col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 26, 2012 23:25:13 GMT -5
Hi all,
I appreciate the feedback, especially as I've had to be very unspecific.
My idea is certainly patentable (with a new piece of hardware), which is why I cannot detail anything of the mechanics, the interface, or specific control options. I probably wasn't as clear about the general aim of the project as I might have been, and any details I did supply are probably lost across my various posts anyway.
The single system works for two basic configurations. Both are intended for three pickup guitars. The first configuration supplies all 17 pickup combinations (sans phase). The second, all 47 combinations, including phase.
The interface is very uncluttered and clean (I cannot be more specific than this).
Switching is semantic, logical, and consistent.
The system is completely passive.
There are no 'hanging from hot' or shunted pickups. There are no dead spots. There are redundancies, but nothing unexpected or perplexing.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Dec 26, 2012 23:51:15 GMT -5
Will it require any permanent guitar modification?
Is it limited only to 'strats'?
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Dec 27, 2012 2:17:04 GMT -5
col, My idea is certainly patentable.... Anytime I see that word, I think of Don Lancaster. Don was, and still is, famous for his outspoken views against the entire patent ecosystem. Like me, Don is an EE, but unlike me, he hasn't looked hard enough for the time to retire - he's still going at it, strong as ever - you can see his verbosity at www.tinaja.com. The thing that I'd most like to impart to you just now is your need to fully immerse yourself in how to prepare for the patent process. If you think you know how it works, I won't say anything, but I can say with equinamity that if you haven't already done it at least once, then you'd better have your Blue Cross paid up, because you're in for one helluva ride.... and not a fun one, either. To get to the nitty-gritty, I'd like to point you to Don's page on "How To Bust A Patent" (PDF file). Therein, Don lays out how to make a grown man cry all the way to the poorhouse, as he literally came to the Patent Game unprepared. There is a goodly number of other pages and PDF files for your edification on tinaja.com, should you still have the fortitude for it. Suffice it to say, I'm posting this for your own sanity (you decide what's good for you, I'm not your daddy, just your friend ), take it or leave it as you see fit. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Dec 27, 2012 6:30:05 GMT -5
Well, good advices Sum (nice tag there too...i just noticed... ) Really, you'd know I've explored this kind of thing myself col, even got a prototype in the hands oof a star and things developed a lot further on 'that' project...but economicall it did not really make sense and the patent road...woah, that's a very expensive and boulavard of broken dreams right there. You are speaking about a very 'niche' market...there would be unlikely that there is a market in forum members here I dare say and as has been indicated...even if we all bouth one, that's no way to start a 'business' and last I calculated it, a USA patent cost 30K plus, renewal every three years...plus full disclosure...and nothing to protect you from places like asia to repliacate it, probably better and at less cost! Even if there is a patent, it does not take much to 'over right it' and re-patented...then it is a matter of money to defend it. I mean, the gutiar world is full of such shinangans...you'd know this...the fernandes vs sustainica vs Micheal brooks shinanigans alone should be enough. They can even use the patent system to prevent you from marketing in their 'region' which of couse, pretty much is everywhere with the net. One thing is tio have a lot of public 'prior art' exposure...it's not 'protection' but cost s nothing and establishes prior art and might aid in market research. With some patent research too, manditory, you may well find that your idea is already done. I now start all my assumptions that ideas of mine, if any good, are already there...seldom let down. So, you can be sure that anything close will be contested and the only winner in all this are going to be international patent lawyers! Theseare the kinds of opinions and experiences that I'd be happy to share with you rpivately, I can't make an 'assessment' of potential either without specifics. But, I do know that there are a tone of 'wiring' patents on this kind of thing on the books...so not going to be an 'easy' (read expensive) case...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2012 7:37:24 GMT -5
col, My idea is certainly patentable.... Anytime I see that word, I think of Don Lancaster. Don was, and still is, famous for his outspoken views against the entire patent ecosystem. Like me, Don is an EE, but unlike me, he hasn't looked hard enough for the time to retire - he's still going at it, strong as ever - you can see his verbosity at www.tinaja.com. The thing that I'd most like to impart to you just now is your need to fully immerse yourself in how to prepare for the patent process. If you think you know how it works, I won't say anything, but I can say with equinamity that if you haven't already done it at least once, then you'd better have your Blue Cross paid up, because you're in for one helluva ride.... and not a fun one, either. To get to the nitty-gritty, I'd like to point you to Don's page on "How To Bust A Patent" (PDF file). Therein, Don lays out how to make a grown man cry all the way to the poorhouse, as he literally came to the Patent Game unprepared. There is a goodly number of other pages and PDF files for your edification on tinaja.com, should you still have the fortitude for it. Suffice it to say, I'm posting this for your own sanity (you decide what's good for you, I'm not your daddy, just your friend ), take it or leave it as you see fit. HTH sumgai I agree. As a software engineer who feeds his children out of using/enhancing/rewriting open source software, i can say only this: There are millions of brain cells burnt out there, millions of fantastic code, ideas, contributions, even our server uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=guitarnuts2.proboards.com runs on open source software, for which ... no patent is pending or even submitted. I consider it unethical for anyone to apply for a patent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2012 7:45:08 GMT -5
