I have looked into this a bit deeper and have edited my original post to reflect the results - this eliminates the confusion of surmising on what-if or maybe.
Quoting Abbey:
The thing is that the whole signal path from the mix bus to the C/R output is on the same PCB, so should not be affected by the rear con.
Yes, that is true under the circumstances of the master PCB
and the rear conn PCB having traces that are correctly matching.
The PCB mis-match happened when someone undertook incorrect alterations to the rear conn PCB and
introduced errors. The whole thing is now 33+ years ago, so defining or stating exactly which circuit nets were messed up and for what reasons will be a tad difficult. All we have to go on is what Dario's desk has and what the designer recalls. A photo of the rear conn PCBs traces would tell me whether it was my original (correct) layout or the modified layout, however, only one side of the board is realistically possible to photograph due to the tight spacing of the jack sockets.
One thing is for definite, I was mightily miffed to return from a holiday to find that a PCB from an electrically perfectly matching pair of PCBs that I had signed-off had been worked on and fouled-up by someone who had not bothered to check what he was doing, or even follow-through his changes with a set of detailed checks that would have revealed the errors. The standard detailed checks involved circuit schematic, PCB and mechanical; ALL had to match to each other 100% to be able to sign-off a job as complete (still my practice 33+ years later). The master PCB was done on CAD and the rear conn PCB was a manual design done with Chartpack adhesive tape and pads on drafting film (oh the good old bad old days during the transition from manual design to CAD
)..... Checking of manual designs was always a time consuming job, well worth the effort, and inexcusable not to do.
I have now cross-referenced with the published schematics and checked the cross-connecting of C36 & its neighbour (C136) shown in the reply #6 pic. This is a L-R reversal of the Studio Monitor outputs. It's probable that crossing the caps was an attempt to get the "Left" and "Right" printing on the rear panel metalwork to match with the L & R signals in the console. Refer to my schem/PCB/mech check comment above. Panel printing does ring a bell as there were all sorts of quick-fire changes taking place in the console's development phase....... daft stuff such as "should the connector on the left be the left signal in relation to the guy sat at the faders or the guy at the back of the desk plugging it up?" :
My typical response: "I don't give a ****, just make a decision, document it, tell me about it in writing and stick with it! I'll make the electronics match your decision."
The crossed-over resistors are in the balanced external monitor input paths. The pairs of resistors are the fixed-level input (2-track B) and the quads are on 2-track C, the jumper linked +4dBu or -10dBV input. Again, this looks to be getting the electrical paths to match the rear panel printing in relation to L&R.
Specific recommendation for Dario:
With the console as it is, if the phase (polarity) and left and right signals through the whole of the master module and rear connectors are correct, do not remove the modifications to make it "look better". Accept the module as it is and for what it is.
It is my belief that the mods are there to make the signals appear in the
correct places, i.e. to make it work as intended.