diy sustainer pickup conversion

[Paul Marossy]

Figure 18(b) shows the bar magnet that is fanned out to give the strings their own sized 'pole'.  Figure 21 shows the three magnets that make up the driver.

That's very interesting how that bar magnet is fanned like that.

[psw]

I am actually considering a new home for all things DIY sustainers...and perhaps clearing out the nonsense so that at least my working versions are clear and a little more prescriptive. Of course, experimentation is encouraged, but often the failures are from not following the design that gives the results...we'll have to see about that...new home...hmmm

...

Anyway...

If you work for a driver coil in 0.2mm wire and about 3mm deep, you will get a coil (depending on the size of the core) roughly that of a single coil bobbin. A lot depends on that core size and winding and potting and materials and stuff, but generally that's what you will get...the turns will be perhaps 150-200 but measure it as in the pictures till you get about 8 ohms.

This design and formula will give you a coil of sufficient induction and resonance and whatever other criteria that is really behind why these things work and others don't and the formula matters.

The "thin coil" design came about from experimentation...but really, it makes most of the coil high up near the strings where you want the EM energy to be, lowers the profile of the device and so limiting the spread of EMI out of it, makes it conveniently small with the potential to be even smaller (like my later wafer coils), maximizes the amount of overlapping turns, etc.

...

I've made the driver (without the bobine) with 2 pieces of epoxy and with a ferrite bar. Does ferrite is a good metal for this ?

I'd have to be see it to be sure of what you mean. Ferrite isn't a metal really, it's a ceramic...like ceramic magnets...but as a core it has the right kind of properties (I have used some and extensively in the hex drivers) but they are very hard to "work".

Not sure if you have varried the design to the extent that you are actually winding around the magnet...this can be problematic. If you look at my tele's driver...

the specs again on the whole guitar project is here btw...

http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.php?showtopic=37370&hl=blueteleful



You can see that this tiny driver is built on a 3mm steel core that sits a top 4 little ceramic magnets (craft shop) glued together to amke the right size. The coil depth is 3mm and very slim (8mm) but with a special epoxy winding technique and years of practice to get it this tight and self supporting...I would not attempt to do similar first go or if you don't have a good working knowledge of epoxies and can access the appropriate slow working and stuff that is this runny. I had to build special molds to do this by the way, but it was essentially "had wound" on a jig I made to do it.

So...it is a pretty simple device though and this clear one shows there are no tricks....it would work just as well with a "bobbin" on top as is usual. 0.2mm wire, 3mm steel core, extremely well potted so there is absolutely no internal vibration potential (the wood glue versions are fine though wont self sup[port themselves without a bobbin of course, but it has to be wound with the potting) basic ceramic magnets below.

But the design works well on say a strat pickups bobbins and pole pieces, so that's about a 5mm wide core. I did find that wider is a problem in response. If winding around the magnet to make things more compact...well, that can lead to some problems...it can work. Often though, people don't get simple things like the polarity right...on a single coil you need the Nth or Sth pole up. If multiple magnets you need the same consistently.

Really, I'd need to know exactly, probably with pictures, how the thing is put together and what you are proposing. While it may seem that if you want to make a super compact driver like the one on my tele, winding around the magnet is the obvious way, in fact winding round the magnets (which would be way to wide at about 8mm anyway on this...and don't go down the neodymium thing either) would make it less efficient and a lot bigger...

...

Ok...well take the patents with a grain of salt...most of these things never got anywhere near used or production or showed to be effective strategies anyway. The "fanned core" is an attempt to provide more balanced drive, particularly with the high strings. You will also note that there is an external shield with closer points to make the "appature" of the magnetic field smaller, especially important on high strings and relates to the core width problem...you could be trying to drive the string on a node and antinode and getting no response as a result at certain places and especially at higher frequencies. Many of these things are aimed to correct problems in the design.

It should be noted that most commercial sustainers also aim for a "bi-lateral" dual coil design...again, not like mine

Mine may seem ridiculously simple in comparison, and they are, but it is a fundamentally different approach. A narrow aperture on all strings is fine...hence I prefer a 3mm core or the standard fenders for the basic SC designs like this.

Things like the elaborate external shielding is to try and contain EMI getting into the pickups. My compact designs use their very small size as a means to contain EMI effects to a localized area.

...

