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

ampage archive

Vintage threads from the first ten years

Addition to list of Rangemaster transistors

3/12/2000 4:18 PM
Mark Hammer	Addition to list of Rangemaster transistors Put together an Austin Trebleblaster last night. I used a 2SB172 transistor with an hfe of about 120, and it worked great. Instant Beano, with a nice soft compression when you get above the 10th fret or so. Ended up using 33k for the base-to-ground resistor, and 2.7k for the emitter-to-ground resistor, yielding -6.7 volts as the collector-to-ground voltage. Everything else was as outlined in RG's doc (thanks guy, VERY clear and easy to follow). A ne'er-do-well electronic parts retailer in my region went belly up and sold a stack of bubble packed 6-packs of NOS Japanese Ge transistors to another place, which are now going for a buck a pop. I have a very wide assortment of these (they come in "variety packs"), and hope to try and identify a bunch of other contenders for this simple but satisfying little gadget.

3/12/2000 4:18 PM

Mark Hammer

Addition to list of Rangemaster transistors

Put together an Austin Trebleblaster last night. I used a 2SB172 transistor with an hfe of about 120, and it worked great. Instant Beano, with a nice soft compression when you get above the 10th fret or so. Ended up using 33k for the base-to-ground resistor, and 2.7k for the emitter-to-ground resistor, yielding -6.7 volts as the collector-to-ground voltage. Everything else was as outlined in RG's doc (thanks guy, VERY clear and easy to follow).

A ne'er-do-well electronic parts retailer in my region went belly up and sold a stack of bubble packed 6-packs of NOS Japanese Ge transistors to another place, which are now going for a buck a pop. I have a very wide assortment of these (they come in "variety packs"), and hope to try and identify a bunch of other contenders for this simple but satisfying little gadget.

3/12/2000 11:32 PM

R.G.

Careful what you say, the CIA's back...

Don Butler, mister "I've got a brother in the CIA", and purveyor of the "Rangemaster 65" (tm) pedal notes in the Vox BBC forum:

quote:
"Rangemaster news: An application has been recieved & granted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office which will register the name "Rangemaster", it's look and circuit to me. They have granted me the right to put the little "TM" symbol next to it's name so it's interests are now protected. What this means is that nobody can commerically use or sell anything like it except me with out my permission. I've made & sold a few hundred of these and appreciate everyone who's bought my little germanium powered treble/gain booster."

It's not clear whether he obtained a trademark on "Rangemaster" or "Rangemaster 65", which is what he calls his pedals.

Don either still doesn't understand copyright or trademark law apparently, or is still blustering about protection of the circuit. In any case, if his post is true, he now owns the word
"rangemaster" as it applies to guitar effects, so you might want to note the distinction between whatever you refer to and anything with
"R*ng*m*st*r" in it.

3/13/2000 1:10 AM
Cole	How can you patent a circuit that's in every single basic electronics book as an example of Class A transistor biasing? More ridiculous patents have gone through, though. FYI, a quick name only search of the IBM Patent Server didn't turn up anything.

3/13/2000 1:27 AM
Gus	Where do you look for postings on trademarks? Trademark a circuit?? Trademark a box???

3/13/2000 3:11 AM
Bombay	http://www.patents.ibm.com/ This should take you there.

3/13/2000 3:24 PM
R.G.	The long and short of it is this: Trademarks and service marks are symbols, logos, or words that are given legal protection to prevent business competitors from offering copies of another business's goods. The roots are in European law where each maker of something would stamp it with his own "mark" to show it was made by him, and therefore a genuine whatever-it-was. We honor that tradition by preventing companies from using the same "mark", so two makers of corn flakes can't use the same or confusingly similar names or logos. Very logical. You cannot trademark a circuit. You could trademark a specific drawing of a circuit as you might trademark a logo, but that would not prevent anyone from making the circuit and selling it, since that is not the same as the drawing of the circuit used as a logo. You cannot copyright a circuit, although you can obtain a copyright on a specific drawing of a circuit. Any drawing of the same circuit that is not obviously a copy is not an infringement. To legally protect a circuit from copying, you must patent it. To patent, it must be new, novel, useful, reducible to practice, and not "obvious to one skilled in the art". In particular, patent protection must be applied for within one year of the first commercial sale of the device. A positive defense against patent claims is prior art. If a patent is found to replicate prior art, the patent itself can be invalidated if it's found to be the same as an earlier process, item, or method. This is why Randall Smith will probably never litigate his patents - too many old textbooks show the same thing. There is also a "design patent", a kind of hybrid of copyright and patent, that protects what is best described as the look and feel of a product. This is for preventing people from copying your neato design of boxes, covers, lettering, decoration, and so on. You could obtain a design patent on a specific kind of decoration on a box. Design patents are kind of patent on decorations and streamlining. As always, these idea represent only my understanding of the law, and may or may not be correct or valid. Before you do anything that might cause you to violate any civil or criminal statute, you should consult a licensed attorney of your choosing. Your mileage may vary.

3/13/2000 3:24 PM

R.G.

The long and short of it is this:
Trademarks and service marks are symbols, logos, or words that are given legal protection to prevent business competitors from offering copies of another business's goods. The roots are in European law where each maker of something would stamp it with his own "mark" to show it was made by him, and therefore a genuine whatever-it-was. We honor that tradition by preventing companies from using the same "mark", so two makers of corn flakes can't use the same or confusingly similar names or logos. Very logical.

You cannot trademark a circuit. You could trademark a specific drawing of a circuit as you might trademark a logo, but that would not prevent anyone from making the circuit and selling it, since that is not the same as the drawing of the circuit used as a logo.

