200e

As the subjects says I am wondering how many of us Buchla 200e users are actually using one of the two main driving features when developing the 200e (besides MIDI) - storage capability by means of the 210e?

As there are a few new 200 modules without this feature (255, 297) and Mark Verbos´s very popular 258v also does not offer this feature I think many users might not use the "complete storage" capability at all!? "Complete in the sense of saving knob settings AND patching.

P.S.: How many 210e can peacefully coexist in ONE 200e cabinet? Given the fact that there are "only" 5 cv and 5 audio destinations available with one 210e and there are "tons" of cv and audio inputs...

With "tons" of cv and audio inputs I meant cv and audio inputs of all the other modules you have in your cabinet!

>
> As the subjects says I am wondering how many of us Buchla 200e users are actually using one of the two main driving features when developing the 200e (besides MIDI) - storage capability by means of the 210e?
> 
> As there are a few new 200 modules without this feature (255, 297) and Mark Verbos´s very popular 258v also does not offer this feature I think many users might not use the "complete storage" capability at all!? "Complete in the sense of saving knob settings AND patching.
> 
> P.S.: How many 210e can peacefully coexist in ONE 200e cabinet? Given the fact that there are "only" 5 cv and 5 audio destinations available with one 210e and there are "tons" of cv and audio inputs...
>

I store multiple revisions of every patch while working on them, then off-load the best verions to memory card and diagram the cable connects.

Once I started using patch storage, and routing, I decided that I couldn't live without it.  As for modules that do not store, I just deal with it.

I store multiple revisions of every patch while working on them, then off-load the best verions to memory card and diagram the cable connects.

Once I started using patch storage, and routing, I decided that I couldn't live without it.  As for modules that do not store, I just deal with it.

On Jun 5, 2009, at 12:20 PM, fhserge wrote:

> As the subjects says I am wondering how many of us Buchla 200e users  
> are actually using one of the two main driving features when  
> developing the 200e (besides MIDI) - storage capability by means of  
> the 210e?


I use presets for "starting points", and "on the fly variations", but  
I don't try for patch cord storage with the 210e.

Starting points include presets named "DroneBase," "Thumper,"  
"Harmonics." which I use as the bases to build sounds upon.

What I mean by "on the fly variations" is something like:
1 - get a sound, store it,
2 - tweak some knobs, store that,
recall sound from step 1, then sound from step 2

I'm not using the 210e much in an of this for patch cord storage. It  
does get used a lot as a matrix mixer with presets.

- C

Chris Muir
cbm@well.com	
http://www.xfade.com

I use it all the time in performance - it's essential for me.

> As the subjects says I am wondering how many of us Buchla 200e users  
> are actually using one of the two main driving features when  
> developing the 200e (besides MIDI) - storage capability by means of  
> the 210e?




Richard Lainhart
http://www.otownmedia.com
http://www.downloadplatform.com/richard_lainhart
http://www.vimeo.com/rlainhart
http://www.youtube.com/rlainhart
http://richardlainhart.bandcamp.com/






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Richard,

how do you solve the "5 destinations limit" of ONE 210e. I cannot believe that you "only" use 5 variable cv destinations for example...
Do you have mostly "fixed" routings (cv and audio) and use only a few for "variable" routings with the 210e?

Second question is/was: how many 210e can coexist in ONE cabinet? I imagine needing more than one if you want "complete patch storage"!

Frank

>
> I use it all the time in performance - it's essential for me.
> 
> > As the subjects says I am wondering how many of us Buchla 200e users  
> > are actually using one of the two main driving features when  
> > developing the 200e (besides MIDI) - storage capability by means of  
> > the 210e?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Richard Lainhart
> http://www.otownmedia.com
> http://www.downloadplatform.com/richard_lainhart
> http://www.vimeo.com/rlainhart
> http://www.youtube.com/rlainhart
> http://richardlainhart.bandcamp.com/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Matt,

you said you "diagram the cable connects" and "using patch storage, and routing". So are you able to completely store a patch or only part of it (added by diagrams)?

