Umble Circuit - Seems to have serious design flaws

[ggedamed]

Most forums are about wringing the truth out.  I have a hard time believing that ROG is immune to criticism for poor work and an unorthodox business model just because they are a major contributor.

Still, you're on a forum. Still, I don't get what's the "unorthodox business model" you're suavely whispering about.

Mr. Tremblay,

Thank you for responding.  I totally understand your predicament and am glad to offer ideas and solutions that make sense for you, the DIY community and potential commercial users... [...]

I'm anxiously biting my nails in expectation...

[...] The thing I took issue was is the underlying flavor of "we will find you" message on your site.  Even guys with patents don't publicly post that kind of messages.  Compounding the issue, was that the Umble ckt was not novel or your best work (by your admission as well).

All food for thought. 

I am in the process of creating my own Dumble ckt and the DIY community and commercial users are free to use it in anyway that they want.  I just didn't want to feel that I might be hunted down for doing so.

No hard feelings, I hope.

[...] ROG posted what sounded like a threat on their site.  I was afraid to do any work on the project until I had confirmation that it was safe. [...]

OK, I thought. Then I thought some more. Nope. No idea what you're talking about. Are you talking about the following text?

runoffgroove.com projects are provided free-of-charge to builders for personal, non-commercial use. We do offer licensing for builders who wish to sell pedals based on, in whole or in part, our projects. As part of the licensing agreement, the builder must clearly state that the circuit was developed by runoffgroove.com, both in promotional literature and on the circuit board. If you see a pedal for sale that seems to be based on a runoffgroove.com project and does not credit us, the builder may not be officially licensed by us and therefore, not compensating us as the developer. Please contact us with the information and we will investigate the situation. Thank you.

Maybe the "If you see a pedal..." part made you afraid of ROG's mob pitchforks. I know I want to know if somebody uses my work, as bad as it may be.
You pretend to be in process of making a dramatically improved Umble, which, therefore, would  not an Umble anymore.
Even better, since it is such a flawed schematic, you could bypass the runoffgroove project entirely and start from the Dumble schematic.

B. Tremblay has nothing to prove.

Mojokorn, on the other hand...

...to prove on this forum, I agree.

So, there is a place where you contributed? With public access, maybe?

[...] btw you could have breadboarded and tweaked the umble by now... [...]

That.
DA is right, the troll is well fed by now.

[digi2t]

Caution: Rant ahead.

Wouldn't all this bullshit here have been avoided with a simple email to ROG? I mean... really?

It never ceases to amaze me how common sense can escape the sharpest minds. I mean, you come in here all %^&*ed up, guns blazing, and for what? Then of course, ego MUCH too big to just say "Sorry, I misunderstood the jist of they're mission", you veil it with "Getting a conversation going". That would be akin to me setting my neighbour's house on fire, hoping to get a "Good morning" as he runs out.

You could have had this conversation privately with ROG, and saved yourself from looking like a complete ass here.

I may not know much about patent, or intellectual property law. I'll never be on par technically with most of the folks that frequent these parts. But, I do know what a skunk looks like, and which end I shouldn't be poking. And if ever I do decide to poke it, I know better than to blame the stick for the result.

Common sense. Look it up. Embrace it.

[GibsonGM]

Why doesn't someone summarize this whole thing and send it off to ROG?  ASK them what they think is *the deal*?  *cough original poster *cough  stirring the pot *cough   

To ROG:  "Do you think you own the CIRCUIT as drawn, or only the drawings and names?"

"Are you claiming ownership of a tube circuit redesigned to use FETs?  At what point would you consider legal action should you see said circuit being reproduced under your name?  Or another name?  What would happen if I modify your design only slightly and then go commercial?"

"Do you hold any patents for the re-creation of tube circuits using solid-state devices?  If not, why do you suppose that you have any right to complain if someone lifts your design (NOT your artwork), IF you in fact WOULD complain?  Don't others already use JFETs as "tubes" and market 'old circuits' as something new, as well as offer them freely?  "

Names and drawings are already, by nature, copyrighted and not kosher to use without credit, as is commonly known.   DESIGNS must be patented, which means they must differ enough from what's already out there to pass muster.     A gain stage isn't going to do that, I don't think...nor would active filters using opamps, etc.


Until someone hears from ROG, this is really kinda behind-the-back stabbery, isn't it?  If this was about me, I'd probably take the sh(t off my site now and let the newbies learn from old books.   

