OK, you have my vote also. Seth's layout is great - hope it can be done
or something close to it.
Honestly, I would probably buy it either way, but I'll be much much
happier with this layout w/ that big freq knob.
...jp
strohs56k wrote:
>--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Tony Karavidas" <tony@e...> wrote:
>
>
>>This was truly one of the most constructive emails I've read all
>>night. Seth, in a way of voicing his opinion about the current
>>layout, offered a nice alternative.
>>
>>
>
>I put a little more thought into this and I think I have some
>improvements.
>
>Here is the tweaked drawing:
>
>http://www.eskimo.com/~strohs/FSlayout3.GIF
>
>http://www.eskimo.com/~strohs/FSlayout3grid.GIF
>
>
>The second drawing (with grid in the name) shows the design on top of
>the "standard" MOTM grid lines.
>
>As you can see, this design actually fits pretty well on the MOTM
>grid. The big frequency knob is centered between what would be the
>upper four knob positions on the MOTM grid. And for the small knobs,
>the lowest row matches up vertically with the lowest row of knobs on
>the MOTM grid. The jack field is exactly on the grid.
>
>
>What I changed:
>
>Put the input jacks (signal and CV) in a group at the left and the
>outputs (local oscillator and shifted signals) in a group at the
>right. I think this is the normal left to right signal flow
>convention.
>
>I moved the fine shift knob to the right of the big shift knob. This
>better matches the convention of oscillators with the coarse tune on
>the left / fine tune on the right.
>
>I moved the gain knob to the left of the big shift knob. I think this
>better matches the left to right signal flow.
>
>The CV shift knob has therefor moved below the big shift knob. I
>think this has good association.
>
>The sine and cosine amplitude knobs (for the local oscillator outputs)
>are now on the left side. (This matches up with the local oscillator
>outputs in the jack field.)
>
>The up and down feedback knobs are now on the right side. (Again,
>matches up with the frequency shifted signal outputs in the jack
>field.)
>
>I moved all of the LEDs to the left side of the panel to match the new
>positions of their associated knobs.
>
>
>This version has a little less symmetry than my first stab but is much
>more logical in terms of signal flow and grouping of like
>functionality.
>
>Also, this might make things a little easier for Tony because there is
>a lot more space opened up between the lower set of knobs for
>components hidden behind the panel. Also, this is actually a little
>closer to his proposed design as far as knob grouping.
>
>
>Questions for Tony / I think some of these may have been asked and
>discussed previously but just in case...
>
>Because the design is "thru zero" - I assume a positive CV makes the
>up output up shifted (and down output down shifted) where as a
>negative CV makes the up output down shifted (and down output up
>shifted)
>
>If so, should the main shift knob be "bipolar" - no shift at center,
>negative CV to the left, positive CV to the right? (Should the fine
>shift knob also be a "bipolar" control with 0 at center?)
>
>Further, should the "freq CV" knob be a reversing attenuator? (Zero
>at center.)
>
>Can we have two more local oscillator outputs for inverse sine and
>inverse cosine?
>
>
>seth
>
>
>PS: yes, there was a FSlayout2.GIF but just as I was about to upload
>the drawing I decided I didn't really like it, pushed some stuff
>around again, and it became version 3 :)
>
>
>
>
>