PG's DIY Sustainer taking a new direction...sells out !!!!

[psw]

In keeping with the spirit of the 200+ pages of sustainer development, I have withheld several critical details and I'm going to make up kits and sell them; I hope no one steals my idea and jumps out there with a knockoff product.

Your idea!!!!

You're not serious are you R.G.? This was my original idea of course, but making entire pickups is not a practical idea, so I have settled for adapting the existing pickup or pickup of choice. Careful study of the thread will show this has been muted. If I were to do it, I was thinking that the drive coil made similarly to this could act as the driver top plate. For years I hoped someone would approach me to develop the pickup/driver when I first built mine a few years back...have you seen this one?



This is the pickup that I have been using for some time and posted on this forum too! This latest is simply the same idea but adapts an existing pickup, rather than replacing it. It works completely as a normal pickup or as a driver (but not both at once of course) exactly as you describe.

The thin coil driver is completely my idea and is key to getting the thing working with simple circuitry. It creates a very fast responsive driving coil with lower EMI and greater efficiency that the drivers currently in use. I don't really think it is in the spirit of the Sustainer Thread at all to wholesale take my idea and sell it. Especially at a time when I am working so hard to make a success of this more practical small time commercial venture. It is not like making a stompbox clone you know where a large manufacturer has already profited greatly from a generic idea.

This is an original and novel idea that I have developed over many years of dedication and I would be very disappointed if a member of this forum as respected as you were seriously considering such a move, or to consider the idea yours of simply taking my coil and putting it on top of the coil winding rather than the top of the bobbin as I have done...for shame if you are. Besides, it is obvious from the above that I have already done this quite a few years ago with a full pictorial over at PG to encourage experimentation...I did not post here or elsewhere to assist in profiteering from my existing concepts.

A kit for a pickup, is just like taking my coil and putting it within a stew-mac bobbin and winding on the wire. You may have other ideas of how this could be done, so have I...but it does not in anyway suggest that you are taking anything but my whole concept of the thin coil and it's use in passive pickups (for which I am the only one to have put this forward and there are no existing patents for) and using it for your own profit. Worse, you are suggesting it is your idea and that I should be prevented from "stealing" my own ideas...or that they are yours.

I am sure you have seen this particular pickup and it's guitar, you have contributed briefly over at PG and on threads here that have featured it in description and in photos. I have plenty of "prior art" publicly documented to that effect.

All you appear to be doing is "withholding critical details" of how you plan to rip off my own ideas and concepts...no one tried to do that until I came forward with the idea of marketing something that I know to be two difficult to DIY and to develop the concept further by putting it into the hands of others.

I came here to iron out critical details, not to have them ripped off!!!

I am very disappointed...very, very...

And, if you are serious, or anyone else is contemplating this, you should be ashamed, if not suspended for this forum and your "product" discredited for what it is...

If you had played any appreciable role in it's development, as you were invited to do, and briefly visited, I may be more generous. Lovecraft (who played a major role in the early years) and contributed greatly to this forum is no doubt spinning in his grave.

I can't tell you how hurtful your suggestion is... pete

Shame, shame, shame...

[R.G.]

Easy, fella. No, I was not serious and should have tossed in smileys.

I have way too much on my plate to "rip you off", even if I wanted to or thought that was a good idea. What I wanted to do was to point out to you that you've set yourself up for being not only ripped off but also being a victim of some really bad feelings.

This forum is one of the most civil and mutually supportive ones on the net, and even here we have raging battles about whether things that are clearly and legally protected IP can be ripped off. I can only imagine how frenzied that ripping will be in other places. So I think you need to be prepared.

Take this as tough love advice. Your development has been too public for you to successfully keep secrets now. You have no issue with me. I hope you have no issues with anyone, but my experience is that you will. Get ready for it, even if only internally. I hope you're successful - but don't get yourself hurt.

[psw]

Oh funny....got you...

