Re: *warning* non-analogue content contained herein

From Bogdan Wies Taw Raczynski
Sent Thu, Jan 9th 1970, 01:00

> Yes, but I'm getting between 50 and 80 messages per day, the majority 
> of which are crap rather than anything useful. For example, the 
> continuing Doepfer saga, the MC303 vs Drumstation debate - all this 
> argument over 2 machines that I doubt the majority of us would ever 
> buy over the originals they seek to replace. Personally, I couldn't 
> give a shit about whether it uses physical modelling, devious use of 
> samples, or springs and rubber bands as long as it sounds good, and 
> surely that is something that we must each decide for ourselves by
> listening to it, not because someone else says it does? So why waste 
> all this time arguing about it

You're exactly right.  And that's my whole point.  I see just as much as 
many, if not more at times, mail that really isn't "helpful" at all.  
Admittedly, this message might be one of those.  My point however, is 
that instead of having 20 people write back about how digital ain't 
analogue and never will be, we should just have a few people do the job.  
It always happens when someone asks something about non-analogue gear.  
> For those of us that pay for our net access this waste of bandwidth is starting
> to spoil what is generally a highly useful and interesting mailing list.

You're right.  Sorry for contributing to that with this post, but I'm 
just sick of the senseless posts as much as you.