Well, good advices Sum (nice tag there too...i just noticed... ) Really, you'd know I've explored this kind of thing myself col, even got a prototype in the hands oof a star and things developed a lot further on 'that' project...but economicall it did not really make sense and the patent road...woah, that's a very expensive and boulavard of broken dreams right there. You are speaking about a very 'niche' market...there would be unlikely that there is a market in forum members here I dare say and as has been indicated...even if we all bouth one, that's no way to start a 'business' and last I calculated it, a USA patent cost 30K plus, renewal every three years...plus full disclosure...and nothing to protect you from places like asia to repliacate it, probably better and at less cost! Even if there is a patent, it does not take much to 'over right it' and re-patented...then it is a matter of money to defend it. I mean, the gutiar world is full of such shinangans...you'd know this...the fernandes vs sustainica vs Micheal brooks shinanigans alone should be enough. They can even use the patent system to prevent you from marketing in their 'region' which of couse, pretty much is everywhere with the net. One thing is tio have a lot of public 'prior art' exposure...it's not 'protection' but cost s nothing and establishes prior art and might aid in market research. With some patent research too, manditory, you may well find that your idea is already done. I now start all my assumptions that ideas of mine, if any good, are already there...seldom let down. So, you can be sure that anything close will be contested and the only winner in all this are going to be international patent lawyers! Theseare the kinds of opinions and experiences that I'd be happy to share with you rpivately, I can't make an 'assessment' of potential either without specifics. But, I do know that there are a tone of 'wiring' patents on this kind of thing on the books...so not going to be an 'easy' (read expensive) case... good advices, while @vmware i took a course on patents, and resarching prior art was definitely among the key notions of the whole concept. Comercial companies try to protect their ideas via patents, but they have armies of lawyers specialized in the field.
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 27, 2012 12:41:31 GMT -5
Pyrros -
I couldn't help but notice how you mention ethics and lawyers in your posts regarding patents. The two have always seemed mutually exclusive, but they're both trumped out in tandem whenever a corporation cries foul. I'm always interested in seeing how the rest of the world interprets commerce.
I have to agree with SG on the whole folly of patents these days. Anything can be dissected and re-engineered or reverse engineered and repackaged at warp speed. I guess that's a byproduct of a capitalist system. When fair access to markets is determined by a requirement for capital resources well beyond the reasonable grasp of the average human there is an understandable motivation to cheat the system. Especially when results trump integrity.
Odds are good that all your patent is going to do is afford an easy avenue for an established concern to come after you. Having been through the "we hold the rights" scenario, including a "cease and desist" letter from the Megatron, Megatron and Satan law firm, I have to say that the formula for success in enforcing a patent is like most things...the more money you have for lawyers the more successful you will be in enforcing said patent. Our lawyer at the time said we had a good case, but we'd need to bring the equivalent of 3 years worth of sales to fight them. Needless to say we just shut the doors and called it a day.
Not to be cruel, or de-motivational, but the odds against you gaining enough access to the marketplace with your idea for someone to notice your designs are slim to begin with. And whether you have a patent or not the harsh reality is that unless you have a deep well of cash there isn't going to be much you can to to stop whoever "infringes" on your design in the end.
Something not driven to any depths here is the issue of being able to bring said design\product to the marketplace. Money spent on advertising will go a lot farther than money spent on patents. Equipment and tooling are going to be another expense, and waiting "until demand calls for it" is a sure formula for disaster. Like the old saying, "We didn't plan to fail, we just failed to plan."
You also have the myriad of regulatory and legal steps in creating any business. I don't know what Country you're in, but some research on either incorporation or limited liability partnerships would also be time better spent versus acquiring a patent.
As has been said before, "The great ones create, the rich ones steal".
Happy Trails
Cynical One
|
|
|
Post by long813 on Dec 27, 2012 13:55:40 GMT -5
Your best bet may be through Industrial Design. If you think the configuration and topology of the system is unique and vital to it working, then you may be in the clear.
ID is what lets say, the iphone has on it's circuitry. It can be reverse engineered and resold, but not in that same configuration. So, the end result would most likely be a bulkier version of the same device.
