electro-music.com   Dedicated to experimental electro-acoustic
and electronic music
 
    Front Page  |  Articles  |  Radio
 |  Media  |  Forum  |  Wiki  |  Links  |  Store
Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
 FAQFAQ   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   LinksLinks
 RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in  Chat RoomChat Room 
 Forum index » DIY Hardware and Software
Backlog Free "Special Timbral Generator" DIY
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: jksuperstar, Scott Stites, Uncle Krunkus
Page 1 of 3 [69 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page: 1, 2, 3 Next
Author Message
phdinfunk



Joined: Jun 04, 2008
Posts: 115
Location: Taiwan

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:00 am    Post subject: Backlog Free "Special Timbral Generator" DIY
Subject description: First "backlog free" project nearing readiness
Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

So here's the story. I have been doing a little DIY here and there throughout the years. Some of you may remember me from the old SDIY list back in the late 1990s: When I was about 19 I got really frustrated one day and pretty much gave up for awhile, but Tom Gamble helped me out and I kept doing baby steps and building kits and projects here and there. Eventually I decided that

a) I'm not an engineer, even though I like building things
b) DIY is still cool
c) Designing panels and interfaces and actually PLAYING synths is more fun than debugging stuff...
c2) building is mega-fun, so long as you actually get to finish something you can enjoy afterwards, as opposed to having half-built and half-working things laying around that you spent a wad of cash and a lot of time on.
d) DIY is still a better way for poor college students to play world class instruments than to saaaaaaay, BUY a vintage EMS, Buchla, Oberheim 4 voice, etc... let alone new ones. I remember, par example, my beloved x0xb0x.

Well we've been at it in a secret underground lab since November, and the holidays are passing and we've pushed the date back by about a month. However, I and my reverse engineering specialist friend have been rebuilding one good 'ol Timbre Generating dual osc from the classic 1970s circuit (no patent laws were broken in this project, FYI).

Yeah, there have been some errors in the commonly available schematics that we've had to work through, and a few parts we needed to sub (and some NOS we decided to keep in to preserve the original sound quality, for instance the vactrols in the original circuit).

We're setting it up with edge pin connections for all the pots and I/O and doing it in turnkey small runs. These will be PCBs assembled and tested working with all parts. Maybe you want Pots, switches and lights as well?

So, what do you guys think? We're doing EVERYTHING in our grasp to keep the price on the low-end, but it looks like perkin-elmer vactrols may be absolutely necessary, along with tempcos and maybe a couple of old trannys.

But the overall point here is *world class* kit for the poor college student who ain't a frigging engineer. . . .something to start and build your whole system around. Something the advanced experimenter could turn into a polysynth (which is what I'm going to do with my boards, probably. After all, everything is on-board for computer control).

This is not a mere shot in the dark, we're nearing completion on this bad-boy so. . . . assuming a realistic final debugging phase, fixing our layouts, and setting up a deal with a small-run PCB manufacturer/assembly, maybe April.

So, who should I contact when they're available?

--JP

www.phdinfunk.com
www.coolsynths.com

Last edited by phdinfunk on Sun Sep 22, 2013 4:15 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ericcoleridge



Joined: Jan 16, 2007
Posts: 885
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:10 pm    Post subject: Re: Backlog Free "Special Timbral Generator" DIY
Subject description: First "backlog free" project nearing readiness
Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Are you're saying you've cloned the Buchla 259 Dual VCO, and you're going to sell it as an assembled, tested PCB? I'm guessing you'd have to sell this for several hundred $$$ just to break even, right?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
frijitz



Joined: May 04, 2007
Posts: 1712
Location: NM USA
Audio files: 54

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Did you contact Don about doing this?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Boogdish



Joined: Sep 21, 2009
Posts: 122
Location: Bloomington, IN

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Maybe I'm a bit of a weirdo but this seems backwards to me in regards to what makes DIY fun. If I wanted something that had already been tested and I just had to plug it into my system, I'd just buy a completed module. Debugging is the best way to really learn the guts of these things, it's not always fun, but I'm really glad that I go through it because it helps me improves myself.

That being said, this might be a good introductory project for people who are new to DIY since it will be less intimidating.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TekniK



Joined: Aug 10, 2008
Posts: 1062

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:08 pm    Post subject: Re: Backlog Free "Special Timbral Generator" DIY
Subject description: First "backlog free" project nearing readiness
Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

phdinfunk wrote:


So, who should I contact when they're available?

