Analogue systems

hello peter,

i don't think so. the rs15 is a double row frame and it will
probably hold more than 10 modules in most cases.
the high power modules are quite new and the rs15 is available
for many years now.

but anyway, i really don't want to discuss this issue
any further. i'm sure that bob had his reasons for
designing the rs15 the way he did, and he also had his
reasons for changing the design on the new rs15.

best wishes

ingo




--- In analogue_systems@yahoogroups.com, Peter Grenader <peter@b...> 
wrote:
> I think Bob limited it to this number of sockets to assure there 
wouldn't be
> any current issues with multiple modules equipped with displays, 
which eat
> up a ton of juice through no fault of A. Systems!
> 
> 
>  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > hello peter,
> > 
> > yes, i agree with you in the most points.
> > what i was trying to say is that it is not ok
> > to have only 10 connectors in a frame as big as the rs15.
> > it would be ok if the dual or triple cables were free,
> > just like the standard power cables, but it doesn't look
> > like that. i can't think of a system with only 10 modules
> > in a rs15 frame, so you don't have a clue, you have to use
> > those special cables. i don't care about the money, it is
> > more a question of principle. maybe i'm just too german?
> > 
> > another thing, the dip sockets are cheap, yes. but there
> > are other sockets and connectors available which are
> > much more rigid and they are not much more expensive.
> > from my point of view it doesn't make sense to save money on
> > the connectors. would anybody care if the modules would cost
> > 1 pound more than they do? probably not, but it bothers
> > me when i have to pay 20 euro for a cable with cheap dip sockets,
> > just to be able to connect another module.
> > 
> > anyway, yesterday i felt really pissed about that, today
> > i feel much more relaxed. if i have to pay for the cables,
> > then this will be ok, but i don't think that this will make
> > me a happy customer.
> > 
> > best wishes
> > 
> > ingo
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In analogue_systems@yahoogroups.com, Peter Grenader 
<peter@b...>
> > wrote:
> >> Bob really raised the pole for everyone with the new PSU.  Its 
much
> > better
> >> mechanically and electrically, but let me just comment briefly on
> > the socket
> >> selection.
> >> 
> >> While some of this is my own conclusion, I think it's fair to say
> > that
> >> Analogue Systems, by virtue of coming after Doepfer, was 
conforming
> > to the
> >> Doepfer standards for power requirements, size, jack type, etc.
> > This was a
> >> supremely intuitive decision on Bob's part as it created a cross
> > platform
> >> which has unquestionably helped his sales.  A brilliant move.
> >> 
> >> But - for obvious reasons, he wanted to avoid using other 
companies
> > PSUs if
> >> at all possible.  It only makes sense.  You can easily guarantee 
a
> > product's
> >> performance if you can control it's operation.  Once a second 
party
> > product
> >> is introduced, you then lose a certain amount of control and
> > therefore, you
> >> can no longer unquestionably guarantee the operation.  I'm not
> > speaking
> >> about the user side of the faceplate here, that's 200% 
compatible -
> > I'm
> >> speaking about it's supply voltage source.  I am also not dissing
> > the
> >> Doepfer PSU.  It's a fine unit, it's just not made by Analogue
> > Systems and
> >> from a manufacturers standpoint, more of a risk.  The very same
> > holds true
> >> with Doepfer modules powered by A. Sys supplies.  It will work
> > fine - but
> >> it's not a controlled situation, that's all.
> >> 
> >> So how to you design in exclusivity?  You use another connector
> > scheme and
> >> that's what Bob did.  Analogue Solutions was willing to take that
> > risk and
> >> their modules have accommodations for both the Doepfer inline and
> > the A.
> >> Sys's DIP connections.
> >> 
> >> Bob's decision to go with DIP connectors make sense as they are a
> > cost
> >> effective functional alternative to the Doepfer scheme.  You just
> > have to be
> >> careful when connecting them, that's all.  Listen, I've got hands
> > as large
> >> as cricket mallets.  It takes a bit of getting used to, but you 
do
> > and it
> >> gets easy at that point. One thing I've noticed that really makes
> >> connections easier is if you remove either the top or bottom 
panel
> > from the
> >> rack when making multiple connections (like when setting up your
> > system
> >> initially), because it allows you to view things from a shallower
> > angle so
> >> you're not covering up the area you need to see with your hand.
> >> 
> >> With Bob's new power distribution panel things are much better 
off
> > because
> >> he included Doepfer style terminations along with his DIP sockets
> > on his new
> >> motherboard.   He also fused the secondary side of the syste (not
> > just the
> >> AC mains, but the DC voltsges as well) so even if ther is a
> > problem, the
> >> chance of it doing little more than blowing a fuse is distant.
> >> 
> >> just my conjecture here...
> >> 
> >> - P
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >