psw

There have been multiple threads contaminated by this "circuit" thing but few have offered anything practical. I've given all the mods required, although they are available in the data sheet, to keep an LM386 happy at high power including the zobel network and cap between pins 1&8 and for biasing the circuit for better high string response and balance by using a lower output cap...and there have been a few other circuits offered as well. The internet is full of non-loading guitar buffers and preamps to feed such a power amplifier. Perhaps Mr Bolero would like to join his geographical cousin in debating the issue... MajorWoody There is no "one way" or best way to do this, I have shown many successful variations and ideas that could run of low powered generic circuits like those presented. The 'sustainer project' was not ever intended to be some 'tutorial' but a general thread on the kinds of things I was working on and to encourage ideas...not tell anyone how it was to be done. However, I was asked to present something that could work with simple amplification and possible for DIY and presented those ideas, Galaga Mike took it upon himself to show his implementation of those ideas. I have shown a tutorial on how to make a driver to this design, full step by step photos...that is the only tutorial presented by me of that nature. Perhaps you might consider taking the issues you have with tutorials up with him, or perhaps other prominent members here who have been successful and have yet to offer similar in terms of circuits or drivers or installations or sound clips in order to compare. But then, there is no obligation and if people are not capable of working these things out without having things presented in 'storybook form' then perhaps they don't have the gumption to complete the project successfully. There are so many variables that some personal ingenuity is required...looking up a suitable preamp and data sheet should be the least of the problems. This was never presented as a basic project for novices. Every time someone does present things, such as col's circuit or mine or Gmikes or any other...some clown comes along in short order with the EXACT same complaints and criticisms such as "he is piss" as with MajorWoody who spammed the other forum the day after this thread was spammed and offensive remarks deleted. That thread does contain one version of cols 'pre-amp' for instance and all the mods and implementations of his and my work are presented over the years. The Driver is the key, making a driver that will effectively drive all the strings without phase compensation and complex circuit designs is the purpose of this simple design suitable for DIY construction. You might want to look into such areas but a low powered amp running from a battery is itself an "automatic gain control" in that the gain is intrinsically 'limited' and while all this may seem to 'simple' often the better ideas are. As for wanting to be seen as "clever"...I think you misunderstand the psychology or projecting your own. I sought to share the things I was working on and there was interest in it, now it seems to only attract abuse. I don't need the approval of others, people can take or leave this project...and my time attempting to help those that may need it is only out of generosity on my part. These kinds of posts offer nothing, there's not even a hint that the project is being attempted, just more 'noise'...much of it from people professing to know better but fail to come up with the most basic of amplifier solutions, only complaints. Most of this leads to misunderstandings over very basic ideas and what would be "ultimate". Power consumption...mine still works and the battery last changed in february! Criteria is lambasted but it is so important to judge the success of anything on it's own terms or in relation to others. My criteria for my own projects are wide ranging and extensive...FF has different criteria...col had yet other criteria....it simply can not be compared on the same level. One is not better than another, each is simply a different solution. For me aspects like battery power and the non-reliance on a battery for the guitar to work, low mods (meaning tiny circuits and driver solutions), ease of construction, dynamic performance, neck pickup and passive switching solutions...all these and others continue to inform the solution that I came up with. If battery power isn't important, there are plenty of suitable power-amp solutions and you can go to town with compressors and limiters, similarly if you don't mind digging enough room into your guitar to install it...same with the neck pickup, perhaps that is not important and that has been a trend generally. In the end, dozens of these things have been built successfully and examples of them working well on all strings and frets and modes are available to hear. Want a super controlled even sustain, try something like col's approach...what a more dynamic effect, perhaps more like mine...but what point is there to log on for the sole purpose of asking over and over about circuits and tutorials and suggesting that there is some obligation on anyone to hand feed the internet or that the motivation be assumed to be for self gratification. If that was want it was about, then surely i or others would do what Gmike did and do a tutorial for you...or if you have a better idea might contribute something with your first posts instead of regurgitating years of the same under various names...just a thought

You guys do realize that the sustainiac river is a completely different animal? It is a bi-lateral dual coil, broad laminated core pair that functions as an active neck pickup as well. Each coil is less than half the length of the standard pickup or single coil driver. FF uses a full dual coil driver where as the basic and tested DIY formula is again different and designed to avoid phase cancellation circuitry intrinsic to the sustainiac and other commercial systems. Basically the "work" to produce a formula for the most basic design that can do the job with the lowest power, mainly to avoid noise and EMI problems, is what is presented and can be heard to produce harmonics and even polyphonic sustain and harmonics throughout the entire range of the instrument. If you change things, such as to a thicker wire, you will require more turns and radically alter the resonance and response characteristics and slowing down the alternating EM action...so it will have phase problems and have to be corrected with circuitry. If you use big amps with unlimited power, then AGC will be more crucial as the battery is no longer a limiting factor as to how far the thing will go...these are all intrinsic elements of the basic design. Also remember that you have to factor in the mass of each string into the calculations...the low strings are easier to drive because they are slower and have a lot of metal to work with...high strings fast and hardly any by comparison. The driver needs to accentuate those frequencies and perhaps to the circuit biased to create a good balance... In the end there is no "ultimate" driver or solution, it's all a balance between response desired and criteria that few are prepared to set out a the outset. Your minimal criteria would it seems already have been met surely? You are running a power amp from a battery, there is no getting around the fact that you are going to be drawing a lot of power from a small power source...you will never get the kind of draw that you might expect say from a fuzz box that is only modifying a signal, that amps clearly state that it alone is drawing perhaps 1/2 a watt of power..plus powering any other gadgets, filters, AGC's and such on there. FF has an entire stompbox compressor running in that thing, so it alone would kill a battery reasonably quickly before we even get to a power stage. Battery power is clearly not a criteria for FF and others and is designed with this in mind, fair enough too. Everyone has different criteria and many have alternate designs that are not comparable. The best one can do is to listen to the results and balance them with your own criteria. It's not that other formulas can't work...but hours of testing and independent confirmation over some years has indicated for the simple design (and that design alone) there is an optimum formula that provides the capacity for efficient driving of all strings with very low and basic amplification. There is maths to work it out as FF and others have quoted...but as yet no one has really run the figures (if even possible without a given criteria) to find that balance or compared apples with apples...that sustainiac uses windings on a unique and novel dual coil design that works in two functions has no bearing on what might be optimal for another completely different design, I would have thought was obvious. It is should in no way be seen to be some kind of "gold standard" and the windings are only relevant in conjunction with the core size and length (less than half of the DIY model or a pickup) and how it is wired (I assume parallel, i forget for the sustainiac) and the wire gauge specified... If you are generating a lot of heat out of an LM386 that indicates you are wasting a lot of power and having to drive it far too hard to get the effect... Of course the pickup signal going in radically changes things as FF points out also, so many variable that there is no way to determine some kind of "universal rule" anymore than one can say there is an "ultimate' pickup...

Yes, but most efficient only according to some arbitrary criterion. You have to settle on a frequency range. Maximizing gauss output at 2 kHz or at 500 Hz ? FF Really it's all about balance. You need a driver that will drive all the strings evenly and "efficiently"...this generally allows you to save on "power" if that is a major concern for your 'criteria'...clearly it isn't for everyone. My tele has had the same battery for months now, the sustainer in a DIY version unlike commercial versions only draws power when the sustainer is on. Other options include rechargeable 9volt batteries... If you need a lot of power to drive the strings, then you may expect a fair few EMI problems. This kind of thing may be addressed with multi coil drivers like FF's or the comerical systems. If you have been looking at the commercial systems a large component is frequency dependent phase compensation. The DIY designs I have pioneered work towards drivers that do not require that complexity of circuit. I have the feeling that much of the AGC and other suggestions of performance are based on supposition...it really depends a lot on what kind of performance you want. Something like Col's is extremely controlled and even where as mine are far more dynamic...but both produce sustain and harmonics on all strings. For me, too much AGC tames things down far too much. The original idea for the DIY project, encouraged by LoveKraft, was to concentrate on the driver design to avoid circuit complexity and to that end several designs were successful. One might also want to understand that the battery itself is a "limit" on the circuit and as such an AGC in itself...along with small amps...and should be considered an integral part of the circuitry and not simply a power supply.

