Yup, proper title is "lopass". It's even printed in huge letters on the PCB:
Did you know you could save 15% in 15 minutes on car insurance?
The Thomas White board is called a lopass gate (not Low Pass).
it's spelled wrong (lopass gate). That explains why I couldn't find it in a search
This is a duplicate.
http://www.modulargrid.net/e/other-unknown-thomas-white-dual-resonant-lopass-gate
No problem, but if someone watermarks an image, they do it for a reason.
By coincidence I bought a VCO-2RM lately. I will make a photo and upload a better image.
Beep, Bopp, Bleep: [email protected]
Sorry! I did take it from BCM — but the one here was all janky.
Also this image is clearly watermarked. Flagged this module as private.
Beep, Bopp, Bleep: [email protected]
Please update the photo on the existing module entry instead of creating a new one.
Now we have two entries for the white VCO-2RM; one with a nice picture, and another with all the specifications and reviews...
Building one of these from pcb. Will make my own panel from .com double blank.
Just built this. Couldn't be happier. Sounds just like it's supposed to. :)
Anyone know if EMW's face plates are metal or plastic? They look like metal but I just wanted to be sure.
Still hope they´ll make a kit, would love to build one. a batch of 10 its not enough! also don´t like the black panel that someone posted on Muff´s.
for some reason the site wont let me make this 104 hp, so I've just left it at the max allowed, 84hp. hopefully a mod will do something about that.
I built this from a pcb board from Mattson Mini. Works great. Cool module. See also, the Quad VCA for separate outs.
This is the best seq ever, period. I'm so happy with mine. It's so versatile, small and hnng I just wanna hug it
I have one of these on it's way in Banana format, should be awesome :)
Hey saemola,
Befaco clearly made a mistake when stating this module is 4hp (unless they have made another panel).
My modular eyes tell me it's 6hp ;-)
Cheers,
KNYST
What a great sound source the Braids is! A great variety of basic oscillator sounds that could easily spice up any patch or track. META-mode, which allow you to modulate between the different oscillator types, is worth the price for it alone. Easily a 5/5.
Looks cool and I think you have showed me this already.Besides the UI the main problem is in the tracking of versions for multiple graphics.I did some wrong choices with database model design in the beginning and it's complicated to update this without breaking stuff. But it's still on my list.
Beep, Bopp, Bleep: [email protected]
Here's an example of how to handle alternate face plates:
http://cl.ly/image/0z3p0D3g142x/modulargrid_panel_switching_concept.png
I did not have figured out a simple and proper way to assign multiple panelgraphics to one module specification. That's the main problem. Now we have to deal with compromises. I understand both of your arguments. We have this problem with multicolored panels too.
Database capacity is no issue, but redundant search results are.Also, we have to keep severel database entries up to date, which never works in the real world.
The statistic features (Top Module/Popular Module) do not work with splitted module info anymore (see Math).So until I am able to implement a solution with the multiassign of panelgraphics I am taking sides to the "let's keep it unique and clean" fraction.I suggest to make use of the private flag function.
Beep, Bopp, Bleep: [email protected]
Not trying to fan any flames here, and writing from a not very technical position ... but, would it be possible to add a toggle button to existing modules which would allow the images to be rotated whichever way a particular user may like?
Well spoken wavicle - I think we should have some kind of guideline for this to set a standard for future reference. I'm honestly rather opposed of adding both directions of possibly inverted modules too, like Planar and Choices, also. Like mentioned before, I think usability comes before personal flair. We only need separate entries when there are actual differences in specifications, not visual style.
Ah I see your argument re: database. My comment was not so much about database size (I'm sure solitud can handle the backend side of things perfectly).
The comment was about usability. From the user point of view there should be no more than one entry per module (there are exceptions, when a module needs 5v and has the option of taking the 5v from the power bus or of converting internally, like 4ms 4PLFO, thus adding two entries because the same module can have different power specs).
From the general user's point of view it's better to have a more streamlined view with the least clutter possible. One puny teleplexer won't make a difference, but it sets a precedent for future entries and Eurorack is growing like crazy.
Best regards,
The Adminius Opposition Society ;)
MG is supposed to be a modular planner, and when stuff like upside down modules are added, you are basically splitting ratings, specs, descriptions and comments among several modules that are functionally identical.
The point we're trying to make is, that MG is not a painting app. It's not supposed to photorealistically portray your modular system. Buy Photoshop if that's what you want :)
By adding stuff like upside-down modules, you are polluting the DB with entries that add no value, and which typically aren't even updated with specs and a description (just look at this one), making it harder to use MG for actual planning.
The Wiktorion appreciation society as part of their argument states the fact that "the database keeps growing", implying that these 'flipped' modules will take up precious database server space, but anyone capable of logical thought must agree that making all 'flipped' modules private will only add to the problem (if one actually exists). If two users create a 'flipped' module and both are made private, that makes at least one module in the database which is a duplicate, whereas if one user creates a 'flipped' module and allows all other users to use it, then there's no need for anyone else to do so and duplicates can be avoided.
As I argued previously, there are certain modules that lend themselves to being installed either way up, and others that are actually designed that way; we should not make a generalised decision about this.
What do you think, solitud?
I agree there is a shitload of completely uninteresting additions made to this database, but upside down tactile modules should be an exception IMO (say the Planar for instance - I'm sure something like half of the owners use it upside down)
I agree completely with Wiktorion too.
Database keeps growing, and flipped modules should be private. The Euro section is turning into a mess, and will become clunkier to search the more modules are released.
My 2 centavos.
I'm all for open minded-ness, but I feel that it's unnecessary to add extra modules flipped. There's no need to exactly replicate the visual style of one's system. The HP is the same, so I don't see why people who do decide to flip their modules can't do that in private. I have Doepfer modules with Davies knobs. Should I make an extra entry for each module? Granted some modules are designed to be fitted both ways but frankly it's completely unnecessary. The modulargrid service wasn't designed to fit everyone's individual needs - each module should have one page, allowing us to accurately plan and rate our systems. In order to keep this module index clean and manageble, we should remove these entries.
Why?
This module may very well be installed "upside-down", and if one person has it so in their rig, may not others also?
It's already in two public racks, so there are other people out there who already think this is a good idea.
The Intellijel Planar can be installed and used in this manner, as can almost any joystick (X-Y controller), look at the panel design of the "Choices" module by Flight of Harmony, for example; also there are a number of modules by Synthwerks that are designed to be installed either way up.
I'm sure that this particular entry on the ModularGrid database was not created by accident and somebody actually intends to install this module 'arse over end' in their own rig, so let's be a bit more open-minded, eh?
Please watch carefully. I know the Microcompressor already exists, this version is a forthcoming stereo version.
Duplicate. There's already this: http://www.modulargrid.net/e/l-1-l-1-microcompressor
Cheers
Yeah! Not just my current rack layout, but loads of gear-lust racks as well.
It would've been better (for me, at least) if you just left 'em as they were.
I'm sure that I'm not the only one with this problem, it's just that I'm the only one who's complained (grumpy old bloke mode).
No matter though - easily fixed!
many of my panels were discontinued i posted that they were being changed 3weeks before making the change
i can not delete panels that are in racks
sp i replaced it with a private panel .. sorry if this affectetd your rack layout
Wot the hell's heppened here?
This used to be a 8HP Blind Panel.
I've used it as such in many of my racks because it looked better on-screen than the Doepfer example.
But now it's a 42HP sequencer-cum-blind-panel and it's also flagged as "private".
Nice one, FSK!
