Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: Korg Poly800/EX800 Users

previous by date index next by date
previous in topic topic list  

Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: Jupiter vs Poly

From: Epiik Soul <electrohead2000@...>
Date: 2009-02-17

Off Topic

...Electrohead


--- On Tue, 2/17/09, serotonic_sound <sero-tonic@...> wrote:

> From: serotonic_sound <sero-tonic@...>
> Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: Jupiter vs Poly
> To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, February 17, 2009, 4:14 AM
> > Off-topic, but I rarely see someone corrected about
> multiple claims in
> > a long post react in a non-defensive hostile manner.
> Your response to
> > being corrected was more impressive than getting the
> details about
> > Jupiters right in the first place would have been.
>
> Well, I always aim to impress...Any impression is a good
> impression right? Oh no, wait,
> that's "press" not "impression"...
> crap.
>
> Anyway...I'm not exactly sure whether I just got hit
> with a backhanded compliment, or
> more "non-defensive hostility", or a missing
> grammatical construct somewhere, or what...
>
> but, whatever...no more Jupiter-speak on the korg
> board!...And get your facts straight
> everyone...we don't wan't to piss off the synth
> gurus do we?
>
> Still really digging this synth...it really likes to take
> over a mix though and I'm a bit
> bummed that the "no-joystick-mod" only partially
> worked...but at least the pitch is
> normal now and I don't have to transpose in my
> head...although I was kind of getting the
> hang of it...
>
> HI MOM!
>
> Later y'all...
> -Tim
>
>
>
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "zoinky420"
> <zoinky420@...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com,
> "serotonic_sound" <sero-tonic@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >...thanks for setting me straight.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Off-topic, but I rarely see someone corrected about
> multiple claims in
> > a long post react in a non-defensive hostile manner.
> Your response to
> > being corrected was more impressive than getting the
> details about
> > Jupiters right in the first place would have been.
> >