"efficiency" relates to the effectiveness of the driver, not the current draw on the battery. The limits of a battery can itself serve as an AGC. The more efficient the driver is at driving all the strings and frequencies required, the less "power" is required and usually this leads to less power consumption. Adding AGC will typically save power...unless you use a complex compression circuit which will draw even more. Use a powerful amp or needing it means your driver lacks the efficiency and you have to go multi-coil like FF and others to reduce EMI so this added power can be harnessed. More power, more battery drain generally and more problems...or a requireement for separate mains derived power to get the headroom and power for the circuit and any reasonable battery life. If that creates the effect after and fits the individuals criteria, then it's valid. Of course, most DIY sustainers also only work when the sustainer is in use while a commercial system uses power to simply work at all...when the battery dies, the whole guitar dies. As this is a specialized effect, the amount of use is less and so my tele has had the same battery in it for months and still going strong. The "ultimate' sustainer is a myth...it all depends upon the criteria one places on all aspects of the system and how you want it to sound and respond. Comparisons with sustainiac are completely irrelevant really. Something like my design is a completely different beast and approach. The designed a bi-lateral driver and compensations circuits for it and optimized it to work as both a driver or an active pickup. There is no 'ultimate' spec other than that which works within the criteria of the individual. Setting the criteria is the only way to judge success and everyone's ideas are different beyond the basic sustaining of all strings. Battery life may not be a factor at all.

"Efficiency" isn't about the power draw or battery life...it is how efficiently the driver can drive the any of the strings with as little EMI and unwanted squeal fizz or noise effects it can put out with the distance between the driver and the source pickup. Often people only make matters worse by increasing power as this only increases such effects generally and require something like a multi-coil driver to counteract some of these effects. Mine tend to run on very low 'power'...watts. As a result they have remarkable battery life, especially compared to a commercial system that draws power even when the sustainer is not in use. However, If the circuit were running with more stuff like a sophisticated AGC or the like, it might pull more power and kill the battery sooner with the same driver...so an efficient driver is separate from power draw. You can't have a figure across the board with the approaches so different and different circuits in use. I've been going to lower and lower power with mine and getting cleaner headroom, while others have been advocating more powerful amplifier circuits. The "Ultimate goal" is not power draw as FF and others use remote mains derived power to get the effect they want and run the circuits and drivers...the goal is to produce the effect you want whatever your criteria is and for many battery power is not a necessary criteria. I use a battery because for me it is, as is the ability for the guitar to remain passive and fully functional even with a dead battery or none at all. But, the battery is also a component of the system...it is itself a limiting factor to any circuit and works as an AGC to stop things 'running away'. That's why I have always advised that people use a battery to test their work to be realistic. A wall wart might have a consistent voltage, but it allows an unrealistic current compared to a battery. Not sure where you got your winding figures from, but for a given wire gauge and core size and bobbin depth and consistent winding style and potting method...the number of windings will always be the same for a given resistance. With such a low count coil, any factor that influences these things can have a dramatic impact on the number of windings. The basic design is able to tolerate a fair variance necessary for a DIY project though...but if you use a 3mm steel blade as I tend to like you it will be more 'compact' than something built on a single coil Pup with say a 5-6mm coil...it can make quite a bit of difference to turn count. Turns though is only one small factor and one shouldn't compare the driver as if it were a pickup which has a different function. You might find that with maths and theory you come up with an 'ultimately' efficient driver that has not the range to drive all the strings as well because of resonant frequencies or perhaps is of some ohmage that it won't run off a common say 8 ohm amp circuit....it's all a balance and remember the basic project presented is for DIY which means it has to tolerate a lot of variances to be successful...which the basic design does. A fernandes system dictates the input pickup as well as the driver to keep conditions consistent and guarantee performance, in DIY systems the source signals are always different in power and frequency response because the pickup choice is limitless.

I have a feeling that you are misunderstanding a bit in these assumptions. It is not as simple as a reverse pickup for instance. Further, even if you follow this analogy, the idea that a driver couldn't produce 'sustain' on all strings and frets would be similar to suggesting a guitar pickup could not reproduce all those notew either because the guitars range is quite wide is it not? As for efficiency, this is also a misunderstanding...it isn't about power draw in this context at all. This relates to the system and particularly the driver's design's ability to produce the effect with the least amount of magnetic output that produces unwanted effects such as EMI and squeal (oscillating feedback). You could make a system that drives the strings theoretically...but does so with so much magnetic output that the pickup is swamped by the signal of the driver over the vibration of the strings themselves. Many times sustain is produced with a lot of noise and this aspect is not understood. Many times the proposal is to simply increase power seeking more powerful amplification, running little amps beyond their capacities, resorting to remote power as the limits of the battery are far outstripped...all this does is to try and overcome the inefficiencies of a system and making the problems worse. The aim is to provide the necessary energy with the most "efficiency" to mitigate any adverse effects interacting with the pickup driving the system. The main thing that allows this to work at all is the distance between the driver and the pickup...any attempt to move things closer together...such as a mid position driver...will require even more 'efficiency' to avoid adverse effects. I can't tell you what the figures are on battery life...the estimates given by sustainiac can't be quantified either really. Every DIY design is different. One of the unique things about the systems I have proposed is that it only draws power when the sustainer is in use and the guitar operates regardless of there even being a battery. A Commercial systems cant and the guitar is disabled...this makes 20 hours a bit of a concern and certainly not great in that context. With intermediate use, my sustainer guitar has had the same battery in it for some months now...but if I were to run the thing continually it would result in a significant loss of performance over time. One thing that seems to be overlooked about the battery being a limiting thing...yes it is, it in itself provides some "limiting" to the system and so is itself a form of AGC and designed into the performance characteristics...it is the component of these simple designs. That a battery powered low powered amp can't produce unlimited power can actually be a good thing. Clearly it is not because many rely on remote power to get the results they do with alternative systems. So, that is not the "ultimate goal" there at all, the goal is performance even if this requires external mains derived power sources. However, my early systems worked with a rechargeable 9v battery and still can and there are other options as well. As to the performance thing being 'patchy' this is of course a preemptive presumption. There needs to be parameters set to make such a judgment. What are your criteria for performance? You can get powerful sustain and harmonics on every string with a simple design and circuit...audio examples abound. SO clearly it is not a requirement to go further to meet this criteria. Every DIY system is and generally is quite different...the pickup input into the system for example and the quality and diversity of the build are major factors of diversity. A basic system produces the effect of a very loud feedbacked guitar with predictability...this can be done of course acoustically regardless of the pickups under specific conditions. It will do so on all fret positions and strings regardless of the assumptions and poor preforming examples (we generally only hear about systems that are having problems and not built to spec). If you want a very even response or something that has a fully polyphonic kind of performance...then you are talking of a different beast. To do something like that, you would need to find a way of driving each string and preventing there being any interaction between the six drivers...but as I say, a completely different beast and beyond what something like these simple systems are designed to do....or indeed commercial systems such as the sustainiac. It should be noted that earlier simple non-AGC examples of the basic systems of mine were compared directly with an example of a professionally installed sustainiac and while 'different' regarded as favorable...and many features and performance advantageous. Some of this is to do with what people want from such a thing and what is delivered. The sustainiacs advanced AGC and such makes for a fairly "tame" kind of sound compared to the more dynamic "alive" performance of the basic systems (words of the owner of the sustainiac guitar making the comparison) and advantages such as the system being completely independent of the passive guitar, choice of pickups, lower mod and more flexible application, smaller circuits and lower cost were seen as advantageous. But these things are a matter or personal preference, my systems for instance accentuate this dynamic performance intentionally as a personal choice accentuating 'effects' such as harmonic bloom. Col went to extensive lengths to achieve a completely different performance that was very even and avoided much of this...as was his personal preference for sound and response. Both of us achieved the minimum criteria of 'sustain and harmonics' on all strings and frets. There is no "perfect system" or "ultimate sustainer" that seems to lie behind many of the disputes on this topic. Really though, this is a DIY project and much of what you ask can only be done if someone actually does the work to make something and do such tests and set out the criteria for what they regard as "ultimate" in terms of performance and such. Things like the number of windings is nowhere near the variable range you have suggested and I don't know where you got those figures. For a given size of wire and core and depth of bobbin...the results will always be pretty much the same. As a highly variable DIY project, to get the "resistance" required (which itself is within a general range to get the most efficiency from the circuit proposed) there will of course be variables. The criteria is that it can produce the results required and this it can do regardless of these variables. When people go outside those specs of course they don't get the expected performance and the result is a lot of "I can't get this to work" posts and a reluctance to see that they have failed to a known formula and getting the results one would expect and reported from the development of the formula in the first place. Also as A DIY project, all this research is also DIY and if this kind of data is required it will take the DIYer to do the work to produce it and set their own criteria for success.