--JP


Contact nobody and don't offer pcb's or i can guaranteed u will have problems
Listen to my sage words .. maybe ask moderators to delete the topic..

Last edited by TekniK on Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ericcoleridge



Joined: Jan 16, 2007
Posts: 885
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I don't want to be contentious-- but why would Don Buchla care that a handful of DIY guys on a nerd forum were recycling a 40 year old design of his? Every time someone "clones" a vintage circuit, someone else asks if the original designer gave permission-- which is a very thoughtful thing to ask-- but is it really necessary? I'm sure it's not legally necessary, and I don't see why it's even ethically necessary. Someone might print up 100 or 200 PCBs, of which 40 or 50 might actually get amateur assembly-- and perhaps half of these will go into use. This is peanuts, no? I guess it's an ongoing conversation...

But looking at recent history, with Thomas White's LPG, Topp's 281, Aaron Lanterman's 208 Music Easel PCBs, it's clear that Don doesn't care; I believe more than once his first response was "do you realize these are 40 year old designs?" In other words, he's wondering why we want to build these circuits at all-- it seems to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TekniK



Joined: Aug 10, 2008
Posts: 1062

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

ericcoleridge wrote:
I don't want to be contentious-- but why would Don Buchla care that a handful of DIY guys on a nerd forum were recycling a 40 year old design of his? Every time someone "clones" a vintage circuit, someone else asks if the original designer gave permission-- which is a very thoughtful thing to ask-- but is it really necessary? I'm sure it's not legally necessary, and I don't see why it's even ethically necessary. Someone might print up 100 or 200 PCBs, of which 40 or 50 might actually get amateur assembly-- and perhaps half of these will go into use. This is peanuts, no? I guess it's an ongoing conversation...

But looking at recent history, with Thomas White's LPG, Topp's 281, Aaron Lanterman's 208 Music Easel PCBs, it's clear that Don doesn't care; I believe more than once his first response was "do you realize these are 40 year old designs?" In other words, he's wondering why we want to build these circuits at all-- it seems to me.


You are totaly right and i completely agree with you ofcource,only for some designs/modulles some owners that made them in the past get a bit excited,particulary if its not a redrawn or based-on circuit but an accurate reproduction and on top sold as full populated board..

I repeat ,care should be taken on this one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adambee7



Joined: Apr 04, 2009
Posts: 420
Location: united kingdom

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

ericcoleridge - Don would find this amusing. as you said these are old designs. i would email him anyway about it as a courtesy. just to say thanks if you know what i mean. Very Happy Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
phdinfunk



Joined: Jun 04, 2008
Posts: 115
Location: Taiwan

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 9:17 pm    Post subject: Names? Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Well, I'll either get permission from the original designer of this circuit, whoever that may be, or I will definitely leave his name out of it.

As for cost, we're building it with some parts subs, and it's in <gasp> SMT, which I know will offend a few purists out there. The expensive bits are definitely the Perkin-Elmer vactrols. It will probably be in the order of magnitude of $300 for the assembled and tested, ready to plug and rock PCB, though I'm trying to push that lower. However, buying JUST a PCB and a parts kit for some of the equivalent complex and exotic DIY out there would cost you similar.

I'm not violating any intellectual property laws, and I'm not even invoking anyone's name. You're speculating about the designer.

I am only saying that I've managed to reverse engineer something that to my knowledge hasn't ever been cloned. I always wanted one, and now I'll be able to make my own four voice synth equivalent to one I once saw on Ebay for $15,000 (sic). So, I thought, "why not let other people in on this? They can still design their own panels, choose knobs and the way everything looks, and put it together. And it will be a guaranteed successful project for them." I mean, where's the downside? Isn't that a big part of the spirit of DIY, pooled runs, etc?

In my opinion we live in a world where you can assemble a computer more powerful than deep blue for under $2000 USD, so the very idea of "boutique electronic circuitry" borders on absurdity. . . and seems like a bit of a gimmick to me.

Just where I'm coming from on this,

-=JP=-
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adambee7



Joined: Apr 04, 2009
Posts: 420
Location: united kingdom

PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

smd is alright. bypass caps for ics, some ics. just experiment and see really. in the end does it affect the sound and reliability Very Happy Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TekniK



Joined: Aug 10, 2008
Posts: 1062

PostPosted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 6:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

if its most in smd and so that way surely different,for certain soundwise,its not a clone and i think you can't have any troubles.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
frijitz



Joined: May 04, 2007
Posts: 1712
Location: NM USA
Audio files: 54

PostPosted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

ericcoleridge wrote:
I don't want to be contentious-- but why would Don Buchla care that a handful of DIY guys on a nerd forum were recycling a 40 year old design of his?

