diy sustainer pickup conversion

[slacker]

- for a circuit recommendation, I'd have thought he'd table something better than a basic circuit simply lifted from runoffgroove    

Simple, that circuit obviously works well enough for him, so there's no need for anything "better".

[psw]

What works and what doesn't very much depends on the transducer you use, mounting location and method, the guitar, etc. It's more of a mechanical system (in my case) than an electronic one- and the mechanics will dictate what electronics are needed. Definitely not "one size fits all", not in my experience anyway. There's really no way of determining what will work without jumping in and getting your hands dirty.

Exactly, and the electro-magnetic sustainer is no different...

Quite why Gurner and his ilk are so adamant about this attacking I don't know. Why it is reserved entirely for me is also a mystery. Where is the circuit..here's one...not good enough? Clearly, not interested in building a sustainer at all as there is no indication of the guitar which seeks to put it on to or even the most surface research from which to criticize...not apparently taken the time to listen to mine and others results, nothing...

Many circuits from me and others have been presented, it is only 'the power source'. That he "doesn't believe" is really his problem, not important since he seems little interested in building the thing and completely obsessed with what I did in my last circuit, not any of the dozens previously or the many others other people have contributed, many of them not given either.

Why is this important, I don't "recommend" circuits to people like this because they are not after it for the purposes of building one, nor are they after if to contribute to the project. I don't "endorse" circuits, I didn't propose the F/R for instance, I think it lacks the datsheet components for stability, I think the preamp for this application is a bit clunky (trim pot to bias the transistor for instance) for this application and after a while, some decided they could make some money off of it by touting it on ebay as suitable for this application, using my thread to sell the idea (even though it is the work of RoG regardless). Many have come along with such ambitions.

I'm not surprised - because it's now quite clear that when it comes down to a DIY sustainer circuit ....the one being touted is way too basic for a guitar sustain system - therefore, if you want a decent DIY sustainer system, you're gonna have to get cracking with the breadboard! (you got to wonder what folks have been upto for all those years if a runoffgroove ripoff cct - with not even the most basic of dynamic range control - is the main recommendation for a sustainer system  Huh?)

This is just so twisted in this light. I posted a RoG design because this poster seemed incapable of identifying a basic preamped/buffered amp to power the project. I personally have never ripped off RoG and am quite sensitive to such an accusation, I presented this not as a recomendation but as one of dozens of easily obtainable schematics of what I was recommending...a basic buffered amplifier.

Sure, there are lots of people who are taking out their breadboards and working from this stage to go further, to make the concepts work to their tastes and goals. Sure, a basic amplifier is the minimum pre-requisite to sustain strings, if you want to go in different directions with it, there are plenty of options and AGC and other such things may well be of interest...there are such circuits to be found, just like the amplifier circuit I found, to play with...don't me to recommend them to you surely? The first step would be to see if you can make a successful driver that can run off the simplest system and take it from there.

it's now quite clear that when it comes down to a DIY sustainer circuit ....the one being touted is way too basic for a guitar sustain system - therefore, if you want a decent  DIY sustainer system, you're gonna have to get cracking with the breadboard! (you got to wonder what folks have been upto for all those years if a runoffgroove ripoff cct - with not even the most basic of dynamic range control - is the main recommendation for a sustainer system  Huh?)

Again...

# Clear from what...it's clear you have done no research other to jump on a band wagon of attack or goad psw for circuits
         I've seen no evidence of that you have even heard my sustainers
         I've seen no evidence that you have read the tutorials
         I've seen no evidence that you even want to build one of these things
         I've seen no evidence of you taking in the range of criteria that I have presented
         I've seen no indication that your vitriol is spread to the dozens of people working on this project and their work, just me...reason?
# I've specifically not "touted" anything...the attitude and behaviour gives me no encouragement to do so...
        I thought the main criticizim was I didn't tout my own circuits to you!!!
# The driver provides much of what you are missing here...you only see a circuit. The driver is doing the work.
         It's characteristics, plus tweaking to the unknown parts of any project
            (the guitar and particularly the pickup, the skill at which someone can construct the coils, etc)
# Too basic...missing the whole point again, I started with the premise of a basic circuit and designed the driver characteristics to it!
        The whole point was to create a driver that could run off basic circuits.
         A driver that needed no phase correction to work within it's range of operation
         A driver that had in part, characteristics that did provide some degree of evenness of response
         I set out not to copy the commercial units response,
             I always sought a more dynamic, organic response than things like the ebow and sustainers of the past.
         They have to be small to accomodate all the design criteria, and small means basic...
              these things are designed for fairly unmodified guitar applications
# Clearly it does work, so these circuits are not too simple,
         only the argument that doesn't take into account the whole system and speaks from assumptions...
# There is not "a" guitar sustain system, there is a principle of feedback loop string driving...
          the ebow sounds one way, a fernades their way, mine sound like mine do...
# Decent is subjective. You have not heard nor played mine. Many people ahve made them and enjoyed the response and found it "decent"
          "decent" is a completely subjective term.
              Decent for who?...I have not heard your criteria from which you are basing such assertions,
                 or that you know that mine does not actually do what you might find 'decent"
           Does my "system" sustain on all strings with no dead or overly hot spots? Yes it does!
             Does it generate harmonics all over? Yes it does!
          If you want to use a term like "decent" apply it to yourself, not to me,
            not to the people who have built and deemed their work decent or to those who would likely have a different idea of what they
              want than you obviously don't!
# the 7 years were to encourage and support people and provide a place for people to discuss such things.
             I successfully built my devices many many years ago, I've been refining and finding new applications since

...

Ok, lets take another scenario...hypothetical

I sign up here, I start a thread that suggests I'd like to build a distortion. I get some parts, I build something with some tinkering, it distorts. I say look at this, I built a distortion box...

Ok...well, I wouldn't expect Gurner to jump down his throat with...well, that's not not a decent distortion, there is no way that those clipping diodes or LED's or whatever is in the thing are capable of producing that sound. You are lying, there's more to it...and what about that "look at me" ego of yours, why don't you just keep it to yourself, I don't want to know about your crappy distortion box, I want to know about a decent distortion, only Gurner knows the definition of decent, and though I have not heard this, and clearly don't understand how it works....It is not "decent" till I say it is!!!!

Ok...lets look at a real life sustainer type device...the KVB idea

I had done many similar things as well. You don't see me jumping down the neck of people who do with criticism because I personally don't like that kind of "system". Similarly, it is curious as to why Gurner isn't as well, must be something personal. So, it doesn't produce the results not applied in a manner that I personally like, that does not invalidate it or suggest that it doesn't "work". It simply doesn't meet a whole raft of my own personal criteria for sustaining strings.

The eBow thing...well, this is a fine device, I have made these kinds of things as well...but it is a very different beast again. Ironically, my sustainers have a very ebow quality. What is actually inside the epoxy casing...oh a simple LM386 amp...can't be done.? Oh, and the patent describes any amplifier known to the art, or some such. Exactly where I drew inspiration for my approach. I designed my work, like the ebow, to run from simple amplification circuits. The Ebow doesn't tell you what's in it, not even in the patent...why is Gurner not pursuing the Ebow guy so vehemently...I don't know, must be personal!

...

You know, Gurner has joined up only recently, very hard to know where or why he turned up to post here. I see he is from the UK, the home of other notable critics...could it be related to the person kicked off of PG after closing all the threads on the subject with the same trollish nature and attitude and little to show for any of this...or just jumping on the band wagon. Hard to tell with a name like Gurner...

How about this, of the total 18 posts here, 12 have been on this tread to critisize me, an at least surface knowledge of recent events at PG and a similar attitude with no actual work done on such things and an attitude that seems to be only directed towards me. Interestingly, the person who was most instrumental in all that, actually proposed an untested circuit for sale in the tutorial...



