TuT FX Loop Values

[Joey Voltage]

What thing was that? Sounds like a fun read!

I have seen examples of ideas in the TUT books that KoC has himself stolen from other sources without reference, so he's not blameless himself.

It's not even worth reading, and you eventually renamed the thing a "zero biased stage", although since then I concede and agree with John that it is just grid leak biased, very poorly, but still you can flip a chair upside down but that doesn't mean it becomes anything other than a chair, and what I thought was common or not so common terminology turned out to be an o'connorism.

The addition is that during the discussion, and after you guys told me not to bother, I hounded him for a reference to where he possibly could attribute the name of "Mu-Amp", to what is essentially a clipper (since then I have seen him use the term for ordinary run of the mill grid leak biased stages as well). IIRC the first email I got back had nothing to with what I asked him, which was then followed by the typical sales pitch. I asked a second time, and again for references, and the jist that I got the second time was that he didn't remember the circuit too well, and then started describing a JFET version of an actual MU-Follower that sounded tubey etc... so I just gave up. I will see if I can track down the email.

[chunkitup]

See, that's the kind of attitude that gets people pissed off.
Kevin is a pretty cool guy. I would have at least asked him first... he used to post here frequently and has been supporting the DIY crowd for years in some way or another.
I'd show a little respect... that's all I'm saying.

I didnt mean to piss anyone off, my apologies. I was making light of the fact that the only thing I own of value is a rusted pick up truck.
Now the only reason I posted the pic was so I could get confirmation on the values of the caps. I paid alot of money for the TuT book and if I cant read the values I am going to ask for some help. Also, I did show my respect when I bought the book.

[BackwardsBoB]

Kevin's big motive in writing the TUT series is fear of bogus patent infringement lawsuits. It makes more financial sense to put all your circuit ideas into the public domain and get the book sales than it does to generate and pay for the many patents. It's more noble too. He's got another little book that reviews the interesting tube amp patents. Most are bogus, based on prior art, frequently described in the RCA receiving tube manuals.

If you watch him closely, he presents each circuit in all feasible implementations. He'll show it with a tube, a JFET, a MOSFET, a BJT, and maybe an LDR. If you don't like this effects loop, he has lots more. I have no desire for musical distortion in my effects loop, so I like opamps. An active tone stack won't duplicate the humps and dips of a Fender or Marshall, but it certainly provides more variety and tuneability, and at least it can do flat response.

The hand drawings are nice. At least in this case he scribbled a value for the component. Component values are frequently "left as an exercise for the reader".

The wierd thing is that he believes that V=-IR, and he uses the left hand rule for the force on a current carrying wire in a magnetic field. Every (almost)current arrow in the series is backward, since electrons are the majority carriers, and we need to throw off the error of the pioneers. Kinda quirky, and it quickly falls apart when he applies standard formulae.

The TUT series is cheaper than a decent amp kit, and you'll learn a whole lot more. You need to know a bit about electronics going in, but if you're trying to fill that tube amp hole in your electronics knowledge, the leavings of Kevin's multi-year brain suck are a feast. He really gets you thinking outside the box. His product line is a testament to original thinking.

The thing the TUT series can't do is show you how different circuits sound, and I don't think that there's a substitute for experimentation. It does provide a solid background for understanding what's going on when you change something, and I think it's beneficial if the theory and history are studied first, with a guiding philosophy. The TUT series does this. I rotate the volumes through the bathroom regularly, and I feel empowered.

You'll also find out that Pete Traynor is like a god, and Randall Smith is like Satan.

[JHow]

My point was just that, I was considering picking up a copy, given the reputation, but it is was somewhat disconcerting to think that I would be buying hand-done drawings that people have to post on the internet and start a debate over component values. It looks sloppy.

I blame the death of drafting classes and the demise of manual arts schools. Software can draft perfectly everytime - unless you're too cheap to invest in it.

[BackwardsBoB]

Am I double-posting? Apologies if so...

