MOTM

OK, you have my vote also. Seth's layout is great - hope it can be done 
or something  close to it.

Honestly, I would probably buy it either way, but I'll be much much 
happier with this layout w/ that big freq knob.

...jp




strohs56k wrote:

>--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Tony Karavidas" <tony@e...> wrote:
>  
>
>>This was truly one of the most constructive emails I've read all
>>night.  Seth, in a way of voicing his opinion about the current
>>layout, offered a nice alternative. 
>>    
>>
>
>I put a little more thought into this and I think I have some 
>improvements.
>
>Here is the tweaked drawing:
>
>http://www.eskimo.com/~strohs/FSlayout3.GIF
>
>http://www.eskimo.com/~strohs/FSlayout3grid.GIF
>
>
>The second drawing (with grid in the name) shows the design on top of 
>the "standard" MOTM grid lines.
>
>As you can see, this design actually fits pretty well on the MOTM 
>grid.  The big frequency knob is centered between what would be the 
>upper four knob positions on the MOTM grid.  And for the small knobs, 
>the lowest row matches up vertically with the lowest row of knobs on 
>the MOTM grid.  The jack field is exactly on the grid.
>
>
>What I changed:
>
>Put the input jacks (signal and CV) in a group at the left and the 
>outputs (local oscillator and shifted signals) in a group at the 
>right.  I think this is the normal left to right signal flow 
>convention.
>
>I moved the fine shift knob to the right of the big shift knob.  This 
>better matches the convention of oscillators with the coarse tune on 
>the left / fine tune on the right.
>
>I moved the gain knob to the left of the big shift knob.  I think this 
>better matches the left to right signal flow.
>
>The CV shift knob has therefor moved below the big shift knob.  I 
>think this has good association.
>
>The sine and cosine amplitude knobs (for the local oscillator outputs) 
>are now on the left side.  (This matches up with the local oscillator 
>outputs in the jack field.)
>
>The up and down feedback knobs are now on the right side.  (Again, 
>matches up with the frequency shifted signal outputs in the jack 
>field.)
>
>I moved all of the LEDs to the left side of the panel to match the new 
>positions of their associated knobs.
>
>
>This version has a little less symmetry than my first stab but is much 
>more logical in terms of signal flow and grouping of like 
>functionality.
>
>Also, this might make things a little easier for Tony because there is 
>a lot more space opened up between the lower set of knobs for 
>components hidden behind the panel.  Also, this is actually a little 
>closer to his proposed design as far as knob grouping.
>
>
>Questions for Tony / I think some of these may have been asked and 
>discussed previously but just in case...
>
>Because the design is "thru zero" - I assume a positive CV makes the 
>up output up shifted (and down output down shifted) where as a 
>negative CV makes the up output down shifted (and down output up 
>shifted)
>
>If so, should the main shift knob be "bipolar" - no shift at center, 
>negative CV to the left, positive CV to the right?  (Should the fine 
>shift knob also be a "bipolar" control with 0 at center?)
>
>Further, should the "freq CV" knob be a reversing attenuator?  (Zero 
>at center.)
>
>Can we have two more local oscillator outputs for inverse sine and 
>inverse cosine?
>
>
>seth
>
>
>PS: yes, there was a FSlayout2.GIF but just as I was about to upload 
>the drawing I decided I didn't really like it, pushed some stuff 
>around again, and it became version 3 :)
>
>
>
>  
>