MOTM

It was an 'unfortunate' choice of words, I suppose.  No, I don't really 
mind different knob sizes.  Proof::  
http://www.pugix.com/bottom-cabinet.htm#blacetmixer

I just enjoy pondering panel designs.  I can certainly picture Scott's 
panel style in my synth.  When the Stooges get their panel shop rolling, 
it probably won't be long before I am adding another cabinet, and some 
of those new Tellun modules could find a home in it.

-Richard Brewster

http://www.pugix.com

john mahoney wrote:

>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Richard Brewster"
>  
>
>>It happens that the dual gate processor *could* be fitted into a
>>"standard" MOTM panel with 4 normal size knobs, if you omitted the
>>buttons or used small buttons.  Two LEDs can fit easily near the large
>>knobs, and small pushbuttons could fit likewise.
>>    
>>
>
>Good analysis.
>
>
>  
>
>>Unfortunately this is
>>not the case for most of Scott's new module ideas, which have more jacks
>>and hence less room for standard knobs.
>>    
>>
>
>"Unfortunately" meaning that you don't like the smaller knobs?
>Or, you just don't like to mix and match them with the MOTM standard?
>FWIW, I think that Modcan makes nice use of different knob sizes.
>
>Some people like big synths with the controls spread way out, like Moogs and
>Arricks. MOTM puts a bit more into the same area. Buchla and Serge rate
>pretty high in this regard, as far as I know, and Blacet and Doepfer score
>high with their compact modules. And Wiard...
>
>12 Moog modules make a small synth. 12 Wiard modules make a small monster!
>
>Different strokes, all good.
>--
>john
>
>
>
> 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>  
>