Which elektron do you prefer?

Hans_Olo · 2015-01-16T15:06:29.000Z

OT for me is like a swiss knife, because it’s so versatile. If I had to choose it would be my desert island machine, too. Rytm on the other hand gives me instant gratification. Load a few samples and bang out patterns in no time (BTW Volca Sample is pretty similar in that respect). Haven’t really fallen in love with the A4 yet, probably due to my lack of sound design skills. To cut a long story short:

OT 2) AR 3) A4

Cheers,
Hans

smais · 2015-01-16T17:26:49.000Z

MD UW by a long way. I love this thing; the way it looks, the way it feels, it’s elegance and simplicity. Then closely followed by my OT, which I actually use more than the MD but it’s complexity makes it a little less fun for me.

I also have a MnM, but I really don’t get it yet. I’m just no good at it. I make better sounds faster with my vsts/ipad. I know you can do so much with it but I’m not clicking with it. I will probably sell it. So that’s MD > OT > MnM for me.

I don’t have any of the Analogs so can’t comment there.

izzymonkey · 2015-01-16T19:14:37.000Z

I own the OT, A4, and MD (non-UW Mk II version.)

The Octatrack for me is the go-to device, as I feed so many various sources into it: at home it might be a modular synth, vinyl from my turntable, the other elektron instruments, or something I cobbled together in Live.

In live performance situations (the majority of its use) I feed it a Prophet '08, the A4, and sometimes my basses. I love it the most when I’m using it to improvise as our trio plays.

The OT takes on such a different character whatever you feed it–one of its main compelling charms for me.

MD is absolutely (as stated before) the most immediate.

A4 just sounds gorgeous, and is a perfect partner to my Prophet.

With that: OT > A4 > MD

audiotonomy · 2015-01-16T20:26:58.000Z

A4 for me wins hands down. I’ve got OT, AR, MD and A4…

Each machine has it’s place but A4s sound (took a while to learn the sweet spots) is just huge. Even for drums I think I prefer it to the AR synth drum sounds. The performance mode just makes songs come alive and breathes fresh air into my productions.

Every time I use it I find a new way of working on it…it’s pretty un-user friendly and a bit of a puzzle to get sounds that are quite easy to get on wysiwyg synths, but that’s part of its character. I would fucking LOVE an arpeggiator update though!

LaughingAnimal · 2015-01-16T21:27:50.000Z

Octatrack for me, mostly due to being able to utilize effects loops via the cue outs and inputs for endless mangling and resampling. I dont think i’d care much for any of my synths without it since I process the hell out of them with it (I just don’t get the same joy doing this with a computer). I’ve always been most creative with samplers and the OT is king for me. I don’t know where my music would be without it.

Second is the Monomachine. I get the most intriguing synth sounds with it… sometimes. Other times I wonder why I love it so much, but that always goes away with the next sound I stumble upon. The key to the MNM for me is using external effects. Sounds wonderful once I start mangling it in the OT.

William_WiLD · 2015-01-16T23:09:08.000Z

For me it’s also Depend about what kind of music…
To me OT and AR are the perfect combo

But all machines was very nice no doubt about that.

ehrek · 2015-01-16T23:17:44.000Z

OT for features and workflow, although quite useless to me without being fed by my MD and A4

biologik · 2015-01-18T05:13:57.000Z

I love all my children equally

well, not really…

A4–>RYTM–>MD–>MnM–>OT

bluewolfse7en · 2015-01-18T09:33:16.000Z

I prefer different machines in different scenarios so it’s a difficult call for me.

MD is so musical & the most ‘instrument’ like. I love it’s architecture, it’s built for live jamming. It’s the only one of the 5 boxes that I feel I could take out live with no prep’d material whatsoever & still get a gig out of it.

MM is much misunderstood at first glance but is a treasure trove. The more time I spend with it the more I love it.

OT with very little prep can be like the MD in terms of musical flow. It also reminds me of the MM b’cos it can be a bit of a chameleon & change it personality depending on machine assignments/routing etc.

