I guess I could live with either 10Ux1U or 3Ux5U but I think I would end up
using such a module "differently" if it was 10Ux1U since I would think of
it more as an "external/effects" module than as a synthesis module. For
example, if a phaser is a separate device from your modular, you tend to
view it as something that process the "whole" sound of the device more
frequently than as something that you would use as a filter-like component
in a sound/patch.
It is possible to break this mindset and that's part of what doing modular
synthesis is all about so I don't feel that it would kill me to see a
10Ux1U module.
However, if you do make it a 10Ux1U unit, please, please, please make
parallel sets of jacks available on the front and back panels! I think
part of the difficulty of using the MoogerFooger pedals well in a modular
system is that the jacks are hidden on the back and you "forget" that you
have more control available. That and the fact that I can never find the
right place to set them down!
BTW, I do like the idea of making a 10Ux5U MOTM "effects" package. This
could include the 410, 120, and 320, etc. It might be a bit pricey for the
usual "effects" crowd though. Sigh, why do economics always have to get in
the way!
Eric
At 07:41 PM 11/22/99 -0600, Paul Schreiber wrote:
>From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
>Time for an opinion poll:
>
>Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could be
>either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
>In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
>a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
>b) more features than the 3U wide
>c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
>d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit in 1U tall.
>
>I really don't want 2 versions, and right now ∗really∗ tempted to do it as a
>1U to get
>possible more sales.
>
>It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
>Well?
>
>Paul S.
>
>>
>