FTFY
2 Likes
True. Well fixed 
2 Likes
I use a similar technique as the OP for making music, albeit different music. I’ve had all the groove boxes and the MPC is main go-to. The Live 2 or Key 37.
You can chop audio along a timeline with audio tracks.
Plus, the chopping on the MPC is second to none
2 Likes
A very fair question. And one I’ve pondered a fair bit. A sketch in my eyes is almost like an unfinished component of a song. Could be a percussive loop,
For example when I first started playing with hardware, I used the Rhythm to chop up samples and add effects etc, but it never got as far as an arrangement. To your point, this is a positive of sorts, because you’re not looking for that killer feature. The main addition hardware can bring is as you say, perhaps basic sequencing and a bit of effect led mojo. The main thing with it is I guess in considering simplifying (eg: to an EP-33 / back to the Rhythm) would be to literally throw some samples into it - make a sketch, transfer to DAW and go from there.
Nothing’s off the table. I need to do more reading on this one. I’m conscious that having moved towards a Tracker, which is not a DAW, it does have a small sub-set of DAW like features. MPC of course takes this a lot further. But it’s deceptive because you can get a very handy studio utility for a lot less than the other options out there. I recently saw the MPC One+ retailing for only just north of an SP404mk2.
Doubles as an Ableton controller as well… That said, it is a lot more fully fledged than anything on the wishlist at the mo, and that will be a consideration.
get a cheap digitakt mk1 and rock it
3 Likes
I went down this rabbit hole over a year ago. I started off with a Circuit Tracks, which I enjoyed. But I then wanted something I could sample with, so the obvious choice was the Circuit Rhythm. I’ve used this pair a lot over the past year and had fun with the super intuitive workflow, but using them as a pair brings in a load of niggles and complexities. But that’s another story.
I did want to have a DAWless/live setup with this pair, but some of the niggles I mentioned before has probably killed that idea. While I was struggling with these niggles I ended up back doing generative type stuff (Dr Chaos for example) in Ableton. Which when I came back to the Circuits, I felt really restricted and limited.
I mention this long back story as I’m now in a similar position as you, coincidentally. I now realise that a Hybrid setup is the future, with a device or two that I can use standalone, away from the computer, that has an easy(ish) way of getting stuff back into Ableton.
I’ve considered similar options as you, and my thoughts are below:
Budget:
EP-133 - lack of usb audio, and similar in a lot of ways to the Rhythm, see below.
Circuit Rhythm - lack of lfo and other generative modulation makes it feel limited, although the device is fun.
Mid:
Digitakt - lack of stereo samples, kills it for me with what I’d want to do with it. Soundscape type things.
Sp404mk2 - not fun enough and the amount of button combo shortcuts I’d need to remember puts me off.
MPC one + - not sure I’d love the touchscreen and the step sequencer is apparently not brilliant.
Maschine + - looks like it covers most of what I need and I’ve nearly bought one several times. I just don’t trust NI anymore after being burned by them a few times, and the lack of modulation for samples, means it might be too similar to the Circuit Rhythm.
High(er) end:
Digitakt II - once over bridge is available, this could be an option. Although some of the lacking options for manual slicing puts me off a little.
High end:
Push 3 - seems like with the continued improvements, this will be a really strong option in the future. But, wow, it’s expensive.
You’d think it would be easy wouldn’t you? But it’s so strange with all the volume offsets and stuff. A single Circuit Pro would sell like hot cakes. Novation do listen, but fundamentally that would be a new product I suspect, because the Circuits to me are DJ controller things, especially the Tracks.
Agreed. I think a few cheap & cheerful boxes that are their own standalone thing, then you can stem whatever you make on there back into Live. To me it’s about simple devices that do something in a fun or interesting way, and let the DAW be the powerhouse for making finished songs that it is.
Yeah taking some inspiration from other commentors here, I’m actually leaning towards something like the KO-2. Reason being, as others have pointed out, if you want to make a sketch - then there’s a lot to be said for not actually having many features, and instead focus on the design, the fun factor and more. While you can finish tracks on boxes like that, it’s so limited that it’s perhaps better to use it for more limited goals. It’s too easy to fall into analysis paralysis (eg: the KO does’t resample but the Rhythm does. The Rhythm has 8 voices, the KO has 12. But at that level, beyond simple chops and a bit of polyphony, that’s about as far as it needs to go if you’re tracking it all out to layer properly anyway.)