Yeah...a smiley could have gone a long way...yet, it gives others ideas, no matter how dry or clever you think your humor might be. There are plenty of people out there who are ready to claim ideas for their own, or seek the attention without doing any of the work. There has been in the past, there will be in the future. Such posts only give these people ideas and fuel such a response.

For instance, there have been a couple of foreign language threads out there that have taken the ideas I have been exploring and trying to make them their own. However they typically fall to the side when visitors discover the 200+ page thread and the much shorter tutorials and pictorials and sound threads associated with it over at PG. More notable than the 200+ pages of the thread is the over 3,000 contributions and the work that has gone into them and the nearly 130,000 visits that indicate the amount of interest there is in this field. If only this thing were as easy as slapping a couple of diodes across the guitar's output and calling it a distortion advice, or building it were as easy as making an epoxy mold!

More helpful and civilized would be a response that included informed comment, suggestions and less of the patronizing "you're going to get hurt this will prepare you for it" lectures. Something more of the tone of your previous post for instance was far more encouraging and "in the spirit" of this forum as you describe. More of that, less of this!

Not everyone in this forum BTW has been so civilized about the Sustainer Thread and have had quite scathing PM's from here in the past about "lack of critical details" from at least one member over the "HEX" designs. I have tried not to put forward ideas since then that I deemed too precious to share and in this case have only (and barely) kept "secret" how I go about creating something that is fully disclosed.

Anyway..."apology" taken...I came home last night from a very long and physical day at work and perhaps a little overtired to to take that kind of joke. My apologies for my reaction, but I hope you and others can see my point and have some suggestions perhaps on how I should address those issues on a more practical level. I don't think that sticking "copyright R.G. Keen" on my posts will have any effect now would it?

A little more sleep is required, but am on a 12 hour turnaround shift for the next few days...so I will leave it there shall I... pete

[aron]

quite scathing PM's from here in the past about "lack of critical details"

WHo are the people sending these PM? There's a report to moderator button PM as well. Let me see them.

Aron

[polaris26]

I know this might be a tangent here,and possibly not even practicable, but I was looking at a DIY metal detector last night on someone's homepage, and he used the same coil for both the outgoing pulse and the incoming signal.  I was reading this thread today and I thought...  couldn't there be an external circuit that timeshares a pickup so that it alternately senses the string signal (the normal function of a pickup) and sends out pulses to keep the string moving.  Maybe a micro controller or something, I don't know.  That way you not have to alter the guitar in any way, just plug in and go.  Just a thought...

Dave

[psw]

Better a tangent than...

Yes...well I have tried looking into this kind of idea and just one of the things explored in the 200+ pages of the thread. Never got it to work and simple pulses of energy will not drive the strings unless at the vibrating frequency of it's vibration (eg, an amplifier). Would be interested if you have a link to that idea though.

Meanwhile...apologies to the 99.99999999 members and gusts here, and R.G. if they take offense at my claims of previous PM's (they are no way associated with R.G. just to be clear), however I can back them up and have sent Aron some. These kinds of things are best left buried in the past, but I do hope my point is taken that some people may be encouraged to behave in such ways and the "tough love" principle can be used to justify all manner of abuse, both personal and commercial.

Now...on with the show... pete

[polaris26]

The metal detector article I was referring to is here:  http://oldradiobuilder.com/mhbp.html

I was thinking if you sampled the output from the pickup into a microcontroller over a period of, say 30 mS, determined the pitch, you could then emit a pulse of matching frequency out to the pickup itself for a few mS, then repeat the process to check for a new frequency, etc.  Not saying it would be easy, but was just an idea to try.  On another tack, you would expect to need the pulses to be in synch with the string vibrations, but when a plectrum 'pulses' a string, it's obviously not in synch with anything the string may or may not be doing.  If you had a sufficently strong and narrow pulse, wouldn't that energize the string, even if it were 'asynchronous', so to speak?  I dunno - just thinking out loud...

Dave

Better a tangent than...

