Modular Synth Panels

hey all,

www.bridechamber.com is up. there are a couple layout issues on the right frame of the
module pages -- the 'add to cart' or release dates are at the bottom. whoops! but you get
the idea. :)

thanks,
scott

Hi,

are the PCBs and the kits RoHS compatible?

And for the frontplate for the Ken Stone Wave Multiplier:
http://www.bridechamber.com/wavemult_big.html

The web site says:
"An AD33 ring mod has been added for extra fun."

I think with AD33 you meant AD633. ;-)

And I think this is not a very useful "extra fun" because
a ring modulator needs X and Y ins.

I would find it more useful to remove these two drills
and instead move the Grinder drills one step lower
so that an additional pot for the "LWF in" can be put there.

Just my 2 cents.

But I already have a PCB for the Papareil Warp633,
so I don't need an additional AD633 ring modulator.

The picture shows the panel in .com format, right?

Thanks,
Joachim


Am 19.08.2006 um 20:49 schrieb Scott Deyo:

> hey all,
>
> www.bridechamber.com is up. there are a couple layout issues on the
> right frame of the
> module pages -- the 'add to cart' or release dates are at the bottom.
> whoops! but you get
> the idea. :)
>
> thanks,
> scott
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hello,

They are not RoHS compatible, no. Some parts are still unavailable as
such (at least that I can find), and the PCBs are not anyways, so...
The panels are RoHS, though. No chrome treatment involved.

AD633, yes. The LWF input is connected as the "modulator". Also, "LWF
Fold" _is_ the input control, as the folder reacts to the level of the
input; thus 'level' and 'fold' happen at the same time.

The nice thing about the panel is that you can use whatever ring mod
you like -- I took care not to specify. I use the 633 for ease of use,
and that it fits in the proto area on the PCB. You can throw in
whatever you like -- Ken's passive ring mod (use the proto area on the
wavefolder PCB for output amplifying, or for carrier zeroing), an MS-20
style digital ring mod, a 1496 ring mod, a Green Ringer clone, a
tube-based ring mod... ;)


Scott Deyo
The Bridechamber
contact@...
www.bridechamber.com

On Aug 23, 2006, at 3:21 PM, Joachim wrote:

> Hi,
>
> are the PCBs and the kits RoHS compatible?
>
> And for the frontplate for the Ken Stone Wave Multiplier:
> http://www.bridechamber.com/wavemult_big.html
>
> The web site says:
> "An AD33 ring mod has been added for extra fun."
>
> I think with AD33 you meant AD633. ;-)
>
> And I think this is not a very useful "extra fun" because
> a ring modulator needs X and Y ins.
>
> I would find it more useful to remove these two drills
> and instead move the Grinder drills one step lower
> so that an additional pot for the "LWF in" can be put there.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> But I already have a PCB for the Papareil Warp633,
> so I don't need an additional AD633 ring modulator.
>
> The picture shows the panel in .com format, right?
>
> Thanks,
> Joachim
>
> Am 19.08.2006 um 20:49 schrieb Scott Deyo:
>
> > hey all,
> >
> > www.bridechamber.com is up. there are a couple layout issues on the
> > right frame of the
> > module pages -- the 'add to cart' or release dates are at the
> bottom.
> > whoops! but you get
> > the idea. :)
> >
> > thanks,
> > scott
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Hi,

> AD633, yes. The LWF input is connected as the "modulator". Also, "LWF
> Fold" _is_ the input control, as the folder reacts to the level of the
> input; thus 'level' and 'fold' happen at the same time.

Thanks for the information, that wasn't clear to me and my PCB is still
unpopulated.

> The nice thing about the panel is that you can use whatever ring mod
> you like

Yeah, but I still miss a second input.

And I for myself have enough ring modulators elsewhere so I don't want
one
in my Wave Multiplier module.

Leaving the jacks unpopulated looks ugly. :-(

In the meantime I have some more questions:

- Can I use Stooge PCB-brackets on the frontplate?