Hmmm...so all the talk about having to have six individual coils turned into just a single coil remarkably similar to my own, with a different wire gauge and response. Then, all the talk of using pics for AGC and digital processing turned out to be a generic amp with a "Tillman" ripoff in the front end of it!!! When challenged about talking aobut the caracteristics of my own pickup/drivers in a thread exactly like this...he built one in a day, and reported that it didn't work...but he didn't find it "decent" enough....or words to that effect, not that it didn't in fact work!

Other than one attempt at humour with his wife's "flanger"....

What brings Gurner to this forum...

Ah...I need a 9v op amp circuit...ok...building an amp perhaps, there's no divulging there as to what Gurner is actually trying to build...

I'm not a designer, just a hobbyyist trying to grapple with a few issues!

well, that's most unlike the guy from PG, so perhaps not, his ego was far more evolved. Clearly he is not a designer and is grappling with a few issues, may as well use 12 of 18 posts having a go at someone who is...good work whoever you are...

FWIW,  I'm dabbling with a widget that is very sensitive to signal phase through the circuit, so your formula will be incredibly useful towards helping me kludge something better together.

Hmmm...seem to be seeing a trend here...not letting anyone know specifically what he is doing (which of course would always help in giving advice, all my posts on this forum related to quiries about sustainer applications made that clear, so that the person who was answering could give a decent advice back. But for some reason our Gurner needs to keep this all very hush, hush...I wonder why...

What I seek is a calculator where I can say "I want a 10 degree phase shift at 330Hz" & it tells me what values of capacitor & resistor I need for an allpass filter

Ah yes, and a few posts picking peoples brains about phase shift circuits and ways of calculating the things...ok...I'm seeing the picture, correct me if I'm wrong, I well might be...

You are looking for information to build an amp that has phase shift compensations. Now, what circuits do we see this so much "touted"...oh yes, all the commercial sustainer patents....want the mechanism, the floyd rose patent is pretty clear with even the values for caps and resistors to effect their compensation circuitry, why didn't you ask or read the first 10 pages of the thread where this was discussed at length with links?

Perhaps Gurner sees himself as a white knight, riding into sustainer territory with a blaze of all that psw and others has achieved is crap....I Have THE answer...seen it before if this is the case. Sure, great, like to see YOUR answer. But, likely it will not meet the many specified criteria I set for myself in regard to size and application and quite likely performance. If all you have read is the patents and made assumptions from them, at best, and unlikely, you might duplicate what they have done before you. Big deal, all this is a ripoff too!

I set out to make something different, sure, I read all those patents, and I worried about these aspects...till a very knowledgeable electronics guy involved here and at PG, and much respected (the late Lovekraft r.i.p.) suggested that I work towards making a driver that did not require the compensations circuitry for which you seek. Could it be, that I might actually have done that soon after? Could it be that my real time showing of what I was doing and the results I was getting proved that? My driver designs are after all, radically different from any that came before it...why equate what I have been doing and the results I get, with coils so big that they need to compensate for the "lead and lag" inherent in them.

You know that the KVB acoustic sustainers also would benefit from AGC and phase and resonance compensation...but then perhaps you might approach things by moving the transducer around to get it to set off different resonances or a more even response. Sounds like a plan, perhaps you might find a spot that will sustain and harmonic bloom exactly as you would like, if only on one note...but have a recording in mind where that is exactly the effect desired. I call that "decent". In fact, it is much as it has always been done...finding the right spot in a room to stand just so to get amp feedback for instance.

How about this very old studio technique that achieves the KVB effect with no add ons and a very powerful musical effect that has worked flawlessly for years and years...

As an example I'd point people towards the tune "Son Becomes Father" by the hellecasters. There is a very much sustained "sustainer" note in particular in this song. How did he acheive this...by taking the speaker grill off his amp then pushing his headstock at the required moment against the speaker baffle...instant controlled sustain at a studio volume! Exactly the same principle as the KVB without wires off the headstock, circuits (phase compensated or otherwise) and a beautiful sound. Play the whole tune as you wish, with no change of tone get exactly the right "impossible" held note for as long as you like....sounds decent to me....

So, why not get into all the "players" that have done this for years. How about those BOC guys....had to make a tape loop to do what they did on the famous 'don't fear the reaper' note...live now they apparently use an ebow. There are countless examples. Garry Moore's Live,Alive album...similar impossibly loing held note in "Parisienne Walkways"...did all teh sound checks and marked the floor to get that "impossible note" but...with the auditorium filled and the recording light on, that was no longer the place to stand and he had to do a dozen or so takes of that one note in teh show...just so they could edit it right for the record...true.

Now...my sustainers for me personally, sound like a really loud predictable infinte note...very organic, dynamic and responsive. It will bloom to harmonics and start o0ut that way, it can have the envelope manipulated to sound backwards if you like...it can be played clean or distorted...and it will do all of this at any volume, even through headphones and no amp at all for late night recording....

Now, people who seek the "decent" sustainer, possibly don't even know what they are shooting for...just that they must be able to do better than psw and his dinky simple amplifier ideas. (Of course these people generally rip off my driver designs which I have always maintained to be the "heart" of why it works)...so, if you make something that will produce an even non dynamic response at great effort and circuitry...will you take the criticism that the things sound lifeless...much as is sometimes said of the fernandes and sustainiac systems?

So...why am I now so circumspect about "revealing" circuit details. Well, I choose not to is the easy answer...for those who cant type or read or comprehend. Another is that I have no motivation anymore to feed trolls with such details. Another is that I did give a lot, and what I got back was from people who think they can do better, which of course I'm all for, but who define better by what exactly I am doing. That's not better, just a clash of egos...why feed into that. There are also an array of mis guided and ill informed opinion form people who have not even tried the most basic working systems then set about building on that say. Invariably they come up with something, often as above almost identical to my own, and then call it completely different...and we are not talking just one person who has done exactly that!

I give my current and evolving ideas and circuits out now, and next a few components have changed which are insignificant, a wire gauge is changed, or in some cases suggest it doesn't matter, but use my formula anyway...and suddenly it is their idea?!

I am not profiting from this, is Gurner now requesting I see him my circuit that he so maligns? Why would he want it?

Have I made these things for others...well, I helped member here "bancika" (creator of the DIY Layout creator pinned to the top of this forum) by sending him wire to build his version with the F/R and blocked coil (individual poles pickup conversion) and he has a tutorial on his website that people might want to check out. One of many that are floating about.

I made one for a custom USA guitar builder along with the internal electronics for a guitar made for a well known guitar celebrity...an offer I couldn't refuse. I ahve done a few myself of course and seen many others through to completion. Is Gurner asking for a circuit for some fabulous project aht would make me actually want to accommodate him...or is it more likely that he wants it to re-engineer what he can't come up for himself with all the detail given, perhaps to critcize and attack me further, or to describe it as not decent enough, or to show all my "secrets" for what they really are...who knows what motivates such people, there clearly seem to be a few from the UK in the last year. Whatever the reason, I have heard nothing that would interest me in supplying gurner with my circuit or coils or a system.

That's not to say I wouldn't, or haven't...but it would have to be a lot better offer than that!

[psw]

...

In the meantime, more little vox pops...

Behind the torrents of text, repetitive pics & accompanying egotistical nonsense..... something doesn't add up.

Your ability to comprehend...what is so hard...

Simple, that circuit obviously works well enough for him, so there's no need for anything "better".

No...it will work in some applications, it is not the best, the mods to stabilize such LM386 circuits I have posted, the 100uF output cap mod, I've posted...but really, these things are largely from the LM386 data sheet, that RoG choose to delete out of their design.

The point is that the design of the driver, as posted at length above, are such that it does not NEED a lot of compensation fi any to actually "work". The reason that the commercial designs do, is the characteristics of the drivers they choose to use. They use dual coil designs of various types, I tend not to, others do. However, this is to reduce the effects of EMI...mine run efficiently a a lower power, not giving off as much EMI...plus, they are from 3mm to 1mm thick...that is a radically different physical design that in itself contributes to localize EMI effects away from the source pickup...

