Clones and copies?

[metropolis_4]

i would not. i also dont believe that language nor music is a hardware store part though, nor a commercial object to be sold in the same way.

commerce and art are different to me- and while i totally get where youre coming from- especially coming from a working musician- that that line is sometimes blurry. but my complaint as a writer of music has more to do with evaporating audiences and venues for original music than intellectual theft or the capacity to profit from it. i suspect that few people are gonna steal my songs or ideas, but who knows?

theyre also made of the same twelve notes.

but seriously- is the guy who invented the tube screamer still collecting? is the engineer who figured out the push pull 6l6 amp talked about at the dinner table? i mean.. we all become nothing but the collective output of musical humanity at some point.

But a circuit isn’t just a hardware store part either. It’s something that someone created by composing parts in a specific way.

Resistors and capacitors are parts, a circuit is a creative composition of those parts.

Rhythm and pitch are parts, a melody is a creative composition of those parts.

Both are something that someone created

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

But a circuit isn’t just a hardware store part either. It’s something that someone created by composing parts in a specific way.

Resistors and capacitors are parts, a circuit is a creative composition of those parts.

Rhythm and pitch are parts, a melody is a creative composition of those parts.

Both are something that someone created

I make a peanut butter sandwich slightly differently than my wife does such that my son prefers mine. I’m not claiming intellectual property rights on my method of making the sandwich.

 

[Eagle]

I make a peanut butter sandwich slightly differently than my wife does such that my son prefers mine. I’m not claiming intellectual property rights on my method of making the sandwich.

You’re not selling it.

 

[Sascha Franck]

What I said true.

Just that it isn't.

 

[Eagle]

Just that it isn't.

Enlighten us all with your extensive inside information then. Tell us who manufactures the hardware and the electronics and where? Then explain why there was never an actual factory in Germany . Then you can explain the precise differences between this and an Ibanez Artcore model that retails at 30% of the price and built of similar materials to the same standard.

 

[metropolis_4]

I make a peanut butter sandwich slightly differently than my wife does such that my son prefers mine. I’m not claiming intellectual property rights on my method of making the sandwich.

Do you think creating an electrical circuit that creates a desired effect on an audio signal involves no more skill or creativity than making a peanut butter sandwich?

I’m surprised how little credit you guys give to the people who have used their ingenuity to invent these devices we all benefit from. Comparing complex inventions to sandwiches or a part you get at a hardware store?

 

[laxu]

The way I see it, this is fine:

• Take an existing circuit, and make your own version of it.
• Bundle it into a box with your own visual style, even if it pays homage to the original.

This is not fine:

• Using a brand name that is not yours.
• Using a visual design that is a straight copy of the thing you copied.
• Taking a small manufacturer's recent original design, and making your own cheap copy of it to sell. Boss or Ibanez has had decades to recoup the development costs of a SD-1 or Tube Screamer etc.

Now, I've built myself clones of a Hudson Broadcast and a Browne Protein using PedalPCB boards. But I would have never bought the originals - it was basically "let's build something I'm interested in just for the sake of building experience, or let's do nothing". My pedals don't look anything like the real ones, the Browne is actually two separate boxes for each side.

Looking at the Browne's schematics, it's like 95% the same as a Nobels ODR-1 or Bluesbreaker. The Hudson is way more original, based on some mixing console preamps afaik.

PedalPCB, AionFx etc live in a bit of a gray area. On one hand they take someone else's work and make their own exact copy of it to sell, but on the other they are selling just the PCB, and have to reverse engineer the circuit which must be a lot of work on top of having to buy the pedal to do so.

The PedalPCB version of the Broadcast even has an extra feature not found on the real deal: switchable 27V charge pump output option. It sounds kick ass in that mode, and can even drive a poweramp.

 

[Chocol8]

I’m surprised how little credit you guys give to the people who have used their ingenuity to invent these devices we all benefit from. Comparing complex inventions to sandwiches or a part you get at a hardware store?

The people who invented the circuits and their components are mostly dead. Taking other people’s tone circuits, gain stages, and clipping circuits and modifying values or rearranging components is not the same level of innovation as being the first person to put together a TMB tone stack.

For whatever reasons, our legal systems have decided that these simple modifications to existing designs generally don’t get the same level of IP protection.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Enlighten us all with your extensive inside information then. Tell us who manufactures the hardware and the electronics and where? Then explain why there was never an actual factory in Germany

Completely irrelevant. They're outsourcing the part building but the guitars are assmbled here (at least most are). Business as usual.

 

[metropolis_4]

The people who invented the circuits and their components are mostly dead. Taking other people’s tone circuits, gain stages, and clipping circuits and modifying values or rearranging components is not the same level of innovation as being the first person to put together a TMB tone stack.

For whatever reasons, our legal systems have decided that these simple modifications to existing designs generally don’t get the same level of IP protection.

The nuances definitely get complicated, but I’m kind of shocked at the lack of respect for the skill, knowledge, and craftsmanship that went into to creating something like this to consider it of no more value than a peanut butter sandwich, or a hardware store part. And to think that we should all have the right to freely use any created circuit as public domain

I don’t know, but to me creating this seems a little more involved than spreading some peanut butter on a piece of bread:

 

[Chocol8]

I don’t know, but to me creating this seems a little more involved than spreading some peanut butter on a piece of bread

I guess you have never had a REALLY well made peanut butter and jelly sandwich!!!

 

[Chocol8]

Seriously though, that design is dated January 1978, and with a 20 year patent life, it would have been completely public domain by 1998. That gives the inventor time to make money off their work before opening it up so others can expand on it or just make less expensive versions which is presumed to benefit society as a whole.

