MOTM

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

From: media.nai@... [mailto:media.nai@...]
Anyway, I think a "Larry bracket" for knobless modules would be an excellent
product.  Think about it -- quality pots are expensive and very difficult to
buy.  Yet there are all sorts simple, useful and inexpensive DIY modules,
such as logic functions, pulse dividers, gate sequencers, waveshapers,
breakout panels, etc. that do not use pots.

Btw, I received a number of private emails saying they would want the
Stooge panel and bracket for the CGS ASR.

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Parker <cparker@...>
Question:  Can a "Larry bracket" be attached to a "Stooge panel" by a
Switchcraft 112 jack?  Is the jack strong enough to hold it securely, and
will the "holes line up"?
-Chris-

The Stooge responds:

OK.  I am a little ahead of you guys.  I have been considering a new bracket
in the Stooge bracket line that would accomplish two things.

1.  Hold any of the CGS PCBs and have holes to adhere to his new CGS
standard of 6" x 1", 6" x 2" or 6" x 3" PCBs.  The 6x3 PCB surface area
would be big enough to hold any of the older CGS  PCBs drilling your own PCB
mounting holes for those older non-standard PCBs.  It would be no deeper
than a standard 4 pot short bracket (same size as full size MOTM) so that it
will work for SKB users.

2.  Mount by jacks only or a combination of jacks and maybe one pot as an
option.  I would prefer jack mounting only.  Since I am not familiar with
all of the control layouts for some of these module panels, I don't really
have enough information to know how to do the front part of the bracket.
However, I can assure you that 2 Switchcraft jacks (one above the other)
have ample strength to support a Stooge bracket.

There is one problem with a bracket that mounts from jacks instead of pots.
It could end up at the "bottom" end of a panel since some modules may have
jacks AND pots.  If you use a slant cabinet, these style brackets would not
fit on the bottom row of a slant cabinet (including my upcoming Stooge slant
cabinets).  However, they would fit in all other standard MOTM arenas.  All
straight cabinets and the upper rows of slant cabinets would be OK.

I think this would also be a great DIY project bracket that would be great
for holding small proto boards for DIY modules or DIY mods to existing
modules.

Feedback on the subject of a new bracket design that mounts from jacks in
consideration of the above information would be appreciated.  Try to be
specific.

Larry

I think the easiest thing to do is to make brackets that have NO 
holes in them. We can then just drill whatever holes we need for 
whatever bizarre PCB happens to come along. If you try to second 
guess every possible combination of hole spacing, you'll need to have 
10,000 different kinds of brackets in stock.

The 4 brackets you currently stock should meet most PCBs sizes 
(except some sequencers and JP's vocal filter). If you could do those 
4 brackets without holes, I believe this would be good enough.

At 10:05 AM -0500 2003/05/02, J. Larry Hendry wrote:

>
>Feedback on the subject of a new bracket design that mounts from jacks in
>consideration of the above information would be appreciated.  Try to be
>specific.
>

I wouldn't recommend this.  Have you tried drilling Larry's steel PCB
brackets?  They're pretty tough to drill, drill press or not, even worse
if you need to drill 8-20 3/8 inch holes for jacks.

My recommendation is two L shaped brackets, one with two jack holes, one
with a single pot hole.  You would straddle the DIY panel across two of
these mounted to the front panel.  The two varieties give a mix and
match capability for PCB mounting with all jacks, all pots or a mixture,
without limitations on where the pots or jacks are located horizontally.

John Loffink
jloffink@... 

The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/

The Wavemakers Modular and Integrated Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com/

> 
> I think the easiest thing to do is to make brackets that have NO
> holes in them. We can then just drill whatever holes we need for
> whatever bizarre PCB happens to come along. If you try to second
> guess every possible combination of hole spacing, you'll need to have
> 10,000 different kinds of brackets in stock.
> 
> The 4 brackets you currently stock should meet most PCBs sizes
> (except some sequencers and JP's vocal filter). If you could do those
> 4 brackets without holes, I believe this would be good enough.
>

At 11:42 AM -0500 2003/05/02, John Loffink wrote:
>I wouldn't recommend this.  Have you tried drilling Larry's steel PCB
>brackets?  They're pretty tough to drill, drill press or not, even worse
>if you need to drill 8-20 3/8 inch holes for jacks.

The stainless stell is tough, but not impenetrable. I've drilled a 
couple dozen so far. You'd only need to drill 2 holes to mount a 
bracket, the rest of the metal that touches the front panel can be 
notched out with tin snips. I've done this too.