That said, I am reminded to remind builders that these things still need a fair distance from the source bridge pickups and any other coils. In use, any other pickups on the guitar (say neck and middle on a strat) and in fact all wiring like the selector are completely bypassed. That means both the hot and ground are connected as noise can be induced in nearby coils (like a transformer effect) and leak into the ground and so the source pickup....this can lead to failure. In testing these things...either hold the driver above the neck far away...but when installed, cut all connections to other coils...and aim to switch these out with the on off switch...this will require a big 4pdt switch function.

The up side is that these things only draw power (unlike commercial sustainers) when the device is switched on and the guitar works as normal with your choice of pickups even without a battery...this applies to the pickup/driver combos too.

...

So, hope I have answered a few questions, it can be difficult to understand sometimes. Basically, the 'bobbin' is the forms that hold the wire on...how wide...well, depending on core size...with a depth of 3mm you should easily fit 8 ohms on a SC sized bobbin...that's about 10mm from side to side...including the core. This will work say with converting a SC strat bobbin and magnet array, filled at the bottom to allow for a 3mm gap at the top to wind to...this is a very common and successful way of doing it. Ding this to one side of an HB also seems to work fine with this technique.

Someone from here has built one quite a while ago by the way and put up something of a tutorial...

http://diy-fever.com/misc/diy-sustainer/

You can see this was wound on a single coil "blocked up" as suggested...as far as I know it worked ok...but another tutorial all the same.

this approach is probably the easiest and neatest approach to take, especially for a first time builder. Being on a pickup gives you more opportunity for height adjustment in the guitar and such.

...

I also looked at the "Ruby"...if the one I know of at RoG there is a buffer in front that will prevent loading...a transistor stage. With an effective driver, I have found a buffer with decent pickups to be adequate, too much preamp gains only going to introduce distortions that might affect efficiency...if the bridge pickup is low powered, well maybe a little bit more is required.

What it lacks is the provisions in the data sheet of the LM386 to prevent internal oscillation that I suggest...



http://www.runoffgroove.com/ruby.html

Now...understand I have not built nor endorsing these things for this project...but there is no reason that an LM386 circuit can't work and that's what I use most of the time including my own new circuits. It is simply a small non-loading circuit design...

However...

Say, on the ruby to put it up to my specs...

that 220uF output cap...I use a 100uF to get better high string response and bloom in the harmonics...it biases the circuit to work the high strings higher and less "lag" that might cause a bit of phase problems...again with the high string response.

Ok...otherwise...I use a 10uF cap from 7 to ground and the same between pins 1 & 8 in circuit with the gain set pot there. This seems to help with internal oscillation a bit should that be a problem. That "zobel network" of the 10ohm and 47n is important...be sure that resistor is 10 ohms not 10K ohms or something silly! Those values seem about right.

I have a few extras typically on my boards, a power diode to protect things if the battery is put in back to front, a resistor to provide a separate power out for an LED, those kinds of touches, but they are not performance enhancing.

But...so much depends on the driver...no circuit will make a bad driver better. If it is inefficient or putting out excessive EMI or the aperture of the field is way out or excessive or the design is significantly altered...well more power is only going to make it worse! You may well find that you can not run these circuits at full power anyway with a good driver...and that's actually a good thing, more clean headroom, less EMI everywhere...all that matters is that it works right.

...

Ok...so will try and keep tabs on this thread, but am moving house. I have updated contact details...but you know...changing ISP, going wireless...all kinds of things can go wrong in this process...

...

PS...we will see how things go, but I do have my own "circuit design" and a "wafer coil" that I had planned to sell...that is why I am not completely forthcoming in what I use these days...though the past is there to see and it's a similar kind of thing with SMD's and a different control function. After this move I may be able to do something along those lines with built circuits that are tested...I might even reserect the "wafer coils" that fit a standard strat type pickup to convert the neck pickup into a pickup/driver...but we will see.

Also, suggestions for a new home for this project are welcome...email me perhaps to avoid politics

[benfox]

thank you very much for this answer with a lot of details !!

i've made my first try with my ferrite driver. It works quite well.
I did it with 0.2 mm²  wire as you said.
The only problem i have is with the high E string.
Something weird happen too. I could'nt check the impedance with my multimeter...
It gave me strange values....i've made around 175 turns and i check sevral time the resistance.
Here i'm around 16 ohm not kohm but ohms with 175 turns. Ive check my multimeter and it's ok working fine with known restance.

