Re: RC-50 FEEDBACK WORKS

[Paul Richards <paulrichard10@adelphia.net>]

//Really at this point why bother monkeying around with 
the RC-20 when a used Repeater can be purchased with 
is's own flawed OS?//

It's the RC-50 I believe you're referring to? A disadvantage of using the 
Repeater is that of its hardware reliability, IMHO compared to the RC-50. 
Also, the RC-50 doesn't need a Behringer MIDI pedal (and the programming) 
needed to control it.

The argument about feedback seems to be like someone complaining that a 
automobile is useless because it doesn't have a truckbed.  So what? Many 
folks don't need a truckbed (or feedback).
--
Paul Richards

---- mark sottilaro <zerocrossing2001@yahoo.com> wrote: 
> I agree.  As much as I wanted to love the RC-20 for
> it's form factor alone, I want to find someone at
> Roland and punch them for not bothering to include
> what a lot of people consider base functionality.
> 
> Really at this point why bother monkeying around with
> the RC-20 when a used Repeater can be purchased with
> is's own flawed OS? ;)  The quirky Repeater still
> seems to be a better product than the RC-20 from what
> I can see.  If you really need something on the floor
> you're probably better off with an Electro-Harmonix
> 2880, no?
> 
> --- Charles Zwicky <cazwicky@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Seriously, that workaround is as arcane as roland's
> > O/S is to begin 
> > with. It hasn't changed my mind about the flawwed
> > RC-50...
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
>