What\u2019s best about MOTM includes many of the reasons we have bought our systems:
- Robust hardware: This system gets my vote for most likely to survive the next 20-30 years. Switchcraft ΒΌ\u201d jacks, sealed cerment and plastic conductor pots and high quality switches ensure that this system is built to last. These are not luxuries, these are requirements for users making lifetime investments.
- Dead-on accurate designs: An overlooked fact, not only is the VCO the most pitch accurate one around, but modules such as the VC Switch and VC Lag process those 1V/oct signals so accurately that you\u2019ll never notice a pitch problem. The Moog tribute ladder filter breaks into oscillation at the same frequency as the original Moog Modular filter. These are only a few examples.
- Ultimate features: How many lag processors have you seen that are better than the MOTM-820? None! What\u2019s missing from the VCO or VCF designs? Nothing other than some esoteric (and rarely used) functions such as variable soft sync. Because of this philosophy we are assured that each new module as it comes out will not scrimp on features.
- Detailed assembly, calibration, theory of operation and schematics. This gives everything you need should any maintenance be needed due to aging of components when we\u2019re still using our systems 30 years from now.
- Modest cost: Non-owners tend to disagree, but if one were to compare the parts BOM cost of MOTM vs. any other modular, you\u2019d realize that this is a bargain as far as the percentage markup applied over the materials cost. Shhh, don\u2019t tell Paul! J Yes, others are cheaper, but they\u2019re using 25 cent jacks and 60 cent pots that won\u03357;t hold up under constant use.
- Customer service: Paul is readily available through email or the telephone.
- Active user base: The MOTM community is the most active and helpful, bar none. Making MOTM available as kits tends to generate a base of hands-on customers.
- Kits or assembled units. Kits are relaxing and easy to build. I\u2019ve often compared it to needlepoint. The instructions even teach how to build stuff well, so you can apply these skills to your own projects.
- Protoyping kit, DIY and third party modules. Paul sells the overlooked Prototype PCB that lets you roll your own designs, or adapt others. The Stooge panels are an example of enhanced DIY. Kits and modules from Blacet, Oakley and Encore give multiple options beyond the core MOTM designs.
- Continuous development and an evolving future. New modules are always being released - no obsolescence here. One modular vendor got scratched off my list for my primary system when they said that once a certain batch of modules was completed, the whole system was \u201cdone.\u201d This was NOT Serge, by the way.
John Loffink
jloffink@...
-----Original Message-----
From: phaeton777 [mailto:phaeton777@...]
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 12:28 AM
To: motm@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [motm] Re: Can there be a
'best'? [long rant]
Very well said Paul. I don't see why you should even have to defend
yourself on this issue since most of us would say
you're preaching to
the converted.
I take great pride in KNOWING that my MOTM system
will be around a
LONG time. The blasted thing doesn't go out of
tune...ever. The
output is so quiet I've already blown a pair
tweeters in my NFMs
because I thought the level was much lower than it
really was. And,
it sounds like heaven. Like my Leatherman, my
Snap-on tools, and my
Rocky Mountain bike, it's something I don't have
to baby. I often
wish I was put together as well!
The technically-minded amongst us know why you do
it, and the
musically-minded amongst us know why you do it.
Stop explaining
yourself and get back to work! :)
Z.
--- In motm@y..., "Paul Schreiber"
wrote:
> Hmmm...it seems that my use of the word
'best' gets me into more
hot water than anything (except
> the time I said the Moog modular VCA had the
same sonics as AM
radio).
>
> I have even heard comments to the effect that
there is like an
unwritten 'rule' that musicians
> avoid using 'best' at all, because it implies
a sort of arrogant
snooty air (like "...so-and-so
> is the best bass player...") so the
prevailing attitude is a
neutral-at-best "hey, everything's
> cool!"
>
> This is 180 degrees out-of-phase with
engineering. The whole
*point* of engineering is to
> show/prove that A is a better solution than
B, because blah blah
blah. There are always multiple
> criteria about what constitutes "good,
better, best".
>
> And certainly I have learned that the clashes
between 'unemotional'
engineering and 'emotional'
> music can go all over the place, and in many
cases I think
musicians don't WANT to know specifics
> as it somehow removes a 'layer of magic'
between the musician and
the audience.
>
> There are cases that seem to be a 'no
brainer' to the engineering
side and no amount of
> explaining will change the attitude of the
user side. My favorite
example:
>
> "Does MOTM come with banana jacks?"
> "No, because they are unshielded."
> "I like the colors, and the fact you can
stack them."
> "Err...they are unshielded. Do you see
any other pro audio gear
using them?"
> "Well, synths that use them sound pretty
good to me!"
> "That may be true, but what about a case
when you DO get hum or
noise induced?"
> "Why do you slag other synth
manufacturers?"
>
> For me, any audio gear (not just synths) has
no business using
bananas because of this one fact.
