Hey guys, I’ve read through a few similar threads but just wanted more opinions. Especially from those who see the AR as more than just a drum machine. Watching the Glophase sets really confirmed with me the potential I felt the box has.
I currently have an A4mk1 and everything I love about it comes more from the elektron flow of things rather than the synthesizer aspects itself.
I want to mainly add samples and more live performance features. Both Fader/Scenes and the Pad Perf/Scenes/Qperf really appeal to me for building songs dynamically.
By samples I mean some ambient chord washes, hiphop style sample flipping, random re-purposed bloops from my existing synths, and single cycles into simple melodic lines. If the AR can plock sample start like the digitakt, I would be content without the slice mode.
I am kind of drawn to the simplicity of the AR because I like to make most of the “action” happen through live tweaks / plocks of relatively simple sounds and building blocks.
The analog filter/drive/comp are a big big pro for me on paper because I love the idea of a box that has a distinct sound and can kind of put its own flavor on everything.
IMHO when the focus is live performing (especially in combination with some other synths) the OT brings much more to the table than the AR. It has more effects, more inputs, can dynamically resample, operates with stereo tracks (not just stereo effects like the AR), crossfader and scenes, 8 dedicated midi tracks … and and and …
OT has slices, cue outs can be used for send fx (return to input pair) slot mode can play loaded samples with trig buttons, slice mode can play slices with trig buttons (page button cycles through all samples/slices).
So you can really perform your samples plus the sequencing, fx and other OT shit.
Three lfos per track can really breath life into samples…it has the lfo designer…
With samples, you can go in (almost) any direction.
Personally I love the AR. I’d say the 2 main cons as a general purpose sampler are mono samples and only 1 set of fx as sends vs per track on the OT.
If you’re making bangers the compressor doesnt really have a conventional sidechain but how much that matters depends on intended use. The OT comp doesnt have one either I guess.
Of course it depends on what you really need/want.
The OT is simply a swiss army knife for performing. Whatever needs arise in a small 2-3 machine setup there is a possibly a solution using the OT (background tracks, mixing, fx, programmed resampling, looper, … you name it … or use the OT alone).
On the other hand the AR is at its core a drum machine which can layer mono samples on top its analog synthesis.
Update:
One of my favorite features of the OT: 64 GB removable storage with a simple USB drive interface (drag and drop).
I’ve been in your position and I can truly say that it depends on the person and how they work. My wife often laughs at my blood type “o” tendencies. For me, there are so many reasons I’d pick the AR mk1 Or 2 over an OT.
OT was my first Elektron box. I acquired a second in a deal for my Machinedrum because I liked it sooooo much. I always had my eye on the RYTM and then I bought one. After many a time dreaming of a more streamlined setup and getting a tighter work flow the RYTM stayed, one OT left and the other OT is currently cupboarded and in its box.
The RYTM is my dream box. It fulfills in places the OT can’t for me. Again, it comes down to a difference of opinion and truly advise you to find out for yourself to disintegrate any burning questions.
The RYTM has separate outs.
The RYTM sample mangling is actually enough for my current music making desires.
That analog filter and overdrive per track makes me drool
Both machines have sample playback but the RYTM has its sample coupled with an analog engine.
Final thoughts;
The OT is impossible to beat on the random noodling and unrivalled on inspirational juices that left me oozing. Besides this, the RYTM gives me more focus. I still end up in my happy weird sonic territory with both. And when I get to my “happy place” the RYTM sounds better.
The midi control was great on my external synths; a place the RYTM simply can’t go.
FWIW I used to miss my Machinedrum but I can dial in very very good hi hats on the RYTM.
I hope this helps.
EDIT: The RYTM is my only audio output. I have been considering the repurchase of an AR and I’ve tried to fit the OT back into my set up on more than one occasion. Just one box is best for me.
Nice man. I wanted to hear from someone in the AR camp. Maybe it’s showing that I came here with an answer in mind.
Those analog filters are a big part of it for me but also the simplicity.
The Swiss army knife thing makes a lot of sense and it is appealing to pick up the OT because it would likely fill a random use case I don’t even have now but I’m going to try the AR first.
A bit more info because you struck something with me on the “focus” thing.
