DT should process audio INPUT Llike in AR / A4, with Delay, Reverb, plocks, lfo.
OMG this thread,.,! 
everyone disagreeing with Open_Mike needs to take a deep breath and just look at a stereo file in an editor.
What is a stereo file? Itās two mono files. One is hard left, one is hard right.
This is literally it. Really!
Now, using L/R mono files in the Rytm totally works. And it sounds great! Obviously. Just tedious to keep the params between the two tracks synced.
2 Likes
I think Open_Mike must be the most zen internetter Iāve seen!
6 Likes
Yeah, I kinda wish linking two tracks (like you can on the MnM/MD) would link more than just the trigs.
thatās what iām saying 
it should definitely do that!
Ez now. Chill ya boots and read carefully. : )
The confusion wasnāt originally (or shouldnāt have been if people actually took in what was said) that L and R is stereo. That is the basics of audio recording everyone can easily understand. But something is missing in translation of the original point due to folkes jumping the gun and refusing to see it.
The confusion is that you cannot preserve the stereo field of (for eg) a field recording where there is natural movement between left and right (or any perceivable depth) already in the recording (sample) by using 2 summed versions ā¦ it will be summed to mono thus removing the movement ā¦ panning L + R is indeed stereo (I didnāt see anyone try to say it wasnātā¦ I certainly didnāt even imply it purposely)
Here is the But ā¦ what you have is 2 mono versions with an artificial representation of the original (natural) stereo field, and even if you could (as open Mike suggested) record the L and then the R separately, it will all still be summed to the centreā¦
Try this yourself and tell me the movement of (for eg) a car passing recorded in stereo, is retained after being summed and then spread L+R afterward. It wonāt be there. It will be static.
The depth and in many ways beauty of a stereo recording summed to mono will be dead and centred, thatās a fact of recording audio. Itās also not what DT was intended for which is why weāre here, as people canāt understand why this limitation existsā¦ best guess is that itās designed for mono drums.
L + R is stereo congratulations Everyone for following this but that wasnāt the original point ā¦ open Mike clearly misunderstood. Sorry but itās written in the thread already.
EDIT - it is also worth noting the original post of open mikes that disputed what I said was removed whilst I was replying, leaving a brand new but still off point, replacement underneath.
Not intending to break balls at all. But itās getting a bit silly now (as you pointed out) all in the name of confusion and probable ego in not wanting to see the pointā¦ (because yet again everyone wants āwhat it isā to be āwhat it isnātā as itās more convienient I guess)
cheers x
Ya know, this is silly. I have nothing wrong with you and Iām not inflating my ego. I appologize for any misunderstandings. I donāt even want a Digitakt, I have an OT. Honestly I thought I was just trying to helpā¦
One thing must be clear though, you keep referring to me saying to use two summed versions to create stereo and how Iām wrong about that. If you read my posts youāll find I never said that even once, been trying to say almost the opposite of that, every timeā¦
Again, Itās all good, nothing personal, respect all Elektronautsā¦ But please stop misquoting meā¦
2 Likes
As you can see if you care to look, the original post I made was simply replying to prints who wanted to preserve the 80s style ātape effect widthā he has in his samples by using 2 summed versions (of said stereo sample) and panning them. My point was If you sum them all the organic movement of the ordinal sample will be moved to the centre and there will be no more 80s vibe that was intrinsic to what he wanted from the sound. Thatās all I originally implied.
Another EG jus for the sake of not looking like Iām arguing for the sakeā¦
If you take the overheads of a drum kit L+R (using 2 mics) you will have an honest representation of the room and anything that happens in it when you play it back in stereoā¦ if you put that into DT whatever happened on the left side of the room (acoustic oddities, somebody farting loudly) it will find itself bang in the centreā¦ that means that panning them L+R although still stereo will leave the fart in the centre, yes still stereo but not accurate to the original. Is this incorrect ?
Iām saying if you sum stereo movement (or anything that happens off centre) to mono the movement is gone and everything is centredā¦ thatās allā¦ am I wrong ?
Does DT have stereo outputs ?! This will certainly give you stereo sound between speakers, but this still will not give you acurate representations of stereo recordings after theyāve been summed. Right or wrong ?
Forget L+R put it in 5.1 and said LOUD FART will still be in the centreā¦ not in its original place on the left.
Hope I donāt get picked on anymore tbh. Iām spent. 
Right back at ya mate. No hard feelings at all. Simple language barrier.
1 Like
Itās incorrect if you presume that the DT will only do summing, there is no basis to presume that, one could reasonably assume that Left or Right or Both(summed) could be tapped into a mono buffer, so a Left input will be captured separately from a Right input, exactly as you can on the OT (simultaneously), except that the OT always works with stereo files (even if capturing a single channel) ā¦ even if the device allows you to present the Direct inputs in the centre (say for two separate mono synths) itāll still permit you to record those two channels in isolation, thus preserving the stereo image at the expense of two tracks
There is no way the DT will come shipped unable to record from L / R / L+R selectively per buffer
1 Like
Was just going to reply with an explanation, but Baddcr has done so in great detail and probably better than I would have. If you donāt get or agree with what being said in said explanation, then thereās nothing more I or anyone else can say to try and convince you otherwise.
1 Like
i didnāt mention recording into DT tho or did i ? The initial thought was that of a sample imported into DT, or am i loosing my mind
Does DT not convert the sample to MONO on import? if not then of course im incorrect, which is fine by meā¦ Never intended it to be this whole LR vs Preserving stereo field stuff, that came off the back off miss interpretation.
Will DT import and play back a PRE recorded stereo sample accurately or will it convert it to mono first ?
this isnāt what i was meaning at allā¦ if you mean me. I was replying originally to prints who wanted to import a sampleā¦ Not record.
thats convenient init 
no
i always was talking of preserving the information of an imported sampleā¦
Bit of a witch hunt all this tbh.
Itāll do as the AR does and discard a channel, I very much doubt itāll have the ability to be imported and split across two tracks, itās just too messy, it wonāt happen (besides the option to split the sample beforehand is always there for the end user, as per AR)
This reminds me of how frustrating the āMasteringā conversation we had months ago was.
the stereo field of a recording has information spread over the entire spectrum (info that has already been recorded)ā¦ info that will be lost if converted to mono? I dont see why thats odd, its correct, just my language is a little misleading, maybe.
Basically prints was querying how DT would treat a stereo sample with lots of organic movement, and i was responding to himā¦ nothing about recording at all.