Yes...well I have tried looking into this kind of idea and just one of the things explored in the 200+ pages of the thread. Never got it to work and simple pulses of energy will not drive the strings unless at the vibrating frequency of it's vibration (eg, an amplifier). Would be interested if you have a link to that idea though.

Meanwhile...apologies to the 99.99999999 members and gusts here, and R.G. if they take offense at my claims of previous PM's (they are no way associated with R.G. just to be clear), however I can back them up and have sent Aron some. These kinds of things are best left buried in the past, but I do hope my point is taken that some people may be encouraged to behave in such ways and the "tough love" principle can be used to justify all manner of abuse, both personal and commercial.

Now...on with the show... pete

[T_u_b_e]

Not at all, and I would welcome comment on this. Yes I have seen most of the patents but consider mine to be significantly "novel". There are patents on this type of device that predate the twentieth century I have seen...valve sustain piano anyone...and plenty of very like patents from Sustainiac, Fernandes and Rose...as well as a lot of others...plus things like the ebow!

I'd love to patent mine, but these things are expensive and difficult to defend.

This thing is very different in many ways. The driver design and it's concept of retrofitting to a conventional pickup is completely novel...there are no patents on this idea. The whole thin coil design is also unique. The use of simple amplification with an efficient, fast responding driver is also unique...the ebow may be a bit of an exception.

You may be right but perhaps you underestimate the problems just a bit in selling a product which could clash with someones patent?
As you say yourself these patents cost a LOT of money and surely they have not spend that cash just for fun 

There may look like there is many patents that are close but I  think that you only have to bother much about those described for electric guitar.
If I get it correctly the patent for ebow do not clash, not because of differences in driving coil or other aspects in the driver. The main imprtant difference that I see is in that it never anticipates  any feedback from the (original) guitar pickup system...the description seem to expect a closed system for vibrating the strings.
The sustainiac guys could not really sell their units without an agreement from Floyd Rose (which have the claims for the basic principle )and AFAIK they indeed have a cross licence deal with Floyd Rose.
The Fernandes patent is mainly about controlling these types of systems and some other refinements. I actually think that they had a lot of business with the sustainac guys in the past so there is probably some financial agreement between those two parties, possibly also directly with  Floyd.
Is there any other commercial system out there that I do not know about? I am not aware of any. I do not think it is because lack of commercial interest or difficulties in making such systems but rather that Floyds patent is ín fact pretty solid and he knows how to protect "his IP". Remember all those Floyd trem lookalikes out there with a "licenced by" line  Perhaps asking Floyd directly if he thinks that your stuff clash in some way and/or if he would defend it strongly is the most easy solution to find out?

The main reason for not being contacted after 200 pages of DIY sustainers is most probably because there is no problem or illegal in doing or describing (even a 100%) copy for yourself of someone elses patent as long as there is nothing commercial going on?

Best regards

[psw]

I am continuing to refine this concept and where it takes me or in what form it will be available, in very small quantities is yet to be seen.

FR has a patent but the whole area is confused. As I have said I have located patents back to the 1890's on this exact concept. The ebow patent does have a whole second half on effectively six built in ebows, so is so close to a built in "sustainer" it is laughable. The true innovator's, such as Micheal Brook, who made his "Infinte Guitar" available to the Sustainac people before they moved from "Acoustic Sustainers" (the model C which Vibrates the headstock) to the string driver effect more commonly described. The must be about 40 related patents and many are extremely close in concept and intent. The Patents are about control of commercial monopoly, no about the innovation as far as I can tell. I am sure they will have no problem "protecting" this monopoly and the R&D they have put in to refine it, the basic concept has a long and checkered history for which none of the contemporary makers should lay exclusive claim on the inspiration front.

The main reason for not being contacted after 200 pages of DIY sustainers is most probably because there is no problem or illegal in doing or describing (even a 100%) copy for yourself of someone elses patent as long as there is nothing commercial going on?

