Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: Modular Synth Panels

previous by date index next by date
previous in topic topic list next in topic

Subject: Re: [ModularSynthPanels] New poll for ModularSynthPanels

From: Richard Brewster <pugix@...>
Date: 2009-08-23

What about moving up the rotary switches to align with the pots oneither side and locating the CV Invert toggle switches right below therotaries, also between and aligned with two pots?  All jacks at thebottom.  There would be space for a second CV input for each filter.  This would be a variant of the horizontal design, placing all thecontrols for each filter together, but isolating the jacks at thebottom, MOTM-style.

Richard Brewster
http://pugix.com

Scott Deyo wrote:
Well, the way I see it we need at minimum, for each filter, four pots,a rotary or something like that, and three jacks. 

Four-position slide? It's defo non-MOTM standard...

Scott Deyo
The Bridechamber
Jealous Edison Record Kompany




On Aug 22, 2009, at 5:50 PM, Scott K Warren wrote:

Definitely nomoving jacks above pots! Very important part of the MOTM layout style.


What if the Mode switch were a4-position slide switch? Would it fit beside the CV Invert switch tomake a 2U layout? I see from the schematic that it's only single pole,and SP4T slide switches are readily available. For instance Digi-Keyhas this one for $2:


If it wouldn't fit, could wereplace the CV Invert switch by a switch on the Frequency CV pot, tomake more room for the Mode slide switch? Maybe a switched pot is alittle easier to find than concentric ones? For instance Digi-Key hasthis 100K linear carbon switched pot for $3.50:


I'd really like a 2U layout.

skw


On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:48 PM,Scott Deyo wrote:



Yeah, I always balk at moving jack above pots, though that's a littlesilly. If you have more than one row of modules, you're going to getcords over your pots anyway, right? 
What do others feel about this?

I really wanted to do 2U, but Idon't think folks (and I count myself as one of these folks) haveaccess to concentric pots. 

Scott Deyo
The Bridechamber
Jealous Edison Record Kompany




On Aug 22, 2009, at 3:55 PM,John L Rice wrote:


Wow,tough call!  If I were doing it for myself, I would do one of twothings. If I went with the horizontal version I’d go off the standardMOTM grid and move filter A’s jacks up into the section with thecontrols and move section B down a bit etc. But if I really was goingto build this I would do the vertical design but in 2U instead of 3U bycombining the Frequency and Frequency CV controls into a dualconcentric pot (if possible), moving the Mode switches down to wherethe Frequency CV controls were and then move the Input jacks up and theOutput jacks over underneath the Input jacks.

 

JohnL  Rice

 

From: ModularSynthPanels@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:ModularSynt hPanels@yahoogro ups.com] 
Sent: Saturday,August 22, 2009 1:16 PM
To: ModularSynthPanels@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: [ModularSynthPanels ] New poll for ModularSynthPanels

 

 


Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the 
ModularSynthPanels group:

For an MOTM-format CGS Dual CMOS Filter, do you prefer the vertical orhorizontal layout?
They're in the Proposed Bridechamber Designs folder. 

o Vertical 
o Horizontal 

To vote, please visit the following web page:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/ModularSyn thPanels/ surveys?id= 2220793 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!