Frank

>
> I store multiple revisions of every patch while working on them, then off-load the best verions to memory card and diagram the cable connects.
> 
> Once I started using patch storage, and routing, I decided that I couldn't live without it.  As for modules that do not store, I just deal with it.
>

Chris,

that is exactly what I thought would the different Buchla users do:
- using "only" the patch storage function, i. e. knob settings IF they do not have a 210e (there is no chance obviously to save patch cords...)
- using the 210e for "some" but not all routings AND for audio matrix mixing IF they have ONE 210e
- using 2*210e to "completely" store complex patches (you might want to use AND save all the flexibility of the 200e system, i. e. lots of variable sources and destinations not "only" 8 to 5!



--- In 200e@yahoogroups.com, Chris Muir <cbm@...> wrote:

>
> 
> On Jun 5, 2009, at 12:20 PM, fhserge wrote:
> 
> > As the subjects says I am wondering how many of us Buchla 200e users  
> > are actually using one of the two main driving features when  
> > developing the 200e (besides MIDI) - storage capability by means of  
> > the 210e?
> 
> 
> I use presets for "starting points", and "on the fly variations", but  
> I don't try for patch cord storage with the 210e.
> 
> Starting points include presets named "DroneBase," "Thumper,"  
> "Harmonics." which I use as the bases to build sounds upon.
> 
> What I mean by "on the fly variations" is something like:
> 1 - get a sound, store it,
> 2 - tweak some knobs, store that,
> recall sound from step 1, then sound from step 2
> 
> I'm not using the 210e much in an of this for patch cord storage. It  
> does get used a lot as a matrix mixer with presets.
> 
> - C
> 
> Chris Muir
> cbm@...	
> http://www.xfade.com
>

On Jun 5, 2009, at 12:20 PM, fhserge wrote:
> As the subjects says I am wondering how many of us Buchla 200e  
> users are actually using one of the two main driving features when  
> developing the 200e (besides MIDI) - storage capability by means of  
> the 210e?
>
I use the preset functionality constantly, it has become a tremendous  
advantage particularly in my live performance efforts.
> As there are a few new 200 modules without this feature (255, 297)  
> and Mark Verbos´s very popular 258v also does not offer this  
> feature I think many users might not use the "complete storage"  
> capability at all!? "Complete in the sense of saving knob settings  
> AND patching.
>
Configure a 256e channel to provide full scale offset voltage.  Pass  
that into the 210e.  Use the outputs of the 210e to provide  
attenuated reference voltage levels on various outputs, connect these  
references to critical cv inputs on old 200 modules.  Now we have  
some mad max vibe presets.  This works very well for me.

The 225e would do well to have a facility where the aux output pairs  
could be set to output an offset voltage instead of being related to  
a midi control code.

- damon

Jon,

any further explanation on your side? Would be happy to be enlightened on that matter...

Generally the severe lack of deeper information about the 200e/modules is something I am a little bit unhappy about!

E.G.:
- the MIDI ports are unlabeled. With "trial and error" I "found" MIDI IN, the other one is...Ezra was so kind to answer my question.
- if you upgrade the firmware version, the documentation (that I kindly got from JB) does not mention HOW LONG you have to press down the RE knob? 2 sec, 2 min, 2 days...
- how many 210e can coexist in ONE system?

There are (too) many questions left when you start to explore the 200e IMHO.

This system has the "most sex" of all modulars - no question - but PLEASE more documented details - thank you!

Frank

--- In 200e@yahoogroups.com, jon schatz <jon@...> wrote:

>
> 
> On Jun 5, 2009, at 3:45 PM, fhserge wrote:
> > Second question is/was: how many 210e can coexist in ONE cabinet? I  
> > imagine needing more than one if you want "complete patch storage"!
> 
> careful where you're going with this; eventually you'll need a 210e  
> just to manage the outputs of your other 210e's :-)
> 
> -jon
> "There are no differences but differences of degree between different  
> degrees
> of difference and no difference."
> - James, William. "Subjective Effects of Nitrous Oxide." Mind. 1882;  
> Vol 7.
>

Damon,

> Configure a 256e channel to provide full scale offset voltage.  Pass  
> that into the 210e.  Use the outputs of the 210e to provide  
> attenuated reference voltage levels on various outputs, connect these  
> references to critical cv inputs on old 200 modules.  Now we have  
> some mad max vibe presets.  This works very well for me.
Nice idea!

