Doepfer

the poll should have been more simple yes, maybe or no. that way 
people don't have to confuse themselves. kind of like the route of 
the touch seq.  having a poll about jacks and knobs, makes it 
redundant and a waste of time . i have not even voted because it's 
about apples and oranges when it should be about which apples  and 
why an orange. the point i am trying to make here , first figure out 
what the function set should be. then design it so it follows the 
function set and not the other way around. the keyboard should just 
be that, A touch keyboard. the sequencer should be just that, A 
sequencer. the  trick is to have them behave together in sync. have 
buttons on the the touch KB to control the seq. directly. if you 
could do it in one package without losing functions then all the 
power to you . let's get to point. we should be voting about the 
functions it should do. we should be dicuusing the same. not one 
person has replied or dicussed the functions i proposed in post #848, 
#860 and #881 . if these types of suggestions are way off let me  
know and i won't bother posting them. just trying to stir some ideas. 
isn't that what a group is all about. i am happy that it might get 
built. but you won't me see doing hand stands,somersaults and jumping 
for joy until it is feature rich and functions properly.
regards,
RM


--- In Doepfer_a100@y..., "Andreas Lindholm" 
<andreas.k.lindholm@t...> wrote:
> I just went thrugh the polls on the site and found that 10 people 
had cast
> their votes on To what extent do you think Doepfer should try to 
fix flaws
> and bugs in the product line?. 7 people say that it should be fixed 
in some
> way, but they range from "Nothing is more important" to "It depends 
on the
> nature of the error". Three people say either "well, you fell for 
the sales
> talk..." or "no, don't fix anything, make new stuff". Haven't seen 
results
> this divergent since the Swedish general elections ;)