>My recommendation is two L shaped brackets, one with two jack holes, one
>with a single pot hole.  You would straddle the DIY panel across two of
>these mounted to the front panel.  The two varieties give a mix and
>match capability for PCB mounting with all jacks, all pots or a mixture,
>without limitations on where the pots or jacks are located horizontally.

I agree that pre-drilled holes would be a much better solution. I 
just can't imagine a configuration that wouldn't require custom 
drilling at some point.

> The stainless stell is tough, but not impenetrable. I've drilled a
> couple dozen so far. You'd only need to drill 2 holes to mount a
> bracket, the rest of the metal that touches the front panel can be
> notched out with tin snips. I've done this too.
> 

You're a lot more patient than I!  That's a lot of metal cutting.

> I agree that pre-drilled holes would be a much better solution. I
> just can't imagine a configuration that wouldn't require custom
> drilling at some point.
> 

Agreed, that's why my proposal split the bracket in two pieces.  As long
as you have two jacks or one pot near the mounting hole locations then
this would give you a solution.

John Loffink
jloffink@... 

The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/

The Wavemakers Modular and Integrated Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com/

> > The stainless stell is tough, but not impenetrable. I've drilled a
> > couple dozen so far. You'd only need to drill 2 holes to mount a
> > bracket, the rest of the metal that touches the front panel can be
> > notched out with tin snips. I've done this too.
> >
> 
> You're a lot more patient than I!  That's a lot of metal cutting.
>

Also, as Larry has noted in private email, it is difficult to drill
holes on the small bend of the PCB bracket. The bend in the metal tends
to obstruct drilling access. Drilling from the outside requires
sacrificing a piece of wood for each bracket.  This also may not be the
safest drilling position, with a long vertical piece held by hand,
drilling through metal which can have a tendency to catch and spin.

John Loffink
jloffink@... 

The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/

The Wavemakers Modular and Integrated Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com/

If you just need to drill small holes in a Stooge bracket to mount a PCB,
buy a drill bit that's designed to cut steel.  I forgot what the material
is, but they cost about $2.50 each at Sears.  I bought one 3/32" size bit
and use it for starter holes.  I can widen them with a standard bit.  A
standard drill bit can't seem to bite into the steel, even center-punched.

-Richard

> At 11:42 AM -0500 2003/05/02, John Loffink wrote:
> >I wouldn't recommend this.  Have you tried drilling Larry's steel PCB
> >brackets?  They're pretty tough to drill, drill press or not, even worse
> >if you need to drill 8-20 3/8 inch holes for jacks.
>
> The stainless stell is tough, but not impenetrable. I've drilled a
> couple dozen so far. You'd only need to drill 2 holes to mount a
> bracket, the rest of the metal that touches the front panel can be
> notched out with tin snips. I've done this too.
>

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Scott Juskiw <scott@...>
> I think the easiest thing to do is to make brackets that have NO holes in
them. We can then just drill whatever holes we need for whatever bizarre PCB
happens to come along.

Drilling in the long side of a bracket is pretty easy.  But drilling on the
side that fastens behind the panel is tough.  You can't get it in most drill
presses.  Hand drilling is tough.

> The 4 brackets you currently stock should meet most PCBs sizes

They are just a bit short for the new CGS standard sized PCBs.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Loffink <jloffink@...>
> My recommendation is two L shaped brackets, one with two jack holes, one
with a single pot hole.  You would straddle the DIY panel across two of
these mounted to the front panel.  The two varieties give a mix and match
capability for PCB mounting with all jacks, all pots or a mixture, without
limitations on where the pots or jacks are located horizontally.

I think this idea has a lot of merit.  I can see this two different ways.

First:  Two separate L shaped brackets, as John suggested, both  the PCB
short bracket depth.  They would never actually be connected to each other.
They would be attached separately to the front panel and each support 1/2 of
the PCB.  Then the PCB would not have metal the entire length.

Another way to do it would be to have these two standard brackets that were
the holders for PCB sized flat plates for mounting the PCBs.  The "L"
brackets would attach to the flat part of the bracket with screws.  Howard U
did one like this that mounted from jack holes.  At first I thought maybe
there was not advantage of the full size plate.  But, then I thought maybe
there would be times that the PCB would not be the right size to straddle
the gap between the L shaped brackets.

I propose that we might need 3 new pieces:
1.  L bracket with same pot hole arrangement I use today.
2.  L bracket with 2 jack holes on standard MOTM spacing (one above the
other)
3.  One full size flat PCB mounting plate that could be fastened to any
combination of L brackets IF it was needed.

