Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: MOTM

previous by date index next by date
previous in topic topic list next in topic

Subject: Re: Call me crazy

From: "Tentochi" <tentochi@...
Date: 1999-07-08

I like having the idea of having a 19" 1U mult in the MOTM style. I have a
patch bay in my pop-up SKB, but that is more for pass throughs. That would
have me some MOTM acreage and be conveniently located. I have told Paul a
couple of times that several passthroughs on the mult (or somewhere)would be
a great advantage to me--especially for MID-to-CV and effects. Is anyone
else out there using the SKB pop-up yet (which the MOTM was designed for)?

When I am ready to use my third set of rails, I may purchase the 5U SKB
which isn't like their regular cases. They also have a 3U in the same
style. They are cheaper than SKB's regular case, have a different forming
process, are shallower, and have a different handle configuration.

Has anyone reverse mounted their PSU yet? Some of the SKBs come with rack
mount rails on both the front and back of the cases. Mounting the PSU on
the back is a great idea for me freeing up 3 MOTM spaces! Suggestions?
Experiences? Perhaps I have to do a custom job mounting the PSU...

Love my '420s!


> -----Original Message-----
> From: J. Larry Hendry [mailto:jlarryh@...]
> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 1999 12:37 AM
> To:
> Subject: [motm] Call me crazy, BUT
> From: "J. Larry Hendry" <jlarryh@...>
> OK, I have been thinking (a dangerous thing for Larry of the 3 stooges)
> about the ultimate configuration for my MOTM set up. I have been toying
> with case designs and thinking about multiples and such. And, I have been
> thinking about the one thing that I guess many modular users think about
> and that is all those cables hanging out there on the front between me and
> all those great knobs I want to twist and tweak.
> Well, one of the things I have heard others mention is some normalizing to
> reduce cables. But, as neat as that may be, it runs against my general
> wishes since I have plenty of synths that are "normal." I plan to connect
> my MOTM stuff in all the abnormal ways I can think of.
> On Synth-DIY, I have seen a variety of panel layouts where guys have
> attempted to place all patching in areas away from knobs and such. But, I
> don't like that as you have to struggle to figure out what jack is with
> what module. I really like the layout of MOTM with the jacks all on the
> bottom of the panel and knobs and switches above ( along with other great
> things I like about MOTM). If one's entire MOTM set up included
> only a few
> modules in a single row, the patch cables would always be at the
> bottom out
> of the way. Of course, once you have more than one row (whether rack or
> case) then you are back to cables stretched across the tweaking area.
> Now, here is where my warped idea comes into play. I am throwing this out
> not to suggest "my perfect plan." But, rather to get some feedback on:
> 1 - what others might like or dislike about the concept
> 2 - any and all suggestions for improvement
> 3 - what plans others might have that are different / better
> Here's my thought. Instead of making my multiples in MOTM rack space
> units, make them on 19" blank rack panels. I have some that I bought
> (about $7 each) that have a nice black finish with the splattered look of
> Paul's panels (not as nice of course) and have the top and bottom edges
> rolled back for strength so there is NO flex like some of the 19" blank
> panels that are just flat stock. The number of jacks and combinations
> could be whatever each thinks is right for their system. My plan was not
> to group the multiples, but to distribute them. Like this:
> Below each row of MOTM panels is a one rack space panel with nothing but
> 1/4" Switchcraft jacks. The drilling and spacing is made to
> match the ones
> on the MOTM panels above. So, you could have as many as 40 jacks on that
> panel. Multiple # 1 could have a jack in each of the 5 double MOTM
> positions across the panel. You could have as many as 8 multiples like
> this on a 19" panel. However, this panel would be wired with coax to the
> every other 19" rack panel. So, Multiple # 1 would have appearances on
> every 19" panel in the system below each row of modules. Multiple # 2
> would be the same and so on. The number of jacks per multiple could be
> varied by user needs and desires. BUT, every multiple number would appear
> on every 19" panel at least once.
> So, instead of patching module # A on row # 3 across two rows to module B
> on row # 1 with a long cable, module # A would connect to multiple # 1
> directly below it and module # B would connect to multiple # 1 also on the
> 19" panel row directly below it. Two cables would be used. BUT, all
> cables in such a set up would be shorter and none would stretch across the
> "land-o-knobs-and-switches." Now, this set up would not eliminate direct
> module to module connections. I plan to arrange my modules to facilitate
> some of that (you know, an EG right next to the VCA and one next to the
> VCFs). However, it would eliminate long cross country cables.
> This same 19" panel with the multiples could have those connections from
> other rack gear that is on the back you want moved to the front. For
> example, many of you may plan to have MIDI 2 CV converters or rack mount
> effects with rear jacks you want patched to the front. And, if necessary,
> these 1-space 19" panels can have XLR connectors or switches mounted. I
> have one in my studio with XLRs (drilling the holes was a bitch for that
> BTW).
> OK, I think that is enough to get the idea across. Now, lets hear from
> some others (especially Curley and Moe). Throw tomatoes if you like, but
> keep those fingers to yourself (Moe).
> Later,
> Larry Hendry
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
> ONElist: your connection to online communities.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------