In a message dated 2/1/2000 7:19:10 AM,
Ken.Tkacs@... writes:
>Regarding all of this [confusing without pictures] talk about rails and
>cabinets, what timeframe are we talking about for these things actually
>becoming available?
Thanks much for the PDF! Like Moe, I really like the look of the IIIP style
you're after -- but the thought of building one cabinet (let alone three) is
not one that I relish. But I too want to have some idea about a time frame
for these rails, since I'm currently out of cabinet space for MOTM. When
Paul, when?
>I ask because I'm close to turning my attention to building my cabinets
>now
>that I have modules built & scattered loose all over my studio. I was
>figuring I'd have to develop a custom solution, but if we are close to
>having "official" MOTM rails available, it would alter my plans.
This is why I recently started thinking (again) about using the 22U rails
I've mentioned before.
>What I ∗was∗ going to do was get a bunch of 10u 19" rack rails and use
>regular rack screws rather than the ones that ship with the modules. But
>if
>there are better rails coming down the pike, I'd rather use the supplied
>screws (smaller heads, for one thing).
I know you've mentioned the 10U rails before. Let me suggest putting the
standard MOTM rack rails in a vice and bending the ears back by 90 degrees so
that those could be used as a way to mount the rails against the sides of the
cabinet. This seems like a perfect solution to me. In fact, between you and
the oak/rosewood inlay (was that Dave T.'s cabinet?) that also used the 10U
wide approach, I'm still thinking about doing a cabinet similar to this --
but mine would slope up (at the bottom), go vertical (in the middle), slope
back (above) to give it that flight engineer look -- but maybe 5 panels.
>I know that you don't want to get into stocking too many different sizes
>of
>rail-completely understandable. It seems that a lot of folks on this list
>want to build big honking Moog 55 style cabinets. Unfortunately for me,
>I
>need something that is smaller & more flexible ('modular,' if you will)
>and
>can be reconfigured, transported... I was designing something more along
>the
>lines of Moog IIIp cabinets.
Larry and I (and others I believe) are thinking more about the Moog 35 look
(two rows as opposed to three) which would only be about 50% heavier than the
IIIP type cabinet you're thinking of.
I've never got the hang of that Moog way of numbering models. Is it IIIP =
three portable cabinets; 35 and 55 = 35 and 55 modules respectively?
John (I always "knew" the ARP 2600 was called that since they seemed to cost
about $2600) Barlow