Umble Circuit - Seems to have serious design flaws

[Bill Mountain]

I'm confused as to why you came in here on the attack.

Build a pedal you like.  Sell that pedal.  If it's your idea then take credit.  If it's not your idea then give credit.  If seems like you're looking for others to clear your conscience.

[mojokorn]

I'm confused as to why you came in here on the attack.

Build a pedal you like.  Sell that pedal.  If it's your idea then take credit.  If it's not your idea then give credit.  If seems like you're looking for others to clear your conscience.

I've seen some other post out there where people have had to defend themselves against ROG and the court of public opinion.  Yes, I plan to build a Dumble-esque pedal, but am concerned that I may fall prey to their so-called licensing model.

[mojokorn]

And since I seem to have their attention, I'll take a moment to say what model does work...

When the B-Type patent ran out, Dolby offered its use with or without the Dolby name.  Companies only had to pay if they wanted to use the name - essentially licensing the Brand of both Dolby and the technology.  I'd suggest ROG build a brand and do the same.

[mth5044]

As with any pedal, there are people that like them and people that don't. There are reviews on this very site that are positive. When I built it, it sounded like a distortion pedal, and I can see where the appeal might be, but it wasn't my cup of tea. Ideally, you would build and try it before you say it doesn't sound good.

What is mojotone doing correctly, in your opinion? They don't say what they based their only not-clone amp kit on, or even provide a schematic. Probably so other people don't either see what they stole, or so other people don't copy them.

A final thought, you say they call it a dumble clone, but if you read the article, they base it on unproven schematics and modeling amps. They are after a sound that certain guitarists got using the dumble amps, they are not putting a clone of an amp in a stompbox for you.

Im not picking a fight with you, but when you come in with a first post, guns a-blazing, without ever having built the pedal or even listened to one in person, saying you can do it better without any supporting details, you will come off as the bad guy. They aren't trying to patent (why do you keep saying patent?) anything here, they are trying to avoid people taking their hard work (or as you say, taking a shit (seriously?)) and making money off of it. In the spirit of DIY, they request you give them a nod where the circuit came from, as most do when they write their name on a schematic.

[R.G.]

Sigh.

I guess they just keep making more of all types all the time and the target demographic keeps turning up here.

[digi2t]

[mojokorn]

As with any pedal, there are people that like them and people that don't. There are reviews on this very site that are positive. When I built it, it sounded like a distortion pedal, and I can see where the appeal might be, but it wasn't my cup of tea. Ideally, you would build and try it before you say it doesn't sound good.

As a first level filter, I listen to YouTube links and audio clips before I invest the money in a pedal or the time to build a DIY schemo/kit.  It's pretty obvious from the videos and clips (and you opinion) that this is not a well designed pedal and not worth the time or money to buy or build it.  Also, if they are going to label it as Dumble, then it better be more than just an standard OD pedal.

What is mojotone doing correctly, in your opinion? They don't say what they based their only not-clone amp kit on, or even provide a schematic. Probably so other people don't either see what they stole, or so other people don't copy them.

Mojotone allows you to build their kits and re-label them anything you want.  In fact many a one-man-shop boutique amp company started with their help in this way.  MJ's value is in the supply chain, not trying to squat and charge a toll for land that is public domain.  A much better and more respectable business model.

A final thought, you say they call it a dumble clone, but if you read the article, they base it on unproven schematics and modeling amps. They are after a sound that certain guitarists got using the dumble amps, they are not putting a clone of an amp in a stompbox for you.

Yes, "unproven" means that it needs to be "proven" and they are essentially saying 'Hey go and finish our work and make sure we get credit as though we finished it.'  This is bad enough from a attribution standpoint, but is really bad when they want to try and enforce royalties.

