col Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 If I am wrong in the assumption that they 'designed/developed' and claim to own rights on their circuits, then my apologies. The ruby is presented as an audio amp - not as a sustainer amp. The Fetzer is presented as an impedance buffer for audio applications - not as the input for a sustainer system. Someone other than ROG cobbled the two together and presented it as a sustainer circut. I know it wasn't you Pete, and I'm absolutely clear that you don't endorse it!. However, you do often attribute the fetzer/ruby to ROG and then criticise it - implying that ROG have created a poor design. I imagine that if ROG did design a sustainer circuit, it would be a whole lot better than yours or mine. My mantra has always been ... The reality is, that no matter how specific I am regarding things, the more people choose to 'deviate' to make it their 'own' and generally with detrimental effects to my standards and aims. I've left the circuit things more open precisely so that those who claim and possibly do know better could improve on things... Fact is: on the one hand, you claim - at very great length - to have presented a simple working sustainer system and criticize folks for deviating from your design. on the other hand, you have only publicly presented one component of your system - the driver. Your circuit remains private. You seem to be misleading people, so you need to make it clear that your 'DIY sustainer' is not - it's a 'DIY sustainer driver' As such, it's not a ready to go project for folks to make - it never was. If someone wants to do their own thing, that's great..... It seems that most folks (not me) don't want to 'do their own thing'. They want do do your thing - that you promote endlessly. Unfortunately they can't because - contrary to the implications of all your endless posts on the subject - your thing has never been published! Amazing really. You can't expect folks to stick to your design unless you give them the design to stick to - they can't read your mind !!! cheers Col Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 The ruby is presented as an audio amp - not as a sustainer amp. was not designed either by the author nor for this application Yep, as has/was said Your circuit remains private. The circuit remains generic and with specific modification tips to assist people to better tune such simple circuits for the driver as described. to have presented a simple working sustainer system and criticize folks for deviating from your design. Over many years I have presented many different driver and circuit designs, at length and the opportunity has always been there and encouraged to make variations, but the variations that are usually done have been variations on the F/R but more commonly, as in this threads example, significant variations on the driver (which is very well documented) and will run on very simple amplifier circuits, but not just any old amplifier I had lying around as evident here also. My criticism of 'folks' is only that there is no point starting another 'psw sustainer does not work' thread or making vague comments on 'phase' and such without solutions or suggesting that I owe anyone anything in regards to their wishes to replicate my work...as is the case here. I've not heard anyone ask to replicate you work, though I have actively encouraged that...though in another forum the 'same guy' was slamming you on your circuit that closed down every thread here under various guises. The reality is in fact that I have not contributed on this subject for some time and far from wanting to promote this publicly, or in any way, I have specifically and generously offered to help people privately...and I think the last half decade and this forums wishes would have been enough to convince people that this is a better solution. I think this conversation supports that notion too. Instead of knocking for years on end, what would be more appropriate, if there is anything that someone with such skills that promote themselves in that way, might think to offer an alternative that address those issues rather than just throw rocks into the wishing well. The reality is pretty clear that I have my devices working since 2004, the original and more contemporary sound clips attest to that and are pointed to here I believe and here is a picture of the thing sustainer strings... You can clearly see the G string moving well and in fact the open high e that has been suggested to be difficult and impossible with my approach... I may not be 'giving away' the specific circuit there, especially in the face of multiple people with the clear intention to replicate it or something similar and sell it on ebay. Similarly, my work should not be used in that way, though it is if you wanted to look around for it. There is no 'it' as far as circuits go as as been said and explained above, the whole driver is designed to be run on fairly generic circuits and this it has proved to do. I never suggested that this project is easy either, clearly the idea of winding in glue or the correct wire specification is not used and the results speak for themselves in countless 'I could not get it to work' threads...this has nothing to do with circuits at all is it...even though there too it is coupled with "Oh, I just used whatever was at hand' and it still did not work. All I am suggesting is, that if you are wanting this thing to do what I claim, then it has to be close (within a very wide margin) to what is intended for it to function as intended. Pretty much universally this is the case. All I am is suggesting is, contact me and I will give the means to do what is required for free with generous assistance. Is there some problem with that, is that not 'anti-public-promotion'? Are there any other similar devices on offer for DIY? Anyone else wish to throw their own 'hat into the ring' with some original work? My only advice here really has been to suggest that if people really want to follow the work I have done for their own purposes then they should contact me without the interjection of naysayers who don't even start their own thread and I will do what I can from the perspective of not only someone who came up with the thing, but has built many and assisted many more to success. What often happens 'publicly' is that instead of helping anyone, there is a lot of 'noise' that only confuses and does nothing to assist at all, and from people who generally have never built the thing itself let alone seen one first hand. My impression col was that you were the 'exception' in that regard, though it