MOTM

My own personal philosophy is to get two of everything.  If its 
something I really like or if its something I know is going to be 
especially useful then I might get more than two up front.  It 
doesn't matter a lot to me whether each module contains a multitude 
of signal sources or functions.  To me the more knobs and the more 
controllable parameters the better.  For instance I wish the 450 
would have an output jack for each filter section in addition to the 
summed output.  This would probably put it into 4U and lower its 
functional density, but for me the usefulness would increase.  BTW 
the multiphase waveform animator sounds like a great idea.  I also 
like the idea of a modular sequencer with a lot of panel real estate 
i.e. the SuperMoe.  The more parameters controllable, the more 
jacks, the more knobs, the greater number of permutations and 
combinations.  Why two of everything?  If it sounds good in mono it 
almost always sounds better in stereo and that means two duplicate 
patches (with a slight variation of course.)  I'll have to ask 
Larry, but maybe thats the Hoosier school of synth design.  The idea 
is not to maximize the density, but to maximize the number of 
variables.

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

From: Richard Brewster
"Yikes, how am I going to get by with only 26U?!" into an intellectual
exercise.
I'm limiting myself to 26U initially in a .com studio case.

HA HA HA.... ROTFLMAO.
I've got $5 say's you can't do it. :)

Larry Hendry