Hi Peter,
Well, I have to say that it is amazing how seldom people mention that yours uses the inverting topography. Maybe you should engrave that on the front!!
Still, It seems silly that someone with your design and construction skills would not come up with a more unique look.
You knew this would be an issue, and I guess figured the advantages outweighed the dis. But as a designer also, my advice is you should have more faith in your ability to do something better.
The great contribution of 47 Labs was rubbing our noses in the fact that chip amps can sound great, component selection is critical, short path is also important. I think they deserve lots of credit for these things, and you have been careful to mention this.
Another data point for the dual mono design: The Headroom highest end can amp is done the same way.
Mark Cronander
Well, I have to say that it is amazing how seldom people mention that yours uses the inverting topography. Maybe you should engrave that on the front!!
Still, It seems silly that someone with your design and construction skills would not come up with a more unique look.
You knew this would be an issue, and I guess figured the advantages outweighed the dis. But as a designer also, my advice is you should have more faith in your ability to do something better.
The great contribution of 47 Labs was rubbing our noses in the fact that chip amps can sound great, component selection is critical, short path is also important. I think they deserve lots of credit for these things, and you have been careful to mention this.
Another data point for the dual mono design: The Headroom highest end can amp is done the same way.
Mark Cronander
Variac said:
You are perfectly right here
But AMP-1 prototype wasn't actually started as a commercial product, but as a design study driven my curiosity, what all GC fuss was about. When my current business partner saw (and heard) the amp, he insisted we market it and that's why the current look. I admit, I had very strong reservations about coming up with something so similar looking to the other amp.
Personally, I think that my acrylic version is an attempt to be more original and currently I'm working on monoblocks which should be the natural progression from AMP-1.
The following link http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/278620.html summarizes quite nicely the whole controversy.
Peter: I think your current design is quite functional and attractive. There are sufficient differences such that no reasonable person would mistake your product for the competitor's.
Look at it this way - a Sony TV, functionally speaking, looks like just like a Panasonic or any other TV, i.e. picture tube in the front, buttons for changing channels, etc.
Ever bought a generic product at a store? The package is typically similar enough to the competitor's to attract the buyers attention, but never to the point that the two products could be confused for one another - That's the legal difference between generic branded products and Rolax watches. One is perfectly legal, the other is counterfeiting.
Don't let the bas%$&!ds get you down.
Look at it this way - a Sony TV, functionally speaking, looks like just like a Panasonic or any other TV, i.e. picture tube in the front, buttons for changing channels, etc.
Ever bought a generic product at a store? The package is typically similar enough to the competitor's to attract the buyers attention, but never to the point that the two products could be confused for one another - That's the legal difference between generic branded products and Rolax watches. One is perfectly legal, the other is counterfeiting.
Don't let the bas%$&!ds get you down.
Peter,
welcome to the cut-throat world of commercial audio, I guess.
I understand your argument and I also understand the detractors argument. Ingenuity was what got you to this point for the good and the bad part of it. On the other hand you could have been a little more original. It's easy to sit back and judge.
In legal terms I don't think you have anything to fear. In terms of publicity you can certainly use any form thereof at this stage of your operation. Your product is better under just about any point of view and cost half of what the other product. I think you are doing just fine. The most likely to be pissed about the deal are the people that purchased the gaincard, but they will never admit to it of course.
As I am sure you understand you will want to try and distance yourself from the gaincard ASAP and establish your own identity as a manifacturer. You don't really want to be associated to an inferior product like the gaincard.
welcome to the cut-throat world of commercial audio, I guess.
I understand your argument and I also understand the detractors argument. Ingenuity was what got you to this point for the good and the bad part of it. On the other hand you could have been a little more original. It's easy to sit back and judge.
In legal terms I don't think you have anything to fear. In terms of publicity you can certainly use any form thereof at this stage of your operation. Your product is better under just about any point of view and cost half of what the other product. I think you are doing just fine. The most likely to be pissed about the deal are the people that purchased the gaincard, but they will never admit to it of course.
As I am sure you understand you will want to try and distance yourself from the gaincard ASAP and establish your own identity as a manifacturer. You don't really want to be associated to an inferior product like the gaincard.
Hi Peter,
You could do an-online search for utility and design patents at the USPTO. If 47Lab has a utility patent, it may not cover anything you are doing. This I doubt since power opamps are used to amplify all sorts of signals, not just audio. If they have a design patent on the enclosure, it might. You'd best consult your intellectual property lawyer. If they don't, then only the philosophists will complain, with no legal place to stand.
