From Rob Walker Sent Fri, Apr 12th 2019, 22:05
From Rob Walker Sent Fri, Apr 12th 2019, 22:05
I get the point. The 202 had a couple of synthesis tricks the 101 didn=E2=80= =99t and vice versa. I=E2=80=99d throw them both into a remake because it=E2= =80=99s easily done, still very simple and is in keeping with the spirit of t= he times and the company that made them. Rob=20 > On 12 Apr 2019, at 20:37, Edward Schultheis <xxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: >=20 > I feel like all the talk about missed opportunities with regard to an SH-1= 01 clone, is missing the point. > The beauty of it is the simplicity/ playability... the wonderful sound, et= c. > Adding to it takes away what is whats best about it. >=20 >> On Apr 12, 2019, at 12:28 PM, Kenny Balys <xxxxx@xxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> Oh, yes lets! >>=20 >> This is one of my favourite things about the SH-09. JP-4 too. >>=20 >> It was a shock how much gear it took on my modular to patch a delayed LFO= . >> VCA+Envelope and the LFO of course. >>=20 >>> On 12.04.19 19:22 , Rob Walker wrote: >>> Maybe we can argue about adding LFO Delay from the 202 as a missed oppor= tunity now? >>>=20 >>> (Sorry) >>>=20 >>> Rob >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> On 12 Apr 2019, at 19:26, Kenny Balys <xxxxx@xxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> I have followed the thread of the last few days with interest. >>>>=20 >>>> The photo on this link shows the instrument is equipped with the >>>> necessary (for the 49.7%) function. >>>>=20 >>>> http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2019/04/12/superlative-announces-sb-1= -space-bee-rechargeable-synthesizer-superbooth-sneak-preview/ >>>>=20 >>>> Good. >>>=20 >> -