As it is, the bobbins are wildly different in particular the nature and size of the core. This accounts for the difference of a few windings difference to get to 8 ohms with a specific wire gauge. For all the maths people have at their disposal an alternative 'formula' is still not apparent. I've always suggested to use resistance as a guide with a specific wire gauge and bobbin depth and on a wide variety of bobbin core types and size this seems to consistently produce the desired results. Unless one were to say that a DIY'er "must use" a specific spec bobbin turn counts can't be used effectively. Even when examples of various types from the earliest to my telecaster that used an ordinary steel 3mm rail core on 3mm depth core...very few if any have chosen to duplicate this very simple scheme. If everybody did, and took care in teh windings...then the turn count could be a given (although would require checking for variables like wire stretch). A machine wound commercial application where everything and the end application is consistent...then of course you can have turn counts...and this is exactly how the wafer coils are built...but then that is not DIY. As for optimum... Exactly as FF puts it...there is the minimum that one should judge if the project works correctly. All notes sustaining, no squeal, low EMI or none at all and no noise, no loading of the guitars output, no alteration in sound from the original guitar are some of the obvious ones... These kinds of things are the criteria that one has to set to gauge the success of any project. I have still more extensive criteria on my work...low mod to the original instrument (so, will require small circuits, the retaining of the neck pickup, minimal switching solutions, drivers that can be surface mounted or combined with the neck pickup some how, battery powered with decent life, reliability, etc)...but sustainiac and others perhaps have slightly different criteria or similar with different solutions (using the driver itself as an active pickup, electronic switching, etc) The basic design and spec has been tested over many years with a variable turn count accounted for by the size of the bobbins core (what is the "optimum" size and material here??) and the skill of the winder. If built correctly, it does work fairly consistently despite such variances. I don't recall a winder to spec ever reaching 200 turns so I think the variances are a little overstated...where did these figures come from?...but with such a low turn coil, the bobbin size and how much it grows (winding style) makes a big difference on the final turns. The main thing is that once has found that all these things have shown to work despite the variances...and by 'work' I mean meet the criteria that FF describes...when the formula is followed. One can of course follow a completely different path than a simple single coil driver, use different wire, multiple coils...reinvent the wheel...and still meet the criteria of 'working'. If the work required to do this is 'better' or optimum is hard to say...not sure that I can hear that it sounds or behaves conclusively "better" or even that much different...though for some solutions the wider criteria might not be met. I think the thing to do if this bothers you...is to make a few and count the turns. Otherwise, really hit the math and see if you can work out exactly what would be the most efficient...the thing is for all the tests and tools offered up like this, the "solution" seems still missing from such activities. There used to be the same kinds of debates over the core material as well for similar reasons... But hey, DIY project, there is going to be vast differences...sustainiac just simply order a specific design and count from a transformer company somewhere, it's just the inevitable result of commercialization and not a reflection that they have the 'optimal' design but are working to consistent product design.

Then there is a problem with the amplifier circuit...do you get noise even when you just run the guitar through it? A noisy circuit will have serious effects on performance...it might sustain a little but some strings fail or significant problems with getting enough power before EMI and squeal. Distortion is one thing (for crtics of teh LM386), but actual noise will be sent out as a signal that is only going to mess with the signal that you are trying to send, that tuned to the strings playing. Glue fumes...PVA is a waterbased glue without harmful fumes...it is a primary reason for suggesting it along with long working times and gap filling properties. In all 150 odd turns should have only taken about 15 mins to complete...but I am glad if you ended up with a decent result. More details and photos of what you are actually doing can help...for instance, how are you connecting things together, minimum length cables, shielded cables etc? Noise can easily get in from the usual sources, but it sounds like something is amiss in the construction or design of the circuit...which circuit are you using, how is it built, how is it connected, etc

I tried to send you a PM but it is disabled and you have no email address. I'd suggest sending me an email for a reply...psw

Thanks... Otherwise, I kind of disagree on your points to a degree. "angle" provides pressure on the nut, if straight the pressure is all down and so there is your friction surface, add 'splay' and you are adding in addition to this friction to the side as well. Now, on a fixed system, this is ok...but with a trem in constant use, the bend in your wire is constantly being straightened and bent as it rolls. Splay provides extra side pressure to the slots as well as downwards force...it's importance is with the tremolo system. You get tension over the nut with the angled back headstock, this is a given on this kind of guitar. The rollers are free and supply no extra pressure there....just relieve the side pressure from the nut itself. A lower headstock angle may well be a good thing, as on a fender, but this is the nature of this guitar design. The guitar was played without the rollers for some time before adding them to the build...a roller nut like an LSR was not practical for this build...but even there side pressure would have adverse affects, see the wilkinson link from when they made them and required much the same idea. I think you are missing the point on the bridge locking thing. Kahlers are a full floating device and come with this 'hybrid' capacity that works well to create a fixed bridge...my thumbscrew mod is to make that possible on the fly. It certainly is not to do with tuning stability! I haven't broken a string even with these trems for years, but all the same, there are techniques that require a fixed bridge as opposed to a floating trem. One that I do use for instance is 'oblique' harmonics...bending harmonics behind the nut while others ring through...a trem plays havoc with that kind of thing. Similarly, any altered tuning like drop D is going to throw the whole trems balance out...unless it is locked! Interestingly, I think I hardly ever have used the locking prefering it in trem mode, but it is good to know it is there! Another aspect that I have been working on designs for is using a kahlers fine tuners as a kind of palm bending thing for a b-bender like effect. This also of course would require being able to lock the bridge to be successful...with this thumbscrew thing, it can be locked or unlocked and used as a trem guitar...so having both as required with a few twists of that thumb screw. The guitar is extremely stable tuning wise, a bit of vaseline on the rollers helps I've found, once tuned out of the case I generally play with the trem for perhaps 3-4 hours without requiring retuning to any great extent on this or my tele with a similar system. So...the features are not a necessity...but they are advantageous. Perhaps others could chime in if my assessment is wrong, but tests on the guitar have shown these mods to be highly effective.

Some interesting 'off the wall ideas' but I think you perhaps need to look into the science of all this a fair bit and make some 'definitions' more closely... In particular you need to think about "reinforcement" and "damping" of vibrations... The waves in a guitar note are complex, you can reinforce some harmonics and dampen others, this will give some of the tonal character in a guitar for instance, what is 'preferable' tone...well, that's more subjective...there is no such thing as "more tone" if that makes sense... Something that reinforces a band of frequencies may create "more sustain" but that same thing could be dampening the sustain of another frequecy... I don't think there really is a "more wood" theory...basically, if something is stiffer then there is going to be less interaction between the strings and the instrument and this might give you more sustain, but then affect tone or other aspects...some designs can reinforce certain frequencies and so appear to sustain longer... Remember also that there are some physical laws, beware trying to make a perpetual motion machine. Without the infusion some energy, say in an amplifier, you can only get so much out of a system. Anyway, a huge area of study there...not sure that your application has any merit, but studying the science will let you into what is at work...