> It doesn't matter if, to your ears, Synth A
with bananas sounds as
pure and clean as the driven
> snow. It's a bad *engineering* decision. The
reality is, the use of
banana jacks is a leftover
> from the early '70s based on cost. In 1974 I
bough 50 Switchcraft
jacks for like $110! 50 banana
> jacks would have been about $35. That is a
significant difference.
That gap is still there today:
> $1 versus about 30 cents.
>
> There are a 100 ways to shave pennies, that
add up to dollars. Back
in the '70s you could lower
> your pcb price by not having a solder mask
and silkscreen. This
made board stuffing a royal pain,
> and you can get copper foil delamination if
you aren't careful. PC
boards were relatively
> expensive as there were no CAD tools, no DRC
(design rule checking:
the schematic net list is
> checked by the computer against the routing).
However, there is
absolutely NO REASON that today's
> electronic products not have a solder
mask/silkscreen. In fact, the
pcb house I use charges
> *more* to leave it off because of yield
issues. Yet, I still see
these types of boards being
> made. If there is a difference, it can't be
over $1 or so.
>
> Besides the obvious electro-mechanical
scrimping, there is the
design and the corresponding parts
> selection. In electro-mechanical intensive
designs like a modular
synth, the actual parts content
> can be as low as 5% of the overall cost
(things like EGs and simple
LFOs). If you serve a low
> cost market, in many cases you are
self-limited in the parts
selection. However, in many cases
> the difference between a nominal part and a
REALLY GOOD part can be
50 cents. The mind-game you
> start playing is you start wanting that 50
cents for yourself, and
so you say "Heck, no ones
> gonna know the difference".
>
> I played that game for many years at Tandy
and elsewhere.
The 'moment of truth' for me came when
> I was designing a compact AM/FM receiver.
Sanyo makes all the radio
chips in the world, and they
> have 3 different FM demod chips, priced like
28 cents, 40 cents and
$1. I had over 50 schematics
> from every stereo receiver on the planet, all
brands. About 60%
used the 28 cent one, 40% used
> the 40 cent one and ZERO used the $1 one.
Even the most expensive,
stand-alone FM tuner (Marantz)
> used the 40 cent one. So, I get demo boards
for it and the $1 one
to measure and listen. Also, it
> turned out the $1 one used a 33 cent Toko
tuned trap coil for the
19.2 demode filter (any hams
> out there?).
>
> The difference between the 2 was STUNNING. The
$1 + 33 cent coil
blew the doors off the 40 cent
> one. Local classical FM radio sounded almost
CD quality. I was
dragging everyone into the lab for
> A/B tests and they all agreed the more
expensive one was the way to
go. Except my boss. "Can't
> afford it!" I said I could scrimp
elsewhere (power supply was a
favorite scrimp, ie the OB-8),
> but I realized that the *idea* of using
"the most expensive"
brought horror and shame to the
> manager. Picture the staff meeting:
>
> "Johnson, that new FM radio sounds
great! Who did the design?"
> "Schreiber. Did I mention he used the
most expensive Sanyo FM chip?"
> Stunned silence, followed by nervous paper
shuffling and coughs.
> "He....did.....what??!
Oh....my....GOD!!"
>
> This is why I am producing MOTM. I want it to
represent what it
means to be the best. I don't go
> out and hunt expensive parts for the sake of
a "gold plated
toothpick" as MOTM has been called. I
> just refuse to use inferior parts when there
are better ones out
there. The R&D in the 500 and
> 600 reflect this even more (there are rotary
encoders that I could
get for $7, but I'm using a
> Greyhill avionics-grade optical encoder with
1 MILLION full cycle
rotations guaranteed with
> stainless steel housing. This way, 20 years
from now, it's still
working perfectly. My cost is
> about $26).
>
> Even if my use of 'best' make you squirm, I'm
not gloating,
bragging or slagging. This is just
> the engineer in me talking facts. I wanted MOTM
to raise the bar,
to show the 'unclean' that
> there is an alternative way to design audio
gear (like looking
inside a Mark Levinson or Krell
> audio amplifier). I think I have succeeded,
and it's not just me. I
have other people designing
> HW and SW that have more ability than me in
many areas. I am
grateful that they feel that MOTM is
> where they themselves have decided to
contribute.
>
> I admit that when I hear the end result, the
music, I want to shout
from the rooftops. I just
> make paint and brushes, others use the
modules to *create*. I
listen to every audio synth demo
> and CD I can find. If I was in the market for
a modular, it is
a 'no-brainer'. I have yet to hear
> ANY other synth demo that made me want to
chunk MOTM in a rat hole
and say "That kicks my butt!
> It's time to close shop." Rather, the
opposite.
>
> OK, the therapy session is over :) Please
don't start in over
bananas (Les!). I know several of
> you have replaced the 1/4 with them: don't
tell me (my poor babies!
Sob....)
>
> Paul S.