200e

On Aug 11, 2011, at 5:13 AM, nicholas_kent wrote:

> My general opinion of the older 249e was you had two 24 step sequences that are separate with less of a user interface. It was more of a program it in sort of thing than a start it up and tweak while running. Not that you couldn't but I felt you needed more of a plan to use it. 

I agree about the 249e. If you knew what you wanted when you started out, the 249e was good, but if you were improvising, or just goofing off, the 249e was not as fun as a "normal" step sequencer.

– C

Chris Muir                <-Music   Industry ->                           Eardrill                  
cbm@well.com	                                                    cbm@eardrill.com
http://www.xfade.com                               http://www.eardrill.com