Having had both, I’d say that the TR8-S is light years beyond the Tr-8. It sounds great. Way more capability. The hands on immediacy is great and it’s super easy to get going with something really fast.
That being said I sold it and have zero regrets. If I could sell the TR-8 I’d do it in a heart beat but if the going rate for a used one is $200 then I may as well hang on to it.
2 Likes
Do you think the sound is a ton better with just the XoX engines? I don’t need samples as I have Digitakt and Analog Rytm MK2 as well. I just like the TR-8 when I want quick XoX drums.
Well, it also has all the XoX sounds. Plus other sounds. I never messed with adding my own samples to it. You also ha e 6 more parts per pattern, and individual pattern lengths per instrument. Also, programmable subdivisions. Worth the upgrade right there. Way better effects, and recordable motion sequencing. It’s UI made me want to pull my hair out, but once you got your kit set up and dialed in it’s super nice. Compressor, Isolater, flange… it’s a vastly superior machine to the TR-8
1 Like
Thanks for replying 
It’s seems like it’s mostly what I’ve read about it.
I think I’ll probably just keep the TR-8. All the sequencing stuff, samples, and extra parts are not things I need. I might sequence an idea on it but the sequence always gets moved to an Elektron MIDI part or Ableton Live. So it’s not worth it to me for just improved FX’s and more outputs. I think the delay and reverb on the TR-8 are very usable. Everything else I just automate sequencer wise.
No problemo!
Yeah, once I cracked into the DT and started to really understand it better I found that I wasn’t using the Roland anymore…like, not at all. I found it a good home and haven’t looked back. I only use the TR-8 for a metronome to practice drums to.
If you were looking to upgrade then I would whole heartedly recommend the S over the 8, if you’re happy with the 8 then no need to do so.
Cheers!
For me the biggest upgrades (apart from samples) are the freely assignable track instruments (with track linking/trigging) and the per-track insert fx. Those two things together massively expand the sound palette over the TR-8.
2 Likes
just bought this TR-8s.
i feel like i am deejaying on my drum machine. yes!!
instantly feeling at home with the layout and the sequencer, generally pleased with the ergonomics.
seems like everything has been well thought out … and of course it sounds so great!
5 Likes
Hi, regarding the Roland TR-8S, can you tell me if it is able to send multi-channel (per track) midi out over USB?
So in other words, whatever I sequence can reach my DAW as midi over any channel/track via USB?
-many thanks
If you’re wondering about assigning a different MIDI channel per track, I believe the answer is no. It would use whatever channel you assign to the unit globally. Each instrument is transmitted as a note number which you can assign. Full MIDI implementation here:
Thank you, great information. Not a deal breaker, still will pick one up soon.
One other thing, if you know, does it need to be selected as the audio interface in order to send out audio on a different stream per track?
TL:DR TR8S needs to be the audio interface for multi-tracking individual instruments and is therefore best left to tracking duties.
It does and if your intention is to use it in a hybrid setup for performance, this is better achieved by running the master outs into the same audio interface you would be using with your DAW.
I only use it as a soundcard when I am tracking the TR8S. If you’re on a Mac, you can use an aggregate device so your TR8S audio plays out the master of a different interface. The problem you run into using the TR8S as the output from the DAW as well is that you’ll getting a doubling of sounds due to the fact that the local sounds combine with the DAW output and you get a doubling effect. You can apparently get around this by running the assignable 1/2 outputs of the TR8S into your mixer instead of the master outs but you then lose the TR8S master effects.
1 Like
thanks for info. I’ll have to just play around with how it can sit best in my setup. Yes mine will be a hybrid setup. I think I’ll just leave it be until tracking is needed, at which point I will use it as the interface with my DAW.
Anyone know… any way to pre-tag (pre-categorize) samples?
It kind of sucks that when you import a sample folder, the folder disappears and you’re left with a bunch of audio files under the Import category without any distinction. Then you have to categorize them one by one.
Also, any chance of previewing a sound from the SD card direct through the TR-8S?
-thanks-
I don’t have the TR-8s, but i know with the latest os update you can preview the samples of the SD card.
You should check what os you have
1 Like
Unfortunately you can’t categories them. You can however rename the files before importing and at their category at the beginning (like bd_ and sd_). Like this they are at least sorted in the sample category.
1 Like
Are there Elektronauts that have the AR and the Tr8s ?
I would like to know if the Roland is much immediat than AR could be. Is it more confortable to use Tr8s for improvisation than AR. If you had to play techno live, with no pattern prepared in advance, would you take your AR or your Roland ?
The faders and knobs might give the tr-8s an edge in that situation. (I have both, but haven’t really mastered either.)
Hi,
New to the forum. I’ll give my thoughts as an owner of the TR-8s and although I don’t have an AR, I do have an OT and a DN, so I’m somewhat familiar with elektron sequencers.
The 8s is great for quickly banging out a pattern and motion recording allows for a quick bit of movement. It’s very fast to play and tweak. It’s also great to be able to copy the variation and then edit it while the first one is playing. It’s pretty quick to learn, but the way it handles saving of kits and patterns could be more intuitive. It is very much on the grid, which can be good or bad thing, depending on your point of view. If the 8s had p-locks and conditional trigs, it would be even more amazing.
I can’t speak to the AR, because I haven’t really used one, but looking at it, I’d maybe miss the faders and the direct control knobs per instrument. I know it’s got a whole other bag of tricks though.
2 Likes
I have TR-8S and AR mk2.
I wouldn’t say the TR-8S is all that much more immediate when starting with a blank pattern but it has certain advantages. The faders are the most obvious thing, especially for techno. On the AR you can set up much more complex and subtle performance controls with scenes and the quick performance controls, but, say, gradually fading hats and clap in at the same time while unmuting the kick… that’s far easier on the 8S (unless you’ve prepared that specific macro on the AR). Also pots for the parameter controls vs encoders. On the 8S you have tune, decay and one assignable control per channel, it’s not a lot but it’s probably a suitable amount for live tweaking and you always know where you are. No paging around to get to the right decay parameter or needing to select the sound you want to tweak first.
(You could add a faderfox or other midi controller to get that always-available control on the Rytm, but that’s another box to buy/bring.)
Live pattern/variation tweaking is also arguably slightly easier on the 8S. Bouncing around the 8 variations and setting up chains on the fly is little more straightforward but I think with a bit of practice it’s not really any harder on the AR. (Edit: except, as Microtribe wrote below, on the Roland you can edit a variation while a different one is playing, which is a great feature.)
The disadvantage of the TR-8S for me is its kit creation process. Tweaking and adjusting sounds is so much more work and less fun on the 8S than the AR. It has a fair amount of power and options but everything has to be done through the little two line display and encoder. Also sample management is somewhat annoying.
But for live improvisation, it’s probably a bit simpler and easier to handle.
AR = more power and depth
TR-8S = simpler to perform with
2 Likes