is unclear. Have you ever made the driver as described by me? Have you ever tried to run it on a suitable guitar with a fairly basic buffered LM386 like circuit with a 100uF output cap? Did in fact it work, what were the deficiencies, what improvements have you too offer knowing as much as you do and with the tools to design such circuits in detail? Anyone would get the impression that it did not work. Noise like 'other guys got it to work with a different wire' I am only seeking to clarify as been a very common reason why it does not work...if trying to get the results from it that I do. I even built the illustrated driver see through to show that that is all that is in it and the quality that one should aim for and provided links to others to show that others can do it and how. I don't see this offered by anyone else frankly. These kind of requests, and I understand where you are coming from (though you yourself appear to have no interest in making one, so what is there to offer really), very often come close to not a DIY project but that psw does the thing for you project and with countless hours helping people, that is an easy thing to feel. I've supported, not promoted this concept and assisted and continue to do so privately and have been conspicuously quiet for a long time now...the length and style of my prose is a complete 'straw man' and not worthy of you col. Any contribution is voluntary here, as is the compulsion to read such things. I was asked, so I responded, as a result, others have contacted me and seemed to be grateful for the help and clarity offered in those exchanges. I am considering helping people in even greater ways and am actively working on a range of things to address that, I don't see others doing that for this or really, any other guitar building project at PG, why is there an expectation that I should? Or that when I do, this is some how contentious? One simply does not get threads that start off with some new fangled bridge design for example and suggesting that they could not be bothered/thought it was cooler/had some better idea for no particular reason that did not allow for intonation and then complain about the guitar being impossible to tune...and that people start into Pythagoruas for it. I recently made a bridge for instance... Am I by showing the above picture suggesting that I have an obligation to help countless others for almost a decade now on this project everything about it or replicate it...no, no one expects that and anyone who were to ask such a question or make such a suggestion of an alternate 'intonation' is likely to get the reply that I offered, that , err, those adjustments are there for a reason, etc...just as I sugest that it might well be that if you vary the design, you will not get the results that I have suggested. What, one wonders with the implication of 'conspiracy theories' implied is my motivation? I get no financial reward, it costs me. I've not been here for a year and have made it quite clear that these kinds of things are not welcome in this forum, how have I 'constantly promoted' anything? Why is it always the 'circuit' that is the 'issue' when the whole point of the design from the very start was to do this thing with the simplest and generic thing and leave open for improvements by others areas in that aspect to make things to taste and response? Is there honestly a suggestion that I faked these sound clips and perpetrated a deception for almost a decade, really? Is the suggestion that it 'cant work' being put forward again, even in the face of such evidence from many who have done this, photos and audio that back it up as well? It is not an 'easy project' but it certainly does do what I claim for it to do and can be replicated for personal use and I have from the very start encouraged the input of others to make variations that are workable and share them with people..this is not been the case and really, am I at all obliged to either? No, but I do. The email is open, other forums are better suited for such discussions and the invitation is there. I'm not selling things at this stage, but I am considering it, precisely because a lot of people have problems getting things (as i the OP here yet again) and it would likely be easier and cheaper and more consistent if people were to get it from me. But, I've not and am not at this stage offering that, it is likely to cost me. I have suggested that I am with others been compiling a concise PDF illustrated with other peoples successful step by step pictures that will be available privately...anyone got a problem with that, or is that some kind of 'self aggrandisement' too? Honestly, I offered to this forum and many members a lot over many years, promoting PG and thanking them for allowing a place to discuss things and things changed. Now, I am here to assist one person who had a query and another who specifically asked for me by name and after at least a year, I explain a few things like 'the wire gauge matters to the design' (as if it has not been said enough) and now we have the suggestion that I am by doing this promoting the project or myself publicly and implications that I am withholding information and fuelling some kind of 'conspiracy theories' about that aspect without any input from people who aspire or in fact do know about these things. Phase, you have everyone using a different guitar, a different scale length, and particularly different pickups as a source signal...can you really say that there is a 'universal' circuit if you are going to get all concerned about phase relations to that level of detail and be successful in the overall aims. Well, perhaps you can, I did not need to go that far and if people can or have worked circuits that would address such things, as is implied, then they certainly are not publicly or freely offering it. Anyway...have email, avoid noise. This can be a tricky project, you do need to have quite some skills in wiring, building circuits, arts and crafts and ingenuity in building a driver to spec and a bit of patience. Some gratitude for the time I offer 'privately' and for offering this up at all. I most definitely am not 'misleading people' in that it is a DIY sustainer concept and design that has been DIY'ed over and again. I never claimed a 'step by step' instruction or... You seem to be misleading people, so you need to make it clear that your 'DIY sustainer' is not - it's a 'DIY sustainer driver' As such, it's not a ready to go project for folks to make - it never was. I started a thread on a guitar forum, my very first introduction to the internet in fact and the