What exactly is your problem Gurner? Can't accept that sometimes, there is some elegance in simplicity.

Too much typing for you...well that's just intellectually bankrupt...try reading it. How about you come out with the project you are working on while telling me I am secretive and "something doesn't add up". What exactly are you implying? That me and all the people who have built this over the years successfully, we are all in some conspiracy against people like you?

No...I recomend a buffered power amp circuit...not ever have I endorsed nor ripped of RoG and I have made that abundantly clear. The F/R suggestion came from another person who never spoke to me about it, and he got express permission form RoG and consulted about it for that project...a sustainer. Don't put that on me...

You asked for a circuit that would work...with sufficiently high output HB say that would not need preamping, and a good coil of the right build and spec...yes, this kind of thing does "work". I gave you that, because you seemed incapable of finding it yourself!


...

If gurner has had enough of an answer, it is likely nothing I say will help him, perhaps a professional in such things are the best...

I am happy as always to try and support people who actually do want to build the kind of thing I have done, support them in their own endeavours, or cheer on as they put their own ideas into practice.

There is no need for there to be a "rail" core in the driver...individual poles have worked well in different configurations. You do ahve to watch the magnets are not too string, so avoid neodymium for instance. For an HB conversion, the simplest way is to do what Primal at PG did, and just wind the stock psw 0,2mm coil to the neck nearest slug coil of the pickup bobbin, and in much the same way Banika described from my advice, block up the lower portion of the coil leaving 3mm at the top...

I'm all for some "open competition, but this kind of nonsense will be answered...it really is ridiculous and unhelpful. Incredible assumption, hugely subjective opinions, no actual data or significant research, no apparent experience at all by admission, a curious obsession with me personally for some reason...largely insulting to me and by inference countless others who have made their own 'decent' sustainers.

I'd love to understand the motivation about this kind of thing, but as always, it seems, that some people see a band wagon, the sustainer bandwagon in this case, see the attention it seems to get, and see themselves at the driving wheel one day. They imagine me in that position, so they figure that toppling me is a good strategy, then coming up with something "better" or "definitive". May I suggest as always, that this is largely in your minds about my role in all this...but also, that if anyone can come up with a decent sustainaer, I will be one of the first to applaud them for it. It's tricker thatn it looks. Of course, it is a bit easier now with 7 years of collective effort to build from...so, I am surprised that Gurner hasn't built one yet.

For those who do seek such control and variety, I'd seek out Col's circuit with Forward Feed AGC and 4 modes with filters...that's a good one, still uses an LM386, but it would work with another I am sure for those allergic to the things. Does not sound anything like what I would want, big, complicated and need to lose the neck pickup...oh and did I mention that it doesn't sound anything like what I am after....though still praising the thing...see the difference?

[01370022]

Umm..... Perhaps I'm misreading all this, but from what I've understood so far is that most of the problems lie in the driver design/construction and most of that seems to be covered fairly well.

From what I can see, the arguments about the actual electronics side, and from what's been said, it's not hugely important, just as long as it sends enough current through at a decent voltage, without draining a 9V in a night.

I could be wrong here, but since this forum is called DIY stompboxes, as in Do-It-Yourself, I'd say that a fair number of people here are comfortable with designing a small 386 driver circuit. And those that don't generally know to ask how to adapt an existing design to fit into their own set of parameters.

As for breadboarding stuff, if you're doing any experimental work breadboarding is second nature, and it's been made clear that if you want a circuit, you're gonna have to experiment. If people need help with this, just ask.  

If you're still unsure how to go about designing something more complex, go work on something simpler to build up your electronics chops and then come back. I think PSW is assuming that people have a certain level of skill when it comes to design work for this project, which is not unreasonable for round here, but does make it harder for the beginner.

BTW for those that don't know, it takes a damn long time to get a design from concept to production, particularly if you're working a day job. A mate asked me to build him a custom trem. It's taken almost a year from when we sat down and he showed me what he wanted to now; where I'm just about to actually populate the PCB.

[Gurner]

I could be wrong here, but since this forum is called DIY stompboxes, as in Do-It-Yourself, I'd say that a fair number of people here are comfortable with designing a small 386 driver circuit. And those that don't generally know to ask how to adapt an existing design to fit into their own set of parameters.
.

No, imho I don't think you're wrong at all - (& BTW I'm very comfortable with DIY circuits. I certainly don't need 'spoonfeeding'-  but a lot of folks do need spoonfeeding - maybe not here but on other related forums) ....but it should be obvious to the trained eye on here that psw's recommended ROG circuit is not going to be particularly suitable for a sustainer - yes, it'll yield sustain, because at the end of the day, all the driver coil needs is an AC current driven through it at the source signal frequency (and the ROG circuit will obviously do that).

No, my surprise is that he hasn't come forward with good DIY sustainer circuit  - which definitely needs compression to tame the guitar's chunky dynamic range thereby getting the correct amount of drive into the driver coil ...too much drive & the string will vibrate wildly, too little & the string will fade - it's therefore a delicate balance ....the basic [crayon] 'my first circuit' [/crayon]  ROG variant he has recommended has no auto signal level/compensation built in whatsoever, which means the guitarist is going to have to ride that sustainer level pot constantly! (to the point of it sending him potty   )

It was just an observation that's all - ie a cursory glance over on Project Guitar shows that psw is someone that monopolizes all DIY sustainer threads - if that's the best DIY sustainer circuit he's come up with after all these years, then most are going to more than a little disappointed when they build it    ....I suspect deep down he knows this - the unnecessarily egotistical pic laden long replies have more than a hint of "he who doth protest too much"

Ok enough said from me ... as I'm note sure the forum server has sufficient RAM/Disk space left for the inevitable response.  

[Gurner]

double post (wrong button clicked!)

[psw]

I'm not a designer, just a hobbyyist trying to grapple with a few issues!

FWIW,  I'm dabbling with a widget that is very sensitive to signal phase through the circuit, so your formula will be incredibly useful towards helping me kludge something better together.

Could it be Gurner that you "SECRET" widget that you joined her to "kludge together" is in fact a sustainer circuit and you just don't want to say. Those questions and hijacking this thread to attack my work and the sustainer thread seems to be your only interest.

You seem to ahve seen my work, superficially read a few patents and "assumed" wrongly that mine are the same as theirs and so would require the same circuitry to make them work "decently".

However, you would be wrong on many fronts. The circuit only needs to compensate for specific drivers. Mine are completely different in that they are designed to work in a manner that does not require compensation to "work" decently. In order to create a circuit even if it requires compensation, would require you to build a driver and know it's qualities...resonance, inductance, capacitance, resistance....and even then, such a design would need to be created and tested in the real world...and even then it would need to be peer reviewed to ensure that this vital component actually does perform advantageously against the designs me and dozens of others have created and shown to work...

But, you apparently have skipped the heart of any system, spent most of the time calling me black while your kettle over boils pursuing your own agenda that itself is "secret"...

I have shown many circuits, I have even shown pics which you say are repetitive...does that mean you have been a part of the sustainer project? Or, is there some reason you have not already? Not that you have to, I get emails regularly from people who successfully make their own from the information I provided to thank me for their success.

No, imho I don't think you're wrong at all - (& BTW I'm very comfortable with DIY circuits. I certainly don't need 'spoonfeeding'-  but a lot of folks do need spoonfeeding - maybe not here but on other related forums) ....but it should be obvious to the trained eye on here that psw's recommended ROG circuit is not going to be particularly suitable for a sustainer - yes, it'll yield sustain, because at the end of the day, all the driver coil needs is an AC current driven through it at the source signal frequency (and the ROG circuit will obviously do that).

You apparently do need spoonfeeding...you could not derive an LM386 circuit for yourself, so I gave you one...now you say I am recommending one, and ripping of RoG in the process...