Weird isn't it...
I have already did some pickups with no problems checking the resistance time to time while winding but here it seems that there is a problem somewhere...

[benfox]

No way to modify a post here ?

I was thinking of my resistance problem
Maybe my wire is bad ? The enamel is perhaps bad....
I've changing values...

I took this one it's in french :
http://www.conradpro.fr/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10101&storeId=10051&productId=116094&langId=-2&ItemHighLightId=116098&from_fh=1&category=recherche

Here you can download specs :
http://www1.produktinfo.conrad.com/cgi-bin/dlc/dlc.cgi?art=607568&ins=62&lang=FR

I've already used the same wire with 0.05 mm for a pick up built and it works just perfect.
i've translate a few and it seems that it's enameled with polyurethan

[psw]

Hello again...

Reading the resistance of a coil should be no different from reading that of a resistor. The enamel insulation needs to be well stripped and your probes clean to get a good consistent reading, an appropriate setting on the meter for low ohms is also required of course. This has been the problem for me when such things occur. The glue potting also can cause problems with making a good reading. The actual insulation enamel makes little to no difference, any loss of enamel occasionally in reading will be re-insulated by the glue potting. That sized roll of wire should make a couple of the things I think...it's much as I used to use.

You will see that I wind with glue in that pictorial but was well prepared and even soldered the hookup lead to the starting point to make reading occasionally as I wind possible, easy and accurate.

The resistance is a guide to the successful coil in this design specs. A bigger core will of course radically effect the number of winds, so that is why winds are not specified...but even winding style can effect things a lot. The real thing that is necessary is the resonance and inductance of these devices, so again, the wire gauge and other aspects of the design along with the resistance as a guide, should get you a driver with the required qualities to work fine. (note: resistance in terms of pickup power and qualities are the same, a guide and often misleading at that).

Now...if you have a driver of 16 ohms...it is way over spec, so it would not surprise me if the high e didn't respond as expected. Again, very little to go on here, no pics or details of circuit (are you using a 100uF output cap on a LM386 based circuit for instance). When you say ferrite driver, is this the core or is it a ceramic magnet. Recent new information leads me to believe that inductance wise, ferrite may well not be the best of inductance and so resonance reasons (it will not show in a resistance measurement either) and it is very hard to work with. More details and explanation for this deviation in design would help a lot.

It's with noting that as you wind, typically the resistance is very slow and you can go a haundred winds before close to spec...as you wind more the resistance increases fast. 175 turns is not unreasonable, but it depends a lot on what it is turned around of course...i think mine would be a little less. I have had drivers work very well with only slightly more than 7 ohms btw...so you do not want to go much higher than 8. If you are having trouble reading the things, it's hard to be sure what the actual value is. Don't forget the potting though, this is a crucial thing....there needs to be absolutely no internal vibration and the end result should be neat, reasonably tight (the sides pushed in) and wrapped in tape and let to set solid.

It could be though that you get high e drive if you were to tweak the circuit with the 100uF output cap or play around with values to get a response you find musical. The driver is much like a speaker, but you can not hear it, you need to go on the effect it is having. Now, if you had a speaker that was too bass-y, your response would be to turn up the treble to compensate...these are the kind of tweaks that make a working system into a great and musical sounding and responsive system and seems to be often overlooked.

Anyway, sounds like you are making progress. Few wind a great driver first time around even with sticking to the specs...some things can take a little practice. In fact, people who really get into this after having success, seem to be constantly building newer and more elaborate versions. There is a renewed interest at the moment in dual coil systems, I've not been entirely convinced of the benefits of this, but there are other design strategies that will work. For this design to work properly though, the details (wire gauge, potting, resistance, core, dimensions (thickness of coil) and such are important elements for results like I have been getting. Keep at it...

[benfox]

i've found where the probleme where.
I used crocodie type wire to connect my multimeter and burn the enameled to remove it.
That's bad !!
You must be plugged to the wire very close with the multimeter to have good value. And to remove the enamel use a knife because while burning i think few enamel stay on the wire. (am i clear enought)
I keep on improving stuff. I'll try to post photos and sound quick !

