At 6:32 PM -0400 4/14/03, Paul Haneberg wrote:
>
>Okay, an explanation:
>
>First off, building a case with those proportions was not my idea, I'm just
>commenting on someone else's idea.
I think it was my idea.
>A 200U case would not only be large it would also be quite heavy, perhaps
>weighing 400 or 500 lbs. If the power supply were included.
Yes, but only with Earth gravity :)
>It might be possible to go to 8" deep instead of 10" if you didn't
>include any Blacet conversions.
I have a TM and MW so I need the extra space.
>Secondly, the "16" would be at right angles to the 1, 4 and 9. The case
>would be 4 dimensional.
Oh right!! I was thinking of the primate perceptual rendering in the
movie. On cold days I could program my MOTM in my klein bottle hat :)
At 10:14 PM -0400 4/14/03,
jwbarlow@... wrote:
>
>I think Moe has the best idea in cabinet size and style -- 18U wide
>by 4 MOTM rows. I seem to remember he came to this conclusion as it
>was about as big as he could "easily" move. I had asked Larry about
>looking into something like this shape when he first started talking
>about cabinet kits.
I agree that wider is better for studio use, and I could have a
flight case built to those dimensions, but it would much more
expensive -- not only would I need a custom case, I would also need
custom rails.
At this point I'm thinking two 20U cases. Given the backlog, it
might be a year or more before all of the modules are available. So
I could just leave the bottom 5U empty for now, then put both cases
up on something after the bottom rows are full. Side by side that
would be 20 MOTM units wide, similar to 18. Maybe Moe has shorter
arms :)
Then, if I need to fit even more modules, I could put the interfaces
and power supply in a separate case.
--
"To Albert Einstein, time and space meant everything.
To Paul Schreiber, time and space mean nothing."