MOTM

I'm in the mixed format group.  And I do understand the space issue,
as I struggle with it also.  However, in the mixed format system, the
different jacks are a pain in the a..!  So I 're-format' by mounting
the smaller panels into blanks and adding 1/4" jacks, leaving the
original module alone.  (I'm 6'3" with BIG hands and 1/8" jacks just
don't work well for me {I've broken them on several occasions}.) 
Banana systems are nice, but there are too many things that really
work better with switching jacks, which don't exist in a banana
system.  If possible, I hook the 1/4" jacks to the switched input on
the 1/8" jacks so I could, in fact, bypass a 1/4" patch using 1/8"
cables.  (My system is Synthesizers.com, MOTM, Blacet, CGS, and ...)

LarryT

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Andre Majorel <aym-htnys@...> wrote:
>
> On 2006-06-15 04:12 -0000, coyoteous wrote:
> 
> > I guess I'm with the camp that would rather buy more modules in
> > their existing formats than spend time and money to re-face them
> > - though I do respect and understand why one would want to unify
> > to one format.
> 
> I think Norman's motivation is not looks but panel density. The
> difference is on the order of 40% : 8.16 cm² per front panel
> element for Modcan vs. about 11.6 cm² on average for MOTM.
> 
> To put things into perspective, the figure is about 4.5 cm² for
> Doepfer and 16 cm² for Arrick.
> 
> -- 
> André Majorel <URL:http://www.teaser.fr/~amajorel/>
> Do not use this account for regular correspondence.
> See the URL above for contact information.
>