second post ever made on the thing. That thread does not start, here is my design for a DIY sustainer now does it? Did I start or endorse the oft followed 'based on my design but failed because i did not follow the directions' tutorial of Gmike? No, I am not misleading people, but tried to correct others who have with my own project, often under the pressure of real life and snide personal insinuations. I do have a sustainer design, it has been independently verified and details have been offered, it is simple enough for suitably skilled people to make and yes, explore. I said that the driver design was not at all followed in the response to this OP, not the circuit. I designed this and many driver designs, true. I designed it to run off fairly generic circuits, true. I showed that it worked with very basic non-phase compensated circuits of several types, true. I detailed several ways of integrating the device to work with other pickups and switching and in various formats from 'piggybacking' on top of a pickup or as a compact driver with the same design criteria, true. I have extensively detailed time and again the mods that I have used for a simple LM386 circuit to improve performance for use with my driver, true. I've offered links to others who have built these things, true. I have demonstrated for years what the device sounds like and the fact that id does work, true...etc, etc, etc... What has anyone done that is equivalent and what have people done in return or for me? Read the first posts from me and realize that I have never said that this is something that I have an obligation to spoon feed anyone or ever suggested that this was a project for anyone buy some advanced or at least attention to detail skills, most people should not have anything to do with this kind of thing frankly. This is not a one size fits all, plug'n'play project at all, never, ever said it was. I do claim and the facts support it that it is possible to DIY and that it will run successfully on a multitude of very basic circuits and not a "one" circuit. I offer advice on such choices to those who ask nicely and this forum does not need more discussion on this subject at all, especially if the only thing offered is to criticize things from a position of complete ignorance...and never even bothered to replicate and verify... Email and alternative forums, much better for me, less 'public' and attracting personal asides, as always, reading my posts or taking from my work is completely optional...doing one's own or offering an equivalent contribution to the subject conspicuously absent and that in itself speaks more volumes than even I can speed type. I've not been offering anything in a very long time other than privately and that is the opposite of 'mis-leading...I never claimed it to be what is now suggested that "it is", so how the %^5 is that misleading anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irky Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) So what is the circuit you specifiy to mate with the your driver, so we can all stick to your design? I'm looking forward to getting started...thanks in advance for your help. Edited November 28, 2011 by irky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 So what is the circuit you specifiy to mate with the your driver, so we can all stick to your design? I'm looking forward to getting started...thanks in advance for your help. indeed!! The circuit remains generic and with specific modification That doesn't wash - there is no such thing as a 'generic' sustainer drive circuit. You should publish specs and docs for a complete sustainer system, or you should stop saturating these discussions with huge multi-page slabs of pointless dogma (I didn't read the last WOT, life's too short - I'll read posts if they are concise and relevant. Why not put all the other stuff in a web-page and link to it rather than repeating it all endlessly ?). cheers Col Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 I didn't read the last WOT, life's too short - I'll read posts if they are concise and relevant. Why not put all the other stuff in a web-page and link to it rather than repeating it all endlessly ?. Fine, well for those who can read and what information relevant to their needs if I can help, use email. It is not endlessly, I was asked too... Where's Pete when you need him? I answered questions that Col put directly to me by name, such as the ownership of the fetzer and ruby design and their authorization of same to the author of the tutorial from which that idea came. Also, that it is a simple LM386 based circuit (a few parts missing from the manufactures applications note) and a preamp. I'm not having a go at RoG that col is enamoured by, I am agreeing with him, this is not a 'sustainer circuit' but it has been used successfully by all accounts as have others. Relevance, well, as well as answering questions put to me directly by 'name' I also suggested for the more technical minded that the pickup and driver are not in the same place along the string length and that alone will mean the phase of vibration where the signal is sensed is going to be different with every note from that it is trying to be driven (also implying that it will be different for every guitar setup and changing). Adding noise into the system by bandying about the word 'phase' without offering solutions or suggestions while taking pot shots about the frustrations with my posts or thoughts (which after all is in fact what this thread appeared to be asking for, by name) and I only knew about when the OP 'found me' on another forum where I don't find such 'noise'). But then that is a furphy because of course, when you do strip it back to basics, pete has in fact more than adequately shown that he has made these things, shown pictures that show it, sound clips where you can hear it. That pete never started out to make the whole world a 'diy sustainer' and has not been at this forum for a year at least. If someone addresses me publicly by name, contacts me at a forum on one of my threads and others ask from me by name, tells me what is relevant and does not even read the posts that answer the questions put to me, by name...well, what do you make of such an attitude? ... Col has offered a complete circuit of his ideas and photo's exist of his drivers and could just as easily if more so offer those to the people who have jumped on to this thread and yet, not been able to email me directly as suggested, with details of their guitar and skills in building things, resources or to obtain more information for what ever reason (that