Why is this only about ROG?  Curious about that - lotsa places do this, and we know sites that for sure do the same with ACTUAL tubes (A*8*....etc), using ACTUAL circuit derivatives...they just ask to be mentioned...

+1,000,000

"To ROG" would have been coming from the original poster, not me. 

I like ROG, have learned tons by their projects over the years, and have no trouble comprehending why they'd want the hours and days of their brain power to be credited when openly sharing their intellectual property, LOL. 

[mcknib]

Bottom line, I'm glad the conversation is taking place... even with the occasional dig and/or inside references to poke fun at me.

I'll have facts soon enough... in the form of Ids, Vgs, gain stages as well as LPF and HPF calculations.

It is as I've already said certainly interesting.....not from the legal obligation point of view.....I had a look at the complete license and fell asleep about a quarter of the way through.....but it has led to some good discussion regarding circuitry (as a by product and of course not from your invisible one) which as a 100% hobbyist I'm always interested in, I do look forward to seeing your improved circuit eventually.

You did come in like a Tasmanian devil initially when perhaps it would have been a better idea to do your work on the circuit first and title your post ROG Dumble circuit revisited? give credit where it's due and let people applaud or constructively criticise it for themselves.

Look at Mr Tremblay's response as an example honest, open and not a jot of sarcasm that is the proverbial way to do it if you ask me.

and yes I've never built a ROG circuit but I've learnt a whole hellava lot from the site which served to inspire confidence and understanding.

The only real thing that annoyed me was your sarcastic response regarding RG who we all know along with many others has made a potentially difficult hobby so much easier to understand for us mere non EE mortals and he continues to share his knowledge and help us all......and please don't say he started it.

Perhaps one of these is in order you do after all seem to keep digging I obviously don't know you personally you do come across in parts as having a sense of humour but then come across as self influential and slightly arrogant when you refuse to let go, credit yourself and try to teach us about 'business models' etc maybe you should just hold your hand up and start again I for one don't think if your work is as good as you purport it to be it'll get shredded without justification :




Oh and here's my improvements to the circuit as you can see it's very similar to yours and please remember I published first you can read the terms of my license if you wish to use it!:

[mojokorn]

OK, after 5 pages of posts, here's my take...

1. Most everyone who has built and tried the Umble doesn't care for it.  Proof that it's not well designed
2. ROG posts the following on their site... "If you see a pedal for sale that seems to be based on a runoffgroove.com project and does not credit us, the builder may not be officially licensed by us and therefore, not compensating us as the developer. Please contact us with the information and we will investigate the situation."  Sounds like they are on the hunt for royalties.
3. ROG does not have a patent on the Umble circuit, and many people on this forum agree that cascading gain stages and a tone stack is public domain, hence not patentable
4. It is impossible to collect royalties on something that is not patentable.  Seems some people here are confused on that point.
5. Putting this all together, ROG is posting ominous messages on their site about licensing and compensation for technology that is public domain.  And to boot the technology is not even that good.

I'm getting a lot of "Hey, you're picking on my friend" type messages and noting ROG are nice guys here on the forum.  Neither precludes them from adhering to proper business practices.  And if I have to take a few bullets to call a spade a spade, the so be it.  My apologies if I come off as "arrogant."

And to answer why I didn't PM ROG... There needed to be a public record of a discussion on this issue so that other people could understand it.  If I sent an email and ROG responded with the same text as they did in this post, then I would be the only one to have it.

I'm in the process of designing a new circuit.  Proper simulation and ordering specific parts takes time, weeks not days.  As noted in prior posts, hang tight.

[garcho]

just when i thought i was out they pull me back in...

someone who has "20+ years EE experience" is this interested in a beginners DIY guitar pedal project from years ago? if it smells like a duck...

someone who has supposedly worked for Dolby (monied work, unlike music) and played the guitar for decades must have an unbelievable amount of gear. In all that stuff, all those inventions you created before anyone else, all the mind-blowing circuits you've designed, you don't have...       ...a JFET overdrive?

ROG posted what sounded like a threat on their site.  I was afraid to do any work on the project until I had confirmation that it was safe.

in all your decades of professional experience you've learned that intellectual property rights get hashed out in public by anonymous people on an internet forum and are legally binding. impressive. can't wait to see what projects you bring to the forum if they're as well thought out as your work in this thread.

from RoG:

We opted for the preamp section only, since the "precision power amp" is intended to be clean and not readily distort

so there goes the "they're so dumb they didn't even put a power amp section in it" argument.

