Been a producer for years now, mostly working in ableton icm with my M1, Prophet 6 and Arp Oddysey. I’ve made so much music with this ableton workflow, that I’m kinda getting sick of it. I want to try something else.
Next to that, I make music with a lot of layers and automation. I like the stuff that I make, but I get the feeling I need to make music that’s stronger at it’s core, instead of compensating it with more layers. So what I was thinking off was moving to an all hardware set, that obviously has it’s limitations, but with that it will open up new creative ways of thinking.
Because I’ve had an analog four for a couple of years (sold it because of the sound), it got me thinking of Elektron again. I started looking into the Octatrack and Digitakt. I would buy an Octatrack, but I’ve read so many people saying it’s too difficult so they sold theirs. It kinda got me doubting my decision to move into an hardware set, and maybe stick to ableton (with a push or something).
What do you guys recommend? One thing I would like to do is make music at it’s most basic level. Just me, couple of synths, maybe a drumsynth, a sampler and a live performance that’s recorded straight to tape. Maybe later I would like to record separate layers, so I can do the mixdown in ableton. But for now, I want something raw and real, see if it works for me. Could the Digitakt already be good enough for what I’m looking for?
Octatrack difficulty is a bit of a myth. It’s not a box you can instantly use every feature on due to its depth and flexibility. It’s not too hard to pick up with a bit of work though. OT can do practically everything DT does and quite a lot more (except overbridge which isn’t out yet.). Elektron isn’t really about tons of layers and automation, that’s a pretty computer centric way of producing. Of course you can P lock parameters but it’s not exactly like working with automation lanes. Of course you can resample to layer things. Even so as you said it will open up many new creative possibilities and change the way you work completely anyway. DT sounds good for what you want though. If you had the a4 and your problem with it was the sound not the workflow then you’ll probably be just fine with elektron gear. OT and A4 are quite clearly siblings workflow wise.
@movingsound thats exactly the path I took over the last 7 years. Was using Ableton (n previously cubase) for years n felt I was always adding more layers to compensate for a weak core. That and producing in the box I always ended up losing the buzz i had for certain creations due to listening to em too much looping away while im tweaking some sh1te
Moving to elektron setups has made the whole process much better for me in terms of enjoyment, speed, and end product. The core is much stronger and i dont bother with bells and whistles (which were unnecessary imo). I always think to Afx Analord stuff as inspiration for keeping things simple.
Anyway, with the available range out now I personally get on best with Digitakt and Digitone. Fast, great UI and can sound great. Ive had most elektron devices over the years but ive sold em and personally connect with these 2 the best, and to start off with especially theres something to be said for a simple fast UI to get you going.
I record live jams into ableton, bit of simple mastering and im done.
I’m headed in the same direction. I think you are doing the right thing by changing things up with hardware. Personally, you can’t go wrong with either one. I’m more biased towards the Octatrack because that’s what I’m looking to get soon. But the Digitakt is almost half price of a new OT MKII so that’s a big plus. A friend of mine has a DT and I was impressed, very powerful and a great sounding.
Stop pondering and get yourself an OT. Read the manual beforehand if you have some time. There are also plenty of fantastic video tutorials further supported by a great community that is full of helpful cats with ample resources.
The learning curve is a little steep but not nearly as bad as you hear. It’s arguably the best alternative to a DAW (MPC X/Live the only realistic alternatives for sampling/sequencing external gear).
i also recommend the octatrack for your situation. you have a clear idea of what you want to do, and approximately what sort of setup you’d envision to do it. many people who have trouble with the OT don’t go into it with such well-defined goals.
a digitakt would give you much of what you want, but an OT would give you more opportunities down the road. not only does it have a more flexible architecture and limited ability to timestretch, but its crossfader is great for live performance, and its 4 inputs may mean you could forego hauling a mixer around.
The OT is very much like Live Lite in a box.
If you’ve made tons of tracks in Ableton, you’ll probably find it simple to learn, but surprisingly deep over time.
A few years back I was in the exact same spot, the OT was an early purchase.
It felt good to let go of Ableton.
the OT has rightly been referred to as a Desert Island item … and yet, for the first few days or months, sometimes seems like a Desert. Very difficult to understand the ecosystem thereof. Except for a few lucky individuals who have expressed frustration that they had waited so long to go for the OT due to other users talking about how complex the unit seems to be.
if I had two Octatracks, i would prepare my sets using the exact Patterns used to make the tunes. As it would be easy to preview the newly opened Pattern using the other Octatrack that is currently playing.
as i only currently have one Octatrack, during song production, i resample all sequenced content into a number of differently articulated versions and save them as wav files on the CF card. this does use up a lot of memory eventually and every so often i must put all the sampled wav files from the Audio Pool into a new folder within the Audio Pool in a Folder named by month. And after about 6 months of doing this, i have nearly filled the 16gb compact flash card … Not a worry, it is easy enough to locate a 64gb card.
then for live performance it’s just a matter of a singe Pattern that does not change, four slots on the left are assigned to Scene A, 3 slots on the right assigned to Scene B, xfader used for crossfading duties only. To preview new content there is the preview cue function to preview any Wav file to the headphones.
