Hey Ian,
thanks for answering my thoughts in such a detail!
You are absolutely right, that building or better thinking in mixing environments definitely drives me a lot in the past few weeks after getting deeper and deeper in all the various options that are possible or at least needed.
I challenged myself a lot with different setups and architectures and from my actual perspective there are two ways and a lot of "open fields" between them.
A) The EZ-Tube standalone Projects -> I call them "a tube channel strip in a box". Everything is available as PCB's at the Emporium and well documented. You can combine a preamp with an EQ of your choice, put it into a case of your imagination and be (very)happy. And that's what i did over the past few month and will be continue to follow this on a side project.
And then there is B)...
B) ...the idea of thinking in "repeating channels" in larger environments. At this point you need to think so different, that sometimes it drives me crazy to fullfill at least the minimal requirements of a mixer.
Holger's actual mixing console shows me that in very positive and incentive way.
Between A) and B) i think there is nothing that makes sense for me right now. And to be clear, there is no need to think in numbers like 4x2 or bigger ("full blown tube mixer"). Two channels at the latest and you are asking yourself exactly the right questions. What is my real world usage of two or later more ez-tube channels pimped with some eq's of your choice, fancy vu meters, faders or knobs for attentuation, you name it?
At this point for me the EZ Tube Lunchbox Project should be more than a "testing rig" for "modules", it should give everyone from one to x channels/modules a solid foundation they can learn, build and grow on.
Sorry, for the long intro
Back to technical stuff!
"Solving problems and requirements with bigger modules"
I couldn't agree more that going deeper is only half of the solutions if we keep in mind, that nothing changed in terms of real estate on the front panel. So why not starting finally and ultimately to think in 6U and 220mm maybe 280mm depth? It makes things so much easier on the road. And you are right, the Mark 3 is exactly the logical next step out of all your experience over the last years and will be the best long term solution i see so far.
Going deeper, i would like to define some constraints in terms of PCB & Panel design and requirements, which everyone (maybe myself 1st
) can rely on. For instance: Two 32 way connectors, with a defined pinout to start with. A PSU Module everyone can slide in and focus on the much more interesting things.
It should be like designing a 500 module. I know my constraints in terms of pinout, size of the pcb, panel with an height and so on. What at the end comes out of any module is defined by the creator/builder himself beside the question of a real world usage.
Last but not least, i like the idea of distributing the load of work accoss several shoulders. With a set of "rules", i think we can grow much faster the idea of a lunchbox and quicker solving problems that will be arise on this journey.
So what are the logical next steps to bring this into a 1st real world "Box" that is standing on my workbench and i can play with?
Cheers, Sven
PS: Is putting the regulators onto the active boards a common approach?