If we look at gear as filling a void or fixing a problem, Elektron in general has been amazing for me in terms of structuring songs. I love how dramatic yet simple changes to the fx, dropping out tracks and changing patterns can be done on the fly.
I’d rather use this to achieve variation and evolution in a piece of music than typical horizontal daw style arranging.
Anyways, I’ve gone off the deep end with sound design through other avenues over the last few years. Right now, I want to turn my focus towards adding variety and a fullness to the structure and arrangements of my jams.
Something about the AR looks like it’s just limited enough to push me into certain choices structure wise. “Only one lfo? Ok I’ll make a new pattern when I want to change what the lfo is doing and build a different section around it.”
I have both and I definitely think both are capable of what you want, they are both great, the ARmkII perhaps more immediate but not quite as flexible as the OT in some ways.
On the AR MKII don’t underestimate the 2 CV inputs, you can add 2 more mod sources there and right up to audio rate too. I made a dual knob box for mine which adds really great extra tweakability, and you can also route audio into the CV ins even from the separate outputs, which is quite handy. Or you could add some modular to spice things up without losing the immediacy.
I’be had both and ended up keeping the Rytm around exactly because it’s more of a “groovebox”. The workflow is much faster and it has many many quality of life features that the older sequencer of the OT lacks.
copy/paste/edit multiple trigs at once
way more button/knob per function. Less menus and waaaay less setup required
preview parameter and soundlocks by holding a trig and pressing a pad (makes quick slicing faster than on OT)
Rytms FX are less flexible but much easier to get good sounds out of
Rytm has samples, drum synthesis and also melodic synthesis
The OT is great for live performance, or crazy live resampling. Outside of that its flexible but its much harder to get a groove started on.
I’ve had an OT (now an MK2) since 2012ish and an Analog Rytm (now using an MK2) since 2014.
I’ve still BARELY used the OT and I use the Rytm 95% of times I sit down to make music. Rytm is more effective as a groovebox because it actually has very well-thought-out limitations. It feels like an “instrument” after much fewer hours of use.
Here’s the thing. If you derive more enjoyment from creating new SOUNDS and TEXTURES using samples, then OT is for you. But if you enjoy getting a beat going, getting your body moving, and then sculpting and interacting with it, Rytm is faster.
I read your original post @philroyjenkins …Rytm MK2 ALL THE WAY
Rytm is great for any of this. To be honest…if I EVER get around to using my OT more…I will probably take what I’ve made on it and LOAD IT INTO RYTM just so I can stay in the “drum machine/groovebox” environment that I work so well in.
The OT seems to have this strange stigma that it’s difficult or less friendly.
Yes the AR is simpler, and very streamlined, until you wanna back up samples along with sysex files.
I always found the OT to be simple to grasp at it’s base features, and the FX sound AMAZING, especially when you start stacking FX with neighbor tracks.
You can do tings with scenes that no other hardware device can do.
Outside of being able to plock multiple trigs at once, the sequencer on the OT is just as capable as the newer boxes.
If you spend time with the compressor, you can get solid results, granted adding something like and FMR RNC really beefs it up.
The AR really does add a nice character to samples, but the OT can give you a complete character style.
Dealing with project management on the OT is extremely better than any of the other boxes, especially compared to the AR and sample management.
Just my 2 cents, but when people say the AR sounds better, I get the feeling they mean “cleaner.”
The OT can go from clean to crazy with a much wider range than the AR.
Lastly, you have twice as many bank per project on the OT.
Perfs, Scenes on the AR are great, but with perf mode, it’s not very precise, you’re just mashing as best you can.
The OT crossfader/scenes is just out of this world fun for performance.
dude, sick stuff! Up to audio rates? Wow! Does it hold up well? I’ve looked into making similar boxes for some of my DSI synths but the CV in is still quantized through there system so it sounds no better than the digital LFOs at audio rates.
Total nitpick of course.
Also what kind of stuff could you achieve with the audio out into that CV in? Can you rig it as a sort of reactive feedback/envelope follower vibe?
E: just scoped that instagram post. This is sick! I really envision doing a lot of droney weird stuff with the AR but I just haven’t seen enough out there. Thanks for confirming it with this.