... I don't think your idea could be classified for ID, but it's worth looking into at least.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Dec 27, 2012 15:39:18 GMT -5
Unfortunately I agree and have written (in my extensive way) about this kind of 'frustration' before of course...though nowhere near as much as I could have. It all sounds a little 'cynical i know (no pun intended C1)... There is a lot writeen about the patent system and how it is 'broken'....the idea of what it is about and what a great service it hase been for humanity has changed. Originally it was to disseminate technical aspects about things so that people could build apon the shoulders of giants and ideas and products 'evolve'...now it is 'protectionist' and used as a legal tool to stop development. The end result is that the person with the most money and lawyers win. Besides, how are you going to 'protect it'...etc...you need constant vigilance and you need constaqnt lawyers. Now, I'm not sure if teh idea is suchthyat you expct someone to pay you for that alone, or you are considering building and seeling the idea yourself. It's inimated that his 'thing' is some sort of hardware solution...but that am i to assume it is some kind of new 'switch'? I don't know. Ok...so, building 'stuff' is costly, and you've witness the surface machinations of stuff I have done. On a small scale, something like a circuit can be put togehter, but all the other work required to have it exist and known to a wide enough number of people, all the hand holding to ensure that enough people have the nouse to install and work it properly, all the critics for the sake of it (remember this is a traditional marketplace and/or those who think they can do better through preference make it their business to 'troll' you)...hmmm Ok...so you work out how to 'do it' and can see circuits perhaps made OS...now you are looking at 'investment'...might work, but in the mean time, you will need to do the market testing which means having it 'discolsed' and actively used by a number of people. With the 'idea that can no longer safely be discussed on public guitar forums' you've had a ring side seat as to this, and this exists right up untill today as you no doubt know. I made plenty of 'mistakes there' bu really...this is the nature of this kind of 'environment' it seems...you've no doubt seen that there are heaps of wankers in teh winggs ho will want a bit of your 15 secs of fame and themselves what to replicate any success you might have. How are you going to find them, are you really going to stop them with a piece of paper when it is some kid in indonesia (this is actually happening at the moment btw, he also clones just about anything!)... ... Now, you have also seen enough of my work to have seen or even been one of the 'critics' the most venomous being in regard to my 'secrecy' and exactly this kind of post or threads. It's a little odd to be on the 'otherside', but I can emphathize. What is not seen is important to consider, I got even more 'weird' than people might have realized. Ideas that I did work on were largely in public, but usually not in 'real time' which seem not to be realized. Before going ahead with ideas, i'd oftten done a mountain of work and made such things somewhat of a reality, at least in principle. SOme principles were such that I didn not wish to discoles the workings...these forums are DIY forums, there is an innate tendency for people to 'expect' to DIY their own versions of everything...often with a naivity that will eventually preclude it working, and then you end up with a mountain of 'it does not work' and 'help me' publicity.... But, I also did that kind of high profile thing, a profile that still exists all these years later and I still consult (for free may i add) via email all the time in part to establish 'prior art' and publically make a 'claim' that would preclude someone successfully patenting me out of my own idea!. Sure there is no 'money in that' but the meme is already out there, and the patent is not worth crap...plus, I've also done an extensive cost risk and other plans, all the way to prototype and celebrity informal 'endorsement'! The reality was that I would need to do all the work i had been doing, promote and protect it from scalpers (virtually impossible) avoid a leagal war from established players with money, weather the gathering storm of critics...etc....and I'd be sitting there inhaling soldering fumes and epoxy for a considerable amount of time at less than $1 an hour and then, having to nurse just about every user iin that market through a difficulat and advanced wiring thing....you can see here how much time energy and patience and words that we've spent on simpler things here! .... Whew...should not type so early in the morning... An example is the so called 'uber pot' illustrated earlier... This is a 'hardware' idea and it does/did work. There is a clever bit of 'design' and strong enough construction and even a pretty decent 'reason for being'. I did not 'pose the idea' other than myself and personally 'wanted' the solution in particular for a 'sustainer control' and with other application and had the guitar to do it with. Patentable, perhaps not, after all it is very much like a 'car radio' multifunction control. However, no one at all saw or heard about that idea, until it existed in reality. No one else has even thought to 'copy it. A large part of the 'protection' is that while clever, it is very hard to impossible to realistically 'replicate'. It's added to the 'possiblities for some advenurous people perhaps, in that I disclosed it. If it really were some 'miracle' I could establish some 'prior art' and all that. Still there is an example of something, I had a problem that I had a personal investment/want/ need for and an inventive spirit and the application/guitar to 'prove' it on...and this 'forum'. I made 'three' and installed them and asked the 'experts' how do I use these things sensibley...i now have a 'no mod' easy to use switching system with 3x4pdt, 3xdpdt and three pots...that is a heck of a lot of switching power. With a thread of discussions, the things I wanted did not need anything like that power and ideas that were possible were simply for the sake of using the power, not praticularly for the end result. Some people, like me' have an inventive kind of spririt. Even if we resist actually making things, we havev often though of and virually explored it, perhaps even rejected it, maybe played with the principles to some degree and put things through teh meat grinder of personal critcism and reality checking, by far most ideas don't see the light of day. Eventually someone else will stumble across the idea and I sound like some killjoy or arrogant to say I'd thought or even built such things before, just never said. Usually not said because they ahve fatal flaws, though interesting enough to actually pursue, often for years! Having some slight, in obsucre gutiar forums, some 'profile', I am subject to a fair bit of mail regarding such ideas and asking for advice. Being a sucker, i tend to perservere where I can. However, often this work is done with little to no hope of eventual acknowledgement, let alone money LOL! I tend to give this kind of advice on how to be your own 'worst crtic' and often will come across with some as a bit 'hard' because people get so 'married to an idea' there wish for something, even their ability to hear the crap in sound samles, is completely compromised. All teh best had harsh critics to their ideas, they need to go through the fire, some are their own worst critics, others lack that skill apparently, completely! I tend to set a few 'criteria'...say in this case to illustrat it... what do you want to acheive?...a new, logial, all pup combo 'thing/solution'... Why do YOU want to achieve this?well, because I personally really want a 'do everything guitar'...I want 15 secs of 'fame' on gutiar forums and the adoration of peers...I want to patent it, have a guitar company pay me for the rest of my days honouring a patent...etc... ~ if the answer are the later ones and you don't personally desire this, the only sure 'client' then...generally you are entering into a very flawed idea...if you don't want it, why would others? Have you a realistic idea of the costs of this endeavour. In this there are $$ but also, there is an enormous amount of mental energy and more so all the way along the line. Ideas also are not enough, these things need to exist, there is a manufacturing and tooling costs, marketing and research in that, cost analysis that it might be sustainable, threats from outside and to your health, costs to your living environment...and always time, time and more time! It's no where near enough to just cost out 'components' of course... ... Anyway, again a rambling 6am bit of drawling as usual. But all these things are required to be considered. The secrecy, particularly since I virtually pioneered a lot of that...well, you col like many others have had a front row seat at what that cost me, and still cost me, and how much damage just one dickhead can do, others might not appreciate that, but there it is! My advice is to avoid it. Also, because you yourself know that you are 'too close' to the scheme, this is exactly when you need to have an external and honest (not a syncophat) critic to hone the ideas still further and out of the 'public eye' is likely preferable. I've as far as possible had such people, but also some training and experience in this on myself and harder on me than even i can be on others in that regard. Call it 'ego' call it 'huburis' call me a 'mr know it all' but these things largely come out of having this essential quality and do a mountain of work and thought, most of which is directly challenging my own ideas and sucking a lot of eggs and being 'wrong' a lot of the time, some times publically, mostly privately. Anyway, make of that as you wish, and to anyone reading this, I know I am not alone in these kinds of idea, I know the patent office is filled with ideas just like this that have never seen the market place. If it requires any permanent 'mod' well that is automatically a big problem right there. We have aslo seen many such 'products' hit the market place, not to be adopted or fail in that regard. If you don't want this, then it is likely that it's not going to be particularly 'wanted' is a fair self moderating position...
