I like to be able to understand a diagram without too much external
reference. I really do want labels for everything used, including the
jacks, pots, switches, and the type of module. I would like to be able
to understand it for the most part even if I don't have a MOTM.
When I draw my own patch diagrams, using a pencil and graph paper, I
make block diagrams of the modules and draw lines with arrows to
indicate patching. This shows the signal or control direction, which is
more detail than you would see in a photo. I label the inputs and
outputs. I jot notes about pot and switch settings. So my preference
would be for a less graphic, more schematic approach.
-Richard Brewster
Mike Estee wrote:
>http://orbelisk.com/clickless.pdf
>
>What do you folks think of this style? Yeah, I know it lacks labels but I
>think it's a little less cluttered this way, only showing that which makes
>the patch run. Comments? Thoughts? Any guesses why this is called
>"clickless"? ;)
>
>
>