<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 25. Oct 2020, at 22:46, Tony Scharf <<a href="mailto:tony.scharf@outlook.com" class="">tony.scharf@outlook.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; direction: ltr;" class="">See...the Poly D goes BEYOND the Model D by everything you mentioned. THAT I like! But exact replicas? Boooooooorrrinnnnggggg.</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If you would have asked me a year ago I might have agreed. But now, (biased after spending the money), I love my KARP 2600 FS. It just sounds so massive, dark and somehow dusty…;)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">And there seems to be a lot of things they could have added to make it more useful, but I really like the sound of the KARP. Haven’t heard the BARP in person but the youtubes sound like there is a considerable difference between the raw waves. It will still be a complete and fun synth, but I’m curious how it will compare to the original or the TTSH.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Kai</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>