Hey,
I vote for the 3 space Super Ladder filter panel. You can check out Daves
panel design on his MOTM webpage. FAT!!! This is MODULAR baby and I want to
be able to jam as many cables into and out of this thing as it can handle.
If the features are on the board, lets use them. I know that space is an
issue for some of you guys, but c'mon. This filter will likely kick ass in
your system and after spending all of the time and effort to DIY the thing
out, wouldn't you like to have the full utility of the module as it was
designed to be used? Functionality vs 1u space = Functionality everytime.
Just my opinion,
Thomas White
>From: mate_stubb@...
>Reply-To: motm@yahoogroups.com
>To: motm@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [motm] Superladder/Multiladder - 3U vs 2U (long)
>Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 17:55:16 -0000
>
>--- In motm@y..., Stooge Barlow wrote:
> >
> > Am I the only one that sees the utility of a 1U 4 knob Oakley AD/AR
> > module? I think this would be much more useful than the triple 2U
> > version with shared AD and AR controls.
>
>In a word, YES<g>. Everybody else wants multiple ARs instead. We can
>probably accomodate you with a one-off sometime. Email me privately.
>
> > Hey Moe, (or anybody), tell us what you would imagine a 3U
> > SuperLadder to feature -- it seems that the MOTM 2U have good
> > control features and don't really need that many more. OTOH the
> > MultiLadder might need a 3U panel to allow all the internal
> > patching/switching kind of stuff.
>
>This is a good time to talk about 3U vs 2U for the Superladder.
>
>Have you looked at Tony's 3U layout for the Superladder? It contains
>the following controls in common with a 440:
>FREQ POT
>RES POT
>3 AUDIO POTS
>2 CV POTS
>3 AUDIO INPUTS
>1V/OCT INPUT
>2 CV INPUTS
>RES CV INPUT
>4 POLE LP (MAIN) OUT
>
>In addition, there is a free onboard VCA that is set up to modulate a
>dedicated EG input. So his layout adds:
>ENV INPUT
>ENV POT
>ENV MOD INPUT
>ENV MOD POT
>
>Since he has extra space to work with, might as well add an
>attenuator on the resonance cv:
>RES CV POT
>
>Finally, the Superladder has two extra filter outputs:
>BANDPASS OUT
>1 POLE LP OUT
>
>So, let's see what we could cram into 2U, and what we'd have to give
>up. Assume we take the first group on faith - 3 input and 2 cv
>attenuators, res input. What we have looks just like the 440 except
>for the switch. You could fit 2 jacks into that space. To me, the
>bandpass and 1P lowpass would be the most valuable features to
>retain. So you'd basically throw away the vca and associated controls.
>
>Now, what about the MultiLadder? If it was just me building for
>myself, I'd make a 3U panel. In that extra width I'd add a 4 input
>dedicated mixer (no input jacks), inputs hardwired to the 4 separate
>outputs. A single output jack would carry the mix response. The
>inputs would use reversing attenuators just like the MultiMix. In
>fact, a 4 pot version of the multimix would be perfect. By adding and
>subtracting differing amounts of the various outputs, you could
>achieve a wide variety of responses.
>
>Another thing you could do, is make the filter output mixer a
>separate 1U panel, that would mount right next to the MultiLadder.
>You'd have to normal its inputs by hardwiring them to the
>multiladder's jacks.
>
>Anybody want to debate the design of these two panels?
>
>Moe
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com