I am thinking of making the switch from Digitakt over to Rytm. I’m really curious about its analog drum sounds and ability to layer these with samples. The analog filter and compressor is a really nice bonus.
I do use my Digitakt a bit to sequence external hardware, and I am curious about what I will lose by moving to the Rytm. I know sequencing is not the strength of AR but I also have really basic demands in this regard.
I do really simple sequencing, one external bit of kit at a time usually. Things like basic synthwavey basslines for example. I also from time to time like to do polyphonic sequencing of a nice string patch or pad. Rarely use much in the way of p-locks. I also manually program in arpeggio patterns.
How do you think I will go moving to RYTM? I dont think it can even sequence more than one note at a time on a single channel correct?
If I remember that correctly, there are neither dedicated MIDI Tracks nor a dedicated MIDI machine for the track.
When coming from the DT1, where you have 8 Midi Tracks to use without loosing anything, you have to turn the volume down on one of the tracks and use that for midi sequencing.
On top of that, as you stated correctly, no Polyphony for midi on the Rytm.
If you really rely on the DT as Sequencer, you might think about either add a different sequencer to your setup (or a device with needed midi sequencing features) or keep the DT besides the Rytm.
Both machines have their strengths, but for me the RYTM wins.
The reason being it’s beside a sampler also more of a (drum) synthesiser.
The synthesiser part makes it much more flexible. I tend to - besides percussive sounds - also make melodic elements with it.
The analog circuitry also yields nice sounding results too. The wonky VCO’s, overdrive / distortions etc. It makes me make better sounding patterns, even when using samples.
It’s also a bigger machine, with more hands on control. The DT felt fiddly sometimes. RYTM is easier to program this way.
I DO miss a second LFO, and the external sequence capabilities are weak indeed. But what it does as a self contained drum synthesiser, it does great. The sampling part is more cherry on top for me (I’m not so much of a sampling person, still great to add classic X0X sounds etc).
PS: I’m about to pair it with a Digitone 2 to add up for the RYTM’s limitations. Yeah, I’m afraid the RYTM MK3 will one day have to become a reality
If you want to create experimental glitch with an analogue heart, the Rytm is superior to the Digitakt. Those CV inputs can be used to control all sorts of things, with all sorts of things, from the outputs of other channels and electronic music toys to your humble fingertips.
What digitakt has over the Rytm however is, no cramped high frequencies of the samples. If you’re someone who loves high frequencies, a Rytm will only offer them on the synthesis side.
You can fight the cramped HF sample resonse on the Rytm, but it requires sacrificing the filter for adding brightness. OTOH if you like your highend smooth, the cramped HF will probably just sound pleasing
Yes the main reason to get an AR is the analog drum machine (maybe stating the very obvious), samples second, and I would consider the midi more of a very limited bonus. Some people seem to like the sample side better than the synthesis just for the filters/overdrive/compressor. OP seemed more concerned about the external sequencing aspects.
I’ve never been of the opinion that either could replace the other. Very different machines with crossover in theory but not so much in reality. I love them both.
I’ve said it before in a different thread. For me the AR’s filters create amazing sound design opportunities with samples. Overall the sound is simply robust and makes the Digitakt sound thin in comparison (I have both). A second LFO would be amazing but that doesn’t slow me down at all. I will say the two machines play very well together, letting the AR handle the rhythm section and the Digitakt handle samples with mid to high frequencies.
