So I’ll start this off by saying samples aren’t a huge part of my workflow. I like to lay down a drum-break or weird melodic lick every now and again, but for the most part I’m more in to sequencing drum patterns and synths.
For this reason the Digitakt was a dream come true, especially since I was on a budget. For less than $800 I had a box that could effectively be a drum machine as well as a sequencer for my synths. Now that I have a bit more money however I’m wondering if I should upgrade to having a RYTM + a standalone sequencer such as the Pyramid Squarp. This would be nearly triple the price of having a Digitakt (over two grand!), which of course has me wondering if the difference would be that monumental. Are analog drum machines that much more inspiring to play than something that’s sample based? Do they sound THAT much better? Will the added features of the Squarp bring my song writing to a whole other level? Or is this just GAS for the sake of GAS?
Before I became a DT owner I had a MFB Tanzmaus and the sounds where really nice and raw, then I swapped it for a Tanzbär. The more I mastered DT and the more I learned about drum synthesis with subtractive synths I realized that I prefer the DT sampler engine + recorded analog drum/synth sounds over the analog machines. But that’s subjective.
The thing I like the most about most analog drum machines is the knob per function layout and knobs aren’t encoders, so rytm wouldn’t be my first choice
For more ‘on the fly’ sequencing on the DT maybe try to save favorite (analog) drum samples and some adjustments as sounds in the sound pool for quick access?
I have both Digitakt and Rytm and love them both so much. I am big on midi sequencing so the squarp stuff has been on my radar…but I’m so into the workflow on the digitakt and now with scale per track, it is truly a game-changer…still no song mode but I can get by without it (scale per track + chaining mitigates this a good deal). Also it seems minor but the small form factor of the digitakt is just great and something most other boxes lack.
Take some time with the digitakt and learn some new things you haven’t tried yet. I like the suggestion elsewhere in the thread to grab a totally different drum machine (non elektron) to pair with the DT and the MFB Tanz boxes are a great affordable option there (and more knobs!)
More to your point, I find the sound of the Analog Rytm to be fantastic, but I could get by with recorded samples on the digitakt very easily (in fact there are a few things the digitakt actually does better than the Rytm). It took me more time to gel with the Rytm as an instrument because of its analog nature and being sometimes tricky to find sweet spots. The digitakt is more transparent and ‘clean’ sounding (in a great way)
RE: synths vs. samplers — I’ve personally never particularly enjoyed sample hunting at the start of each production. I’ve found a few solid packs that I could make due with if necessary (Goldbaby Thermionic being the prime candidate coming to mind), but the vast majority that I’ve found are far too brash for my tastes.
That said, I won’t disagree with anyone who suggests that a sampler will generally be more immediate (when composing a track), as there aren’t quite as many opportunities to get “lost in the sauce”.
RE: DT vs. AR: I truly believe the only reason to choose the DT over the AR is if you’re interested in the MIDI sequencing.
The DT has no aftertouch or velocity modulation pages, nor does it have pattern-pushable accents, slides, trig mutes or swing trigs.
The DT still has no bandpass or base-width filter. I can’t imagine this not happening at some point, but seeing as Elektron saw fit to give it parameter randomization before something other than the LP/ HP filter modes, I’m not sure they view it as a priority. Obviously, you can always resample once filtering, but considering the limited nature of the sample slot list (only 128), I don’t think it’s that practical of a workaround. (The AR on the other hand has 7 filter modes, which will absolutely provide you with tools for achieving better mix results, regardless if you find the DT to be more transparent or clear.)
The DT has no dedicated FX track. In order to work around this limitation, you’ll need to MIDI-loop (which will still cause your device to hang if you double-press stop). Additionally, things will get hairy if you try and do this in conjunction with sequencing other devices.
While some have lauded the decision to forgo kits with the digi-boxes, I lament it as you’re no longer afforded the opportunity of saving alternate track routings per pattern – This + direct jump can result in some truly spectacular/ wonky fills.
All of these points are applicable with both the AR MK1 and MK2.
Don’t get me wrong, I still have a lot of love for the DT, but I would never put it anywhere near the AR.
This is a great comparison/missing features list between the AR and DT! Thanks for taking the time.
The AR to me always seemed like the least sensible of all Elektron boxes, as it appears to be rather limited, with the only thing that distinguishes it from the DT being its synth engine.
But your post helps to understand why it is a “big box” / one of the more expensive ones from Elektron.
Still, if only they would have implemented the MIDI functionality, I’d see a clear upgrade path from the DT to an AR Mk2.
Haha, you’re very welcome, though I honestly left out quite a few things for brevity.
Honestly, the level of expression afforded with the aftertouch/ perf-macro/ scene modulations in an analog synth/ drum machine is truly THE highlight feature of the box, IMHO. Add the control input modulations of the MK2, and it’s a veritable embarrassment of riches.
Agreed. Though I’m not too saddened as I absolutely plan on grabbing the OT next — Still, an Elektron MIDI-sequencer with direct jump would be sublime.
It’s different, not better or worse … and … the DT is a sampler only, the AR is analogue synth and sampler, which gives us more opportunities to create sounds.
IMO the advantage of analogue circuits is that they can create a very beefy punch. IIRC the AR got a sound-level warning at NAMM, when presented for the first time, because it was so punchy and bassy. There is some work to be done, to get a sample on the same level. I prefer a mix of analogue and sampled sounds for my drum patterns.
The Pyramid is a very versatile performance sequencer and is my midi-brain, if I am working completely out of the box. Recording and editing midi is straight forward and easy. Organising songs, tracks, clips etc. works for me. Since OS 3.x it allows to create and use Definition-Files, which can hold particular information about specific synths like naming the CCs and other stuff, which is a great feature. It also comes with some functionality, which reminds me of the Elektron sequencers. If you use a couple of synths already, the Pyramid could be the right machine for you too.
One thing might be of interest too. The Pyramid imports and exports midi files. AFAIK this is not a feature of any Elektron sequencer.
As an alternative you could also use a second hand MPC 500 to be your sampler/sequencer
