Dotcomformat

>  > Are you taking about the #901 standalone (originally triple-width
>>  front), or the
>>  #901A and #901B driver/oscillator (each on single-width fronts) pair?
>
>No, A/B sets. Theres no real point in doing a 901 because its' really just a
>901a/b pair with output attenuators.

I agree.

>  > Will you update the old parts (trimmers, transistors)?
>
>I've replaced the "weird" transistors with standard modern NPN/PNP parts on
>the one I bread boarded and it worked just fine.

Good. Old transistors are getting harder to find.

>  I was able to find a small
>cache of CA3019's, so no hacking in that regard.

Does this mean that you will be offering CA3019s with the boards?

>  As far as tuning, it does
>kinda suck. But that's 901's

hehe... Yes, that is how they are.
One thing that is very facinating, is the fact that Klaus Schulze had 
a moog 3P + sequencers. There were the usual banks of 9 x #901 VCOs 
and 3 drivers - and he was using this on tours in the beginning of 
the 1970s. I have the boxed CD sets which includes many live 
concerts, and very few of them have out-of-tune VCOs. I know that he 
was running the modular for hours before the concert to make it 
stable, but still it is amazing. Maybe some of the tuning unstability 
in the VCOs cancels each other when you have multiple VCOs. Or maybe 
the desaster concerts (tuning-wise) is not on the CDs.

>  > And what about front panels? Stooge to the rescue, I guess...
>
>If Stooge has a supply for the metal. Larry?
>
>BTW, don't know if I ever posted this...but this is what that VCADSR panel
>looks like after silk-screening:
>
>http://denonville.com/panel.jpg

Nice!

>  > May I ask why you have choosen the 901 VCO and not the 921 VCO?
>
>I'm looking for more of a "vintage" sound/behavior oscillators. We pretty
>much have 921's in our dotcom systems already. Not to mention trying to get
>around the ua726 issue.

Very good point.
Any idea of a time-frame for these boards? Price?

-- 
tw.  :)