MOTM

Well said, John.  This is my position exactly.

Paul has made cogent arguments elsewhere about 'mystique' vs. 
engineering, lately in regard to Buchla systems.  Part of 
the 'mystique' of a Buchla is its looks.  But I'm not after 
mystique, I'm after sound.

And I'm after preserving my MOTM's mystique :)

Mike

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Speth, John" <john.speth@c...> wrote:
> If the only justification for the 200 series to to have the 
*appearance* of Buchla modules then I would suggest you drop the 
idea.  It's the sound and function that matters to me.
> 
> If the justification for the 200 series is some sonic, ergonomic, 
or useability values of Buchla modules, then I would suggest keeping 
with an MOTM style layout (if there is truly one).  I want good 
sound and good useability at a fair price, not Buchla visual 
nostalgia.
> 
> John Speth