If not:

How does your PCB-bracket work?
It looks like it is connected to two pots.

And: Can I mount the Ken Stone PCBs without having to drill further
holes
(which I have to on the Stooge brackets)?

Thanks in advance,
Joachim

Am 24.08.2006 um 01:44 schrieb Scott Deyo:

> Hello,
>
> They are not RoHS compatible, no. Some parts are still unavailable as
> such (at least that I can find), and the PCBs are not anyways, so...
> The panels are RoHS, though. No chrome treatment involved.
>
> AD633, yes. The LWF input is connected as the "modulator". Also, "LWF
> Fold" _is_ the input control, as the folder reacts to the level of the
> input; thus 'level' and 'fold' happen at the same time.
>
> The nice thing about the panel is that you can use whatever ring mod
> you like -- I took care not to specify. I use the 633 for ease of use,
> and that it fits in the proto area on the PCB. You can throw in
> whatever you like -- Ken's passive ring mod (use the proto area on the
> wavefolder PCB for output amplifying, or for carrier zeroing), an
> MS-20 style digital ring mod, a 1496 ring mod, a Green Ringer clone, a
> tube-based ring mod... ;)
>
>
> Scott Deyo
> The Bridechamber
> contact@...
> www.bridechamber.com
> On Aug 23, 2006, at 3:21 PM, Joachim wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> are the PCBs and the kits RoHS compatible?
>>
>> And for the frontplate for the Ken Stone Wave Multiplier:
>> http://www.bridechamber.com/wavemult_big.html
>>
>> The web site says:
>> "An AD33 ring mod has been added for extra fun."
>>
>> I think with AD33 you meant AD633. ;-)
>>
>> And I think this is not a very useful "extra fun" because
>> a ring modulator needs X and Y ins.
>>
>> I would find it more useful to remove these two drills
>> and instead move the Grinder drills one step lower
>> so that an additional pot for the "LWF in" can be put there.
>>
>> Just my 2 cents.
>>
>> But I already have a PCB for the Papareil Warp633,
>> so I don't need an additional AD633 ring modulator.
>>
>> The picture shows the panel in .com format, right?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Joachim
>>
>> Am 19.08.2006 um 20:49 schrieb Scott Deyo:
>>
>> > hey all,
>> >
>> > www.bridechamber.com is up. there are a couple layout issues on the
>> > right frame of the
>> > module pages -- the 'add to cart' or release dates are at the
>> bottom.
>> > whoops! but you get
>> > the idea. :)
>> >
>> > thanks,
>> > scott
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>

You could populate the jack holes and use them as extra outputs.
You could turn the panel over and label them whatever you like.
You can use a 3U blank and drill and label them completely at your whim.

Or:
You could use this ring mod and get rid of another one and save
yourself some panel space. Again, you borrow one input from another
wavefolder's jack. You can only fold a wave so much anyways, so I doubt
you'd use all four at once. If you would, I'd recommend a distortion
pedal instead.
If none of those options work for you, then... you don't want to buy my
panel! :)
You can design one using Schaeffer's software and they will make it for
you. There may well be a file in the group's file area...

You can use a Stooge bracket, yes.
Mine you can use without having to drill holes; it does indeed attach
to two pots.

