Hi Mica!
Moments ago, I posted confirmation on the main build tread that -bassed on the electronics upgrade quote you emailed me- I WANT TO UPGRADE MY EUROPA ELECTRONICS TO SIGNATURE ELECTRONICS WITH 3-POSITION Q SWITCHES AND A (single) PAIR OF BASS & TREBLE KNOBS!
Thus my electronics will have 6 knobs (Volume, Balance, Neck Filter, Bridge Filter, Bass, and Treble) and 2 toggles (the 2 3-position Q switches).
Here are my preferences -in order of preference. I will refer to the mock-ups you did for Shim... but my body is a Balance K... and his is a little wider... so I don't know how applicable his options/mockups will be on the Balance K body.
First of all, I'm flexible here, and just want it to be mellow for Alembic. I'll tell you what I want, but will respect whatever constraints you lay down. Let me just communicate my preferences, and we'll see what works.
My FIRST preference would be what I described in Control Layout in Shim's FTC thread -in my post 366. The layout would be just like that -minus the LEDs, which my bass won't have. This setup consists of 2 parallel rows of 3 knobs -with (the row of) (N) filter, volume, & (B) filter closer to the C string, and the other row -bass, balance, & treble- closer to the edge of the body. The 2 Q switches would be in-between the 2 middle (volume & balance) knobs and the knobs to either side. This seems pretty clear in the picture/graphic representation.
You'll note that, in this picture, I have the two middle knobs in each row (the volume & balance) slightly farther away from each other than the other knobs are... but they could all be parallel. Either way would be cool. The biggest thing is that I'd prefer it be perfectly symetrical -if possible.
If not, my second favorite layout would be your mockup for Shim in your post 4038 (again in the same thread). This is virtually the same thing -only the 2 rows of 3 knobs aren't perfectly parallel.
Ideally, in any even, the top row would be symetrical, with the (master) volume in the middle and the 2 filters to either side; then, the bottom row would have the 3 knobs with center detents (bass, balance, treble).
But if, for any reason, there are constraints about which knobs can be where, just tell me what they are, and I'll communicate my preferences within the bounds of those constraints.
My third preference would be your post 4044 -basically the same setup with just slightly different angles for the lines of the rows.
My fourth preference would be your first post for Shim -your post 4032- with the knobs in that pattern, but the two toggles within the 6 knobs... basically the same pattern I've already described -but just rotated at an angle.
At your convenience, let me know if these are doable. Ideally, my first preference is no problem. If so, it's a done deal. I really like the first preference, as it's the most intuitive setup; it would be completely symetrical in appearance, and almost completely symetrical in function -the exceptions being the bass & treble controls.
Thanks again for everything, Mica! I really appreciate your patience, support, and world-class service!!!
Mark
P.S. I'm going to attempt to copy the graphic illustration of my ideal control configuration from Shim's thread... here's the attempt:
..........NECK...............BASS
..........FILT................CONT
..........KNOB...............KNOB
.................................
.......................N..........
.......................Q..........
.................................
......MAST.......................BLEN
......VOLU.........LED.........CONT
......KNOB.......................KNOB
.................................
.......................B..........
.......................Q..........
.................................
..........BRID...............TREB
..........FILT................CONT
..........KNOB..............KNOB
Looks like it worked! So this is my ideal/preferred setup -for reference!