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 28, 2012 1:11:04 GMT -5
Will it require any permanent guitar modification? Is it limited only to 'strats'? It could be made to work with a Strat, with no permanent modifications. It is suitable for any three-pup guitar.
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 28, 2012 1:15:05 GMT -5
col, My idea is certainly patentable.... Anytime I see that word, I think of Don Lancaster. Don was, and still is, famous for his outspoken views against the entire patent ecosystem. Like me, Don is an EE, but unlike me, he hasn't looked hard enough for the time to retire - he's still going at it, strong as ever - you can see his verbosity at www.tinaja.com. An interesting read. I was fully are of the need for it to be novel and a non-obvious solution to be patentable. I was not aware of just how nightmarish the patently process can be. This is something patent layers don't tell you. Why would they!? Yes, grim reading. Yes, it all helps. Thanks.
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 28, 2012 1:18:40 GMT -5
[quote author=ashcatlt board=wiring thread=6689 post=67185 B) I think most people probably don't care enough. 5-way switching is more than enough for most people.[/quote]
Except that there are all manner of after sale options available. This suggests that there is a good potential market.
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 28, 2012 1:22:26 GMT -5
I've tried almost every mod I have ever heard or thought of, and to my mind, there aren't that many that truly offer something both new and useful. For example, I have yet to hear a tapped coil sound in the bridge position that I find really useful. The bridge position is already a trebly one and tapping most coils makes them thinner yet. The difference with this system over other (47 configuration) system is the interface. It just makes much more sense. That's it - each player will have different preferred subset, even when the guitar is an identical model.
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 28, 2012 1:33:48 GMT -5
Odds are good that all your patent is going to do is afford an easy avenue for an established concern to come after you. Having been through the "we hold the rights" scenario, including a "cease and desist" letter from the Megatron, Megatron and Satan law firm, I have to say that the formula for success in enforcing a patent is like most things...the more money you have for lawyers the more successful you will be in enforcing said patent. Our lawyer at the time said we had a good case, but we'd need to bring the equivalent of 3 years worth of sales to fight them. Needless to say we just shut the doors and called it a day. That is of some concern. It is terrible the way those with deep pockets can abuse the legal system in all manner of ways. The only way I can see around this is I was partnered with a medium sized player that liked the product (or a parts manufacturer), but I can't see how this could happen without me first patenting it. This path had occurred to me, but I gave it little to no real thought. Yes, spend some time and some money developing the project, and launch it - stealing a march on those that would seek to copy and compete. I'm in the US, but am new here - it is an unfamiliar landscape in all kinds of ways. I'm going to have to give a whole lot more thought about how I should proceed.
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 28, 2012 1:36:42 GMT -5
Your best bet may be through Industrial Design. If you think the configuration and topology of the system is unique and vital to it working, then you may be in the clear. ID is what lets say, the iphone has on it's circuitry. It can be reverse engineered and resold, but not in that same configuration. So, the end result would most likely be a bulkier version of the same device. ... I don't think your idea could be classified for ID, but it's worth looking into at least. A large part of the design is the user interface. It would seem a lot easier to protect copyrighted material over patented material.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Dec 28, 2012 1:43:34 GMT -5
col, As seen just from this thread alone, many players, if not most of them, vacilate between 'full-on nerd' and the Luddite, depending on what side of the bed they got up from that morning. There's no predicting how the market will react to any given item as it's brought out, but generally speaking, something that looks simple/easy has a greater potential for market share than something that looks like the inside of an Apollo Lander. Just a thought, of course. Now, let me carry on a bit about patents. I'm not advocating that you give up the idea, just that you keep both eyes wide open, and perhaps devote some resources to investigating other avenues of protection, such as Trade Secrets for one. And do keep in mind that while Lancaster presents a decidely one-sided view of the whole system, said system has been going for several hundred years - which tells me that somebody must be happy enough with it. (Besides the lawyers, that is.) HTH sumgai
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 28, 2012 1:44:50 GMT -5
Sure, well if you want to talk 'privately' feel free to email, people often do, will even give a non-disclosure etc... I might take you up on that. I'll think about this some more and PM you. I do appreciate all the feedback from everyone, and that you all take on trust that my idea has some merit. If I do not develop this system one way or another, I will detail it here. Although novel in its approach, and requiring a new piece of hardware, I think it is possible for people to modify existing components to make this for themselves at home. I still think there is a potential product here - I just don't know how it might be realised.