This is the oppisite of what I ahve been saying, again showing how intellectually bankrupt your argument...I did not recommend nor ever recommended any RoG design specifically, it was one of the options. The Fetzer/Ruby design came up in a tutorial without any consultation with me many years ago and with the permission of RoG. The author of that tutorial and that proposal that caught on back then was GalagaMike, but I don't think that he did wrong there, what he did do wrong in his tutorial was go it alone, and not follow the design. He used slightly thicker wire and two neodymium on the ends of the rail core which itself was stainless steel...these factors were instrumental in the poor response he achieved which could have been fixed before he created a tutorial on the subject based on my design.

The rest is history in regards to the RoG connection...please withdraw such comments and suggesting them again...

I HAVE NOT recommended any circuit to anyone...this was your original argument. I don't recommend ROG or the many of my own, or my present "secret" circuit either...there is NO perfect circuit, and never will be...what part of this do you not understand?

No, my surprise is that he hasn't come forward with good DIY sustainer circuit  - which definitely needs compression to tame the guitar's chunky dynamic range thereby getting the correct amount of drive into the driver coil ...too much drive & the string will vibrate wildly, too little & the string will fade - it's therefore a delicate balance ....the basic [crayon] 'my first circuit' [/crayon]  ROG variant he has recommended has no auto signal level/compensation built in whatsoever, which means the guitarist is going to have to ride that sustainer level pot constantly! (to the point of it sending him potty  Angry )

No...you again misunderstand, and have in fact taken the phrase "ride that sustainer level pot constantly" almost directly from similar attacking posts from PG...or is that your own work.

What happened to your phase concerns...suddenly you are an expert in sustainers...what work have you done, where are your successes and failures and circuit designs along the way?

Have you even heard my guitar and others from this project?

In any system there are limitations...these limitations can become their own AGC. The driver design and the limited power possible from the small circuits is itself an AGC. This is why I resist the temptation or apparent necessity that many feel to go with more power...this is not required with an efficient coil...less power is what people who know what they are doing are and have been aiming for.

SO...you fail to see that any system, the circuit, the driver...and in fact the physical potential for the string to vibrate on the instrument...is LIMITED" Such limitations are AGC.

ok...besides that...you assume apparently that I don't personally have or have used AGC in some of my designs. Again, you would know this to be false. Me and many others have, even more so in early designs when I used a quite large 4 knob limiter compressor built for the project. However, this was found to be unnecessary as I worked toward driver designs that would not require such control...to get the response I was after.

I have not gone potty riding a drive control...you just have no experience in these things at all, working from a position that is false, that there is a one size fits all circuit...seem to be "secretly" designing a circuit yourself that will be "better" without doing the vital work on the drivers that would be necessary to work out what it is you need to compensate for...and I will be pretty pissed if you take that part of the project and call it your own while promoting your circuit as THE ONE when it could work with just about anything.

What you are suggesting Gurner is patently untrue and based on no evidence what so ever!

In fact, what I use now is secret, that's my prerogative though I had hoped to discuss it, I am reticent to discuss it openly with the likes of you. It has been independently tested and the design made clear to people that do matter, so I am comfortable in that direction, and had plans of course to develop the thing further. There is no obligation at all for me to share every detail of what I do with you or anyone else frankly...and hardly anyone else has been as open as me, particularly about circuits...in particular your allies who blatantly have a commercial interest and have since dropped the AGC and other ambitions (hex coils) for the general driver design and implementations I developed (ironically enough, there are plenty of alternatives).

For one, may latest circuit has a completely different "drive" control than you imagine...this is in fact the "secret" that I am protecting. "Riding it" would not help or work as you suggest. So, in the clips available to you of what this guitar sounds like, or others with this design, such a technique would not in fact help. The "drive control" actually works on the effect as much as intensity. The reality of these things and the characteristics of my extremely open design itself puts limits on the system. The problems some have encountered stem in part from say, giving the system virtually unlimited power or perhaps twice or far more the amps that I use.

I have in fact, and only recently practically described the circuit I use, at least in operation, so that anyone who could design something like this, could pretty much work it out. People obsessed as you could just as easily look into the archive just before it appeared...and see me trying to discuss a couple of circuits, some from this site that were developing at the time, that I was interested in. You could perhaps infer that perhaps, given my description, that I took this interest further on my own since things were deteriorating into this kind of crap arguments and trying to cajole me into giving you all the details you want...when you clearly have made up your own mind, based on no experience at all...that what you have in mind (that you stole from the patents but don't apply to my driver specs) is 'necessary" and with the assumption that you know better and can in fact dictate what a "decent" sustainer sounds like.

But then, everything you have done is "secret" isn't it? Even as you complain that "peter won't give me it"...wha wha...come on Gurner.

If you really wanted to make such a thing, or even comment, the least you could do is spend a couple of hours actually making one to the design and seeing if it works.

The last post now seems to concede that it does in fact sustain the strings of a guitar...but that it will do so too much...

The tail end as usual deteriorates to personal abuse about posts he clearly has not read, for the purposes that if i "protest to much' this somehow proves the argument. Could it be in fact that I in fact have a bit of experience in these things, made a fair few, had them independently verified, encouraged dozens of people to do the same or develop things still further, and provided the forum for it at PG?

Unlike you, I use my real name, my location is well known, I can be contacted and do not seek at this point in time to make money off of these things that people like yourself may well hold fantasies of...Your posting pattern and attitude is clearly just trollish. Perhaps you have been asked not to post anymore at PG...or perhaps you know that wouldn't be advisable wiothout any work to speak of to base your assertions.

Regardless...

All I have suggested is that the more the merrier, there is no one kind of circuit nor response that people desire from this technology...that's why there is no one circuit recommended and certainly not from me. A huge amount depends on the characteristics of the driver coil, I can only vouch that my driver design will work with simple circuits, I have provided such circuits and the mods that are required to get the kind of response that I achieve on a range of guitars. If you have a good original idea for AGC or have built a driver like the commercial systems that require compenstation, if you are happy in fact with the commercial systems state of teh art...then why not just copy the AGC pahse corrected schematics directly from the patents themselves?

However, if you come up with something, that's just great Gurner, more power to you. That's what "the project" is and always was about. As for my predominance...you think it should be you? I had an idea back in 2003, I started a post like anyone else...it ran for years...till it was closed down as being no longer functional after a sustained campaign of ill informed mis information from someone exactly like yourself in attitude and incapacity to understand. You are not the first, not the last. What is characteristic is that you ahve nothing to show for it, while I have much and have shared a good portion of that, surely enough for people to find there own best solution...and certainly enough to make what many have considered a decent sustainer from...

So...how about it gurner...introduce yourself and your 'secret widget' that you joined this forum for...or was it just to hijack this thread for your own agenda and you are more concerned about flanger controls in your head?

[deadastronaut]

@psw

have you got a kit of the sustainer..? to sell?..

if so does it sustain on the b and e strings, especially above the 12th fret..on a 24 fret guitar...
as i ve read that it can be a bit weak  on them..

does it matter what gauge of strings..? i use 9's...

i'd love to have this on my ibanez rg470... or even on a knockabout old guitar...

cheers man...rob

[DougH]

PSW: Your posts are way too long to read.

Gurner: You need to take the pissing contest offline to email or PM.

Seriously guys, give the forum a break... 

[TELEFUNKON]

@ Gurner: you seem to have missed these topics: http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=30449.0   http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=34264.0   http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=35062.0   http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=49595.0  http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=49848.0   http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=57817.0   http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=60476.0   http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=70431.0   http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=83814.0

[psw]

@psw

have you got a kit of the sustainer..? to sell?..

if so does it sustain on the b and e strings, especially above the 12th fret..on a 24 fret guitar...
as i ve read that it can be a bit weak  on them..

does it matter what gauge of strings..? i use 9's...

i'd love to have this on my ibanez rg470... or even on a knockabout old guitar...

cheers man...rob

@deadastronaut

No...not at this time nor in any near future.