in itself does not bode well for their success in these things, frankly)... So, what might be of more use then is that everyone follow and quiz col on his 'drop in' DIY sustainer complete system approach, his 4 modes of harmonics, his forward feed compressor designs, his dual coil sustainers and how to use them and all that. It was fine work at the time and the guy is there to quiz publicly and there are a bunch of people over at You Tube who profess to have similar things that can be quizzed to if you prefer their approach as well, though in truth behind the 'anti-psw' diatribe (most of which had to be modified only the other month) they look and sound surprisingly similar...but it is there if people want it. Here is Col's sustainer at work... My link ... he had a different criteria but perhaps this is more the kind of thing that people are after so have at it. of course even col started somewhere, like right here tagging onto my thread and playing with my driver design himself... There you go, build that and quiz col on it all and replicate it as I have encouraged, there are a lot of fine ideas in it. That it does not meet my over all criteria means nothing, I wanted a different performance and sound than col and to his credit, he said as much of his goals from the start and set out in this to achieve it. Those that are looking to 'improve' things should follow that example and in fact, follow his work perhaps. In instead of vague notions of phase, he can explain his approach in detail in reference to this...this would of course be far more relevant than taking pot shots at me where I have offered my email and I am sure that people who do want to explore such areas can have a lot of fun with that. ... No one need 'stick to my design' they can put in the time and thought and make their own as I did in the first place but if one is going to make my design or modify it, one should at least understand what and what they are seeking to achieve and come up with some original ideas and share them openly under their own name and threads. Is it any surprise at all if you ignore the driver specs and construction techniques offered and use ad hoc circuits that it does not work as expected? The circuits were not the main issue, that is other peoples agenda....the same people as always in fact. I only came here because I was specifically invited by the OP from another forum and from another member in the second post...apparently there is a problem with that from some segments of the PG membership and so I would encourage people to save me a lot of time and effort and follow in the footsteps of Col and others who 'know better' and build that is they so desire. Others with a genuine interest know how to contact me and will have seen the pictures and the sound clips and have thoughts on that or not and make decisions on that and if I have time and feel inclined, I will help those that I can through those means as I have been doing so now for years for absolutely no reward whatsoever other than to make a few friends along the way. Goblin Guitar Link Some people respect my work, others not so much... I have plenty of deficiencies and personal flaws as does everyone, that does not diminish that I did and continue to achieve results and continue to explore ideas in my own way and very often succeed in that too. The sustainer never was the only thing that I worked on or am working on and I built these things for myself and my own use because I had a musical use and desire for them and I've been generous enough to share that journey with others and from that, others have seen from my example and tried to do the same, some with more originality than others. I'm not and was not seeking to 'sell' anyone anything as far as my work goes or promoted myself, I came here and only knew of this thread as a result of contact on another forum by the OP. I believe that the observation that his initial attempts though produced some results, were typical of deviating from the design that was shown to work and in the hope of helping him to modify the design to something that does work and to suggest that to make 'improvements' one might need to formulates some goals or criteria to aim for. Examples of the kinds of criteria that I set out to achieve was... # For the guitar to work passively when not in use. # To be compact enough to allow for a low mod install in a range of guitars. # To allow the use of the neck pickup and the guitar to work as normal without compromise from the addition of a sustainer. # In the DIY version, to be adaptable to individual needs and work from simple circuits. # To be a organic and expressive device, not just about holding a note or generating harmonics, but to be as much about the way a string is driven and initiated and decays and controllable by technique. etc, etc, and as set out very early in my work and it's success in how well it met those criteria...Is it not reasonable for the question to be asked, what is one trying to achieve and in what ways they are trying to achieve these ends? Where is the direction and 'improvement' and all, or is it just to tag along years after my work was given and make it 'their own' without the enormous amount of the real work to come up with things in the first place and give people the space and indeed motivation or encouragement to do theri own ideas. Where are all the sustainer threads from before I came involved. This is not an ego thing, it is just when I started to explore things publicly, there was little to nothing and certainly nothing like the kinds of design principles that inform my work and is largely taken for granted and exploited at times as well. Col and others can be dated to getting involved through my public posts years after I had started and succeeded and even started from where I was at at that time with this version. Now, well, apparently it is personal despite my praise for his own contributions...hmmm...one has to wonder what his motives are for not being more forthcoming, not my own! ... So, given Col's attitude and the PG environment, I think that members should in fact follow his work and his ideas and go for those results and ideas and that col should reciprocate instead of short 'vox pops' that are largely a little bit of a dig or frustration with me and clearly has not read by admission nor intends to anything of mine to answer questions put to me directly and to put words into my mouth regarding what I claim and or offer or why in fact I came here after so long to assist by request...just creating noise without any assistance and sitting on his own version without