No no, I forgot to mention that I did like the sound. Kinda crisp and velvety at the same time. 
3 Likes
Ah OK, cool. Yes, I think smooth is the word. It can get quite crunchy, with the distortion, but that just adds another dimension. There are actually three stages of distortion available that can change its sound drastically.
5 Likes
what kind of music are you making with the A4? same question for M:C? and other gear?
i’ve been enjoying working with the M:C only right now (kind of indie drum machine/synth & guitar music). I’ve been finding i use the same sounding kicks, hats, and basses a lot though. this isn’t bad since a band would have these limitations, but still. always nice to hear other perspectives
Can you clarify this? Do you mean that, as you crank the vol/dist knob up, you can go through different stages of distortion? Or, are there more than one location to apply distortion? I think it’s the former, but I might as well make sure.
To add to the original topic, I am still scratching the surface of my A4, but I have been enjoying it quite a bit. Using it to sequence a small modular palette is like a nice little bonus. It’s also nice using the A4 along with the model:cycles. The devices are very complementary.
First there’s the PUNCH button with KICK and TONE (possibly others.) It activates a waveshaper.
Then VOL/DIST which I think activates an overdrive.
Then the final output. It has a soft clipper.
My stuff falls in minimal melodic techno. I found that A4 adds an arcane / medieval quality to my style, it’s like a brazier. I’m mostly planning to use it for chromatics; bass, arp, pad. I mostly do melody live on a Nord Lead 3.
M:C is digital glee, neon lights. I use it for everything that it can do. Great at percussion and FM bass and lead. CHORD machine is also a great trick unique to it.
MD is just a digital bedrock of bumps, taps, clicks, splashes, and crunchy samples. Often of classic drum machines. If I use it for chromatics it falls in the “rhythmic” category.
3 Likes
i really like the chord machine even if i put it low in the mix. I’m a big fan of using the LFO at a kind of faster pace to get some weird warbles on the chords. the tone machine is really great. like you’ve pointed out about the M:C, i like the continuity of its limitations. the same i think is true of the A4 and the way I use it. both boxes are really exciting to me and fun to try to parse out whole arrangements with.
1 Like
I sold my MonoMachine when I had a head injury and retired early. I like the A4, and I like matching it with the Jupiter Xm. It may seem like a strange comparison, but the Jupiter Xm is everything the A4 isn’t, lots of polyphony, lots of parts, lots of vintage sounds. And the A4 is everything the Jupiter Xm isn’t. Great mono lines, Elektron sequencer, and the ability to tweak every note in the sequence. The two of them together can handle anything I can think of.
6 Likes
Hands on workflow
Not scrolling through pages mean you can dedicate more time in improvising and coming up with interesting results sounds and beat
1 Like
I would also add that the model cycles+a model sample is a wonderful match
The model sample can cover the limits of the model cycle in the sound palette
I can believe it’s nice to have something that is easy to play for sure. I initially asked Roger about this bcs personally I think interesting describes something that is more complex and multi-dimensional.
Yes, I’ve thought about the M:S … but I am still using the MD and ESI so it seems redundant.
Maybe if it had inputs … I don’t know. ESI is quite powerful. But it is older tech so it’s a bit clunky.
One of these days I’ll get the hang of sampling on the MD, taking advantage of the MCL as a sample librarian. It sucks that there are only 48 slots and so little sample time.
Sometimes the complexity and multi-dimensionality isn’t in the gear, but the musician!
It has just enough capability to unlock that complexity. It’s like one of those older pieces of gear that got pushed to the limits because of a couple of special features, but sadly couldn’t go beyond for lack of crucial missing features. Only M:C has plenty of special features and doesn’t lack for much, so it doesn’t limit you.
A4 is similar, I think, because of its focus compared to MnM or MD or AR. Actually one could probably more than make do very well with a cost-reduced Model-ized version. Here’s hoping the Models aren’t going to be just a blip in Elektron’s history.
2 Likes
The more I use my a4 or now AK the more I fall in love with it
5 Likes
Well obviously, but we we’re talking about gear, not our musical abilities or level of artistry. I do understand that complexity isn’t really serving creativity in many cases.
1 Like
Yeah, I guess that was pretty obvious. I guess I’m interested in a balance; high complexity can call itself into question when its role isn’t apparent. (That was me and the concept of the DAW previously.) I started with MD, possibly Elektron’s second most complex instrument (first is OT 
), and now I have that and arguably Elektron’s simplest instrument and I like them both. Also M:C helped me become more able to tackle the MD, and equipped me to start making music with the A4 instantly.
1 Like
…maybe another good moment to repeat myself…
only swedish stuff i never owned and used are the three classics that made them them in first place…and since their second and third chapter, only the rytm was never mine…
all the others i had in heavy use…and i can clearly state the essential must haves now…
a4, ot, m:c, heat…and that’s about it…
the digis are a great thing to have, but nope, they had to go, since they’re simply not that essential on their own…no matter what a great synth the tone is and what a straight forward sampler the takt is…
since that most unique and basic elektron workflow is simply common ground for all the others, too…
and hey…the cycles is the second most underrated machine from sweden, right after heat…
2 Likes
That sounds great!! I tend to gravitate towards complexity sometimes without a good reasoning behind it. I guess it’s bcs I got used to some freedom with modular and don’t really like to be restricted too much with the gear I use. OTOH I’ve lately been more creative musically than ever and that may be because I’ve been streamlining my setup a lot.
It sounded a bit condescending and I have a killer headache so I threw that word in there lol. I got triggered. 
It’s always cool to hear ppl finding the optimal setup or device and at the end of the day the creativity, pleasure and inspiration are what matter the most when making music.
1 Like
If I had started with that pair I probably would have needed nothing else, not even a computer.
But we all have different paths.
I’ve always been less of a samples guy. OT was too much and not enough at the same time. I hope that the sampling capability I have doesn’t make me yearn for a DT or M:S. Koala Sampler is pretty damn good too.
I wonder would an A4 fit into a Digitone/Digitakt sized box as a sort of ‘Mk II compact’?
I’ve always preferred the traditional original elektron right-angled (large and small) box than the new A4 and RYTM larger wedge box. Just like the old style shape. And I REALLY like the Digi sized box. It just looks chunky and capable, whilst small.
But as the A4 mk didn’t have a crossfader or pads it conceivably could be squeezed into the Digitone/Digitakt format. Maybe if it lost the CV outs (which would be a pity), and had the Digi style chromatic mode rather than separate button keyboard, but otherwise I wonder could the 4 track analog circuitry fit into the ‘half’ sized shape.
Even also sacrificing the arranger might make it an attractive mid market option to the full A4 mk II
1 Like
Elektron wants to get in on some of that sweet sweet cheap analog hype.
Likely for it be a VA so it could use exactly the same hardware architecture as the other Digis. Maybe the same form factor with different coloring. But what about … 8 (or more) simplified analog circuits PLUS samples. Single osc, single filter, digital envelopes, but maybe you can stack voices to create more complex timbres…
On a side note I thought the big wedge design of AR MKII was weirdly different but after using it pretty good. Very comfortable, less likely to make mistakes. It can even still be rack mounted, and then you can pretend it’s not a wedge