Yes, harmonics and infinite sustain on all strings across the guitar

Yes, gauge does matter...see the sustainiac et al sites. Mine uses 10's which is generally the recommended gauge of the commercial units too. However, my more recent guitar could drive 9's...so there are a few if's there. It's to do with the amount of metal in the strings for the driver to work on. I can't control the quality of the work of others or the qualities of the guitars put on, nor troubleshoot things from across the world (another reason I've not 'sold' stuff except for special projects)

Hence, yes I suppose any sustain with 9's on them may be "a bit weak", it is the nature of the way the sustainers work, they require some metal to work on.

In an RG or similar shredder guitar, you have no room between teh neck and the pickup..that means the neck pickup will have to be taken out and replaced with something, or wood work, or several other considerations...where will the battery and circuit fit in such tight control cavities? I suppose I am assuming that if you need me to supply a 'kit' then you may well need assistance in thee other areas and the installation an switching that can get quite involved?

Also, I wouldn't want to give the Gurners of this world any ammunition that I was ripping people off by supplying a circuit at cost as was the original plan. They are built by had on vero..so you know, it takes time that I wont recoup or people would not be prepared to pay in small numbers I would build the things. Every time I have it has cost me money, so I do it only where there is a project of sufficient mutual interest. I'm sorry, but this is not one of those projects, but it can be done, perhaps you know someone who can work on it with you.

...

@DougH

Fair comment...in part. There is no compulsion to read my posts or any particular thread, once it comes down to this stage, it's a pointless exercise. One person sticks to hammering home mis-information and personal asides, the other defends himself as best he cans...none is particularly useful information...but Gurner has not sought that from me.

However, it would appear clear that as many times before, and with a similar approach, Gurner joined this month to explore the sustainer thing...or so it seems, he refuses to confirm or deny, and is just spreading the same kind of crap that was at PG again over here. I contributed because I was contacted to help Benfox and a couple of others here with making MY design for the thing...I did not expect yet another Gurner to pile on 12+ posts of pointlessness onto someone elses thread attacking me! He came here, well, he doesn't say, but most of the posts have been directed towards me and he has a more than passing obsession with PG so perhaps he has been banned from that forum, who knows.

The reality at PG has always been the same pattern. Guy thinks he can do better, keeps it to himself, then hijacks every thread on the subject, then tries to pass himself off as an expert (without ever building one) and denigrating the remarkable work done before (and targeting me as the head of this dynasty) only after much fuss, to "re-invent" my own public design and call it their own. Suggesting..."well, it's the circuit i just use your driver design"...

The length of my reply in no way should suggest anything about it's content.

I'd love to give the forum a break...my purpose here was to help a couple of people who sought to make the project...in part I suspect because people like Gurner made the sustainer work non-functional at PG. I don't know who Gurner is, but I know his 'Type', my response is to refute personal attacks or against the project and it's work to date and continuing. I more than welcome someone coming along and building their own sustainer, especially if it surpasses my own...there are many people who have already done that. So you know, make one but why stoop to just following me around with this nonsense...12+ out of 18 threads here, and the rest of the 6 posts 'hiding' the nature of the 'widget' he seeks to improve...but no actual work on improving the things, and too secretive to ask the people he wants help from in the context of his plans.

Free speech and right of reply...not compulsory or interesting reading. Answering accusations of fraud effectively, is a nesesity and as far as I know, not restricted by word count.

@TELEFUNKON

I'm sure Gurner could use some help using the search button. I am hardly the first, there were people here that did some stuff before or separately from me. Of course the patents go back the 1890's, so with over 100 years of sustainers, we still don't "have it right' or have one on every guitar. Got to wonder why...perhaps they are not the greatest thing since sliced bread, perhaps it is different things to different people...

But oh so young...2005 I see and using color and 40 pages of sustainer thread. And asking the same questions that Gurner is asking others about with the one big difference (besides using my real name)...I said that I was asking these questions because I was working on a sustainer!

Gurner sees the huge subscription to the sustainer stuff and sees a "market" I presume and seeks to exploit people like Ron, I don't...even though when I built my last version, I have 12 more just sitting here as I had to buy the SMD's in packs of a dozen! And, a machine to build wafer coils...oh well...

...

@Gurner

If there is something you wish to discuss or clarify with me, you know who I am and how to reach me. If you are working on a sustainer, I can give you more details than were made public on a number of things. It's interesting that the KVB thing came up recently, cause I did quite a bit on these kinds of things and researched others attempts but never reported on that. I also have worked extensively on hex drivers as another example. Piezo bridges, multiple tuning bridges, all kinds of things I have had an interest in...bult a few guitars as well...and actually play the guitar a lot with a degree in music that included the physics of sound and vibration of strings and such. It would appear that you are working on much as I was looking for in that post in 2005 that maggotbrain kindly dug up for you.

These things really should show you the avenues I have explored. I give my time and all these words freely, but I wouldn't need so many if I was asked a question reasonably and without agendas that I have seen so often over the years, and that seem to be characteristically directed towards me personally, though many have and continue to be involved.

...

Really, I find these things a trial. This is somehow peculiar to the sustainer stuff. If  one were to design a stomp box, say a distortion...You'd just go out and make something, and present why you like it, perhaps why you find it a superior sound...perhaps you make a box that can easily switch between chips and diode configurations that makes it more flexible or something. You wouldn't go about before doing anything at all, asking how to achieve these aims without describing what it is that you are trying to do. You wouldn't start out by attacking everyone else's distortion box without ever building or hearing the things and making derogatory statements about it's "decency"...then pick someone that has successfully built and designed such things for the last 8 years and more, and accusing them of not making a decent product even though clearly a lot of people are happy with the thing (lots of designers don't give out their details, hence reverse engineering, particularly with sustainer circuits)...all before they come up with anything at all.

The usual approach surely is to do a survey of what is available, how they work, and particularly how they sound...perhaps build a few successfully...then make the judgment call...hmmm, that's not quite what I am looking for...then set out to build your own version or innovation...then present your own, perhaps then suggesting that you find it a better sound...and seeing what others think about should they choose to build the thing. That's all I ever did, but it has only been in the last year or so that these kinds of people have really come out...because they are attracted by the popularity of the thread, which I did not set out to create.

Really, the sustainer is pretty old news, even the DIY stuff. There is so much more to explore, there are so many more worth while things to develop should one have the know how and the fortitude to pursue them. There is more than enough information on the things, things that have worked of mine and many others, so many variations on a similar theme. Somehow I should have come up with the "perfect" circuit or be the one to dictate what people should use, but I do not see it that way. I was fascinated by the possibilities and the problems, and I set out to solve them for myself. Up till this point, I believe that I have in many ways. I am asked regularly if I can do these things for others, but I live on the other side of the world than most and now on a tiny island only 8kms wide!

The reality is that I actually play guitar and have done for over 35 years, that's the core of things, and the sustainer is just an effect to put on it...one that I rarely actually use anymore even though built into my main guitar and working perfectly.

I am building a new guitar right now in fact, and though just done an extensive electronics thing on it and intended to be my main guitar for the new music project I have embarked on, there will not be a sustainer coming anywhere near the thing. I be if I looked around Aron's site though i might come up with a few projects that I might like to try that would be useful...but you can be sure that when I ask about it, I will be up front about what I am doing and thinking of using it for, and that I will be in full acknowledgment of the work that was put into it but the people that came up with such ideas and solutions before I got tinkering with it.

Yep...if Gurner whats to piss on me privately he knows where to call...plus, if he is an ex-PG'er, he has known this all along.

Otherwise, start your own thread Gurner, gurner's sustainer thread...and you know...actually build something. Don't knock my work till you've tried it and even then, present yours as an improvement or an innovation or something completely different. Don't hijack innocent threads of others and hide behind pseudonyms, don't waste time pissing on me... just do the work, others will decide if it's any good, as they should...and before long some of them will make something even "better"...that's the way of things.

[psw]

Ok...for those who have not even heard what my device sounds like (though they have always been available from links on the 'sustainer sounds thread, along with others for comparison) I uploaded 3 tunes of the very first 'sustainer strat' which featured the first pickup/driver combo, the very one featured in the how to make a driver pictorial of which this thread was originally about...