Magnets are cool and clever and an option...but with a surface pickguard like a strat as others have pointed out, so easy for there to be slippage....recessing, well that's tricky and a different look... I was intending the magnet thing on my LP as an option, posted recently but wasn't put up for view (hmmm) but as an alternative, you could consider this... Looks the same, and the recessing helps...but instead of magnets, I just used some double sided tape! How often are you going to need to take the plate off...perhaps if there was a battery in there it might be ok, but that wouldn't work with a strat anyway unless you take the strings off! Select a suitable tape (not too aggressive) and just stick it on with a few pieces as appropriate and not so close to the edge that you risk the finish. With an appropriate tape it can be simply peeled off, if the tape loses a bit of stick, just add bit more on replacing the guard. Same look, less hassle, reversible, no cost, no slippage or risk... Over thinking the magnets and pickups thing...perhaps need to get a better understanding of how these things work and such...their are magnetic fields all around us all the time

Absolutely...this is supposed to be 'project guitar" not "build a guitar" or "aspiring luthier"... For me I have entered once and came in second with a refinished squier with innovative features and hardware...it depends to a degree on the guitar and the competition that month as much as anything. A build thread certainly helps...the end product more so...a build thread gives more exposure to the end product, so you get double the exposure at least. But a lot is just personal preference, some people might like a 'metal machine' and vote that way against another guitar with more work or better skills or a name perhaps. Some are going to like a 'classic' others think it 'passe' a good twist on a classic, likely to be more popular than something that people already desire...no point in complaining, if you really want to "win" in an election perhaps one needs a campaign and a 'product' that is aimed at the mean. A build thread works though as a 'marketing angle' and anyone considering being a commercial luthier should be aware of the marketing side of their perspective business. A good product and exposure...and a build thread gives an unlimited amount of time to expose the details and work involved and to hype up the features. But there is also the, "I would want or play that" factor...so if you put a lot of idiosyncratic bling or minimalism or whatever it is, if it does not appeal to the 'masses' or at least the idea of it, it is unlikely to win. But absolutely, the main thing about GOTM is to show your work...simple as that. The winner is a popularity vote for the type of guitar and if it catches imagination of the voters...it will do well...even a squier. Personally, I like to see a wide mix, it is good to see that refinished classical for instance...it shows the whole scope of what the forum offers, not just a place for an elite of builders and such, but all aspects of the craft and at all levels. It is good for people to see that you don't have to 'build' a guitar to participate and that a lot can be done without going to that extent, often with more effect. It might not 'win' but it is there to see, so why not. In past years we saw more of it and less of this kind of BS...a lot more of a mix and the progress of members in the community. Not many are going to want a stainless steel fretboard or an excessively thin neck I should think, but it is good to see the thing. One wonders if the builder who complains about not winning themselves have reservations about their end product. If you have done the work to produce something that is exactly as you wished and the guitar for you, who cares if you win...but if the aim is only to win approval in some no prize GOTM thing, well...perhaps a bit more strategy and marketing is required. As for the long time some guitars take to reach their conclusion. I take pictures that I think may help, but I don't generally find that everyone's 2c are required for a successful result in the actual build. For me the build thread comes a little later and when decisions are made and successful...then i will post those aspects...and who knows, perhaps the completed project will see it's way into GOTM if it is interesting enough. But, everyone has their criteria for voting...some perhaps on the build quality even if they may not like the guitar, others on the outcome even if the guitar was made with a prepaid neck and body or show how far you can go with an existing guitar (my thing, by necessity).

Are you sure you had a 'split' switch on that PRS? They originally ahd a so called "sweet' switch that was just stupid...simulates a long cable or something daft! It's a good idea if you really want to get into this kind of thing to get a cheap guitar and try out all kinds of things as a test bed...go nuts and see what works...then refine that into what works for you and how things sound. Gives you a chance to 'go nuts' and get a lot of this kind of thing out of ones system. If you want a look at a huge arrange of wiring schemes, you can't go past DGB Studio Discrete is good, works well on my new LP... So, no visible switches, but 22 combinations! These switches can be fiddly though, sometimes a simple toggle is better or even necessary for some things (if you need more than a 4pdt)...a 'blow' switch might be better with a toggle than pulling on knobs while trying to play. And there are other things you can do with pots...the so called 'spin-a-split' tone control uses the tone pot to go from split on 10, HB around 8 and normal tone roll off beyond that...without any switching. A good treble bleed on the volume control can add treble as you turn down...turn up the amp, cut back on the guitars volume and you have more volume and fat midrange in reserve. And, different pickups have different qualities, some sound good in split or parallel, others don't. If interested in getting some 'different' sounds, there is a lot to explore. I'm quite taken with the parallel sound on my LP's bridge pickup, fairly cheap overpowered HB's but come out with quite a powerful bright single coil sound without the noise in that mode. If you thing is distortion though, really there is so much to be said for the EVH approach, one pickup and the volume marked as 'tone'.

YES But you know, got to set these things up discretely and something usefully. My new LP has 22 "sounds" similar to the Jimmy page thing...but all 'hidden' in push pull pots...with them all down it is just a standard LP and you cant see it is there. Pull the bridge tone, it's in parallel, so a good single coil sound with no noise, pull the neck tone, and you get a nice straty like rhythm sound to switch back to from a full HB mode say for lead with the bridge...pull both...and you get both coils cut for more fendery sounds in all positions. Of course, you just tend to pull the things for the song you are about to play, setting teh guitar up to produce the sounds you want. Also, highly interactive for the pickups that you use...not everything sounds good split... The out of phase thing can be very hollow, or you can add a cap to 'half phase' to taste...similar with splits to maintain more bass from an HB split by rolling off the tone on one coil with the switching...so many options. One control switches both HB's in series...that's 4 a huge 4 coil HB, a powerful thick sound but sounds quite jazzy as well...but again, so many options...the main things are that you do it discretely, don't mess with the function of the guitar and there is a point to all these mods and they are reliable and useful...not just a 'gimmick'. But, it is good to avoid to many switches or to think that you need to play switches while playing teh guitar...properly done it has a lot of character. There is something cool about a single pickup guitar with nothing as well of course...there is no "need" for all this stuff...but you can get radically different and highly useful sounds out of a single guitar and pickup sets with experimentation if you learn what you are doing and work with the pickups and guitar rather to a formula. But hey, if you have had those options and you just stock to a few sounds, then perhaps it's not your thing. Unless you play relatively clean, you aren't going to hear a lot of difference unless you do something completely off the wall...like full reverse phase and it just sounds "nasty" like some of those old LZ records

You might find this thread of interest at GN2 regarding 50's vs Modern wiring on LP type guitars... JohnH tecnical stuff on 50's-Mod wiring As I found on my old original LP, there is a deep cut in treble as the volumes are turned down...I installed on that guitar and others like it treble bleed caps to compensate, the tone being brighter as it is turned down. On super bright fender like my tele, it can be good to leave them out so that as you turn down it takes off some bite of course. I played the old gibson through all of my 'live' career (such as it was) and found the layout to be really useful. Turning off one pickup made it super easy to turn the guitar off as required and between sets...also makes a good kill switch effect al la townsend if required. But, in moderation (not all off) it does provide a good mix of sounds so you can quickly go from a full on lead sound to something more sedate or inbetween and mix different tones as well on the fly...handy if you are doing vocals as well. Any mods like coil splitting also become handy, mixing a split neck and HB say and mixing to taste with volume and controls I often use to this day. In many ways a single volume control as with a fender is preferable for me, but this layout which i recently returned to on my new guitar, certainly has it's uses.

Thought I might throw a few more "ideas" used on my LP project... Along with the roller truss cover and the TusQ graphite nut, locking tuners are important... Westhemann gave me a tip on these sperzel locking tuners and they are excellent for this project. Unlike the EZ lock wilkinson's I tried (hence the obsolete screw holes) and figured would be ok if I was using a locking nut. These satin chrone things match the knobs and look there (mix of satin and chrome on this guitar) and are surprisingly light...plus, they work and cheaper than some by a pinch...cheers wes Here's a closer look at the bridge, pickups and knobs...again, the chrome and satin chrome going on...bit of tortoiseshell in the high output 'buckers to tie in with the head plate thing....all kind of subtle touches but important to make for an overall "look". You can see one of the knobs pulled, very discrete... The back plates are matching cream plastic, matching the binding and pickup rings...the camera makes them look a bit 'white' but they are cream and kind of blend well. Traditionally these are screwed in, however...having considered something 'tricky' like magnets to hold them on as an alternative...or just using the traditional screws...I went instead with double sided tape for a clean look. You can always wedge them out if required, but how often does one really need to get into those cavities if the wiring is good? The wiring is interesting too...perhaps next post...pete

