Does it makes sense to anyone else that “performing” with the pads will send the note assigned with the NOT (note) parameter on the Trig page, yet when SEND MIDI is check on a channel and the pattern is played, the all trigs at send on the same note (C1)? I wish this was configurable. It makes recording patterns from the Analog Rytm to another hardware sequencer impossible without designating each track to their own dedicated channel. The workaround is very inconvenient (swtiching between global slots) since I have limited channels available in my rig and this workaround uses 13 channels!
There needs to be a way of exporting patterns from the RYTM that isn’t completely insane. They’re so close to having it perfect. From the Function + Trig menu they could set a fourth option to indicate a desired MIDI output note from the sequencer while it’s playing. The solution is so simple, it’s infuriating that we’ve gone years without this since MIDI output from the sequencer was added.
edit: Please. The Rytm has come a long way in terms of capabilities and stability over the years. I, for one, really appreciate it. I love the sound and the mk1 is sexy af in my opinion. It’s a great instrument. I just wish it played nicer with others.
After the DT update I feel like the sample mangling capabilities on the DT are now far superior to the AR… I mainly hope they will update the AR to be on par…
-I really really hope the AR gets the same samplestart resolution as the DT, maybe with the option to disable it for old projects (like a legacy startpoint checkbox or something)
-I think a basewith filter for just the sampleengine would really add a lot of possibilities for mixing samples/synth sounds
-A second LFO per track and some visual feedback on the compressor should be there since the little brother DT has both of those.
I must admit i feel the same, now that all 8 tracks of the DT can have its own sonic pocket it makes a massive difference, i was trying to use the ARmkii last night and couldn’t get anywhere near the sounds coming from DT. There is just soooooo much more headroom, especially when the 2nd filter eliminates all the low end mud. And the second LFO brings breathes new life into static repetitive sounds.
I see how the AR could easily get a second LFO but can’t see how it could get that base width filter without introducing a digital filter to an analog signal path? I mean i wouldn’t mind at all, but im not convinced there wouldn’t be some users who could think it impure…
Unless Elektron can get creative with a new piece of code to enhance the bandpass, with 2 cuttoffs or a width control allowing the same resonant filter on the low pass and an adjustable high pass. Keeping the filter Analog…now that would be cool…
Yeah, I agree the digital filter shouldn’t be part of the analog signal path. Maybe they could place it right before the sample is mixed with the analog voice, I guess that would be before the analog filter.
This would also give us the option to take the low end of the analog voice and add some high end from a sample or vice versa.
+1
Second LFO and base-width filter would be incredible, but really just a second LFO would change everything for me.
EDIT: I can’t see how they could implement a base-width filter into the AR’s analog architecture without being really creative (if you take a look at the scheme below, the gray elements are analog). A second LFO though!
EDIT2: would a base-width filter for just the sample playback engine be something? Like, add a base-width filter when you double tap the SMPL button instead of showing the sample. That way you could add a digital filter right after the sample playback engine.
That looks like a perfect place! You could layer just the high end of a kick drum sample with the analog kick engine for example… or just use it to get rid of mud when just using samples like I often do
I agree, and it’s all because the AR engine deserves the treatment. It’s nice to be reminded that the AR is already powerful and generous by using, say, the TR-8S, where you only have a single global LFO to play with. But once you get back into the AR, it doesn’t take long for LFO greed to start creeping in again. It’s like modular GAS that you can’t act on.
Although I shared my hope for an LFO earlier, I am going to remind myself publicly (and thus everyone else :-D) that the AR has p-locks, sound-locks and param slides. I (we) kinda don’t need another LFO. Most tasks we might want to achieve with an LFO can be done with those three other tools and a bit more effort.
I’m a big fan of random LFOs… but most of the time I know I’m just being lazy. I don’t even want random… I want “somewhat random, ideally not repeating much, within a range and then full control for musically significant moments”.
but can’t see how it could get that base width filter without introducing a digital filter to an analog signal path? I mean i wouldn’t mind at all, but im not convinced there wouldn’t be some users who could think it impure…
