I have had the ARM2 for a couple of weeks now, and loving how organic the process is for creating music (although the workflow still befuddles me). I know its natural twin is the A4M2 as I’m looking to add some sonic punch. This effectively gets me an Analog Studio setup - until Elektron is ready to release a similar box…
But I also have a Digitakt, and the Digitone is starting to look like a viable option. Especially with the arp function. I understand the Analogs and Digis are completely different sonically, and what I liked about the Analogs are the pattern and song modes.
Question 1: how hard is it to save songs/patterns that will match up and controlled via MIDI with an Analog/Digi pairing? I could use same Project/Kit names for both to infer manually, but will it call up automatically via MIDI control from ARM2?
Question 2: I know the workflow screens are different, but is it so vastly different between the Analogs and Digis, it’s better for me to stick to Analogs?
I’m looking for an opinion from someone who owns these boxes and have first hand use pairing ARM2 and Digitone. Much appreciated!
The RYTM and A4 look and work similarly in the sequencer. So creating pieces that use both can sync up easier visually and in workflow. Also, the sequencer on the Octatrack is similar to these two.
The DN sounds great and it’s sequencer is powerful. But it’s laid out differently and doesn’t have the extra depth in the pattern setup.
I wouldn’t have a DN normally in my setup. But I needed a good keyboard and ended up adding a Digitone Keys. It works well playing the A4 as well as the DN.
Either the AR or A4 can send program change messages to the DN or DT. The patterns have to be named the same: that is, when pattern A01 is playing on the AR, pattern A01 will play on the DT, and when the AR switches to pattern A02, the DT will as well. You can test this right now with your current setup.
That means that you don’t need to choose the A4 over the DN just for song mode, unless you want the flexibility of not using the AR at some point. You can use the AR as the “song brain”, and you wouldn’t want two such brains. So the choice of A4 or DN can be made based on other features each one offers.
I don’t have an AR, but I have an A4mk1, DNK, DT, and the workflow is not vastly different among these; in fact, there are a lot of similarities which makes it much easier to get started with a new machine. You just have to be aware of the differences.
I also have the Model:Cycles and loving the metallic clang of it, and that’s why I am thinking maybe it’s better to go with an A4M2 for some warmer sounds but still run M:C for the FM sounds. Hard choices!
I should bring back the DT now. I didn’t quite like spending so much time on it and having to re-chain patterns each time I fired it up. The ARM2 Song mode can take care of that now, but, really the sampling on ARM2 is pretty good on its own, especially with Herr Shield’s brilliant Timestretch workaround.
As @plragde mentioned, the Analog R and 4 can send program change messages to DT & DN. It’s very easy, you just have to match up patterns A01 on both machines, etc. for your songs/pattern chains to work.
What sounds are you looking to get? That to me is the more important question when determining A4 or DN.
Quite honestly I like both type of sounds! But I really ought to just get one and not both. I do like the warmth of the A4M2, and from my current use of ARM2, I like the tweakability factor of the format. DN looks a little more daunting and also the programming looks more complicated with multiple key presses.
A4 is more conventional, but there are a large number of possibilities immediately evident, and it is harder to move from the init patch to something really interesting, just because of the full range at hand. It’s definitely possible, but not so easy at first. DN, on the other hand, has a more unusual architecture, but if you don’t twist the knobs to their extremes, it’s actually easier to get a nice complex sound out of it. Each of them has much depth (in different directions) that comes with more experience; I am speaking of early use (which, if too intimidating, one might not proceed beyond). I would not say that DN is more daunting or complicated to program than the A4. DN is also cheaper than the A4mk2 (but not the A4mk1, which is a great bargain).
I had both analogs and the digis but I’ve recently sold the digis…
I think why I decided to keep the analogs is I prefer analog sound, I make more chill stuff these days analog is smoother and warmer …
Plus the analogs have more comprehensive features overall…
The rytm and digitakt have a bit too much overlap to have both after owning both imo
I eventually decided on the DigiPair because it forces me to do things on the fly. This leads to things that don’t happen as often (for me) when I have deeper programming and song modes available.