With the xfader being limited to the crossfading function, i also have a Doepfer 16 fader bank to gain immediate access to a number of potentially useful parameters (Filter Width etc on the Master Effects, maybe some kind of Echo Freeze parameter on a couple of tracks, perhaps Dark Reverb Send parameter for another couple of tracks, it depends on what would be useful for live performance).
this also means a separate midi sequencer is required for any extra synth hardware - for chords or basslines - as the single Pattern on the Octatrack is not changed during live performance, in this scenario.
Agreed. I think most people that have a really hard time understanding the OT are basically refusing to read the manual and learn it. Flip side is: I think it’s valid to not “gel” with it in terms of the workflow but I also came from a Live centric setup and Elektron has been far more interesting. I’m producing a lot more music and focussing a lot more on sound design than I had been in Live. Also, using the crossfader and LFOs has produced more interesting results when just experimenting than automation lanes really did for me. I still use Live for mixing, hosting VSTs that I often sequence with the OT, and messing around with Iris.
Yeah I can totally understand if someone doesn’t gel with it too, that can happen with any gear. I would say elektron gear has a higher likelihood of not gelling than a lot of other stuff due to initial confusion. I think hybrid hardware/software is the ultimate setup. I’m using OT the same way, computers are just too powerful to miss out on. Best of both worlds
Thanks guys, very insightfull information. I’m gonna go for the Octatrack. Better buy something with the posibility to go deep. I’ve used up Ableton to it’s full potential, so If it’s in any way comparable (like making clips vs making patterns) I’ll probably get my head around it.
That would be a good idea … this or a MPC Live or X.
But I am not sure that this will be a smooth transition. If you like layering and are used to do this in Ableton, I fear you might be disappointed doing all of this inside the OT. Ableton is well organised and preparing samples or clips is very handy. OT is not to be mistaken as a sampling workbench. It has some limitations.
IMO the OT is best used as a live sample mangler, live audio processor, and a very deep sequencer for audio and midi. It’s closer to DJing rather than to be a production center. AFAIK there are some OT users like me, who prepare samples ITB and then upload those to the OT.
You have also to consider, which sound sources you need. With Ableton and all the VSTs you have a wealth of options to create very different timbres. Will you miss it? Maybe you might need some more synths and a decent mixing desk, and some outboard gear too, though
And don’t forget about “song structure/project organisation”. Here on Elektronauts are many posts, which ask, how to do it best.
I often switch between Ableton with softsynths and strictly hardware with A4 and Rytm. I choose the MPC Live over the OT for my hardware setup and I don´t regret my decision so far. The only negative point are the effects, esp. the bad reverbs. All in all a great box.
I will probably have to get used to not being able to do everything as fast as I could on Ableton. But, one of my goals is to do less with more. My gut feeling is that i will grow a lot as an artist this way. Plus, me and my partner perform as a DJ duo and we would love to move towards a full fledged liveset in a few years. This might be a good step, but I’ll have to keep thinking of it’s long term reward. Otherwise i’ll probably just end up selling it.
Ableton also took me years to fully master. I can work without limitations in that program, sort of like how someone plays a piano or guitar completely intuitively. This will be the biggest setback. Not being able to transform the ideas in my head into something that can be heard. But hopefully this will lead to new ideas, which will be better executed once the muscle memory’s there.
I only wanted to point out that there might be a big difference between the workflows. I think, if somebody can learn Ableton in and out, there will be no difficulty to learn the OT. But there is one issue popping up every now and then. There is an Elektron Way. If the musician happens to like it, it will work perfectly, but experience tells that the Elektron boxes will not bend easily to quite different concepts of workflow.
If you can adopt your workflow to this Elektron Way, you will have much fun and success.
I start doing this more and more.
I like building tracks up live. I always was afraid that this will not sound good enough and was bothering that the OT will never get OB. I always ended up recording each track separately with some little knob twisting and arranging it again in the DAW, so I could still eq and compress each track.
But comparing the results, often the live take doesn’t sound worse, but more alive most of the time. A friend also liked them better, he said it doesn’t sound so polished.
It’s more fun and faster, and I don’t use too much eq anyway usually. I always try to select or create, or record sounds that fit together from the beginning, without much overlap in frequencies. Less eq needed. And the OT has this handy filter with high- and lowpass together.
Sorry for getting off topic.
To the OP - i think the OT will be your best choice of the elektron instruments - comes closest to the versatility of Ableton
not to veer off even further…but yea, i find that approach has been good training for getting sounds working in the mix from source too, rather than trying to fix problems later on, which used to be a major part of my workflow