A4 & AR usher in better sequencers, better FX (generally but I still love the MM delays), & a lot more performance based features. That said they require more prep to get the most out of them IMO…
There’s a lack of immediacy for me that the MD had nailed & even the OT came close to.
An example would be ‘Scenes’. On the OT I’d never stop playback, you just dial in on the fly & away you go. I find this a bit fiddly on the newer boxes, the flow is lost for me.

Live…MD > OT > MM > AR > A4
Studio…MM > A4 > OT > MD > AR

Costo · 2015-01-18T22:56:04.000Z

I acquired them in that order :
A4 (Q3 '13 : first synth ever) -> OT (Q3 '13) -> MD (Q1 '14) -> AR (Q4 '14).

And prefer them in that order :
AR+A4 -> OT -> MD.

But that may be because I just got my AR and love it’s immediacy and the organic feeling of scenes and perf modes.

AR and A4 are an amazing combo !
I rarely use the AR without the A4 (mostly for melodies, basslines and pads/FX.)

Although the OT is only third for the moment, I use it all the time, if only as a mixer, MIDI sequencer, FX processor (including cueing to external FX) and a loop sampler (from other synths like Monotribe and Shruthi-1.)
It’s an amazing box but I’m still new to music production and am more comfortable with boxes which generate their own sounds than with samplers of that depth. Need still more practice with it…
I’m having loads of fun with the AR samples, though.

MD got a lot of love until AR arrived… love that analog punchy sound more than the more glitchy digital nature of the MDUW+ for the moment. That will probably change once I got enough practice with AR, then I’ll try to combine them both.

Desert Island box ? Don’t make me choose, please !
For now it’d probably be the AR, but once the OT will be mastered…

Old_Dub_Dude · 2015-01-18T22:58:07.000Z

MO-NO-MA-CHI-NE
greatest synth ever built imho

TrabanT · 2015-01-20T23:52:59.000Z

""biologik"":

I love all my children equally

well, not really…

A4–>RYTM–>MD–>MnM–>OT

hey biologic … I really enjoy your sounds … would you do me a solid ? could you when you have a “spare minute” make a sound design tutorial for the MM (non+drive) … especially pads ???

here my toys chart:

rank 1 : MD

rank 2 : A4

Rank 3 : OT MM AR

biologik · 2015-01-21T00:05:55.000Z

""TrabanT"":

hey biologic … I really enjoy your sounds … would you do me a solid ? could you when you have a “spare minute” make a sound design tutorial for the MM (non+drive) … especially pads ???

Thanks I’ve thought about this, but the beauty in the MnM isn’t really the sounds, it’s the integration with the seq too. That’s probably why the MnM is so loved and hated by people I may do it in the future, but right now I’m diving into the RYTM…

dubathonic · 2015-01-21T20:13:11.000Z

too great a puzzle for this ‘classic’ trinity owner. each one feels like a tool that i reach for under different circumstances, which have significant overlap … inspiration increases with experience.

i’m having a hard time even choosing my favorite configuration of two or more elektrons.

together with my iPad, i haven’t felt GAS in more than two years.

Tornfrayed · 2015-01-21T20:59:10.000Z

Only had my MDUW for a few hours and it’s shot to the top of my A4 and Octatrack, so easy to use! OK back to jamming…

ach · 2015-01-21T21:25:03.000Z

monomachine.
dual, better.

djadonis206 · 2015-01-21T21:51:18.000Z

Couldn’t live without all three: AR, A4 and OT.

If one had to go, the A4 would go first followed begrudgingly by the AR.

The OT would need to be pried from my cold dead hands.

OT

rex_mundii · 2015-01-22T03:58:27.000Z

Haven’t tried anything except the AR & OT. The other boxes do look good, but they never really appealed to me in the same way that these two do.

So far I’ve been enjoying the immediacy of the AR. Pretty much turned it on and I was good to go - it’s fulfilled what I saw to be a gap in my setup perfectly (i.e. a quality HW drum machine that’s enjoyable to use). Plus there’s plenty of room to grow with it for the next few years at least.