Quite right...and so encouraging others to do likewise, not a problem? What about selling a "developers kit" to make such experimentation easier, is there a problem there? After all, initially, that is all I was offering, the chance to get one's hands on a machine wound coil and an amplifier to run it with so more could participate in the development of the technology. It is also remarkably different in application and design from the patented systems in some crucial details, details that have now been in the public domain for some years now and could even prohibit me from patenting them!

Anyway, thanks for the continued interest, like the concept itself, I proceed with stealth... pete

[T_u_b_e]

I am continuing to refine this concept and where it takes me or in what form it will be available, in very small quantities is yet to be seen.

FR has a patent but the whole area is confused. As I have said I have located patents back to the 1890's on this exact concept. The ebow patent does have a whole second half on effectively six built in ebows, so is so close to a built in "sustainer" it is laughable. The true innovator's, such as Micheal Brook, who made his "Infinte Guitar" available to the Sustainac people before they moved from "Acoustic Sustainers" (the model C which Vibrates the headstock) to the string driver effect more commonly described. The must be about 40 related patents and many are extremely close in concept and intent. The Patents are about control of commercial monopoly, no about the innovation as far as I can tell. I am sure they will have no problem "protecting" this monopoly and the R&D they have put in to refine it, the basic concept has a long and checkered history for which none of the contemporary makers should lay exclusive claim on the inspiration front.

The main reason for not being contacted after 200 pages of DIY sustainers is most probably because there is no problem or illegal in doing or describing (even a 100%) copy for yourself of someone elses patent as long as there is nothing commercial going on?

Quite right...and so encouraging others to do likewise, not a problem? What about selling a "developers kit" to make such experimentation easier, is there a problem there? After all, initially, that is all I was offering, the chance to get one's hands on a machine wound coil and an amplifier to run it with so more could participate in the development of the technology. It is also remarkably different in application and design from the patented systems in some crucial details, details that have now been in the public domain for some years now and could even prohibit me from patenting them!

Anyway, thanks for the continued interest, like the concept itself, I proceed with stealth... pete

Hey psw
You are right. Many patents today are quite ridiculous  in that there was so much prior art  before that they should not be accepted by the patent office to begin with-
As you say they are there mainly there  to block and scare others of. And that is what some of the holders also use them for.

I do not think a developers kit should be any problem but what do I know 

Anyways, I wish you luck. Just be aware about that some of these guys could cause trouble if they really want to.
They do not need to be right. The process initself is often damaging enough because of the money involved.
Best regards

[psw]

Thanks, things got a little out of hand on my end, the whole original "Sustainer Thread" is completely overblown and for sometime has required condensing into the essential elements. This was really an attempt to solve the perennial problems people have found but from pressures to produce more of a complete "system" it got out of hand.

The problems people have had is to do with lack of experience building even simple circuits), difficulty locating components (particularly the wire) and a lot of inconsistency, especially in the coil construction. There isn't even a "standard" purpose designed circuit, the fetzer/ruby was put forward by someone else as an effective amplifier that can and has done the job.

What I did then was to design a purpose built circuit and refine the coil for easy application and effectiveness with a view to easy replication/manufacturing. The intention was to originally provide a kit of parts and a reel of wire, a one stop supply of components to get people over this hump. This did leave a lot of inconsistencies in the idea and a lot of people, even here, with experience in circuits are put off by the more "arts and crafts" aspects of building the coil. It is pretty easy, but outside of peoples experience so a little off putting.

My concept then expanded to a solution of not only providing a kit of components, but to provide a very small purpose designed "standard" circuit and a well made coil suitable to get people started. Once installed, people could experiment to their hearts content, designing different driver coils, applications and installations as they wished, or more sophisticated circuits. The circuitry side of things would be of particular interest to people here as, once installed, it is very easy to simply swap out the circuit for your own design, if that's your thing.

People could of course cobble together a quite presentable device that does pretty much what other such devices do, and I suspect a little more far cheaper and without such invasive and limiting factors that all other systems have so far entailed. Now, it may be splitting hairs but you can see what I mean in the previous post...
I can build my own, even clone a design from the patents.
I can encourage others to do this kind of activity or copy my design.
I can tell people where they can get components and how to put them together.
I can sell these components like any supplier to be used in these endeavors.
Can I not assemble these components then to do exactly as I suggested and the receiver of these piece them together?

