Why don't PedalPCB build docs tell you what trimmers are for?

[LetsPaul]

I think you are doing a good job presenting your points without being critical. I think it comes down to an implication that the site operator should want to allocate more thought and time into providing more useful information in the build documents, while others understand that the site prioritizes putting out new boards with minimal documentation, sometimes with the build documents lagging for some time after the boards are offered. There are resources in the forums along with people willing to help.

Well, I tried to be explicitly clear in my OP, twice, that I wasn't putting any expectations, demands, or judgements on the site operator.

I was just trying to give a counterpoint to the view I was seeing form other posters, that bare minimum docs were actively better in a general sense.

In all other respects I agree with what you're saying.

 

[LetsPaul]

The BOM example I am referencing is in Skeptical Buffer. He puts tant on one of the components. It is very barebones. I agree this could not be newbie friendly. However, a counterpoint is lots of pages of documentation fluff isn't either.

Thanks. I'll give that a look.

I was never advocating for lots of fluff, just more specific part types listed for a "default" build, in the fashion of Coda Effects and Breakfast Audio's docs.

And yeah, looking back at my posts, I could have worded myself better. I can see how some of my more "off the cuff" language looks more antagonistic than I meant. I will try to learn from that. My apologies for stirring things up.

 

[ThePanda]

Thanks. I'll give that a look.

I was never advocating for lots of fluff, just more specific part types listed for a "default" build, in the fashion of Coda Effects and Breakfast Audio's docs.

And yeah, looking back at my posts, I could have worded myself better. I can see how some of my more "off the cuff" language looks more antagonistic than I meant. I will try to learn from that. My apologies for stirring things up.

whoa. the breakfast audio and coda docs are pretty extensive and detailed.
have you seen the stewmac ones?

 

[LetsPaul]

everyone here was new at some point. There are a number of forums, vendors and suppliers that cater to this very small and niche market of hobby pedal builders. Many, not all, have links or FAQs to the knowledge you so desperately seek. Searching within this forum and google will give you all the answers you seek. I admire the quest for information, but the reality of diy pedal building, as with most hobbies, is that you will ultimately have to do your own research and learn through trial and error like all of us here, even the most seasoned builders. I don't know that pleading your case in a somewhat argumentative fashion on a public forum is the best way to have someone give it to you now, and why here of all places? Have you tried this on DIYSB??? It really sounds like you want everything handed to you and you don't want to be a part of the community, at least that's how it comes off.

I apologize for mispresenting myself in an antagonistic fashion. That was indeed my screw up, and caused a lot of unnecessary argument.

I'm in no way asking for everything to be handed to me, and I'm not sure how that came across. Literally all I'm trying to say is that extreme barebones docs are useful to a much narrower range of people, so barebonesness is maybe not an absolute metric for quality.

 

[LetsPaul]

whoa. the breakfast audio and coda docs are pretty extensive and detailed.
have you seen the stewmac ones?

I'm only taking about how they specify things like "film", "ceramic", etc. next to components on the parts list.

 

[Guardians of the analog]

I apologize for mispresenting myself in an antagonistic fashion. That was indeed my screw up, and caused a lot of unnecessary argument.

I'm in no way asking for everything to be handed to me, and I'm not sure how that came across. Literally all I'm trying to say is that extreme barebones docs are useful a much narrower range of people, so barebonesness is maybe not an absolute metric for quality.

then don't build pedalpcb boards, build ones that have docs that meet your expectations. Just because build docs have added content doesn't mean all that content has value. I'll see myself out, clearly this is another one of "those" threads. good luck.

 

[fig]

Way to go Paul, you pissed off half the forum.

 

[BuddytheReow]

Way to go Paul, you pissed off half the forum.

Fight nicely, everyone!

 

[Guardians of the analog]

IMO, there should be a Newbie forum here

I thought that was the troubleshooting section

 

[Cybercow]

Way to go Paul, you pissed off half the forum.