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 28, 2012 1:48:21 GMT -5
Now, let me carry on a bit about patents. I'm not advocating that you give up the idea, just that you keep both eyes wide open, and perhaps devote some resources to investigating other avenues of protection, such as Trade Secrets for one. And do keep in mind that while Lancaster presents a decidely one-sided view of the whole system, said system has been going for several hundred years - which tells me that somebody must be happy enough with it. (Besides the lawyers, that is.) Yes, I had thought about using Trade Secrets to (co)develop this. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Dec 28, 2012 3:26:48 GMT -5
Hmmm....i don't think that most people are happy with the patent system the way it is dysfunctioning these days actually, that something exists shows no merit. I've spoken to a lot of 'players' that have been burned and so I've never attempted it. Yes, not sure of the terminology these days, but there is a very outside way one could get a company to perhaps patent in thier name and buy your idea...if they don't steal it themselves that is...but it seems to be a very outside shot. In ten years no one has ever approached me, seymour duncan unbenost to them even made one effectively without knowing in their custom shop LOL....oh well... I predict a 'hard road'...but still... regardless, no one is going to show and interest without a very good working prototype. If the intended thing includes any DIY including installation you should find someone that is willing to try and install that has basic knowledge to do the job (such as is typical of the envisioned market) but their wits about them to make notes as to how that all goes. But before all that, you need to get some people who can give you a little perspective. There are people here, including myself that would be willing to look at the idea with some dispassion and constructive criticim and so 'test' this idea privately. I've signed or had signed non-disclosures when necessary, you will probably be able to find something on the net, a specific agreement by email or scanned signed doc should be enough I'd imagine. As the response here has been fairly jaded as to things like patent systems, it is very unlikely that any of us is going to be willing to steal or invest in such a scheme so, with some knowledge of some of us, and the 'proof' of the existance of this thread to back it up, it seems to be farly 'secure' all things considered. I believe that this is a vital thing to do, even if it is perfect to miraculous, this will provide some better indication of how perhaps to proceed should you go ahead. So... outside informed consultation and opinion a working prototype proven utility with a typical user real world 'product' testing These three things are essential... Without any details, not sure what we can say further about it. Although it's often been the case or accused that I've in the past been overly 'secretive' to the point of my ideas being 'fake' I've actually always tried to cultivate the things above with people. My first 'non-discolsure' thing was actually with 'lovecraft (william love, rip) from the start of the sustainer thread and included sending him occassional 'prototypes' to validate the principles and results that I was getting as well as providing encouragment and specialist advice o things such as circuits. Such arrangements can be reciprocal too if you too share some of their 'secrets'... I also had a non-discolsure and other protections on this...as an example of how far I went... www.guilfordguitars.com/the_goblinI can tell you that it ended up costing me to do it, plus the builder also didn't get paid despite the profile of the end user. It did however put a developed prototype in the hands of a respected custom builder, seymor duncan (unknown to them) and a top flight artist for testing of the end result and with the installation process. And despite all that...it still is not cost effective enough or within my resources to make it so, let alone protect it... ... Anyway, did not know you've moved...welcome to the USA...I'll stick to the island myself, at least an idea like this sounds like it would be a practical ebay/postal kind of item It's really hard to know theough what we are talking about. The no-mod strat or other gutiar thing does 'bode well' though, sot aht is encouraging, but can't quite see what this 'hardware is'. I am aware of various things over teh years like 'starr switches' (active and various things shecter used to do way back when, some had a bit of a burst of 'light' to them but generally did not last and if anyone really profited it is hard to tell. If it relies on others to do all the work and you get a ryalty, i suspect that the returns are going to be incredibly minimal though. Have a good hard look at the way the music industry recompenses artists and the way some are addressing these things perhaps. I know one that actually is making a 'pay what you think is fair' download policy and making it work very well, certainly higher returns than the things that people get off of iTunes or even worse 'spotify'. It's always been that way too, I remember at school they had the drummer come in, in one of the biggest bands in Oz at the time as a friend and telling us how tiny (in cents) they got out of every album sale in royalties. That this system exists, does not mean that it is 'working' and the artist or inventor is typically the least recompensed. Some times there is a reason though, if theis idea is soemthing that requires a specialist manufacturing, such as a new kind of 'switch'...well, that is a huge punt and investment in an idea for anyone, espeiclaly in trying times...hmmm. It could be an opportunity if you were prepared to make them in small batches and the costs and such were favourable and you were able or inclined to go nuts lifting the 'profile' of this personally and all the rest. I think in general, that this is something that we will see a lot more in this day and age of marketing and selling and even manufacturing over the net...
