Is it really that easy - or what am I missing?

[sjconolly]

Hey folks - newbie builder and this is my first post, but this really isn't a technical question.

Having dabbled in electronics for many years, I decided to actually break down and start building things of my own over the last month or so. Bought a bread board and a pile of components from Rat Shack and Fry's, and cannibalizing old gear I have laying around.

First project was a single transistor preamp pedal. Two 9 volt batteries, one npn and a couple of coupling caps and resistors, maybe 12 dB of boost and it'll put out about 7V RMS before clipping. My bass player was astonished at what it did for his passive bass, and wants me to build him one.

Second project was a basic jfet op-amp preamp for my guitar, to bring it up to line level and plug directly into my ADC. Now I'm the one who's astonished at just how good and clean you can get out a single chip, and that's it's actually cleaner than running through my Crest mixer. It's DC coupled, and measured pretty flat from about 5Hz to 40Hz. I can't directly measure the phase shift, but in the simulator the phase shift is only a couple of degrees through the audible range. I just know I've never heard my guitar sound that clean and detailed.

Last night I switched it around a little and made it into a mic preamp with about 40 dB of gain, and it's flat, very low distortion, and a good 20 dB quieter than any of the dynamic mics I've plugged into it.

Which brings me to my question here: these are all stupid simple circuits that you can find all over the web and build with single digit part counts, and they sound good - so why is so much of the commercial gear loaded up with parts but (in my opinion) actually sound worse? I'm telling myself that surely it can't be that easy, and I must be glossing over some important details here.

Thanks in advance for any comments or opinions,
Sean

[LucifersTrip]

I think alot of people want loads of bells & whistles rather than just one solid sound...

Plus, I believe a lot of the modern digital stuff has more complicated switching, buffers, etc outside of the part of the circuit that does the real "work"....probably, so they play better with the multitude of other effects out there today.

But you're right, tons of classic circuits have single digit parts counts...Fuzz Face, Rangemaster, LPB-1, the modern Super Hard-on, etc...

[mistahead]

Its the mojo in between

I love low parts count DIY gear, simple tube amps that let me stomp them into filth, passive humbuckers and beer.

I also love my shiny new (baby-cheapo) digital PA, my multi-effect units, amp modelling, software tools and blended whiskey that is older than I.

It is that easy... until it isn't!

[darron]

IE:

http://www.geofex.com/circuits/what_are_all_those_parts_for.htm

[GibsonGM]

One thing that has always bothered me is that yes - they put the extras in there, all kinds of filtering and fluffing between stages (and all the SMD crap is microscopic, so you can't really even examine what is in there!).   

BUT -  you can't defeat their bells n whistles and get back to what SJ is describing...simple, effective, fat and in-your-face amplification with simple, but appropriate, tone shaping.  No controls are provided (usually) to cut out the extra junk.   These days, you just have to accept whatever 'ideal sound' the company sells you.   

Bugs the heck outta me.   So much so, I just build my own )

[midwayfair]

You made something that's perfect for you and some other people. That's perfect and what DIY is for!

Large companies don't have that luxury, though. They have to make something that sounds good to lots of people and works with a wide variety of gear. And is unique enough to sell. And is protected from utter stupidity (like using the wrong power supply). And uses the cheapest parts available to keep the shareholders happy.

LT's right about the bells and whistles, but there's more than just a lust for knobs involved¹. I know that when I first started building I wanted extra knobs on everything. Now I try to figure out what's the most I can get out of the fewest external controls. But something with four knobs when it had three? Before I started building that was MIGHTY attractive.

In pedals, there's an even worse thing. It is extremely common to think that a smaller enclosure involves inherent sacrifices in sound quality, workmanship, etc. This is utterly, unfathomly ridiculous, but it's a thing. If I build two copies of a pedal, one in a 1590A and one in a 1590BB, people will tell me that the 1590BB one sounds/feels/works better. 

¹Heh.

[GGBB]

I know that when I first started building I wanted extra knobs on everything.

Heh-heh - that's kinda me right now.   

If I build two copies of a pedal, one in a 1590A and one in a 1590BB, people will tell me that the 1590BB one sounds/feels/works better. 

Seriously?!  Now that is *not* something that would matter to me - in fact the smaller the better - pedalboard space is always precious.  I could never understand why so many DIY pedals get built with 1590BBs when clearly a 1590B would fit.  And they do them sideways a lot of the time too!!  Although - visually they can look more pretty with extra room for fancy etching and graphics.

