J Everman CMOS Boost.

[brad]

J.Everman Custom Analog Effects
CLEAN BOOST PEDAL PROTOTYPE

This 1 of a kind unit was built to test the circuit boost concept based on a CMOS IC. This is used instead of the normal transistor push pull boost design seen many other boosters built today. We believe that this tone is more natural and harmonically rich and will be using this circuit in our production pedals in the near future.

*   Adjustable presence and gain controls
*   Custom Orange LED in Chrome Bezel
*   Switchcraft(tm) Jacks
*       1% metal film low noise resistors
*   True Bypass Switching
*   Power Jack (9VDC): 2.1mm barrel jack
*   1 Meg pulldown resistors
*   PCB plated though holes
*   Input power filtering
*   Internal 15V charge pump power filter supply

Unit provides a clean gain boost to your signal, sound is rich and just like your bypassed signal, only louder, just like a boost should be.

As a fan of Tim Escobedo's Circuit Snippets, and especially his CMOS Boost, I hope he'll be getting a cut of the profits or at least an acknowledgement from these "soon to be production" pedals!  A Harmony Central user posted that Everman had made an innovative design after seeing this pedal, and it was frustrating knowing that Tim wasn't getting the kudos he deserved.

[Tim Escobedo]

While I wouldn't mind taking credit for this design, I have no way of telling that it is my design. And the 15V supply is unique.

[Torchy]

crp

[j.everman]

Ok, last time I post any PCB's pics.

Tim,

To set things straight, I did not take your design. I use a CMOS inverter but so did Way Huge and EH Hot Harmonics and maybe others so that is nothing super new. I used a multiple stage design anyhow and from what I can see on the net just now, you used just 1 of them. Also you used two 5meg resistors in a T filter formation with a cap on center, I did not use that what so ever, my caps are parallel to the inverters and interstage.
I did not even know of your layout before these posts started up, just wanted to set things straight before people start getting upset here.

Just trying to build something that sounds good.

Regards,
J.Everman

[bwanasonic]

I noticed a similiar tone in a recent post about the Keeley Time Machine boost. Kind of "gee, who did he steal that idea from?" Unless you have actually traced the board or something, making an accusation like that, just based on parts count, possibly similar architecture, and ad copy, is not too cool. In fact I think the term is libel.

Kerry M

[black mariah]

There seems to be a lot of the Slashdot "If we do something like them it's okay, but if they do something like us it's horrible and must stop" mentality crossing over here, and I really don't get it.

If you want to keep your stuff secret, don't post the schematics where anyone and their brother can find them. In fact, don't even make schematics. Just build pedals and cover them in goop. Actually, don't even build the pedal. Just think about how good it sounds. Mmmm... brain noise.

Posts like this are incredibly silly in a forum where 90% of all posts deal with buillding a ripoff of SOMETHING.

[Peter Snowberg]

I just want to say that using CMOS inverters presents a whole world of construction options with a whole world of tones that are unique to the land of CMOS.

I LOVE (most) CMOS stuff.

I've got a couple of CMOS designs that also use a charge pump supply, but that's where the similarities to any known DIY or commercial effects end. I'm sure going to think twice about saying anything more or posting pictures.

Please folks.... DO NOT make unsubstantiated accusations!

Kerry is quite correct, such a post could be considered libel. :|

[Gilles C]

The first time I saw the 4049 used in the linear mode is in an application note from Radio Shack. That's a long time ago, back to when they were a real Radio Shack.  

They were using a 1M and a 10M resistors, a xx? cap  and 3 gates in a row, not one gate.

That's if I remember well.  Then I saw Craig Anderton circuit using 1 gate at a time and all resistors and cap values divided by 10. For lower noise probably.??

So, when engineers design an electronic component, they normally give suggestions on how to use them. And it's there for people to use.

Now, who got the idea from an application note, and who got it from someone else design is hard to say.

Gilles C

[brad]

Egg >>> My Face.  :oops:

[brad]

Sorry J Everman!  My extreme cynicism of boutique pedal manufacturers obviously got the better of me.

[Mark Hammer]

J makes stuff in response to client demand.  His pot-in-a-box volume preset raised hackles earlier this year, but it too was simply something the clients asked for.  I don't know how similar or different the pedal in question is from ALL existing CMOS inverter-based boosters, but it may well have a number of changes to existing *fundamental* designs (and I mean fundamental as in the sense of "inverting gain stage") that simply dovetail better with the circumstances those clients find themselves in.  

If they ask for it, and you make a run of them to provide service, are you gonna post them as a product with the qualifier "Here. It's not much, I suppose, certainly only a few parts different from what so-and-so makes, and you could probably do it cheaper yourself.  But what the hell, I made a bunch, like it or not, and I have to unload them without losing too much money in the process"?  No, you present your product as proudly as befits the quality of build and stand behind it.

We've had the "when-is-a-mod-a-design-idea?" debate multiple occasions in past.  If simple variations on a basic no-way-around-it circuit were intellectual property, then just about every tube amplifier company would have been embroiled in multi-decade legal wrangles with every other amp company since the damn of amps.

Yes, sometimes simple things get tarted up a little too much in the promo blurb (to read Robert Keeley's stuff sometimes, you'd think the pedals he mods were simply a buncha parts on a board and not really an effect with a personality until he got hold of them!), but ultimately the product is something that someone put together solidly and professionally, being mindful of all the things that matter, and you're paying for their labour, time, parts, and other overhead.  Whatever they may or may not "borrow" from anyone else represents a tiny portion of what you're paying for, and what they're selling.

J,
I'm hoping the PCB pics continue.  Certainly if one wishes to prevent them from being detailed adverts for how you can make one yourself, there are ways of doing that with digital retouches.  But for the most part, PCB pics serve a number of useful functions.  One is certainly to let people know where wires are soldered back to when torn.  Another is to assure the customer of quality of build.  F'rinstance, Dave Fox's Paradox Through-Zero Flanger is a fairly unique product.  The posted pictures of the prototype and final product reveal very little of what makes it sound the way it does (other than knowing that two BBDs are used), but it DOES convey that this is not your mama's flanger, and that the amount of work and parts that went into it is reflected in the price.

[j.everman]

No hard feelings....Brad


Mark, I get your point on PCB pics, I dont usually post them and this one time I did, we'll.....  Anyhow if I feel its needed to give product information or explanations of features then I guess I may reconsider.

J.