I’ve had both A4mkI and A4mkII. I traded the A4mkII towards a P6 desktop and am very happy with the decision. The P6 has so much body/presence… so much better as a poly synth than the A4.
But I think the A4 still wins for mono sounds and in-the-box modulation/programming potential.
I agree with a lot of the assessments here, but just as a curveball, be sure to listen to all of the examples in the A4 Warm Pads/Chords thread. Amazing reminder of the power of the A4’s synth engine:
I am deeply grateful for your reply.
If P6 is sampled by OT
Does not sound quality deteriorate?
Is not it better to play a live sound on P6 in terms of sound quality?
Anyone who answered my question
I express my deepest gratitude.
The people here are kind and smart.
Thank you.
I bought OT mkii for the purpose
I want to transmit MIDI signals to my synths and play them automatically.
Therefore, the purpose of purchasing a desktop synthesizer rather than a keyboard synthesizer
It is.
I am designing such a band.
If you don’t modulate a “live” sound in any way why should a high quality sample sound differently? (44,1kHz/24bit should be enough for almost any human ear).
Thank you.
I fully agree with your opinion.
I got a lot. 
If possible its always best to play and hear an instrument live rather than sampling.
As long as you don’t timestretch or pitchshift the sample in OT it should still sound ok
Sound quality depends on the recording, playback, and processing quality of the equipment. Be it analogue or digital. We can create unwanted clipping or damaging the sound with both technologies.
I agree with @tnussb that 44,1 kHz at 24 bit should preserve enough sound qualitiy of a P6 or another high quality synth. But the recording settings and the sound treatment have to be appropriate to do the job. There is a bit of recording/mixing craft to be applied.
There will often be differences between programming a sequence and playing live.
A keyboard with velocity, after-touch, mod-wheel, and an optional expression pedal would be played very differently by different persons. This would influence the sound too. If you want to catch such a performance with a sequencer, the OT would not support this, because it is a step sequencer. For such a performance a “linear sequencer” with more then 160 ppqn would be needed, to record that particular human feeling too.
However, often a techno-like style having it’s own sound character would be hard to be played in real time by a musician. Particularly the OT provides so many p-lock opportunities, which a single person could not control in a live situation. This also would influence the overall sound.
Love that song and sound … maybe it’s my age and loving progressive rock ever since 
There is a great gnarly bass-mid sound, which gives the track a special spirit and drive. If you want to have such sound in your band, I would say that this could be out of range of a Dave Smith synth. Since the gnarlyness appears to be very melodic, but not harsh, I guess it could have been created by the Voyager, which the guy in the white t-shirt is playing.
That’s a very good point!
Maybe it should be mentioned that the OT dos not record the correct note length. A DAW is actually better for recording the MIDI information.
Keep in mind, that A4 sound is weak and not that beast-mooglish style. So here is a big dilemma, or have many options for live playing and not juicy sound or have less options but normal analog-mooglish-powerfull sound. Heh…
It’s true that the A4 does not sound like a Moog … and why should it … it was never supposed to do it. To call it weak … well … there are some interesting threads here going into detail. But a P6 would also not sound like a Moog, wouldn’t it?.
Yes, the A4 can sound ‘rich’ poly, but you have to work for it. The P6 sounds ‘rich’ or ‘thick’ the moment you turn it on, and it maintains the ‘body’ of its sound over the majority of the keyboard range, where I find the A4 gets thinner in the bass (for poly sounds, that is)
Another bonus for the P6 is the trigger input which can be used to step through the sequence. Not sound related, but a really great feature.
I sample my P6 all the time, once I find a patch/loop/sound I want to lock into a track. That way I can use it for another sound! Of course you lose a little ‘something’ when sampling it, but in the end, in a full mix, it’s hard to tell.
Ok, fine.
Players wearing white shirts actually use Moog Voyager.
I do not expect a sound like the Voyager from the P6.
The P6 is a grand and giant pad sound. (Ambient)
On the other hand, the A4 sounded very weak, unlike what I thought.
Thanks for the advice.
The A4 sounds like an average soft synth.
The P6 sound is big and bold, exactly why you would want analog in the first place.
I would then chose the DSI OB6 over the P6 personally though, as it’s even bigger and bolder again.
I would then chose the P12 over all the above 
I wouldn’t call the A4 having a “weak” sound, because I can compare it directly with Moog, Dave Smith, Oberheim and other analogue synths in my studio. The A4 is different and allows very versatile sound design, but it’s best performing, if the sequencer is used to a certain degree too.
There are quite some threads here on Elektronauts complaining about the A4 sound and beeing particularly week in the bass register or playing pads. In each of those threads you will find the one or the other post, which says, the A4 takes a good understanding of synthesis at all and some time to master it, but this would be rewarded with great sounds.
As an example you might be interested to have a look on the following thread, where we discuss pad sounds (which indeed is not the major strength of an A4, but at the end, it can be done)
https://www.elektronauts.com/t/why-cant-the-a4-do-warm-pads-chords-solved
I have a A4MK2 together with a MatrixBrute and a Korg Kronos and NO, the A4 is not weak or thin. Use what’s in the menues and you will get a full, rich and lively sound that integrated perfectly into existing gear. With Moog and DSI you sometimes have the problem, that these synths are too present in the mix. If you want that - OK, but most people are happy to hear something new instead of the sounds that exists since 40 years 
While the original question concerned sound specifically, I feel like a few others here, you can’t talk about the A4 without taking the sequencer into account. Sound design can be so much more than just great stuff coming out when you press the keys, the options allowed through the Elektron sequencer makes the A4 a completely unique tool for creating organic and moving patches that the P6 won’t ever touch.
So even if you’d go “I’ll never use the sequencer, I’m just gonna play it”, you still gotta know that the Elektron sequencer isn’t just a sequencer - it’s a way to shape and design sounds and patterns, and it can’t be disregarded no matter if you’re gonna run your A4 with Ableton or Pyramid or an old QY or whatever.
The Prophet’s strength is that it’s the pinnacle of classic analogue synthesis and a hardware interface that really invites you to work it like a classic synth. It really is the instrument we all refer to, when we speak about our preference for analogue gear, if you have such a preference.
But the Analog Four is an instrument that does to analogue synthesis what the Octatrack does to samples - work the sequencer for just a few minutes, with p-locks, para-sequencing and those four LFO at work, and you’re at a place no other analogue will take you. And that’s just the beginning.