There is no 'secret' as to the circuitry used in this, it used the CHAmp LM386 data sheet kit modified with a 100uF output cap for the response I personally like and my driver design (0.2mm wire on a 3mm deep coil wound to 8 ohms) adn for a preamp the PRECHAmp, modified (as per the instructions with it) to provide a bit more gain. This guitar is a cheap strat copy with cheap single coil pickups, exactly as the one modified for the driver in the pictorial...ceramic magnets below slug poles. I used to think that extra gain was necessary, on this guitar and pickups perhaps it was a bit, but in more recent times I have gone for far less power in the preamp stage.

So, if you follow this link...

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=869409

that I was reminded of by looking back at the posts TELEFUNKON provided...

I'd point interested parties to the present sustainer demo...actually a demo of the guitar I built that featured it...Blueteleful1 parts 1 & 2

This was built in 2008 and features "the circuit" that seems to bother Gurner and his ilk so much. As I say, I was developing it and it features a different kind of drive control, the driver is very much like a newer version of the original, the core was even cut from the same piece of ordinary hardware steel...the ceramic magnets from the $2 shop in the craft section. So, pretty much the same tecnology as the original...

One should notice that this was improvised against a drum loop...the bass was overdubed later...in one take, with one guitar...and no effects directly into the BR600 with a little echo to give it ambience perhaps. So, recorded silently through headphones at about 1am in the morning and with a fairly flat battery as I recall.

Blueteleful1 pt 1 http://soundclick.com/share?songid=6852773
Blueteleful1 pt 2 http://soundclick.com/share?songid=6881582

...

For comparison...the original version from 2004. The exact driver/pickup in the pictorial and a no frills preamp/LM386 circuit...no AGC, no phase compensation, no trickery or magic, no secrecy behind it...very much as I have suggested all along...4x the size of my present devices...

The tracks Beckistan, Airie and The Yearning...just three of quite a few posted over the years and dating back to 2003-4.

These were recorded pretty primitively with a korg digital effects unit plugged directly into the soundcard of the computer...hence the recording quality.

Beckistan http://soundclick.com/share?songid=9178457

This shows the range of the thing and honestly how it worked. Yes, this first version was not that "controlled" but still musically useful. With the amount of tremolo use, and the position of the controls at the back of the guitar, hardly likely or sounds like I was "riding" the intensity control. But this was a first prototype on a very cheap guitar...and in fact the first thing played on it pretty much. The first phrase is the modified neck pickup, the second the bridge pickup, and thereafter you can clearly hear the sustainer on and switching to harmonic mode.

Ok...from the same "session" pretty much and same guitar...

The yearning http://soundclick.com/share?songid=9178466

A fairly loud recording I notice, so perhaps turn it down. Some kind of flutey sounds and a lot of ambient drones...gives an idea of the polyphonic response I guess. All sustainers tend to have the bass strings 'win out' over the higher strings, yet even with this first prototype you can see that there is no problem playing multiple chords and getting some polyphonic sustain.

Airie http://soundclick.com/share?songid=9178483

Same set up...I suppose I was demoing the 'auto picking' kind of thing...looks like I was letting the sustainer activate the notes. Super clean sound and the use of sustaining polyphonic notes

...

It's been interesting to hear that again after all those years...

So, that's what it sounds like and pretty much what I always claimed was possible with a basic amp circuit and suitable driver.

I could have cheated of course, though it is obvious that I didn't and never had. I could have for instance just dialed in a compressor on the stompbox I used to link to the computer. Not on the circuit to the driver, but just on the guitar and normal. This of course would have brought up the softer notes and toned down the louder ones and got the coveted "even tone" that Gurner and others seem to desire and more of a fernandes like sound perhaps.

But of course, back then as now, I actually wanted to create a more dynamic expressive device. I didn't want the thing I was after to sound "even" and "sterile" and "bland" and all the things that many sustainers are criticized for...I wanted the capacity for a wide dynamic range and with it expressiveness. Now, to do that takes a little more "work" by the player, but that is always the way...or a little cheating with a compressor, distortion or a range of other ways you could tone the thing down if that's the desired effect.

...

So, I have made these available to hopefully end any controversy about my work, the project in general or what is capable even with the most basic of circuits, not trickery or masking distortion. Now others have submitted similar clips, some have got a lot of AGC and such on them, they were going for a different kind of sound and got it...simply though, I was looking for dynamic range, they weren't.

Now, in the more "modern circuit", what is the difference really...well., perhaps there is a little more control and more drive on all strings, less noise, and a more varied drive control...but it is pretty much the same thing don't you think? Because, that is the direction I chose to follow. Now I could just as easily have gone down the route of "taming" the thing as Gurner and others and the commercial units have gone...but I really think that the whole dynamic range should be in the hands of the musician if they choose that, and this will get it there.

As far as 'phase compensation', my driver design does not need it. Gurner might have a radically different driver in mind, this is by far the biggest "battle" or he may simply be banking on rehashing one of my many designs or others, or copying those of the patents...who knows, he seems rather cagey about his involvement completely...hardly the most honest of characters it would seem.

...

However, with my devices, they can be "tamed" with signal processing. The huge dynamic range would benefit in recording and in a live situation with some limiting on the actual instrument (say with a compressor) to help it sit in the mix better and not peak out as much...a very easy and routine way of dealing with such things, especially instruments like say a sax that also has a wide dynamic range at their disposal.

I've never heard a sax player complain about the dynamic range of their instrument or try and tame it, but I dare say there are a few recording engineers who do it to them. Still, if that is the direction someone wants to take things, it really is no big deal, add a compressor in the drive chain or just simply on the guitar itself. My demos were to show honestly what it sounded like naked. Any distortion pedal btw will automatically squash things down and provide are ridiculously fast response to sustain and harmonics and 'auto-picking' features of the device...as will just playing it in a room with a real amp, not through headphones at the dead of night.

The new circuit is an improvement...about an inch square (4x smaller that the commercial units and far smaller than the originals circuit), cleaner, more range of effect, better drive control, and better drive across the string sets...but then that was after 4 years of tinkering later and several different circuits and a completely different guitar. It is however, remarkably similar to the original in design and concept.

The reality then, in complete contradiction to Gurner's and others accusations is that it does in fact work. In fact, it works due to a driver design without AGC and Phase correction, no secrecy or trickery. And these clips have been continuously available with an open invitation to provide any further evidence, since 2004!

Now, I think I know why this is. I think, like I did early on, look too hard at the patents and assume from that that what they found necessary with their drivers and response characteristics, that I must need that too. But, Lovekraft encouraged me to work on driver that could work designs that would work on the range of the guitar without those requirements. This is the "secret" if there is one to what I have been doing, and radically different from that approach. In fact, it is far more like an eBow. Anyone looking at making such devices and done a bit of work must have come across the ebow and it's elegant simplicity (LM386 circuit as it happens) and wondered why the same could not be constructed for all six strings in a "sustainer" format...well it can, and that's exactly what I have offered up to anyone.

Like the Ebow then, there is a wide dynamic range of effect. With an ebow you can control the dynamic range by moving the thing nearer to the pickup, with mine, you control it by how hard you pick the strings and such. But, like the ebow, you can tame it with effects. Mine has the benefit of not interfering with the picking hand and being able to play multiple strings and chords, the ebow can't.

But I admit that my simple things do not sound like the fernandes or sustainiac or floyd or micheal brook (who these guys stole it from anyway) or any of the others...because I designed them for me with a whole other set of criteria in addition to the "performance" aspects.

These criteria are often completely ignored in criticizing me or the way my sustainers sound and are constructed.

These include very small flexible units that do not interfere with the guitar without the sustainer. The guitar works as normal, it will work without a battery, the sustainer only uses power when actually on, a range of control options, extremely small cheap circuits with easily available components, no requirement for extensive modification of the host instrument. The tele's driver sticks on with double sided tape, others are completely invisible under the cover of the neck pickup and add no magnetic energy to the string or pickup operation.