Now, if I were building a cloned design of a stompbox and selling this, sans box, perhaps there would be a problem but this is my own design of circuit, driver and application. At what point is it problematic. When components are assembled into circuits, or when circuits are wired into systems for a particular application? So, if I were to design a circuit that produced square wave forms (fuzz) from a guitar signal, would this be an infringement of EH or anyone else if it bore no relation to their design, but used diode clipping for example?

So...check this out...


1892 patent for an electromagnetic sustaining device for a piano, well out of patent rights. Now, the thing ran on valves, but it is still an amplifier running coils to produce infinite sustain, exactly what the ebow or any other such device does. So, you may suggest that this wasn't guitar specific, but there were plenty of others...and of the well known ones...you mentioned Floyd Rose, how do you explain the extremely similar patents from the other two as well, how were these granted. They are the same concept, application and in detail (such as phase correction circuitry, AGC, etc). Sustainiac claim the use of D class amplification...surely it is simply an amplifier, regardless of it's type (that warrants a patent) or the use of a push-pull pot...patent? Better a patent such as Heet's ebow which states pretty much any amplifier circuit that is know to the art. Even though that patent (well before the others) showed a built in version of the ebow, it didn't prevent the others from patenting over the top, including Floyd Rose! Sometimes it seems as if the patent "process" invites people to take ideas, modify them a little, then use a new patent to protect for themselves essentially other peoples ideas.

(just for the record, the whole point of my work was to simplify the circuitry back to simple amplification by innovating in the driver department and the application, quite different from each successive patent of this kind of device. In that way, it is quite different from these later patents, there is no phase correction or fancy amps or obscure components, just simple workable design quite different in both the style and application of those that have been proposed before...or so I believe)

So...as I stand now, I am going back to a very small scale manufacture of components for people to do as they wish and to hopefully share the results. The intention is to take the discussion away from the "I can't locate the right part, can I use this?" and "I built it just like you said, but it doesn't work?" type questions, to a "thanks, I have it working and now I was thinking of doing this" and "hear what I sound like with this device" kind of discussion.

These things are not easy really. A Fernandes kit will cost quite a bit and will require a lot to install (you need to use not only their neck driver active pickup by the way but their bridge pickup as well, and their switching that is built onto the board and so requires routing of the instrument). There is a reason that they never previously sold these things outside of their guitars and still provide no after market advice or service...it is not a simple thing. Sustainiac are better but would rather you let them install it for you at a premium plus shipping...otherwise there is no guarantee the thing will work for you. Any of these devices (including mine) are going to require substantial rewiring of pretty much the entire guitar.

The big difference is that my "components" are simple (largely due to the driver design), cheap (use magnets and cores that exist already on the guitar) and far less invasive (very small [37mmx22mm circuit + 1mm coil] with far less modifications and the ability to adapt these things to a particular application as you wish, or completely change things if you so desire.

My concept probably is patentable since the others are, but why should I be pressured into a game where a slight refinement (like the type of amplifier) may over-right my patent anyway and the people with the most money win? I may well put a PAF on it, but really, have I the recourses to track down people in foreign countries and prosecute under their rubbery laws to protect my patent...no, I don't think so.

All I have ever wanted for this was to be able to provide the opportunity for others to play with this concept and to do so as easily and with as much success as possible. To make this thing better. That was the aim of the present "venture" and I don't see the problem with it. If I am asked to cease and desist, so be it. But should I discover that someone tries to patent this publicly open design, I certainly will be pointing out the prior art in the public domain to protect my right as well as yours to develop these kinds of things. There really isn't much difference, in my mind, between someone developing this as is someone building any stompbox (distortion or otherwise) and Boss or whoever claiming the "stompbox concept" is theirs.

