MOTM

Time for an opinion poll:

Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could be
either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.

In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:

a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
b) more features than the 3U wide
c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit in 1U tall.

I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it as a
1U to get
possible more sales.

It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")

Well?

Paul S.

More features is always better!
Let it be 4U!!!!
--Shemp

BTW...I am back from an extended stay in Japan.  I have my soldering iron
warming up as we speak.

> Time for an opinion poll:
>
> Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design
> that could be
> either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
> In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
> a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
> b) more features than the 3U wide
> c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
> d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit
> in 1U tall.
>
> I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to
> do it as a
> 1U to get
> possible more sales.
>
> It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
> Well?
>
> Paul S.
>
> >

On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Paul Schreiber wrote:

> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
> 
> Time for an opinion poll:
> 
> Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could be
> either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
> Well?

  1U x 19"

  MOTMers will have a rack already.  Non-MOTMers will have a rack, but
likely no rails.

  --Crow

/**/

>I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it as a
>1U to get
>possible more sales.


I'd go with the 1U format.

jmw

Paul Schreiber (07:41 PM 11/22/1999) wrote:

 >I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it as a
 >1U to get possible more sales.

If you go with a 19" format, be sure to stiffen the panel so that it 
doesn't flex, or, just go with a fully enclosed case.

I have a modular machine that's made up of pieces in a 19" rack format. The 
flex in the middle of the panel is pretty bad. I had the modules done up so 
that all the jacks are at one end, so it doesn't bother me that much.


Mark

Hey Paul,

Is this a "must -have" for us MOTM users? If so, I'd like to see it in the
standard format 5 Unit Tall, no problem with me if you want to expand it to
4 units wide to get in all the goods.

Could this be the vocoder module?

Aren't all MOTM's - "must have"?

Love that 410!

Mark T




----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Schreiber <synth1@...>
To: MOTM listserv <motm@onelist.com>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 8:41 PM
Subject: [motm] 1U tall *Modules*??!?


> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
> Time for an opinion poll:
>
> Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could
be
> either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
> In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
> a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
> b) more features than the 3U wide
> c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
> d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit in 1U
tall.
>
> I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it as
a

> 1U to get
> possible more sales.
>
> It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
> Well?
>
> Paul S.
>
> >

My thinking this is not required for subscribers as it is "specialized" to a
degree.

Not a vocoder. Good try!

Paul S.

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark T <mmt@...>
To: <motm@onelist.com>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 9:25 PM
Subject: Re: [motm] 1U tall *Modules*??!?


> From: "Mark T" <mmt@...>
>
> Hey Paul,
>
> Is this a "must -have" for us MOTM users? If so, I'd like to see it in the
> standard format 5 Unit Tall, no problem with me if you want to expand it
to
> 4 units wide to get in all the goods.
>
> Could this be the vocoder module?
>
> Aren't all MOTM's - "must have"?
>
> Love that 410!
>
> Mark T
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Schreiber <synth1@...>
> To: MOTM listserv <motm@onelist.com>
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 8:41 PM
> Subject: [motm] 1U tall *Modules*??!?
>
>
> > From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
> >
> > Time for an opinion poll:
> >
> > Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that
could
> be
> > either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
> >
> > In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
> >
> > a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
> > b) more features than the 3U wide
> > c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
> > d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit in 1U
> tall.
> >
> > I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it
as

> a
> > 1U to get
> > possible more sales.
> >
> > It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
> >
> > Well?
> >
> > Paul S.
> >
> > >
>
> >

synth1@... writes:

>>Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could 
be either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.<<

A few people are blindly spurting out, "go with 1U x 19 inch".  We, or should 
I say myself and probably some others, would need to know what it is before 
we could answer that.  If it's the kind of unit that I would use more for 
other keyboards and synths then I would use in an MOTM synth patch, then I 
would say 19".  If not, or if there are already similar units on the market, 
then I would stay with the nice 3Ux5U.  But without knowing what it is, 
nobody can give a realistic answer.

Keep in mind, if a module is so super-ultra-mega-cool and is only available 
in MOTM format, you might pick up a few more MOTM modular synth customers.

