probably 
True, but that’s also a bit reductive. It doesn’t have to be one or the other. I prefer making music on the DT, and use the DAW to record and to host plugins that I sequence from the DT. My PC and work laptop is at a small desk, so putting away my gear when not in use just has to be done if I want to do anything else at the desk.
2 Likes
Cables make me crazy anxious as well, and since I must move my gear each time I have to work on my computer (ultra small desk in a ultra small flat + my GF isn’t crazy about having blinking boxes everywhere in the living room), I constantly lust for small, portable, battery powered gear.
That said…
If we’re talking hardware only, OT is the song finisher. Parts, scenes, arranger mean that you can have complex structures without having to perform the song each time. And you have all you need to (pre) mix your track.
3 Likes
Congrats to the OP, I think the DT is the right choice given your implied workflow and what you want to achieve. I say this as a owner of both, DT & OT.
3 Likes
For sure, it’s really all about what works for you. I was just playing the devils advocate, white knight for the OT so to speak.
1 Like
OT - if you don’t want to use a DAW, once you commit to it it has probably one of the best song modes of any hardware sequencer - if you like the list of patterns paradigm over a more visual approach.
Learning the OT structure and getting your head around that is key to getting any sucess, but really despite what is often said is no more difficult than say a MPC.
Once you understand the relationship between slots, parts and banks it is pretty easy.
Then you make your first pattern, copy it edit for variation, copy, edit, and so on until you have all the sections for your song. Then jump over to the arranger, insert the patterns in the order you want, along with any mutes, bpm, repeats, length, offsets etc that you may want, you can also set scenes for each section. You can make multiple arrangements of the same song, you can also set arrangements to hold on each step and manually advance them, in short it is very flexible and very powerful.
OT has enough mixing capability to get great sounding results, some would argue you lose flexibility, I’d counter that by saying get your sounds sounding how you want and don’t worry about final mastering until your song is finished, then bring the file into the computer for mastering.
DT - if you want to use a DAW for arranging, don’t mind mono samples, prefer mixing ITB.
5 Likes
Oh, the other thing is that if you do want to have audio clips to arrange in the DAW you can quite easily and painlessly resample on the OT and save the files onto card then bring those into the DAW. The only caveat is that you need to have enough memory allocated for your longest section, which in my experience is practically always possible, you can reuse the same record buffer after saving each section.
2 Likes
Yeah. Once you get the workflow down, it’s easy as pie and not much slower than actually recording into a DAW. Takes you 5-10 minutes to transfer the wavs to a DAW.
2 Likes
RTFM 
Joking aside, this is a valid point when getting to grips with the OT, but there definitely comes a point where over writing buffers by accident is a thing of the past - because pain is a good teacher 
3 Likes
this is true. especially if you set up overbridge multitracking each time.
And the big advantage of OT resampling is the lack of any latency
1 Like
For sure, RTFM. It’s not always easy to remember where everything is, especially when the OT is so flexible that you can configure it exactly to your needs. I experienced a lot of congitive overload when using the OT because I had to keep updating my “mental map” of how the OT was set up. When I recorded my performances, instead of just letting muscle memory take over like on the DT, I’d have to first double check with my “mental map” if this part had that FX on slot 1, or if this bank had these scenes or those scenes set up. It would be different for every project, even if I tried sticking to the same template as much as possible.
2 Likes
To OP:
Since you already got this feeling, you’re probably used to work this way.
Chances are high that you get frustrated trying to get the OT working the way you want in that regard.
I might be wrong but I get this feeling reading your post.
DT + OB + Ableton work very nicely together
2 Likes
thanks for the detailed answer!
That doesn’t make it easier for me to decide,
but it’s good how people make the OT work for them.
Honestly 8 months is not really that long to learn an instrument. Ive played bass 20 years, hundreds of shows and on multiple albums and I still fuck up live now and then. And the bass is not as hard to play as the OT.
1 Like
Have you considered other hip hop staples such as MPC or the SP samplers? Might be worth a look, there is a reason(s) for their popularity within this genre after all.
That said the OT can be used in a somewhat mix of MPC (arranger) and SP (realtime fx) styles, although as usual none can replace entirely the other.
I have a MPC one and it might be the thing I’d most recommend to you given your stated needs, it can be used in a very simple fast way, or it can also be used in a much deeper DAW like way.
3 Likes
Yeah even after 10 years with OT I still have the occasional WTF moment if I have not used it for a while or reload in an old project. (spoiler: culprit is usually scenes)
2 Likes
I just wanted to point out that the OT is complex, especially I compared to the Digitakt. I was a lot more productive with the Digitakt after 8 months than with the Octatrack after 8 months, and I think how easy a device is to learn should be taken into consideration.
4 Likes
I’ve had a few MPCs as well as owning a Force right now, which soon will be sold to fund the elektron device of choice.
I did like the older MPCs, but the touchscreen stuff isn’t for me.
I am looking at elektron, because the sequencer works similar to the OP-Z. P-Locks, trig conditions and such.
And I really like the OP-Z, but it’s built quality is just terrible.
I already destroyed one…by just using it.
So an elektron device is my attempt at getting a sturdy OP-Z.
Just to pile on after the decision was made to go with the DT…
I’ve only had my OT for a month, and it’s quite clear that the DT is far more immediate, and excels at sketching ideas. I agree with others that “finishing” is typically done in the DAW after you record some clips/tracks/stems.
I’d highly recommend starting with the DT, esp if you are going to leverage midi sequencing external gear or VSTs with it. If you hook a midi keyboard to the DT it comes alive IMO, and personally I can’t work with my DT without a keyboard attached and I’ve tried many times.
The audio track side of the DT is deep, and rewarding to explore, esp with the last few firmware updates. It’s just cleaner than the OT, which makes it ideal for learning the Elektron sequencer.
So is the OT lame? NO! It’s a monster, and somehow more “alien” than the DT, but in a cool way. I’m experiencing the OT journey first hand, and while I’ve already had breakups and makeups, if nothing else the journey is colorful and memorable, so YOLO! The OT is much better suited for doing full sets and songs, and is designed for that. I’ve done about 4 short tracks on it so far, and it excels at live recording and of course live mangling. The crossfader with scenes is brilliantly designed, and will open your ears as you explore it.
In summary, once you are comfortable with the DT, the OT still makes sense in the future. I don’t think it needs OB, as it’s one of those “if I can only have 1 device on a island, what would I bring” and that for sure would the OT loaded up with some samples. So be warned, Elektron boxes are addicting!
3 Likes
Just to follow up on my little story…
-
I am an idiot.
-
The DT will be sold again.
-
I will buy an OT!
-
I have watched so many tutorials by now, I don’t believe the difficulty hype anymore
-
Wish me luck!
2 Likes