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 28, 2012 6:58:57 GMT -5
I haven't chimed in on all this discussion of patent law, and I'm certainly no patent lawyer. But most of what has been said before is true. Most of the best ideas of the past 100 years or so were not successful because they were patented. They were successful because they got the idea to market first, and staked out a claim to a certain share of that market, such that those who came along later, and who perhaps copied the idea, were left "playing catch up". Remember, too, that most potential lawsuits, including patent suits, never see the light of day because they get resolved behind the scenes. With patents, often the small guy holding the patent that the MegaCorp wants to infringe can end up getting "paid off" so long as he or she doesn't insist on getting 100 cents on the dollar (or even 10 cents). And, too, there is the occasional David who sometimes beats Goliath, provided that the David in question is persistent, knowledgeable, and ready to litigate for years. Best known of these Davids is probably Robert Kearns. So, don't be unduly discouraged from filing a patent for any novel ideas. Just go in with eyes open, and realize that a patent doesn't buy you protection, it just buys you a right to sue someone.
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 28, 2012 21:15:06 GMT -5
4real, Interesting stuff. What is with some famous (and rich) people that they expect freebies. I have no respect people that have no appreciation for how most people live. I'll contact you in a few weeks - I'm busy with other things at the moment. I will have to produce some half-decent drawings. Can you point me to some free, easy-to-use, drawing software? I can produce reasonable engineering drawings by hand, but don't have any equipment now, and am unfamiliar with CAD systems. newey, There are certainly other possible approaches - I had given them scant thought before everyone commented here. Non-disclosure agreements seems like another possible avenue. All, A few posts back I mentioned that it would be possible to adapt my system to work with a standard Strat. I also mentioned that it might be possible for those who are skilled and have some equipment to make a half-decent version at home. However, for reasons I will not detail here, it would be next to impossible to produce a home-build version to work with a standard Strat without making permanent modifications to the guitar. It would be possible to make a production version that would work with a non-permanently modified Strat.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Dec 28, 2012 22:48:56 GMT -5
Hi col - if the nature of your design that needs drawing is a physical product, rather than an electrical schematic, you might like to have a go at using sketchup: www.neowin.net/news/google-sketchup-8016846Its simple 3d freeware - used by many design students and professionals (but with most freeware - there's usually a caveat about commercial use) John
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 468
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Dec 29, 2012 11:47:38 GMT -5
Hi John,
I downloaded it, but only had time to review the first demonstration. It seems like a useful and easy-to-use utility. I think I might make use of it later. For now however, I just need a 2D utility. Something that could be used for schematics (not just plain electronic circuits) that could be used to describe function. So long as I can add dashed lines, this should be sufficient (even optimal) for describing the system.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Dec 29, 2012 17:17:35 GMT -5
These days, there are prototype CNC manufactures of all kinds around that include software and such as a part of the service. Basically if you can draw it in that, it can be made out of all kinds of materials. It sounds like an idea that would require some actual 'tooling' and such...if it is some kind of novel 'switch' say. It might be worth looking into this if you can't build the 'thing' yourself...though one off anything tend to cost a bit and of cousre require a lot of effort in the preparations as well as investment. It's been a long time since I've looked into such things myself so don't have links (in old computer). I do think in order to 'sell' such an idea, that one needs at least to make the 'thing' exist in at least on high quality working form. There is though some 'potential' protection in something that is custom made though, it is a lot harder to 'rip off' should you wish to invest in your idea and sell it. I would strongly suggest that you really cost out such a venture, the risks and inclued all the time and tasks and skill that would be required. As a one man band for it, there is all the R&D, testing, prototyping, manufacturing, hawking it around, lifting the profile, getting it into prominent players hands, promotion (at least YouTube videos that are impressive not only of the thing, but the playing demoing the 'thing'...the list goes on and few have all the skills required to pull that kind of task off, nor can it be justified on costs IMO, but I am sure there are soemthat are successful at it. Personally, and of course I am working without any specifics' I ahve my doubts about the utility of the 'have it all thing' and the 'no mod' requirements are also a small sub-set of the market for that kind of ambition. As you ahve seen, plenty or people here and elsewhere don't have too much of a problem modifying guitars if they are that 'keen' and such a range of options may well be nothing more than a novelty. Honestly, while I've not heard all these combos, i don't think, I would say there will be quite a few that are virtual 'duplicates'. Further, I've not been impressed with the 'series' things that much either on a strat, it's not as if that makes it an HB, the coils are very wide and the resulting sound is quite bass heavy and ofen considerably louder than parallel. Phase might be used to calm this down, but then things start to sound even more 'alike' and with 47 combos a bit unweildy I'd suspect. In the end, there are a heap of alternative ideas about that can do a far more 'dramatic' job of making a strat sound a bit more LP like...such as the popular clapton mid boost etc. Bare in mind also that there are schemes which though perhaps don't offer quite as much as 47 but use conventional parts and can do more than one would likely require and without mods and passively. ... On my strat, I've no mods...the super switch and three push pulls handle it for 30+ combos. It cant do mid alone, but it does have a HOoP/phase switch that works in a lot of the positions (neck pup) and one whole pot and switch is dedicated to controlling the bridge HB, not something