If I want to do anything serious (eg: longer samples, advanced editing) that’s always better on the computer. Usually the hardware is watered down so that it has some DAW features but without the power and flexibility, so again, I’m thinking the smart money is to come back to playability and fun factor as the primary selection critera, beyond the spec sheet. The Rhythm is also fun, and so that could be an option at some stage.
I admit that we’ve been a bit spoiled with audio over USB these last years, so I just need to pull my finger out and get my old Scarlett interface connected up. I’m completely ITB, and I don’t want a studio full of MIDI cables and gear, but it’s probably something I should get set up.
Thanks for chiming in!
The OG OP-1 might fit the bill here, and it definitely has non-DAW FX too.
4 Likes
I’m surprised the Deluge hasn’t been mentioned much. Bit pricier than other stuff mentioned, but it literally ticks all your boxes and if there’s anything it doesn’t do there’s an active and friendly community development team that are adding new features almost everyday. Latest beta includes stem export.
1 Like
I think I’ve had most boxes mentioned here apart from Op-1, Deluge and Play.
‘Sample based song starter’ says SP404mk2 to me, loud and clear. That’s what it excels at.
It has its quirks, but every time I start with the SP I’m guaranteed to be quickly working on a ‘seed’ idea… I usually go to Ableton to make it a ‘flower’.
I can use the MPC/Maschine in a similar way, but there’s more tasks involved to get to the point of playing, better if you have a clear picture of what you are doing.
SP has you making patterns and flipping between them within 5-10 mins.
3 Likes
The term groovebox can be quite liberal. Perhaps a Xylophone or even a Toy Piano. Anything that you can create a melody on.
Just musings…
It may be useful to just figure out the main limitations of every little box. For me, for example:
- Model:cycles - distinct sound fingerprint, 6 tracks only
- EP-133 - I don’t feel I’m in control, for some reason
- OP-Z - flimsy hardware, temperamental device
- QY-70 - no audio, no screen backlight
- Seqtrak - flimsy as well, confusing interface, too much stop to remember the exact combo to do this or that
- BR-80 - no sequencing, just linear audio
- Kaossilator 2S - 2 bars only, no sequencing
- Mc-101: a bit confusing, 4 tracks only
Etc.
All of that can surely be circumvented somehow (just use the Seqtrak app, bounce tracks on the mc-101, buy a damn lamp for the QY-70, buy a thousand cables for this or that, etc) but I just don’t have the time. I just want to make music. I may as well be at the piano or grab a guitar. I just take the charm of every little box and stop there. Whenever something gets too much in the way, move on.
So I tend to use one box at a time to layer song foundations, almost as batches of 8-10 songs. I did this with the Yamaha RMX1, Kaoss 2S, the OP-Z, the QY-70… For example, this summer I focussed on the M:C. Whenever I feel I’ve reached its limits and everything tends to sound the same (I’m getting there), I will move to another one. I just give myself time to know well the device and be productive, normally 3 months or so. That way I can have “albums” with distinctive sound fingerprints. Hopefully at the end it will all sound like me once I layer guitars, bass, vocals, etc. on top towards the finished song.
I have not managed to find a groovebox that is a permanent fixture for song drafts, and it may be my fault. All of the above are relatively cheap though, so I take them as temporary devices that spark inspiration for a while. That way I can escape a bit the over-analyzing, reading manuals and watching videos to make the ‘right’ decision. Somewhat. It’s psychological, but I would feel much less comfortable if I screw up with the purchase of a 2000$ box.
That said, I may need an MPC key 37, maybe that will change my views and become a stable go-to. But I’m pretty sure it will not be ‘perfect’, nothing is.
1 Like
Worth looking at Logic and/or Drambo and/or Koala Sampler on the iPad imho. It helps to already be in the Apple ecosystem in terms of cloud sync and being able to pick up in the DAW where you left off on the iPad. But these are some serious and insanely powerful options, especially if you already have an iPad. Touchscreen is not for everyone, but for me working with Logic and Apple Pencil feels really nice. Each of those three apps have killer sample chopping / sequencing functionality in their own way.