These things are extremely important to consider in judging what I have done compared to what is currently available. Professionally done, my present circuit say in SMD would be smaller than the back of a normal pot for goodness sake...have you seen the size of the commercial units? These are massive achievements in the technology and achieved years ago.

So...the biggest complaint seems to be that "it can't be decent" because it is so simple. Well...the ebow is simpler and a beautiful elegant design that has not been surpassed. I suggest that those that have not done or heard the thing, can't really comment.

But, the point of the "sustainer project" all those hundreds of pages and thousands of contributions from many was to encourage others to have a go themselves and take this technology further in directions they wanted to. I offered up the most basic working model as a template, quite freely, for people to get started with. If a more 'even response' is what is wanted...go for it!

One guy famously wanted the string to settle into a 'sine wave' pattern in sustain as he felt this was the 'natural' sound of the guitar once the string had been plucked. That's nice, go for it. However, it is not what I was seeking from the thing...the end result of his contribution was to have the thread closed in a hail of personal abuse towards me (and likewise defensive post from me in return)...the result of all this apparently was something exactly like my prototype with a different chip and the tillman stuck to the front of it....and claiming it as entirely his own work.

I am reminded in looking back at those posts of some of the other Gurners that pop up...one from this forum suggested my hex drivers were a hoax. He claimed that I was suggesting the 5 LED lights in the things that indicated it was on was what I suggested drove the strings...nothing would convince him and abusive PM's ensued. Similarly this nugget from 2005...

man im geting mad with your talking what the hell is your problem? stop anoying me i have notho«ing to do with your paranoia  tomorow i will post here a video demosntrating the sound of your f** sustainer its nothing special to build and if contoinue to anoy me i will put here the plans of your "NOT SPECIAL" DRIVERS I WILL BUILD TONIGHT A SISTEM JUST LIKE YOUR!!!!!!!!!!!! SO DON´T MESS WITH ME AGAIN I EXPLAINED YOU A FEW TIMES I DONT NEED YOUR FAKE PROIJECT FOR NOTHING YOU DIDN´GET NOTHING NEW TO ME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
JESUS WHAT A PARANOIC GUY!!!

perhaps people can see why I am a little defensive and the kind of thing I have had to put up with years now. Gurner is small fry, but one of many. The main characteristic is that he is deceptive in his agenda, has nothing to show for it and no first hand experience, perhaps not even read the material or avail himself of the sound clips and other evidence...and goes straight into attacking and belittling me and putting words into my mouth.

I am not recommending any circuit, not mine, not RoG, not the old Jaycar and other kits...and I never have. I do recommend a particular driver design of mine as being easy to make (though clearly some can't get that right and dont pot with wood glue and such) and has been proven for years to work with simple circuits without phase compensation or AGC...it's a place to start. And to back it up, I have shown exactly what the results should sound like. Where exactly is the problem and the need to personally attack me or my work?

[Taylor]

Where exactly is the problem and the need to personally attack me or my work?

Word. This guy is clearly loquacious, but he doesn't owe anybody anything. He has put lots of words, and some info () out there for (as far I can tell) free. I agree it might be tough to follow because of the length and because sometimes some of us really do want to be spoonfed (myself included), but you can't get mad at somebody or give him crap if he's not forthcoming with the info you want, or because he says it in a way that you have a hard time following.

I think it would be best if all involved killed the personal attacks. This is not one of those forums where we do that kind of stuff. We are friendly and helpful here. Don't bring this place down to the standard of other music-related fora.

[psw]

Thanks Taylor...

I am just trying to point out that while I have been involved for many years in this project, I have been the subject of such "attacks" routinely for almost as long, yes, even here. This Guy...(I have a name by the way)...but Gurner, joined on April 30th and by far the majority of his posts have been directed towards me, the others obsess about a "secret widget" that is clearly or most likely 'sustainer related'. I'm just pointing out the likely motivation for the behaviour and even being in this forum...and trying to repair the damage such people cause.

This "Guy" (I really don't know his real identity) has the ability to contact me directly, I have encouraged him to do so.

My appearance here was because I was notified by the forum that an old topic of mine, cited by TELEFUNKON was reactivated by an interested member. I did not expect to be stalked on this forum, or abused in this manner, but then, I suppose there are trolls in any forum.

If anyone does need help with this or would like to contact me directly...they know how to do that.

As for the length of posts, if anyone read them, they would be able to see that there are points to them...if anyone would have bothered listening to the clips dating back to 2004 that were always available, they would know exactly what to expect from this kind of device. I posted them again for those who may need them...and because it has also been suggested that I am misleading impressionable people about what my design can do with a basic circuit.

I have been incredibly open about that...some people just fail to believe it cause they think they know "better". Well, I encourage it, go and make a sustainer, design your own driver (try not just to duplicate mine without due credit if you don't mind) and build that better circuit...I'd love to hear it. In fact, there is a real opportunity here as there always has been, for someone to develop a basic "standard" circuit for the thing. I obviously have my ideas and put them into action...they certainly have nothing at all to do with RoG or any similarity, in fact I am known to be critical of this design since it was proposed and offered my on mods to get it more up to the task.

My apologies to the OP who had his thread hijacked and to others who are interested. I will endeavor to continue to help those who are sincere in their wishes to build these things or just explore the concepts further personally....and I will I am afraid continue to defend myself against such trolls who have their own 'agenda'...and use as many words as I deem necessary. If this forum has a problem with the behavior of such people, then they should speak to them accordingly.

It's unfortunate that this forum is not more controlled on this subject...perhaps this is not a place for the sustainer to be discussed at all, especially if it is prone to anyone joining and behaving in this way less than a month after joining. Since most of these threads are seeking to copy the ideas that I presented, I figured that they at least may have wished to speak to the creator of the thing. I also would have thought that this forum would welcome a member of many years contributing in an area which he has worked on for years, and in fact created...but perhaps not.

But, I appreciate that people need help, I say an amplifier, he says give me one, I give him one, and he says I am recommending one and further, ripping off RoG even though I have made it clear that this was not a recommendation but in fact "a" potential circuit. If he wants a purpose built AGC (not phase corrected) circuit with 4 modes...do a bit more research...there is a great one in the sustainer thread from member col...not that I am recommending that either.

More than half of the sustainer threads many pages are in fact about spoon feeding people, often very young, towards success in this project...now it's a matter of scorn...the project was largely successful from my point of view in 2004...that's a long time ago...there have been plenty of comers since, take it up with them why little progress has been made on my work back then. Unfortunately for me, my name i9s on it, so I cop the falck...and the fact of the matter here, is that it has spread to this forum.

my names pete btw...but you know...guy would do...

[Taylor]

  No offense intended by "guy", Pete.

I'd like to build a bass with a sustainer-per-string. Never could get my Sustainiac to sustain my bass's lowest string at all.

I'm not that great with analog tech, but I've become decent at digital processing, so I may go that route to get the lowest notes to sustain at their fundamental frequencies. Having compression and filtering tuned for each string may be the ideal way to get good performance in this case. It's strange, because my ebow works ok on the lowest string. Don't know why the Sustainiac can't work as well as the much simpler Ebow circuit...

[psw]

You are lucky to have a bass sustainiac...do they still make those things?

I got a fabulous demo disc of the sustainiac on a floppy record in old guitar player mags when they first came out, including the bass and it sounded fantastic...never seen a demo like that since...and of course you hardly ever here them

The bass is a good candidate for these things. I have played with the idea a bit, generally the bass strings are easier to drive...lower frequencies and a lot more metal in those strings. Just testing the guitar version of mine on it though did produce a lot of harmonics.

The frettless that I use has a P-bass split pickup and this tended to harmonic one set of 2 strings, and the fundamental the other.

Last time I tried working on a bass, I used independent drivers for each string righ on the bridge...the scale and pickup spacing tends to mean there is a lot of space to work with...and of course, generally a lot of space between the top and the stings generally. Perfect candidate for a simple surface mounted driver, and if a typical bass, no need for bypassing, so perhaps a small stick on box with the circuit and battery in it to make it removable. So, I guess a mounted ebow...

