MOTM

Har! Round Three of the Mixer Wars erupts again! I posted both panel 
designs to start a discussion, in part because some of the newer list 
members are complaining about all the off topic posts, and we haven't 
had a design brawl in awhile. So if you're a list old-timer and are 
tired of all this, blame me.

Be aware - adding a second switch ups the module cost $5 - $10. Still 
want it?

Moe

Dave's Hot Rod MOTM Shop
http://www.users.qwest.net/~daveb2

--- In motm@y..., "J. Larry Hendry" <jlarryh@i...> wrote:
> I have to disagree with the prevailing opinion here.  The jack 
switching is
> more efficient in that you do not need an external switch and you 
leave the
> panel space open for other things.  What is it that the external 
switch gets
> you?  Nothing I can see.
> 
> with only one output connected, it is a 6 to 1 mixer.  With both 
jacked, it
> is a 3 to 1 mixer times 2.  What could be any more simple than 
that.  I have
> a DIY mixer built like that except  it is either 4 to 1 or 2 to 1 
times 2
> with dedicated bias and LEDs on each 1/2.  when you plug in the 
second
> output, it splits the mixer, that simple.  I also added 2 LEDs that 
indicate
> whether the mixer is in 4 to 1 or 2 to 1 x 2 mode.  However, I have 
found
> that the LEDs are just not needed.
> 
> So, I think Paul's concept of a switching jack is still best, but I 
think
> the "switch jack" should be the second output not the first.   
Think about
> it -- one output plug and it is 6 to 1 --  two output plugs and it
> automatically splits off  3 of the inputs to the second output.  
Highly
> intuitive.
> Larry H
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dave Hylander <david@h...>
> To: <motm@y...>
> Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2001 1:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [motm] Re: Mixer design as of now
> 
> 
> I like the dedicated mode switch on mixer2.
> 
> dave