ProCo Solo with gain recovery

[dongeo]

Okay, I'm finished with it but I find that the overall volume of the distorted signal is too low compared to the bypassed signal. For example, my volume is cranked to the max and the clipping is in 'melt' position, then distorted sound is a bit louder than the clean signal and when in 'hot' position the distorted sound is a bit quieter than the bypassed signal. Other distortion pedals sound many times louder than the bypassed signal when the volume is at max but not this one. How could I fix that?

[jymaze]

Just modify the last stage (JFET) according to the schematic I attached. It should satisfy your need.

edit : that is add a 22k to 33k resistor between Q1's drain and Vcc.

[dongeo]

A question first. Could the problem be in the OP07 or 2N5458? Since I messed quite a lot with the pedal due to a faulty pot, I might have heated them too much. Should I try to swap them out for new ones before making these changes?

[analogguru]

Just modify the last stage (JFET) according to the schematic I attached. It should satisfy your need.

"jymaze" wants to proof us, that he is a handicapped theft who is unable to read - it is clearly written in the schematic:

"By downloading you agree not to alter this schematic, distribute it on CD/DVD or on the web or to publish it without a written permission"

I am not aware that I gave the characterless "jymaze" a written permission to post it somewhere (even here) - especially when he simply can place a link to my website:
http://analogguru.an.ohost.de/193/schem ... o_Solo.gif

So after this is done: jymaze, can you please be so kind and remove the copyright violation (= my schematic) from your posting ?

thanks,
analogguru

[Dirk_Hendrik]

I do agree with Analogguru that it is indeed strange to upload a schem instead of pointing to the source. Especially when the copyright holder pretty explicitly states the request not to do so. I myself do not add that sort of texts to the stuff I post since I do not believe in it. I do however realize that that is my personal choice and therefore I do not expect others to make that same choice as well.

Having that said;

Just modify the last stage (JFET) according to the schematic I attached. It should satisfy your need.

Hello Jymaze.
As you can see it is clearly written in the schematic:
"By downloading you agree not to alter this schematic, distribute it on CD/DVD or on the web or to publish it without a written permission"

I am not aware that I gave you a written permission to post it. You could have linked it from my website:
http://analogguru.an.ohost.de/193/schem ... o_Solo.gif

Can you please be so kind and remove the copyright violation (= my schematic) from your posting ?

thanks,
Analogguru

Says exactly the same in a much friendlier manner. I understand that was not your intention AG but don't play the bitten, poor and oh so victimized dog, when you get a just a shitty response back.

Furthermore, the apparent absence of a website (the schems say www. .com) for ages and the anubics.com site as a source of technical info seems to be extinct for quite some time as well. This does not make it easier to ask for permission. The http://analogguru.an.ohost.de/ does not give any evident contact adress either.

And apologies for the typo. The quote should say "written", not "wrote".

[Dirk_Hendrik]

btw,
the registration for anubics expires in 16 days. Preps get it back?

[modman]

DH, maybe you didn't see (I didn't either until I looked better) that the drawing was messed with. It's not the original schematic, parts were erased and redrawn without marking it on the schematic. I think AG would have been less pissed off if it was just the original drawing or even if it was based on the original drawing, but clearly indicated who made the changes.
Now there a schematic with his name and refs on, for which he is not responsible.

Correct me if I'm wrong AG...

So peepz, if you really can't resist re-using others drawing, please still indicate something about the version history. Maybe we should do a thread with pointers to foolproof (?) or at least basic schematic software...

removed schemo now

[lolbou]

Redrawing the FET part and mod would have been easier indeed, and would have kept another wrong schematic to appear. I did edit the post though to keep trace of the suggested answer.

[Dirk_Hendrik]

DH, maybe you didn't see (I didn't either until I looked better) that the drawing was messed with. It's not the original schematic, parts were erased and redrawn without marking it on the schematic. I think AG would have been less pissed off if it was just the original drawing or even if it was based on the original drawing, but clearly indicated who made the changes.
Now there a schematic with his name and refs on, for which he is not responsible.

True. I indeed dis not see that, nor did AG explictitly say, the schem was altered.

However, that does not go for the fact unnessesary rudeness.

[jymaze]

Dear, dear Analogguru

Your post was so fabulously entertaining to me... I am still mesmerized. And the irony is that I almost missed it since I don't check every thread!
You should have sent me a private email to make sure I receive the full expression of your despise. It is safer when you really want to efficiently insult someone.

Back to the topic, I am so sorry I just wanted to help... I have busy days so I tend to expedite personal interest activities like helping people on that forum when I can. I missed that (of course perfectly legit...) copyright claim you appended to the schematic. I must have rushed too much.