That is the general thinking behind IP law. New technology becomes public after a modest time because advancement is in the interest of the public. Copyright works are protected longer and trademarks can be infinite because there is less and no benefit to the public from people copying them.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

Do you think creating an electrical circuit that creates a desired effect on an audio signal involves no more skill or creativity than making a peanut butter sandwich?

I’m surprised how little credit you guys give to the people who have used their ingenuity to invent these devices we all benefit from. Comparing complex inventions to sandwiches or a part you get at a hardware store?

Of course there is more creativity there, but fundamentally there is no greater progression of technology on a level that would justify granting someone a monopoly right.

Monopolies are bad. They should be avoided unless REALLY justified.

Record evidence in the guitar gear circles are that (1) people keep tinkering with pedal circuits despite the lack of IP protection afforded them. Why? Because investment costs are minimal, and because humans are inherently curious. In general we don’t usually need the carrot of a monopoly opportunity to keep tinkering. And (2) people that are creative with pedal design AND good at running a business are still able to succeed despite the lack of monopoly protection. That is because the reality is that building a successful pedal company that can charge $200 a pedal … really doesn’t depend that much on having novel creative circuit design ideas. That can help, but it’s far from a necessity. See success of Warm Audio which puts way more effort and energy into making sure the visual and tactile experience is accurately reproduced than they do the sonic experience. And their stuff ain’t cheap.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

That is the general thinking behind IP law. New technology becomes public after a modest time because advancement is in the interest of the public.

This is kind of framed in reverse. The framing you put forward here is that the defacto standard should be monopoly protection absent a public benefit. Intellectual ”property” was conceived as the anomaly, not the standard. When certain conditions are met, there MAY be a public interest in granting a limited monopoly right, but otherwise everything is public domain.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

You’re not selling it.

Lots of people have patents on shit they never sell/sold. Indeed, you better get that patent before you try to sell any embodiments of the idea.

 

[metropolis_4]

Of course there is more creativity there, but fundamentally there is no greater progression of technology on a level that would justify granting someone a monopoly right.

Monopolies are bad. They should be avoided unless REALLY justified.

Record evidence in the guitar gear circles are that (1) people keep tinkering with pedal circuits despite the lack of IP protection afforded them. Why? Because investment costs are minimal, and because humans are inherently curious. In general we don’t usually need the carrot of a monopoly opportunity to keep tinkering. And (2) people that are creative with pedal design AND good at running a business are still able to succeed despite the lack of monopoly protection. That is because the reality is that building a successful pedal company that can charge $200 a pedal … really doesn’t depend that much on having novel creative circuit design ideas. That can help, but it’s far from a necessity. See success of Warm Audio which puts way more effort and energy into making sure the visual and tactile experience is accurately reproduced than they do the sonic experience. And their stuff ain’t cheap.

I have no qualms over the business side of this discussion, my comments were about this insinuation from some in this thread that the inventors of these devices don’t deserve respect or recognition for their work because their work is no more meaningful than spreading peanut butter on bread or picking up tools from a hardware store.

 

[Eagle]

Completely irrelevant. They're outsourcing the part building but the guitars are assmbled here (at least most are). Business as usual.

Proudly strung up in Germany with American strings ( until we find some cheaper ones.)

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

Completely irrelevant. They're outsourcing the part building but the guitars are assmbled here (at least most are). Business as usual.

Just so I get this by assembled you mean slapping the hardware on and setting it up? They’re set-neck right?

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

I have no qualms over the business side of this discussion, my comments were about this insinuation from some in this thread that the inventors of these devices don’t deserve respect or recognition for their work because their work is no more meaningful than spreading peanut butter on bread or picking up tools from a hardware store.

This thread is entirely about the economics of it. If it weren’t, there wouldn’t be any knock-offs to discuss. While I’m not disagreeing with you that circuit design is usually more creative than how I make a PB&J sandwich, I would also argue that you aren’t crediting my creativity as much as you should. My son is autistic so super particular about his food in ways that are hard to imagine. I came to my method over many months of continually listening to what he didn’t like, etc., and slowly fine tuned a process that led to the least mixing of stuff he didn’t want mixed, less of the texture that bothered him, etc. small tweaks that most wouldn’t notice but he does. Making subtle eq tweaks to a known overdrive circuit, or finding a preferred clipping element aren’t much beyond that.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

This thread is entirely about the economics of it. If it weren’t, there wouldn’t be any knock-offs to discuss. While I’m not disagreeing with you that circuit design is usually more creative than how I make a PB&J sandwich, I would also argue that you aren’t crediting my creativity as much as you should. My son is autistic so super particular about his food in ways that are hard to imagine. I came to my method over many months of continually listening to what he didn’t like, etc., and slowly fine tuned a process that led to the least mixing of stuff he didn’t want mixed, less of the texture that bothered him, etc. small tweaks that most wouldn’t notice but he does. Making subtle eq tweaks to a known overdrive circuit, or finding a preferred clipping element aren’t much beyond that.

Except they don’t sell gear tailored to the individual, they tell folks what to like.
Let’s not all of a sudden think marketing has no impact.

A great example is Tyler guitars, the existing customer base of US made guitars that aren’t interested in the the Chinese or Japanese models will tell you it cheapens the brand.
Well when I A/B/C them I have no issue with the Chinese one for 2k€ or the Japanese for twice that. But it’s hard to warrant an 8k price tag on a new US model.

So you got the guys that are into the “either you know, or you don’t” and they don’t want the cheaper version to be that good, and the guys that can’t afford the crazy priced ones hoping it’ll be “good enough”.

And that’s just word of mouth marketing.