Scott Deyo
The Bridechamber
contact@...
www.bridechamber.com

On Aug 24, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Joachim wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > AD633, yes. The LWF input is connected as the "modulator". Also,
> "LWF
> > Fold" _is_ the input control, as the folder reacts to the level of
> the
> > input; thus 'level' and 'fold' happen at the same time.
>
> Thanks for the information, that wasn't clear to me and my PCB is
> still
> unpopulated.
>
> > The nice thing about the panel is that you can use whatever ring mod
> > you like
>
> Yeah, but I still miss a second input.
>
> And I for myself have enough ring modulators elsewhere so I don't want
> one
> in my Wave Multiplier module.
>
> Leaving the jacks unpopulated looks ugly. :-(
>
> In the meantime I have some more questions:
>
> - Can I use Stooge PCB-brackets on the frontplate?
>
> If not:
>
> How does your PCB-bracket work?
> It looks like it is connected to two pots.
>
> And: Can I mount the Ken Stone PCBs without having to drill further
> holes
> (which I have to on the Stooge brackets)?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Joachim
>
> Am 24.08.2006 um 01:44 schrieb Scott Deyo:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > They are not RoHS compatible, no. Some parts are still unavailable
> as
> > such (at least that I can find), and the PCBs are not anyways, so...
> > The panels are RoHS, though. No chrome treatment involved.
> >
> > AD633, yes. The LWF input is connected as the "modulator". Also,
> "LWF
> > Fold" _is_ the input control, as the folder reacts to the level of
> the
> > input; thus 'level' and 'fold' happen at the same time.
> >
> > The nice thing about the panel is that you can use whatever ring mod
> > you like -- I took care not to specify. I use the 633 for ease of
> use,
> > and that it fits in the proto area on the PCB. You can throw in
> > whatever you like -- Ken's passive ring mod (use the proto area on
> the
> > wavefolder PCB for output amplifying, or for carrier zeroing), an
> > MS-20 style digital ring mod, a 1496 ring mod, a Green Ringer
> clone, a
> > tube-based ring mod... ;)
> >
> >
> > Scott Deyo
> > The Bridechamber
> > contact@...
> > www.bridechamber.com
> > On Aug 23, 2006, at 3:21 PM, Joachim wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> are the PCBs and the kits RoHS compatible?
> >>
> >> And for the frontplate for the Ken Stone Wave Multiplier:
> >> http://www.bridechamber.com/wavemult_big.html
> >>
> >> The web site says:
> >> "An AD33 ring mod has been added for extra fun."
> >>
> >> I think with AD33 you meant AD633. ;-)
> >>
> >> And I think this is not a very useful "extra fun" because
> >> a ring modulator needs X and Y ins.
> >>
> >> I would find it more useful to remove these two drills
> >> and instead move the Grinder drills one step lower
> >> so that an additional pot for the "LWF in" can be put there.
> >>
> >> Just my 2 cents.
> >>
> >> But I already have a PCB for the Papareil Warp633,
> >> so I don't need an additional AD633 ring modulator.
> >>
> >> The picture shows the panel in .com format, right?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Joachim
> >>
> >> Am 19.08.2006 um 20:49 schrieb Scott Deyo:
> >>
> >> > hey all,
> >> >
> >> > www.bridechamber.com is up. there are a couple layout issues on
> the
> >> > right frame of the
> >> > module pages -- the 'add to cart' or release dates are at the
> >> bottom.
> >> > whoops! but you get
> >> > the idea. :)
> >> >
> >> > thanks,
> >> > scott
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

> You could turn the panel over and label them whatever you like.

For this I don't need a silkscreened panel.

> You can use a 3U blank and drill and label them completely at your
> whim.

Yeah, for this I don't need any of your frontpanels/kits anyway. ;-)

> You could use this ring mod and get rid of another one and save
> yourself some panel space.

No, because the Warp633 has way more features and needs a full front
panel.

> Again, you borrow one input from another wavefolder's jack.

It is still not labelled for the ring mod and completely somewhere else.

> You can only fold a wave so much anyways, so I doubt you'd use all
> four at once.

That is not the matter. At one time I may need the one input and at
another time
maybe the other.
I will not resolder the jacks each time I need them. ;-)

> If none of those options work for you, then... you don't want to buy
> my panel! :)

Maybe other people are thinking the same as I do:
The ring mod makes no sense there.

> You can design one using Schaeffer's software and they will make it
> for you.

If I didn't know this I wouldn't be a member of this mailing group. ;-)
I already started a design in 2 TE .com format. But I would prefer your
design
without the two ring mod jacks.

> You can use a Stooge bracket, yes.
> Mine you can use without having to drill holes; it does indeed attach
> to two pots.