I’m a relatively recent SP404 convert, but I love mine. There is a bit of a learning curve, I feel like the SP is like sampling/sequencing with the training wheels off. It doesn’t have some of the hacks and shortcuts that you find in other devices, but that’s if anything a positive in my book now that I’ve had a few months to get used to it. I think my technical sampling/chopping fundamentals have gotten a lot better since I got the SP and this has carried over to using other devices too. But I also get why people bounce off it for this same reason.
The other big advantages of the SP are that it sounds great - both in terms of pitching and playback, as well as effects - and that it plays so well with other gear, whether as an end of chain resample or as a soundcard / midi interface for iPad device or sidekick to an MPC / Push. I kinda think of it as a collection of tape loops in a box.
I’m also heavily into the Push, but I think it’s probably overkill for primarily / exclusively sample-based creation. For me it really shines played as an instrument when developing compositions rather than collage. Even though it can do cut ups pretty well, it’s just nothing beyond what you can do on the SP - even though warping audio is a pretty big advantage - and/or iPad. When I’m in the right mindset I can sit down and create track sketches across various styles / moods / techniques with it just one after another. It’s obviously a lot of money but imho it’s in no way expensive for what it is and how much it can do.
3 Likes
So you want hardware for that initial spark, the 0-25% of the song writing process?
Given that you intend to just do initial ideas, loops etc for export into Ableton, I’d recommend something that’s optimized for quickness and fun.
The MPC is amazing, but I feel it’s more geared towards the 0-99% of a full song writing process. Meaning, it can certainly do the 0-25%, but I’d personally feel like that would be dismissing a lot of its potential. I hear many people use it like that though and are happy with it.
The Digitakt would be my choice for a sample based idea and loop generator. It’s quick to use, the step sequencing is fast and fun, and you can use it to discover ideas that you wouldn’t easily have come up with in the DAW through the many happy accidents it generates. Now, it’s perfectly capable of doing 0-75%, leaving only the mixing to the DAW, but I feel it’s the 0-50% phase where it truly shines and is incredibly fast and fun.
Legend:
- 0-25%: the sketch phase, making the first loop and making it sound great
- 25-50%: making b and c sections, arranging things to start to sound like a proper song
- 50-75%: full song arrangement, simple, initial mixing, etc
- 75-99%: mixing, automation, the more precise details
- 99-100%: final mix, master (no groovebox can do this well)
8 Likes
Using this framework, here’s how I’d place various gear in it. Completely subjective and not sure how useful this is.
Digitakt (1 and 2)
- Can do: 0-75%
- Enjoyable: 0-50%
- Most fun: happy accidents, ctrl+all morphs of pattern copies, etc - lots of fun
MPC
- Can do: 0-99%
- Enjoyable: 0-75% (quick once you learn the shortcuts and menus, so easy to make a full song)
- Most fun: really appreciate how it lets you jam freely and record every knob twist into automation
MC-101
- Can do: 0-50%
- Enjoyable: n/a (I found it frustrating to use throughout)
- Most fun: noodling around with pretty Roland synth sounds
Polyend Tracker+
- Can do: 0-75%
- Enjoyable: not sure (slightly tedious throughout)
- Most fun: not sure, haven’t used it enough yet, playing the pads is fun though
3 Likes
I fully agree with you on your assessment of where the sweet spot usage is for the Digitakt I and II.
I’ve been trying to use Song mode for that 50-75% arrangement phase on my DT2 and have been tripping myself up, getting lost, etc. I really benefit from the visual overview that only a DAW can give you.
1 Like
Problem with the Digitakt imho is that it’s just not good at sample editing / chopping. For me at least I really need to identify and prep material in the computer or another device like an SP404 to get the best from it. The auto chop engine is … fine, and can be good fun when you randomise trigs. But after giving it a decent chance for trying to turn loops inside out and take them to weird and unexpected places, I find that it’s nothing I can’t do better and easier on the Push / Logic / SP, albeit in slightly different ways.
Particular issue is that so long as the slice machine is based on a fixed number of regions rather than transients or manual chop, for a lot of material you’re going to get clicks or dead air - have seen people in the Digi2 thread complaining about this recently. But on some material this really works and gives you weird timing / feel. And of course, you can go and do your chops properly manually and save as sounds to sequence or p-lock start points, but this is pretty cumbersome compared to the competition.