Thanks D1...I have found you and the OP to be obviously sensible and courteous, and obviously not included in the above rant...it's not such a hard thing... The really offensive stuff was removed, the member apparently permanently banned (though I suspect this wont be the end of it) but the damage remains...it is important that people know what is going on and take that into account before judging my 'attitude' let alone making wild psychological assesments of my personality...especially when they are asking for my assistance! So... I don't know all the details of your guitar, other pickups, etc. Take a direct line from the bridge pickup before the controls...hot and ground...and run it off that. For testing, just poke them out of the control cavity or scratchplate or something. Shielded cable is best for cutting back on noise if possible. If you have other pickups in the guitar and you ahve a mind to, completely disconnect them from the circuit of the guitar...otherwise, just test the device well away from all of them, probably up near the 12 fret or even further away...holding it above the strings like an ebow. The bias pot is there on the F/R design only to keep the transistor happy and provide half voltage per side. Follow the instructions for this circuit to measure this with the multimeter and forget...it is not a 'control'...so you won't 'hear it' as such. The reason is, with this circuit, that the transistors are all inconsistent and require a resistor to adjust it to work correctly at half voltage per side. Besides that the Fetzer is actually designed to distort mildly (not the best for this project) and provide a moderate gain...it is actually a solid state emulation of the fender valve preamp stage, hence the name. The bias thing is one of the main reasons I didn't like it, confusing and takes up space...but that is the design. I am not sure how 'loud' the thing is, but it should be like a low powered practice amplifier with a suitable speaker and a good battery. Check those two things, these circuits consume a fair amount of power, so the battery can easily lack the guts to do much if old. It requires a magnet to work. My tele's driver... ...is exactly the same as the basic and original construction, and hence yours...except that it is built without a bobbin. The core is ordinary steel, the magnets 4 craft store magnets super-glued to it, all poles up the same way...the coil: solid, with 0.2mm wire to 8 ohms 3mm deep. One reason to make it transparent was to show exactly what the thing is and there is no silly 'secrets' in the thing...other than what it is. A ceramic pickup magnet, poles all up is ideal. Rare earth magnets are not, alnico would be ok, if you can find the right size and polarity kind of thing. You don't want the thing too strong or it will attract the strings themselves just by being there and affect vibration, even tuning. Something akin to the power of a basic single coil pickups magnet strength is idea...better yet, use one for that purpose. But, as you can see, my telly used 4 in a line ordinary ceramic craft magnets...10 for $2! The banana effect is common and does not effect performance. My original did much the same as the bobbin was a bit 'flexible'. It's the nature of winding asymmetrical coils really...but it looks fine, and it doesn't take long to build one once you have the idea. The bottom looks very flat for the magnet. so that is the main thing...make sure the magnet makes contact with the core material. Hope that helps...

You may have given the impression to some starting out that you understood what you were doing and working at a sufficient level to give advice that has some validity. Well...you were asking me directly and with lots of quotes a lot of questions which at first I tried to answer...till you revealed that you 'planned to commercialize your system" eventually and asking me questions so that you could work towards that...that is your business, not mine... This is in the public domain, under my name...I'm not asking for policing, the fact that it is public domain itself makes it patentable and the originator documented. I have never charged anyone for the information and research I have given for public use, and in fact anyone can replicate a patented design for that purpose if they have a mind to. Are you suggesting that I should not have replied to your posting or tried to help when you directly asked me questions by name? That post with all the personal abuse form that "other guy" was taken down within minutes of it being reported...interesting you know the general thrust of it before it could be seen. This is exactly why such posts should be left up to show exactly what I have to put up with and why the sustainer subject is not welcome or safe to talk about here...because it is outright abuse and at many times stalking now extending across multiple forums, also alluded to in the last post...along with my personal life and other false accusations. If there was not a problem with those posts or the many others...they would not have been taken down...if PG believe that I am over reacting to them...return them for all to decide...by making no comment it just fuels the controversy without the evidence. I doubt anyone would find that kind of thing appropriate...but the moderators can decide on that and perhaps tell me if I am 'just over reacting' which is what is now implied. ... Yes, everything went alright till I stopped answering your huge posts asking me to provide information towards commercializing the thing for personal gain, asking me to do more work that actually helping you get the thing going itself. But, hey...you chose to come here...when people like you address me by name and quotes in posts, I try and help. Further, this thread is not yours...you could contribute to it if you have something to say, but if it is misleading like wrapping a pickup in aluminium foil" to stop EMI...what am I supposed to do? You have already declared that you have not read the original work here as 'too lazy' and all I am doing is having to retell you the most basic principles that already exist if you are looking for them. If I have confused you with other 'guys' who email me from Indonesia about this project, well then...that guitar is kind of distinctive...my apologies there. I'm not going to go through my entire emails and look at all the guitars on there to confirm it conclusively. You have suggested that you just ground the other pickups, that means you are with this kind of circuit, connecting the batteries negative terminal and one side of the driver itself directly to the ground plane, and the ground going directly to your effects and amplifier. This does not sound like a well thought out plan, again, I question it, I have nothing to go by, no details of what you are actually doing circuit wise (sound familiar) other than it uses an LM386 which would necessitate such a situation. You have reported things like squeal, for all I know you are getting a lot of noise, or masking it with distortion and or effects or NR in the effects chain. Regardless, a lot of work has shown it to be less than advantageous...but as you say, it is easier to do it the way you did. If it works for you, that's fine, if it doesn't blow the input stage of your effects eventually, that's good too, if you don't mind a bit of noise, more power to you on that front. As I say, not details, I can only go from experience. Very few people have actually built this thing into multi-pickup guitars other than me, so most don't have to deal with the bypass and other complexities. That other guys vid of my desing, the pickup was just sitting there, no connection at all...it's all conjecture till you do it, but hey...if it works for you, that's great...didn't for me! ... Like the moderators, I too am unpaid, but if you think you could have come up with this on your own...or indeed, fulfill your ambition of some original work (apparently without reading any of the source material or what has come before, let alone the 'patents')...then go and live the self described 'lonesome musician' thing...and do it on your own, ok! As for the other stuff...this kind of thing is not helpful...it is largely kids that are naive, it has to be said...poor work practices and lacking quite a bit of grasp of the deeper concepts. Some people are obsessively malicious, much older and mining every post of mine here and on other forums to 'have a go'...that much is clear. This kind of thing doesn't matter, a kid can make this as well if not better than another...I give it freely. However, making a business out of it, having original ideas that pass muster, giving advice without this kind of understanding and a lot more experimenting and research than making a single device off of a known design that has been replicated many times but had problems with. Similarly me informing the poster about things that are towards that aim, not that of building a sustainer for himself. Declaring that they are 'too lazy' to read the source material and expecting me to explain it all again, is likely to piss anyone off...it did me! And no good complaining that the original thread is too long, that was not my intention or within my control. I originally came to PG on a different thing, started that thread to show what I was working with and get some help...completed that project getting results on the second page, published tutorials separate from it so people could make replicas of a working model...I am not "poncing" around as has been suggested, I am under no obligation to assist at all. I do a lot more than make 'sustainers' and contrary to beliefs, this is not the most important thing I have done nor do I feel the need to invest thousands in it to make it a commercial enterprise nor the $30K to patent it for 3 years plus lawyers to defend it. There are already several very good commercial systems, hand building these things takes time, let alone the R&D plus sales and support...how much would you guys really pay for the 'commercial' version of such a product anyway if I were to "sell it". Come on, think about it...I certainly ahve, it is a business decision...just because I could and can, does not mean there is a sufficient market to support it or make it worthwhile me dedicating my life to slaving over a hot iron, endlessly supporting people who can't install it properly, or not prepared top pay a reasonable cost for such handy work and design. The same people would pay $300+ for some 'boutique' stompbox far easier to do, but research shows they wouldn't for this when they could get a fernandes or sustainiac for about the same! These are rational decisions and life choices...it is not a determination of the worth of the thing or an indication of my design that I don't follow that route. I did go significantly in that direction, I now chose a different lifestyle. My life is my business...it does not require criticism or comment! ... I am sure it is a nice guitar, and I am sure you are happy with your sustainer now that it works so well for you...thanks for that, my work and yours is done in that regard. As for standard of work, if you aspire to make a commercial product or to do proper work, I think you would be wise to consider working at a bench, using appropriate quality materials, get a little more organized and systematic...and get off the floor. For your own use, you can do what you like! ... As for others, I can be and are contacted directly for information on this subject since the abuse here started and because things continue in that way. PG may own the material once it is put on this board, but the ideas are date stamped with my actual name...that's enough to show prior art. I am not asking anything from PG and have been grateful for an avenue to share information. I have done so, it is all there, almost all 'problems' are as a result of not following the instructions correctly, going off on their own mis-informed tangents, or making fairly basic mistakes. The result is that I am just repeating again and again the same information and advice. # Build a non-loading amplifier module, test it with a speaker to see if it works. # Build a driver to spec with the right materials and solid # Test the device with the circuit well away from all pickups...over the neck # The 'harmonic switch, simply reverses the driver wires # When that works, think about modifying and integrating the thing into the guitar. # If more than one pickup, you will need to arrange a bypass switch, lifting both ground and hots from all pickups (usually the entire selector), switch to the bridge pickup only, and connect the power...4pdt switch can achieve this generally. ... As for circuits, I am under no obligation to show all of my own designs...many peoples aims to commercialize it is enough to not disclose the later ones publicly. Guidelines and many pages and actual designs including the original circuits I used have been disclosed. This design has been shown to work from a couple of dozen circuits from me alone, including quite a few alternatives to the LM386. As for the LM386...At no time did or have I suggested that this chip or the F/R or any amp design is necessary, that is entirely the users discretion. The design, like the ebow patent, calls for any suitable amplifier. I have confirmed as have others that the F/R and others can work and that I do use the LM386 and that I have disclosed the more common modifications for use on this project that I use with my driver design and the effect I seek. All freely available. But the choice is yours! The LM386 is a cheap, practically indestructible, widely available industry standard audio power amplifier. It is not designed to take the input impedance of high output pickups directly, so will require a buffer. Adding more gain before it will distort it, running it at full power will distort it. How it sounds with a little speaker shows that it works, does not mean that is how it will react with the driver attached. As a general rule...the battery limits the power and clean headroom of any amplifier, less power will result in less EMI and fizz and provide a cleaner headroom. Any excessive preamp gain will only overload the input of any power amp chip, most guitar pickups once buffered will be more than powerful enough if not excessive on their own without gain. Things like my telecaster run off of about 1/4 watt at full power, enough to have the strings 'bounce the frets' (the limits of their travel) and sustains powerfully all strings on all frets in both modes. It is set up to 'bloom' on the lower notes below middle C as a preference. The battery in it now was last changed in February and still remains good. It happens to use an LM386 but it is not necessary, but certainly there is no 'instability' if you use the data sheet precautions for the chip (not found on the RoG designs). However, you could get similar results with other chips, it is simply a choice...and not mine to make. If I were to say, here is 'the circuit' it would just invite trouble or some SA using a different chip (it is just an amplifier, there is no magic in it) and calling it their own. To make an original design for this device takes work, work I am not obliged to 'give away'. Plus, there are an infinite number of choices, and preferences. Someone like col for instance, wanted a different kind of response or 'effect' than I do and set about designing a circuit to achieve this (coincidentally using an LM386 also, as does the ebow btw) and showed a lot of innovation...that circuit too is freely available. I have no responsibility for the F/R or any other RoG design nor endorse the thing. I have suggested mods to help stabilize it more and get a performance more like mine, it has been shown to be up to the task, even in it's basic form, many many times. Using it or any other circuit is a matter of choice...your choice! ... If seeking to improve or design your own or vary this design, then it is wise to have in mind what it is that you are aiming for. I suggest that as a base line the least one should do is create this as designed and get it to work at it's optimum before modifying or going your own way...gives you a standard to work from. At the very least, unless you have done this successfully, there is no basis for rational criticism or to suggest improvements as these would be based entirely on the assumptions about the original's deficiencies...so complete nonsense...and shown to be so again and again. With that then, you should set criteria for what you should aim for. Do you want a very controlled response and even sustain? You will need AGC of some kind. Do you want strong fundamental sustain in the lower strings? You may require an amplifier that can cleanly and accurately reproduce notes that low. Do you want a 'bloom' from fundamental into harmonics? You may want to look into filtering, the use of the 100uF output cap for instance creates this effect on mine on lower notes. And this extends to other aspects too. How much modding will this take to the guitar, will I be sacrificing anything if I have a sustainer (like say, the neck pickup), how do I want switching to affect things and where and what controls do I want. How 'reliable' do I want it, must the guitar work as normal without the battery, do I want to risk a BTL or other more 'modern chip' with heating overload switching that will shut down in seconds under this load, how big do I want this circuit to be...how easy to install...etc...etc... All these kids of things affect my work, and so there are some compromises and different approaches taken along the way to achieve it. Finally... This is a DIY project...that means Do It Yourself. I have made this for others, but without the guitar in my hands, so much depends on the ability of the person installing it, that I don't want the hassle unless I know that the person knows what they are doing...these are very few...and that they have a project that interests me...also rare. I help people out of charity and do expect acknowledged for that, it is a cheap price to pay for the amount of work put into this by me. Strong critics of this 'attitude' you will note that badger me about my 'secret circuit' etc, have not revealed at any stage their own designs or helped at all int he DIY side of things. My design is proven to work if built as described and with adequate quality. I don't need to personally prove it, because it has been replicated many many times over many years...it's not my word for it, it's a fact. My design is obviously not the only design possible, the one I describe is the most basic form, I have shown and use many variations on this, as well as other kinds such as multi coils systems all the way to hex systems. I was asked to make a simple sustainer system for DIY by members here in 2003, this is what I came up with. It is unique in that it will run off a simple amplifier and is deceptively simple in it's construction. It does work, I continue to support it for people with little experience to build and it works. My obligation is nil. However, out of charity I try and help people and this just blows out threads, especially when people continually hijack threads that are begun by others and then descend into ingratitude for that, promote their own designs and 'product' and odd ball theories (wrap it in foil will fix everything apparently, it has come up a lot!)...instead of starting their own threads...and then invariably descending into personal attacks towards me for some reason...largely fueled by malicious behavior because someone doesn't like me. Obligation to 'like me' is also nil, as is my obligation to like others if they set out to 'piss me off'! All I am suggesting is that if you want my personal help, you show some respect and gratitude for the time spent,...if not, my obligation to help is nil, as is my obligation to be 'nice' about it! See...now that's gratitude...if you don't want assistance, quit asking me...if you have something to offer, publish it in all it's detail (resizing your pictures would help)...and if it doesn't work when others follow your advice, you help them...if you think you know what you are doing!

