Golf Apps
in [Golf]
|
Prev: 59 with an asterisk?
Next: Golf as a sport article
From: Lloyd Parsons on 5 Aug 2010 20:40 In article <alangbaker-394DBB.17283605082010(a)news.shawcable.com>, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article <2010080519374130078-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>, > "R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote: > > > >>>> Of course technology can't quite replace TALENT. But in some cases, it > > >>>> can come pretty darn close. Just turn on the radio for all the proof > > >>>> you need. > > >>>> > > >>>> Randy > > >>> > > >>> Thanks to both of you for this info. > > >>> > > >>> I'm not particularly good at playing the organ, but I play good enough > > >>> for me to enjoy it. I will admit to using the 'automatics' on mine > > >>> quite a bit though. They fit right in with the older music I prefer to > > >>> play. > > >> > > >> Well, if you can play the organ, then all you need is a little $100 > > >> MIDI keyboard (which you can pick up at any Guitar Center), plug it > > >> into your Mac, and you can make music in GuitarBand. > > >> > > >> Randy > > > > > > Got one and have fiddled around with GarageBand but just never got the > > > whole loop based thing. > > > > > > As to organs, I have 4, 3 of which actually work and one which is > > > decorating the garage... :) > > > > Loops are just pre-produced grooves you can add (or not add). > > > > For the musically challenged, they come in handy. > > > > For someone who can actually play, I suppose they're another color on > > the palette, but you'd probably find yourself more inclined to create > > your own. > > > > Just a guess. > > What's useful about them even for experienced musicians is that it lets > you quickly create the parts of the music that are less important to the > the musician in question. In short, you can build yourself a basic > rhythm section on top of which you can build a song and then you can go > back and replace the basic looped rhythm with something better later. Yeah, but they don't do much for "Down by the Old Mill Stream", do they? -- Lloyd
From: Alan Baker on 5 Aug 2010 20:55 In article <lloydparsons-75108B.19400605082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote: > In article <alangbaker-394DBB.17283605082010(a)news.shawcable.com>, > Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > In article <2010080519374130078-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>, > > "R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>> Of course technology can't quite replace TALENT. But in some cases, > > > >>>> it > > > >>>> can come pretty darn close. Just turn on the radio for all the > > > >>>> proof > > > >>>> you need. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Randy > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks to both of you for this info. > > > >>> > > > >>> I'm not particularly good at playing the organ, but I play good > > > >>> enough > > > >>> for me to enjoy it. I will admit to using the 'automatics' on mine > > > >>> quite a bit though. They fit right in with the older music I prefer > > > >>> to > > > >>> play. > > > >> > > > >> Well, if you can play the organ, then all you need is a little $100 > > > >> MIDI keyboard (which you can pick up at any Guitar Center), plug it > > > >> into your Mac, and you can make music in GuitarBand. > > > >> > > > >> Randy > > > > > > > > Got one and have fiddled around with GarageBand but just never got the > > > > whole loop based thing. > > > > > > > > As to organs, I have 4, 3 of which actually work and one which is > > > > decorating the garage... :) > > > > > > Loops are just pre-produced grooves you can add (or not add). > > > > > > For the musically challenged, they come in handy. > > > > > > For someone who can actually play, I suppose they're another color on > > > the palette, but you'd probably find yourself more inclined to create > > > your own. > > > > > > Just a guess. > > > > What's useful about them even for experienced musicians is that it lets > > you quickly create the parts of the music that are less important to the > > the musician in question. In short, you can build yourself a basic > > rhythm section on top of which you can build a song and then you can go > > back and replace the basic looped rhythm with something better later. > > Yeah, but they don't do much for "Down by the Old Mill Stream", do they? Sadly, most of them seem to be aimed at modern pop music, yes... -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: bknight on 5 Aug 2010 21:04 On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 20:31:20 -0400, "R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote: > >What attitude? > >My attitude is directed at Microsoft and Windows. For Christ's sake Randy. It had nothing to do with your opinions about MS and Mac, but denigrating mine as if I was a recalcitrant student. > >I mean, do we have to take a poll to find out how many here believe >that you "take umbrage" whenever someone disagrees with you? This >isn't a new phenomenon. I was wrong. You're just as stubborn as Baker. You couldn't disagree with me about MS, you only disagreed that I knew what was best for me. > >I love ya, Bobby, but honestly, you'd have to read something into my >comments that just wasn't there to come away with the belief that I was >attacking YOU. My expressed opinions in this thread have been about >Microsoft and Windows, and what I perceive to be their inherant >inferiority to Apple and OS X. I'm not alone in that view. I have no problem with those views. Maybe you didn't intend to come off as telling me that I was stupid, but that is damned sure what I read. Incidentally, I'm not alone in the view that MS is the better way for me. Others feel that too. > >You can huff and puff all you want, but it's not going to change my >views. I've already been dragged over the hot coals as a Windows user, >so I know what it offers. > There isn't one instance where I attempted to change your views, but you sure let me know that they trumped mine on what I wanted to use. >You, on the outher hand, refuse to even try a Mac. Fine. That's your >perogative. But judging Mac from the vantage point of someone who >refuses to use one does not provide you with the most knowledgable >perspective on the subject. Now that's telling. You obviously DIDN'T read my responses. I have tried Macs and said so on a couple of occasions today. I guess you didn't care enough to take a break from telling me how dumb I am to even read what I said. I thought I'd try to clear this up with you, but it seems that I can't get through. As far as I'm concerned this matter is closed with you as well as Alan. Maybe some day I'll understand what owning a Mac does to people's psyche. BK