So in general, I think it works better with either drums / one shots or tape loop type material. But what I personally like the Digitakt for is remixing / versioning prepped material from projects created elsewhere. I often come out with something radically different and usually more direct from the same sounds / loops I’d been developing elsewhere, often a way of rescuing projects that weren’t really coming together or that had come out badly, rather than starting from scratch on the box.
I think breaking the process into sections is a useful way of looking at it, but not sure about that scheme or at least the percentages. Does this kinda assume that doing 100% on one device is a worthwhile goal? Because that really doesn’t tally with my experience, I generally prefer devices that are really, really good at the thing they’re good at. Probably the closest to a 100% device imho is Logic on the iPad (or computer), but there are other tools I’d rather use at various points. It really comes into its own for the DAW stuff … because it’s a DAW.
It’s kinda painful to mention the MPC because I’m mentally preparing myself for the final “it’s not me it’s actually you” breakup when 3.0 drops - it used to be my go to for idea generation and sample chopping - the 0-25% phase - but the more they’ve emphasised the the DAW stuff and overlooked the traditional strengths of the device, the more it’s been overtaken by other contenders, in particular the SP404 - for my uses at least. Even before they blow it all up in 3.0.
There are so many factors that come into play, from playability whether in terms of physical interactions or scope for experimentation, to how material is structured and can be manipulated on a more macro level, to sound generation / manipulation, to mixing tools. I personally don’t think any device will ever excel at everything across the board, or even more than one phase of the process. But for sure the most important thing is what clicks for a person’s particular working methods and what they’re trying to achieve.
4 Likes
This is a great question and the answer will be entirely subjective. For me, it’s not an either or, but I’ve learned that I prefer to use devices where the friction points of switching between devices/workflows are as seamless as possible. As in, while I also prefer to use devices that are really good at what they do and are fun to use, if that means I’m left with a half-crippled interim result that I then need to recreate or backtrack from, any fun I had in that first phase is canceled out by the extra work required in the next.
I like the Syntakt (and by extension the Digitakt) because it offers the ability to record a performance using Overbridge, meaning that the next phase of mixing in the DAW is relatively straightforward.
I like the MPC even more because there I can record a jam where all the knob twists and mutes during a performance is saved into the project file and then the MPC VST plugin can just be dropped into Ableton for the mixing phase. Meaning, here you still have the ability to further sculpt or change out sounds entirely, or even to tweak the automation that was recorded if you got a small detail wrong.
I think it was mentioned in the thread earlier, but in my opinion if you have an iOS device. Then Koala sampler is a really strong option for sketching out tracks and if you are on an apple device you have an Ableton export option, that looks like it works really well.
https://youtu.be/R1_84qjOca0?si=J0LJnpYwh9hCUD7W
I’ve been using Koala on an Android device, just to try it out, and for the price of the app, I have to say it’s phenomenal.
Yeah some interesting points here including the fact that some gear (for better or worse) can move away from being a sketchpad device. I’ve heard this comment about the SP404, the MPC and others where additions take the device to a different place to its original workflow. (I don’t own these so I’m just talking about what I’ve heard.) Though I suppose I also see this happening on the Tracker too, which now has synth engines, double the tracks etc. It really is a box you can finish something on. Except actually, I feel that its main strength is in forcing you to mess with samples in a different way. Seems like most of the boxes that are in the mid range tend to accumulate features for better or worse.
I like @djst’s idea of the % formula to a point, as it helps you ground the idea of what you’re buying into. Since as many folks say, you’re buying a workflow as much as a piece of hardware. That said, at the level I’m talking about, it feels like there’s always a trade off. For example, the top boxes at the moment that get you 25% of the way there could be the Samples, the KO-2 and the Rhythm. Each has their own quirks, pros and cons. But since each is so limited, it’s also as much about picking the one you maybe just like the vibe of and going from there, since there are no “perfect” boxes and moving up the chain takes you away from song starters. But to play devils advocate, you also don’t have to use a bigger box to its full potential, choosing to use a part of it to get some ideas out quickly.
1 Like