Frank

> 
> The 225e would do well to have a facility where the aux output pairs  
> could be set to output an offset voltage instead of being related to  
> a midi control code.
> 
> - damon
>

Jon,

thanks for your detailed explanation!

You confirm my "fear" that it is very hard (or at least limiting) to get a "completely storable modular system" even with the 200e!

We know that well known people like Richard Lainhart (and probably Alessandro Cortini) work live with a 200e, question was how they handle the challenge to be able to quickly (!) recall different "complete patches".

Frank

--- In 200e@yahoogroups.com, jon schatz <jon@...> wrote:

>
> 
> On Jun 5, 2009, at 4:10 PM, fhserge wrote:
> > any further explanation on your side? Would be happy to be  
> > enlightened on that matter...
> 
> so your original email was about "complete patch storage". you  
> mentioned the limited number of cv and audio outs on the 210e and  
> questioned getting a second one.
> 
> my answer was sort of in jest. in my usage patterns i hardly ever  
> setup patches with only 5 audio / cv routings. even with certain hard- 
> coded setups (all my 281e outputs shorted to 292e inputs, all the 292e  
> ouputs into all the 227e inputs, etc) i need more than 5 extra cables  
> to recall a preset.  so then getting a second (or a third!) 210e seems  
> like a solution but eventually i'm dealing with so many outputs / 
> inputs on those modules that i need some sort of module to simplify  
> them. hence, one more 210e.
> 
> i think it's a losing battle to truly come up with a system of presets  
> that solely uses the 210e and doesn't require manual patching around  
> unless you've only get 2 or 3 modules (and even then, really hard).
> 
> thanks,
> 
> -jon
> "There are no differences but differences of degree between different  
> degrees
> of difference and no difference."
> - James, William. "Subjective Effects of Nitrous Oxide." Mind. 1882;  
> Vol 7.
>

Ezra,

man you are GREAT! I LOVE your (mostly) promptly and friendly replies that gives some background on the 200e module working!!!

The reason I was starting the thread:
Before purchasing 1-n 210e I wanted to know if I would be able to accomplish the goal of "complete patch storage" with a modular without loosing flexibility (as this was something Don has obviously in mind when designing the 200e).

Now I know what I can expect!

And I am by no way unhappy, I would say HAPPY about the phantastic help and prompt support I got from this forum...again!!!

Thanks to all

Frank



--- In 200e@yahoogroups.com, ezra buchla <ezra.buchla@...> wrote:

>
> yahoo formatting is messing me up, i'm trying to respond inline but it could
> be all wrong.
> 
> 
> > Generally the severe lack of deeper information about the 200e/modules is
> > something I am a little bit unhappy about!
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sorry about that. it'd be great to have a wiki, or something, somewhere, i
> don't mind starting one but not sure who would maintain it. meanwhile i
> think we'll soon have digital copies of the manual on buchla.com
> 
> >
> > E.G.:
> > - the MIDI ports are unlabeled. With "trial and error" I "found" MIDI IN,
> > the other one is...Ezra was so kind to answer my question.
> > - if you upgrade the firmware version, the documentation (that I kindly got
> > from JB) does not mention HOW LONG you have to press down the RE knob? 2
> > sec, 2 min, 2 days...
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you can let go as soon as the lights come on in the system. in paerticular,
> the blue LED on the 292e should be going like crazy (it is an I2C bus
> activity indicator.)
> 
> > - how many 210e can coexist in ONE system?
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i can't see any reason not to have as many as you like. presets are actually
> stored in each module, not in the 225e or any other centralized memory. the
> 225e simply sends a global message for all enabled modules to store or
> recall preset X.
> 
> if your goal was to minimize the physical moving of cables, you could
> certianly do that. but i think you would eventually wind up with one 210e
> for each other module (the 291e has 10 cv inputs, for example!), or
> something equally crazy.
> 
> that doesn't make the 210e useless... some people (like allessandro and
> richard, i think) have a "core" patch with a few "variable" elements that
> are rerouted using the 210e presets. this is kind of the intended purpose.
> 
> i've done extensive touring with a very small 200 system (4 panels) which
> uses a 225e and 210e to reroute all my pedals and signal sources
> (microphone, viola, synth, distortion, delay, stage feed, house feed,
> etc.)... really really useful. hideous feedback on cue.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