-Elhardt

I prefer the 3U x 5U version.  It would be cool too.  To me a 19" by 1U 
module is not really a modular item.

Fred

> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
> 
> Time for an opinion poll:
> 
> Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could
be
> either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.

My preference is always the standard 5U height.  However, for just such an
occasion, I have planned 19" rack units even in my case design.  So, I
would buy either.

Larry (representing 25% of the stooge vote) Hendry

>From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
>Well?

I actually have a 1U blank space in my MOTM rack, the MAQ is only 4 spaces
and it's in a 20 space rack. So 1U or 5U would work for me.

So what the heck is the mystery module?

________________________________________________________
Dave Trenkel : improv@...  : www.peak.org/~improv/

"...there will come a day when you won't have to use
gasoline. You'd simply take a cassette and put it in
your car, let it run. You'd have to have the proper
type of music. Like you take two sticks, put 'em
together, make fire. You take some notes and rub 'em
together - dum, dum, dum, dum - fire, cosmic fire."
                                            -Sun Ra
________________________________________________________

1U tall is OK with me - more features being a good reason and I'll gladly go along with it if it's better for sales. Whatever I can do to make MOTM the Modular Of The Millennium...

...jp
_______________________________________________________________________________

>From: motm@onelist.com on Mon, Nov 22, 1999 8:43 PM
>Subject: [motm] 1U tall *Modules*??!?
>To: MOTM listserv
>
>From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
>Time for an opinion poll:
>
>Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could be
>either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
>In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
>a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
>b) more features than the 3U wide
>c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
>d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit in 1U tall.
>
>I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it as a
>1U to get
>possible more sales.
>
>It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
>Well?
>
>Paul S.
>

Is it true that MOTM-ers will already be using racks? It sounded to me like
most of us were building custom cabinets.

A 1u x 19u wouldn't work for me personally.

As  a way to make MOTM modules available to those not building complete
systems (i.e., who want a 410 as a stand-alone effect) maybe it would be
fruitful for the long run to design some kind of generic "mini-cabinet" that
could, say, hold 4u worth of modules-any MOTM modules-and had a wall-wart
supply. That would open up many MOTM modules to non MOTM-ers. They could put
two 2u modules in it, 2 1u & 1 2u, etc.

Seems to me that this would be a better long term design solution. Much more
flexible.

19" rack doesn't fit with my plans at all. I'd MUCH rather have it in MOTM
format, even 4U wide if necessary.

Dave Bradley
Principal Software Engineer
Engineering Animation, Inc.
daveb@...

>
> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
> Time for an opinion poll:
>
> Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design
> that could be
> either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
> In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
> a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
> b) more features than the 3U wide
> c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
> d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit
> in 1U tall.
>
> I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to
> do it as a
> 1U to get
> possible more sales.
>
> It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
> Well?
>
> Paul S.
>
> >

>Is it true that MOTM-ers will already be using racks? It sounded to me like
>most of us were building custom cabinets.
>

I certainly plan on building a custom cabinet when my MOTM exceeds the size
of it's current home, but I also plan on making space for 19" rack modules.
There are some devices that I'm sure Paul won't be designing (e.g. multi
effect units) that I like to use almost exclusively with MOTM gear.

How are all of you 5U purists mounting your Kenton or other Midi/CV units?


jmw

>
> How are all of you 5U purists mounting your Kenton or other Midi/CV units?
>

My Expressionist is away from my MOTM system in a rack with other rack mount
synths. It's 8 CV, 8 gate, 1 DIN sync clock and 1 DIN sync start outputs are
brought out to a custom 2U panel mounted in the main MOTM case, connected
via a snake to the other rack with an ELCO connector. That gives me room to
also have 8 LEDs for gate lamps on the panel.

Dave "Gimme an LED" Bradley

> From: "Tkacs, Ken" <Ken.Tkacs@...>

> My own preference is for 5u "major" modules and 3u high "minor"
> modules, but
> I'm not pushing the 3u idea on anyone. I'm building a series of cabinets
> that are 13u high to house two rows of 10u MOTM gear and then a
> 3u "utility"
> section along the bottom for multiples, passive filters, a coupler panel,
> adapters, CV mixers, etc. Pretty much the Moog IIIp look.
>

Consider this: I'm doing 2U high "minor modules" on bottom (Moog IIIc look)
instead of 3U high, that way I can just buy a 5U x 2U blank MOTM panel and
turn it on its side. You could buy 3U wide panels from Paul and do the same.
You may end up cutting one short at the end if it doesn't come out a whole
multiple of your cab width.