That is really good because I have buyed many Ken Stone PCBs. :-D

Cheers,
Joachim

>
> Scott Deyo
> The Bridechamber
> contact@...
> www.bridechamber.com
> On Aug 24, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Joachim wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > AD633, yes. The LWF input is connected as the "modulator". Also,
>> "LWF
>> > Fold" _is_ the input control, as the folder reacts to the level of
>> the
>> > input; thus 'level' and 'fold' happen at the same time.
>>
>> Thanks for the information, that wasn't clear to me and my PCB is
>> still
>> unpopulated.
>>
>> > The nice thing about the panel is that you can use whatever ring
>> mod
>> > you like
>>
>> Yeah, but I still miss a second input.
>>
>> And I for myself have enough ring modulators elsewhere so I don't
>> want
>> one
>> in my Wave Multiplier module.
>>
>> Leaving the jacks unpopulated looks ugly. :-(
>>
>> In the meantime I have some more questions:
>>
>> - Can I use Stooge PCB-brackets on the frontplate?
>>
>> If not:
>>
>> How does your PCB-bracket work?
>> It looks like it is connected to two pots.
>>
>> And: Can I mount the Ken Stone PCBs without having to drill further
>> holes
>> (which I have to on the Stooge brackets)?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Joachim
>>
>> Am 24.08.2006 um 01:44 schrieb Scott Deyo:
>>
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > They are not RoHS compatible, no. Some parts are still unavailable
>> as
>> > such (at least that I can find), and the PCBs are not anyways,
>> so...
>> > The panels are RoHS, though. No chrome treatment involved.
>> >
>> > AD633, yes. The LWF input is connected as the "modulator". Also,
>> "LWF
>> > Fold" _is_ the input control, as the folder reacts to the level of
>> the
>> > input; thus 'level' and 'fold' happen at the same time.
>> >
>> > The nice thing about the panel is that you can use whatever ring
>> mod
>> > you like -- I took care not to specify. I use the 633 for ease of
>> use,
>> > and that it fits in the proto area on the PCB. You can throw in
>> > whatever you like -- Ken's passive ring mod (use the proto area on
>> the
>> > wavefolder PCB for output amplifying, or for carrier zeroing), an
>> > MS-20 style digital ring mod, a 1496 ring mod, a Green Ringer
>> clone, a
>> > tube-based ring mod... ;)
>> >
>> >
>> > Scott Deyo
>> > The Bridechamber
>> > contact@...
>> > www.bridechamber.com
>> > On Aug 23, 2006, at 3:21 PM, Joachim wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> are the PCBs and the kits RoHS compatible?
>> >>
>> >> And for the frontplate for the Ken Stone Wave Multiplier:
>> >> http://www.bridechamber.com/wavemult_big.html
>> >>
>> >> The web site says:
>> >> "An AD33 ring mod has been added for extra fun."
>> >>
>> >> I think with AD33 you meant AD633. ;-)
>> >>
>> >> And I think this is not a very useful "extra fun" because
>> >> a ring modulator needs X and Y ins.
>> >>
>> >> I would find it more useful to remove these two drills
>> >> and instead move the Grinder drills one step lower
>> >> so that an additional pot for the "LWF in" can be put there.
>> >>
>> >> Just my 2 cents.
>> >>
>> >> But I already have a PCB for the Papareil Warp633,
>> >> so I don't need an additional AD633 ring modulator.
>> >>
>> >> The picture shows the panel in .com format, right?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Joachim
>> >>
>> >> Am 19.08.2006 um 20:49 schrieb Scott Deyo:
>> >>
>> >> > hey all,
>> >> >
>> >> > www.bridechamber.com is up. there are a couple layout issues on
>> the
>> >> > right frame of the
>> >> > module pages -- the 'add to cart' or release dates are at the
>> >> bottom.
>> >> > whoops! but you get
>> >> > the idea. :)
>> >> >
>> >> > thanks,
>> >> > scott
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>