My (not so original) idea was just jacks and pots. But, as Larry
pointed out to me privately, for the added cost of a Multimix board
and a few cheap components you get mixing, inversion, etc.
So far it doesn't look like there is enough interest (just you and
me) to make an official Stooge panel. So, I'll probably go ahead
and get a couple of Multimix Stooge panels and go that way
instead.
Barry
--- In motm@y..., "CHRIS PARKER" <cparker@d...> wrote:
> I'd be interested in a couple, maybe more.
>
> Are we talking about just a front panel with some jacks
linked/separated by pots, or will you be creating a circuit board
with other passive components?
>
> -Chris-
>
>
> >>> "coyoteous" <satori@t...> 05/01/02 07:54PM >>>
> Would anyone else be interested in this if there were a Stooge
> panel? It would be like the Multimix panel with the pots scaled
> from 0 to 10 and no " /MIX" on the OUT3 jack.
>
> pots:
> IN1
> IN2
> IN3
> jacks:
> IN1 OUT1
> IN2 OUT2
> IN3 OUT3
>
> I know we discussed this before, but with a low driving
> impedence it should be okay, right? I think it would be a good
aid
> for the 490, since it has a three inputs with no attenuators. It
> could also be handy with the shared inputs on the 890 or
> anywhere you don't need the buffering/mixing/inverting
> capabilities of the 830, 890 or Mutlimix.
>
> Barry
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/