Trade marks and such they can keep, I never liked the name anyway, and it is inadequate to describe what these things really do. These things are not just about infinite sustain, I actually am more interested in some of the other effects this thing produces. Except for the novelty effect, how many people really what to hold a note for minutes at a time? Reverse envelopes, automatic harmonics, EMI distortions...these are far more interesting...even the subtle effects like natural decays that  fade out to a natural harmonic that my system can now produce , are more interesting than infinite sustain IMHO.

So...that's where I stand at present on the matter. I have taken R.G.'s point and am developing it largely in private. The first ones will be sent out soon for independent testing and evaluation while I am fully installing my own device. I have done a lot of the legwork already, and if all goes well small scale production will occur as a result and anything that comes of it will be spent on other associated applications (an HB driver for instance) while I anticipate that there may well be some clever people on here that may take the circuitry to another level, perhaps even sell these to complement what I have to offer. I have worked out a way in which I can do this on a small scale cost effectively without commitment to bulk quantities and PCB's even but still provide a quality "product".

It is a kind of "open source" approach that I find particularly appealing and which is likely to enhance things rather than stifle them. There will still be room for people like myself, even if I do sporn my own completion. Better that than the idea never sees the light of day or that I (expensively) open it up for others to use through the patent system. If I make a good enough "product" then there will people who will be interested, if not, well market forces will prevail (as they always will). I have a pretty good head start however even if I have been too open with the details...eventually they will be out there anyway.

Maybe when this is more fully developed and made available, there will be a new beginning and a new "thread" in support of this which leaves a lot of the old 'thread behind and concentrates on the more interesting over mundane posts that litter the thing. Perhaps I will have learn't a valuable lesson and moved on...well, see...

thanks pete

[psw]

Apologies to all and sundry for my previous "spazz" attack...I will try and remain calm. Still bogged down in other stuff but thought I would update where the project is at.

Here, for the first time is a pic of the circuit...



Here are the other components...



This one is being built as a prototype for a US builder doing a commission for a major artist and may even be shown at NAMM in January, all being well.

Still haven't gotten into a "production mode" so these things are still pretty labor intensive.

I have been working on a few other things plus an innovative guitar wiring that features powerful but hidden switches. I have found a way, and am working on them tonight, of modifying the dpdt switch pot (shown above) so that in addition to the pot, and the push pull switch, there is a collar around the base which when turned activates a 4pdt switch (made from a pair of sub-miniature toggles). This dual action switch pot has a lot of switching power (same as an S-1 switch plus a dpdt). This will enable the sustainer on my guitar to be operated from one control. Turning the base will switch it on and bypass the selector, the pot will control the drive and effect, and the push pull the harmonic function. This still leaves two more 4pdt and 2 dpdt switches to play with and there is a lot of internal tricks and features that will give a wide range of sounds, but will look very minimal...seemingly only three knobs and a selector switch in typical strat fashion.

I have also installed a piezo, system that I had tested on the original guitar some time back. I may even be offering this as again, low price and easy installation over present systems. It doesn't sound "acoustic" though it does give a woody quality and a dynamic punch and attack unlike magnetic pickups. Combined with different magnetic arrangements the sound can be quite effective. On my guitar, I have installed a battery behind the strat's trem block for easy replacement and so, since power for the sustainer is only drawn when this is in use, I feel confident using the same powersource for a simple preamp that draws power only when the piezo's are engaged. Also, as this pickup is not magnetic, it can be used in combination with the sustainer.

Anyway, the project has been delayed but still something that I am actively working on the production of with a few people interested in it at a higher level. It really does require a lot of work to find an efficient production mode to make it cost effective. I really don't want to go down the road of the boutique builder and am aiming at a price of less than half of the present systems with huge advantages in installation and operation as well as retaining the choice of pickups and complete functionality of the guitar.

So lots of surprises, but extremely complicated to wire and to make many of the hardware components (even though the base instrument is a high level squier).

