That being said, my MO8 is a really ugly synth - I like what it can do but it is huge and hidious!

And balma....I don't think the Blofeld is as much ugly looking as it is boring/sterile looking.

no quotation neccisary, it's simple logic.(and this wasn't directed at you, it was in generalImperatorDX wrote:ninja6485 wrote:
it's one thing to appreciate the look of a particular synth, or really detest the look of another, but when you start making decisions on what you want to own and use based on looks, it shows that the mucisal value and functionality of the synth are less important than the looks.
Your premise is flawed. Please show me the quotation where I say that the musical value of the instrument is less important to me.
krzeppa wrote:And balma....I don't think the Blofeld is as much ugly looking as it is boring/sterile looking.
Those are pretty sexy!!!balma wrote:
RD9 wrote:
"Never judge a book by its cover."
pricklyrobot wrote:I strongly object to the Mopho/Bruce Lee comparison. Bruce rocked that jumpsuit with some style. The Mopho looks like the font-monster went diarrhea on its front panel.
Ha ha, classic!pricklyrobot wrote:...The Mopho looks like the font-monster went diarrhea on its front panel.
All right, that's understandable. Now my simple logic:ninja6485 wrote:no quotation neccisary, it's simple logic.(and this wasn't directed at you, it was in general) but i think i see where the confusion is. let me clarify: (...)
I washed out of design school, and even I know they're bad.nvbrkr wrote:I was just waiting for the bashing on Dave Smith's regrettable taste for fonts to begin.