Yes the A4 has separate per track send for the reverb, delay and chorus. As well as the ext input.
1 Like
thanks, that is indeed a handy way to produce some atmosphere !
Yes it is. I actually run my monomachine through ext in for those luscious effects.
I really love the sound of the mono also.
hrmā¦ b/c in terms of sound they both appeal to me greatly it seems that so far iām here.
A4:
better live
better sequencer
better (use of) FX
very useable nice polyphonic mode
MnM:
control of ext. instruments
more tracks
lovely cold/haunting character
yep - different sends per track and different amount per external input channel too - the A4 is a live performance dream, the poly and credible drum m/c potential make it a one stop shop imo - there seems to be little product overlap, so let your ears do the choosing, but i thinj that good UI can liberate a machine and your ideas and the A4 is very well set up, even with just 4 voices and stereo outs, the cv side is great
i would say: get both 
but ā¦
not an easy choice for sure and whether you choose the MnM or the A4 is up to your ears (as avantronica said).
the A4 has an improved OS over the MnM which has been out there for a while now so you get new features which you wonāt find on the MnM, things like performance mode, different tracks lengthā¦
i think of the A4 a bit like the analog version of the MnM though, you strip off the CV and the FX track, put back two tracks of synthesis and there you have it, your analog MnM 
perhaps it could come down to (the usual): would you rather go for analog or digital? 
ā¦ you could start with an A4 and then later on, get a second hand MnM
MnM is incredible. I am really proud of my choice. Speaking in terms of genre, MnM is the ultimate techno superbrain for me - never tried its glitchy capabilities. It is worth mentioning that I managed to produce a complete schranz track with just a solo Monomachine. To sum up, it is a box full of surprises. Iāll share the schranz track soon - that is when the MnM really surprised me - so powerful piece of gear! Have a look at my examples, hope it would help you a bit about your choice:
http://soundcloud.com/radoslav-valkov
Pong Fu is your friend 
More Pong FU
Hereās a track done by me thats pretty much thirds Monomachine with a touch of A4, MD and Nord Modular Sequenced via the MnM.
I sold my Monomachine in order to fund the Analog Four when it was announced. If I HAD to choose one, Iād choose the A4, but after owning it for a shirt while, I really regretted not being able to keep both. I lust after getting one again, but I just cannot rationalize the cost. The Analog Four is an unbelievably awesome synth, but Elektron are evil and the perfect companion to it is the Monomachine. I just really miss the vesatility and unique sound character of the MnM. If I had to pick only one, it would be the A4 due to the improvements to the sequencer and the really nice effectsā¦this thing has a really great sound to my ears, anyway. Tough choice though!
thanks for the input - and please keep it coming !
the vids of the MnM (and VDās use of mult. machines) are really helping to put the sounds/uses in perspective, but iām still very torn.
itās as if each machine lacks what the other possesses in technical ability.
youād think sound would be the #1 decision-maker, but since both units arenāt lacking in top-notch sounds comparing workflow/features become more important than ever.
I would recommend the monomachine. I have both and Iāve owned the monomachine for years. I can tell you the monomachine is a complete stand alone music making unit. Six individual outs six tracks with massive potential. Even if you sacrifice a track for reverb you still have five tracks to build on, not to mention you will have six midi tracks to controll the rest of your gear. Possibilties are endless. Think about it, more voice, midi, separate outs and itās cheaper! Maybe you could put the money you save on a nice reverb pedal. All that being said the A4 is a beautiful synth but I feel youāll be happier with the monomachine. Thatās my two cents.
random thoughts, about this,
i love fm synthesis, but they seems covered by the Yamaha, it sounds better than the mono for fmā¦
but as a stand alone the mono is much better,
if the 4 had external midi it would be more useful i think.in this situation.
i have the a4 and had the mono, i want another because of the fm alone,
i think the a4 is the least standalone of all their machines,
if you have a sequencer to handle the other gear than an a4 is the winner, if not than the mono.
u cant really lose either way though,
the version 1 mono can be had cheap, but used a4 are rare it seems,
i had a really hard time making tracks with either machine alone, the mono drums are very limited, the a4 drums are better,
they both need another machine,
the ot and md are the best all in ones. great fm too,
^ compelling. thatās still the direction in which iām leaning. i even like the interface/aesthetic/buttons better. still gotta read both manuals !!!