Now for the OT. I’ve really been struggling to find happiness with this box in the same way I have with everything else. Maybe it’s a result of the past year being not so good musically speaking, or maybe I just haven’t found an enjoyable workflow yet. I often wish I’d never purchased it considering how expensive it really is for a student/part time worker.I’ve tried to sell it a few times now, but pulled out at the last minute. At the moment I’ve got it quietly resting in its box until I’m ready to have another crack at it. Saying that, I’ve had some good moments with it and I’m not ready to give up just yet. I can still definitely see the potential.

But for the moment I definitely prefer the AR over the OT.

Accent · 2015-01-22T08:13:09.000Z

Give me the OT and an iPad and I’ll never run out of ideas.

As a singular device, give me the Monomachine.

I could make music for years with either option. If I had to pick just one, it would be the OT, but as it doesn’t create sounds independently (“a machine that makes music?”) it would need some source to get things going.

Either way, I’d have thousands of potential songs sitting on my desert island.

PeterHanes · 2015-01-22T18:23:55.000Z

OT > MD > MM. Nul points for the AF or AR, so far.

This is not based on only the individual merits of the machines, but also from my history and existing set-up. I started with the MM and soon afterwards got an MD (UW). When I was ready, I added an OT.

The MD is such a brilliantly-conceived instrument: take (almost) all the best features from all previous drum machines and package them in a stand-alone box, then provide a long stream of free new features that greatly expanded its capabilities. It didn’t skimp on pro-level features like audio ins and plenty of individual outs. The groovebox format is perfect for a high-performance drum machine: simple sequencer plus easy interaction with sound generator. The synthesis machines have parameters that not only make it easy to tweak drum sounds, but also to allow for much more unlikely (from a drum machine) sounds.

The MM is a work of eccentric genius! Take a great drum machine UI, and build a uniquely-freaky digital modular synth/effects instrument that feels like having the whole of Kling Klang studio in one box. That’s a tough mission to fulfill, and some of the functions are strained because of the limits of the step sequencer paradigm for melodic compositions. The features that are exposed given the limited number of parameters available are cleverly-chosen. The MM will always surprise people. Any of the sysnthesis methods can generate a huge number of different-sounding results. The trick is to envision what is possible given the flexible audio routing architecture: it needs time to explore, and (for me) a flexible patchbay system to use it to its fullest with other gear.

The OT is different to all the other instruments. It’s the ultimate “what if …?” (for unwary new users maybe “WTF?”) instrument. Seemingly, everything that Elektron learned from people using the MDUW and MM got piled into it. The presence of a ‘Personalize’ menu means that Elektron couldn’t quite nail down an optimum configuration. Working with audio rather than synthesis means that anything can happen - it can be a basic drum machine or an entire compositional system, the hub of the performance or a nice add-on. The price to pay is the number of key combinations to remember in order to use all the functions, and some time to understand why it’s so different from other samplers. I really hope that it gets a bit more development and polish, and a different type of manual. It’s my favourite Elektron because nothing else, from anyone, so far can quite replace it.

I was never excited by the AF. The synthesis engine is ingeniously done, full of small touches that shows that Elektron has payed careful attention to what’s available in the existing market. But I don’t have the same excitement for analog synthesis that many other people have, the UI seems a bit less sensible, and four voices is too few for me in a standalone package, and I already have a five-voice DSI Evolver set-up that is very nice for both mono- and polyphonic work. In terms of user interface and some hardware features, it seemed that Elektron went back to basics after the complexity of the OT: the size of the screen and the lack of individual outs (maybe Overbridge was expected to be ready much, much sooner) made it seem that the design was driven by a vision of expanded market share, which the premise and low initial price certainly gave them. The AK fixed some of this, but I don’t need a keyboard like that.

The AR might become the most technically-accomplished and all-round playable instrument that Elektron have produced so far; it’s helped by having Strom on iPad as a great companion. I haven’t yet heard much stretching of the capabilities of the instrument that the Elektron-Users pioneers eked out of the MD. If I didn’t have the others already, an AR would be great. If I have an MD and an OT, why would I need an AR? I think it’s too soon to say.