mojkarma?!…:-) Well, you get an A+ for determination LOL! This is kind of long, but only because I addressed each of your points, as well as quoting you…And here we go….again
Ok,
since some "pro" debaters are even asking me to delete my posts because they strangely consider it as a battle against them or the FG (what a nonsense), ill make my points clear once more
IT WAS A JOKE!!!
What are you trying to do here? You have no facts, your theories are flawed and you keep forgetting who said what first. At this point you’re just trying to save-face and you don’t seem to understand that facts can not be defeated. Again, all arguments have a foundation, and the point is to push the argument in your direction so that it seem that you are right even if your are wrong.
But the facts are invincible…and I can just keep repeating what I have already said unless by some miracle God changes the facts involved here. So repeat it all you want but you can not win your argument.
Point 1. Again, I am not saying that the G is the best workstation for anyone in anyway at all. As I said…no matter what….a belief can never be untrue. So of coarse I am fine with your opinions (beliefs).
However…If one car is faster then another or has better gas mileage etc, then those things are facts and can be used to determine superiority according to the purpose for each feature and part…period. In other words, no matter what you want the G to do, in most categorizers, it will do it better than it’s rivals. It’s like saying, if you want to win a race, the car with the faster, most balanced, most efficient parts etc will help you win over the car with the same inferior parts.
Point 2. You do remember that you responded to my first post here right? Then I responded to your response to my post. The next move was yours…(how many time do I have to say this).
In other words, you would have never been asked anything by me if you did not speak to me first!
Point 3. That is not the way it went…You said…
The sampler is incomplete. The basic function for creating proper loops - crossfade loop - is missing. Without it, it is simply impossible to create a loop on a wave without clicking. Especially on acoustic instruments. Kurzweil has it, Korg has it,
Then I said, Now prove that Roland did not intend to make those things as they are on the G in order to cut cost (for example)…..Because there is a huge list of features that are on the G which are not on the gear you mentioned etc etc…read it again. In other words, you can not prove that Roland did not intend to make the sampler as it is in order to balance price, performance, features...ect. And if they intended to make it as it is then…(drum roll)..it‘s not incomplete! And, you are unintentionally spreading lies…which I am trying to stop to help you.
Point 4 is fine…And no one said you were a troll…TWA said
You've actually been very reasonable.
And I agree…I never knew you to be a whiner at all, and I don’t see this as whining…I understand…but know when to stop.
Point 5. All actions have an equal and opposite reaction...do as you wish. But, be prepared for the reactions of others. Public places have rules (and unwritten rules) that must be followed. But you can choose to break the law and suffer the consequences which are issued by those responsible for keeping the peace.
Rules are rules my friend…and they are put in place to keep you safe or to prevent chaos.
Point 6 is fine, and it is ok to say,
I like the keyboard but I still have some complaints about it
But I do not feel it’s ok to say,
The sampler is incomplete. The basic function for creating proper loops - crossfade loop - is missing.
You have no facts and such statements hurt us all more than help us. So I choose to speak out, that’s my choice. But I do feel it would be fine to say… I would like Roland to add a feature (whatever it may be). But use the proper channels…A wish list thread or make it clear that this is just something you personally want. And do not make claims that Roland should of had the features you want already, or claims that the G is incomplete etc. Because you have no proof and someone here will most likely point that out.
Point 7 would not happen if my response to point 6 was respected.
Point 8. Each company can only put their best effort into creating a competitive and desirable product. And the consumer must ensure that their best efforts are put into buying the product that best meets their needs at the time of purchase.
In other words, just do your best to make sure that the workstation has what you need. And that those things work properly. You can visit the music store as often as you like to confirm that the workstation meets your requirement.
Point 9. You can say whatever you like but read my response to point 5. And the moderators didn’t jump on you at all…And if they do it’s because a member (continuously) breaks a rule or just to correct them because they are wrong about something.
And I didn’t jump on you until you jumped on me first…read the first page.
Point 10. Read my response to point 3 again (see how we are just repeating). But just so you don’t have to go back…. You can not prove that Roland did not intend to make the sampler, effects ect as they are in order to balance price, performance, features...ect. And if they intended to make those features as they are then…(drum roll)..it‘s not incomplete! And, you are unintentionally spreading lies..
Now, guys, it's up to you if you want to argue further with me trying to prove how wrong I am, that I can leave or that I will be banned.
Again...You spoke to me first…So who was trying to prove who wrong?
Whatever you do, the FG will not be a better keyboard, neither for you, nor for me.
Errrrumm??? The Fantom-G is the better keyboard for me (that was easy). And you can make your own choice.
But the facts are still in place…And as I said, they can not be defeated.
Thanks Mojkarma…and calm down…LOL
A valiant effort my friend