Im not picking a fight with you,

I don't see it as a fight, but a honest and raw exchange of ideas and opinions.  Like any great forum, this should be welcome (oh how boring life would be with only rainbows and unicorns). 

but when you come in with a first post, guns a-blazing, without ever having built the pedal or even listened to one in person, saying you can do it better without any supporting details, you will come off as the bad guy. They aren't trying to patent (why do you keep saying patent?) anything here, they are trying to avoid people taking their hard work (or as you say, taking a shit (seriously?)) and making money off of it. In the spirit of DIY, they request you give them a nod where the circuit came from, as most do when they write their name on a schematic.

A little background... I'm a degreed EE with over 22 years experience working for companies such as Dolby and Apple.  I built many pedals during my college years and designed the first ever midi controlled effects looper back in 1996 - decided not to bring it to market.  I just finished designing and building the 3rd generation of my 4x 6L6 tube amp.  Oh yeah, and I've been playing guitar for a mere 35 years.  Back to the topic at-hand... I wouldn't take issue if they asked for attribution of their circuit (unchanged), with no royalty.  However, asking for attribution and royalties for circuits that require changes in order to make them usable and desired, with strong arm techniques to boot, is simply out of line.  I only mention patents, because a patent is required in order to charge royalties - the Dolby B-Type model is a rare-exception.

I'm actually a friendly guy and willing to help DIY and newbies - do it all the time.  I just don't care for the ROG business model.  Sorry to come off as a ton of bricks.

[mojokorn]

Sigh.

I guess they just keep making more of all types all the time and the target demographic keeps turning up here.

Ahhh, the insider quip made by the one of the old-timers (17k posts, impressive!).  They have those over at Harmony Central too 

[digi2t]

Sigh.

I guess they just keep making more of all types all the time and the target demographic keeps turning up here.

Ahhh, the insider quip made by the one of the old-timers (17k posts, impressive!).  They have those over at Harmony Central too 

[Quackzed]

i'm gonna suggest that 'to me' it seems all of your issues with rog have quickly become simply this...
You want to make a commercial product out of the rog dumble and because you plan some changes or improvements you don't feel you should be required to give them any credit or license anything they have done because ,in your opinion, their circuit is derivative.
you may not want any such thing... if not i apologize.
but if you just want to build one and mod it, then what is the point of any of this?!? you wanna build a pedal they designed and offered for you to build, what a bunch of jerks?!? you wanna build one, but REFUSE to give them credit? who will know...
its only the commercial side of things that offer any point to this line of argument.
so are you planning a commercial product or not? 
if not, carry on... with my apologies.
if so, your conscience has already told you what you don't want to hear.
final thought: theres plenty of room to do whats wrong within the law... but that don't make it right.

[mth5044]

I'm on a phone, and splicing a quoted post is a huge pain, so I'll just take a few sentences.

"It's pretty obvious from the videos and clips (and you opinion) that this is not a well designed pedal and not worth the time or money to buy or build it." - never said it was not well designed, but it wasn't for me. I'm not a huge fuzz face fan either, but I'm not calling that a poor circuit.

"More than just a standard OD" - if it sounds like a Dumble to them, what's the problem? There are plenty of Marshall pedals out there that sound like garbage, but does a pedal that the designer thinks sounds like a dumble somehow elevate it over them? It's not like they are making you pay for this.

"Mojotone allows you to... respectable business model" You can't compare mojotone to ROG in that respect. Mojotone is a shop that sells other people's products, ROG is DIY site that comes up with ideas and posts them for free, with the stipulation you don't steal the idea and sell it. Unsure why you keep mentioning patents, tolls, fees, etc.

"Royalties" No where on the site, or in the CC, are they asking for this money.

ROG business model - it doesn't appear they are even a business to me? What are they selling? Where are they asking for royalties? Where are they saying 'make this better?'. Frankly, we are fortunate that they come up with ideas and post them. If you end up making improvements to the circuit, why are you afraid to give credit where credit is do? Don't use their circuit if you don't like their rules!

Your background is great, and it's great to have you around. Unfortunately (I mean, fortunately) this place is not Harmony Central.

