Am I right in thinking the RYTM MK2 basically has the DT built in? Apart from the MIDI tracks (which I don’t use), does the DT offer anything the RYTM doesn’t? I know the UI is better on the DT (envelope graphics etc.). Anything else?
Different workflow. Midi control. Control-all. Are the major features the DT has that the Rytm doesn’t
Edit: Also, from my time of working on an ARmk1- it seems really geared towards working with Analog voices with the capability of working with samples. Anytime you manually load a new kit(which is not automatic per pattern like on the Digitakt-both a pro/con based on the scenario) all the sample parameters are minimized. While the DT, is always geared up to go with samples freshly from the get-go.
File this in workflow changes, I know. But the differences in workflow are comparable to OT mk1 vs mk2 imo.
Midi sequencing as you said is missing. This seems to be one of the biggest feature request of rytm users.
DT workflow is much quicker
Does the Rytm allow you to loop samples? Does it have the same sample functionality as the Digitakt (besides sampling) ?
Yes it does.
You can loop samples, but the parameters are start and end instead of start and length. For granular- it forces you to go static method instead of moving it around without destroying granular integrity.
Oh! Another thing! The reverse parameter on the DT can more easily reverse the sample mid stream(extending the sample flawlessly by trigless locking it to reverse). If this is possible on the AR, it would be very difficult to execute.
Yeah but it’s the only one that lets you modulate both the start and the end simultaneously, I think that’s special… The end doesn’t move with start like the other boxes with the length parameter, I like it like that as a unique difference from OT or DT…
You can for example assign both to a pressure pad and have your looping sample get smaller and smaller as you press until it’s grainy than press harder and it starts going reverse and getting bigger… It’s got it’s own thing…
I prefer the envelopes on the DT by a ton.
Another thing is the DT has much more precise sample editing with decimal point resolution, a hundred more values to choose in between Rytm values…
You can use the midi tracks to apply multiple LFOs across your internal tracks
Do you mean the graphics, or the actual envelopes?
So if I sell my DT and buy a RYTM MK2 am I essentially getting a RYTM MK1 + DT in one box?
Actual envelopes. They’re really effective/good for percussion whereas the ones on the RYTM did not feel punchy enough so I always ended up using the LFO in one shot mode instead.
Really? You’d think the RYTM would have snappy envelopes too being a drum machine. Did you sell your RYTM for a DT then?
Much faster Workflow. And no Kits! Everything is stored on a per Pattern basis. Which is actually the way how it shoild be! This whole Kit/Sound Structure of the older machines is nasty and always gets in the way of creativity if you want to work fast!
I sold it long before the DT came out. I’d be more interested in the mk2 because my main complaints were the inability to fine-tune the sample starting points, and the audio input that didn’t serve much use to me. I also had trouble getting the kick to sound how I wanted.
This! Perhaps it’s also the fact that I didn’t care for the analog engines on the Rytm either- but I could never consider even trading my DT for an ARmk2. DT, workflow wise, is the superior machine
THIS! I dont even use my Rytm anymore. Just because of this. I need new sounds on a new pattern? Easy: I just assign a new sample - done! With the Kit-Structure i would have to create the sound i need in advance and then sound-lock it - otherwise assigning a new Sample and changing parameters would replace that Sound on every pattern i have. This slows you down so heavily and makes creating new sounds on the fly almost impossible. If you are like me at least
I’m trying to decide whether to swap the DT for the RYTM MK2. Do the kits/sounds work like the Analog Four? What do you mean it gets in the way? Surely its just a case of loading sounds into a kit (or creating a new one using a synth engine) and then saving the kit. Then you can reuse that kit in other patterns? Sounds like a nice workflow to me. Or have I missed something?