Wiardgroup

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, HDibrell@... wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 9/14/2006 10:02:01 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
> drmabuce@... writes:
> 
> The  change is in me.
> Synths are no worse, nor are synth  magazines.
> i've  just lost my youthful ability to be cheerfully  oblivious to the
> ubiquitious down-side, and focus with ardent desire on  that one
> holy-grail piece of gear (du jour!)i wanted.  i remember  clearly how
> much i iconized my first 2600 and later, my Xpander. Hell! i  remember
> how dazzled i was at the ravishing sleekness of the DX7 ....  oblivious
> to how thoroughly that sleekness would handcuff me when i tried  to
> adjust a velocity response.....
> 
> 
> Well said. There really is little difference. I just think there is
a lot  
> more of the same. We used to have to look pretty hard for the
magazines or wait  
> a whole month for another issue. Now with 24 hour news cycles, no
sign off on 
>  television and unbelievable amounts of information on the internet it 
> appears to  be worse. The same quality and lack of quality is there.
The same hype 
> as well.  I was just looking through a 1974 issue of Crawdaddy magazine 
> yesterday. The  adds are the best part. Even better are the
downloads of Polyphony on 
> Cynthia's  website. When I think back on those times , they seem so
pure. But 
> ,in reality  there was little difference to now. Age does change our 
> perspective. I also used  to drool over car magazines in the mid
'60's , picturing 
> myself in that Ferrari,  Maserati or Lamborghini. Now I'm perfectly
content to 
> tool around in my Toyota  Corrolla and go home to a home studio of
mostly older 
> gear. Not necessarily  vintage, just older. It works for me. I also
remember 
> being "dazzled" enough to  sell my Synthi AKS in order to buy a Siel
DK-600 and 
> a Fostex cassette 4-track.  Ooh, I wished I hadn't remembered that.
Now I 
> won't be able to sleep  tonight.                Harry D
>