MOTM

This is a test of the emergency patch documenting system. Had this 
been a real emergency, the patch you just viewed would have been actually
tested, and accompanied by an mp3 sample.

So, after all this talk of patches I got to thinking about a better way to 
document them. I work on a mac (for some strange reason) and there is this 
nifty little program called OmniGraffle which I use for work. It's like 
visio for ya win32 people.

I decided to make a template set for the MOTM modules (others to follow!) 
for documenting patches. It's not as quick as my usual method (camera 
snapshot) but it is pleasing-on-the-eye, and a lot easier to read. The 
template set currently looks like this: (took 3 minutes to assemble, fyi)

http://orbelisk.com/clickless.pdf

What do you folks think of this style? Yeah, I know it lacks labels but I 
think it's a little less cluttered this way, only showing that which makes 
the patch run. Comments? Thoughts? Any guesses why this is called 
"clickless"? ;)

ps: i'll post the template file after a little peer review.

--mikes

>What do you folks think of this style?

I like it, it certainly makes efficient use of space. IMHO:

1. lose the drop shadows, it's so 1990s
2. add black lines to the outside edges of the patch cords
3. labels for pots and jacks would be nice, but then they'd make the 
modules larger, I suppose if it is in PDF format then it can be 
resized on demand
4. your 300s are mislabeled as 310s

with Scott's comments:

http://orbelisk.com/clickless2.pdf


On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Scott Juskiw wrote:
> 1. lose the drop shadows, it's so 1990s

Awe...

> 2. add black lines to the outside edges of the patch cords

Sadly, no can do, but I see why this would be desirable. I'll see if I can 
hack it together somehow.

> 3. labels for pots and jacks would be nice, but then they'd make the
> modules larger, I suppose if it is in PDF format then it can be
> resized on demand

I thought about adding them as tiny text, but it still cluttered things 
up.

> 4. your 300s are mislabeled as 310s

Fixed.

--mikes

How is this supposed to work for complex patches with an arbitrary set
of modules?

Moe

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Mike Estee <squeeker@h...> wrote:
> 
> with Scott's comments:
> 
> http://orbelisk.com/clickless2.pdf
> 
> 
> On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Scott Juskiw wrote:
> > 1. lose the drop shadows, it's so 1990s
> 
> Awe...
> 
> > 2. add black lines to the outside edges of the patch cords
> 
> Sadly, no can do, but I see why this would be desirable. I'll see if
I can 

> hack it together somehow.
> 
> > 3. labels for pots and jacks would be nice, but then they'd make the
> > modules larger, I suppose if it is in PDF format then it can be
> > resized on demand
> 
> I thought about adding them as tiny text, but it still cluttered things 
> up.
> 
> > 4. your 300s are mislabeled as 310s
> 
> Fixed.
> 
> --mikes

I like to be able to understand a diagram without too much external 
reference.   I really do want labels for everything used, including the 
jacks, pots, switches, and the type of module.  I would like to be able 
to understand it for the most part even if I don't have a MOTM.

When I draw my own patch diagrams, using a pencil and graph paper, I 
make block diagrams of the modules and draw lines with arrows to 
indicate patching.  This shows the signal or control direction, which is 
more detail than you would see in a photo.  I label the inputs and 
outputs.  I jot notes about pot and switch settings.  So my preference 
would be for a less graphic, more schematic approach.

-Richard Brewster

Mike Estee wrote:

>http://orbelisk.com/clickless.pdf
>
>What do you folks think of this style? Yeah, I know it lacks labels but I 
>think it's a little less cluttered this way, only showing that which makes 
>the patch run. Comments? Thoughts? Any guesses why this is called 
>"clickless"? ;)
>
>  
>

On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, mate_stubb wrote:

> How is this supposed to work for complex patches with an arbitrary set
> of modules?

The basic idea is that by using OmniGraffle (http://www.omnigroup.com) one 
can drag different MOTM symbols out of the template I'm building, and 
construct a patch as large and nasty as one needs. You could also use it 
to print patch sheets, scare your in-laws, or solve complex differential 
equations.

I've uploaded another simple patch to illustrate this:
http://www.orbelisk.com/motm-kick.pdf

I killed the drop shadows (which I liked) because the PDF export was huge 
with 'em included. I also added some little notes describing why some of 
the patch is the way it is. This is kinda how I'd want to see a patch 
documented. There would also be an mp3 file included to illustrate what 
the damn thing sounds like,but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

--mikes

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Richard Brewster wrote:

> I like to be able to understand a diagram without too much external 
> reference.   I really do want labels for everything used, including the 
> jacks, pots, switches, and the type of module.  I would like to be able to 
> understand it for the most part even if I don't have a MOTM.

Excellent point. I'll look for a solution to labels that doesn't create 
too much clutter.

> When I draw my own patch diagrams, using a pencil and graph paper, I make 
> block diagrams of the modules and draw lines with arrows to indicate 
> patching.

I thought about arrows for signal flow, but I decided to go with the 
white/clear circles instead. Arrows require a bit more operator 
interaction, but maybe that's ok.

> This shows the signal or control direction, which is more detail 
> than you would see in a photo.  I label the inputs and outputs.  I jot notes 
> about pot and switch settings.  So my preference would be for a less graphic, 
> more schematic approach.

A schematic approach would be ideal. I've looked around a bit, but I have 
yet to find a schematic symbol set that can adequately describe a given 
modular system and its subcomponents without looking like a tangled mess.

Something like the IEEE symbol language for logic diagramming would be 
swell. For example: 
http://www.standardics.philips.com/products/hc/pdf/74hc238.pdf

I've thought about designing one that could encompass any system, but it 
looked hard so I made it MOTM specific ;)

--mikes

On Friday 10 June 2005 03:30, Mike Estee wrote:

> I've uploaded another simple patch to illustrate this:
> http://www.orbelisk.com/motm-kick.pdf

Very nice already! :)

I agree that I'd like to see the labels of module 
inputs/outputs used by the patch. 

The colored cables may prove to be a problem when printing 
this PDF on a b/w printer.

I love the patchbook idea!!

- Robert