Wiardgroup

>I'll be the first to admit that in the past, I have
>been guilty of ....errrr.....'overly zealous emails'.
>This was based soley on pressure of mounting inventory
>of parts around Christmas. When you build high-end
>equipment, you have high-end inventory (I think at one
>point I had $43,000 worth of raw parts sitting in
>storage).

Each and every one of us makes "high end" audio equipment, 
and we are all under considerable economic pressure.
Rex's investment makes everyone else look like Kindergartners, 
yet, I have never heard him say an unkind word about anyone.
Do not think you are the only one to experience that level of 
anxiety.

> 
> So, with 'gentle prodding' I hope Grant and others
> adopt the MOTM form factor as a cross-platform. 
> 

I wish that I could embrace it more enthusiasticly, but the format 
is "the surprise reappearance of an earlier form thought to be 
extinct". While I understand you mean well, the format offers the 
same mixed bag of advantages and disadvantages as any other 
solution that has been tried. The decision to trade process 
indicators for signal to noise ratio is particularly puzzling. The 
rapid troubleshooting afforded by visual process indicators is 
almost universally considered a strong design enhancement.

Realistically, I do not believe that there is a perfect solution, or 
"ultimate format" for an analog modular. There will always be a 
trade off between durability and weight. And there will always be 
a trade off between complexity and rapid utilization. This applies 
to any engineered object, and accounts for the wide diversity of 
synthesizer designs.

We know that bio-diversity is an index to the health of an 
eco-system, more diversity is better. We can only hope that the 
same holds true for our little "industry".