Dave Bradley
Principal Software Engineer
Engineering Animation, Inc.
daveb@...

> Any non-MOTM module I buy (PAIA, Blacet) I'm creating MOTM-sized
> panels for.
> It's a major bitch! I don't recommend it. But I centered my system around
> the MOTM standard and I have to admit to being just a tiny bit
> frightened of
> another standard sneaking in-I'm doing enough harm on my own. So
> I am going
> to be curmudgeonly :-) .

Sorry to say it wouldn't work for me.  I have a cabinet design that 
perfectly fits 2 side by side sections of 5 2U modules by 2 rows.  Not to 
say that the next cabinet I build can't have an extra short row added but 
then I'll have to ask myself "How many short rows do I need to add?"  This 
all gets back to the standards you've established and it's been mentioned 
before.  I'm glad to see it won't be a mainstream MOTM-xxx module so I 
(hopefully) could live without it.

The major downside is the extra $30!  I ain't rich!

John Speth
Object Engineering, Inc
mailto:johns@...

On Monday, November 22, 1999 5:42 PM, Paul Schreiber 
[SMTP:synth1@...] wrote:
> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
> Time for an opinion poll:
>
> Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could 
be
> either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
> In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
> a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
> b) more features than the 3U wide
> c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
> d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit in 1U 
tall.
>
> I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it 
as a

> 1U to get
> possible more sales.
>
> It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
> Well?
>
> Paul S.
>
> >

Well.
Here's my opinion.  If  the 1U  panel will boost Paul's sales of the module
from say 100 units to maybe 500 or more units, then there's no reason he
should let us stand in the way.  A fella's gotta make a living--am I right?
Of course, if the appeal is going to be mainly to the modular crowd, I can't
see too much reason to break out of the 5U format.
Just my Rather pragmatic 40% of a nickel.

tomr

*Please* stick to the form that you have adhered to so well thus far. If
this is something that will duplicate functionality elsewhere in the MOTM
series (i.e. not essential to MOTM freaks), then please put the Synthesis
Technology name on it, give it the same look, do it in 1U, but please don't
give it a MOTM number. I think the MOTM stuff should stick with the 5U-high
form. I like the fact that, though I have the modules in a 19" rack now, I
can later build a wider cabinet. Or even narrower cabinets!

Please don't violate the standard you've already set.

(Don't know why this got me so worked up!)

David.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Schreiber [mailto:synth1@...]
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 6:42 PM
> To: MOTM listserv
> Subject: [motm] 1U tall *Modules*??!?
>
>
> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
> Time for an opinion poll:
>
> Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design
> that could be
> either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
> In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
> a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
> b) more features than the 3U wide
> c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
> d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit
> in 1U tall.
>
> I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to
> do it as a
> 1U to get
> possible more sales.
>
> It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
> Well?
>
> Paul S.
>
>

It's quite possible that I won't be using any such MIDI->CV unit, though I
made to throw in a ProSolo now and then. The further I get from MIDI, the
happier I am, and the more I like my music. I still use MIDI clock out of
necessity for some things, but all my CVs and triggers so far for "MOTM use"
have been from FR-777, TB-303, TR-606, ARP Axxe, SH-101. I wish I hadn't
traded away that System 100 model 104 sequencer now...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jmw/cmu [mailto:evening@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 9:11 AM
> To: motm@onelist.com
> Subject: Re: [motm] 1U tall *Modules*??!?
>
>
> From: "jmw/cmu" <evening@...>
>
> >Is it true that MOTM-ers will already be using racks? It sounded
> to me like
> >most of us were building custom cabinets.
> >
>
> I certainly plan on building a custom cabinet when my MOTM
> exceeds the size
> of it's current home, but I also plan on making space for 19"
> rack modules.
> There are some devices that I'm sure Paul won't be designing (e.g. multi
> effect units) that I like to use almost exclusively with MOTM gear.
>
> How are all of you 5U purists mounting your Kenton or other Midi/CV units?
>
>
> jmw
>
>

Consider this: I'm doing 2U high "minor modules" on bottom
(Moog IIIc look)
		instead of 3U high, that way I can just buy a 5U x 2U blank
MOTM panel and
		turn it on its side. You could buy 3U wide panels from Paul
and do the same.
		You may end up cutting one short at the end if it doesn't
come out a whole
		multiple of your cab width.