Sorry...Hank came back to pour out his persona abuse and I hope permanently banned for his efforts...however, I do object to deleting exactly what I ahve to put up with as a warning to others...so yes, meanwhile It looks ok dark one... That 'banana effect" is very common as the stresses on the ends are significant...a stronger bobbin would fix it...but it is certainly good enough to work and looks fine...got a suitable pickup magnet for it? As for the circuit, if it is not working as an amplifier, it is not going to work as a sustainer...clearly something is not quite right there. Sounds like a problem with the buffer/preamp stage, are you sure of the transistor and it's legs out are in the wrong place...the GT8 is being used as an alternative preamp perhaps to overcome some problem. I haven't built the F/R and so have not had to bias the transistor...but if it does nothing, that is a concern. Trim pots area notorious for having faults and not for constant use...still they have their uses, perhaps check that they are working. The workmanship looks fine, but looks don't count for much if the thing doesn't operate as expected, a GT8 may even have enough to power a small speaker, so not the best thing to have in the circuit as a test. ... Anyway...I don't have a problem helping if I can on people making these things for their own use at all, I think I ahve been pretty generous in that regard...but if my personal life gets much more or any attacks, I will not only be not helping but may even close my photo account details removing all photographic material and making much of the information here useless, forum or not. It is a shame that the outrageous accusations about me were removed from the public, because in another setting they would be criminal in nature. I am sure I have not heard the last of it, but I am pretty tired of this topic being such a hot bed of angst and then turned on me for trying to help without any form of gratitude at all...and now this mornings outbursts (now deleted from view)...all aimed to have this subject banned from public discussion, and been very successful at it to. If people think they can do better on their own, then they shouldn't need to follow me around and ask me questions. I attempted to help therizky for the longest time by email and now publicly. If people would prefer that no one answers but people who have failed to get any results, that is what it will be reduced to be. Anymore crap, and I'll have to see what I can do personally...but otherwise, the advice the mods have given me is that I should not participate at all...so who else is going to chip in...hmmm, therizky with his naivie ideas from the tiles of the kitchen floor where he works?

