That track you shared, EL2-2, was particularly juicy! 
Cheers
Same hereā¦ Sold the A4 bought Virus Tiā¦ later bought A4 again and now have almost any "Analog"synth sounds covered.
(Second hand market)
2 Likes
Telling how some people sell their A4s, only to buy them back again. The main reason Iāll never sell mine is because I know Iāll eventually crave it and buy back!
For those of you that need some patch inspiration, be sure to download the free āSound Packsā from Elektronās site. I think thereās about half a dozen at least. With the A4ās +Drive, no reason not to. Some of the packs are good bread and butter stuff, but others are so insane and experimental (e.g. Richard Divineās), I have trouble previewing them all at once. My ears can only handle them in small batches. Iām not a preset person myself, but itās always valuable to study how others work their magic. And there is some serious magic in some of those Sound Packs. They will make you question your abilitiesā¦
Definitely not dull.
5 Likes
wow this thread grew quite big, itās all good guys I actually managed to have quite a bit of fun using the sequencer and plocks, I guess I have to suck it up with my initial complain about the sound, if itās an intrinsic characteristic of the A4 to be dark (not to use dull) then so be it.
I was playing with the lfo square wave modulating the amp volume in an attempt to replicate the Korg Monotribe gate and struggled a bit as in I didnāt seem to get that satisfying sound cut, anyone got that working fine?
thanks everyone for your inputs! very interesting
2 Likes
When it first launched every A4 youtube video I viewed had the same muddy sound to it and I came close to writing it off as a dud.
It was a while before I heard some stuff which convinced me that I had to have it but those sounds came from much deeper and complex sound design and there wasnāt a great deal of offerings along those lines then, those times probably didnāt help the A4 build positive first impressions.
Itās not what Iād call a bright sounding synth but that means you can push it to the extremes at the top end with stuff like oscillator sync and high resonance squeals without it becoming a tinnitus-fest and the same is true at the bottom end too, which is a good thing for a synth that launched with only one stereo out.
And, just for the record, I love the Analog Fourās sound and architecture, itās my desert island synth.
It is often called muddy but im just not hearing this anyone got any examples of āmuddyā?
Trust me guys: the a4 and monomachine stand up well, in terms of functionality, playability and uniqueness - against big ass modulars like the system 100, arp 2006, buchlas and so on
Yeah yeah different beasts but
The a4 and mono are basically huge modulars in small boxes
And they are freaking bargains, together for like $1600 us
Add in a Sputnik vco in euro for the a4 and you have got something which rivals a 20k Buchla
Iād always take a mono and a4 over a eurorack, just because you can turn them on and get wild pretty quickly and they donāt take up more space
They are fun and sound fab in their own way
Sometimes you can play on a dream synth and you will say ,I wish I could p lock or sequence like this or do this like elektron
Sometimes, I go like fuck , why iis so complicated to trig this and that and the other on a modular
Random sources are just so simple compared to elektron sequencing and random locks
I was sequencing a Jupiter 6 the other night with the ot and sampling
Just unbelievable
4 Likes
nice tracks mate
1 Like
Get a gig in Montreal and Iāll buy you lunch if I can watch how you build patterns on A4. Sounds like early Autechre to me, which is a very good thing.
1 Like
Cool
I was just in Montreal for Mutek!
1 Like
You guys who think the A4 is muddy, do you think all factory kits and patches are muddy too?
If not, then its propapby about programming skillsā¦?
Maybe the A4 just sounds āmuddyā to some of us when trying to program sounds other synths do with ease.
Doesnāt mean the A4 is only muddy
3 Likes
I think my main problem is the raw oscillators. Iām definitely missing something on a raw saw wave for basses. Might have to capture a sample and see if I can spot what it might be.
I donāt think itās a general problem with my programming ability. Iāve had nearly 3 decades playing with synths and have spent a lot of time trying to get a good dubby bass out of the A4. I can get one which kind-of works when the Rytm is going, but the stand-alone sound is definitely lacking in definition (for want of a better word).
It could be that a digital parametric EQ, with some of the frequencies notched out would tame it thoughā¦
1 Like
@Purusha Canāt really give you synthesis lessons I guess 
But here are some solutions that come to mind :
- You can input sine waves and treat it as an oscillator.
- You can also use the filter resonance of a track : either youāre of with tweaking the frequency to get your note (you can have the frequency follow the key notes), or even use a neighbor track to tweak it.
- I guess you could also use the feedback but I donāt entirely understand the theory behind it ^^
- Or simply set the multimode HP filter with high resonance on a TRI signal
Donāt these solutions come close to a sine wave ?
Whatās wrong with this ?
Thereās always room for improvement and learning. Iāve mostly been trying to use the resonance of the multi-mode filter in high-pass mode, to accentuate the lower end. That and peak filter, doing similar. If I was after a sin, Iād probably use a square wave and low-pass filter.
Apart from inputting a sin into the external input, Iāve tried every approach I can think of and have seen written.
If I was going to input a sin, I may as well use another synth for bass - like my Minitaur. 