Looking closely, we can see what amounts to a few Fender-style gain stages and an odd looking Fender-style tone stack. There is nothing revolutionary about the cascaded gain stages...

so you read RoG's terms of acceptance but you didn't read anything else they wrote about this? like, how they address the "issues" you've brought up, years later?

Our advice is to try the Umble as it is drawn. If you think you would like something a little different, "customize" this circuit after looking at the amp schematics.

what's your problem again?

[digi2t]

just when i thought i was out they pull me back in...

[stallik]

There needed to be a public record

No there didn't. If you had entered into a conversation with ROG and were unhappy with the outcome then perhaps. But instead, you decided to do it within a forum of friends.

I have seen some of your posts on other topics and you are clearly knowledgable and willing to help. That is what this place is about, not this cr*p. Let it go man

[stallik]

@ digi2t
Nice one. First time I've smiled while viewing this thread

[mojokorn]

There needed to be a public record

No there didn't. If you had entered into a conversation with ROG and were unhappy with the outcome then perhaps. But instead, you decided to do it within a forum of friends.

I have seen some of your posts on other topics and you are clearly knowledgable and willing to help. That is what this place is about, not this cr*p. Let it go man

Consider it "let go-ed" 

[stallik]

Thank you and welcome

[teemuk]

ROG projects are really nice and many of them actually have decent tone too.

...But with most of them you need to acquire the state of mind that only similarity to original units is their name. They don't sound really like the units that inspired them, and with the incosistency introduced by traim trimmer bias each build will end up sounding different from another.

As for realism of the "simulation".... Just look at "Mockman". This is supposed to sound similar to Rockman units. Original Rockman units had compressor implemented to an opamp gain stage with clipping diodes in feedback loop. It had pretty unique ovedrive characteristics because of combining gain compression and soft clipping. Other key points in design were BBD-based time based effects (MAJOR part of the tone, really) and a built-in cabinet simulator.

Quote from ROG website:.

The Mockman sounds uncannily reminiscent of this sound as it is based on the Scholz Rockman's distortion section. Distortion is created by overdriving the op-amps, similar to the Sansamp units

Which means it's not even remotedly based on Rockman distortion section. Hard opamp overdrive, no built-in gain compression, no BBD effects, no cabsim. Entirely different overdrive characteristics, entirely different response alltogether. It's nothing like a Rockman, doesn't sound like a Rockman. They may feel it does, but it really doesn't. Not even a bit.

But of course anyone can CLAIM anything. Personally I'd just take claims on ROG website with a grain of salt.

As is the Mockman may have a nice tone of opamp overdrives. Unique in its own right. Point is that the unit's tone is not similar to Rockman tone although everything on the webpage suggests towards that. I lump most of their FET-based amp sim pedals to same category. Nice tones, but often not even vaguely similar to units that supposedly inspired the design.

As for their scheme to emulate tubes with FETs. Sigh. Just look at AMT designs (or alike) for examples of putting some real thought on accurate tube characteristic emulation with FETs. Look at commercial amp designs with FET gain stages for ideas how to implement bias schemes mile ahead of inconsistent drain trimmers. It's all out there and in that light most ROG designs just happen to look really amateurish.

But obvious issues excluded they can be nice, simple projects, which sound pretty good as is.

[digi2t]

@ digi2t
Nice one. First time I've smiled while viewing this thread

You're welcome Kevin, but all credit for the inspiration goes to Gary.

I'm glad to see this let-go'ed'ed.

The only real thing that annoyed me was your sarcastic response regarding RG who we all know along with many others has made a potentially difficult hobby so much easier to understand for us mere non EE mortals and he continues to share his knowledge and help us all......and please don't say he started it.

When I served in the navy, in foreign ports, we always sortied in groups of at least 3 or 4 when allowed shore leave. This way, when faced with any local knuckleheads, we could at least depend on "If you @#$% with me, you @#$% with the whole table". That alone would generally provide enough deterrent to ensure a pleasant, uneventful evening.

Glad to see that kind of camaraderie, albeit in a virtual form, exist here. 

[slacker]

4. It is impossible to collect royalties on something that is not patentable.  Seems some people here are confused on that point.

