Yeah it’s great for hi pass and short metallic sounds.
I think it sounds great, especially for a reverb on a drummachine. It‘s not a dedicated reverb box
2 Likes
I don’t know for other Elektron devices, but the reverb on the DT is better than every other reverb I heard on this kind of gears in this price range.
It also beat lot of vst plugins reverb but speaking about VST I feel valhalla is better.
1 Like
A4 reverb is better because it sounds great + there’s an FX track with plocks and LFO. 
It tends to crack if you send too much bass though, so using the HP filter is almost mandatory.
1 Like
…tone and takt share the same…
…ot is on it’s own…
…not sure if rytm and a4 also share the same…but i love my a4 one…
and on there, fx got their own lane…dunno about the rytm though…
but a4 reverb differs defenitly a lot from the digi’s…
The synth voices that hit the reverbs sound much different but if you send the DN or DT dry - into the A4’s external input, through the reverb, you’ll hear it is the same reverb algorithm as the Digis (and AR)
In fact, you already can:
3 Likes
…i see…er…hear… 
Would it be true to say that even though the Analog and Digi-* have the same reverb algorithm, it’s curated differently? As I recall from demoing a Digitone, it’s reverb had fewer editing options than my A4. With the A4, it’s pretty easy to wander off the beaten path when editing the reverb, so that you may end up some place unpleasant. The Digi’s, with fewer editing options, may help keep you from getting lost in the woods. So even though it’s the same algo, it sounds “better.”
I thought the the DT and DN had higher FX processing sample rates than the AR, A4, AK, and OT.
I can’t find Ess explaining that, but I could have sworn it was somewhere on the forum. 
dont matter set the bad boy to INF and away yoi go
Yep they are definitely the same parameters.
Otherwise the shootout / comparison would have been impossible to do.
2 Likes
I also have the perception that DT and DN reverbs are different and more detailed. I also like A4 more and AR less. But I guess it’s only because of what you feed the reverb. I think (for my taste) the algorithm just works so good on crisp and clean sounds with are DT and DN.
The reverb was one of the reasons why I switched from AR to DT some time ago (switched back already since). And I work almost only with samples on AR, the same samples as on DT… But the analog path vs higher sample rate makes samples sound very different on AR and DT. I love the AR sound, but I love the DT reverb…
1 Like
OT plate verb is deffo my favorite… love putting that on percussive samples and fiddle with gate time… in fact I love all the effects on OT due to its modulatable nature…
I haven’t quiet dug into A4s fx section yet.
3 Likes
Both play 16 bit/48 khz mono files - I guess gainstaging, levels, how you use an effect, what type of sounds you use and even if you use the same sounds/samples, how you treat them before sending them into an effect (e.g. analog filter vs digital filter) can make quite the difference.
This is exactly what I meant. even if AR is the same sample rate… I’ve spend time trying to copy patterns from one to another. same samples, same settings, playing next to each other… sound very different! and as such the reverb too
The overdrive is such a big difference too! I actually like DT overdrive better than AR
1 Like
for me:
- A4 mk1 reverb sounds great, it is also nicely feedbackable
- DN not that much
There are also probaply differences in how gain related controls are parameterized (for example an amp volume of 100 on one device does not nessecarily mean that the result will be the same on different device if turned up to 100) and in general differences in the gain structure itself.
But I’m pretty sure the UI/UX also has an impact, basically how we approach a certain instrument, how we interact with it.
1 Like