MOTM

Well said, Tom!

(It is with some trepidation I adjoin with this thread, thereby increasing
the sense of vexation for a narrow vein of the masses that be, alas...)

Now while I don't maintain quite the same position on the "white noise/sea
of knobs" analogy (another opinion - imagine that!) I nevertheless feel the
same way about the "what is the best interface" argument, namely that there
can be no right one for everyone.  I for one agree that the use of empty
space is very important, specifically to improve the spatial recognition of
various functions; this is why I have "wasted" my vote on the 4U 450
solution.  Since my cabinet is really a standard-width rack that is six feet
tall, there's not too many modules on any one row; confusion is less than it
would be in a wider cabinet.  I also utilize a couple of blank panels and
mults to help things out. (must...buy...more...910's...)

In any case, I believe Paul has done an excellent job at striking a balance
in the user interface design; it looks unique while providing excellent
functionality along with top-quality at a reasonable cost.  Regardless of
the layout the 450 ends up with, I'll be sure to pick [at least] one up.

I also appreciate the fact that Paul not only [seemingly] tolerates our vast
opinions, but is actually crazy enough to solicit them!  (As I recognize
that opinions on the overall MOTM layout was not recently solicited, I
therefore appreciate his clemency as well. ;^) )

George

----- Original Message -----
From: mbedtom@...
To: motm@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 2:32 AM
Subject: [motm] Layouts


Each of us make noises that please us.  There is no "wrong" style of noises
that we make.  But I don't think that 74 minutes of white noise would do
much for me, musically.  To me, the "sea of knobs" arrangement of modules is
akin to 74 minutes of white noise.  Hasn't anybody thought of using some
carefully placed blank panels to help group like-things together or breakup
that sea of knobs?  Must every inch of the synth front be laden with knobs,
jacks, wires, and LEDs?  You WILL outgrow your present synth cabinet within
the next 3 years.  Accept the inevitable and start another cabinet now.  Add
some blank panels to the layout!  Buy all you want - Paul will make more.  A
painting is not always universally appealing if there are a million dots of
bright colors stretching from corner to corner.  What's the matter with a
little, plain white showing through?  Blank panels = the magic white of
paintings.  Try it!  (This will probably be unpopular as I've seen posts
that indicate that empty panel space is "wasteful".  I guess I'm the only
one that has bought blank panels from Paul for the purpose of breaking up my
layout.)

What is the user interface to our synth?  Is it the knobs, jacks and patch
cables?  Is it a mouse and a screen displaying a Sonar or other sequencer
window?  Is it a piano-looking keyboard with a glowing LCD connected to a
MID-CV?  Is it a joystick or an AirSynth?  Is it a linear slider?  Is it a
guitar with a MIDI interface?  The answer is "yes" and "no".  That is
because we each have our own personal take on what music is to us and the
"best" way for each to express those ideas and those feelings.  There can be
no one best answer to the issue of layout as there is no one best kind of
music.  Each has its place and its fans.  But the layouts we choose reflect
the anticipated efficiency of producing the delightful noises we like best.
The MOTM format and layout is not "best" from my perspective.  But, I think
Paul has done a remarkable job of coming up with something that is workable
for just about everyone.  The current layout is probably not "best" for
anyone.  But it works.  I think it is wonderful that we have decent quality
building blocks to make anything of our choosing.  If our layout doesn't
work, I think WE must assume a significant part of the responsibility for
that failure.  After all, WE put the modules in the order of our choosing.
It would be wonderful if Paul had a Santa Claus machine that could stamp out
modules to order.  But I think that is a little too far off in the future.
For me, I am quite content to let Paul continue on with the framework that
now exists.  The limitations can mostly be overcome by some creative
arrangement and the use of blank panels.  Unless you shell out really big
bucks for custom, I can think of no other device, appliance, apparatus, or
instrument that offers the creative flexibility of a MOTM synth.  On my
fridge for example, I'd be happy if the damned ice maker would work for more
than 6 friggin' months!  It only has two user controls and they don't work.

Cheers!
Tom Farrand