In a message dated 9/20/99 11:36:46 PM,
jlarryh@... writes:
>Some might argue that even with one
>row, the number of jacks is still excessive. I cannot really see that
>many
>multiples being needed. However, this project is more about having those
>multiples in a handy location, which does suggest that one might end up
>with a few more than he really needs.
I find I often need to patch a single CV to 5 or more inputs (especially
keyboard or keyboard pressure, and gate and trigger outputs), so I would urge
you not to underestimate the need for multiples. I would suggest that it's
better to have unused multiples than to have too few.
That's why I agree with you comments below.
Keep up the thinkin!
JB
>The number really starts to sound more reasonable if you compare it to
>a
>MOTM system two rows high and 22 or so module-units wide. A single 1U
>multiple panel with standard MOTM spacing would yield 20 jacks (5 multiples
>of 4 each for example) If you had one of those in each row you would have
>40 jacks. If you compared that to a MOTM system two rows high with ONE
>of
>the horizontal multiples I suggested between the MOTM rows you see that
>the
>number of jacks is similar (44 compared to 40). However, the horizontal
>multiple in this example actually contacts the physical edge of every
>single MOTM module in the system.