You cannot copyright a circuit, although you can obtain a copyright on a specific drawing of a circuit. Any drawing of the same circuit that is not obviously a copy is not an infringement.

To legally protect a circuit from copying, you must patent it. To patent, it must be new, novel, useful, reducible to practice, and not "obvious to one skilled in the art". In particular, patent protection must be applied for within one year of the first commercial sale of the device. A positive defense against patent claims is prior art. If a patent is found to replicate prior art, the patent itself can be invalidated if it's found to be the same as an earlier process, item, or method. This is why Randall Smith will probably never litigate his patents - too many old textbooks show the same thing.

There is also a "design patent", a kind of hybrid of copyright and patent, that protects what is best described as the look and feel of a product. This is for preventing people from copying your neato design of boxes, covers, lettering, decoration, and so on.
You could obtain a design patent on a specific kind of decoration on a box. Design patents are kind of patent on decorations and streamlining.

As always, these idea represent only my understanding of the law, and may or may not be correct or valid. Before you do anything that might cause you to violate any civil or criminal statute, you should consult a licensed attorney of your choosing. Your mileage may vary.

3/13/2000 3:54 PM
Mark Hammer	My "RANGEMASTER"(TM) is busted and I want to know what replacement transistors are available...and I also want to rant To repost... So, I'm fiddling with a circuit of the famed (and trademarked) "Rangemaster" that you have heard so much about. And I am wondering if a 2SB172 transistor will be an acceptable substitute for the original one installed in this fine, but now broken, product. Armed with the technical information provided by RG Keen about a similar (but NOT identical) device, I am pleased to say that it will work, providing another source of emergency replacements for when the existing component on this outstanding commercial product does not function anymore. Once upon a time, in the old days, people simply put out a decent product for a fair price, were content to make an income that vaulted them to lower middle class and a recent issue AMC car, and that was it. These days, to be a manufacturer is to either be a predator, or live in fear of them. This is most especially true in a culture and economy that depends upon the disposible income and priorities of youth, and caters its production plans in that direction. The demise of business ethics, especially in an era of increasing globalization and the ability to hide behind national borders and act unethically, not to mention every little pisher thinking they can be a day trader and making companies crazy with the fear of falling behind and losing investors, dismays me. It also leads to an increasingly litigious mentality, exemplified by the note RG alludes to, simply because people stand to make a lot of money off stupid teenagers with McJobs and somebody else paying for milk and toilet paper. If it isn't Disney or Coca-Cola or Nike going after somebody, it's guys making pedals. Maybe it's time to recognize that perhaps NOBODY deserves to make bundles of money off of things that lure little boys (and sometimes little girls) to a wastrel life of noisemaking and hearing loss. Sure we like distortion units, but are they good for us? Should someone get rich, or plan on getting rich, because of something that isn't really good for people? I see it as a bit like trademarking or copyrighting pornography. Imagine Larry Flynt copyrighting a certain..."pose"...such that no one else may use it in their publications. All of a sudden a legal battle flares up because some competing "publication" dared to use photos of the "pose", and is impacting on Flynt's income, in the words of his legal team. S'cuse me? Does ANYONE deserve to make money from this, let alone become richer by virtue of applying the law like a club? How's that for cranky on a Monday morning? Please note that I say this from the other side of a border where the balance is shifted a little more in favour of collective rights and community responsibility, than in favour of individual rights (the "u" in "favour" gives it away).

3/13/2000 3:54 PM

Mark Hammer

My "RANGEMASTER"(TM) is busted and I want to know what replacement transistors are available...and I also want to rant

To repost...

So, I'm fiddling with a circuit of the famed (and trademarked) "Rangemaster" that you have heard so much about. And I am wondering if a 2SB172 transistor will be an acceptable substitute for the original one installed in this fine, but now broken, product. Armed with the technical information provided by RG Keen about a similar (but NOT identical) device, I am pleased to say that it will work, providing another source of emergency replacements for when the existing component on this outstanding commercial product does not function anymore.

Once upon a time, in the old days, people simply put out a decent product for a fair price, were content to make an income that vaulted them to lower middle class and a recent issue AMC car, and that was it.

These days, to be a manufacturer is to either be a predator, or live in fear of them. This is most especially true in a culture and economy that depends upon the disposible income and priorities of youth, and caters its production plans in that direction. The demise of business ethics, especially in an era of increasing globalization and the ability to hide behind national borders and act unethically, not to mention every little pisher thinking they can be a day trader and making companies crazy with the fear of falling behind and losing investors, dismays me. It also leads to an increasingly litigious mentality, exemplified by the note RG alludes to, simply because people stand to make a lot of money off stupid teenagers with McJobs and somebody else paying for milk and toilet paper. If it isn't Disney or Coca-Cola or Nike going after somebody, it's guys making pedals. Maybe it's time to recognize that perhaps NOBODY deserves to make bundles of money off of things that lure little boys (and sometimes little girls) to a wastrel life of noisemaking and hearing loss. Sure we *like* distortion units, but are they good for us? Should someone get rich, or plan on getting rich, because of something that isn't really good for people?

I see it as a bit like trademarking or copyrighting pornography. Imagine Larry Flynt copyrighting a certain..."pose"...such that no one else may use it in their publications. All of a sudden a legal battle flares up because some competing "publication" dared to use photos of the "pose", and is impacting on Flynt's income, in the words of his legal team. S'cuse me? Does ANYONE *deserve* to make money from this, let alone become richer by virtue of applying the law like a club?

How's that for cranky on a Monday morning? Please note that I say this from the other side of a border where the balance is shifted a little more in favour of collective rights and community responsibility, than in favour of individual rights (the "u" in "favour" gives it away).

Page 1 of 4

Next>

Last Page>>