On Jun 5, 2009, at 3:45 PM, fhserge wrote:
> Second question is/was: how many 210e can coexist in ONE cabinet? I  
> imagine needing more than one if you want "complete patch storage"!

careful where you're going with this; eventually you'll need a 210e  
just to manage the outputs of your other 210e's :-)

-jon
"There are no differences but differences of degree between different  
degrees
of difference and no difference."
- James, William. "Subjective Effects of Nitrous Oxide." Mind. 1882;  
Vol 7.

On Jun 5, 2009, at 4:10 PM, fhserge wrote:
> any further explanation on your side? Would be happy to be  
> enlightened on that matter...

so your original email was about "complete patch storage". you  
mentioned the limited number of cv and audio outs on the 210e and  
questioned getting a second one.

my answer was sort of in jest. in my usage patterns i hardly ever  
setup patches with only 5 audio / cv routings. even with certain hard- 
coded setups (all my 281e outputs shorted to 292e inputs, all the 292e  
ouputs into all the 227e inputs, etc) i need more than 5 extra cables  
to recall a preset.  so then getting a second (or a third!) 210e seems  
like a solution but eventually i'm dealing with so many outputs / 
inputs on those modules that i need some sort of module to simplify  
them. hence, one more 210e.

i think it's a losing battle to truly come up with a system of presets  
that solely uses the 210e and doesn't require manual patching around  
unless you've only get 2 or 3 modules (and even then, really hard).

thanks,

-jon
"There are no differences but differences of degree between different  
degrees
of difference and no difference."
- James, William. "Subjective Effects of Nitrous Oxide." Mind. 1882;  
Vol 7.

yahoo formatting is messing me up, i'm trying to respond inline but it could
be all wrong.


> Generally the severe lack of deeper information about the 200e/modules is
> something I am a little bit unhappy about!
>
>




sorry about that. it'd be great to have a wiki, or something, somewhere, i
don't mind starting one but not sure who would maintain it. meanwhile i
think we'll soon have digital copies of the manual on buchla.com

>
> E.G.:
> - the MIDI ports are unlabeled. With "trial and error" I "found" MIDI IN,
> the other one is...Ezra was so kind to answer my question.
> - if you upgrade the firmware version, the documentation (that I kindly got
> from JB) does not mention HOW LONG you have to press down the RE knob? 2
> sec, 2 min, 2 days...
>









you can let go as soon as the lights come on in the system. in paerticular,
the blue LED on the 292e should be going like crazy (it is an I2C bus
activity indicator.)

> - how many 210e can coexist in ONE system?
>




i can't see any reason not to have as many as you like. presets are actually
stored in each module, not in the 225e or any other centralized memory. the
225e simply sends a global message for all enabled modules to store or
recall preset X.

if your goal was to minimize the physical moving of cables, you could
certianly do that. but i think you would eventually wind up with one 210e
for each other module (the 291e has 10 cv inputs, for example!), or
something equally crazy.

that doesn't make the 210e useless... some people (like allessandro and
richard, i think) have a "core" patch with a few "variable" elements that
are rerouted using the 210e presets. this is kind of the intended purpose.

i've done extensive touring with a very small 200 system (4 panels) which
uses a 225e and 210e to reroute all my pedals and signal sources
(microphone, viola, synth, distortion, delay, stage feed, house feed,
etc.)... really really useful. hideous feedback on cue.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

the idea is you will probably be able to design your patches in such a way
that most cable routings remain fixed, and use the 210e for the few where
you think, "dang it would be awesome to send this thing over here and then
over here and then these two things there and then nothing."

since you can have very radically different sounds and behaviors even with
the same cable routing and different presets, this usually isn't a problem.

if you need more patch switching, you can always get an additional 210e.
think of that module as a potential tool for composition, and not as an
integral part of a "total recall" system; it may be crucial to your goals to
have more than one but i'd try playing with it for a while, first.

total recall is already possible, since all the knob settings are stored and
all you have to remember is what plugs into what ( a binary decision for
each possible connection, and easily accomplished on paper)... a synth
design that went any further would probably just eliminate the patchcords,
and patchcords are fun.

