> Sorry for being clumsy. why? you aren't.
> I write off-list since im not sure this is of anyones interest as > such, why? its a bad idea. now im the bad guy... i havnt misread anything. just using this "opportunity" to make a little attemp to fish some sound aesthetic related issues up, especially in digital domain. no bite... > I try to be nice, but > clumsy can stop that alright. didnt expect you'll be so humble... sorry then... On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 20:38:47 +0100, "Steffen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > On 23/11/2006, at 18.29, threen wrote: > > then what would we be refering to if he didnt. would that be > > understood as well and would that change the use of filter technics > > in conventional/commercial way > > You lost me. > > I just want to correct something. When i said "might be understood by > all" i was just trying to say that what i pointed out, might be a > known, trivial thing, and that the comment on the filters was not > triggered by a miss read of analord to analog. > > I can just feel, this don't come out right. Basically i was just > trying to make a catch all, such that i didn't necessarily > insinuated that you infact did miss read, as it could well be that > you didn't. > > Sorry for being clumsy. > > I write off-list since im not sure this is of anyones interest as > such, i just wanted you to know what i meant. I try to be nice, but > clumsy can stop that alright. > > Best, steffen -- http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
