MOTM

> I gotta be honest. I think posting the review to the MOTM list was a
> little mean spirited.
>

In a way, yes. HOWEVER, it was on a PUBLIC FORUM (AH). Now, if it was the .com forum, it would
have STAYED THERE.

If Roger wants to be mad at somebody, be mad at the person for NOT FIRST giving him an
opportunity to respond BEFORE posting. Sound familiar (cough cough) ?

Paul S.

> If Roger wants to be mad at somebody, be mad at the person for NOT FIRST
giving him an
> opportunity to respond BEFORE posting. Sound familiar (cough cough) ?

hello all,
don't know how to put this the way i intend it (with a big :-))
but i'd hate to think all the shite going on at Gas Station was going to
creep onto this list
i like this list, and we all know *why* we're here as subscribers
it's so good natured even when todd, erm, fucked up it was still a
relatively gentlemanly affair

does that make sense..?
i'd hate to see things start to go negative
no replies needed - just go think up a good patch...

cheers
paul b
sheffield
uk

I appreciate everything I read in this forum, good and bad.  I run a 
high end studio with lots of synths and most of them I bought on a 
recommendation.  The kind of stuff I use you usually don't see at 
the music store in the mall.  I depend on reviews and 
recommendations heavily when deciding what to buy and whether or not 
to buy a certain piece of gear.  I finally decided on a MOTM system 
after lurking for a while because of a recommendation.  I'm sure the 
synth.com stuff has good qualities, but let's face it it isn't 
MOTM.  Maybe there's some stuff it can do the MOTM can't, (a 
situation I'm sure won't last long.)  Paul has a great thing going.  
He is the quality leader in this small industry.  I don't mind it if 
he gloats a little.  I don't mind it if he expresses happiness upon 
beating the competition.  I'd rather read the truth here than have 
everyone start quibbling over whether it's politically correct.

> I'd rather read the truth here than have
> everyone start quibbling over whether it's politically correct.

I concur, so let's move on. I am a little stressed out, tomorrow is "Justify Why We Shouldn't
Fire You Immediately" day, so yes, I admit, I was gloating *ever so slightly*, BUT as you noted,
I DID NOT comment AT ALL on the post. That IS GLOATING and not appreciated. Some of you have
stuff from both of us, I buy cases from him, etc. Let's not get into a school-yard argument
(www.the-gas-station.com has that in spades). The market is tiny, there is little (if any) money
to be made.

Paul S.

It's a little akward seeing somebody rub their competitor's nose in 
the dirt. We all get enough of that every time there's an election. 
Fortunately, we haven't seen the unique characteristics of the MOTM 
EG's critiqued on other lists.

It's obvious that some of the synthesizer.com modules have 
characteristics that many would consider defects. There's a little 
irony in how the compromises of modern designs get ripped apart, all 
while everybody tries slavishly to imitate the defects & quirks of 
classic synthesizers.

But why run down Arrick? Arrick is not really competing with MOTM. 
MOTM tries to create the best modules possible, with less emphasis on 
doing it in a businesslike fashion (ie, competitive pricing, 
available product, quick turn-around times, etc.) Arrick seems 
willing to make quality compromises in order to have competitive 
pricing, product availability, and quick turn-around. These are two 
very different approaches, and they'll appeal to different types of 
customers. 

I say more power to Arrick, even if he makes flawed modules. He's 
filling a market niche that MOTM doesn't try to compete in. The 
presence of multiple vendors increases the number of choices we have. 
It also expands the market, ensuring that we'll be able to get 
modules in the future. I'd even bet that a lot of sythesizers.com 
customers will upgrade to MOTM someday.

In the meantime, Paul, you're better off letting your modules speak 
for themselves. Many of Arrick's modules fill gaps in your line, so 
until those gaps are filled, there's not much to say.

Where you do have comparable modules, your modules' quality speaks 
eloquently for itself. 





--- In motm@y..., "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@a...> wrote:
> 
> 
> > I gotta be honest. I think posting the review to the MOTM list 
was a
> > little mean spirited.
> >
> 
> In a way, yes. HOWEVER, it was on a PUBLIC FORUM (AH). Now, if it 
was the .com forum, it would
> have STAYED THERE.
> 
> If Roger wants to be mad at somebody, be mad at the person for NOT 
FIRST giving him an
> opportunity to respond BEFORE posting. Sound familiar (cough 
cough) ?
> 
> Paul S.