I'm also working on a double design : 6 long pole magnet sustainer/pickup at the same time
on top a 3 mm wide driver
under a pickup

[psw]

YES...extremely bad. If you use long leads you are adding more length and so resistance to the coil. Burning wire is no excuse...gently scraping with the back of a knife or gently rubbing it with some light wet and dry will get a good connection. When potting with glue (an important part of the project) it is also easy to get glue everywhere, so this need to be cleaned of course...it does though  reseal the insulation to prevent shorts.

You really do not need an iron at all to build the driver till it is finished...best leave the thing well away!

...

I'm also working on a double design : 6 long pole magnet sustainer/pickup at the same time
on top a 3 mm wide driver
under a pickup

I may not be following this, but don't get too far ahead with the ideas and there is plenty of material to look at to get an idea on what has been attempted.

Putting a driver under a pickup will not work for instance...it needs to be as close t the strings as possible. Many have made dual coil systems including me, some with HB conversions...but there are some issues...you may need to get a far bigger grip on the problems at hand before getting to carried away with the things.

There is a project at the moment I know of that is a proposal for a dual coil bi-lateral design with coils optimized for each string set. He works more with the facts and figures than perhaps I do, but he is chasing increased efficiency to lower EMI and power consumption and for more control.

The specs I have given produces a coil generally with an inductance and resonance at 8 ohms resistance that will work throughout the range of the guitar with an appropriate amp. This is a wire gauge of 0.2mm. However, with alternate coil designs, this may be radiacally different to produce the same effects.

A driver below a pickup is not a practical proposition...a bit more study and or experimentation will reveal why. The project and principles are fairly basic, but the details are important and the whole thing is a balancing act. To have any effect on the strings at that kind of distance, you would need to feed it so much power and the eMI spread would make it squeal uncontrolably...or simply not work at all.

But as always...I may have envisioned the proposition wrong and need more details to properly assess it.

Oh...and if not mentioned earlier, swapping the output cap on an LM386 amp to 100uF tends to help bring out the higher strings a lot better...sometimes these circuits need a little tweaking to get the drivers to work to their best.

[Gurner]

The guy that ran that design could talk your ear off without being able to answer a question on the design.  I just gave up thinking someone would come up with the answer so I wouldn't waste any more time on the thing.  Well, I'm still waiting.

Hehe - I agree it seems puzzling how can a thread run that long & still (apparently) not even have an agreed basic circuit in the tutorials? I see a degree of repetition wrt the Fetzer Ruby being used, but never anybody actually coming right on out & affirming - "yep, the Fetzer Ruby is the best in class for a basic sustainer" ...which frankly in the light of 300+ page thread, is a little underwhelming.

[psw]

The 300 page sustainer thread was an ongoing conversation that just simply grew out of my own personal work. Much of it explores the various options. If it were in search of the ultimate distortion and said, this is it...would anyone believe it, or would you simply get 300 pages of people chipping in with their own ideas and such...so please consider...

I agree with the standard circuit thing, the fetzer ruby is still a viable option and been successful for many, most have problems with the driver actually. Mods for the fetzer ruby and similar LM386 circuits have been posted and pictorials and tutorials plus various blogs of successful builders work based on the design are everywhere. There have been posted a few other basic amplifier circuits that have worked as well...some consider it to be "better"...but who's to say...

"best in class"...well, the whole point was that these things develop, but the basic designs work with any number of basic little amp circuits that are buffered. Unlike stomp boxes, this project is not about a 'circuit'...it is not about signal processing, but the physical activation of the string.

There are also a whole range of different responses and 'effects' available with this technology...there is "no best option"...it depends what you want out of the thing.

My systems tend to sound like a very loud guitar at any volume (even headphones)...in normal mode you get straight strong sustain, but the lower range blooms to a harmonic. In harmonic mode you get quite high predictable harmonics all over the neck.

Some don't want that sound which can be very dynamic. Some want a very even sound, good strong fundamental tones in the bass strings and less of the dynamic effect of the "loud guitar" feel and sound.

Something like this requires a different approach to circuitry. There is a circuit presented by col, much larger than mine, that includes 4 modes and a lot of control over the response and good bass fundamentals.

But still...there are more options should you be seeking them, many have gone out after hexaphonic drivers and influenced by the features of the Moog guitar for instance.