But these things need development...if you imagine playing a bass through a little LM386 amp with a speaker, those lowest strings are going to struggle. At least you would need a big output cap (the opposite of my 100uF for my guitars...perhaps 470uF or even higher)

I ahve not spent a lot of time on it, because when it came down to it, and not being a bass player as such, I wondered whether I would have a use for it and not knowing what others might want either.

There are a lot of people who are interested in a 7 string version too...apparently they are not available by anyone anymore.

You got to hand it to the eBow, it is an elegantly simple device that no one has really bettered in concept or design. I tried my hand at building one as have others here with some success...but it is hard to replicate the utility of the real thing!

So...not sure that I personally have a music vision for such things, I am aware that there are a few bass players who manage to play with multiple ebows...so there must be something! For me, the musical 'vision' or at least usefulness is paramount.

...

Sorry Taylor, didn't mean to take offense at you, it is just all too often and I have had to put up with a year of this nonsense, my patience is at an end with such people. The irony is that they have the idea that of course it will work...but the driver is such an important part, they take for granted the time and expense put into arriving at something so apparently simple and freely available. It simply is not 'any coil', you can get some sustain with some designs, it is not the only design even of mine, but this one is designed not to need the compensation circuits the commercial systems do and is radically different in design and in implementation.

I don't own a patent on the thing, but I do own the public rights to it...it is now 'prior art' and all I seek is acknowledgment if it is used and it not be used for personal commercial gain. There are many that clearly have that in mind. This is of course why I don't personally use anyone else's circuit designs but my own...and in the current climate of me being ripped off...if I were to give away my actual design or put a recommendation on anything, some "guy" would have it up on Ebay so fast...believe me...then who would be being ripped off?

So, I am sensitive to such accusations that I am ripping RoG or anyone else...I will defend myself against such allegations.

Where people join a forum and in three weeks target a member such as me, and I appreciate those who understood what I was saying...it works for me, that circuit will do, etc...and the most surface research into what they are really "up to"...well, I think they do need to be 'called out' for the sake of the forum to keep this kind of thing out of it. Perhaps his lack of reply will be enough for him to disappear, but I am sure even then he will reappear under yet another assumed name...part of any forum I am afraid.

It just seems amazing to me that this particular project, the sustainer, seems to particular attract such people, but it does for some reason. Plenty of people have their own take on fuzz's and such, many replicate the classic designs, some create their own flavours...but I have never seen anyone without even building one join up to abuse long standing designers because they "think" they can do better, don't like their writing style, or accuse a proven much verified design as being a hoax. I hope that I don't have to keep hammering that home, but I will as necessary.

I thank everyone else for their patience, reading is optional of course...the post above links to the sounds which in themselves should be enough to answer the critics and let people know what they are really getting with my suggestions and a basic sustainer system.

As for Bass...well you know, I did my sustainer more than half a decade ago now I see, and the last I built in earnest was in 2008. I have one in the works, but with this climate, any ambitions for further work and the moves I ahd made to make available tested circuits and coils for those who require those things, came to an end with the arival of people such as, if not in fact, gurner...so...take that as you may.

The guy thing...well, I am sensitive to such 'psychology'...de-personalizing a person as if there was not a real person communicating to you with a real name and feelings. This kind of disassociation is what gives people license to behave in the manner of a gurner...perhaps I should have started out with some privacy...but then, the start of the sustainer thread was my first introduction to any internet or forum. But when I read a lot of these kinds of posts, I can see this pattern and it disrupts the message...

Anyway...perhaps gurner will be inspired to find his own way and be his own sustainer celebrety somewhere and in so doing, attract his own bunch of crack pots...perhaps then, if I am still around and I see it, I can restrict my posts to...I told you so...but I suspect there are $$ in there eyes...otherwise he wouldn't be so secretive and ashamed of what he is in fact up to with this mysterious widget...

[DougH]

I think it would be best if all involved killed the personal attacks. This is not one of those forums where we do that kind of stuff. We are friendly and helpful here. Don't bring this place down to the standard of other music-related fora.

My point exactly.

Speaking of bass sustainers- we are going to give the one I'm building a try on my son's bass.

[fpaul]

I started reading the million page thread on the other forum and gave up on building a sustainer.  When this one started I was hoping to get a condensed version but it's going out of control as well.  It would be nice to have an actual project file of something that actually works, maybe in the gallery.  If something requires breadboarding to tweek I can handle that but after reading a few hundred posts I'm not really sure even of what readily available material to make a bobbin with or what dimensions, or how to wind an pot it, much less an optmized driver circuit.  It may be in there somewhere but I don't have the patience to find it.  Appreciate the sharing of info for people with more patience though.

[DougH]

It would be nice to have an actual project file of something that actually works, maybe in the gallery. 

I'll post a write-up, some photos and/or video and/or sound clips when mine is finished. Getting the perfboard done today. Should be finished pretty soon.

[Gurner]

I started reading the million page thread on the other forum and gave up on building a sustainer.  When this one started I was hoping to get a condensed version but it's going out of control as well.  It would be nice to have an actual project file of something that actually works, maybe in the gallery.  If something requires breadboarding to tweek I can handle that but after reading a few hundred posts I'm not really sure even of what readily available material to make a bobbin with or what dimensions, or how to wind an pot it, much less an optmized driver circuit.  It may be in there somewhere but I don't have the patience to find it.  Appreciate the sharing of info for people with more patience though.

This was my whole point (which seems to have been missed)....anyone who needs guidance on a sustainer circuit (& for what's it's worth I definitely don't) are simply going to be dumbfounded by the sheer volume of text & words wherever they look for DIY sustainer guidance!

On Project Guitar there's a thread spanning back almost 7 years - & whilst there are a few tutorials wrt making drivers (a simple device - a bobbin with some wire around it & a magnet attached!), the reader is pretty much on his own wrt the accompanying circuit (I emphasise, this is after 7 years - no recommended circuit!).

Now as it goes I most definitely don't need spoonfeeding - I'm more than capable of knocking up a sustainer circuit of my own (it won't be a basic ROG clone  )....therefore this is *not* about me being 'demanding' that some one tells me how to make a sustainer circuit....oh no.  

Nope, this was an observation that for all the words, pics & the persistent riding of a (perceived)  'kudos wave' being reaped at each & every presented opportinity...where's the beef? Cutting through a bazillion words, just what is his base recommended sustainer circuit ?(ie for those that perhaps do need some guidance).....he always ducks this one.

Time & time again I see others asking for a sustainer circuit eg saying they don't have either the time or inclination to wade through a monster amount of (very egocentric) schpiel .....or they don't have enough experience to design their own.

Now for someone adopting a self crowned DIY sustainer king stance ......there seems to be a massive amount of reluctance just to come right out & say "I suggest you make this circuit" - so I'm simply saying that, before you allow anyone to dominate similar threads on this forum like he apparently has on PG  (where the overall electronics experience is far lower) ...that those with a more refined electronics eye simply question through the noise just what is it is he's recommending.

I've laid out my stall -  while it'll obviously give sustain, the very basic ROG circuit touched upon earlier is not particularly appropriate for a decent sustainer (much as you can tow a small caravan with a large juggernaut, it'll tow, but it's not particularly elegant) - well controlled sustain is what you should get with a good sustainer - & that's a massive missing element in the ROG circuit - so if that's the best he can recommend , then perhaps folks are being hoodwinked by his sheer volume of pics & words. On Project Guitar where folks tend to obsess about things like walnut, fret wire & lemon oil, he's seemingly had carte blanche to be sketchy about the circuit aspect - but in a more techie savvy forum such as this  ....there ought to be more eyebrows raised.

And no, this isn't a p1ssing contest - (& you'll see no bizarre 'war & peace' posts from me) so I agree let's keep the forum walls dry!