I know this sound like a lot.  But, I am thinking this might be the one size
fits all (or in this case 3 sizes fits all) for DIY PCBs and CGS stuff that
some MOTMers are building.  BTW, how does Ken mount his CGS stuff?

All feedback was appreciated and is continually welcomed.
Larry

I like the idea of the full size plate.  That gives even more
flexibility on where the L shaped brackets could be positioned.

John Loffink
jloffink@... 

The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/

The Wavemakers Modular and Integrated Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com/

> First:  Two separate L shaped brackets, as John suggested, both  the
PCB
> short bracket depth.  They would never actually be connected to each
> other.
> They would be attached separately to the front panel and each support
1/2
> of
> the PCB.  Then the PCB would not have metal the entire length.
> 
> Another way to do it would be to have these two standard brackets that
> were
> the holders for PCB sized flat plates for mounting the PCBs.  The "L"
> brackets would attach to the flat part of the bracket with screws.
Howard
> U
> did one like this that mounted from jack holes.  At first I thought
maybe
> there was not advantage of the full size plate.  But, then I thought
maybe
> there would be times that the PCB would not be the right size to
straddle
> the gap between the L shaped brackets.
> 
> I propose that we might need 3 new pieces:
> 1.  L bracket with same pot hole arrangement I use today.
> 2.  L bracket with 2 jack holes on standard MOTM spacing (one above
the
> other)
> 3.  One full size flat PCB mounting plate that could be fastened to
any
> combination of L brackets IF it was needed.
>

> Drilling in the long side of a bracket is pretty easy.  But drilling on the
> side that fastens behind the panel is tough.  You can't get it in most drill
> presses.  Hand drilling is tough.

Uh, just flip it so the long side is hanging of the drill press platform. 
Actually it is easier this way since you get a little bit more stability.  Just
make sure you are using a board on the platform (you are doing this already,
right?) and that your depth is set so you don't inadvertently hit the platform
(oops!).
 
> First:  Two separate L shaped brackets, as John suggested, both  the PCB
> short bracket depth.  They would never actually be connected to each other.
> They would be attached separately to the front panel and each support 1/2 of
> the PCB.  Then the PCB would not have metal the entire length.

This sounds cool, but it looks one of the important features of a single
bracket--stress.  With a single bracket, there is almost no additional stress
placed on the PCB if it is attached in a stress-free manner.  2 brackets will
not support the PCB as well and slightly increace the chances of additional
stress being applied to the PCB IMO.  Perhaps negligible, but worth
considering.

Cheers!
Shemp

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

At 10:44 PM -0500 2003/05/02, J. Larry Hendry wrote:
>
>I propose that we might need 3 new pieces:
>1.  L bracket with same pot hole arrangement I use today.
>2.  L bracket with 2 jack holes on standard MOTM spacing (one above the
>other)
>3.  One full size flat PCB mounting plate that could be fastened to any
>combination of L brackets IF it was needed.
>

Are you planning to have pre-drilled holes for attaching the L 
brackets to the flat plate?

J. Larry Hendry wrote:
>
>OK.  I am a little ahead of you guys.  I have been considering a new bracket
>in the Stooge bracket line that would accomplish two things.
>
>1.  Hold any of the CGS PCBs and have holes to adhere to his new CGS
>standard of 6" x 1", 6" x 2" or 6" x 3" PCBs.  The 6x3 PCB surface area
>would be big enough to hold any of the older CGS  PCBs drilling your own PCB
>mounting holes for those older non-standard PCBs.  It would be no deeper
>than a standard 4 pot short bracket (same size as full size MOTM) so that it
>will work for SKB users.

The CGS ASR PCBs are 2" x 6" each, so two of them together are 4" x 6".

>2.  Mount by jacks only or a combination of jacks and maybe one pot as an
>option.  I would prefer jack mounting only.  Since I am not familiar with
>all of the control layouts for some of these module panels, I don't really
>have enough information to know how to do the front part of the bracket.
>However, I can assure you that 2 Switchcraft jacks (one above the other)
>have ample strength to support a Stooge bracket.

The proposed CGS ASR panel uses standard MOTM jack spacing for
uniformity and man-sized ergonomics, like a MOTM-910, but with fewer
jacks.

>There is one problem with a bracket that mounts from jacks instead of pots.
>It could end up at the "bottom" end of a panel since some modules may have
>jacks AND pots.  If you use a slant cabinet, these style brackets would not
>fit on the bottom row of a slant cabinet (including my upcoming Stooge slant
>cabinets).  However, they would fit in all other standard MOTM arenas.  All
>straight cabinets and the upper rows of slant cabinets would be OK.