I personally have a range of extra criteria that I use to mark success...I do not want to lose the neck pickup or be forced to alter the guitar, I need very small circuits and switching systems that can cope with this stuff silently...all kinds of stuff...and to that extent I have developed a whole range of options (pickup/driver combos, very compact drivers only 4mm deep, circuits of only about 1"x1", etc)...but this is not what many others who contribute there want, I am one of the few that have done much work at all on multi-pickup guitar options.

It is not, and never been my responsibility to continue to come up with circuits and say 'this is how it is', I have had enough criticism over that kind of thing in the past...everyone wants something different. There is no "best in class" distortion, everyone likes a different flavor, why should this be any different or that I should be responsible for making that judgment for you. I dare say that you will get some response from all kinds of circuits...noisy cricket, gem, ruby...so many of these kinds of basic circuits...but there is no "best option" if people are not even sure what they want and are not prepared to have a go...and to put the work into the driver and installation issues that are far more important to success.

The level of experience and preparedness to do the thing right is the main problem with projects and much of the 300 pages is trying to fix problems caused by an underestimation of the specifications of drivers, the need to pot things with glue while winding and all the other basic aspects that are essential...no amount of circuitry is going to fix that. Only the other day someone again tried to make up for their poor work and failure to follow the directions by pumping 20 watts into the driver...having to explain that more power is only going to make things worse is a huge part of that 300 pages.

There are moves afoot though to revamp the whole project and start again if people are interested...if so, suggestions of what people expect from it would be appreciated.

[Gurner]

As BringoC pointed out, when reading Project Guitar threads, often there a lot of words but the underlying question/issue is seemingly often deflected. Let's see if we can avoid deflection here ......

So, condensing all  you know & all you've learned over many years of researching sustainers  ...which circuit do you actually recommend people construct to go along with your driver type? (& why is there no reference to it in your sustainer tutorial - the driver without a circuit isn't a whole lot of use! It's akin to saying "Here's the stompbox chassis - it's up to you to put what you want inside it...you're on your own")

Or has an actual sustainer circuit not been nailed yet, therefore no recommendations/schematic?

[deadastronaut]

yeah...be nice to see a complete tutorial...video even!...

[ashcat_lt]

Are you freakin serious?!?

The answer has been posted in this thread several times, and I can't see how it could be simpler.  As long as the driver coil is built and installed properly, it can be driven by just about any smallish amp circuit capable of working with an 8 Ohm load.  Done.  Period. 

Depending on the specific properties of your guitar and what you intend to do with the thing it might need some filtering either before or after the amp.

I think it's funny to see in a forum like this where DIY and experimentation are encouraged so strongly that there's so much whining about the lack of a "paint by numbers" solution.

Build the driver, build a Ruby (or whatever amp you prefer) and try it.  If it just plain doesn't work, it's far more likely the coil itself will be the problem.

[deadastronaut]

Are you freakin serious?!?

lol..........

[psw]

Thanks Ashcat

Really I have to agree, in recent weeks I ahve tried to help people who used playdoh for coil potting apparently, could find the J201 tansistor so jsut left that stage out (I can't get them easily here either, but surely leaving out parts one wouldn't expect it to work) and another that couldn't be bothered gettting the correct wite gauge for my design (o.2mm) so just used the old pickup wire (probably a hair like 0.042) then asked if when it breaks is it ok just to tie the loose ends together..so after many years, and as you point out 300+ pages of people not capable of doing things right...my "attitude" has suffered...

Yes, the huge thread was a discussion about the technology...it is very different from stompbox kinds of signal processing things...and as such explored all comers and variations and was effectively a forum unto itself much like this entire forum.

Originally and for many years, as I have made quite clear repeatedly, but again for people here if I must. Used generic kits that as far as I can tell are available world wide but originated from the magazine "silicon chip" This was the CHAmp (cheap and handy amplifier) which is simply the LM386 data sheet pretty much and it's companion the PreChamp...a two transistor generic preamp for audio applications. I modded these a bit, originally I used a lot of gain in the preamp, I have since scaled back to virtually a buffer as my drivers improved and to avoid EMI and distortion/fizz effects. The LM386 I personally use a 100uF cap on the output to get a response aI like...blooming harmonics in the low end in fundamental mode, strong drive in the high strings, better balance overall...but this can be adjusted to taste or even add a switch to change the things...