featured in this proposal I gather... for those who've not seen it... guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=music&action=display&thread=5413To me there is no compromise on the semantic/logic of the contols. With no switches pulled, it is standard strat but with the great N+B in teh center where one might expect it. You can switch quicky to the same in parallel ith most settings by pulling the volume knob, all very logical and quick. So, say the neck position, you get to go from the standard 'neck' alone to the dark jazzy 'all three' series sound' instantly. The bridge only goes to all three parallel which might seem odd, but a good way to quicky change for a light acousticy sound to full on bridge instantly too. In fact, readign that thread again, I see you ahve already noted of it that I am likely underestimated... In addition, the bridge pup control is a dual variable one, so there are more than 3 graduations to that right there! I don't think I did much of a job on teh sound clips and obviously never used all 38 combos or more....but there is this demo I noticed... "Spy Conga"soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=10409860Actually, having not heard that in a long time, it does not sound too bad. It demos the JB noiselss pus, the HOoP control (heard on teh funky scratch part) and a few other parts. The 'acoustic' like sound though was made using a behringer acoustic sim on it. As I recall that kind of 'duane eddy' bass part features the all three series 'dark tone' possibly modified with the HOoP...it almost sounds 'detuned' but it's all to pitch standard. Obviously unlike most of my demo's, it is not a 'clean' demo, I don't recall if it was recorded directlyout of my fender amp, DI'ed into the interface, quiet likely but the distortion sounds and such were done with amp sims in the software. There is obviously a bit of keyborad/piano in there, and I think that 'phaser sound' is in fact a synth. I'm sure I took notes and times of what is what, but can't find them now. Some may find it interesting to see just a few of the kinds of things possible. .... The reason for this expose is not to promote my work but to point out that it is possible with standard components to get a huge range of options, a logical order and flexibility to get 'more than enough' without permanent mods and wilth a well tested scheme and extensive support in achieving it. There are others too tha are equally valid and of course vartiations. The original MR scheme had access to a whole other pot/switch and not the effective dual coils of an HB as in my guitar. Th reason is that, this kind of option is in direct competyition and with no premium, to any suggestion that you might be thinking of. Given that there will require special hardware and so cost, many customisers may go this way rather than yours! It is impossible to 'compare' of course as we don't actually know what the 'thing' is, but in any kind of proposed venture, an analysis of the 'competition' is vital. embeber also on this very guitar (there are seveal threads trying to come to this conclusion) I ahd these 'uber pots' and all kinds of things...a huge wiring nightmare that sideline the guitar for a couple of years...and still, anything that any of us here could dream up withthis kind of switching power, never came close to the utility of the far easier MR scheme with minimal mods to that to suit my needs (mainly for the HB control and using HOoP rather than OoP for a more useful milder effect...though listening again, I can see it is a pretty phasy sound). Also bear in mind that on my guitar there, besides the splits of the HB, everything is noise cancelling. With true single coils in your scheme, noise cancelling will by necessity be all over the shop I'd imagine...this might influence qutie a few. The series things might be a bit dark, perhaps this could be addressed in some passive circuitry if the switching could accomodate it, and likely some erratic volume and tone 'shifts' through selections, particularly series and paralllel options and of course phase. Anyway, thougt I'd put that out there, the 'tune' is actually surprisingly 'good' and demos the kinds of things that such schemes 'can do'...in reality, other than this kind of recording exercise, I just use the thing in the 'standard mode', generally spliting the HB a bit to be level with the other pups. This gives me room to 'boost' this to full HB increasing volume and midrange...so a kind of passive mid boost control in the center 'tone' knob. If you listen carefully though, the more dramatic 'effects' of tonal changes are actually more from 'technique' than pickup selection. For instance picking closer to the bridge gives that classic low string 'twang' and such things are far more dramatic variations than one can get from 'wiring' IMHO
|
|
|
Post by long813 on Dec 31, 2012 12:59:33 GMT -5
Yeah...the 'toneshaper'...basically the kind fo thing I'd ensiaged, but it you know what you want...I guess it is just as easy to wire a suitable scheme. You know, most of thoese 3 pup combos I don't think I've actually heard...the more you have I suspect the more they are near enough the same and so redundant effectively. Plus, unless you play clean and analog, I suspect you are not going to hear enough difference. And of course, most 'lay audiences' don't hear any differences at all...they just hear 'electric gutiar'...you know?! Funny, I first heard about the toneshaper from here, checked the site, didn't get much explanation. Next, I vist TGP today and see someone has it in review! It's quite the piece of equipment I must say. www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?t=1192941
|
|
megi
Meter Reader 1st Class
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
|
Post by megi on Jan 1, 2013 15:37:13 GMT -5
Just looking at the link in long813's previous post, re the ToneShaper review - I am a little puzzled. The reviewer posts some before and after sound samples, and his strat does indeed sound kind of fuller and meatier. He says he has used the ToneShaper to set his guitar up with higher value tone capacitors, but it is my understanding that the cap value has no discernable influence with the tone on 10, and also only rolls off treble as you turn it down. I find it difficult to believe just changing the caps could produce the changes on the sound samples. In general, the reviewer seems to imply that the ToneShaper improves a guitar's tone, and does not just make it easier to try different cap values and circuit arrangements - but to me it looks like that is exactly what it is designed for - a nice facility, but I don't see how it could influence the sound quality. Anyway, I can't deny the difference in his before and after recording samples, so what is going on?
