Sending again, as this didn't seem to get posted.
Richard Brewster wrote:
> For this application I want to use passive simple attenuators. I
> already have two Oakley Multi-Mix and two Blacet Mixers with
> reversible, center-off, active attenuators. These lack the simplicity
> of a pot that just goes from zero to 100 percent. I have a number of
> non-attenuated CV inputs on various modules where I'd just like to
> patch a passive attenuator.
>
> Richard Brewster
> http://www.pugix.com
>
> David Moylan wrote:
>> I like this idea but wouldn't 3 attenu-verters be more useful? Could
>> probably be done with an MUUB.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> Scott Deyo wrote:
>>> That could easily be done, but they'll have to wait a bit until the
>>> current run is finished and paid for.
>>>
>>> Good idea!
>>>
>>> I was also planning on making one for DotCom cabinets, a partial
>>> width for all those MOTMers using DotCom cabs.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Scott Deyo
>>> The Bridechamber
>>> contact@...
>>> http://www.bridechamber.com
>>> Jealous Edison Record Kompany
>>> http://www.jealousedison.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 27, 2009, at 6:09 PM, Richard Brewster wrote:
>>>
>>> I've realized that I could use some passive attenuators. Just 100K
>>> linear pots wired to jacks for in and out. Three could fit on a 1U
>>> MOTM-format panel in the same configuration as an Oakley
>>> Multi-Mix. I
>>> can easily make a FPE panel design for this, but wouldn't this be
>>> a nice
>>> addition to Bridechamber?
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> -Richard Brewster
>>> http://www.pugix.com
>>>