If they happen to have patent protection of any kind, you can still keep making or selling the unit in countries where they don't have patents. Even though YMMV in various countries, that's the basic nature of IP law.
ensen.
You could do an-online search for utility and design patents at the USPTO. If 47Lab has a utility patent, it may not cover anything you are doing. This I doubt since power opamps are used to amplify all sorts of signals, not just audio. If they have a design patent on the enclosure, it might. You'd best consult your intellectual property lawyer. If they don't, then only the philosophists will complain, with no legal place to stand.
If they happen to have patent protection of any kind, you can still keep making or selling the unit in countries where they don't have patents. Even though YMMV in various countries, that's the basic nature of IP law.
ensen.PATENT WHAT??!!
They could even have a patent for the box, but that sounds ridiculous to me.
It's plenty of money to make a patent.
As for the electronics, what's there to patent?
The only active device is a power op-amp, and that is National Semiconductor's property.
The PSU?
Do you make a patent just because you used 1000uf caps? 
Or just because it's external? 
Or just because you run 4 wires instead of 3? 
Is it the volume pot?
Would a patent be accepted just because you used a 12-position switch with some resistors?
Oh, I see...
IT'S THOSE CRAPPY SPEAKER TERMINALS!!!
For the first time someone remembered to use telephone wire fixing connectors for audio!
Deam, seriously, I don't see anything to patent here.
They could even have a patent for the box, but that sounds ridiculous to me.
It's plenty of money to make a patent.
As for the electronics, what's there to patent?
The only active device is a power op-amp, and that is National Semiconductor's property.
The PSU?
Do you make a patent just because you used 1000uf caps?
Or just because it's external?
Or just because you run 4 wires instead of 3?
Is it the volume pot?
Would a patent be accepted just because you used a 12-position switch with some resistors?
Oh, I see...
IT'S THOSE CRAPPY SPEAKER TERMINALS!!!
For the first time someone remembered to use telephone wire fixing connectors for audio!
Deam, seriously, I don't see anything to patent here.
Hey guys, I think that this is probably getting blown out of proportion as the thread grows longer!
It seems to me that this is not about 47Labs, or any other manufacturer threatening Peter, rather a few rather jealous individuals on another forum who have raised this issue of the physical similarity between the two amps, as presumably they can't fault the AMP-1 in any other department.
Correct me if I am wrong but so far there have been no solicitors/lawyers or lawsuits. Until such time as another manufacturer does complain we certainly shouldn't belittle their products.
My guess is that there is room in the market for both the Amp-1 and Gaincard as there will always be those who want to pay the highest price because their ears can't tell the difference and they are reassurred by a higher price tag.
So, while we understandably are sticking up for 'one of our own',
let's not get too carried away with a war that isn't actually happening! (Remember the WMD 
)
It seems to me that this is not about 47Labs, or any other manufacturer threatening Peter, rather a few rather jealous individuals on another forum who have raised this issue of the physical similarity between the two amps, as presumably they can't fault the AMP-1 in any other department.
Correct me if I am wrong but so far there have been no solicitors/lawyers or lawsuits. Until such time as another manufacturer does complain we certainly shouldn't belittle their products.
My guess is that there is room in the market for both the Amp-1 and Gaincard as there will always be those who want to pay the highest price because their ears can't tell the difference and they are reassurred by a higher price tag.
So, while we understandably are sticking up for 'one of our own',
let's not get too carried away with a war that isn't actually happening! (Remember the WMD )
carlosfm said:
Actually there were two statements from Sakura Systems on behalf of 47Labs.
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/278633.html
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/278476.html
How to avoid controversy.....
You know...... This is not the way to do this. You have just handed your detractors all the ammunition they need. I find it awfully strange that a "reviewer" would not only get in the middle of all this, but START all this on another forum. Mention of the fact that a lot of design input was from members of this forum, seems strangely absent as well. I have warned that the overlap between commercial and hobbyist use of this forum is a big problem, and this is a textbook case! A cynic would say that a sustained controversy on TWO public forums is just more notoriety and free advertising. I can't believe a moderator wouldn't have sense enough not to get in the middle of something like this......
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/278470.html
Anybody else?
