[sdiy] Definition of Modular (regarding FatMan)

[Scott Gravenhorst]

Magnus Danielson <cfmd at bredband.net> wrote:
>From: Peter Grenader <peter at buzzclick-music.com>
>Subject: Re: [sdiy] Definition of Modular (regarding FatMan)
>Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 12:45:15 -0700
>Message-ID: <BF2E27DB.260A2%peter at buzzclick-music.com>
>
>> I think Peng's point defines 'large' or 'small' modular, amore than it's
>> it's 'top layer' description.
>> 
>> If not, then please somebody tell me what a Putney is - what category.  It
>> needs to be patched in order for it to do anything, yet you cannot move the
>> functional blocks around.  Does this make it just a patchable system?  Or a
>> non-modular patchable system?  The fact the it is broken into separate
>> functional blocks, or modules, that must be routed together externally
>> doesn't qualify it as a modular system?  I think so.
>
>Actually, with the Synthi you are a bit limited, so it is not quite there.
>Never the less, I love my Synthi for what it is. 
>
>To some degree this discussion is partly meaningless, we could end up with
>different answers depending on letting modular pertaining to functional modules
>in a set of modules or physical units. You can have virtual synth with a fixed
>set of modules but for which you can hook up in whatever way you want, that is
>still modular in the sense that you can hook those modules up as you want, but
>it is not modular in that you can pop in some new module. You could also
>consider an analogue synth with a programmable patch-matrix performing the same
>functionality altought all in analogue.
>
>With sufficient of plugs in and out of any form of box containing one or more
>modules you can hook up to any number of other boxes doing the same thing. One
>such box may be a physical module containing several instances of some
>particular function, which you can use independently as if they where fully
>modular except that they all sit in the same box. The good old modulars have
>several of these physical modules. The Formant for instance have a tripple LFO
>module, the Buchla 200 has a tripple "Gate" (VCA) and what about those Buchla
>source of uncertainty, that is actually several different noise sources crammed
>into the same physical module.
>
>The Buchla 259 Complex Oscillator is a physical module which contains several
>functional modules in a fixed-patched maner, yeat we view it as one module.
>
>No, there is no simple exact interpretation of what is a modular. Sorry.

Damn.  It seems it is a distinction without a meaningful difference.  

For me, it is conceptual anyway.  I look at a VCO as a module, a VCA as a module
- conceptually.  If they are made with a single PCB and front panel, some would
call it a "vco-vca" module, I would count it as 2 modules.  The fact that they
could be rearranged electrically, I would call "pachtability" and not modularity.  

>
>I go for the functional modularity since in the end, when I use a synthesizer
>which has the necessary functional modularity, that is what gives me the
>limitations and powers. Add a few modules or add another panel or whatever and
>I get mor functionality, but what I may see the difference is the grouping of
>those that I am forced to pay for. Full modularity comes at a price.
>
>Cheers,
>Magnus
>

---------------------------------------------------------
- Where merit is not rewarded, excellence fades.
- Hydrogen is pointless without solar.
- What good are laws that only lawyers understand?
- The media's credibility should always be questioned.
- The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist.
- Governments do nothing well, save collect taxes.

-- Scott Gravenhorst | LegoManiac / Lego Trains / RIS 1.5
-- Linux Rex         | RedWebMail by RedStarWare
-- FatMan: home1.gte.net/res0658s/fatman/
-- NonFatMan: home1.gte.net/res0658s/electronics/
-- Autodidactic Master of Arcane and Hidden Knowledge.