Synth-DIY Yahoo! Groups Archives

Thread

MOTM-450 layout

2002-04-12 by J. Larry Hendry

Well since almost everyone else has spoken their piece on this, I will enter
mine.

1.  Actually, any layout is fine, as most have said, it is about the sound.
Having said that, I do have some preferences.

2.  I do not like the knobs that are so low on the panel.  I guess I would
not mind so much if the panel was crammed full.  But, it is not.  I would
prefer that no knob is lower than what can have at least one jack under it.
I would rather use some of the space "off board" space where the EQ I/O
switch is for a couple of the knobs / controls.

3. Since the Low and High controls are different (more shelving) and I
understand it, they are the two that make sense to move into Column 3.  One
in row  1 and one in row 4.  The space between Low and High can have switch
and LED.

4.  I like keeping pots on the board.  But having only 2 of 10 off the board
does not seem bad to me.

Larry Hendry

RE: [motm] MOTM-450 layout

2002-04-13 by John Loffink

In all the controversy no one seemed to notice that cut/boost knobs
should be labeled -5 to +5, not 0 to 10.
 
Also, since any of the options seem to have some jack space left, it
would be REALLY nice to have at least one extra out.  This can save on
patching and mults, especially if you're putting this inside a feedback
loop.
John Loffink
jloffink@...

Show quoted textHide quoted text

-----Original Message-----
From: J. Larry Hendry [mailto:jlarryh@...] 
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 5:40 PM
To: MOTM List
Subject: [motm] MOTM-450 layout

Well since almost everyone else has spoken their piece on this, I will
enter
mine.

1.  Actually, any layout is fine, as most have said, it is about the
sound.
Having said that, I do have some preferences.

2.  I do not like the knobs that are so low on the panel.  I guess I
would
not mind so much if the panel was crammed full.  But, it is not.  I
would
prefer that no knob is lower than what can have at least one jack under
it.
I would rather use some of the space "off board" space where the EQ I/O
switch is for a couple of the knobs / controls.

3. Since the Low and High controls are different (more shelving) and I
understand it, they are the two that make sense to move into Column 3.
One
in row  1 and one in row 4.  The space between Low and High can have
switch
and LED.

4.  I like keeping pots on the board.  But having only 2 of 10 off the
board
does not seem bad to me.

Larry Hendry

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.1994012.3473453.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705
032277:HM/A=1036972/R=0/*http:/www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3466> Click
Here!

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=194081.1994012.3473453.1261774/D=egrou
pmail/S=1705032277:HM/A=1036972/rand=136332959> 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service.

Re: [motm] MOTM-450 layout

2002-04-13 by Paul Schreiber

Actually, they are *cut* only (non-shelving).

Mult out may be a good idea.

Paul S.

Show quoted textHide quoted text

----- Original Message -----

From: John Loffink

To: 'MOTM List'

Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 9:40 PM

Subject: RE: [motm] MOTM-450 layout

In all the controversy no one seemed to notice that cut/boost knobs should be labeled -5 to +5, not 0 to 10.

Also, since any of the options seem to have some jack space left, it would be REALLY nice to have at least one extra out. This can save on patching and mults, especially if youre putting this inside a feedback loop.

John Loffink
jloffink@...

-----Original Message-----
From: J. Larry Hendry [mailto:jlarryh@...]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 5:40 PM
To: MOTM List
Subject: [motm] MOTM-450 layout

Well since almost everyone else has spoken their piece on this, I will enter
mine.

1. Actually, any layout is fine, as most have said, it is about the sound.
Having said that, I do have some preferences.

2. I do not like the knobs that are so low on the panel. I guess I would
not mind so much if the panel was crammed full. But, it is not. I would
prefer that no knob is lower than what can have at least one jack under it.
I would rather use some of the space "off board" space where the EQ I/O
switch is for a couple of the knobs / controls.

3. Since the Low and High controls are different (more shelving) and I
understand it, they are the two that make sense to move into Column 3. One
in row 1 and one in row 4. The space between Low and High can have switch
and LED.

4. I like keeping pots on the board. But having only 2 of 10 off the board
does not seem bad to me.

Larry Hendry

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Re: MOTM-450 layout

2002-04-13 by coyoteous

An inverted output would be excellent (very useful for cancellation 
effects), JH seemed to like this idea.

Barry

--- In motm@y..., "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@a...> wrote:

Show quoted textHide quoted text

> Actually, they are *cut* only (non-shelving).
> 
> Mult out may be a good idea.
> 
> Paul S.

Re: [motm] MOTM-450 layout

2002-04-13 by jhaible

> In all the controversy no one seemed to notice that cut/boost knobs
> should be labeled -5 to +5, not 0 to 10.

No, 0 ... 10 is fine. It's a filterbank, not an Equalizer.
All pots at 7 will have the same frequency response as all pots
at 3, just the output level will be different.

LPF and HPF are full blown 24dB/Oct filters, BTW.

Demos are on the way to Paul.

JH.

RE: [motm] Re: MOTM-450 layout

2002-04-13 by Les Mizzell

> An inverted output would be excellent (very useful for cancellation 
> effects), JH seemed to like this idea.

Oh yea....I can think of a ton of uses for an inverted output....

Add my vote to that one.

Les Mizzell

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ERROR 406: file corrupt: config.earth 
--- reboot universe? (Y/N) 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Re: MOTM-450 layout

2002-04-13 by sasquatch98930

--- In motm@y..., "jhaible" <jhaible@d...> wrote:
> 
> No, 0 ... 10 is fine. It's a filterbank, not an Equalizer.
> All pots at 7 will have the same frequency response as all pots
> at 3, just the output level will be different.
> 
> JH.

Please correct me if I'm wrong. But, doesn't increasing the level of a 
band also increase a resonance peak in the center of that band. If this 
how the MOTM filterbank is going to work, then difference will be more 
than just the output levels. "All pots at 7" should sound very 
different from "all pots at 3".

David W. Skinner
(Owner of Synthesizers.com system with a growing infestation of MOTM 
modules)

Re: [motm] Re: MOTM-450 layout

2002-04-13 by jhaible

> Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I correct you. (;->) You're thinking equalizer - this is a filter bank.
See Paul's link to the Moog archives site for more details.

JH.


But, doesn't increasing the level of a

Show quoted textHide quoted text

> band also increase a resonance peak in the center of that band. If this
> how the MOTM filterbank is going to work, then difference will be more
> than just the output levels. "All pots at 7" should sound very
> different from "all pots at 3".
>
> David W. Skinner
> (Owner of Synthesizers.com system with a growing infestation of MOTM
> modules)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Re: MOTM-450 layout

2002-04-14 by coyoteous

It's a mixer with a filter on each input, each of which is multed to 
"the" input, correct?

Barry

INPUT
  I
  I--LP---in01--I M I
  I--BP1--in02--I   I
  I--BP2--in03--I I I
  I--BP3--in04--I   I
  I--BP4--in05--I X I--OUTPUT
  I--BP5--in06--I   I
  I--BP6--in07--I E I
  I--BP7--in08--I   I
  I--BP8--in09--I R I
  I--HP---in10--I   I

--- In motm@y..., "jhaible" <jhaible@d...> wrote:

Show quoted textHide quoted text

> I correct you. (;->) You're thinking equalizer - this is a filter bank.
> See Paul's link to the Moog archives site for more details.
> 
> JH.