sharing or allowing others even the position from which he comes and knowledge that he could instead be offering there...so col, the floor is all yours and others, a little of his credentials and ideas and the man at hand to follow through with him his ideas and build his device. Anyone that really wants to know about my work or aspires to the kind of criteria I set and achieved and the kind of sound that it produces with the empirical knowledge that dozens of DIY'ers have succeeded in building such things based on my ideas and designs know where I can be found...but it would be a lot less work on my part if col were to do it for me...so better yet, contact him or others and follow his threads and instruction. As for me, I have my own life to lead, my own ideas to follow through on and other projects to work on than this old thing. There are plenty of the same people to ask that consider themselves to know more than me about my own designs that routinely pop up with a few ad-homily attacks and creating noise where they used to share ideas as above. Most only know of me, but then I am saying, check this guy out, ask for the details and the explanations and follow his lead if that better matches the kinds of things you seek to achieve... I have moved on to other more interesting projects for me... and better places to be... Though as I say, I went further with these things and will continue to, some may even want one or to benefit from what ever I might come up with, none of any of this actually assists me and one has to ask, what is in it for me...clearly just noise from the peanut gallery if discussed publicly and especially here, so my offer stands but completely at my discretion as I have no obligation and there is no reward in any of this...(people of ill will and under troll id's need not apply, they need more professional work than I can provide) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irky Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) Nice location you live there? At the risk of labouring the point, I'm keen to get the parts ordered, but I don't know what to order still .....I'm a little puzzled, earlier in this thread you emphasised that if a new DIY sustainer builder want decent results, then he should stick to your proven design, but your design appears to be only the actual sustainer driver coil? It seems there's a catch22 situation here, ie... begin_loop: "if you want good results you must build to my design". Q: What's your design? A: "here's 50% of what you need" "Hmm, I built a sustainer but I didn't get good results" goto begin_loop Do you see the quandry? As someone said a bit earlier, the sustainer driver coil is only 50% of an overall sustainer system/design ....I'd imagine any system requiring a delicate 'balance' of electrons/magnetic flux, will likely need a well matched circuit (I guess even Fernandes or Sustainiac driver coils would not work too well if mated with other circuits) ...which is why it's probably important to have a complete build/package to work to for someone like me who is new to this ??? Edited November 28, 2011 by irky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 Stick with Col Irky... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irky Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 Stick with Col Irky... ?? no circuit? Ok, Col - do you have a confirmed driver design spec that marrys with your circuit as posted further above? (it looks a little complicated for my first attempt, but I've only a limited amount of time I can spend on this and want to go with a full confirmed design (ie driver coil *and* correctly matched circuit). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 That's the way 'mate'... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkAvenger Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) Ok... so sustainer's are still a sensitive subject. Until I can get one built in January or February, let work towards something productive. OP has a driver, it doesn't work because of... oh, it was 'thrown together' without following the specs to the letter(to no fault of the OP btw just needed to obtain the right parts). SO even NOT built to specs and NOT following anyone's circuit, OP managed sustain on lower three strings using lights. How much does that tell you about the importance of the circuit vs coil specs? The HEART of the sustainer is the design pete has laid out, and he's made that clear. On the other hand, you need a circuit. Pete suggests a LM386, so let do it. This will start generic and can be modified as needed. Here is part one of the design, will this work? Part two, will this work when connected to part one? (change 250uF to 100uF) gain=20x I would please ask that further replies be restricted to design aspects from here on, or any other subjects not related to personal disputes. Topics such as sandy beaches, sustainer circuits, and puppies are OK. Edited November 29, 2011 by DarkAvenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billm90 Posted November 29, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 well **** on me. I am guessing this is going to get locked up soon. In a last ditch effort to save this post, I got my 32awg wire, and once the wood glue dries up, I will get to seeing what I get out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 I am very interested in some of your ideas billm90, again other forums and the people that i know that could be accessed through email or myself is still on offer...I am sorry that it has come down to this again, but you knew that there was a very high risk at PG associated with this subject... Again thanks to Billm90 and DarkA and anyone else of interest in such things and hope to learn from the things that perhaps you create or could inform my own ideas... pete I do mean it and I wish you every success. Interestingly to you, I have seen a range of these kinds of things with internal resonators being built into acoustic guitars and such, but again...this is not the place for such things it seems, or for me without attracting this kind of thing. I did not 'ignore' your post but instead again offer that invitation to correspond should or when you should wish to. Circuits and such are not that secret as people say, there are many, I offer things by email but there are several I looked up today on this very site and material that have proven successful with my driver design. As you are aware, I am working on many projects some of them innovative in nature as this approach was in it's time and have always done so, but it is unfortunate that this is not the place