200e

> While I agree that the learning curve for the 249e is steep, I 
 > disagree that it is difficult to program.
 
 I said "no fun" not difficult.. I am comparing the enjoyment factor the that of playing the original 248-1602 (or 3206) as well as the 250e...which are among the most interesting modules I've ever got my hands on.
 
 the fact that you have to step thru pages on the 249e to get to parameters and then have a single encoder to input values is too early 80's yamaha to me... I prefer the immediacy of knobs and sliders for the kind of music I make.  The 249e does have some neat features but those that I enjoy the most can be recreated with combinations of other modules...  I guess the main loss is the functional density department.. as well as the X Y location inputs and of course you cant have one row of LEDs chase the other... ;)
 
 try out the 250e.. the Fix Input feature is excellent and very useful (not found on the 249e) .. the 250e is more along the lines of the 248 only with a single output section.. I wish it had been designed as a modular sequencer with an input module that could the chained to several output modules so you could stack sequences.. . I came to the table with that idea too late.. or perhaps Don just didnt like it.. 
 
 -rick
 
 		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Everyone is raving about the  all-new Yahoo! Mail.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]