Here’s some clips from previous posts I’ve made…
All from this thread and there’s more on there too… I’m sure there are other useful threads about this too.
Strange issue when changing parts
4 Likes
Plocks on patterns must be considered strongly on a mid pattern switch because if not thought out they will affect different parameters on the next part. One needs to conceptualize exactly what will happen on the part switch and think it through very much for it to work smoothly and program accordingly. Even the exact timing of manual mid pattern part switch is critical as even performing it on different steps might yield different results.
Mid pattern part switches can be quantized using the arranger and its length and offset parameters…
4 Likes
Sometimes the way to go is rather than (as we often tend to do) try to make something work the way we want, instead try to work the way the thing works.
An example of this in this case might be to use a whole bank for variations of sections of a piece, so initially forget about parts, start working on your first pattern, copy it to another pattern and change the sequencing a bit, rinse and repeat until you filled a whole bank. Now listen back to your patterns and if you decide that some of them need different sounds copy the part and make the changes, so that eventually (which can happen quite quickly, working this way) you have 16 patterns with 4 sets (parts) of sounds. You have plenty of other banks which can all have their own set of patterns and parts.
So in effect rather than squeezing a lot of different pieces into one bank, the bank is used just for one piece but with multiple variations, this way you get to use parts in a more logical way, and your patterns are used more in a jamming/composition way than perhaps they would be with for example the Digitakt, where typically you’d tend to use fewer patterns for the same piece and more likely focus on muting and tweaking to ‘ring the changes’.
It was actually the Toraiz SP16 which made me think of the Octatrack in this way, because the SP16 only has 16 samples across 16 tracks across 16 patterns, but like the Octatrack there are no shortage of pattern banks each with their own sample set, so it becomes a focus on using more patterns with sequencing variations.
Of course on the Octatrack we have scenes which can be used to further enhance this, not to mention using statics say in one part to contain samples of other pieces in other banks to use for transitions and so on.
As others have said parts can at first feel a bit of a ball ache, but ultimately they can be used in many ways, making them actually more powerful than kits.
9 Likes
Yeah, you all got something there. But I still find it illogical that nothing gets saved per pattern except the trigs and thus you are forced to only have 4 instead of 16 changes per Bank. I don’t see why it should be a problem to save the states in patterns and it makes everything just harder for the people to use it. I always thought parts are a nice addition / performance tool but if you want to use the OT they are mandatory and there is no way around and with 4 parts for 4 patterns the idea to make transitions between patterns (4 to 5 e.g. when part 1 is connected to patterns 1-4) is totally breaking away imho.
1 Like
It’s all about being able to make live improv tweaks that carry through pattern progressions… Many don’t seem to care about this but to many others its absolutely essential to their music. Parts/kits allow for this, strict association of all parameters to each individual pattern breaks this…
There is a very logical reason to not have all parameters strictly associated to individual patterns… I really think if you give it some time you might arrive to see their usefulness. We get more and more complaints on the digi threads as time goes by that there are no kits, because eventually folks hit the wall that parts/kits leaves an open door through, but it sometimes takes some time to see the wall…
7 Likes
I often rename the first part to the BPM. A nice reminder when having multiple ‘songs’ in a project with different tempos.
5 Likes
Haha, yeah … this is indeed something I have forgotten. You are totally right. I guess I’d come here with the opposite complaints if it was the other way around.
2 Likes
It also saves the part assignment, but not the actual part.
3 Likes
Octatrack isn’t safe…
It’s living dangerously… 
Good for thrill seekers, living on the edge, knowing your jam could be f***ed up at any moment… It’s possible to get a handle on it, but you might get hurt along the way… 
2 Likes
It’s kinda like rock climbing… It’s pretty dangerous for beginners when you don’t know the equipment, but becomes relatively safe with experience and determination… 
I MADE A LOOP !!!
9 Likes
When you know OT, it’s more like this :
It doesn’t need Overbridge. 
7 Likes
The excerpt doesn’t show the landing. I suppose it’s a total loss? 
2 Likes
You never really land with OT. 
But you can make perfect loops. 
7 Likes
Im saving all parts and saving proj pretty often, doesnt hurt to copy paste patterns onto unused patterns just in case you hit function-play while not in trig mode and clear the whole pattern you just spent an hour tweaking like thisssssss guy! ------> 
4 Likes
Anyway… OT is the best, if you want to make anything less boring in real time
2 Likes
If you immediately redo a key command it will undue.
2 Likes
I definitely prefer the Octatrack way of dealing with patterns and parts vs. the Digitakt saving everything to a pattern - as people have already said it allows for a lot more continuity while live tweaking. When I had a Digitakt I would get really annoyed by the way small tweaks I made to a sample in a pattern couldn’t easily be copied to other patterns. That’s where parts (or kits like on the MD) come in handy.
Back to the Octatrack - I especially appreciate how all of the routing is saved into parts - this is super handy when working with external gear IMO. I’m still barely scratching the surface with the Octatrack but I find it really well thought out. Just save your parts!
3 Likes