This is so funny 
yaa obviously elektron head office crew jus sit round all day flicking through ikea catalogues and listenin to ABBA 
… Actually, you are 110% correct.
For the A4 all tracks are transferred pre - FX. The FX is transferred on a specefic ( fifth ) track.
I think the eight will be an interesting day…
you do realize, the analog four is a bit of a hybrid in the sense that it uses DCOs instead of pure analog VCOs so there’s still quite a bit of digital processing going on =)[/quote]
People still trying the failed DCOs are digital argument in 2015?
“Bit of a hybrid”.
No.
Define “processing”.
The signal path is 100% analog. There is a difference between control (being pre-oscillator) and processing (being post-oscillator). The clock of the analog oscillators is being controlled digitally. The actual sound that is generated, from waveform through analog outputs is 100% analog.
And considering the alternative often comes without patch recall, and comes with a host of tuning headaches, and sure as hell wouldn’t have sound locks… I’m relieved that the so called “bit of a hybrid” has DCOs.[/quote]
i agree with all the benefits you mention of DCOs, just saying the so called digital part still has a lot to do with the sound capabilities of the A4.
I simply meant that the digital side of the A4 influences the way it sounds by providing more extreme modulation capabilities, not in the sense that it sounds harsh or digital or anything like that.
I won’t pretend to be an expert on the synth architecture of the A4 but this thread has some very interesting information on why you should see the A4 as a very nice marriage between the benefits of digital and the awesome sound of analog leading to my “bit of a hybrid” statement
Just because it’s an integrated circuit doesn’t mean that it’s digital. 
While the “core” sound is analog by all means, the digital control does push it in directions that your typical analog synth does not go.
tell the elektron gods to make us an 8 voice version 
Even if this was the case, you could load an automation track per instrument and have the pan information sent from AR MIDI to control the OB ITB track.
Solved.[/quote]
Very true, thanks.
I don’t know how latency will be handled between what goes to OB and what is sent from the device to OB via MIDI, there might be timing differences…
We will see when Overbridge is there!
The CC/panning information will be sent via the USB also.
oh yeah, you are right about the FX, forgot about that, but no big deal everything else is more important also forgot to mention sample organization for RYTM will be worth it alone, that’s another big one for me.
Alright, so now the focus of your question has shifted (inevitably, as stuff like this always seems to go) towards analog. If your point is that the RYTM being superior because it’s analog, do we know for sure how this audio-over-USB feature is going to impact the overall sound?. Honestly, I don’t even think any of that matters so long as you make something interesting with what you have.
I also thought that the RYTM’s audio input feature was awesome, pretty sure anyone on the forum who has used it can vouch for how useless it is lol. Not saying Overbridge is going to be in the same vein, but I’ll believe the hype once I use it first hand. Keeping my fingers crossed either way.
Sorry, can’t vouch for that statement. I run my A4 into the OT and out of the OT’s CUE outs into the Rytm. I also run several other OT tracks out of the CUE into the Rytm.
This way I can process, glue if you will, everything together and it sounds frickin’ awesome.
I can see the inputs being an issue if you have no way to boost the signal beforehand; however, the OT has plenty of sound boosting features.
Other people use small mixers to boost signals.
shouldn’t need a computer to manage samples on the Rytm. Especially with Elektron hawking sound packs.
You don’t need a computer at all really to manage your samples on the RYTM, I am doing well without it BUT the computer is more expansive in it’s scope of what it will be able to do in organizing files in ways that the interface on any synth may not be able to do.
I never once used the word superior, digital vs analog is subjective both have their merits BUT as I said Elektron will be the only company with analog synths working with a computer with the kind of detailed integration only digital synths have had.
As I said I forgot to add the word analog in my original statement but I thought that was a given, as there are plenty of digital synths that record over a usb and nothing else.
Regarding Rytm sample management, I do sample chains, and that requires a computer. Not complaining. I have 4,000+ sample hits & waveforms in my current project and about to add 240 more tonight.
All this talk about pan automation and using the external inputs for additional A/D inputs to DAWs, and recording FX on their own track… and, I just looked up and we’re less than two days from May…
and then…
\m/
yup looks like they used Overbridge for the Junkyard demo.
… Actually, you are 110% correct.[/quote]
…hehe,with that kind of multi-tasking my respect is even greater!
[quote="“djadonis206"”]
Sorry, can’t vouch for that statement. I run my A4 into the OT and out of the OT’s CUE outs into the Rytm. I also run several other OT tracks out of the CUE into the Rytm.
This way I can process, glue if you will, everything together and it sounds frickin’ awesome.
I can see the inputs being an issue if you have no way to boost the signal beforehand; however, the OT has plenty of sound boosting features.
Other people use small mixers to boost signals.[/quote]
Right on, but for those of us who don’t have that particular configuration it’s still unbelievably quiet. I own other gear which has a price bracket below the RYTM and even their audio inputs are better in this regard. It’s not exactly a deal breaker for me but it does make me go “c’mon, really?” considering it’s a $1400 drum machine.