When someone asks the same question in a 18 posts thread… 
I moved the post here from a fresh thread (referencing AK which is a subtle enhancement on same design) … the poster might have tried a few different search terms rather than starting a new one, but anyway, they’ll get the info above now 
1 Like
Now that makes sense, thanks for letting me know, @avantronica . My apologies to @TheFlowerKings for misunderstanding, then
4 Likes
So does anybody have both units and can comment on sound difference ?
I’ve heard a couple of demos but its hard to tell not having both machines to compare.
Im just curious cause i was thinking about a second A4 and … maybe just maybe i will succumb to the temptation 
2 Likes
I’ve owned the A4 MKI and have the A4 MKII and it’s night and day. the A4 was a mediocre synth with a lot of cool features for sound design, and now the MKII is a MONSTER synth with all that same functionality. One big thing I found on the MKI is the sub oscs could sound a bit floppy sometimes. It’s nice and tight on the MKII. Can get some INSANE bass out of it now with little effort.
4 Likes
i still wonder if we had insisted on the first model if we would be as sharp in our opinions. because when we love we do not count time on a machine. But when something does not please us, we tend to sell and find an alternative solution, while insisting in general allows to have a more neutral opinion on a device at the END.
i agree there’s difference no doubt, Filter (in terms of frequency) and Overdrive… i do feel also Bass are more easy to achieve… But i’m in the middle of Sound Design with it especially in the Low End department. And if it’s a real pleasure, maybe i discover better the analog four than the first time i had… (simple personal reflection here)
What i do know is they both have they own character, i have the feeling FM doesn’t really react the same way on both machine, anyway it’s a good addition to alter timbre and get different sounds at the end.
But i’m coming to my point now, i know now i will process my A4 externally in 70% of the time (Effects, EQ, Compressor) and i haven’t that in mind when i buy the Analog Four mk1, i consider it like all the other box like a self contained chain in one box… But to my taste it’s not. Even the MK2 model… in my music genre, i need more possibilities in Distortion for the Timbre, a Drive who warmth the Damn Thing (at this point i do think the A4 + AH are perfect together)
But i need EQ, Compression, and Effects to cover my creation duties. Now things are more an evidence to me i can’t ask for that in one box… even if the Analog Four Effects are Fine…
4 Likes
I just got the Virus TI2 desktop. I feel that it addresses a lot of the things you desire. I never gave the Virus much consideration in the past due to my own narrow conceptions of it, but I think it’s quite amazing. You should maybe consider one as well.
1 Like
I’ve owned all three of the Analog 4 models. In some cases, multiple times.
The Mk2 is definitely the most pleasing sound wise. It’s difficult to describe sound at times but it feels more “fuller” to me with a bit more “bite” when you need it.
I still don’t think I’m going to keep it though. Have actually requested a return on it so got maybe 2 more nights to try things out before making my mind up for good.
1 Like
If someone is looking for a poly in that price range and already has an Elektron sequencer, why would he look into the A4 MK2 and not a more advanced synth such as the Peak or REV2 desktop?
I stopped looking for the price as a main criteria. I check whether I would enjoy the sound and the handling, the experience of using it. The price is then also important but I find that I always fool myself into thinking that I could save money. I enjoy the Elektron design and workflow that comes with it. With two A4 around, at the moment, I enjoy the poly mode and unison sounds in the deep registers with another machine and it’s voices looking after the higher registers.
And why are the others more advanced? Not sure whether that is a measure by which one can compare synths.
4 Likes
I have the MK2 and a Peak AND a Digitakt. Same thoughts. The MK2 could go, but in the same way Digitakt and Peak could go. I will keep all of it, because each add a different flavor which all Match. Its like having a Roland Jupiter 6 plus an Ensoniq ESQ1 plus a MPC60. All workhorses, adding each other, different colors in the palette. Now it is ones turn to make something out of it.
3 Likes
Multiple reasons.
If he (or she… they) is interested in programming melodic sequences, chords, etc, they’ll soon discover that not all Elektron MIDI sequencers are the same. MD and MM are very different for chords, visually due to the display. And neither will give micro-timing, or trig conditions.
OT has a great MIDI sequencer, but cannot p-lock MIDI program change like MD/MM/DT (for A4, a sound lock would do the job). Sustained chords on DT are treated very differently than A4’s sequencer, once one begins to gradually remove notes from the chord.
When it comes to sequencing melodies and chords on a synth, A4 sequencing itself is > in capabilities than any other Elektron sequencer sequencing something else, from the perspective of notation and programming control. (More p-locks internally vs MIDI, too!)
And of course, A4 is much more than an analog poly.
It can be a 4 voice multi-timbral work station, capable of adding far more to a track than a given analog poly synth. It’s SUB OSCs can tune to -5ths, so chords on a single voice are easily achievable. It can be a drum machine and a mono synth at the same time.
It can add CV sequencing to their setup.
It can add 2 more analog inputs to their DAW for other gear, via Overbridge.
Workflow differences between a single A4 vs an Elektron MIDI seq + a poly module is also a consideration.
5 Likes
I see, thanks. The A4 definitely has many useful features.
When I said more advanced I meant more advanced in the sound design department, not in feature set. Surely the A4 provides less options than the Peak for example which I’m guessing offers a wider sonic palette?
You can’t make an argument for sound design and not include the sequencer when it comes to the A4. It’s an inherent part of a patch’s organics, and making a track with it is only part of that.
The Peak is fantastic, but the A4 is unique. The closest I’d compare it to is the Evolver, which still remains one of the coolest kits around.
4 Likes
The Peak and A4 are sonically both complex machines. Both can so things the other cant.
Exactly.
Since micro timed conditional trigless locks can be used as fade-in modulators, the same way an envelope or LFO would operate, the sequencer is HUGE for sound design.
4 Likes
Tried the A4 MK2 in a store in Auckland but think AK is better (Future Classic) for sure if AK is discontinued and no mk2 model surfaces:)
Something about having a really nice keyboard controller built into the machine makes all the difference.
Could not hear any sound quality improvement with the A4MK2 over the AK either but perhaps that was because A4MK2 ships with the same factory presets.
In this case newer is not always better.
3 Likes
Hello,
i fell completely in love with the elektron synths and i was wondering if Anyone compared these two already?
The separate Outputs seem very interesting to me but getting a keys second hand would obviously be much more price friendly.
I would love to hear your thoughts!
(Also how big is the difference still if u update the keys to the latest firmware?)
I have both at the moment. The MK2 sound a little better as expected though it’s not a huge difference. I do prefer the work flow on the MK2 with the new buttons and better screen. I’m thinking of selling the AK but I’ve decided I’d rather keep it around than sell it for peanuts.
The AK is an amazing machine, I haven’t used the sep outs when I had one. Is it stereo or mono? I think the mk2 has stereo individual outs, doesn’t it?