While I don't think I'll be building a wogglebug myself, as I already
have PCB's for a number of unfinished projects, and a lack of panel
space, I would like to comment on this situation in general.
What people often seem to forget in these discussions, when adding
features to panel, is that a modular is modular.
Imho, bad UI decisions are when panel space is wasted (eg. no
attenuator for shape CV pn the MOTM-320 which has space for five more
knobs), or when it results in situations that cannot be overcome by
external modules (eg. missing a way to control a parameter, or access
to an input or output). This doesn't seem to be the case here.
So not knowing anything more about it, I would say that having two
single wogglebugs with separate panels is better than a double
wogglebug. If the extra outputs on the double unit are easily
obtainable by ring modulating outputs that would be already available
on single wogglebugs, then having a separate ring modulator would be
much more flexible. How often are you going to use these child
tones?? Not only could you use that ring modulator for whatever else
you wanted, but you might not even have to add one. If necessary, I can
already get two or three ring modulators out of what many people
would consider a relatively small modular.
On 3/16/08, Scott Deyo put forth:
>To get the Child tones, just ring mod two Wogglebugs. The Wiard unit
>RMs the Woggled Outs from two 'Bugs for one Child Tone, and the
>Smooth Tones from two 'Bugs for the other Child Tone. At least, I'm
>pretty sure.
>: )