[R.G.]

It's always easier to make something to do one and only one thing than to build a more-universally applicable something.

There is a never-ending tradeoff of simplicity versus universality, flexibility versus complexity.

It comes back to objectives - what was it you were trying to do in the first place? If it was to do one and only one thing, go simple and direct - if you're SURE you'll never want to do more than that one thing. If you want added flexibility in case something else comes along, put in your best guess about what might be needed to handle that, too.

So - anyone ever use volume controls? Two resistors would do it and be much smaller/lighter/cheaper/yada/yada.

[armdnrdy]

The more knobs the better! 

To quote Roger Waters (It's a miracle)

We've got Mercedes
We've got Porsche
Ferrari and Rolls Royce
We've got a choice

I believe that it's human nature to want controls to change something at will....even if we don't use them!

[sjconolly]

Actually, I'm starting out with an anti-knob philosophy. Whenever I see something with a lot of controls I can't help but think that they're making the user make all the decisions instead of just making the thing sound good in the first place. I know that's a lopsided view, but that's where I want to experiment.

Where I'm heading is a single pedal with three functions: clean boost, distortion, and compression. I think I got enough ideas on the clean boost, so I'm starting on the compressor section next - circuit suggestions welcome.

Thanks to all,
Sean

[mistahead]

Just knock them up in different boxes - yes its three boxes vs. one larger box with three switches but it gives you modularity and flexibiltiy.

I still love the idea of monster mega circuits in boxes with two giant rotary switches, fourteen toggles, and seven stomps all in a row... but ultimately I don't like most of those clipping / filtering options (for example), and should that change - the hardware I've put onto uberboch is probably worth more than a purpose built stomp on the day I do want that odd little clipper/filter option... and on that day there is probably a booster/fuzz/whatever more suited to application... DIY minimalist cycle haha.

The above said - compare a Fuzz Face (or any of the many two transistor fuzz boxes) to something like the Silly Face and the Fuzz Factory, then again to something like the Skyripper, then again to... there's a cycle here too! 

[joegagan]

i knew an electrician who rode an old chopped Harley to work every day. no rear shock absorber and the seat was basically the rear fender. i could not imagine how rough it rode, but it was his.

[joegagan]

chevy will sell you this:


i sometimes think how much fun it would be to build a car with it to drive on the street that weighs under 2400 pounds vs the 3800 + of the chevy production version.

[pappasmurfsharem]

Just knock them up in different boxes - yes its three boxes vs. one larger box with three switches but it gives you modularity and flexibiltiy.

I still love the idea of monster mega circuits in boxes with two giant rotary switches, fourteen toggles, and seven stomps all in a row... but ultimately I don't like most of those clipping / filtering options (for example), and should that change - the hardware I've put onto uberboch is probably worth more than a purpose built stomp on the day I do want that odd little clipper/filter option... and on that day there is probably a booster/fuzz/whatever more suited to application... DIY minimalist cycle haha.

The above said - compare a Fuzz Face (or any of the many two transistor fuzz boxes) to something like the Silly Face and the Fuzz Factory, then again to something like the Skyripper, then again to... there's a cycle here too! 

That's why you just build it with the jacks on the back still.

So you can just use one effect or change the order with patch cables

A giant multi effect box but can be used as individual stomps if need be.

[mistahead]

What is the value of that though - portability only (and internal daisy chaining rather than external whoopedeedoo), the other advantages of using a single multi-box over the little singles are lost.

What is the downside - well if you've ever chased parasitic noise through one of these uberboch there's one, one thing to fill up with beer or walk off from the gig...

Really all you've done is save yourself slightly on enclosures - maybe.

[PRR]

> stupid simple circuits ..... they sound good

Your OWN stuff often sounds better than ANY other. (After you get signal, kill squeal, chase buzz....)

Yes, simplicity is a virtue. I ran mikes through mixer to tape deck. Later I got Ampex's stupidly simple (even crude) internal mike preamps, and they sounded better (to my very non-Golden ear) than the several op-amp path through the mixer. A later mixer sounded much better through, but better yet when I added direct-outs for when I didn't need mix/pan/EQ facilities.

[Paul Marossy]

The more knobs the better! 

To quote Roger Waters (It's a miracle)

We've got Mercedes
We've got Porsche
Ferrari and Rolls Royce
We've got a choice

I believe that it's human nature to want controls to change something at will....even if we don't use them!

+1