Not that those things are bad in ANY way. It’s just that I painstakingly programmed all of my music one note at a time for around 20 years. I like the departure and immediacy of the Digis.
That said, an AR+Digitone is quite the combo. I had a Rytm and Digitone Keys together, and actually miss that combo quite a bit. I generally prefer synthesis to samples for percussion, and while the DN is great for that, I don’t like spending the channels on it for that.
My perfect Elektron setup would be:
Rytm: tracked percussion over a song.
Digitakt: improvised per pattern percussion and effects.
Digitone: melodic and scapes.
However, my Hydrasynth can fill in any of those gaps except samples using MIDI tracks.
I do love the A4, but like it more on its own trying to cram a full track into its four channels than adding it on. Weird I know, but something about my odd psychology. Hehehe
This setup keeps me busy these days. I barely touch anything else actually.
IMO the DN has the best melodic sequencer of any Elektron product, despite the lack of arp plocks and retrig. Entering notes and tweaking the active notes per step is a breeze from the note menu. Maybe worth noting if you don’t use a midi keyboard.
i’m biased and can say that I love the A4. even with an mk1 I really enjoy the sound design and limitations of this thing. song mode is a whole draw for me, but since you’ve already got the AR, you don’t necessarily need to worry about that. so it comes down to how comfortable you might be with the FM or analog synthesis. what kind of music do you make?
Perhaps an oversimplified way to look at it is: the DN is the MC unleashed; the A4 is the non-sample part of the AR unleashed. Which dimension do you want to explore first? (Keeping in mind the distinct possibility that you will eventually get both.)
Thank you so much for sharing your experiences with these machines! I’m very much into the experimental stuff - leaning on ambient/shoe-gaze to harder beats layered on top of the music bed. The arp “plink plonks” to cut through the pads are my preferred musicality tones rather than chord stabs and progressions.
LOL! I agree with you. I am so “programmed” with all the previous boxes and not saying it’s bad (like the MPC), but having moved into the Elektronsphere, I find it refreshing that a lot of my messing around with the boxes are so much on-the-fly and just knobbing the parameters.
But, I still fall back to wanting a song-mode… just in case… and the ARM2 does that for me. What’s missing for me right now is a synth part - a better structure for bass track and some arp melodies instead of trying to tune/detune it to get the notes. Although the DT can somewhat fill that part, but I find it not so immediate from a sampler. Much prefer to hit a keyboard to get those notes.
Unless they changed something on the MK2 I don’t think so, I’m talking about the “add notes” button on the DN. It brings up a menu where you can adjust scale and transposition, as well as re-mapping the trigs to show which notes are active. So you can freely add and remove notes from the chord on that particular trig.
There is a “NOTE MENU” in A4M2, which allows a note value to be dialed in, but yeah, not sure if this is the same as the DN “ADD NOTES” button. There is also a transposition checkbox, but this again is looking different from the DN. Maybe it does the same thing but I am not sure just from reading the manual.
It’s a rad question OP, I love the idea, these two twins either analog or digi. but really, it doesnt matter. it’s all elektron, it’s all the same stuff, 16 steps, 4 pages, etc etc. it’ll all work. it’s been said in other thread but it’s easy to underestimate how much admin owning a few boxes takes. like keeping everything in check etc. i think your real questions would be about the type of sound you want. and then there is always the OT which can serve either pairing. good luck!
So… after many hours of YT, reviews, comments and RTFM I pulled the trigger on the A4M2 I have a sneaking suspicion the DN will join the family later, but, because the workflow is very similar to my ARM2, I figured this would be the better addition. Besides, I do like the analog sounds. I could always use my M:C if I need some metallics for now.
Thank you for your feedbacks, and bear with me when I get the machine as I would be asking inane questions and cries for help. I am in no doubt it will grant me hours of frustrations, high-blood pressure and moments of perfect anguish and pain with lots of doubts as to why I spent so much for this privilege. (My therapist will have a field day…)
)
I have a sneaking suspicion the DN will join the family later, but, because the workflow is very similar to my ARM2, I figured this would be the better addition. Besides, I do like the analog sounds. I could always use my M:C if I need some metallics for now.