> From: "Tentochi" <tentochi@...>
>
> Lots of Switchcraft jacks!!! Aluminum!!! 1U only!!!
> No bends!!! No additional screws visible on front panel.
> Have the shop work up a 19" 1U panel and see how it
> acts. The lots of jacks should stiffen it a little. A welded
> crossmember is the best solution for me for support.
I have to respectfully disagree here. 1U Aluminum without the bends at the
top and bottom will be too flimsey unless you have 1/4" thick. And, the
more jacks you add, the worse it gets. I have some I U steel panels that
have bends at the top and bottom that are almost invisible. You can fill
these with holes and they are still nice and stiff. They key to the
stiffness is the bend at both the top and bottom. Sure a welded cross
member would do 1/2 as good. But, do you really want that in the way of
creative drilling and such?
> What will the DC source do for me?
Maybe use it as a DC bias to add to an AC signal on a module input.
However, with all the features of MOTM, bias is not the necessary evil that
I found with my PAiA. However, I still like the idea of a CV source. You
could have a joystick or other resistive controller to patch between the CV
source and the modules under CV control. Now, can we say "wah-wah pedal?"
From:
JWBarlow@... > OK Larry, I'm not sure I followed the specifics of your
> idea, but it really got me (and more importantly Paul)
> thinking.
Ahem... That was the whole idea.
> For these and other reasons, I've begun to think about
> moving away from the 19A rack mounting and going
> towards a Moog 35 style. It occurred to me that with even
> a two row system, there will be many cords hanging over
> knobs (BTW Larry, just in case you don't know, the basic
> synth layout has signals going from left to right with CVs
> coming in from the bottom -- the ARP 2600 has a good
> panel layout IMHO).
John, I agree. I do not plan to keep my MOTM in a 19" panel. However,
when I do move to a wooden Moog style cabinet, I will have places in that
cabinet for 19" rack stuff. I already have 4 pieces of rack gear that will
be in my MOTM cabinet (31 bank single space EQ, TSR-12 digital effects,
Kenton MIDI2CV, and {close your little peepers Paul} my modified and
appearance enhanced PAiA vocoder). So, regardless of cabinet style, I
think the ability to have some 19" gear in the same cabinet is a plus.
Concerning synth layout, yes I have noticed the general order of the
universe. And, I have certainly given considerable though to how my system
would be similar and different than that.
> I'm really interested in the way this
> discussion is developing, so here's my basic idea:
> A couple of weeks ago I floated an idea about an
> undedicated 1U MOTM prepunched panel (I'll call
> it the 900-X) with 16 holes and no jacks. The thought
> being that it would allow each user to custom design
> the panel for any particular function (e.g., patchbay,
> multiples, adapters, etc.) I think this might be somewhat
> better than a standard 19" 1U panel since it would be
> compatible with 5U MOTM standard. Also these panels
> would probably cost only a bit more than the blank 1U
> MOTM panel, so they wouldn't be that expensive for the
> users (maybe Paul could sell 16 jacks as an option too).
> Of course it would be nice if such a panel had little label
> holders (like on a real patchbay or like what's on little file
> drawers) for obvious reasons.
> As a patchbay example, if one had a two row system
> which was about 20U wide, one could have two 900-X units
> (one in each row, one above the other) which have say, four
> jacks from the lower unit connected to the upper unit. This
> would allow a signal to be transferred from the lower to the
> upper level (or vice versa) without those pesky cords interfering
> with one's artistically inspired twiddling of knobs. Not really
> normalled, but a good way to get around the cord/knob problem.
This is exactly what I meant John with the 19 inch panel below each row.
What you proposed is the same with just a slightly different format. What
really determine which format would be best for each would be the size of
ones system and the format of the case. For example, I have my MOTM right
now in a 44 space rack that is about 7 foot tall and only 8" deep with a
closed back and sides (back removable). Your idea would be cool for that
ststem with one of those 16 jack panels in every other row (4 total) taking
very little real estate and having 1/2 of each panel very near the
elevation of that row's MOTM jacks. In any case, we are talking about the
same thing. As far as the jack's they are not that expensive if you buy in
quantity. I ordered the exact same jack Paul uses in the MOTM (got the
number from Paul) from Mouser. I bought 100 of them and will use them in
MOTM and other projects in a hurry. I think I paid about $1.30 each.
> Now Larry, if by normalled, you mean actually
> connecting (soldering) the 19" 1U jacks DIRECTLY
> to the MOTM IN/OUT jacks, let me strongly discourage you
> from doing this until you've had your system in one configuration
> for a good long time.
No discouragement required. I intend to have NOTHING normalled. The only
thing I plan to have "normal" is modules, that will "normally" be
connected, positioned so that thoses "normal" connections are short and out
of the way. For example, I cannot imagine too many patches where my VCF
will not have an EG connected in some way. Therefore, one of my EGs will
be in close proximity to each VCF (like maybe one in between pairs of VCFs)
> John "I just got about 2' of Curly hair cut off my head
> and I can't do a thing with it." Barlow
Your lucky Moe didn't get a hold of it or you would have none left.
OK, let's here more opinions and ideas. Come on gang.
Larry (I've got more hair than you) Hendry