In a message dated 9/20/99 11:36:46 PM, jlarryh@... writes: >Some might argue that even with one >row, the number of jacks is still excessive. I cannot really see that >many >multiples being needed. However, this project is more about having those >multiples in a handy location, which does suggest that one might end up >with a few more than he really needs. I find I often need to patch a single CV to 5 or more inputs (especially keyboard or keyboard pressure, and gate and trigger outputs), so I would urge you not to underestimate the need for multiples. I would suggest that it's better to have unused multiples than to have too few. That's why I agree with you comments below. Keep up the thinkin! JB >The number really starts to sound more reasonable if you compare it to >a >MOTM system two rows high and 22 or so module-units wide. A single 1U >multiple panel with standard MOTM spacing would yield 20 jacks (5 multiples >of 4 each for example) If you had one of those in each row you would have >40 jacks. If you compared that to a MOTM system two rows high with ONE >of >the horizontal multiples I suggested between the MOTM rows you see that >the >number of jacks is similar (44 compared to 40). However, the horizontal >multiple in this example actually contacts the physical edge of every >single MOTM module in the system.
Message
Re: Horizontal format multiple / Larry's magic bus
1999-09-22 by JWBarlow@xxx.xxx
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.