The book doesn't look anything like the JPEG of a low-res scan that's represented here. He's using "mu"s not "u"s for micro. It's all clear on my copy. Everything is in microfarads except for the 47 and 470. Note the text, which is clear and book-like in the original.

I kind of like the hand drawings. He's certainly better at it than I am, and I used to design on vellum, back when floppies were the size of a '45 cover. There are drawings for everything, probably more than one per page, and well over a thousand in the set. Only the full amp designs in TUT3 (I think) are intended to be more than illustrative of the concepts presented, and even there, I think you'd get in trouble quickly if you just cloned the layout drawing without regard for what you're doing.

He rarely claims originality.

[d95err]

My point was just that, I was considering picking up a copy, given the reputation, but it is was somewhat disconcerting to think that I would be buying hand-done drawings that people have to post on the internet and start a debate over component values. It looks sloppy.

I blame the death of drafting classes and the demise of manual arts schools. Software can draft perfectly everytime - unless you're too cheap to invest in it.

I have 3 of the TUTs and the schematics are easy to read. Books that are printed in really small series like the TUTs will always be expensive. Would it be worth it to pay say 50% more just to get fancy CAD-designed schematics and perhaps a nice color foto on the cover?

[imaradiostar]

I love old books with the hand-drawn examples. It reminds me of the old radio shack op amp cookbook that I still have in a box around here somewhere (it was on the shelf but I moved!)

My copy of Merlin's book has the pretty cover sitting on a shelf and I carry the bare blue book around with me lots of places. Same goes for a number of old tube texts. I wish I could say my RCA tube manual was in such good shape! It's next to my bed in about 3 pieces.

I'd truthfully love to buy the TUT books but I can buy a lot of parts and build a lot of experimental designs for the same money. I already waste too much time theorizing and posting here instead of building stuff and enjoying it.

Maybe I enjoy talking about building amps and playing guitar more than I enjoy building amps and playing guitar?

jamie

[Alf]

I bought 4 of Kevin's books in the past and am more than satisfied with them.

The Best fx loop is very good adn transparent.

The 6.8 uf can be lower, I used a 3,3 , I specifically mailed Kevin about it !

Alf

[JHow]

The book doesn't look anything like the JPEG of a low-res scan that's represented here...

I'm glad to hear it - that was my main point. Legibility is important to me.

There are drawings for everything, probably more than one per page...

Also good news, that's my main complaint about Gerald Weber's books - few schematics.

I have 3 of the TUTs and the schematics are easy to read.

Good to hear. It sounds like maybe the OP diagram was a fluke.

Books that are printed in really small series like the TUTs will always be expensive.

With technology, print-on-demand, and so forth, printing costs are going down, even for samizdat. Market conditions set price levels, and the price of these books more likely reflects the small potential audience, rather than production costs.

Would it be worth it to pay say 50% more just to get fancy CAD-designed schematics and perhaps a nice color foto on the cover?

Nope, not to me. My comment should not have been interpreted as a slam against all hand-drawn diagrams. I am actually happy with hand-drawn if it is clearly done.

As an aside, photos do have value, for example, I consider the photos in Dave Hunter's amp book well worth the entire price of the book. They are clear, large, well done, and since I am not going to buy orginal copies of all those amps, well worth it to me!

I bought 4 of Kevin's books in the past and am more than satisfied with them…

Okay! You guys have convinced me! Great books with good diagrams!

[DIY_Guy]

They are for sure great books with lots of value. Well worth the cost. Just have do get used to the drawings, and if you get the whole series, it's a good idea to tab out important areas, as it gets confusing trying to flip between all the different volumes.

[Alf]

Just noticed this post , sorry I haven't been around here for some time.

I built this loop in one of my amps and can say that I like it very much. It' s very transparent
I asked Kevin about the big 6,8 uf cap and he answered that he had it lying around and I could just as well use a smaller value , he said.
So I did , I believe there is a 4,7 or even 3,3 in it now .

Maybe this info can be useful for someone.

Alf