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM, fhserge <Frank.Hettlich@gmx.net> wrote:

>
>
> Jon,
>
> thanks for your detailed explanation!
>
> You confirm my "fear" that it is very hard (or at least limiting) to get a
> "completely storable modular system" even with the 200e!
>
> We know that well known people like Richard Lainhart (and probably
> Alessandro Cortini) work live with a 200e, question was how they handle the
> challenge to be able to quickly (!) recall different "complete patches".
>
>
> Frank
>
> --- In 200e@yahoogroups.com <200e%40yahoogroups.com>, jon schatz <jon@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jun 5, 2009, at 4:10 PM, fhserge wrote:
> > > any further explanation on your side? Would be happy to be
> > > enlightened on that matter...
> >
> > so your original email was about "complete patch storage". you
> > mentioned the limited number of cv and audio outs on the 210e and
> > questioned getting a second one.
> >
> > my answer was sort of in jest. in my usage patterns i hardly ever
> > setup patches with only 5 audio / cv routings. even with certain hard-
> > coded setups (all my 281e outputs shorted to 292e inputs, all the 292e
> > ouputs into all the 227e inputs, etc) i need more than 5 extra cables
> > to recall a preset. so then getting a second (or a third!) 210e seems
> > like a solution but eventually i'm dealing with so many outputs /
> > inputs on those modules that i need some sort of module to simplify
> > them. hence, one more 210e.
> >
> > i think it's a losing battle to truly come up with a system of presets
> > that solely uses the 210e and doesn't require manual patching around
> > unless you've only get 2 or 3 modules (and even then, really hard).
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > -jon
> > "There are no differences but differences of degree between different
> > degrees
> > of difference and no difference."
> > - James, William. "Subjective Effects of Nitrous Oxide." Mind. 1882;
> > Vol 7.
> >
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

right now a card can hold presets for:
one 206e
one 210e
one 222e
one 225e
one 227e
four 249e's
four 250e's
two 256e's
four 259e's
two 260e's
four 261e's
two 266e's
four 281e's
two 285e's
four 291e's
and
four 292e's

subject to revisions, of course.
stick whatever you want in your system-- they'll save and recall and all the rest just fine;  just don't expect a single card to hold more than what's listed above.

Yasi

I use the store function quite a bit. I also write down patched that I 
really like and would like to use in a live context.

> .
>
>

oh oops a correction... you can't store presets externally for more than 1
210e... some other modules as well? (i should find out) this is simply a
limitation on the size of the storage on the external cards.

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 4:51 PM, ezra buchla <ezra.buchla@gmail.com> wrote:

> the idea is you will probably be able to design your patches in such a way
> that most cable routings remain fixed, and use the 210e for the few where
> you think, "dang it would be awesome to send this thing over here and then
> over here and then these two things there and then nothing."
>
> since you can have very radically different sounds and behaviors even with
> the same cable routing and different presets, this usually isn't a problem.
>
> if you need more patch switching, you can always get an additional 210e.
> think of that module as a potential tool for composition, and not as an
> integral part of a "total recall" system; it may be crucial to your goals to
> have more than one but i'd try playing with it for a while, first.
>
> total recall is already possible, since all the knob settings are stored
> and all you have to remember is what plugs into what ( a binary decision for
> each possible connection, and easily accomplished on paper)... a synth
> design that went any further would probably just eliminate the patchcords,
> and patchcords are fun.
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM, fhserge <Frank.Hettlich@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Jon,
>>
>> thanks for your detailed explanation!
>>
>> You confirm my "fear" that it is very hard (or at least limiting) to get a
>> "completely storable modular system" even with the 200e!
>>
>> We know that well known people like Richard Lainhart (and probably
>> Alessandro Cortini) work live with a 200e, question was how they handle the
>> challenge to be able to quickly (!) recall different "complete patches".
>>
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> --- In 200e@yahoogroups.com <200e%40yahoogroups.com>, jon schatz <jon@...>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jun 5, 2009, at 4:10 PM, fhserge wrote:
>> > > any further explanation on your side? Would be happy to be
>> > > enlightened on that matter...
>> >
>> > so your original email was about "complete patch storage". you
>> > mentioned the limited number of cv and audio outs on the 210e and
>> > questioned getting a second one.
>> >
>> > my answer was sort of in jest. in my usage patterns i hardly ever
>> > setup patches with only 5 audio / cv routings. even with certain hard-
>> > coded setups (all my 281e outputs shorted to 292e inputs, all the 292e
>> > ouputs into all the 227e inputs, etc) i need more than 5 extra cables
>> > to recall a preset. so then getting a second (or a third!) 210e seems
>> > like a solution but eventually i'm dealing with so many outputs /
>> > inputs on those modules that i need some sort of module to simplify
>> > them. hence, one more 210e.
>> >
>> > i think it's a losing battle to truly come up with a system of presets
>> > that solely uses the 210e and doesn't require manual patching around
>> > unless you've only get 2 or 3 modules (and even then, really hard).
>> >
>> > thanks,
>> >
>> > -jon
>> > "There are no differences but differences of degree between different
>> > degrees
>> > of difference and no difference."
>> > - James, William. "Subjective Effects of Nitrous Oxide." Mind. 1882;
>> > Vol 7.
>> >
>>
>>  
>>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