[mojokorn]

I'll say it this way.  I don't plan to use ROG's Umble ckt, but it would be hard to create a circuit that wasn't a jfet version of fender pre-amp.  If I do that and they decide that it was a derivative (spin-off) of their ckt, they say they will come after me. Which is a bunch of BS for both the DIY and commercial worlds.

I'm pretty sure I can create a great Dumble-esque pedal and don't need them giving me a bunch of grief just because I cascaded jfeg gain stages and used some of Dumble's tone stack values.

If the project turns out cool, by other's standards not just by mine, then I'll sell kits and assembled versions.  I'll post the final version here and then all parties including the "snacks" folks can decide if it was much-ado about nothing or something pretty darn cool.

My hands will be on the breadboard and my guitar this weekend in case you don't hear from me.

Good times, thanks for hosting this conversation 

[mojokorn]

Sigh.

I guess they just keep making more of all types all the time and the target demographic keeps turning up here.

Ahhh, the insider quip made by the one of the old-timers (17k posts, impressive!).  They have those over at Harmony Central too 

x2!

[Quackzed]

to slightly soften my previous comment, imho i don't recall any particular mobster type attitude on the rog guys part. i have no reason to believe they are unreasonably claiming ownership of jfet use or tube sim style circuits...
      they HAVE i believe put in some hard work on the circuit stages they use regularly in their circuits. but there are many ways to skin a cat. unless you directly copy their circuits or refined gain stages i believe you're on solid ground and don't have to worry about them 'coming after you'.
      they ,like many of us, take a certain pride of ownership over their 'babys' and their own hard work and understandably want to protect that intellectual property from theft and general buggery and bastardization. theres plenty of room for a room full of dumbl'esque sounding circuits and they can each stand up and sing so long as someone somewhere digs em. feel free to take a shot (or many) at that tone.
       thats the nice thing about circuit designing , there are so many ways to go. just follow your ears and ideas and your never gonna be ripping anyone off. there are a million ways to get to point b. as long as you're interested in finding YOUR way and not copying someone else's map i cant imagine 'accidentaly' taking every single same step as someone else...
       
       

[deadastronaut]

 

[mcknib]

Interesting reading! anyway a musical interlude to lighten the mood.....I do look forward to further posts especially to see if your contribution will be as solid and educational as RG's here's hoping I do like to learn and love a wee bit of banter here and there!

Here's a wee avatar suggestion hopefully Campbells won't come after me 

[GibsonGM]

Look....if you play "D C G" and call it "Can't you see by marshall tucker on this here my album, and it's MY song", sing the original lyrics, you violate the copyright/license or whatever.  You stole their name and lyrics, their intellectual property.

If you PLAY D C G and write some new lyrics, it is YOURS.   D C G is so used, nobody owns it.   NOBODY.   

ROG owns the NAME they gave the circuit, NOT the gain stage design, etc etc etc.  As said - you wanna use their NAME on things and make $, you have to get the license.   That's all.   To call is something new, you'd need to make a few minor mods and *say* you invented it based on commonly seen gain stages/tone stacks.


A photographer doesn't own Niagra Falls.  They take a pic, YOU pay and credit them for use.     OR - take your own pic, and it's yours. It's that simple.

Capiche?

[duck_arse]

worms? not even two pages, and we've already run outta popcorn.

[digi2t]

worms? not even two pages, and we've already run outta popcorn.

Time for this then...



(No wiener pun intended).

[Pedalhead]

When I first started making pedals there wasn't much around on the internet. I'd do my own vero layouts and ROG were one of the few places I could find interesting circuits to have a go at. I even applied the jfet amp sim method myself to a Selmer amp and got a neat overdrive pedal from it.

ROG were instrumental in getting both my own pedal building and IMO the wider pedal building community going. They were happy to email me back with answers to circuit questions and in general get a big thumbs up from me. I don't care about the commercial aspects. This is DIY.