What? Wait! Did I miss a chance to get pissed off and vent some fabricated outrage? (j/k)


For MZY12:
I actually have a boilerplate sorta answer for such questions as posted in the OP. It's slanted towards beginners and not meant, in any way, to be demeaning. But here it is . . . .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It's kind of important to know from the start that building a stompbox is not really like painting-by-numbers or doing up a Lego project. Many kits make it "look" that easy, but there are several prerequisites to getting a good handle on pedal building. Soldering is a skill that verges on art. Understanding what the different components are and how to determine their respective values and orientation is crucial. Knowing one's way around a DMM (digital multi-meter) is another must.

The build documentation varies from vendor to vendor and range from very detailed, step-by-step instructions to little more than the Bill Of Materials with some notes one how to make connections to the main board. No single vendor can anticipate what level of electronics experience the reader will have.

Then there's the point about what one needs to do when after spending all that money & time to build a pedal only to find it doesn't work. Where would you begin? Would you know what questions to ask? Knowing how to read a schematic is vital. Being able to resource and comprehend component datasheets is yet another facet of aids useful to any bench tech.

To casually build a pedal or two from kits is not that hard. One can get by with minimal soldering skills, the ability to identify and orient components properly on a PCB and be able follow simple wiring diagrams. But to take building stompboxes to the next level, (coming up your own mods, designing you own circuit and\or troubleshooting), be prepared for about a year of really dry reading to truly comprehend electronics. Be prepared for experimenting and experiencing several failures while remaining hopeful about achievements.

There are thousands of discarded, unused soldering irons and cheap DMMs stuffed away in closets across the world from those who thought they would try building electronic things. And to the contrary, there are thousands of successful pedal builders around.

There is no substitute for one's own research. And reading about general electronics is an eventual requirement.

One of the first and foremost points of building effects pedals is that it involves electronics. One does not have to know electronics to begin this pursuit, but electronics will step into the path and it will be key to have a better understanding of how to deal with the electronics aspect of it.

With no clue of what electronics skills, (soldering, schematic reading, and\or general electronics experience you possess), we're hard pressed to point you in the right direction - other than reading. Lots of reading and\or watching video tutorials. Good luck!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That being said; this is a great group and the folks here are really quite helpful - even with the simplest of questions. I think it's safe to say that everyone here is all about learning and sharing what they know & experience. Nothing wrong a good debate when things remain civil.

Even with my personal decades of electronics experience, I often need some remedial reading and/or help with things. Oftentimes, I find myself looking up the schematics of the same circuit(s) from other PCB vendors. This helps me better understand a given circuit and allows me to compare differences, fill in gaps and get a clearer/broader picture of what I'm working on.

For me, pedal building is actually about electronics. And electronics is a fickle mistress. And she does not tolerate impatience, laziness or inattentiveness to detail. She prefers consorts who read up on her ways. She is not faithful, is exceedingly mischievous and stubborn as the day is long.

I believe you're in the right place. And if it's not already been said, Welcome to the group!

 

[Bricksnbeatles]

Read through this all, and while I agree with much of what our forum regulars have said here, I also don’t see anything wrong with what @LetsPaul said at any point, so personally some of the reactions to it seem a bit misplaced.

First off, as others have noted, component types don’t really matter so much other than making sure they fit as well as noting electrolytic voltages— newer boards do have the electrolytic voltage requirements marked on them, but I get that it could be useful to have noted elsewhere too if you don’t have the board on hand when ordering parts.
The question of trim pots is certainly a good one. While doing it by ear is a generally safe bet for most applications, it would be nice to have the “stock” voltage readings noted for certain things, and for stuff like the BBD circuits, a simple boilerplate blurb about calibration would be a worthwhile addition.
As someone else noted, the parts lists with notes are often posted on the forum, but it takes quite a bit of digging to find that (and the drill templates that are posted in the forum), and that’s why we get the same request for certain parts lists, schematics, or drill templates over and over when they’ve already been shared in the “missing documents” thread— if there’s a way to clean that up a bit through a directory, or to associate those text documents and drill templates with the product pages for those PCBs while docs are pending, I think that would cut down on a lot of the questions. Robert’s obviously a busy guy, but I don’t see anything wrong with the mere suggestions.

Anyway, welcome to the forum @LetsPaul ! If you’ve got any specific questions for builds, and you don’t see an answer in the forum search results, start a thread and plenty of folks will be happy to help! Happy building!

