I can't see deviating from the MOTM standard. Why do it? I'm not sure why
the introduction of Buchla-style modules warrants a change in appearance
that was never considered for any other module or module clone.
As the fantastic success of Stooge Industries panels shows, a lot of us are
bending over backwards to make a lot of our other gear match our MOTM
modules in precise appearance, not just mounting sizes, but color, fonts,
labeling, spacing... so why now introduce a series of official modules that
breaks the styling consistency? Are banana and 1/8th" jacks next?
There have been many cases in the past where there has been a temptation to
break grid, go with smaller knobs, and so on because of ∗functional∗
demands, and we've all agonized and gotten creative to avoid doing that.
Here, we're talking about wrecking the uniformity out of... ∗what?∗
Frivolity? Boredom?
I guess I just don't understand why there's been such a rigid adherence to
the color scheme, styling, grid, etc. for all of these years, and now that
there are a few Buchla designs on the table, it's up for discussion.
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Schreiber [mailto:
synth1@...]
What I want discussion on is the front panel styling. One of the err..unique
aspects of the Buchla was that ∗every∗ module had a different front panel.
The SIZES were uniform multiples, and
in general flow was bottom-to-top-from the side :) Meaning:
a) Inputs on the bottom
b) CVs on the left side
c) outputs on the top
Some modules have everything on the top (filter banks, since there is no
CV).
So, what are thoughts about this? I want to still use the MOTM panels sizes.
But I can:
a) change color
b) add graphics
c) change knobs/add colored knobs
d) not be "on grid"
e) place jacks somewhere except across the bottom
Well??
Paul S.