That's for him to decide, not you.

Quote:
Every time someone "clones" a vintage circuit, someone else asks if the original designer gave permission-- which is a very thoughtful thing to ask-- but is it really necessary? I'm sure it's not legally necessary, and I don't see why it's even ethically necessary.

"Necessary" has nothing to do with it. Asking is the right thing to do. Why risk creating ill will and endangering future projects?

Quote:
But looking at recent history, with Thomas White's LPG, Topp's 281, Aaron Lanterman's 208 Music Easel PCBs, it's clear that Don doesn't care; I believe more than once his first response was "do you realize these are 40 year old designs?" In other words, he's wondering why we want to build these circuits at all-- it seems to me.

Perhaps, but that is just speculation on your part.

Ian
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RSFC



Joined: Sep 02, 2010
Posts: 63
Location: space lab

PostPosted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Just curious why don buchla gets special treatment. Don't misunderstand me, I think it is great if original designers are asked and even better if they are compensated. However, I seem to only see these "did you ask" threads with buchla stuff. There are prominent diy guys and respected manufacturers making a profit on what are straight up clones and no one bats an eye. Mention buchla and it's chaos. What's the deal?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adambee7



Joined: Apr 04, 2009
Posts: 420
Location: united kingdom

PostPosted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 10:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Thing is Don is a nice guy. email him anyway. tom white did and even got questions answered about the design from him. so emailing him wouldn't be a bad idea. you might get some advice. u never know. Very Happy Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
synthi



Joined: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 28
Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Hey! Yes I remember you from the SDIY list, good old times...

...and you come with good news!
Thanks and keep us informed!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sduck



Joined: Dec 16, 2007
Posts: 442
Location: Nashville
Audio files: 5

PostPosted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 10:34 pm    Post subject: Re: Names? Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I'll definitely buy one or 2. It sounds like a great project!

I don't know why you guys are still harping on the subject - he wrote
phdinfunk wrote:
Well, I'll either get permission from the original designer of this circuit, whoever that may be, or I will definitely leave his name out of it.

I'm not violating any intellectual property laws, and I'm not even invoking anyone's name. You're speculating about the designer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RSFC



Joined: Sep 02, 2010
Posts: 63
Location: space lab

PostPosted: Sat Feb 05, 2011 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Looks like someone on muff is going to try and do a PCB of the 259. It is in its infancy but for those who want to solder themselves and don't want a populated board that might be a good alternative.

http://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/topic-28976.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ericcoleridge



Joined: Jan 16, 2007
Posts: 885
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Sat Feb 05, 2011 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

[quote="RSFC"]Looks like someone on muff is going to try and do a PCB of the 259.[\quote]

If it was as easy as populating the PCB artwork that's available on the web, it would already be done. This guy on the Muff forum admits to having no electronics training-- it doesnt seem very likely that he'll get it working.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
toppobrillo



Joined: Dec 10, 2005
Posts: 766
Location: oakland, ca
G2 patch files: 1

PostPosted: Sat Feb 05, 2011 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Quote:
But looking at recent history, with Thomas White's LPG, Topp's 281, Aaron Lanterman's 208 Music Easel PCBs, it's clear that Don doesn't care; I believe more than once his first response was "do you realize these are 40 year old designs?" In other words, he's wondering why we want to build these circuits at all-- it seems to me.


I believe in Lanterman's case it was something more like "I couldn't stop you if I tried" which doesn't sound at all to me like "I don't care". correct me if I am wrong, and bear in mind that either of these statements taken out of context could certainly say different things to different people.

in my case, I first designed the 281 boards for myself.. later after suggestions from a few others, and my desire for more boards without the drilling and etching, I decided to do a run. asking permission did not occur to me, and that may sound weird to some people, but given the fact it is 40 yrs old and, Don's moved on and made a modern, programmable version for a pretty affordable [all things considered] $800.

so it came up pretty quick as I was hashing out the details for the 1st group buy and one of the forum owners (Mosc, who once worked for Don) actually took liberty and emailed Buchla himself about the 281 project on this forum. nothing came back from Buchla so I decided to just give him a call to talk about it.