let me ask everyone this:
since most A4 & MnM users create āsongsā on their devices, can a trackās voice change throughout a song ?
just for example, if iām making a 10-bar song, can i:
use sound XY on Track 1 for the first 5 bars, then go to sound YZ on the last 5 bars - while still on Track 1 ? i guess i should say iām wondering if you have to stay with the same sound per track for each song. i know p-controls can let you vary sounds greatly w/in a track, but some songs iāve heard from the MnM and A4 on YouTube seem to use many more than just 4-6 sounds for say a 6 minute song.
i hope iām phrasing my question well enoughā¦
yeh im in the same boat with trying to decide between these units, one or the other because ive only got a budget for around 1500
tbh tho, im waiting until after NAMM in a few weeks when elektron unveils the newest box
my problem with the A4 is no midi sequencingā¦ ive been doing electronic music for almost 20 years now, and syncing MIDI devices is like my nemesis at this pointā¦ im talking about the really tight robo-lockstep action ā¦ also the problems with lost resolution by sending clock with notes and CC, and so on, etc. are just fucking so ughā¦ so the less of that i have to deal with, the betterā¦ in a huge way
(side note: my only other elektron so far was the sidstation, got one of the first run devices, but sold it some years ago)
so no matter what im probably looking at getting a clock generator or something anyways (id like innerclock but its too pricey atm) this caught my eye: http://www.midiclock.de/
but anywaysā¦ yeh the monomachine is looking like the one because it can sequence other gear ā¦ although its missing the performance mode and per track reverb fx (which is a big deal actually), and apparently some other sequencer stuff
but i really enjoy programming weirdo synths, and doing very experimental type sound design, so the mono appeals to me - also i kinda need a machine to do double duty for making chiptune stuff, and its got a fairly ok sid emulator
but im sure the A4 can do wacky stuff as well, along with chiptuney sounds, plus its real analogā¦ which is an undeniable advantage imo
but actually lately ive even been looking at second hand virus TIs because of how you can sequence 16 parts of 25-100 voices with per track fx ā¦ and its routed internally through the VST and gets into the device via USB, so you arent limited by the shitty as hell MIDI DIN spec (i love/hate it)
but then id have to stick with ableton and miss out on all the super wacky stuff an elektron seuqncer brings to the partyā¦
manā¦ its really a quandary for me right now
but yeh, waiting for NAMMā¦ i already know bitwig is being revealed, and im thinking there might be more cool stuff about to drop as well as the new elektron
the A4 can do it but im not sure the mono canā¦
the A4 can change patches per step of the sequenceā¦ which is crazy as hell for an analogā¦ also i know i could make some super weird sounds with it using that feature
thats another one of those pro/con things
Although the Mono has more synthesis methods, so arguably a wider sonic palette, it does have narrower sweet-spots and less oscillator-specific synthesis parameters available for tweaking making the A4 a far better machine for warping and morphing sounds over huge ranges. You can have an A4 sound in a constant state of flux over very wide ranges without worrying about hitting the ugly and unusable zones that limit the Mono in this respect.
Also, if youāre really into P-locking to the extreme, the A4 lets you P-lock double the amount of parameters within a pattern so youāre more likely to run out of P-locks on a Mono.
Lastly, I think the A4 sounds better and is much more pleasant on the ears, I canāt listen to a Mono for long without having to turn the monitor level down lower than is ideal.
Just a few prods in the direction of the A4.
thanks giger !
an acquaintance is also asking if iāve checked out the A4Keysā¦ and i havenāt really, because though it looks really great itās out of my price rangeā¦besides, i have an old E-MU midi keyboard i think i could use to simply play it.
i had no idea Elektron was debuting something new @ NAMM this yearā¦and iāll certainly still be saving up/selling gear by the time that rolls around in, what, 2 weeks ?
very exciting times.
iāll have to weigh the ability to sequence other machines & have 6 tracks
VS
the ability to swap patches in the same track (throughout a song), making things much more live-friendly.
Personally I prefer the A4 in general for the sound (I love the āvintageā sounds it can make). But I think you might be better off with the MnM for the style of music you want to make by the sounds of things.
The Mono lets you change kit wherever you want in song mode, or even in pattern mode - just switch pattern with different kit. FWIW a kit is is the āgroupā of sounds you assign to each track. You can change it anywhere/anytime you like. No hassle, really.