 

[p_wats]

As someone who has been building off and on for a good number of years now I still get thrown off when there's no mention of what a particular trimpot does in the build docs (not just here---try dialing in the Blue Warbler from JMK without needing to google what's what), so I can sympathize with @mzy12 & @LetsPaul on that point (I am also a Paul, so that may help).

I can imagine it would also seem strange from a new builder's perspective to see a number of projects without documentation at all, but we've all grown accustomed to the way things are around here (and, dare I say, enable it, as it allows our one-man-provider to focus on exciting new circuits).

The good news is it's a great community that is very helpful when questions do arise.

 

[Fama]

I'm only taking about how they specify things like "film", "ceramic", etc. next to components on the parts list.

Don't PPCB docs specify those? Or do some older ones not do that? I know not all boards have documentation, but then that is how it goes.

Otherwise I think this has been gone through. More in detail docs or component lists would be useful for beginners, yes, but PPCB is not really focused on catering for beginners. Other places are better for that, and that's fine. I would also argue that most people who build pedals are not necessarily beginners - or rather they were confused about components for their first or a couple first builds, and after that it's unnecessary.

If you look at the bigger picture of the pedal building communities, it's also pretty obvious that this is an enthusiast "industry". The sellers do this because they enjoy it, and that seems to be the main driver. They're usually just one person handling the PCB's and documents, which means that things will not be perfect.

Some PCB sellers have good documentation and a smaller selection. Others (like PPCB) have less documentation but a lot of selection. One seller has a big selection but unreliable PCB's which might not work at all (avoid PCBGuitarMania FWIW). You used Coda Effects as an example for good documentation - but his selection is very small, and I ordered one PCB in February, got a refund in April when it still hadn't shipped, and now it shipped in July. The blog part is excellent though.

 

[SillyOctpuss]

Read through this all, and while I agree with much of what our forum regulars have said here, I also don’t see anything wrong with what @LetsPaul said at any point, so personally some of the reactions to it seem a bit misplaced.

100% agree

 

[szukalski]

Yeah, I have to agree, the docs do put up a barrier to new builders. I wouldn't call that gatekeeping though. The end result may be the same (harder to get into certain builds) but the intent is radically different.

Gatekeeping would be doing it on purpose so that other's can't participate. I don't see that being the case.

It's a topic that comes up repeatedly. More detailed documentation would help some, but it would also hurt others. Bob, Bill, and Beatrice won't be getting new goodies to try because Rob's doing detailed documentation instead of tracing more pedals. That's the bottom line. A perfect world would be perfect, but it ain't all that.

Just throw any old component in there with the rated value, twist the knobs until things sound good, and ask the forum if you get a problem. The electrons aren't picky and neither are we (regardless of the ribbing in threads like these).

Or take a different approach, there is no documentation needed because Chuck's Boneyard exists. Read that all, read it again, a third time to understand it, then you will be ok!

 

[mkstewartesq]

I’m going to chime in here because, as noted above, the thread seems to have gone off the rails a bit and I’m gonna throw my lot in with those who don’t find OP’s comments unreasonable as a general proposition.

My journey is illustrative. I had never even picked up a soldering iron in February of this year. I decided to build a pedal so I bought one of those little “make the ring of LEDs light up” kit on Amazon to learn to solder and then bought an Aion FX kit. That kit, with its documentation, really gave me the lay of the land on how to put a board together, what various components were and how to install them, etc. (I get that that level of tutoring is not what PPCB strives for so I’m not drawing any comparison there – just stating how I got here.) After doing that one kit, I came here because I wanted to source my own parts and build from PCBs, not kits. Since then I’ve built about 30 pedals and I think I’ve become a reasonably productive contributor to this forum. I consider myself lucky that this forum has taught me so very much as well.

All that being said, while PPCB is targeted to the experienced builder, so are other PCB makers like MBP and Lectric-FX and they each provide at least basic information regarding how to properly calibrate the pedal. Even the most experienced among us may be building a certain type of pedal for the very first time – I don’t believe anyone here is born with the knowledge on how to properly bias a phaser or dial in a flanger. So I think the original comment regarding giving at least some guidance as to what the trim pots do and how they should be adjusted just to get a properly working pedal isn’t really too much to ask for, as it is literally the final step in the process from populating a PCB to having a working product.

