I do have Cycles already. 
Yeah, great combo, M:S for the immediate stuff, OT for the intricate stuff. Currently I use the M:S as a simple drum machine to play with and improvise on while the OT manages long stems and it’s a lot of fun!
1 Like
I have a MS, DT and OT. considering getting rid of the MS since I have the DT. But for me I’m still not a huge fan of using the OT for drums except in a pinch. Having dedicated tracks for each drum part is so ingrained in me compared to tack sharing and sample chains / flipping.
Currently I like to use the OT for longer and stereo samples and as a mixer. Have one dedicated drum box that sequences it self and have the OT sequence one or two synths 
1 Like
…well then…ur question is obsolete for real…
u got sampled one shot drums already more than covered…
and hell yeah, it’s a great thing to have the simplicity and taken further actionmode of a model to get hosted by and run along with the ot…
but another model that is nothing but a slimmed down takt, end of the day, a sample device that can’t sample on it’s own, is useless…
cycles got all the advantages of the models BUT dealing with synthesis…
and drums and such generated in realtime by some synthesis method remains way more expressive than no matter how much mangled and processed samples…
so u got it all in front of u already and further money is way better elsewhere invested…
1 Like
That’s a +2 output +6 channels expansion board of the OT, maybe? 
1 Like
this narrative…
how is it “nothing but slimmed down” if it can have 449 more single shot samples in a single project?
how is it “nothing but slimmed down” if both HPF and LPF on each track are accessible at the same time? when the other cannot?
how is it “nothing but slimmed down” if it has velocity sensitive pads? when the other does not?
how is it “nothing but slimmed down” when it has more realtime controls and therefore a different workflow which results in different performances and different creative expressions.
“nothing but slimmed down”
right.
4 Likes
…oh, i mentioned the overall advantages of models a lot, ma cher…
and in case of the m:s it IS slimmed down compared to a takt when it comes to OB, to sampling option, lfo usage, loop operations…
please, adam…don’t slim me down…thanx…
I don’t debate that. But that’s not what you said.
You said the MS is “nothing but a slimmed down takt”
Nothing meaning no more than.
And here I have given you definitive things that the M:S can do that are, indeed, more than the Digitakt’s capabilities. Those differences matter. Those distinctions make the instruments different from one another in important ways.
I’ll debate things based on the facts, and I’ll debate them based on the words folks choose to use, and I’d hope you’d want to as well.
The digitakt is in a different League then the other 2, I had the cycles before I got a DT and the digitakt allows me to shape the sound waaaay better to my needs
Can’t speak for the M’S though
…good thing that u mentioned the points where the m:s is upfront compared to a takt…
no doubt…
but as u know, i don’t debate things that much on plain pros and cons without also sonic and setup wise usabilty kept in mind…
and “slimmed down” is no bad thing at all in many other ears and especially not when it comes to usability…
i personally don’t care at all, how many more samples can be accessable within one project in direct comparison that much…it’s way more than enough in both cases…but that’s just me…my way of thinking…my narration…and final judgement is up to each 'n everyone else…all on their own…
I really like the M:S in its own right. I really think what Elektron did there was resurrect the spirit of the early Korg Electribes. Not a lot of voices but just enough on board to keep things interesting.
AdamJay points out a lot of interesting features that are unique onto the M:S itself when compared to the DT. I have both the DT and M:S and they feel different enough to me in use to keep. It is another six (+sample locks) voices of sampling that I can sequence from the DT if I want to.
It is so small and light weight I just keep my stashed where ever in the house and sit down with it to play where ever I am. Many a good Sunday mornings spent with a Bellini and the samples at my kitchen table in the sun light!
4 Likes
why not. dedicate the MS to have handy kits of sounds ready while you do deeper stuff on the ot… its a good choice if you have the spare cash id say makes a lot of sense to have both… all the machines are built so nicely i was amazed at the price/build quality of the MC… they all seem to have a charm these boxes.
4 Likes
Exactly! I didn’t want to dive too deep and make shit about me. But currently using the M:S as “all the other drum machines” as I"m using the DT as my synths and vocals box and the RD8 is my only other drum machine. Working out a treat so far. Using the DT as a one shot drum machine seems like a waste. Not so much with the M:S.
3 Likes
totally right . 4 years in im still finding new ways to use the DT… best buy ever!
2 Likes
totally. MS for drums and single shots. OT for loops, slicing, more intricate sample editing, and overall mangling.
MS would also be great for the sofa, traveling, or just pairing with a laptop and sending samples and audio back/forth.
3 Likes
MS is a better drum machine than OT. The almost knob per function of MS is unlike the DT or AR. It’s pretty satisfying for creating beats and messing up samples really quickly.
BUT…I recently upgraded to the AR as my main drum machine as I wanted synthesis and more depth in sound design. Though I did keep the MS, it’s in my gf’s studio now and is also much easier to take out into the wild.
1 Like
How do u feel about AR compared to MS? Sonically I mean.
From all videos I watched I didn t get too overwhelmed by AR sound.
First let me say, overall they both sound good and are worthy of making records.
After about a year and a half using the MS, I noticed it can sound a little sterile/safe without pushing samples into distortion or using stuff that’s already edgy. But the MS does have a good Dist parameter, you just have to gain-stage around using it. I also found it sounded better when running through a pair of Radial Jensen transformers into preamps on the way in vs line-in or USB Audio. The MS is fast and you can mess up the whole sequence pretty easily, changing every tracks parameters simultaneously is pretty awesome and being able to quickly reload back to previously saved settings on the fly makes for dynamic beats and performances.
I haven’t had the AR as long but I’m happy with the sounds I’m getting 2 weeks in. I love the blend of synthesis and samples, plus there are many more ways to add edge / distortion to the samples and synth engines. Having a compressor and distortion FX on the Master bus of the AR is a huge plus for me. I can crush the whole sequence really quickly and blend to taste. I’m using AR through OB and don’t feel the need to hit the transformers on the way in like I did with MS. Plus there are many, MANY more advantages for performance mangling and stuff on the AR but since there’s a massive price differential, I won’t hold it against MS.
1 Like
Preach! Preach!!! tell it like it is Adam Hallelujah!!!
I challenge anyone to have a better experience from start to finish… leave the house, go somewhere, reach into your bag, and pull out a beat machine and have a better time.
MS is too light, and too capable… it’s more than a sketchpad and less than a back ache!
2 Likes