ā¦but the original idea was to cut down on kit.
Iām getting the best hardware basses (for my needs), from my Virus Ti. Either low pass on filter one and high pass with resonance on filter 2 (essentially similar to A4 architecture), or 2 low-passes in parallel, so that the second filter accentuates a controlled amount of low frequency from the same source.
If and when I invest in a digital mixer (A&H QU series perhaps), I might be able to get things under control on the A4. It could just be certain frequencies which need notching out a bit.
1 Like
Sounds interesting, have a Virus TI myself ā¦ you are right, the Virus and the A4 share some similarities here.
AFAIK, there are some differences ā¦ technically speaking, which could explain different sounds ā¦
- the default filter on the Virus works at 12dB, but this can be changed, I think, there are 6-poles in total available.
- the LP of A4 is supposed to be 24dB
- the MMF of A4 is 12dB
This might make a difference and the analog filters of the A4 should have different response curves too, specially concerning the resonances (digitally modeled vs. analog). Let the Virus resonance peak only be significantly slimmer and the A4 broader in comparison, or the other way around ā¦ 
It could be the envelopes also ā¦ the Virus is, without a trick, linear ā¦ the A4 provides various shapes. Have you ever tried to get help from a āsingle shotā LFO? The āexponentialā shape can do much to create āattentionā for the sound and maybe helpful to generate more definition.
My hunch is that this is perhaps the one aspect that shapes (no pun intended) everyoneās opinion.
For a starter, those oscillators are very unusually configured, with the āwidthā adjustment for all shapes.
Personally, I think the filter is the most important element, how it sounds, how it moves, how it is at the extremes, how it bites ā¦ so Iām drawn to the whole MS20 architecture, itās known as a cheap crude synth, but it gets nasty so beautifully, so interestingly ā¦ even the Monotribe which is a half part of this delivers the goods for me, in some ways in a nicer way ā¦ and tbh, the way I like to set it up, itās far less important which shape is pushed through the MS/MT filter because itās the filter which defines the aspects of the sound I like
anyway, in this regard, I think the A4 filters very much appeal to my sensibilities, unlike on a DSI (e.g. prophet) when you crank up the resonance on the A4 you get extra goodness, extra presence, whereas on the p08 the resonance boosting changes the sound but the level is capped ā¦ I havenāt explained that very well, but itās the same on the early nords which had eyes on the prophet sound (yet, on the Nord modular some of the filter types allow you to have this style of resonance response gain be either contained or āaddedā)
getting back to your point, I think if youāre looking for a less extreme sound, then the influence of the core oscillator may start to be more fundamental to how you feel about what you hear ā¦ that classic prophet or oberheim filter style is fantastic for a certain sound, poly sounds especially ā¦ I canāt imagine a ms20 poly being as musically charming e.g.
maybe a lot of this polarisation points to our different expectations of what a synth should do, but iād really love it if there were some good tech insights coming out of a dissection of the raw elements, in particular the oscillators as mentioned - keep in mind that the A4 oscs are always being affected by the filter, there is no neutral or open state, the designers are on record here that the various versions of the default patch are in and around a flat response or a pleasant starting point - you donāt merely open up that filter and reveal the true oscillator, itās not that simple
if anyone has some ideas about how we might look at this objectively itād be good to see what we find out ā¦ maybe record a three note line C2,C4,C6 (or fixed freq alternatives) and look at the shapes and spectrums etc, compare classics, a4 to theoretical shapes to gain some insights
whilst certain oscs are describes as X when the āwidthā is nominally zero, I find that it can be more to my expectation if the width is adjusted away from zero ā¦ e.g. to get towards the ātypicalā square sound
it ought to be possible to learn how to better harness the A4 osc section to dial in certain core sounds or to understand why these are perhaps harder to reach ā¦ look at the slop settings etc
as for accounting for filter differences, Iām not as sure how that could usefully be examined methodically
itās hard to deny that thereās something quite different falling on your ears when you CV up a simple true vco through the a4
whoās got some toys or ideas to bring to this party then 
1 Like
Iāve tried all combinations I can think of on the A4, including using the MMF in 2 low-pass modes, envelopes etc.
Iām fairly convinced that thereās something going on in the frequency spread.
I havenāt really tried bringing the A4 into Cubase or Live for digital parametric EQing. Perhaps I should try that as a test, before I ultimately (hopefully) grab a QU?
I also want to capture an unfiltered (as much as thatās possible) saw on A4, to see if thereās something obvious about it.
Yeah - I think the Elektron filters are generally very good. I donāt think I have a problem with those. I also like the Nord Modularās resonance response setting - Iāve used that a lot, both ways.
Maybe there is mileage in tweaking the oscillators. Sync or FM might bring something out that Iām currently missing.
ā¦and yeah, bringing in a VCO, or even a sample through the input and into the filters would be an interesting experiment.
1 Like
Is there an opportunity that you give us examples of sounds?
How is that sound you are looking for? And what is the A4 capable of?