that one can do that any more. Yes, the plastic backed guitar, the multi tuning, the hex project...and even continued work with the sustainer still goes on. I have stated that I am working with others to clarify most of that project and to make things like supply and consistency easier. I am not obliged to, but posting anything here has been made clear that the forum owns and controls the information and my involvement attracts trolls. Better to work with a select group of sincere honest people away from this kind of thing...and I am offering circuits, there is no 'secret' as is put about. Sure, I developed many circuits and own the designs t some original work, but then that is not the DIY sustainer is it and there are otehr reasons why people seek to know how those things are done...just like the tech in the old hex sustainers or the new hex pickups based on that...such things are not DIY anyway. I am also sincere in the praise for Col's work, why he does not publish his own circuit from when he used my driver and leaves it to me is a bit of a mystery, as is that I have consistently been the one to promote his work for years now...being the first to replicate his ideas should be something he would himself promote surely? Certainly he has the chops and knows the requirements for 'non-loading' and what a generic amplifier is as do others. There is enormous merit to his ideas on forward feed compression. My approach is different and with the DIY sustainer to be a bit more approachable, but I don't like the game being played obviously and clearly some information is not correct and the personal asides, unwarranted and not what I am saying...cause it serves some other purpose I'm not privy to. So, the invitation still stands, but not here and not amongst people of ill will....anyone can track down the very many places I have helped on many ideas elsewhere, here it is not the best and I choose to contribute elsewhere. I have made many friends over the years at PG but it is a big community and still harbours and attracts a few trolls, especially on this subject as you know from your first post. There are better places and since all these things, by far the best is via email directly as I say. I wish you every success and the offer stands, I can provide info on suitable circuits, but not here... pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 Stick with Col Irky... ?? no circuit? Ok, Col - do you have a confirmed driver design spec that marrys with your circuit as posted further above? (it looks a little complicated for my first attempt, but I've only a limited amount of time I can spend on this and want to go with a full confirmed design (ie driver coil *and* correctly matched circuit). No, I don't! And have never claimed to, although I will give you specs of the driver I used. To my knowledge, there has never been a DIY sustainer system complete with publicly available driver and circuit schematic that has been proven to be consistently successful and repeatable. That's one reason why I (and others) get annoyed with Pete. My most successful setup used the circuit posted, combined with a dual coil driver. The driver has two coils of a bit under 4ohm each wound with 0.23mm wire around steel(flat iron according to B&Q). These were mounted using an alnico magnet from a humbucker. They are wired in series to give a total DC resistance of just under 8 ohms. I think that they were wired out of phase (it was a long time ago), so that they pull together magnetically. This setup works for me better or as well as any others I've tried - significantly better than when using the driver I built to Pete's specs. I get good sustain on all strings, open and up the neck. There is very little fizz (you might get a very small amount on the lowest notes if you set the AGC up to be as responsive as possible by tweaking the trimmers. Unfortunately, the one other person I know of who tried to build it seemed to have some problems with the circuit - there were language difficulties, but he was clearly not happy with the results he was getting. The biggest issue with it and with other systems I've tried is battery usage - there's no way I could recommend this as something to use on your regular axe because it eats through batteries (the simple circuits without AGC are worse in this respect) Personally, I do not promote my system as something that everyone should make - there are no guarantees. I just put up all the details of my full system as info for others working on their own sustainers. Don't build it unless you are ready to debug it and make changes to get it working. You also need a pretty big cavity in the guitar to put it in as its a big circuit. Potential problems: One problem is that some of the component parts are not easily repeatable in a DIY sustainer. The core material is important, and that is usually pretty random - everyone uses what they can find handy or local. This can cause a difference in inductance, hysteresis, and eddy current losses which will affect the functionality. The pickup on the guitar is another major variable - it's sensitivity to EMI, and the frequency response will have a large impact on the success. My sustainer setup uses a Seymour Duncan JB which is a high output humbucker. I don't know if this is a good choice because I don't have lots of different pickups lying around to compare with. (For a long time Pete claimed great success with a single coil bridge pickup feeding the driver. It became apparent later though that for a lot of his successful tests, he was using a stacked humbucker! I think now that his system works well with all pickups?) The setup of the guitar is crucial - I like to play with a high action which is bad for sustainers. The magnetic pull of the driver falls off with the square of the distance - so if the string is twice as far from the driver due to high action, the pull from the magnet will be a quarter !!! My circuit uses a fet based compression stage. Fets are notoriusly variable, so getting that to work could be tricky. It worked for me, but that might have been pure luck. Anyway, personally, I don't like the way these magnetic sustainers effect the guitar tone. My initial motivation for building one was to try to get a loud guitar feel when playing quietly. Unfortunately, due to the phase gap between driver and pickup, a sustainer actively damps the guitars natural sound. It reverts to a sinusoid much more quickly than it would naturally. This is just the nature of the beast, some folks don't mind it, others love it. Another example would be pinch harmonics and similar techniques - magnetic