Already in Texas,
Fred
You know...... This is not the way to do this. You have just handed your detractors all the ammunition they need. I find it awfully strange that a "reviewer" would not only get in the middle of all this, but START all this on another forum. Mention of the fact that a lot of design input was from members of this forum, seems strangely absent as well. I have warned that the overlap between commercial and hobbyist use of this forum is a big problem, and this is a textbook case! A cynic would say that a sustained controversy on TWO public forums is just more notoriety and free advertising. I can't believe a moderator wouldn't have sense enough not to get in the middle of something like this......
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/278470.html
Anybody else?
Already in Texas,
Fred
Guys, let's recapitulate.
We own the basic GC circuit to Thorsten.
Not only for this, as I "know" him for some time (since the first days of TNT-Audio), but I consider this man a genious.
Then somebody makes it a little different...
I did put some things on my own too on the ones I made.
But we own to Peter Daniel the components that people are using these days.
He did listening tests with several diodes and got to the conclusion the ones he likes more are MUR860s.
People (not all, but most) are using them.
He changed the caps back and forwards and uses BGs.
People that whant the best and can afford them use them.
He tested resistors and told what he likes more.
Some people use the same resistors.
He tells you what cable he likes most, what speaker terminals...
Guys, this is very time-consumming and he did all that trouble, reported to us and spared us plenty of time with experiences.
Now the question:
WHAT'S ALL THIS GOT TO DO WITH THE 47 LABS GAINCARD?!
The box?
They must be joking...
We own the basic GC circuit to Thorsten.
Not only for this, as I "know" him for some time (since the first days of TNT-Audio), but I consider this man a genious.
Then somebody makes it a little different...
I did put some things on my own too on the ones I made.
But we own to Peter Daniel the components that people are using these days.
He did listening tests with several diodes and got to the conclusion the ones he likes more are MUR860s.
People (not all, but most) are using them.
He changed the caps back and forwards and uses BGs.
People that whant the best and can afford them use them.
He tested resistors and told what he likes more.
Some people use the same resistors.
He tells you what cable he likes most, what speaker terminals...
Guys, this is very time-consumming and he did all that trouble, reported to us and spared us plenty of time with experiences.
Now the question:
WHAT'S ALL THIS GOT TO DO WITH THE 47 LABS GAINCARD?!
The box?
They must be joking...
carlosfm said:
Now the question:
WHAT'S ALL THIS GOT TO DO WITH THE 47 LABS GAINCARD?!
The box?
They must be joking...
Hi,
IMHO try to answer your question is such that it is in the commercial side of the fence now and when bread and butter are involved, things get cut throat When the suffering company goes down there may be a few number of people/families get pulled down too. Let alone or put aside artistic/ ethic or ego moral issues.
So you may think there is nothing to do with them but if they think are being threaten they will for sure try to protect and fight back before it is too late; even though sometimes there may not be any legal ground to support the fight but there are other means or avenues to fight the battle.
Just my two cents of venting, no offends to anyone in mind at large.
Best Regards,
Chris
Re: How to avoid controversy.....
The controversy was started not by me, but by the reviewer having moral and legal doubts regarding taking for review a questionable product. I also have doubts, so I wanted to see the reaction and opinion of this forum members. If the overall judgement was clearly against me, I would withdraw this product (AMP-1) from the market.
This is a Chip Amps board, and althoughy you, Fred, don't participate much in GC building there are other members curious of any developments in this area. I think the review was such a case and following controversy was interesting also. It might be a free publicity, but I wouldn't count on that much.
Although I might be a moderator, my interest in Audio and my hobby (it is still not a business) will always be priority.
Now, what was exactly "a lot of input input from members of this forum, that seemed strangely absent as well"? Everybody knows that I used Thorsten schematic as a starting point and some version of this schematic was included in a review.
Fred Dieckmann said:
The controversy was started not by me, but by the reviewer having moral and legal doubts regarding taking for review a questionable product. I also have doubts, so I wanted to see the reaction and opinion of this forum members. If the overall judgement was clearly against me, I would withdraw this product (AMP-1) from the market.
This is a Chip Amps board, and althoughy you, Fred, don't participate much in GC building there are other members curious of any developments in this area. I think the review was such a case and following controversy was interesting also. It might be a free publicity, but I wouldn't count on that much.
Although I might be a moderator, my interest in Audio and my hobby (it is still not a business) will always be priority.
Now, what was exactly "a lot of input input from members of this forum, that seemed strangely absent as well"? Everybody knows that I used Thorsten schematic as a starting point and some version of this schematic was included in a review.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.