		I bought a truckload of 3u high blanks already, so I'm
pretty committed to that form factor. I like the ratio between the 3/5-it
looks to my eye much closer to the Moog look. It also allows me to place a
decent number jacks and knobs while still keeping to the MOTM "grid."

		I realize that 13u high is unlucky.

		It doesn't do me any good to use the pre-painted faceplates
since I can't screen on them-I'm ink jet printing my panels onto photo
paper, laminating them onto the aluminum, drilling the holes, and then
sealing the whole thing in a million coats of polyurethane. It sounds like a
nightmare, but it actually comes out better than it sounds. After trying all
sorts of things for my Theremin faceplate, I tried that out of desperation
and it came out really decent.

I guess I could live with either 10Ux1U or 3Ux5U but I think I would end up
using such a module "differently" if it was 10Ux1U since I would think of
it more as an "external/effects" module than as a synthesis module.  For
example, if a phaser is a separate device from your modular, you tend to
view it as something that process the "whole" sound of the device more
frequently than as something that you would use as a filter-like component
in a sound/patch.

It is possible to break this mindset and that's part of what doing modular
synthesis is all about so I don't feel that it would kill me to see a
10Ux1U module.  

However, if you do make it a 10Ux1U unit, please, please, please make
parallel sets of jacks available on the front and back panels!  I think
part of the difficulty of using the MoogerFooger pedals well in a modular
system is that the jacks are hidden on the back and you "forget" that you
have more control available.  That and the fact that I can never find the
right place to set them down!

BTW, I do like the idea of making a 10Ux5U MOTM "effects" package.  This
could include the 410, 120, and 320, etc.  It might be a bit pricey for the
usual "effects" crowd though.  Sigh, why do economics always have to get in
the way!

	Eric

At 07:41 PM 11/22/99 -0600, Paul Schreiber wrote:

>From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
>Time for an opinion poll:
>
>Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could be
>either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
>In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
>a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
>b) more features than the 3U wide
>c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
>d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit in 1U tall.
>
>I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it as a
>1U to get
>possible more sales.
>
>It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
>Well?
>
>Paul S.
>
>>
>

I guess I could live with either 10Ux1U or 3Ux5U but I think I would end up
using such a module "differently" if it was 10Ux1U since I would think of
it more as an "external/effects" module than as a synthesis module.  For
example, if a phaser is a separate device from your modular, you tend to
view it as something that process the "whole" sound of the device more
frequently than as something that you would use as a filter-like component
in a sound/patch.

It is possible to break this mindset and that's part of what doing modular
synthesis is all about so I don't feel that it would kill me to see a
10Ux1U module.  

However, if you do make it a 10Ux1U unit, please, please, please make
parallel sets of jacks available on the front and back panels!  I think
part of the difficulty of using the MoogerFooger pedals well in a modular
system is that the jacks are hidden on the back and you "forget" that you
have more control available.  That and the fact that I can never find the
right place to set them down!

BTW, I do like the idea of making a 10Ux5U MOTM "effects" package.  This
could include the 410, 120, and 320, etc.  It might be a bit pricey for the
usual "effects" crowd though.  Sigh, why do economics always have to get in
the way!

