EMI TG1

Another thought... If this is a big complicated copyright mess... Then how do people like Drip and Gyraf post UA designs which are now in reproduction legally... I just realized that defeated my question on the Helios comment earlier... So now I am confused... Is there anyone that can clarify any of this? What is and what isn't legal here... Reading that other forum just muddied it all up even more. I get the MORAL aspect of not posting it, which I respect. But it would be nice to know the LEGAL aspect of things before I clone something in the future that gets me in trouble, or share some schematic from my database that I shouldn't.

Thanks,
Grant

Anoter thought me too..
maybe already said in the other thread, but:

I think that if the clone product "A" is great, and a bunch of geeks super-enthusiastic about its sound start cloning it doing "Aa"
and filling forums on how fantastic it is..
how that would not be a good marketing push for the product "A"?

1954U1 said:

Anoter thought me too..
maybe already said in the other thread, but:

I think that if the clone product "A" is great, and a bunch of geeks super-enthusiastic about its sound start cloning it doing "Aa"
and filling forums on how fantastic it is..
how that would not be a good marketing push for the product "A"?

Click to expand...

Good point... Never even considered that aspect.

its not so much copywite, but when we all club together to figure a current production Item out its not so much private use but concerted group effort - In theory mass production.

other side of the coin maybe

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about on this, but from what I remember from copyright law class in college is that you can copyright an "Expression fixed in Tangible form"  ie sheet music/musical composition and/or sound recording.  The owner of a copyright has the rights to exclusively reproduce copy's or derivative works of the copyright. 

Then there is also trademarks etc which I think are names to do business under. 

So reproducing something on a fairly mass scale with the name on it doesn't seem very cool at all. 

You can't copyright something simple like an idea, for example a musical scale or very simple phrase or word.  In electronics I'm not sure how this would apply, but it seems a very unique expression could be copyrighted, but just something simple like using some diodes to perform a function couldn't be copyrighted, like a voltage divider or something.  It seems like that area of expression could get fairly hazy like songs that use 12 bar blues.  I'm not what would constitute a derivative work in the field of electronics. 

just my 2 cents. 

This is a very public forum, I don't think Wade and co have anything to worry from us.... but, if say a cheap 'made in China' TG1 clone came onto the market as a direct result of our reverse engineering!!! this would be the flip side! and a great shame.

and a recent Brewery thread proved the threat of that

First... I don't think it is the same thing as mass production if a lot of us DIY a project on here, because no one is profiting (except maybe mouser, and NOS Tube retailers).... However I do think it is a good argument for the Chinese companies ripping off designs... Though they seemed more fixed on the idea of knock off microphones.

As for copyrights... You are correct, I forgot about that... Copyright is just expression... What I meant to comment on I guess is a Patent. Trademark's have nothing to do with this argument really, because as long as we don't put "EMI" on it, we are safe. It protects the name, not the product. For example you can make a soda with Coca-Cola's formula, but you cannot name it Coca-Cola. The formula is not protected, but the name is. Trademarks are really just to prevent people from claiming they are your company. Patents protect inventions, which is where we find ourselves.

Now patents don't last that long, which I think was mentioned before as 25 years (which I believe is correct). Once that patent is up, it is fair game to copy away. So unless Chandler changed the design enough to patent it himself, then it should technically still be fair game. I am sure the licensing he pays is to use the TG-1 or TG-2 name... However if I were to clone it and name it the RACTGYTSAFFP-1 "Really Awesome Compressor That Gives You The Sound of A Famous Four Piece British Band ", than I would be fine. It seems to be to be a matter of respect.

However I am not really sweating this anymore... I am going ahead and building the Drip 47 for that sort of EMI pre sound, and I am going to build his 175b clone next for a good tube compressor. That should give me all the phatness I need. Yes... I did just use phat with a PH.

I think at the end of the day it boils down to ethics here. However I don't see the harm in someone offering up the schematics through PM only and forcing people to prove they are not with a manufacturer somehow.

Or even better yet to offer it through a e-signed document stating this is not to be used for research purposes or mass production, but for personal educational and DIY use only.

-Grant

I think problems start when cloning is related to the name of a current product and PCB selling is involved.
If someone designs a PCB starting from the antique EMI compressor schematic and make the PCB files available for free to the forum members, these discussions would not happen.

