how many slots are should a 500 form card be?

[pan60]

Originally Posted by Scott LaChapell

Agreed. Losing a set of input/output connectors for one unit wouldn't be as appealing, IMHO. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
FYI, the 583 WILL make use of both input/output connectors if the user decides to separate the EQ and run it solo; tube pre signal through left bay, independent EQ in right bay (just flip the toggle). <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
BUT, if there ever was a great single channel unit that takes up two bays I would love to be able to consider buying this unit. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
There is a difference between a standard and a tradition. <o:p></o:p>

[pan60]

we have 23.40% for never more then one
we have 23.40% for depends what type of card as in a pre/eq or a comp.
we have 10.64% for more the one but only if the in and outs are to be used.
we have 4.62% only for a comp so as to use side a chain function
and we have 23.40% for do not care just get another rack
i think it makes sense to me to combine the
for more the one but only if the in and outs are to be used.
only for a comp so as to use side a chain function
as they are about the same so we 15.26%
and truly i think we should lump in
for depends what type of card as in a pre/eq or a comp.
so now we have 38.66% for those who think it depends on the card and what it will have to offer, and 23.40% who do not care at all .

so between that and the 23.40% who do not care at all
and the 38.66% who will decide if it is worth based on the card the majority seems to not care about size
so it appears that in the size dose not matter

[DaveThibodeau]

Originally Posted by TonyBelmont

You could also say that none of the companies I sell have any high current drawing 500 series modules. All of these things fall in line with my beliefs about the format, hence the companies I support (or don't).

The fact that the companies I support don't have double spaced modules, might have at least a little bit to do with theories I have expressed to them about module widths, current draws, and space. But, who's to say one of the companies I am a dealer for won't release a product of multi-space widths tomorrow. My views wouldn't change, and it wouldn't bother me.

Well, Tony, You have said great things about me in the past and I hate to disappoint you but I do need to clarify something. The DakingPlus A-Range EQ/500 does draw more power then the API spec allows for. This is detailed in the users manual which will be available on-line as soon as the web site update is completed. I would have loved to have kept to the 60ma standard. (BTW it is 60ma if I remember correctly) but it is an extremely difficult standard to adhere to if you want to design good sounding gear with class A circuits and lots of headroom,etc. I think that the buyer should be informed of this in advance of purchase and then they can make the decision. API understands this limitation and in the new Lunchbox they beefed up the power supply so it could handle around 150ma/slot. Our EQ draws around 115ma. The rack mount 500 series racks can handle the power draw as well so it is only a problem for people with older lunchbox units.

I am proud to have been able to squeeze the EQ from an A-Range desk into one slot! This EQ took up a lot of front panel space and PCB space in the original Trident A-Range console. I recently worked on an old A-Range console and the EQ circuit seemed HUGE to me compared to what we designed for the 500 racks. So like many things in designing you have trade offs. I think we are offering an option to buyers to buy a classic EQ design and be able to use it in their 500 racks as long as they know what the trade offs were.

We will be starting production very soon and I hope you will consider carrying our EQs but it will ruin your record of only selling gear that conforms to the original API spec!
I will get a couple modules over to you listen to soon. That is if you still want to listen to them!

Dave Thibodeau
DakingPlus Inc.

[TonyBelmont]

Originally Posted by DaveThibodeau

I am proud to have been able to squeeze the EQ from an A-Range desk into one slot! This EQ took up a lot of front panel space and PCB space in the original Trident A-Range console. I recently worked on an old A-Range console and the EQ circuit seemed HUGE to me compared to what we designed for the 500 racks. So like many things in designing you have trade offs. I think we are offering an option to buyers to buy a classic EQ design and be able to use it in their 500 racks as long as they know what the trade offs were.

We will be starting production very soon and I hope you will consider carrying our EQs but it will ruin your record of only selling gear that conforms to the original API spec!
I will get a couple modules over to you listen to soon. That is if you still want to listen to them!

Hey DT,

My preference is for people to develop the format in a single space. The fact that you were able to engineer the A range EQ into a single space is awesome.

It looks a little power hungry, but I'd love to check them out...

[Tim Farrant]

Dave, good to see you here and nice to meet you at the AES Vienna show.

I understand the API rating for any single slot device to be 120mA although the Lunchbox does not support 6 modules at this current so there is a bit of a conflict there until it's rectified. I spoke with the API guys at AES and it is something they will look at doing in the very near future.

With regard to the 2 slot width we make, I'd much rather have decent size knobs, graphics and decent controls behind the panel than compromise by doing everything ultra miniature to squeeze it into 1 slot.

Perhaps what would be better for the 500 format is double height racks, 6U, with 2 sets of input/output connectors available per slot.

Tim.

[DaveThibodeau]

Originally Posted by Tim Farrant

With regard to the 2 slot width we make, I'd much rather have decent size knobs, graphics and decent controls behind the panel than compromise by doing everything ultra miniature to squeeze it into 1 slot.