There have been a range of other options presented also...some asolutely hate the LM386 on technical performance grounds, some have presented sophisticated forward feed AGC circuits, some have even built in commercial stompbox compressors...

The point is, that "sustainers" are quite different from signal processing, it is a way actually work on the physical world of string vibration. The "project" that developed naturally over many years grew out of my work. But as others contributed, they had differing ideas about the performance, installation and use of this technology.

Early on I set myself a list of criteria and I have had an argument about this before and again today as it happens. For me, I wanted something that produced a different way of actuating the strings, that was musical and dynamic and worked. But in addition, I didn't want to compromise the host guitar in any significant way. So, I needed to retain the neck pickup (the place where the driver would normally be) and I could not allow the circuits to get to large that the guitar needed to be hollowed out, or take so much power that they couldn't run off a 9v battery effectively.

The results of these criteria for "success" in my work is evident...



This one is on my main guitar, a compact driver that sticks to the scratch plate with double sided tape, the circuit sits under the bridge pickup and the whole thing including the battery fits inside an unmodified telecaster control cavity...one of the smallest there is...



Even if i were to show exactly what I am using myself these days, would it help...are you adept at SMDs or could even get the parts?




This along with some of my other developments were prototypes for potential commercial distribution...I am not at liberty to offer up this particular circuit, but all the driver details are more than transparent and the details to make your own to spec is freely available in the tutorials and elsewhere from the many who have successfully built this or similar things derived from the parent thread. A range of small amp circuits have proved to be perfectly adequate...but what effect are you seeking anyway from this technology?

Again, here is another avenue I was exploring, and again with an eye to small scale manufacture...the wafer coil...





Now, we are starting to get way out of DIY land don't you think? These are the results of the sustainer project and my work in particular...

The wafer coils and such are far more developed and goes beyond what is commercially available and adhere to the criteria I set for myself, and the effect I was seeking to create.

But there are a range of highly differing views on the matter, some are highly committed to Dual coil systems and dedicated "sustainer guitars"...others want a very even fundamental response, others what to go all out with hex pickups, drivers and sic amps with digital processing...all current projects...

But most seem to be wanting to be spoon fed, for them I have offered up enough information for those who what to to build something that works...say for me.

What others want is rarely if ever stated...I have my criteria, whats yours. Many seem to think that all these things are the same, while others seek to push the boundaries beyond what is commercially available. Many like the "idea" but are not even completely sure what these things do or sound like. I have posted sound clips of the kinds of things I have been going for and plenty of pics like those above of what I have achieved. And of course a whole slew of what others have done in true DIY style...

Control systems, how about these...



The so called Uber pots...the base twists to turn on the sustainer with a 4pdt switch, the knob pulls for the harmonic drive...the pot turns for intensity of drive...the sustainer project is always looking for people who are seeking to innovate. If I told you that this was what you have to do, no one would pay attention, I get enough derision already thank you! Perhaps you are not the kind of person up for this challenge. Again, this is not a signal processing stompbox kind of project, it is working on a physical world, it is not plug and play...it involves making the critical component, the driver coil, from scratch, with what you can find, for your particular instrument, yourself!

remember DIY means do it yourself...not have pete do it for you!!! So, my reaction is much like Ashcats and I think it more than valid...doubt your own ability, not the projects worth...perhaps this project isn't for you!

Build the driver, build a Ruby (or whatever amp you prefer) and try it.  If it just plain doesn't work, it's far more likely the coil itself will be the problem.

This too pretty much sums it up...there is a step by step pictorial from me on winding a coil, couldn't be more clear...nor is it that hard.

The thing is, people cut corners. The easiest way is to take a single coil pickup... strip it of windings, block up the bottom half (cardboard will do) leaving 3mm at the top...then using PVA as you wind, wind 0.2mm wire a hundred or so turns, pushing in the sides as you go, measure with a multimeter till you get to around 8 ohms...wrap in PVC tape, clamp tight and wait to dry! Instant no fuss driver!

So often this simple process is screwed up...I used superglue...did I say super glue...well how about playdon...does it matter at all...of course it does, these things are electromagnetic, they can have no internal vibrations at all, otherwise it will vibrate and sqeal like a pig and the strings wont...is that so hard to understand...well apparently it is!!!

