179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
chthonic streams
To:
Date:
Mon, 8 Nov 2004 22:22:28 -0500
Subject:
Re: [idm] (off topic) digital not vs. analog
Msg-Id:
<p05210600bdb5e75beebe@[64.63.244.121]>
In-Reply-To:
<bf.49eccd38.2ec11d9e@aol.com>
Mbox:
idm.0411.gz
quoted 6 lines In a message dated 11/08/2004 1:46:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,>In a message dated 11/08/2004 1:46:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, >chthonic@chthonicstreams.com writes: > >so let's stop this argument right here and say: to each their own, >and whatever works. >
quoted 3 lines I agree with that, no need for an argument per se. Your inference>I agree with that, no need for an argument per se. Your inference >that analog is cheaper though, I >would disagree with. Good analog >sound is really awesome and really expensive.
i didn't say "good" (at least, not in the way you mean). just analog. read my post about making music with casios and portable ncassette recorders. or really cheap used synths even. although those are now harder to find, but there was a time when non-midi analog synths went for $50-$100. this gave rise to house and acid house, not because that gear was hip, but because it was all those people could afford. there's still stuff like that out there, and innovative people ready to make it into something. although someone who works totally on a loaded laptop has my respect too, as long as what they're doing is good. d.