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 1, 2013 17:05:53 GMT -5
Firstly, it is a shame the clip is so processed and chorused...however, these are the selections...
From...
Se basically a 'treble bleed' was added to the volume control so that highs remained when the guitar volume was reduced. A different cap for the two tones with ecah having it's own tone.
Remember that this guitar is fitted with extremely high quality pickups and sounds good regardless so the 'difference' is subtle. In order to make the 'comparison' there has to be different takes before and after the mods were made and then recombined. When you look at the wave forms, the modded versions are a little louder and seemingly 'compressed' as well, so I suspect a little teak in the recording there perhaps, who knows. Just differences in playing can make that kind of difference sometimes if not careful (a little less close to the bridge strumming etc).
Regardless, there is a slight difference but in reality all the tone shaper there is doing is using the tone controls separately for N&M and B and the values of the caps and the treble bleed thing... so easily done with a few caps and wiring rearrangement for a few cents.
Howver, the real 'power' of the thing is that you can switch things about a bit without the soldering iron and has mini SMD caps and such built in so the 'parts' are already there.
This mod was very minor, a more interesting 'mod' that it would have been more capable of doing would have been the neck pup blender kind of mod that JohnH did in his new strat.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Jan 1, 2013 17:42:52 GMT -5
I’m hoping the ToneShaper is selling well. But the main issues I see with it are:
1. It would appeal to a subset if a subset of players, who wish to get involved in tweaking their guitar and rewiring it, but are not willing to tackle the soldering, but are willing to get the TS installed in the first place, which requires quite a bit of work.
2. On a Strat, the hardest part of doing a simple mod is getting the strings out of the way, getting the pg unscrewed and disconnected to work on it, and then not being able to hear the results of a change until its all back together and restrung. Such a thing with internal switches would have a head start on guitars that have control plates, front or rear, that can be opened up without affecting the strings.
How about a guitar with normal controls, and internal electronic switches to connect and disconnect pickups, caps and pots in different combinations, programmable externally with a pc via a nice graphical USB interface, so you can set up any wiring scheme you like on each of 5 switch positions, save it to the guitar then unplug and play? The electronic switches would need to be low impedance when on, but 100Ohms or so would be OK I would think.
John
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 1, 2013 18:14:58 GMT -5
Any converntional strat has this 'problem' hence I was attracted to my squier Wirinf like this allows a bit of 'tinering' before the install and o hear it. It is possible by extending or leaving long the pup connection (or some kind of connectors I guess, but I worry about these kinds of things compared to a solid solder joint in use) with a 'standard strat'. My old test bed had a 'connector' to remove the PG and was routed such that I could remove it with the strings on (no overhang, lafger routings and such)... For the electronic switches, you'd ahve to ahve some kind of power to keep them 'alive'...might only need a watch battery or perhaps a small lithium thing to recharge by the USB. These things could I guess be built into a 'custom' back plate for USB editing and recharging as an idea, keeping the 'mods' and look to a minimum. It would otherwise be 'passive' but perhaps one could use a better battery and have 'active' options to if going to the trouble of having all this electronics in there, likely requiring SMD and commercial production technique to fit it all in. The 'limitation' is still in the 'switching'...perhaps Col's 'thing' addresses this. Your recent strat mod accesses the best additional sounds without much moding...the N+B and N+M+B and with variable control. The MR thing in my guitar adds sacrifices the 'middle alone' for the N+B which is far more useful and desirable IMHO (though, on a true SC strat, lacks noise reduction, but then so does the M only) but with push pull switchs a huge variaeity of sounds with conventional components. But with the 'tone shaper', you seem to be replacing all the pots with theirs, caps to taste (do these make much if any difference with the pots on 10?) and a few other options like blending (though, the pot is the same so not able to be optimised for value (my strat needs 500Ks) or 'no load' and that kind of thing. In all though, I think that a true customization is superior...but it does rely a little to a lot on knowing what one actually wants. This si where the TS despite it's limitations, I guess, allows one to make such decisions. Each guitar and pups and player are going to want something different regardless I am sure.
|
|
megi
Meter Reader 1st Class
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
|
Post by megi on Jan 1, 2013 18:46:20 GMT -5
Thanks John and 4real, I do appreciate your thoughts - I guess that the apparent change from the before to the after recording takes may not quite mean as much as first appears. The poster does seem to me to be implying that different value caps can have a very significant influence on a guitar's sound, even with the tone control(s) on full - about his before and after recordings he says:
"Note: For the sake of comparison, I set all tone controls to 10 for all clips, even though in real use I'd probably adjust them to taste."
Then later on he also states:
"Lastly: I wonder how many people replace perfectly good pups when the real problem is their wiring and capacitor settings?"
But as you imply 4real, I think he has an interest in being able to show his purchase of the ToneShaper has worked out, so intentionally or not, may have influenced the apparent recorded sound by altering playing technique, or other means.
I have John's Strat SP circuit installed on my strat - I chose to use a 0.015uF cap for the tone, and I certainly don't feel the sound is too shrill or lacking in body, quite the opposite, it sounds great to me. So in the end I don't think I can go along with the idea that the tone cap value can have the influence implied by the TGP thread. Though like you John, I hope the ToneShaper is selling well, it undoubtedly has its plus points.
|
|