MOTM

In a message dated 2/4/2001 9:01:47 PM, pow333@... writes:

>If we can make use of the dead space 
>currently vacant on the Superladder, then why not a 3U panel? 

I didn't see the additional VCA used for the level of the envelope input when 
I initially questioned the use of a 3U panel over a 2U. Given those controls, 
I can't see getting the module into a 2U format without losing something 
important -- there is about enough room to add a LFO though.

If we can
>fit 3 eg's on two panels, then what increased function does an 1U 
>module make possible? 

Since you ask, Tony's module gives simultaneous AR and AD outputs from a 
single gate. Tony has the PCB laid out so that dual ganged pots can be used 
to provide simultaneous control over both of the attack segments and 
simultaneous control over both the decay and release segments -- this is a 
smart way to lay out the PCB, but on a modular (as you said) real estate 
isn't a major issue. In this implementation (the one that allows three of 
these EG modules in a 2U front panel) one loses independence over the 
different segments of the envelopes -- both the attacks will (of course) take 
about the same time, and the release will take about the same time as the 
decay.

That's why I think the 1U four knob (fully independent -- one knob for each 
segment, using standard pots) version of this module is preferable; more 
control.
JB