well in the quest for knowledge, because to the best of my (admittedly limited) knowledge, including (what i took) as a confirming nod about this from a source within Elektron, i’m somewhat surprised that there’s potentially any difference at all … so strip down that 3 kick and snare to as clear and as rudimentary a pure test case as you can … with a .syx dump of a pattern/kit … and i will provide the blind audio test back or at least add some anecdotal feedback as i can A/B both versions here
i do think it is possible that you are right, i’ve seen another case where on a different set of machines a user was getting superior (in terms of attack transient consistency iirc) results from the Mk1 !! - so they may be essentially the same in terms of engine, but there may well be extremely minor and undisclosed tweaks that have an effect
I’m preparing for a live set that i’m performing next week for a live streaming radio (hör in berlin). Then I’m sending my rytm in the next day to get some repairs done to it. (In short, I don’t have time to do this.)
Probably the biggest reason I really want the mk2 is because of the display; i’m visually impaired.
An a/b test of the two machines would be really awesome.
There was a time when I had both a MK1 and MK2 at my disposal.
This was right when the dual VCO update was released.
Both freshly calibrated, I A/B’d them and found no discernible differences. (Where as the A/B I did of A4 MK1 and AK was immediately noticeable, as if both were going through separately configured curves on two master equalizers.)
I’d have to check change logs, but perhaps subsequent firmware releases contained a tweak here or there to the Rytm MK2.
Or perhaps this machine just needed to be calibrated:
No evidence or basis for what I’m about to suggest… but is it possible that the headphone socket spec was changed/improved from mk1 to mk2? I’d always base a comparison off the main outs rather than the headphone outs. Although headphone outputs are usually very good.
I don’t think so. I have rytm mk2 btw. And a4 mk1. Formfactor doesn’t seams as much of a difference, but it is. I like mk2 better, really HQ build, very slick and hi tech.
Bigger screen, extra quick performance knob and two CV/expression inputs that can be mapped to 4 parameters each. That’s about it. The voice outs are on separate jacks instead of needing a splitter.
The sampling (and internal resampling) is the big one. The synthesis capabilities, sample playback, filters and signal flow are the same from mk1 to mk2. The midi out capabilities of the sequencer are the same, it’s basic monophonic notes only.
Same number of independent outputs in total (8 voices + stereo L/R) but the mk1 has two voices per socket, one on the tip and one on the ring of a TRS jack - you use Y-splitters to get them on to separate mono jacks if that’s what you need. Mk2 has separate jack sockets for each voice.
Had a Mk1 for 6 years and finally upgraded to Mk2 last week. My thoughts are:
Mk2 Pros:
Much improved pad sensitivity, no more complaints here
Quick Performance is great
Encoders are overall nicer
It’s nice to have all outputs available on Overbridge, and much faster sample transfer
The CV inputs are useful, especially if you can run an individual output through an envelope follower and feed that in (for sidechaining anything to that voice)
The waveform view on the sample page is useful
Temp Jump is a nice fill-like feature, and it’s really nice to have the different pattern change settings on dedicated buttons
Resampling is definitely fun
Mk2 Cons:
While nicer overall, the encoders are a bit more touchy for small adjustments. Faster in some ways, slower in others
Definitely will need to get used to its size … the buttons feel almost comically large to me. I do miss being able to do many FUNC + other-key combos with one hand
Really need to get used to the new location of the FUNC key. I keep reaching for TRK.
One nice side effect of the Mk1’s combination of voices on the same individual output jacks was that I could track BD+BT on the same input of my mixer, which I liked because I layer them frequently and use both as alternate bass drums
Was it worth the 500€ cost of switching? Maybe. Overall I think the Mk1 is still incredibly good value if you don’t mind the pads and your encoders are still in good shape (or you can get them replaced).
Oh this drives me crazy too - messing with muscle memory like that was a real bind - but to be fair to the Mk2 here it was correcting the issue created on the Mk1 when they dropped the upper left key being Fn paradigm - no use when you get used to it like that on the Mk1 and they swap it back the way it should have been
so this is almost a pro, but i take your point - you can’t win if you own both !
Maybe on the Octatrack the Fn key is “upper left” (relative to some other keys), but it feels like middle-left, exactly where Fn is on Rytm Mk1. So I’ll need to maintain different motor memories for each
AK has the func button on the bottom, under the transpose button - on OT it’s basically reversed, pattern button on the bottom, function above it. My muscle memory let me hit the pattern button on my OT so many times, it drove me mad.
Fortunately it’s possible to jam with the AK without using the function button, doesn’t work so well on OT, though. OT is sort of the function button reference…
This was the reason I planned to buy an AR Mk1, not Mk2.
I had the mk1 Ar and A4 and I upgraded them. The truth is that are nicer, better screen, better encoders totally awesome, the sound has some difference, not much.
The mk1 appeared problems at encoders and LCD after 2 years…I bought them second hand at a mint condition, with neither a scratch. So be careful before you buy any of them run the test mode and check the encoders.
headphone outputs are usually very good.
