[HAM] Is it is or is it ain't

[Organfreak]

At 11:27 AM 8/9/2006, Trevor Reynolds wrote:

>Just wondering if, the XK3 seemed to have all the balls, presence and vibe 
>(like all the propaganda purports it to have)of your beloved C3?

First I want to point out that all this is subjective. And it depends on 
how you set it up, And it depends on what you're used to from your oiler. 
Some have more balls than others. Some have very little.
I would say, it has 99% of it.

>  Or is it just a glorified XK2?

It is leaps and bounds better than that.

>Does the XK3 nail the sound that much better to warrant the layout in cash?

That depends on you. Personally, I wouldn't buy any instrument I hadn't 
played first. But for most fo0lks, the answer is yes.

>  Or is it just a case of planned obsolescence so the CEO of 
> Hammond/Suzuki can buy another yacht?

Now hold it right there. The person you are referring to has spent a good 
deal of his own fortune to get the new products on the market. If he ever 
makes any money on it, it will be a bonus well-deserved.

>  I know it's lighter so your don't need to go there and we all know that 
> any Leslie simulation that doesn't move air falls way short of the mark 
> as well.

Do we all know that? Yeah, I prefer my XK-3 hooked-up to my Leslies (be 
prepared to spend another ~$200 to make that happen), but I myself find the 
onboard simulator to be perfectly adequate.

>  I'm Just wondering specifically about the XK3 nailing the sound like 
> "they" say it does.  It either does or it doesn't.

I disagree. *You* have to try it and decide for yourself. And can 99% be 
"nailed."? Maybe.



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.8/415 - Release Date: 8/9/2006