I present a circuit, this gets even worse, and people jump down my back about it not working. The fetzer ruby was never endorsed by me, it can work, I have offered mods to my specs...but then...I never suggested it. It was plagiarized obviously from RoG and was not designed specifically for this project nor tested by me. I have used a bunch of different amps...but everytime I suggest something, someone wnat something more. And still to this day! Yes, various AGC designs are a lot better...how much are you prepared to route out your guitar to run the things. Others have suggested other things...I have my doubts about the practicality...in the end I find they are plugging the actual guitar into a wall wart...oh, different criteria clearly!!!

So, basically, if you need to be spoon fed, if DIY is not for you, then neither is the sustainer project....

But then, I have had a few drinks tonight...it really isn't that hard to get something that works, many find the whole technology to be addictive...but we are not talking signal processing and there is not "best circuit" this is simply a myth. Look up the sustainer patents, most ru for over fifty pages, even the ebow which includes sustainer stuff is quite extensive. Look up hover (sustainiac) or rose (floyd rose) or the many fernades patents...or look at the archive back to the 1890's before solid state when they were working with this technology on pianos...or look up guys like micheal brook who pioneered a lot of this kind of thing for guitar and never succeeded with patent on the things...you will find circuits that can run to 5 pages...or have a little fortitude, take the formula that I developed to circumvent these things, a much simpler approach that gets the jov done in it's own fashion, and have a go...with an enormous amount of ongoing support...or not...

[deadastronaut]

 

[DougH]

I'm following this approach for a guitar sustainer and having great success: http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=83559.0

The transducer part is finished and I'm getting started building/boxing-up the amp.

How complex this needs to be depends on your goals. If you are looking for perfect sustain, where every note on the guitar sustains and is balanced with other notes - then you probably want to go the more complex route. If OTOH you are looking for something to give you some ambience and harmonic blooming, and while not perfect is certainly much better, more lively and consistent than a loud set of speakers- KVB's simpler approach works just fine. If you want something to give you speaker-like liveliness at low volumes and/or for direct recording, KVB's approach is more than adequate.

I will do some sound clips or video when I'm finished.

[Gurner]

Exactly (& wasn't that the earlier point - a lot of words, but deflecting the underlying issue ......& still no recommended 'base' schematic!)

I don't think anyone wants to paint by numbers, but equally, nobody wants to waste time reinventing the wheel - but if the person who has spent years on this, can't offer up a 'base' circuit recommendation, then  perhaps that - even after all these years - the 'DIY sustainer wheel' still isn't particularly round yet! (which is what DougH is alluding to above - ie does a job, but a bit uneven).

Oh well - if there's no agreed/acknowledged (well performing) base circuit, I guess I'll make my own way

[DougH]

perhaps that - even after all these years - the 'DIY sustainer wheel' still isn't particularly round yet! (which is what DougH is alluding to above - ie does a job, but a bit uneven).

Oh well - if there's no agreed/acknowledged (well performing) base circuit, I guess I'll make my own way

Just to be clear- I'm not alluding that PSW's approach is not good or even "perfect". I wouldn't really know. I remember that monster thread but I'm not interested in reading all that, esp if there's nothing definitive in it. After reading a page or two I gave up on it. Not a lot of "value added" as it just read like someone's extremely wordy blog with very little useful info (for me). I have heard clips of the Fernandes unit and IMO it wasn't that impressive. But that was probably just the clips, which didn't really demonstrate anything compelling about it to my ears (and it was years ago).

My only point was to think about what your personal goals for a sustainer would be. If you want "speaker-like" feedback, which is imperfect (i.e. not resonant for all notes) by its nature- KVB's simple approach already does more than that (ambient chord swells and etc too).  If you are looking for something beyond that, then maybe the Fernandez/PSW/pickup approach is more appropriate.

BTW- the thread I linked has all the info you need to try it yourself. When I finish mine I'll write it up as well. No secrets or coyness here. It's a pretty simple system.

[Gurner]

Double Post removed

[Gurner]

DougH - my apologies & thanks for clarifying....ie  that you were not referring to the Project Guitar DIY sustainer (I'd missed your enclosed link!)

Obviously a sustainer is different things to different people, but in my opinion, even a DIY electromagnetic guitar sustainer should at least yield the basic commercial offering functionality, ie strong controlled, well balanced & even sustain across all strings & fret positions  (ie mainly fundamental frequencies) but with the option of blooming higher harmonics when required.