Anyway...some may be wondering where it's at...

pete

[bancika]

I just thought of it today, really 
when do you plan to start selling

[psw]

Hi Mr B...it really is a matter of sorting production strategies for the thing. Hand crafting these things is out of the question...but I am working on it. Hopefully in a few months...early next year...fingers crossed...

Here is a related project...the ultimate switch pot...





This thing has a push pull function and a decorative disc at the bottom which, when turned actuates a pair of ultra-miniture dpdt switches. This one control then will be used for all the functions of the sustainer in my guitar. I am installing two more to match for the other controls so there will be some powerful options hidden in the controls while still looking and playing like a standard 3 knob strat and five way selector.

On that circuit, notice that even though hand soldered the whole thing is tiny (compare with pick) and much smaller than any commercial units on offer. I am pretty proud of the design and layout, it includes an amp, preamp and agc control so is more sophisticated than earlier designs I have tried. Any comment on the DIL connector idea...perhaps it would have been easier simply to install leads to the board?

will keep in touch... pete

[R.G.]

On that circuit, notice that even though hand soldered the whole thing is tiny (compare with pick) and much smaller than any commercial units on offer. I am pretty proud of the design and layout, it includes an amp, preamp and agc control so is more sophisticated than earlier designs I have tried. Any comment on the DIL connector idea...perhaps it would have been easier simply to install leads to the board?

The design and layout are nice and tight for a homemade setup.

However, it could be half that size or smaller with surface mount, which would be even cheaper to manufacture. I suggest you get a good layout guy to make you a surface mount unit.

The DIL connector idea is OK for homemade again, but there are commercial connectors that are smaller size and provide latching retention. For instance, there is a line of connectors that has pins on every 0.05" inches and has a latching header/connector. I've used them on some custom stuff.

As a bit of advice, ditch the potting. It is a screaming cry to some segments of the DIY community to come over, remove the potting compound, and publish the schematic. If there is no potting it will be less attractive. In fact, it would be smart of you to simply publish the schematic. Paradoxically, that will make you even less likely to be copied, as there are fewer people who will do this if the diehard reverse engineer-ers don't get caught up in it; it's the thrill of the chase that pushes most of them.

[bancika]

I was wandering, do you plan to make 7 string version of the driver sometimes?

[psw]

Thanks for the replies guys...

A seven string is a possibility but for now only in an adapted single coil driver design, the circuit and other components should suffice so it is simply a matter of extending the coil on a custom basis. Until such time that I work out a way of effectively building these things in number, that may well be the next development. An HB version will have to wait some time however and has a lot more complexities to produce.

RG...It is a fairly simple circuit and does contain quite a few SMD components to get it this small. The potting on these prototypes helps disguise the vero board construction and provide insulation as much as anything. The connectors are a problem and I kind of think flying leads may be more practical anyway. So many connections need to be made that having connectors on the circuit board really doesnt help matters.

It is intriguing to think how small this could be all in surface mount and how more cost effective it would be compared to my present methods of construction. Any advice on who I could make contact to get such things laid out and built...it may in fact be better to go into this phase more directly and make the investment rather than trying to build them myself. Getting the components together, making the boards or having them made, really is a big commitment.

Making the coils is really the part I think I ill have to continue to do myself, but even there, there are obvious ways I could solve some of my present problems by getting someone to CNC the jigs required to make them in some number rather than making them myself...this is a large part of the hold up in production at the moment as they can only be made one at a time, one day at a time and so is too inefficient for commercial success.

I did a circuit board layout, and my vero exactly matches that. While this would be obviously easier to construct, again, experience or lack there of in this area is of some concern and parts acquisition seems to be a difficult proposition as it seems multiple suppliers are required and at retail, costs (although possible) really eats into the possible margins by this method.

So...any advice. SMD manufacture/layout (I don't see myself hand soldering any more SMD components (like chips) that I am already committed to in this design) and connectors or not (these DIL sockets were the most compact solution I could find, some other connectors can end up being as large as the circuit itself and so defeats the purpose, plus, I have had trouble connecting leads to these sockets in the past...they also add cost (perhaps simple leads are best).

later

pete