Shut it down already if this kind of abuse is going to be tolerated...and while you are at it, make visible the crap that I I have to put up with from that guy... This subject is clearly not 'safe' nor welcome on this forum...I held back from trying to help, offered more of the same for what it was worth, though in recent times the information has been returned for all to learn from if they choose to....but even there, all it gets you is ingratitude and insults... so yeah, shut it down, perhaps ban the entire subject again as just to much trouble...and do something about the personal abuse...my personal life is not open for public ridicule and no one should have to tolerate it, and few would...clearly not appropriate and I don't see any lessons learned at all by the person responsible for it...nor a respect for the forum or it's operators.

Your words, and I appreciate that you said that you would need to come up with your own design and and driver before selling it (aka commercializing it) and then proceeded to ask a lot of questions from me to help you along that path...despite there being thousands of pages already covering it... I'm sorry that you can't see my perspective or that you can't see that I have spent hours helping you and others to achieve the goal of having a pretty cool device for your own use. I am glad you have achieved that... Words like...it's just a wiring game...you have already been using the idea that your circuit, for which there are no details really even while you ask details of mine, as 'your circuit' and as if it was somehow unique... Because as soon as you have the thing working, your first thoughts are about commercializing the thing... No, I didn't miss it, but I have seen it before, perhaps you don't realize that you suggested that some of this at least is "just wiring game"... See...lets reel off a whole list of generic LM386 circuits (by other people), all the same thing basically and built to distort and run a speaker...a completely different project...and make a judgment of the single component on that...the LM386 is the "pit of death"...well design something else, I didn't say that you needed to use an LM386 to anyone, I just suggested people could run my driver on any suitable amplifier (that's my project, I've never built any of these generic systems or endorsed them, even the F/R was someone elses idea taken straight off of RoG)...and I have said and shown details that in fact, that is what powers mine, and detailed the output caps and stabilizing filters. Now the last person suggesting this kind of thing had all kinds of grand plans, but in the end started promoting the tillman on an Lm386 (so, no original work there) with actual pictures of what others might expect to purchase...and the driver morphed closer and closer to the simple design....my design. Surface mount, well some copy that, or the combination pickup driver kind of thing...there is a lot of stuff in that sustainer thread of devices actually built. And, I am all for people working out something of their own...but more and more the questions are abut me explaining why 'wrapping aluminium foil' around something wont help with EMI or what do I actually use in my circuit, the secret must be there...or what are the dimensions of the tele pickup when it is repeated ad-infinitum...non of these questions actually are going to help people build their OWN designs....what it leads to is the idea that it is 'just a wiring game' and substituting a few different parts here and there, a slight alteration of the wire gauge (perhaps) or amalgamating a few ideas taken from other peoples work say from the stompbox world...then, bob's your uncle, there's your design. Surface mount is not the design, the design is based on specifications and performance...that it can be surface mounted or applied in other ways (say, on top of a pickup) is completely incidental. I stopped sharing when the first response to the latest 'wafer coil' which is only 1mm thick was along the lines of "I could knock those off" even though it took me a year to get it to that stage...easy to do things when someone has the concept, does the work to make it reality and shows it to work isn't it? ... Yes, but not empathy... patronizing remarks aside, there is no hint of acknowledgment in what you were actually saying. Really, well I don't know where you are from or anything about you (though you clearly know me far more)...but certainly you have been quick to judge me even though I have been helping you in quite good faith for some time and actually got the kind of results (or towards them) that you were seeking...that's quite a chunk of work on my part you got without cost...hmmm...and I still haven't heard much of a 'thank you' in all your vitriol aimed at me for taking offense at what you did say. Almost impossible english aside, do you think that I am going to help you in this when your stated aim is to commercialize your own design...clearly you are asking me to invest my time and expertise in helping you with such concepts...so, more of my work? Oh, different wire gauge, a different magnet...so many times a little tinkering on the concept and it is born anew as suddenly 'completely different and completely my own work'...even to the 'pit of death' sentiments about the LM386 which was your choice to use...a different amp or buffer (usually cribbed from some other source, not your own) and it's suddenly your idea...or someone just like you. Then, when all sustainer subjects are removed from the internet, there will be the complaints that the information is necessary for your success, so bring it all back! Along with personal attacks towards me and how I am 'judging' people or you don't like my response or are rude about it. You don't complain when I am hand feeding you for free and little gratitude, perhaps it is a cultural thing...maybe you are like this with your parents (whom I am perhaps even older) and teachers or just generally in life. However, since you are specifically asking me for information and my time, it all comes of a bit rich...and ungrateful...and potentially exploitative. ... So, what would be nice, since 'life is good" would be that you, instead of heading straight for the personal ambition thoughts and sharing that with me (along with a big post of further questions to help you on that road) and not sharing 'your work' with others as I clearly have done now for years...is to show some appreciation... But instead, it is just a diatribe of personal attacks and getting all upset that I might think something of you and how I rush to a judgment on what you actually said and question that...and a bit of hokum superiority "here we taught ourselves to be..." and a nice follow through as to how despicable you find me personally, which you held back while you were getting what you wanted from me... Perhaps a bit of acknowledgment and gratitude would have been in order...perhaps instead of asking more questions so that I do the work to craft 'your design' further in the appropriate direction and clear up your misconceptions for you. "round here" it would be the appropriate response. Or perhaps sharing your original work, that would be good too, give back to the community that helped you along. But, I read back, and I don't see acknowledgment or gratitude, I see a lot of questions and re-quotes from me patiently trying to explain some things in good faith. Now, you wonder why I might be 'pissed off' at this kind of attitude, and attitude repeated again and again. Not a hint of empathy or understanding of my position, not a word of gratitude just personal attacks and patronizing remarks. Again, difficult expression to understand aside (I appreciate that english is not your native language, but I have worked extensively with non-english communities, so don't even think about playing a racist card, ok), you have a hint at the 'process' being important, but what you don't seem to get is what the 'process' is. The process is work, actually learning and doing stuff independently and openly in front of peers, many of whom may well have done more work and acquired more knowledge and even been prepared to put this out there to help you. The process is to take on board this, and work it with your own ideas and prove it experimentally, to open those things up to scrutiny and to take criticism and not head straight for the personal attacks and swear words and self deprecation (contextualized as if I were thinking that way of you, then accusing you of judging you for your own words). ... Look the process is this...1% inspiration, 99% perspiration...and peer review and results. Now, you could start with research, obviously I have given here 10's of 1,00's of words and information and photos and design ideas over many years...but have a look at the patents...all cross referenced showing all the other ideas that it was derived from and how it differs, that's one place I started...and lucky for many, linked a lot of that work so it could be replicated. But, you could go back further to basics, what are you trying to achieve, what are the forces at work, what influences these things...that's when you start getting proper textbooks and reading still more about the basic concepts. Then, you set about putting some of these ideas into action. Wind some basic coils, build some basic circuits, get some results. Now, analyze those results, learn what makes a circuit work, know what happens if you run 100x the power into the front end of a chip like the LM386...think about alternatives, learn about what makes a circuit or component unstable and how to stabilize it... Then, see what you have got...is it demonstrably different from what has come before enough to say that it is 'your idea' or just a variation on an existing idea? Then, you can perhaps start thinking that you have something that you can truly call 'your own' and start refining it. Only then could you in all good consciousness even mention words like "im planning to commercialized my sustainer for other fellow guitarist here"! ... Look, empathy is important, and gratitude...neither is in evidence really...just words like 'retard' and 'bullshit' and '****' and the rest...bad spelling and obscure expression and questions....and advice about how I should behave and feel and think and how harmful my words are when I say something that you don't like...but not for me when you do say things that are of concern...such as "im planning to commercialized my sustainer for other fellow guitarist here"... It can be frustrating, but still I have tried to help even though inevitably the response seems to be the same. I'm glad that you have made a sustainer that works, I suspect that if you did actually do the work to refine it, it would come closer to the basic principles set out....just as your work improved when you started to consider the aspects that were pointed out to you so far. But, do you really think that you could have come up with this result without the work that I put into this, the hours of frustrating work helping you and others, or the incredible charity I have shown through the process of sharing it with you? I don't think it is too much to ask for a bit of acknowledgment and gratitude for all of this and a little giving back. But what I get in return is further personal abuse now you have what you want, more questions to get more of what you want, and putting words and attitudes into my mouth based on your own personal and immature assumptions about who I am. You do realize that you are talking to an actual flesh and blood person here, if you want something from this person, perhaps try a little humility and gratitude instead of attacking and assumptions...seems like a lot of 'taking' going on, and not a lot of giving. And when I point it out, you go into further attack mode.... Think about it.... ... Lets face it...again, this thread which was not yours, nor in the appropriate section...has been somewhat hijacked in typical style of late by other people such as yourself therizky and ended much the same way, with personal attacks towards me...making it almost impossible to help the actual person who started the thread and others also. I believe that I have helped you significantly or at least tried to publicly and elsewhere over some time...have you not considered your last thread went unanswered for a reason? As for 'fear' of your work...perhaps people don't realize what you work consists of and the quality we are talking about... therizky thread Now, compared with my work... I really don't think there is a comparison or anything to fear from you...except ingratitude and personal attacks and a lack of empathy and humility! telecaster thread See, I think it is important that people here know the level of professionalism on these matters in case they should get the wrong idea and from where you speak about it...and perhaps you might consider changing your attitude a little and cleaning up your work practices and going back to basic principles...you can start with an apology if you like!