Do you remember the old forum times (7-8 years ago) when there were no boards for sale, only a few projects from some generous people, and each member was a real DIY-er? You had to build everything from scratch, etch your boards, buy the parts, make your case, measure, troubleshoot, etc. Now for many members it is mostly painting by numbers.

chrissugar

chrissugar said:

I think problems start when cloning is related to the name of a current product and PCB selling is involved.
If someone designs a PCB starting from the antique EMI compressor schematic and make the PCB files available for free to the forum members, these discussions would not happen.

Do you remember the old forum times (7-8 years ago) when there were no boards for sale, only a few projects from some generous people, and each member was a real DIY-er? You had to build everything from scratch, etch your boards, buy the parts, make your case, measure, troubleshoot, etc. Now for many members it is mostly painting by numbers.

chrissugar

Click to expand...

What's wrong with paint by number! I painted a beautiful picture of a unicorn under a sunset... Though I guess I did accidentally put red instead of blues in number 437 and ended up with a red eyed evil unicorn that looked like it wanted to maul me to death, but it was still really pretty! I SWEAR! 

In all seriousness, I agree it used to be more DIY... I researched forums then, but never built anything... Mainly because of the PCB part. I didn't have the space to be working with chemicals then... However I do believe the SCA Audio stuff was around back then (I just couldn't afford it). This whole "paint by numbers" thing has an updside, which is that it allows people who weren't terribly DIY savvy a chance to dive in and learn about this gear. It has helped educate a lot of people in the world of electronics. That is always a good thing. It keeps people from spending more money than they need to on pieces of gear that have been badged with clone like named, but contain inferior components, despite having the original schematics. This allows people to mod their gear, and get a leg up in the DIY world.

Also! It may be a good thing if in the long run it deters companies from making clones (because everyone is making them themselves), and in turn is forced to innovate and come up with NEW DESIGNS. Which is really what I think companies should be doing anyway. Leave the cloning to us, and go design some new shit that our kids can one day clone!

-Grant

I think problems start when cloning is related to the name of a current product and PCB selling is involved.

Click to expand...

I dunno, we build a number of versions of 1176's with impunity, which is without question a current product. The only difference is that the schematics are readily available, as is not the case with EMI products. The schematic is being held close for obvious reasons. So, we manage to get a copy of the schematic and create our own version. Wade has given the green light to this project, which is cool. But as he stated it's really EMI's design. He licensed the name from EMI after they discovered he was making a readily available commercial product by the same name. Will EMI come after us if we create our own version for non-commercial use, I doubt it.

As far as paint by number, well if you've ever tried troubleshooting a botched build you'll realize quickly that it's not the case.

Mark

Biasrocks said:

I think problems start when cloning is related to the name of a current product and PCB selling is involved.

Click to expand...

I dunno, we build a number of versions of 1176's with impunity, which is without question a current product. The only difference is that the schematics are readily available, as is not the case with EMI products. The schematic is being held close for obvious reasons. So, we manage to get a copy of the schematic and create our own version. Wade has given the green light to this project, which is cool. But as he stated it's really EMI's design. He licensed the name from EMI after they discovered he was making a readily available commercial product by the same name. Will EMI come after us if we create our own version for non-commercial use, I doubt it.

As far as paint by number, well if you've ever tried troubleshooting a botched build you'll realize quickly that it's not the case.

Mark

Click to expand...

Wade gave the ok? Did I miss that somehow... I mean it's awesome that he did! But somehow I must have missed that post, or maybe it occurred in another thread. I recently started a Redd 47 build and it's interesting, because the person labeled it Four Seven who was selling the board. However it is without a doubt a Redd 47. I am excited about the build.

You are correct about trouble shooting as well... However theoretically if you get all of the colors correct in your paint by numbers, you should get a perfect sail boat or unicorn every time!

-Grant

speakercoil said:

What's wrong with paint by number! I painted a beautiful picture of a unicorn under a sunset... Though I guess I did accidentally put red instead of blues in number 437 and ended up with a red eyed evil unicorn that looked like it wanted to maul me to death, but it was still really pretty! I SWEAR! 

Click to expand...

I'm very interested in this unicorn mod, please share your secrets...

;D

Hello guys!
A friend lent me a TG1 reissue, when I switch on the PSU then the unit it take a very long time before the Vu-Meters turn on and the sound goes through the audio circuit (30min more or less), does it sound normal?

saint gillis said:

Hello guys!
A friend lent me a TG1 reissue, when I switch on the PSU then the unit it take a very long time before the Vu-Meters turn on and the sound goes through the audio circuit (30min more or less), does it sound normal?

Click to expand...

No.
Best,
Bruno2000

What do you think could be the cause of that ?...