MOTM

On Oct 28, 2003, at 2:09 PM, Paul Schreiber wrote:

> Well, it is a 2-edged sword. IBM invented the PC format, paniced when 
> others "muscled in", and
> anyone remember Microchannel and the TopView OS (snicker). How about 
> the EISA buss connector from
> Compaq? Eck.......

True, true. There are some other lessons to learned from that analogy 
as well. It could easily be argued that IBM lost that war a long time 
ago. Intel's market cap is higher than IBM's these days. So is 
Microsofts. Of course IBM is still in business, but I think we're 
comparing apples and squid here ^_^

Okay, now for some crazy talk: Maybe MOTM could work on licensing out 
MOTM designs? Or offer some sort of MOTM seal-of-approval. You review a 
design, approve it if it lives up to the MOTM level of quality, and 
then offer for a small cut to sell "MOTM-Approved modules" on the 
Synthtech website. Or maybe something closer to THX certification? I 
also aspire to build some of my own custom modules, but I don't have 
any desire to try and design a whole synth system, or try  and run a 
whole business on these few modules. As a customer my loyalty to the 
MOTM brand has to do with the quality of the modules. I wonder how much 
that factors into others purchasing decisions?

> Something tells me Stooge panels are the best thing to happen to 
> Blacet in years :)

I personally wish the blacet modules where laid out in a more MOTM 
friendly manner. Maybe there is something you and John could work out 
there. As much as I love soldering, hooking up Blacet modules in MOTM 
format is a pain. It's worth extra to me to not have to go source the 
parts, beg you for knobs, and cut custom pcb mounts just for an analog 
delay.

> I am putting several things in place to speed up delivery. I just 
> received 30 '190 stuffed/wave
> soldered pc boards. All the solder , resistors and caps for the kits 
> is done outside. I'm
> expanding the R&D design and firmware effort to more and more people.

This is the best news on any subject I've heard in months ^_^

> I consider Larry & Moe *critical* to MOTM's success (group hug!). I 
> mean, if you would have told
> me when I started in 1998 that I would sell 5,000 modules, I'd have 
> laughed my a** off.

No argument there. Larry & Moe are definitely a part of what makes the 
MOTM format special. It's hard not to see them as a branch of 
Synthtech.

> NOW.......explain those "critical gaps" in the product line!

*cough* um, uh, eh.... ^_^

I've been thinking about delays for a while now. I got all excited 
about BBDs a few months ago when chip availability got removed from the 
equation, but BBDs are just one answer. And if the question is "high 
bandwidth" the answer sucks. I still think the MOTM format needs a 
really good delay. Delay is crucial for making many interesting sounds. 
Delay is also one of those things that works better in the digital 
domain, and that starts to run afoul of the tired analog/digital 
argument. I personally don't care, I want a good, high quality digital 
delay with CV controlled parameters. I don't want some outboard wart on 
my modular, and I don't want a DIY hack solution.

I want a musical delay with full CV control/syncing of time/feedback 
parameters. This is worth about 500$ to me.

I've been looking at cypress 192KHz AD/DA chipsets, they seem very nice 
from the spec sheets. I also know that the filters and input limiter 
stages are what separates a good from a bad AD. How delay sounds as it 
changes time is extremely important to me too. (no clipping, ever!!) 
This sort begs for a proper DSP in the signal path which sort of make 
things expensive. It hasn't gotten to the point where I'm willing to 
pony up the money for dev boards and prototypes yet, but it's getting 
close. I wouldn't complain if someone *cough* beat me to the punch!

--mikes