<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Jan 15, 2014, at 12:07 PM, Tony Scharf <<a href="mailto:entropymagnet@noisetheorem.com">entropymagnet@noisetheorem.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr"><div><br>> Well the factual stuff, analog synthesizer = subtractive synthesis? "Producing instruments the old way"? The tech and process that goes into these modern instruments is light years ahead of what was going on before.<br>> <br><br></div><div>Actually...can you name an analog synthesizer that isn't at it's base subtractive? Its like....99% accurate. </div><div><br></div><div>> Plus Moog, Dave Smith, Arturia, are the big boys not the little guys. Not a single mention of the modular guys (who are not rolling in the big bucks) who are arguably doing the most innovation and helped keep this thing alive so these other guys could come back. <br>> </div><div><br></div><div>Ken MacBeth?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>True, but I always forget about him, </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br>> I'm really not old enough to act like a grouchy grampa. <br><br></div><div>I am. Almost. Kind of looking forward to it. </div><div><br></div></div></div></blockquote></body></html>