Legally that may be true but within the community people are happy to pay "licensing fees" if they sell pedals based on people's designs. I've never put any restrictions on what people can do with stuff I've published but I've had a number of people voluntarily offer to pay me for using my stuff, I assume other people have had similar experiences.
On that basis I don't think it's unreasonable for ROG to contact people who are using their designs for profit and discuss this with them.
The issues you've raised here aren't new, they've been discussed and debated many many times and most people understand where they stand legally. As people have pointed out though there's more to it than just what's legal, some people get this others don't.

[Frank_NH]

just when i thought i was out they pull me back in...

someone who has "20+ years EE experience" is this interested in a beginners DIY guitar pedal project from years ago? if it smells like a duck...

As a guitar player, I have long been waiting for the the ultimate DUMBLOID pedal design...can't wait! 

(BTW, the jfet-based amp stage designs like the Umble can be found today in numerous well-regarded commercial pedals e.g. Plexidrive.  Unfortunately, you have to pick through a pile of fets to find ones with the appropriate Vgs(off) and Idss for your design.  It's not that hard to do...)

[Transmogrifox]

you dont have to please the audience...just yourself. if others like or dislike, thats fine..

There is a lot of work that goes into formatting and organizing a project that is shared with the community/public.  The fishing for "is anybody interested?" is well justified in determining whether the extra effort will be widely appreciated enough to be worthwhile.  I get this.

As for the public challenge to ROG I think others have said enough -- I don't have any desire to fuel the flame. 

Just so nobody is guessing where I stand on the issue, I have come to have a genuine respect and appreciation for ROG over the years of being involved in this forum. 

It is true it's a catch-22 about revealing your credentials, so unless you really are a noob you have to pick the lesser of the 2 evils.  I (I hope I have finally learned this for myself) would rather be considered a noob than one of these:

(for those of you not from West Coast United States, that is the Stone Brewing Company "Arrogant Bastard" Ale trademark..damn good beer too, by the way...if I am what I drink, so be it). 

I have long been waiting for the the ultimate DUMBLOID pedal design...can't wait! 

I'm also looking forward to what comes out of this, but please start a new thread in a few weeks when you have finished.  With all these pages it's going to be hard for anybody to get to the meat of the project itself.

[GibsonGM]

4. It is impossible to collect royalties on something that is not patentable.  Seems some people here are confused on that point.

Legally that may be true but within the community people are happy to pay "licensing fees" if they sell pedals based on people's designs. I've never put any restrictions on what people can do with stuff I've published but I've had a number of people voluntarily offer to pay me for using my stuff, I assume other people have had similar experiences.
On that basis I don't think it's unreasonable for ROG to contact people who are using their designs for profit and discuss this with them.
The issues you've raised here aren't new, they've been discussed and debated many many times and most people understand where they stand legally. As people have pointed out though there's more to it than just what's legal, some people get this others don't.

My wife is a photographer...she runs into copyright issues now and then (mostly like this here, watching them evolve from afar over the net).   What I've learned from her about 'intellectual property' is this:

If you DRAW anything, lay out a pedal (even a Dist +!), and put that on the net (or anywhere)...people need permission to take that drawing and use it on their web sites, in their kits, and so on.    They CAN redraw it, as you don't have the patent, only the copyright on that 'artwork'. You made it, you own it forever.

Much of the "claims" attributed to ROG can be attributed to the desire to not have their actual artwork copied without credit (as we often see, around the internet...new web page using someone else's schematics).

I say this not to 'keep it going' or anything, just to put that out there - if I redraw a Marshall 18W,  THAT picture is MINE, my copyright. 
If I add some anode bypass caps, different value coupling caps, and tweak the tone stack, guess what?  The WHOLE IDEA is mine as that type of cascaded gain stage amp is so common. 

I'd be more smoked about someone taking my physical drawing of the circuit, and could be pressed to put out a *warning*... just sayin', it's not important.

[DougH]

i don't recall any particular mobster type attitude on the rog guys part.

Well, one time they *did* remind me that they knew where my wife & kids lived when I suggested a transistor substitution for one of their projects, but otherwise no...

[vigilante397]

I always seem to come into these things after they've been let-go'ed. Although to be fair, that still didn't kill the Burst Box

Although I did have a good laugh in the banana amp thread before that one finished, that one was pretty good.

Is there any popcorn left? If deadastronaut never got the change for his tenner I do believe I owe him a bag of popcorn, and sausages for everyone are on me!

[Jack White]

Excuse me,

But I think that it would be really awesome if mojokorn built me an Umble, but with a burst button switch.

Thanks,

Jack