Again, Robert does an amazing job and his time is limited. But I get the frustration at working through an entire build but still not having any guidance as to how to make the final adjustments to get it to work properly without going to a separate Internet forum. I’ve learned to do it and I’ve been very happy that the people here are so kind-hearted and willing to help. But here are just a few of the very basic topics I had to research here over the past few months because they’re not addressed in the documentation: (and I found most of my answers in threads started by others who had the exact same questions, so I don’t believe I was being excessively ignorant):

• How to bias the XC Phase?
• How to bias the Rangefinder?
• What are the three patches accessible by the toggle switch on the Unison Double Tracker, and in what order? What parameters do the knobs control for each patch?
• What the hell do the DIP switches do in the Tearjerker Wah?

We are lucky that Robert is such a conscientious designer – once I learned that his PCBs are usually painstakingly accurate to the original pedal, I’ve started downloading the owners manual for the real pedal for each build I do and using that as my guide as to functions and settings, etc. Or I’ve come here for assistance and knowledge that all of you fine folks share.

But I’m not gonna say I disagree with the proposition that the documentation is often missing some basic information necessary to the basic process of getting a working pedal, which could be added without turning the documentation into a full-blown hand-holding tutorial.

Mike

 

[mybud]

First of all, welcome @LetsPaul and I agree with all saying that you (are above all things) entitled to your opinion.

Funnily enough, Mike, the XC Phase was one of the first PPCBs I built and I also didn't get the biasing aspect correct at first. With some noob trepidation, I asked for help and it was swift and clear with practical advice on how to get it working. That kind and helpful response was a hell of an incentive to check out these forums and get to see other builds, comments, jokes, build diagrams, advice to noobs, what have you.

@LetsPaul, do get a couple of breadboards and go through the wizard @Chuck D. Bones's boneyard posts, where he takes you the process from start to finish and explains super-clearly how the various circuits work.

Read @Cybercow's wise words above. Practise soldering (a lot, till it's second nature), be patient with yourself on the journey, and don't be despondent when things don't work the first time. There are scads of tutorials on Tayda printing, breadboarding from @BuddytheReow, ace demos from @MichaelW and his colleagues, super high quality builds and designs, and a bunch of creative people having fun sharing something they are very passionate about.

Don't hesitate to ask for help with troubleshooting and check the useful related threads when you post. Good advice in those parts.

Good luck and all best.

 

[Laundryroom David]

The kit is truly paint-by-numbers, intrinsically teaching nothing other than soldering practice.

A different perspective:

A kit teaches you what the components are, where they go and what things like uF, nF, pF, K, R, Q, IC mean. A kit spells out how those pieces go together. You can then incorporate that knowledge and apply it to builds like those from PPCB. “I see that a 100n goes here. I know from building a kit that n refers to nanofarads, which is what we use when talking about capacitors. The 100n I used in the kit was shaped like a little box and was referred to as a box film capacitor in the instructions. It had the same outline as the outline in this PPCB board. I will put a 100n box film capacitor in this spot.” Same process applies to other components. Maybe you’ll look up a pF/nF/uF conversion table and learn what 100, 101, 102, etc means. My point is that kits are a FANTASTIC learning opportunity and you might want to view them as more than just soldering practice.

I think I’ll see myself out now.

 

[andare]

At the risk of being misinterpreted, and/or getting off on the wrong foot as a forum newbie...

As a pedal building noob, I have to provide a contrast to some of the sentiments above. The fact PedalPCB offers so much is amazing, but I have to honest: the terse documentation is a speedbump to entry for people who are just starting out like me. The amount of assumed prior knowledge in PedalPCB docs can be frustrating. I would love to have at least recommendations on what kinds of caps, diodes, resistors to use in what spots (film? ceramic? etc). I realize that's often open to tinkering for different results, but having part callouts for a "default" benchmark build would really help A LOT. Not just in building, but in discussion as well.

I absolutely respect that it's all being done by one guy, and given the huge volume of boards in his catalog, I absolutely can't fault him if it's too much work. If he can't or doesn't want to do it, that's his call.

