Thanks @infovore for taking the time to answer me. I did not take it as “passive-aggressive”. Please let me explain why I asked instead of making it myself – and I hope that this also does not appear as passive-aggressive.
While I do see your point regarding the benefits of Open Source beyond “building things cheaply”, I did not go for an OS device because it allows me to save money. I bought the Sweet Sixteen fully assembled and gladly paid for it, because I still fail at proper soldering (I really tried several times), and buying an assembled instrument saves me time.
My goal is to get lost in making music, and with the limited time left at the end of each day I have to decide whether I want to make music or learn new skills to become even more of an instrument builder than I already became when falling in love with modular electronic instruments over 35 years ago (Hm. Was that a mistake? Should I have stuck with learning the piano back then?
)
Anyway, after reading this I assume that in order to create a Sweet-32 out of 2 Sweet-16 I’d need to connect the two 16-channel multiplexers to one Teensy. The S0 pins of both 16-channel multiplexers could be connected to Teensy pin 5, the S1 pins to pin 6, S2 pins to 7, and S3 pins to 8, so that the Teensy switches both multiplexers simultaneously. The analogue out of the first multiplexer is connected to Teensy pin 14, so I assume the analogue out of the second multiplexer needs to be connected to Teensy pin 16. Then I’d need to change the Teensy firmware so that it alternates between reading the analog input pins 14 and 16, and the alteration happens after having completed switching thru all 16 position of S0, S1, S2 and S3.
But putting this theory (which might or might not work) into a new circuit board holding the Teensy, and which connects to the 2 Teensy slots of the 2 Sweet-16, is beyond me. Or, to be more precise: Playing with what I have is more important for me at this point.
In any case, thank you for all the work you put into the 16n, without it I would not have so much joy using the ER-301! And without your answer I would not have put in the time to try to find out how 2 multiplexers might be “merged” in theory – thank you for that as well! 