my techno stuff it would be cool, but when I’m trying to produce structured songs, I always fall back to using ableton, so much quicker and I have so much more control.
With all that said, I’ll only sell my DT if I’m in dire straits. It’s just so immediate and fun to work with. But it shines a bit more with a friend or two. My plan is to get a microfreak soon, and then a DN.
2 Likes
It does have a tempo knob 
1 Like
Not really planning to abandon ableton (and bitwig), but want to bring some new life to my workflow
The remedy for this is, once you have a pattern you like copy and paste it into at least 5 more patterns. Now go to each of the new patterns change things up. Now you’ll have variations to play with. I personally will use patterns 1-8 for one song and 9-16 for another. That’s two songs per bank. This approach works with any elektron device.
7 Likes
Throwing another opinion on the stack…
I have a musician friend who got a DN a few months ago, and loves it. He then wanted to replace an older drum machine, and started debating getting the DT or OT. He told me that the Elektron workflow had won him over.
He ended up getting a DT because of Overbridge support. He uses Cubase for mixing and mastering, and that integration was important to him (esp multi-track recording, and Total Recall).
He’s been exploring DT+DN+Modular+Cubase and is very happy.
2 Likes