So if I had redrawn it all before modifying I could have used it then? How is there any copyright belonging to you on that schematic anyway? If there are any rights, one would think they should go to Proco, do you know them personally? Do you have written agreements with them? Are you legally entitled to claim these rights for a circuit you did not design? Of course you do, or you would not claim these rights... Sure...

To satisfy you, I swear I won't post anymore on the forum after that post. I hope it fills you with infinite joy, since you must hate me so much that you wallowed yourself into that despicable public display of rudeness.

Also, please allow me to correct the result of your poor language skills:
1) I cannot be a "theft", I can commit a theft, and therefore I would be a "thief".
2) I don't "proof" anything here, but maybe I "prove" (although "to proof" does exist I agree).
It would make your post more semantically acceptable (sadly it cannot mellow the lovely sentiments expressed in it). I sincerely hope I did not get too literate for you with the word "semantically" though. You see, I cannot read your random copyright statements, but I can read a dictionary. Everything is not lost for "characterless" me. On the other hand you just learned how to use at least one or two words reading the last 5 lines, rejoice!

To conclude, in this period of Thanksgiving, I wanted to sincerely thank you for reminding the whole of us on that forum what humanity is all about.

Logging out...

[Dirk_Hendrik]

Jymaze,
The tone you display in above post is understandable although the start is by far the most mature part of your post. Regrettably. That does not take away the fact:

This is an international board (that means people from outside the US and not living in the US and perhaps not even willing to live in the US) so not everyone is a native English speaker. Therefore it can happen that someone makes grammatical errors. Going that road in your post is rather lame.

But more important is that you should study the concept of copyrights a little more. Copyrights do not apply to the content of the material. Copyright applies to the material itself. In this case the material's copyright is indeed AG's. The design, connection to ProCo or whatever else do not matter a single bit.

[bajaman]

Thanks Dirk
I personally cannot see WHY there is a need to increase the output level (and noise ) by replacing the jfet buffer with a gain stage
Storm in a teacup Jymaze
Analogguru DOES know his electronic theory and is ALWAYS a valuable contributor to this and many other forums
He can "come across" as arrogant and opinionated on some occasions however, but those of us who respect his contributions often make allowances for him - especially as English is not his first language
I am sure that all he was trying to do was protect his copyright material from being altered while HIS NAME was still on the altered drawing
cheers
bajaman

[jymaze]

You really think it is storm in a tea-cup being insulted? You really think it is appropriate to say I am a "characterless" "handicapped theft"? I should just be glad to be insulted by analogguru because he posted more than 3000 times here and it is an honor to even capture his attention? Is it tolerated for everyone on the forum to insult each other or is it only acceptable when you are a long time contributor, grumpy or not?

I don't think it is too much to expect a civilized attitude instead of a burst of insults. I concede that I made a mistake because I rushed and did not pay attention, but it does not excuse that overly aggressive attitude from analogguru.

Also, it can be argues that this schematic is probably not really sound on a copyright point of view since it may be considered as "derivative art" from another documents (I am pretty sure someone else already had a schematic of this pedal, at least Proco themselves). I agree that copyrights laws for such things as schematics are hard to interpret, but drawing a schematic and put your name under it does not make it automatically and totally yours if there is a schematic "looking-alike" already available somewhere before (the so-called "underlying-art"). So I am not totally clueless about copyright laws Dirk. Also, I did not use this schematic to get recognition, money, or any type of advantage so it is really not worth firing at me like that.

All in all, I don't think it was that lame from me to point at the language deficiencies: The next time he will want to insult someone, he will be able to better express his acrimony thanks to an improved lexicon. Next time, he may even be able to appear aggressive and displeasing to the fullest extend he intends to, which would not be a small feat!

For the record, I am french so english is not my first language either. Also, I guess I should know about what rudeness is if I am french, right? So analogguru was too rude compared to the matter at hand, plain and simple.

Finally, if one thinks there is not enough output after a tone-stack, it makes plenty of sense to put a recovery stage instead of a buffer: As you know bajaman, the first 1 or 2 stages dominate the noise figure of a circuit (Frii's formula).

[modman]

Also, it can be argues that this schematic is probably not really sound on a copyright point of view since it may be considered as "derivative art" from another documents (I am pretty sure someone else already had a schematic of this pedal, at least Proco themselves). I agree that copyrights laws for such things as schematics are hard to interpret, but drawing a schematic and put your name under it does not make it automatically and totally yours if there is a schematic "looking-alike" already available somewhere before (the so-called "underlying-art"). So I am not totally clueless about copyright laws Dirk. Also, I did not use this schematic to get recognition, money, or any type of advantage so it is really not worth firing at me like that.