BUT, with all due respect, folks here actually praising and encouraging that kind of lack of info as a general practice sets a really bad precedent. You may personally be advanced, and that's cool for you, but saying stuff like "it's everything you need and nothing you don't" (YIKES, is that untrue), or "I like being treated like I know what I'm doing" (pulling the ladder up behind you in over an ego thing that ultimately exists in your head instead of the documentation), or "I prefer less because I like to print everything out" (treating major value for many others as disposable compared to a convenience to a quirky practice that may be unique to you) is corrosive in the bigger picture.

A lot of these ideas in practice manifest as unintentional gatekeeping. Catering to the egos and non-standard quirks of old hands at the cost of making it harder than it needs to be for new blood to enter.

Good documentation makes learning WAY easier and more efficient. It can often be a difference between just two minutes of close reading a doc, vs, half an hour of combing forums and trying to parse the one simple bit of needed info from a quagmire of semi-unrelated "did you try this?" troubleshooting discussions that I don't yet have the expertise to learn from.

And again: all I'd personally want is specified cap/resistor/diode types for build benchmarking (like Coda Effects and Breakfast Audio have in their docs). Just that alone would be the single biggest help. And again: I understand if PedalPCB himself has to pick his battles when it comes to his time, energy, or interest. It's the community appearing to gather around the idea that the quality of documentation can be measured by how exclusively it caters to experts and grognards that's throwing up red flags for me.

I don't see the issue. The information on what components to buy is out there - Aion has articles about it. The most complete, take-you-by-the-end build docs are out there - Aion again.
And then you have this forum, which is a goldmine of knowledge and home to some of the best people I've ever interacted with on the internet (and I've been online since 1998).
Whatever you don't know you will find elsewhere or on the forum, which is where you will do most of your learning.

I came here as a total noob and was welcomed very warmly. My beginner questions were patiently answered without any patronizing. I sensed no gatekeeping.

I imagine Robert is incredibly busy. He either churns out boards at the pace he does or he puts together expansive build docs. Members here prefer the former because, let's face it, after minor growing pains all you really need is the values on the PCB and the schematic. I'm still a clueless solder jockey and I can build pedals without docs.

The way I see it, we are free to shop elsewhere if we don't like the product. No one is under any obligation whatsoever.

I have a lot of resources I can share on all the basics. Just ask.

 

[jimilee]

I'm not lashing out. I'm just trying to provide a counterpoint. I tried to clarify up front that I wasn't trying to attack, because I know from experience that sometimes it doesn't matter: the mere fact that one is disagreeing is enough to get people riled up into reading the disagreeing party as riled up. Case in point.

In regards to many documentrarion being a suggestion: I know. That's literally why I 'm saying suggested component types are helpful to newbies who don't yet know what you know. There's a lot of discussion over component types, and a lot of it is too much for a newbie to digest all at once. The documentation is the perfect first-in-line-place for such, and offloading those suggestions elsewhere only "helps" experts who already know what they want (and it doesn't really help them, it just makes reading the docs very slightly more streamlined).

Like I say: it helps the learning process move more efficiently. This isn't Dark Souls: there's no benefit to actively making newbies take a longer road than is neccisary.

Newbies have to start somewhere. Even with the risk of components going out of production, having a baseline reference to start with is enormously more helpful than just being thrown to the winds. Nor am I talking about not needing to consult the community. I'm saying having a "default" build actually helps newbies get their fingernails into the concepts, both internally, and in their ability to frame their questions to the community. Just being able to ask "what is the equivalent of specific part X, and why does it matter" is already a MUCH more educational question for a newbie to ask than a completely open-ended "what should I use?".

In fact, asking "what's a good substitute for this OOP part and why?" is WAY more educational than a kit that provides all needed parts. The kit is truly paint-by-numbers, intrinsically teaching nothing other than soldering practice.

I bet where you’re coming from, we were all newbs at one time. Let me tell you about my ginormous oversized caps. sourcing parts is the single most intimidating part of this hobby.

My first builds were kits, then I moved on to this phase. It’s like taking the training wheels off. While the documentation isn't likely going to change, after your first couple of builds, you’ll get your bearings and have a better understanding of what’s going on.

The one thing I did before jumping into this hobby was to read the troubleshooting forums… a lot. It was really helpful in both learning how to solder and where to start with troubleshooting.

Good luck and reach out if you need help.