	Eric

At 07:41 PM 11/22/99 -0600, Paul Schreiber wrote:

>From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
>Time for an opinion poll:
>
>Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could be
>either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
>In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
>a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers
>b) more features than the 3U wide
>c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
>d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit in 1U tall.
>
>I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it as a
>1U to get
>possible more sales.
>
>It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
>Well?
>
>Paul S.
>
>>
>

>From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>Reply-To: motm@onelist.com
>To: "MOTM listserv" <motm@onelist.com>
>Subject: [motm] 1U tall *Modules*??!?
>Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 19:41:59 -0600
>
>Time for an opinion poll:
>
>Let's say that a super-ultra-mega-cool module was in in design that could 
>be
>either 3U wide x 5U tall, or 1U tall by 19" wide.
>
>In the 19" wide version, the advantages would be:
>
>a) optional "wall-wart" supply for non-MOTM customers

PLEASE!!! NO WALL WART!!! I'm buried in them now.

>b) more features than the 3U wide
>c) easier to build, due to mechanical reasons
>d) cost would be probably $30 more. Say $219 kit versus $249 kit in 1U 
>tall.

I can live with a 19" rack mount.

>I really don't want 2 versions, and right now *really* tempted to do it as 
>a
>1U to get
>possible more sales.
>
>It's more of an effects thing (ie like a '410 is an "effect")
>
>Well?
>
>Paul S.
>
>
><< text3.html >>

> From: "Tkacs, Ken" <Ken.Tkacs@...>
> As  a way to make MOTM modules available to those not building complete
> systems (i.e., who want a 410 as a stand-alone effect) maybe it would be
> fruitful for the long run to design some kind of generic "mini-cabinet"
that
> could, say, hold 4u worth of modules-any MOTM modules-and had a wall-wart
> supply. That would open up many MOTM modules to non MOTM-ers. They could
put
> two 2u modules in it, 2 1u & 1 2u, etc.
> 
> Seems to me that this would be a better long term design solution. Much
more
> flexible.

Good idea Ken.  One of those little 5 space high (not very deep) SKB racks
would be really cool for that.

Paul, would the "wall wart" supplies be something like what Blacet sells at
his site?

Larry H.

I'd much prefer 5U, as always! 

Note: 100% of Stooges agree on this -- and what are you gonna do with 3+ 
angry stooges!

JB
I'm guessing it's a phaser (maybe based round the ARP Qudra Phaser).

In a message dated 11/23/99 8:17:33 AM, daveb@... writes:
>19" rack doesn't fit with my plans at all. I'd MUCH rather have it in MOTM
>format, even 4U wide if necessary.

In a message dated 11/22/99 6:51:04 PM, tentochi@... writes:
>More features is always better!
>Let it be 4U!!!!
>--Shemp

In a message dated 11/22/99 10:40:51 PM, jlarryh@... writes:

>My preference is always the standard 5U height.  However, for just such
>an
>occasion, I have planned 19" rack units even in my case design.  So, I
>would buy either.

>Larry (representing 25% of the stooge vote) Hendry

paul,
depending on what the "module" / "effect" is, for me, a "standalone" 1ux19 
unit would be attractive. however, i don`t have an investment in framing, 
etc. for your existing module line. i would suspect that the majority would 
prefer something styled to fit in with their systems. since i`m planning on 
getting a 420 anyway, ultimately the choice of "whether to buy" for the new 
device would depend on what it did. so, in the interest of peace and 
conformity, i`d have to say that you chose a size / form factor, so stick 
with it.
best,
dave

4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U

--Shemp

I see the remaining 25% of Stooge-ness has expressed his opinion.  Real
subtle Shemp.  You always were the sneaky one.
LH

----------

> From: Tentochi <tentochi@...>
> To: motm@onelist.com
> Subject: [motm] RE:  1U tall *Modules*??!?
> Date: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 10:39 PM
> 
> From: "Tentochi" <tentochi@...>
> 
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U
> 
> --Shemp

synth1@... writes:

>>Phaser? Who said "make the Moogerfooger 12-stage look like a toy" phaser?
Me??!?<<

I can't tell if this is confirmation that the possible 1Ux19 unit would be a 
phaser.  Just the thing I was hoping to get a quantity of two off in modular 
5U format.  Is it really too much extra work to do both module and rack 
versions of the same thing, seeing how the PCB could be exactly the same for 
both formats?  All that is required extra for a 5U module version of a 19" 
rack unit, is the faceplate.

-Elhardt