sustainers kill them. When I discovered this, and then through research understood why it happens, I pretty much gave up developing my version of the sustainer (I can go into a more detailed explanation of this effect if you are interested). So I'm still interested from an electronics hobbyist point of view, but not as a guitar player. You are welcome to build a copy of my design in the knowledge that it might not work for you. If you try and it doesn't work, I won't have a go at you and claim you didn't follow the specs closely enough Just to reiterate, There are no publicly available designs for sustainers that have been proven to be repeatable and successful in a variety of guitars. The people who do claim to have repeatable successful systems, have refused to make them available. I'm sure they all have their reasons. So you will have to get your hands dirty, and try things out. Good luck and enjoy. Col Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irky Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 Thank you for such a clear concise explanation Col. If you are a bit unsure of the specs/config of your own driver coil, then I may get unexpected results (so no further forward really) ...but you make some good points nevertheless. ok, if there's no published full diy sustainer design available (driver coil & circuit) & a lot of issues with battery life to do with the simple ones - I think I'll park this one up and wait until someone comes along with "here's a confimed sustainer system, the coil is this spec & this is the the circuit I recommend marries with it"....else I can see this being a big time sump (& spare time is what I don't have) - back to dabbling with stompboxes for now (they normally have confirmed schems, BOMs etc). Thanks once again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 Part two, will this work when connected to part one? (change 250uF to 100uF) gain=20x You need a voltage reference to attach to Vr I used an op amp stage to create the voltage reference - maybe a simple potential divider would work here ? here are links to info: tangentsoft.net/elec/vgrounds.html http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/echeeve1/Ref/SingleSupply/SingleSupply.html you should get slightly better phase response at low frequencies by increasing the input cap to 220n. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 Thank you for such a clear concise explanation Col. If you are a bit unsure of the specs/config of your own driver coil, then I may get unexpected results (so no further forward really) ...but you make some good points nevertheless. The specs are pretty much: .23mm wire wound to ~4ohm on each coil. steel/iron cores. cores 2mm thick, 10mm deep 56mm long (could have been a bit shorter... but that would alter the inductance for that DC resistance, so stick with 56mm for now) coils were wound to give as near to a square cross section to the wire bundles as possible to maximize magnetic coupling, so they are ~3mm thick and wide (4mm would work as well for sure. there is 1mm of core above the top level of the coils. the wiring as I said is series. And, although I'm not sure if they are in or out of phase, that is something you could test after construction - keep your options open. here's the driver up close and personal: http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m15/col_012/angleddrivercloseup2.jpg and here's the circuit with a pick for scale http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m15/col_012/toviewwithplectrum.jpg ok, if there's no published full diy sustainer design available (driver coil & circuit) & a lot of issues with battery life to do with the simple ones - I think I'll park this one up and wait until someone comes along with "here's a confimed sustainer system, the coil is this spec & this is the the circuit I recommend marries with it"....else I can see this being a big time sump (& spare time is what I don't have) - back to dabbling with stompboxes for now (they normally have confirmed schems, BOMs etc). Thanks once again. If you just want a working sustainer, you would be better buying a commercial unit. cheers Col Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irky Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) Thanks again....actually, since you've now given your coil driver spec - and therefore I have a complete design to build towards - I may well now have a go! If you just want a working sustainer, you would be better buying a commercial unit. I just wanted to build an overall DIY sustainer system to a known confirmed build - but it seems that there's always just a lttle bit missing (& then a lot of grief!) ...I'm surprised that there isn't a complete build package for the whole system (a bit like when you make DIY stompbox). Nevertheless, what you've provided is great - ie nice concise technical info that didn't take me all morning to read - many thanks. Edited November 29, 2011 by irky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 Thanks again....actually, since you've now given your coil driver spec - and therefore I have a complete design to build towards - I may well now have a go! thats great. good luck. do you have a breadboard to build it on first ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkAvenger Posted November 29, 2011 Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 pete, maybe your right.... back to email, sorry guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billm90 Posted November 29, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 29, 2011 arg.... So i tried checking the ohms while winding my coil. (burn the coating off and sanding it) The ohm meter threw a fit giving me every number possible. I am guessing my battery is low. So I went with 190 winds. too many. Once I soldered up the driver, I found I have 12 ohms testing it again. Have to soak it, and unwind it a little. It is fun learning how each bobbin or DIY blade coil is a different size, changing the length of wire you end up using, thus changing the ohms. Going to have to nail this testing process down. I went ahead anyway and tried it out. I got some faint reponse from the B string this time. Broke my E string off. The A string rings out like crazy. I have the magnet loose, and I found that you get different results as you play with the driver set up... When I hit the fuzz button on that first act practice amp (no volume control), the harmonic mode reposonse is awesome on the A string. However I get 1/2 the fuzz sound through my main amp(I am using a clean sound). I dont think it is being picked up from the bridge pickup, That is a different sound. I am guessing by the split wiring possibly...