I'm confused.  If these modules use pots, couldn't they just use pot brackets??

>I think this would also be a great DIY project bracket that would be great
>for holding small proto boards for DIY modules or DIY mods to existing
>modules.
>
>Feedback on the subject of a new bracket design that mounts from jacks in
>consideration of the above information would be appreciated.  Try to be
>specific.

OK :)

>Drilling in the long side of a bracket is pretty easy.  But drilling on the
>side that fastens behind the panel is tough.  You can't get it in most drill
>presses.  Hand drilling is tough.

I agree.

>  > The 4 brackets you currently stock should meet most PCBs sizes
>They are just a bit short for the new CGS standard sized PCBs.

Just to recap, those are:

Short, 3 pots  3 7/8" x 4 3/8"  (3.875 x 4.375)
Long. 3 pots   3 7/8" x 7 1/4"  (3.875 x 7.25)
Short, 4 pots  5 1/2" x 4 3/8"  (5.5 x 4.375)
Long, 4 pots   5 1/2" X 7 1/4"  (5.5 x 7.25)

The CGS PCBs are 6" long, so the "Long" brackets would be long
enough, leaving 1.25" of clearance for jacks or pots.

>First:  Two separate L shaped brackets, as John suggested, both  the PCB
>short bracket depth.  They would never actually be connected to each other.
>They would be attached separately to the front panel and each support 1/2 of
>the PCB.  Then the PCB would not have metal the entire length.
>
>Another way to do it would be to have these two standard brackets that were
>the holders for PCB sized flat plates for mounting the PCBs.  The "L"
>brackets would attach to the flat part of the bracket with screws.  Howard U
>did one like this that mounted from jack holes.  At first I thought maybe
>there was not advantage of the full size plate.  But, then I thought maybe
>there would be times that the PCB would not be the right size to straddle
>the gap between the L shaped brackets.
>
>I propose that we might need 3 new pieces:
>1.  L bracket with same pot hole arrangement I use today.

Did you mean to say "jack hole spacing"??

>2.  L bracket with 2 jack holes on standard MOTM spacing (one above the
>other)
>3.  One full size flat PCB mounting plate that could be fastened to any
>combination of L brackets IF it was needed.
>
>I know this sound like a lot.  But, I am thinking this might be the one size
>fits all (or in this case 3 sizes fits all) for DIY PCBs and CGS stuff that
>some MOTMers are building.

Like Shemp, I don't think that using a PCB to straddle the brackets
is the such a good idea.  Nor are three pieces fastened together with
screws nearly as stable as one solid piece of steel.  So in order not
to degrade the build quality and road worthiness of the system, a
"full-sized" bracket is necessary.

Another issue is space -- a bracket mounted to a flat plate is more
than three times as thick as a bracket by itself.

So I propose two new "Larry" brackets (but feel free to call them
"Mark brackets" if something goes terribly wrong :)

1.  4" x 7 1/4", with four jack holes using standard MOTM spacing on
the 4" end.  This will hold two CGS ASR PCBs, as well as many other
PCBs.  Having four jack holes provides stability, even with the
option to skip one or two rows.  It also allows one to be add large
PCBs, either vertically or horizontally, to existing 2U MOTM modules.

2.  1 1/2" x 4 3/8", with two jack holes, (and if possible, a pot
hole in between them).  By itself, this bracket will allow one to add
small daughterboards (eg. buffers, LED drivers), either vertically or
horizontally, to 1U or 2U MOTM modules; and two or more could be used
with either jacks, pots, or a combination thereof, to mount a flat
plate, or be straddled directly a PCB.

How do you mount two CGS ASR PCBs for use with an SKB rack??  Use two
1 1/2" x 4 3/8" brackets, mounted between the two columns of jacks,
with one PCB straddling them on each side.  While this isn't as
durable as a single deeper bracket, imho, anyone using SKB cases
isn't that concerned with durability :)

If someone needs a flat plate, or a shallow bracket for a special
application,   then the full-sized bracket could easily be cut down
with a hack saw, cutoff wheel, tin snips, etc.  Imho, pressing the 90
degree angle is what most folks can't do at home.

One very important consideration, no matter what the other dimensions
might be, is that the short end of these brackets must allow room for
an adjacent row or column of jacks.  The 1.38" used for pots is too
wide for jacks.