I was really nervous just talking to the guy, and probably gave him WAY too much information but eventually just asked straight up, "how do you feel about this?" the 1st thing he said to me was "well, it's a really simple circuit" which I sort of took to mean "maybe you could just design something like it yourself" and/or "it's nothing special" I don't really know. but then he went on to "it's fine" I then offered to charge a few bucks extra and send him the cash. he laughed a little and said don't worry about it. he was very cool about it, so it wasn't painful at all to ask and I actually felt better after talking with him.

anyways...

it's certainly not lost on the Buchla team that re-releasing 200 series modules would be huge, and they've probably been approached about 'licensing' numerous times, but the've moved on with new concepts that puts them in a class of their own again, and for whatever reasons, they don't seem to be interested in doing either of these things.. but this is just speculation.

there is a very fine line I think here, and it seems to move alot. it's not nearly as simple as money, as evidenced by Don's attitude. there is a degree of sentimentality, like art, and to some degree, entitlement. take the Verbos 258 clone for example. I don't know the whole story behind this, so please correct me if I am wrong.. Mark's got a huge system, so he didn't [publicly at least] take much heat from anyone that I am aware of? maybe I missed it....

it is indeed an ongoing conversation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
reve



Joined: Feb 23, 2008
Posts: 147
Location: USA

PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I'd be interested in hearing more, as this shapes up, yeah. Sorta at the limits of my price range, though....
_________________
- r. mosquito
SynthDIY Synthpop -> http://www.reverbnation.com/photovoltaik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
decaying.sine



Joined: Aug 31, 2009
Posts: 92
Location: New Haven, CT, USA

PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 7:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Hey Folks,
I wanted to drop a line in this thread. I am the guy posting some info about doing a 259 clone over at Muff's. My goal was to use the original PCB and panel artwork to create vector graphic clones, etch the PCBs, and work on the build from there. I was doing this only for my personal use with no intention or desire to sell it. I did have a strong wish to share everything and every step of the way though with SDIY folks. That was part of the fun for me. I did make extremely accurate reproductions of the PCB and panel using inkscape. They look amazing. In talks with some of my fellow DIY folks over at Muff's I decided to email Mr. Buchla. I shared all of my cloned artwork with him and was very up front about everything. I pasted in my post from Muff's below that describes his response.

As was mentioned here at EM, I don't have electronics training and this is a huge and wildly complex project. That's precisely why I wanted to work on it because I figured it would be fun to immerse myself. I am going to proceed with working on a build but as you'll see from my post below, I'll have to modify my approach a bit. I'll document failures and successes over at Muff's. If I am able to recreate something that works well, I'll share it in the way you folks have done so everyone can critique it, change it, etc.

Sorry for the threadjack, but thought it would be interesting to post here because I received a response from Mr. Buchla.
-Brian

My (decaying.sine / Brian's) post from Muff's...
I received a very pleasant and thoughtful reply from Mr. Buchla. I explained precisely what I had already done, and shared all of my artwork clones with him. I also let him know that my plans were for personal use only and not intended for profit.

His response was very clear. I am fully welcome to build this instrument. However, the artwork, which includes his PCB design and panel layout are under common copyright law. Thus, he asked that I do not replicate these and do not share what I have done so far at Muff's or other locations. He "does not want to see people tempted to build obsolete or unstable equipment."

He also noted that the design has many obsolete components including the entire "digital control system" and instabilities, and there are currently better available options from him and others.

His approach is consistent with what others have experienced when asking about using the designs from what I have read. My read of his message to me is that I may not use the artwork clones that I have created, even if they are for my personal use. That part disappoints me because I invested a great deal of time in doing the vector graphics. As I mentioned above, the whole point of my approach was to replicate those artworks for myself because I really like them. However, Mr. Buchla is kind enough to allow his schematics to float around, was very nice and reasonable in his email, and I certainly will respect his wishes.

I am going to think about what I'd like to do and will certainly post here for feedback. I am little worried about trying to make my own PCBs but maybe that would be fun even if it fails. I'd certainly learn quite a bit. If I keep everyone up to date, then maybe little contributions here and there will help.

I'll likely try to clarify my use of the vector graphic artwork just for my own build as long as I don't share it.