First, you think you know something about copyright, but it's stuff you've made up in your head. If you infiltrate NASA and trace their new missile electronics, you will not go to jail for copyright. They will hang you for treason.
Next time you mess up somebody else's schematic, please sign with your name, or at least give some indication that you've modified it. You put the drawing you edited out under the name "Proco Solo".

Most French people I know have a terrific talent for insults - you're not really french are you?

[jymaze]

Modman,

Derivative work is a complex subject, but I think one might agree that drawing a schematic, in the case there is already a schematic existing can be considered legally as an uncreative variation of the earlier, therefore copyright would only be granted to the earlier work. It also takes into account the notion of transformativeness which is hard to define and hard to arbitrate. It has nothing to do with who goes to jail, it is just about "Do you get your own copyright if there is an underlying-work?".

Again, I am sorry and I made a mistake. I was just thinking we were a big happy family of tinkerers loving the smell of solder in the morning, and I was very wrong since there are people here feeling that it is normal to bash and insult others for fallacious reasons (Are you really one of these Modman?).

In any event, copyright is not enforceable when there is a notion of "fair use", for example when it is for non-commercial purpose and it is used solely for the purpose of discussion, without claiming any ownership. I think it applies here... I think one of the main point to consider when you look at jurisprudence is whether or not a copyrighted piece was used for commercial purpose. I agree I should have modified the document a bit more so no one gets angry. I just did not even think about it because I am not that type. Call me naive.

I just don't understand why people cannot just say: "okay, it was not cool to insult for something so little". Instead it sounds like I am the mean person here. I was trying to help someone and it was clumsily done, period. I just feel like I should react a little when someone calls me a "characterless handicapped theft" for so few.

I am french for real, but I have sufficient "savoir-vivre" so as not to insult people for no reason. But you are true, I can be very good at convoluted and cruel insults, but just when people deserve it. I did not really insult anyone here and was not even trying. What I wrote is more of the tongue-in-cheek type (I make grammar mistakes myself, believe it or not!). Next time I will write a semi-humorous thing to poke at someone, I will add some smileys to set the tone, it will get everyone more relaxed.

Why be so serious and prone to anger? We are all trying to share knowledge and have fun along the road, aren't we? Did I miss something? (you see, I can do it)

[analogguru]

Dear Mr. wannabe-lawyer,

I appreciate that you are from french, this makes the things a lot easier because the european law applies. Because you throw around with terms like "....when you look at jurisprudence...." to achieve the impression that you would be legally trained - which can confuse others - I will respond to your fluffy nonsense:

1.) A copyright does not apply to the content it applies to the artwork itself. Artwork means e.g. which objects are chosen, how they are arranged or how they are colored. This means everyone can make a picture of a horse, but noone is allowed to produce a duplicate. Applied to my schematic this means, I chose the symbols used i arranged them in a special manner color etc. and for this I have a copyright.

2.) In europe it is not necessary to register a copyright or place a copyright notice, you achieve the right when you have finished your artwork automatically.

3.) Therefore the copyright message is unnecessary under european law. An artwork must not contain this message to have the copyright on the artwork.

4.) I even applied a special note as a terms of use (= contract) for those idiots who are not familiar with the copyright laws or think they can ignore them.

5.) "fair use" means that you can use ONLY A PART of the work of another when you need it as a REFERENCE in your own work. This means you are not allowed to use the complete work of another, by fair use you are only allowed to use A PART of it, and only such a big part which is necessary for your own work. You own work always has to exceed in amount the "fair used" work of another.

6.) Your argumentation about non-commercial purposes is totally bullshit, in reality the law says for "private use" or some exceptions for educational pürposes in STATE-APPROVED schools or universities. freestompboxes.org (or another website) is not a state-approved school or university even when the knowledge of some solder-jockey-boutiquers is limited to the content of what can be found here.

7.) Therefore my terms of use are in total agreement with the existing copyright-law: "You can download it for your private use" but not for more. As a result it doesn´t matter if you have read my notice for the total idiots or ignorants, because this message only describes the already existiting law in understandable words.

8.) As I wrote under 1.) a copyright does not apply to the content, it applies to the artwork. Therefore it is irrelevant who designed the circuit which I DESCRIBE with my artwork in my unique way. Example: Microsoft makes a program called "WORD". You are not allowed to make a copy of this program. But you are allowed to write your own book how the program "WORD" can be used and you will have the copyright on this book - not on the program itself.

9.) Derivative work does also not apply to my schematic - maybe your changes would be such a derivative work. The reason is simple: I did not take the factory schematic (= artwork) and make some small changes, instead I created my own artwork (= special use of symbols, how they are arranged etc.). Therefore there is no "underlying work" in my schematic.

