MOTM

Sorry, I'm long winded tonight.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Schreiber <synth1@...>
> Well, it is a 2-edged sword. IBM invented the PC format, paniced when
others "muscled in",

Like most things in life, it is a 2-edged sword.  I can take several issues
about Stooge or other vendor panels being manufactured in the MOTM size
format and make both a good and bad point statement and about the same issue
and find correctness in both.  I'll bore no one airing such a disertation.

What really matters is consideration for the parties involved.  Moe and I
consider our services as "gap filling."  Now certainly, that will sometimes
overlap into what might be viewed as competition.  However, that is never
our goal.  We wish to support the format and users without killing the
mother cow (sorry Paul, it just seemed like the right term).  So, we try
very hard to respect Paul's wishes.  Sometimes that is as simple as not
talking about certain things on the list.

> Having a universal format is only good for business. Doesn't it really
"dilute" the business, or one can argue that there's not that much business
left to dilute in the first place :)

That is how I feel.  When someone stumbles into MOTM and realizes that they
can get a nice Phaser from Oakley or Miniwave from Blacet, or another filter
variation from either, they see a lot of diversity inside a single format if
they are willing to put some work into it themselves.  Without disrespect to
anyone, when you have the ideas and creativeness of many it will always
surpass the best of a singular mind.

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

Well, this is another situation I consider win-win.   John Blacet is one of
the high-quality manufacturers in this market.  If you build his stuff, you
develop a great deal of appreciation for the thoughtfulness he puts into his
designs and the value he delivers.  In fact, his format is damn nice if you
personally can deal with the small size and 3.5 mm jacks.   And, I think
John was dropped on his head as a child, because I find something weird in
each of his designs (weird is often good).

I have no doubt that our panel availability and conversion brackets and
techniques have helped to selll more than a few modules that John might not
have otherwise sold.  But, that in turn helps development, which supports
the format, puts money in all the suppliers pockets and gives all users a
better selection.  And, YOU all benefit from that.  I cannot tell you how
many Blacet conversion panels we have sold for between $15 and $27 due to
volume in the screening process.  Try buying a cusom panel when you are the
only one.  OUCH.  The other side is that we have sold a lot of panels
because John has new product to convert.  And, the price savings he offers
for the "MOTM format" modules is nice.   So, everyone wins.

> Heck, 5 of Cynthia's models ARE MOTM pc boards :)

You will see more and more of this kind of inter-mixing of products in
various formats in my opinion.  I see nothing but good coming to all
involved.

> 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.

And, I can tell you that we have sold more conversion panels that several of
the modular companies ever actually sold in modular gear.  If you had told
Moe when he finished that first $85 Dark Star panel how many we would sell
for $23, he would have laughed his ass off.  If you had told me when I
fashioned that first PCB mounting bracket that it would turn into a global
business delivering thousands of brackets into more than 10 countries, I
would have laughed my ass off.  Now, that would really bug me if Paul was
sitting around like some other vendor saying "Hey, I could use some orders
over here."  But, he is just keeping his nose above water level trying to
keep up with demand (only one nostril I think).  So, I think making other
things available in his format may reduce some frustration in perceived
"gaps" in the product line.

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

I bought my first module when there were some "critical gaps"   In fact,
Paul offered only one module then.  Today, it is hard to call any of the
gaps critical if you consider the 650 and 600 as near market.  Sure, we can
all name some we think are critical.  But, many have work arounds.
Certainly pan/fade can be done with a 190 and a 830.  If I were to suggest
one big hole, I would say it is non-keyboard interfaces.  I think envelope
follower / preamp type devices for interfacing should be on that list. Next
might be end processing like delay, phase, reverb, etc.  But, with all the
great gear out there that will do that, would we not all rather see Paul
focusing on core stuff like FFB, and sequencer?

I have noticed that several of the very talented guys on this list have
managed to make some pretty nice music somehow working around "critical
gaps."

Lastly, thanks to all you guys that make Stooge Industries a success.  I
have thought more than once about giving it up because it takes WAY too much
of my time.  But, it is the sincere appreciation that I constantly get so
many of you that keeps me in the game.  Sorry to be so long winded.

Stooge Larry

P.S.  SHAMELESS PLUG:  I am soon expecting delivery of the first 100 new
generation modular brackets.  These are designed so that mounting can be
accomplished with virtually ANY pot spacing and jack-only modules also.
They are specifically targeted at Cynthia and Ken Stone sized products.
However, I doubt you will find any single sized PCB you cannot somehow mount
with this new line of modular brackets.  Look for a Stooge announcement as
soon as they are in stock.  I will demonstrate mounting the jack only CGS
ASR.