Oh for goodness sake...how many times must this come up like this... Over seven years I have openly developed and shared and answered the same questions over again, only to hear that the whole plan was not to enjoy the bounty of my good will, but to 'commercialize' the concept for financial gain!!! My design, the most basic of many, is a driver with the characteristics to run from simple amplification. I have not been specific about the actual circuit design because any compatible design will work with the driver design, it is that simple...that is the design. So, any design that matches my own and therefore works, and runs of basic non-loading amplification is essentially my design, not yours, and unethical to call your own by simply changing a buffer stage and suggesting it is your own. Now if you can make up your own that doesn't violate my work and fernandes, floyd rose, sustainiac and all the rest out there at the USPTO...well, you might be onto something...though it would still be riding the back of my work and others here like me! Plus, there is so much you clearly don't understand...and that is misleading to potential customers. Things like this are rediculous!!! Aluminium, copper, shielding paint...any of this stuff is 'non-magnetic'...electromagnetic interference EMI will pass right through this as if it isn't there. Worse, it could induce the EMI signal in the conductive material, right around the actual pickup. Such materials are designed to combat RF signals....sigh... And then, well...I'll just boost the signal and it will be my own...distortions don't lengthen anything...they just turn the signal into a square wave...have you ever seen a string vibrate in a square wave?...no, because it is not possible. So, the signal driving it, is completely different from what you are expecting the string to do. It is the right frequency, but saturated. It might work, but is it efficient, does it reduce EMI and noise...no, it makes everything worse! ANd, it is not 'original' to think so....dozens have made this mistake! Grounding everything is not a solution either...not at all adequate...but... 1,000s of words have been written on this, it is the basis of cols design work on circuits as well. No...it isn't just about battery life. When you regenerate the signal, it gets continually louder, the sting vibrates harder, creates a louder signal, and round it goes till the limits of the battery to produce amplification and the strings physical limits of vibration are met. AGC provides control so that it doesn't just run away with itself... How are you 'designing' circuits if you don't understand the basic concepts of such designs imperative to these systems? Are you just patching together other peoples designs...oh, here's a buffer, here's an amp? Is that your own work or theirs? Has no one noticed that the closer things get to the tolerances I set out, the better and more successful it is? Make a solid driver, suddenly it is more efficient...use the correct specifications and build with a bit of quality and positive results start emerging. I'm sorry, but this kind of gratuitous use of ideas and years of research to 'call ones own' really pisses me off. Where is any of the 'original work' that would be required to call something your own? Where is the understanding to even know the direction you should be going in...am I supposed to nurse you through to financial gain without even acknowledgment? So far, you have made significant errors and have a lot of misconceptions still and required a lot of help. I am glad that you have some results, but I suspect they would be even better if you followed the scheme even closer and acknowledged the work that went into getting it to that stage. Yeah, life is good...but consider the moral implications and give some credit before you start 'selling' off another persons concept...and definitely know what you are doing. I help people make their own, I encourage people to take things further if they wish...but all you have done is use my design, add some substandard ideas and misconceptions and called them your own...now really, is that fair? So...I put this to people here, should I be helping you guys at all if this is what it is all about? Someone designs and builds an original guitar and you start marketing and selling it as your own...and you defend this 'ownership' because you used a different wood or pickup...come on...the forum would have an opinion on that, and it would not be positive I am sure! So...I do know the answers to all these questions and in fact answered them numerous times and specifically. What is lacking is peoples ability to take this information and put it into practice without going off on their own tangents because they feel they know better, or in fact plan to make it 'their own'...complain when it doesn't work, alter things to be closer to mine...then as soon as you get any result, suddenly you have your own 'product'... as I say...pisses me off...all my designs and concepts are publicly documented 'prior art' even if given freely...contrary claims of ownership will be vigorously argued should they emerge. And people wonder why I keep some of my designs under wraps...this is the reason, because I am tired of months of work being stolen under the guise of a different component here or there...the real work was getting something that worked at all...I doubt that you would be sustaining away without the treasure trove of work on this forum and in the case of this specific design, my help and design work. Think about it! This is exactly why all mention of this device has been shut down removed and carefully monitored in recent times...I'm just sorry I got suckered in to helping you if you had another agenda all along!

No...th Ez lock... You can get the same effect with normal tuners by string twice through the same hole anyway...but really, they are not even a good enough quality tuner as standard in my book. I put them on my last project and they were off again before I finished it... Real locking tuners, especially on a fender type, are so much better and worth it... easy super fast string changes, no winding about the post and they are properly staggered to avoid the need for string trees... I have noticed that there are a heap of locking tuners out there now and many have come down significantly in cost...well worth the little extra...plus the quality of a better quality tuner alone is worth it.

Aesthetics are important as long as you keep functionality in mind... That Jersey girl guitar there, perhaps a little 'woody' but really just recovered HB's...lots of options there. ... With my LP I had several pickup rings, satin chrome like the knobs, chrome...but the cream plastic matches the binding on the body and neck and the back plates. The tele, well...some how I needed to mount the FWRPup and meld the scratchplate of the tele into the kahler...here's a better pic and the khaler... tele build thread took a few goes cutting out paper shapes before I came up with a solution that felt 'natural' for that guitar... ... Yeah...the khaler has become a subtle but important part of my playing these days...expensive but they work, these guitars (with the proper tuners and nuts, etc) stay in tune incredibly well. I have another LP in mind it worked out so well...sometime! With the flat mount K's, just make sure you have a decent angle as those saddles need to be a reasonable height, had to shim the tele's neck a tad and that angle is only just enough. The LP is better in many ways like that...and, I found a thumbscrew that replaces the hybrid lock screw so it can be locked down on the fly...not really practical on the flat mount as it's too close to the surface really. The bridge intonation locking screws are also a little 'domed' and a shallow angle can rub on strings and break them, something to watch out for, more angle to get more height over the bridge, or replace the screws. I ahve seen a couple of builds here where the whole bridge has been inset..that would fix it if you have enough depth in the body (need about 1" under the bridge itself) also watch the alighnment, on the 6 string version anyway, the forward monting screws are not symetrical Oh...and if you check out 'wammiworld'...I see they have some new modifications, like a down only adjustable leg...so it wont go out of tune if you say tune down a string or perhaps break one. I've been thinking, since I use locking tuners and roller or teflon nuts...might even attempt to modify the fine tuners to create a bit of a palm operated b-bender...lots of scope with these things...can you tell, I'm a bit of a fan...nice chrome work too! ... I know what you mean about the cream plastic soapbars, but it is a look and P-90s are particularly fetished these days...still, perhaps in person they look ok, and over time they may age ok. Probably a better look than black or chrome for a PRS like that. ... Oval pickups...I have seen some somewhere in days of yore...perhaps not. Not sure why variax came up with such lame designs, though I think there is a new one in the works that might be better...moved the variax control onto it's side up where an LP selector would be. ... Interesting thread MrM hope you have got some ideas...lots of options really...if you like the 'wood look' I suspect there are pickup cover makers out there...then again there are all kinds of TV pickups, tri-sonics and other stuff these days, many can be dressed up to give a different vibe... With my guitars, I just like them to look a bit different but as if they were 'meant to be' so you need to take the whole thing into account, often in subtle ways. My tele was painted the color of an AC Cobra, so I added a bit of crome, a bit of the 'cobra stripes' in the pickup plate, the tortoiseshell touches give a bit of a 'dashboard look'...all fairly subtle, but it is a 'look' and a change form 'wood' you know.