hm we should probably restructure that a little since there are about 4
249e's in existence.

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 7:28 PM, cyaarsoil <yasi_p@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> right now a card can hold presets for:
> one 206e
> one 210e
> one 222e
> one 225e
> one 227e
> four 249e's
> four 250e's
> two 256e's
> four 259e's
> two 260e's
> four 261e's
> two 266e's
> four 281e's
> two 285e's
> four 291e's
> and
> four 292e's
>
> subject to revisions, of course.
> stick whatever you want in your system-- they'll save and recall and all
> the rest just fine; just don't expect a single card to hold more than what's
> listed above.
>
> Yasi
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:04 PM, damon <damon@mac.com> wrote:

>
>
> The 225e would do well to have a facility where the aux output pairs
> could be set to output an offset voltage instead of being related to
> a midi control code.
>






yeah that's on a list of "features that would be great to have if they were
straightforward to implement."

in this case, i don't like the ramifications of causing the preset space to
grow. it would break all existing presets, for one thing. i'm also not sure
how closely the preset card module space (referred to by cyaarsoil, above)
resembles Tetris.

that said, i fully appreciate the usefulness of having static voltages as
part of a preset, so i would like to see it happen.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

i understand entirely.  i think it is much like tetris...

On Jun 6, 2009, at 2:32 AM, ezra buchla wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:04 PM, damon <damon@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > The 225e would do well to have a facility where the aux output pairs
> > could be set to output an offset voltage instead of being related to
> > a midi control code.
> >
>
> yeah that's on a list of "features that would be great to have if  
> they were
> straightforward to implement."
>
> in this case, i don't like the ramifications of causing the preset  
> space to
> grow. it would break all existing presets, for one thing. i'm also  
> not sure
> how closely the preset card module space (referred to by cyaarsoil,  
> above)
> resembles Tetris.
>
> that said, i fully appreciate the usefulness of having static  
> voltages as
> part of a preset, so i would like to see it happen.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

I wonder if Don has ever thought about releasing a 40wls....I am sure 
people would buy it, then we could get on with buying more modules :-)

On Jun 6, 2009, at 6:33 PM, amnesia wrote:
> I wonder if Don has ever thought about releasing a 40wls....I am sure
> people would buy it, then we could get on with buying more modules :-)


I would be all over that. Expansion via multiple cabinets has always  
seemed a little clunky.

- C

Chris Muir
cbm@well.com	
http://www.xfade.com

should this man be allowed to work on our Buchla's ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGWYCUguT_U

Hell yes :-)

well spotted Don Hassler :-)

> .
>
>

yeah, that was great!

2009/6/9 amnesia <amni56@tpg.com.au>

> should this man be allowed to work on our Buchla's ?
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGWYCUguT_U
>
> Hell yes :-)
>
> well spotted Don Hassler :-)
>
> > .
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]