Hey!
GAS is hitting me hard these days.
Today I had the chance to play around with Rytm for 10 minutes.
With the idea of buying other synth in the shop (Moog Studio 3), I jumped off from the idea, because I really felt in love with the sound of the Rytm and decided to overthink my decision.
So now to my question:
The sampling capabilities of the Rytm seem like doing the same as the Digitakt does. (Which I own)
Would buying a Rytm make the functions of the Digitakt redundant, when I don‘t need the additional 8 voices for sampling?
Or am I missing festures of the DT, which the Rytm doesn‘t have?
These days digitakt has the bandwidth filter along with the regular filter/eqs and dual lfos. It also handles start end loop points different. It feels more it’s own than it ever has imo. That said rytm can cover quite a bit of sampling duties so maybe it is enough. Its work flow is also a bit different. So I wouldn’t say it makes it redundant but it could if you don’t use those features in your workflow.
The Rytm doesn’t have the midi capabilities of the Digitakt. It can’t transmit controller messages like the DT can and it only has midi polyphony of 1 note per track against the DT’s 4 note polyphony which the DT has 8 midi channels of. They actually work together well since you can use the Rytm’s song mode to control the DT.
I’d say what that guy said and unless you are just down sizing they seem to cover their own territory and it depends on you so far as the sampling, as I can’t speak for the Rytm. I didn’t ‘need’ the DT once I bought the OT but it would have been nice, though way to redundant as far as my skills go to use both.
100% yes. The Digitakt is literally just the sampling engine of the RYTM. Although it has a couple of small features these days that the RYTM doesn’t. A Digitakt + Rytm is the exact definition of redundant. Could one have both and incorporate them into a nice workflow…sure. I’ve seen setups with 2 Octatracks or 2 analog fours but unless you had a very specific reason you’d need that functionality times 2 then there’s no point in owning both.
You can’t really use the Rytm to sequence other gear effectively since it only ouputs one midi note per track/channel and it can’t output controller messages, only note data. The DT has 8 channels of midi sequencing with 4 note polyphony per channel which the Rytm doesn’t have. The Rtm does not replace the DT if you want to sequence other gear.
I’ve owned both and they are distinct in features and workflow. The sampling does of course have similarities but they are different enough to be distinct. The AR has start/end position and 120 steps for those parameters (if I remember correctly) and the DT has start/length plus very fine control on position.
It doesn’t sound like much on paper but it makes a difference in practise which is why e.g. you’ll see lots of those DT granular videos on YouTube and not many for the AR. The lack of fine control results in different workflow. For example, it’s not so easy to do sample chains on the DT because you can’t move the position in “steps” to work like slices and with the AR if you want to move between your slices or whatever in the sample chain I think you need to move start AND end parameters, because there is no length parameter, so to “select” a specific region you need to position both start and end ratehr than setting length and then just moving the start.
I don’t agree with @Matthewsavant above for the reasons I mention, 100% is putting it a bit strongly, although of course it would be churlish to say there isn’t any crossover at all. If you just want a relatively “simple” one-shot sampling drum machine then the DT is a great option, and then if you want to dive deeper then you have a lot of room to play.
You’ll find many threads on this forum where people will tell you that the real “magic” of the AR is the analog filters and overdrive etc. It can make pretty dull samples sound a whole lot better. Of course you have to pay a hefty premium for the privilege if you’re buying an AR brand new, twice the price or thereabouts. That said, the second-hand prices on old MK1 AR and A4 are pretty good, so it’s worth looking on eBay etc.
You want to have the Rytm for its analog engine that can also play and or layer samples. You want the Rytm for its analog circuits and maybe songmode.
You want the DT for more advanced sample mangeling, polyphonic MIDI sequencing and way smaller footprint.
I had both, I sold both, I would buy a DT today even that I own a OT.
Overall I have to say, I don‘t want to miss my DT.
It‘s just that I was afraid that I would be sitting here with both and having the DT cstching dust and no reason to switch it on again.
Also selling the DT would make the Rytm a bit more affordable.
But just the midi sequencing alone is a reason for me to not let the DT go. Wasn‘t thinking about this, when looking at the Rytm. Also it probably make sense for my style of writing to see the Rytm more for its analog capabilities than as a machine, which is also covering all DT duties.
Thanks for all the advices.
Last but not least, Anyone here, who wants to tell me that I shouldn‘t buy a Rytm at any costs?
The Rytm is awesome! But I wanted to size down my setup and as I can get the sounds I need out of samples and don’t need all the performance features, I cannot argue the price and space it takes up.
If money wouldn’t be an issue, I would rebuy it, add a A4 and a DN to it tho
but seriously, I agree with what @Uija said. they’re very similar in some ways, as you noted; but distinctly different in others, which he noted. so I think it depends upon how you plan on using them.