(one to jack, one to driver circuit) defently going to play with this more. Even if I cant get the higher strings to respond like the lower, that A string gives me some cheap thrills. I would say 1 second after tapping a note, I get the harmonic to ring when overdriven. when not overdriven, it takes about 3 seconds. I think I like harmonic mode much more then sustaining. Everytime I flip the magnet, I get some different goods or bads when using it, Sometimes it wont work till I fiddle with it, Other times it is more responsive. It is a very percise thing which concerns me when I do finally lock it all down. I hope I have it right. I also broke the lead off my practice amp and have to figure out where it went. All in all, the usually frustration with playing with DIY electronics, and the reward with when it does work. I just have a ways to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 30, 2011 Report Share Posted November 30, 2011 arg.... So i tried checking the ohms while winding my coil. (burn the coating off and sanding it) The ohm meter threw a fit giving me every number possible. I am guessing my battery is low. So I went with 190 winds. too many. Once I soldered up the driver, I found I have 12 ohms testing it again. Have to soak it, and unwind it a little. It is fun learning how each bobbin or DIY blade coil is a different size, changing the length of wire you end up using, thus changing the ohms. Going to have to nail this testing process down. that extra 4 ohms will be significant! DC resistance is only part of the story, a more important parameter is impedance, which in the case of a sustainer is a combination of DC resistance, capacative reactance and inductive reactance. The problem is that most folks don't have the kit to measure the inductance (from which impedance can be calculated), so we go with a DC resistance reading. The capacitance is easy to adjust - just tweak the output cap. The reason why the baseline driver spec works is because the coil inductance, resistance and the output capacitor together form an LRC circuit in which the resonant frequency is near that of the open high E string - the most difficult to drive. Additionally, the bandwidth of this circuit is in the region of 1000kHz - exactly what we need to cover most of the guitars range. look here http://www.calctool.org/CALC/eng/electronics/RLC_circuit here's another really good calculator: http://pr.erau.edu/~newmana/imped.html plug in a resistance, capacitance and inductance, and this one gives you overall impedance, and phase shift ! If you change any of these parameters, you will have to find other ways of tailoring the drive to match the response of the guitar to the sustainer. Ok here's the point to all this babble your extra DC resistance equates to about 50% more turns than the required spec (either for Pete's coil or the twin coil I use). Inductance increases with the square of the number of turns, so if ~126 turns would have given you 8ohms and an inductance of around 1.2mH (assuming the correct wire guage and a suitable core), 190 turns would give around 2.7mH, Plugging 12 ohms and 2.7 mH into the first calculator, the resonant frequency is now about 220, and more importantly, the bandwidth is reduced to 700Hz (If you reduce the DC resistance to 8ohm and keep the inductance at 2.7, the bandwidth is reduced further) The resonant frequency can be corrected by switching from a 220u cap to a 100u, but the bandwidth is not so easily sorted! To demonstrate the effect of the reduced bandwidtch, lets use the second calculator I linked to to look at the impedance at the extremes of the range we are interested in ie. 82Hz and 1000Hz: with a 220u cap, 8 ohm and 1.2mH: the impedance at 82 Hz is 11.5ohms and the phase shift is -45 degrees the impedance at 1000 Hz is 10.5ohms and the phase shift is 40.5 degrees with a 100u cap (better match for 2.7 mH), 12 ohm and 2.7mH: the impedance at 82 Hz is 21.65ohms and the phase shift is -56 degrees the impedance at 1000 Hz is 19.5ohms and the phase shift is 52 degrees (at ~300 Hz, both have an impedance of close to their DC resistance, and phase shift close to zero) So you can see that in addition to your extra 4 DC ohms, the extra inductance, pushes the impedance up dramatically at the edges of the required frequency range - beyond what an LM386 can effectively drive. The phase distortion is also worse meaning that less of the energy getting to the strings is actually helping drive them, due to the phase shift. Anyway, enough. My point is that the difference in number of coil turns can make a significant difference to the success of the device. Everytime I flip the magnet, I get some different goods or bads when using it, Sometimes it wont work till I fiddle with it, Other times it is more responsive. It is a very percise thing which concerns me when I do finally lock it all down. I hope I have it right. hmm, it almost sounds as though something is broken - a bad solder joint, or some fault in the coil ? It shouldn't be that sensitive to 'fiddling', and it shouldn't jump between not working at all and working quite well... anyhow, keep at it do you have a breadboard ? if not get one, they are not expensive, and make circuit tweaking MUCH more practical. Col Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Our Souls inc. Posted November 30, 2011 Report Share Posted November 30, 2011 why do I get the feeing that I'm the only one who feels like this: when reading about sustainer projects? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted November 30, 2011 Report Share Posted November 30, 2011 why do I get the feeing that I'm the only one who feels like this: ... when reading about sustainer projects? LOL :-D awesome clip forget AGC and bi-lateral drivers, all we need are two hydrocoptic marzel veins and a drawn reciprocation dingle arm ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Our Souls inc. Posted November 30, 2011 Report Share Posted November 30, 2011 why do I get the feeing that I'm the only one who feels like this: ... when reading about sustainer projects? LOL :-D awesome clip forget AGC and bi-lateral drivers, all we need are two hydrocoptic marzel veins and a drawn reciprocation dingle arm ! you musn't forget the lunar waneshaft......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkAvenger Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 HA that video just made my day. Now off to source some pre-famulated amulite for my base plates ; ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.