If I understand what's going on, my personal view (not based on any inside information) is that the limitations would involve the number and placement and name of the modulation points. All jacks would have to be in exactly the same place and have the same name (I could be wrong about this part) to work correctly. This means all connections would remain in place when you switched modules. This also means you could likely only select (at best) between a very limited number of similar modules, which is VERY non-modular at the core. It's only one small step away from the current setup, and there would certainly be no way for third party modules.scratchnsnifff wrote: ↑18 Dec 2018
Ohh I mis represented what I meant. While I see what you mean and you are correct I just mean something along the lines of a limited size modular. Like for example take complex 1. But have drop down field arrows (like in an excel table) and have the option of having various oscillators filters etc
But yeah, if someone who was wanting a full blown system, you’d have to get use to building up and downwards due to the width restraint, do you think it’s possible for the props to add interchangeable oscillators to this synth as is though?
In fact, even adding what I described above, if possible, may require a whole new synth.
Of course, I would love to have different oscillators and filter options at the very least. But maybe there's a better way to do this, which is to do it as it is done with the Noise and Function module, where you select from a list of possible core options and the UI stays the same.