Tim.

Yes, Tim, it was great to see you at the show and put a face to the name. That is one thing I think is great about the boutique side of this industry is that most of the competing designers are friends.

I think it does make sense for some things to have two slots. Like you said there are the ergonomic issues and finding small switches and pots that will last a long time can be difficult as well. I personally do not like the forest of knobs that are so close together that you screw up the settings on adjacent channels when you adjust a control! Then trying to see where the settings are can be difficult with concentric controls. These are some of the reasons why we went with the radically different front panel design with our EQ. Losing the one-knob-per-function is a radical change and some people just will not like it because of that but I am finding that some people are seeing the advantage of the uncluttered faceplate and liking the interface. So you can't please everyone no matter what you do.


Dave Thibodeau
DakingPlus

[OBO]

As a 5** module lover, I can say that the main interest consist in mixing different coulors in one rack, according to your sensibility and your musicality.

But, for a lot of people, the box is never as large as they need it.

What about 2 channels in one slot ???

[Dan]

I vote for more manufacturers to come out with 1073 size modules if the 500 series doesn't work for them.

[OBO]

One slot, 2 channels...

http://www.alternatesoundings.fr/images/mp2.jpg

[Realtugs]

Originally Posted by OBO

One slot, 2 channels...

http://www.alternatesoundings.fr/images/mp2.jpg

Nice!

Any more info?

[OBO]

More next week on the web site.
And more modules...

[Realtugs]

Originally Posted by OBO

More next week on the web site.
And more modules...

Exciting.

Thanks

[NathanEldred]

Originally Posted by OBO

One slot, 2 channels...

http://www.alternatesoundings.fr/images/mp2.jpg

If it's two channels in one slot...there are only one input and output per slot on any powered rack for the format. So if someone puts 11 of your preamps in a large rack, there won't be 22 inputs and outputs on the back. So how does this work?

[vince @ speck]

Originally Posted by NathanEldred

If it's two channels in one slot...there are only one input and output per slot on any powered rack for the format. So if someone puts 11 of your preamps in a large rack, there won't be 22 inputs and outputs on the back. So how does this work?

Yea, I'd like to know the answer that question too.

If I had to take a wild guess.... the two XL input connectors on the front are the "only" access for mic input . The rear input XL-F would need a gender changer to make it an XL-M output. The other XL-M output on the rear remains as-is.

[Realtugs]

Originally Posted by vince @ speck

Yea, I'd like to know the answer that question too.

If I had to take a wild guess.... the two XL input connectors on the front are the "only" access for mic input . The rear input XL-F would need a gender changer to make it an XL-M output. The other XL-M output on the rear remains as-is.

That would be a cool innovation.

Great minds at work!

[pan60]

Originally Posted by NathanEldred

If it's two channels in one slot...there are only one input and output per slot on any powered rack for the format. So if someone puts 11 of your preamps in a large rack, there won't be 22 inputs and outputs on the back. So how does this work?

same question hear?
maybe it sums the two?

[OBO]

You will need an XLR adapter in order to use the rear input as an output.

As it is a mike pre, you don't need to access all the time to the settings...

[Realtugs]

Brilliant!

So feckin simple once it's right in front of you. Two in, two out...fantastic Olivier. I'd say you have just spawned a whole new wave of modules to come. Bravo! Encore!!

12 Pre's in a lunch box...too cool! Can't wait to see what else you've got coming too!
Thanks

[AL.SO]

Hello,

Have a look at the 'New product alert' section for more infos...

Thanks for all your kind words.

Yours.

[OBO]

And other modules : http://www.alternatesoundings.fr/modual.html

Best,

Olivier Bolling

[vocomotion]

Seeing that "dual channel pre" module, makes me wonder:
If a module needs 4 XLRs (side-chain, second channel, etc), is it better to have a one-slot module with connectors on the front? Or is it better two have a two-slot module with all the connectors on the back?

I've been meaning to ask people here this question...working on something of my own over here...will announce soon (hopefullly)...

--> freddie

[Realtugs]

Originally Posted by vocomotion

Seeing that "dual channel pre" module, makes me wonder:
If a module needs 4 XLRs (side-chain, second channel, etc), is it better to have a one-slot module with connectors on the front? Or is it better two have a two-slot module with all the connectors on the back?

I've been meaning to ask people here this question...working on something of my own over here...will announce soon (hopefullly)...

--> freddie

I would definitely predict some one-slot compressors w/side-chains coming up now.

I for one have absolutely NO problem with connectors (even DB-25) on the front panels & XLR adapters hanging off the back. If I was really adventurous, I could even mod the XLR's on the back of my rack or lunchboxes...voiding my warranty, of course.

I LOVE this turn of events!!!

[pan60]

their happens to be some very cool stuff coming for this format
we are in the glory days!