Let me think a bit, and I'll post again soon! I certainly share everyone's excitement about the 259 so I am motivated to do something. It's a great project for me. It's very difficult and has a high likelihood of not working and that makes me want to do it even more :sb:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
phdinfunk



Joined: Jun 04, 2008
Posts: 115
Location: Taiwan

PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

decaying.sine wrote:
Hey Folks,
I wanted to drop a line in this thread. I am the guy posting some info about doing a 259 clone over at Muff's. My goal was to use the original PCB and panel artwork to create vector graphic clones, etch the PCBs, and work on the build from there.

Sorry for the threadjack.

His approach is consistent with what others have experienced when asking about using the designs from what I have read. My read of his message to me is that I may not use the artwork clones that I have created, even if they are for my personal use. That part disappoints me because I invested a great deal of time in doing the vector graphics. As I mentioned above, the whole point of my approach was to replicate those artworks for myself because I really like them. However, Mr. Buchla is kind enough to allow his schematics to float around, was very nice and reasonable in his email, and I certainly will respect his wishes. :sb:


As the OP, I'm totally not offended by the threadjack. This certainly contributes to my own understanding of the situation with Mr. Buchla as well as everyone else's, I think.

Also, yours sounds like a cool project. I wonder if you could use those inkscape vector graphics in any way to redraw a circuit board layout? I mean, yes, PCB artwork is copyright for sure, but most old circuits are not only not patented but probably were unpatentable to begin with (as most of them aren't original enough technology to qualify for a U.S. patent).

Definitely the digital control circuitry system is obsolete. However, in a clone, I would be inclined to replace the system with modern components and leave it in for experimentation. The whole idea of some kind of old-school microprocessor control bus to screw around with appeals to me on some level (most of it is just extra CV inputs anyways, but the switching is done with ICs, for anyone not familiar with the circuit). Of course, you could always flip the switches to "local" control.

You know what I think'd be cool? One of those 259 thingies you're talking about, an EMS Synthi Osc A and Ringmod, a couple of Serge Style EGs, maybe some MS20 filters, and some lowpass gates all on some kind of ASIC. . . .

--JP

www.phdinfunk.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
phdinfunk



Joined: Jun 04, 2008
Posts: 115
Location: Taiwan

PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:25 pm    Post subject:
Subject description: thanks!
Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

"I'd be interested in hearing more, as this shapes up, yeah. Sorta at the limits of my price range, though"

Thanks Reve, this is good feedback for me.

We're trying to push this is low as possible, but I'd hate to give a too-low estimate so I'm just telling you what it would cost based on me having pcbfabexpress make five or ten of them right now.

We're testing the Perkin-Elmer Vactrols versus the modern Silonex ones. However, the response curves are a little different. He prefers the Perkin-Elmer, and I kind of like the vaguely longer release times on the Silonex, but then he's being obsessive about keeping things as close to original as possible. I think it's just "an engineer thing," though I appreciate his perspective on this.

This thing has got a bunch of Vactrols in it, but actually we can't replace some of them because the topology requires some dual element units, of which Silonex doesn't make any. So, it's down to changing the actual topology, or keeping some things NOS. Thus far, we're preserving the circuit topology to a T.

There are other parts we're striking balances on, from Tranny pairs to other bits here and there. We're also trying to find places to do short runs. I'm working on GuanXi with some suppliers here in Taiwan as well (hey, it's where your apple stuff was made). At the very least, things like jacks and knobs are crazy cheap here.

The main idea though is a world-class synth that I could have had (along with cool filters and VCAs and maybe some SEM Envelopes, which are my fav. EGs) back when I was a poor college student. Thus, if it gets out of that range, then it would defeat my core intention, yes?

--JP

www.phdinfunk.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TekniK



Joined: Aug 10, 2008
Posts: 1062

PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

decaying.sine wrote:

His response was very clear.


And you got it very fast,faster then reply's concerning his 200e product!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
decaying.sine



Joined: Aug 31, 2009
Posts: 92
Location: New Haven, CT, USA

PostPosted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

TekniK wrote:
decaying.sine wrote:

His response was very clear.


And you got it very fast,faster then reply's concerning his 200e product!


It sure was quick. Less than a day.

You got some good ideas phdinfunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: jksuperstar, Scott Stites, Uncle Krunkus
Page 1 of 3 [69 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Goto page: 1, 2, 3 Next
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » DIY Hardware and Software
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
e-m mkii

Please support our site. If you click through and buy from
our affiliate partners, we earn a small commission.


Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Copyright © 2003 through 2009 by electro-music.com - Conditions Of Use