From: Alan Baker on 5 Aug 2010 21:08 In article <ijmm56lnjumhdsb6s0bm9jrcds3sjcbo7n(a)4ax.com>, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: > On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 20:31:20 -0400, "R&B" > <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote: > > > > > >What attitude? > > > >My attitude is directed at Microsoft and Windows. > > > For Christ's sake Randy. It had nothing to do with your opinions > about MS and Mac, but denigrating mine as if I was a recalcitrant > student. Bobby. Take a step back. Would you please take a moment to quote the worst example of this denigration you claim you received? > > > >I mean, do we have to take a poll to find out how many here believe > >that you "take umbrage" whenever someone disagrees with you? This > >isn't a new phenomenon. > > I was wrong. You're just as stubborn as Baker. You couldn't disagree > with me about MS, you only disagreed that I knew what was best for me. I can't speak for Randy, but what I disagreed with was your notion that you couldn't be missing that there were problems with your computing experience that you weren't noticing because you were too close to them to see. > > > >I love ya, Bobby, but honestly, you'd have to read something into my > >comments that just wasn't there to come away with the belief that I was > >attacking YOU. My expressed opinions in this thread have been about > >Microsoft and Windows, and what I perceive to be their inherant > >inferiority to Apple and OS X. I'm not alone in that view. > > I have no problem with those views. Maybe you didn't intend to come > off as telling me that I was stupid, but that is damned sure what I > read. Incidentally, I'm not alone in the view that MS is the better > way for me. Others feel that too. Yup. Mostly people who haven't even ever touched a Mac. You do agree that their opinions can be completely dismissed, right? > > > >You can huff and puff all you want, but it's not going to change my > >views. I've already been dragged over the hot coals as a Windows user, > >so I know what it offers. > > > There isn't one instance where I attempted to change your views, but > you sure let me know that they trumped mine on what I wanted to use. Nope. > > >You, on the outher hand, refuse to even try a Mac. Fine. That's your > >perogative. But judging Mac from the vantage point of someone who > >refuses to use one does not provide you with the most knowledgable > >perspective on the subject. > > Now that's telling. You obviously DIDN'T read my responses. I have > tried Macs and said so on a couple of occasions today. I guess you > didn't care enough to take a break from telling me how dumb I am to > even read what I said. How much trying did you really do? How many hours use in the last 5 years: even one? > > I thought I'd try to clear this up with you, but it seems that I can't > get through. > > As far as I'm concerned this matter is closed with you as well as > Alan. Maybe some day I'll understand what owning a Mac does to > people's psyche. But of course, that's not denigrating to Randy or I, right Bobby? -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Felicity on 5 Aug 2010 21:17
bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 20:31:20 -0400, "R&B" > <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote: > > > > > >What attitude? > > > >My attitude is directed at Microsoft and Windows. > > > For Christ's sake Randy. It had nothing to do with your opinions > about MS and Mac, but denigrating mine as if I was a recalcitrant > student. > > > >I mean, do we have to take a poll to find out how many here believe > >that you "take umbrage" whenever someone disagrees with you? This > >isn't a new phenomenon. > > I was wrong. You're just as stubborn as Baker. You couldn't disagree > with me about MS, you only disagreed that I knew what was best for me. > > > >I love ya, Bobby, but honestly, you'd have to read something into my > >comments that just wasn't there to come away with the belief that I was > >attacking YOU. My expressed opinions in this thread have been about > >Microsoft and Windows, and what I perceive to be their inherant > >inferiority to Apple and OS X. I'm not alone in that view. > > I have no problem with those views. Maybe you didn't intend to come > off as telling me that I was stupid, but that is damned sure what I > read. Incidentally, I'm not alone in the view that MS is the better > way for me. Others feel that too. > > > >You can huff and puff all you want, but it's not going to change my > >views. I've already been dragged over the hot coals as a Windows user, > >so I know what it offers. > > > There isn't one instance where I attempted to change your views, but > you sure let me know that they trumped mine on what I wanted to use. > > >You, on the outher hand, refuse to even try a Mac. Fine. That's your > >perogative. But judging Mac from the vantage point of someone who > >refuses to use one does not provide you with the most knowledgable > >perspective on the subject. > > Now that's telling. You obviously DIDN'T read my responses. I have > tried Macs and said so on a couple of occasions today. I guess you > didn't care enough to take a break from telling me how dumb I am to > even read what I said. > > I thought I'd try to clear this up with you, but it seems that I can't > get through. > > As far as I'm concerned this matter is closed with you as well as > Alan. Maybe some day I'll understand what owning a Mac does to > people's psyche. > > BK Good lord Jesus. Let it go. BAWAWAWAWAWA! |