10.) As you point out for yourself changes to my artwork (= underlying work) does not grant you any rights to use my (now modified) artwork without permission. Forget about your "fair use"-dreams as pointed out in 5.) and 6.)

11.) I have my reasons - which can be found elsewhere in this forum at length - why I enforce my copyrights.

12.) Since you try to appear legally trained I assume that you will be familiar with Art. 5 Nr. 5 EuGVVO. If you don´t believe what I have written above, you are invited hereby to send me your adress so that we can look who is right within the scope of an injunction suit in my home country. There you will have the possibility to convince the judge from your odd opinion.

13.) Since I believe that you will not have the balls to clear our disagreement in court I request that you please leave me (and the forum) alone with your accusations and your role as a "victim".

kind regards,

analogguru

[Intripped]

...is this a bad moment in your life analogguru? i mean: are you angry for something else that maybe happened to you?
because i think you're really overreacting here. and also in another post i read few days ago

for what i see jymaze was wrong in posting your schem, and he already has admitted it and apologized
but you insulted him and he (rightly) would like to hear some excuses: for the insults, not for the copyright infrigment.

all the jurisprudence matters are interesting actually, but they aren't and shouldn't be considered the main trigger of this discussion

[bajaman]

[jymaze]

Analogguru,

I agree with you that copyright doctrines differ from country to country. Under the "sweat of the brow" doctrine you are right. It is different in the US since originality is a must to grant official copyright. For example, it is harder to get something copyrighted if it is based on facts (like what is in a stompbox) than on pure creative work (which is what copyright is mostly applied to). In the EU, it is different, but IP laws are complex everywhere and evolve rapidly with new medias of expression. So we are both somehow right I guess, it depends on the legal referential.

Also, again in the US, fair use does apply to more than educational purposes since there is commonly some leeway in term of copyright enforcement when no money/market interest is present. Although, I agree I should have not modified your schematic in any way then. Once again, I just did not see the mention, I just rushed. Such things about copyright don't usually cross my mind, I am a little to naive and see ourselves as a happy community helping each other without hidden interests. Everyone modifies the schematic of other people all the time here. I just did not think about it, frankly, and just zoomed on the output buffer, did the mod, and forgot about it. I must be one of these "idiots" you talk about in your previous post. No one died in the process and I did not make a million dollar on your back so why be that angry? I just don't understand it (but I am an "idiot", remember).

Anyhow, I just made a mistake, I apologize. I don't really care about all that legal talk and I am not a lawyer (neither are you probably) but it does not prevent me from knowing things and have an educated opinion (just like you). I just want to have fun making stompboxes while not being insulted. That is what I expect when I check that forum, and I hope it is the expectation of everyone here.

I really think it was not worth insulting me on a public forum, but again maybe it depends on the referential (at least the cultural/ethical referential, insults laws can vary). I am just not used to being insulted, but I am getting there, that's the good news.

I think I can describe myself as open and tolerant. Dialog is stimulating and I don't mind a nice little debate once in a while. Aggressiveness just pushes my button and I had to react to the "characterless handicapped theft" epithet apposed to my name. I did not deserve it in my opinion and I did not start the hostilities (french people rarely do, right?).

You can see that my present answer, just like the one before, uses neutral language, devoid of any personal attack, aggressive statements, prejudice-based joke, or slang. There was even some slight attempts at humor. I thought it would be somehow appeasing. It did not work very well, but I am not giving up.

Why not just bury the hatchet? I am tired of that fight for nothing. I just wanted to say that a recovery stage after the tonestack would be nice if the output level is not satisfying and that it will only introduce a very limited amount of noise.

//HUMOR ALERT//
Someone else can make a schematic and get all the rights, glory, and fortune that comes with it if it matters to them. They can even take the few other incredibly creative schematics I have submitted, which automatically created massive copyrights, and do whatever they please. It should cover their needs for retirement funds. Also, because you own the rights for the very schematic that is after all the object of this all too lengthy effusion of words, I am also officially giving you the totality of the money I gained from the shameful illegal use of your copyrighted material, would it be fortuitous. You can happily walk away with your 0 euro check, marveling at how justice has been done without even going to court and that the "sweat of your brow" has finally been recognized for its real value.
//END OF HUMOR ALERT//

Thank you for everything, you made me a better man.

Jymaze

[sinner]

Hi jymaze, I'll redraw analoggurus schematic having my share of copyright, and bro, feel free to modify it as you like - in fact I'll be really grateful if you kindly will

I'll back when I put my kiddo to bed