ampage Tube Amps / Music Electronics	For current discussions, please visit Music Electronics Forum.

ampage archive

Vintage threads from the first ten years

previous: Llamma This Version is a Reverse Engineere... -- 2/22/2000 9:09 PM

Re: 69 pedal

2/23/2000 2:18 AM
Bill Kahle	Re: 69 pedal Llamma: Upon looking back at "my" original post, there's no benefit of doubt that I can give since you replied directly to me. So, I guess here we go. First, from a 75 DPI 4" JPEG, you must have the perception, senses, and mental capacity of a genius. So, Mr. Mensa-member are you prepared to give any details? I could run down the entire list, starting with the transistors, passive component values, the arrangement, parts count, adjustments, current and voltage levels, switch(es), pot values AND tapers...etc. Mike Fuller is a good guy. I've talked with him on usenet, and through email a couple different times. He's famous for his ability to see a void in the marketplace, but more importantly, his ability to make it "happen". From what I also understand, he's an accomplished studio player and could no doubt play circles around me. Unless the articles didn't mention it, one thing he's not is an engineer. I am. The reason for that snippet is to support the statement that although I would not try to gain a "one-up" with a guitar on stage with him, I would go down to any Geek-U and be happy and excited to compare test scores. The point? Why in the fuck would I copy a circuit that has been so widely hit (on RG's) site and then bring it to the 'net for sale? The basic F/F circuit is too simple to hide any bullshit in. The fundamental design is similar to any ONE of them, but certainly is no fucking knock-off. Of the (few) passive components that exist, my values are not even CLOSE to his design. There is also a trimmer in a very effective and important position that I have not seen implemented yet. I cannot tell you how much this offends me. It never fails, no matter the location, there is always some assumption-making asshole more than willing to offer up their un-informed two cents. Please tell me that your reply was directed at something else. If not can you email your phone number to me? I would really love to discuss this in further detail with you. If you meant it, you have to be one big loser to look at a picture and declare what you did. You're WRONG in this case dude, this circuit is mine. I will send one directly to Fulltone so that Mike may back this up. What would you be willing to do for me when he says that I'm correct.< That's what I thought> Zero. How about a hi-res. close-up accompanied by a schematic sent directly to YOU? Would you then come back here and apologize? Thanks man. Your keen observation really helps me, and makes all of my effort worth while. It would make me feel better if I knew for sure that Karma really existed, Bill

2/23/2000 2:18 AM

Bill Kahle

Re: 69 pedal

Llamma:

Upon looking back at "my" original post, there's no benefit of doubt that I can give since you replied directly to me.
So, I guess here we go. First, from a 75 DPI 4" JPEG, you must have the perception, senses, and mental capacity of a genius.
So, Mr. Mensa-member are you prepared to give any details? I could run down the entire list, starting with the transistors, passive component values, the arrangement, parts count, adjustments, current and voltage levels, switch(es), pot values AND tapers...etc. Mike Fuller is a good guy. I've talked with him on usenet, and through email a couple different times. He's famous for his ability to see a void in the marketplace, but more importantly, his ability to make it "happen". From what I also understand, he's an accomplished studio player and could no doubt play circles around me. Unless the articles didn't mention it, one thing he's not is an engineer. I am. The reason for that snippet is to support the statement that although I would not try to gain a "one-up" with a guitar on stage with him, I would go down to any Geek-U and be happy and excited to compare test scores. The point? Why in the fuck would I copy a circuit that has been so widely hit (on RG's) site and then bring it to the 'net for sale? The basic F/F circuit is too simple to hide any bullshit in. The fundamental design is similar to any ONE of them, but certainly is no fucking knock-off. Of the (few) passive components that exist, my values are not even CLOSE to his design. There is also a trimmer in a very effective and important position that I have not seen implemented yet. I cannot tell you how much this offends me. It never fails, no matter the location, there is always some assumption-making asshole more than willing to offer up their un-informed two cents. Please tell me that your reply was directed at something else. If not can you email your phone number to me? I would really love to discuss this in further detail with you. If you meant it,
you have to be one big loser to look at a picture and declare what you did. You're WRONG in this case dude, this circuit is mine. I will send one directly to Fulltone so that Mike may back this up. What would you be willing to do for me when he says that I'm correct.< That's what I thought> Zero. How about a hi-res. close-up accompanied by a schematic sent directly to YOU? Would you then come back here and apologize?

Thanks man. Your keen observation really helps me, and makes all of my effort worth while.

It would make me feel better if I knew for sure that Karma really existed,

Bill

Replies:

jason What are you freakin' on? -- 2/23/2000 2:52 AM
Llamma I was infact talking about the Kama... -- 2/23/2000 4:47 AM