Why DIY? (was Re: [sdiy] Another new hard to find part....)

[Roy J. Tellason]

On Wednesday 07 July 2004 06:27 pm, The Peasant wrote:
> > > > I don't personally feel like I want to be bothered with tubes any
> > > > more.

> > > Good, then maybe you can understand how I "don't personally feel like I
> > > want to be bothered with computers any more".

> > Sure,  I've felt that way at times.  :-)  But I do continue,  finding
> > them just too useful for what I want to do here.  Please don't take my
> > comment as being disparaging,  it wasn't meant that way.

> No, I didn't take it that way. :-) You seem to prefer software DIY and I
> seem to prefer hardware DIY for basically the very same reasons: personal
> preference.

Actually,  I don't.  I've spent most of the past 3 or 4 decades messing around 
with hardware.  Not so much building things that I'd enjoy using as fixing 
what was out there and broken,  until it got to the point where I wasn't able 
to make a living at it any more,  or at least not the way I was.  I've dealt 
with "consumer electronics",  organs,  synths,  MIDI gear,  computers,  and 
all sorts of other stuff.  I got into the organ market in 1975, only to hear 
somebody say a few years later that the organ market had been in decline 
since 1975.  :-)   I was one of only 3-4 people in the whole NYC area doing 
that at the time.  After leaving there,  I was one of two ARP service centers 
in PA.  When I closed my shop back in 1992 we were a service center for a 
whole *bunch* of different makes of stuff -- basically anybody that would 
give me a parts account and service data and not make absurd demands about 
purchasing a "parts kit" or similar nonsense.

I watched this tech go from tubes when I started to solid state to chips to 
logic to computerized and to ASICs.  It got very frustrating when you 
couldn't get a manufacturer to tell you how a chip was supposed to act,  or 
what technology it used (so signals would make some kind of sense),  or 
similar stuff.  Or things like the time Roland sent me a software upgrade,  
but neglected to say that the original had been an EPROM while the 
replacement was a masked ROM with different signal requirements,  and that 
I'd have to move two "jumpers" that were actually surface-mount resistors to 
make it work.

I've been scrounging parts for *years*,  and have quite an accumulation of 
stuff which I'll probably never even use most of.  This doesn't,  
unfortunately,  include such stuff as blank boards,  enclosures,  and a whole 
mess of the other trivial stuff that goes into every project.  I've also been 
collecting books and schematics and such,  and since I got on to the 'net a 
few months back,  all sorts of stuff online,  too.

So yeah,  I'm into the hardware side of things too.

> When I first got a computer, I was very excited by it's potential, and for
> a while it seemed like hardware really wasn't that relevant anymore. After
> spending a year or so just playing with software, I was feeling less and
> less satisfied with what I could do with a computer, I was starting to
> reach it's limits. I eventually got to the point where the hardware again
> became more interesting and rewarding to work with.

Was it on your site I saw that "drum synth"?  I have trouble remembering any 
more.  There was a perfect example of how ambitious I ain't these days... :-)

> IMO computers seem to have become bogged down in bloatware and complex
> technical details, which has caused their great potential to be seriously
> compromised.

You'll get no argument from me on that!  Only "computers" to me means a great 
deal more than what it means to joe average,  in that it could be a 
single-board setup,  a CP/M box (yes,  I have a bunch of those),  a dedicated 
machine,  or any number of other possibilities.  I suspect that your context 
for that statement is what most people would call a computer,  meaning what 
most people would have,  and I sure as heck don't fit into that category.  I 
suspect there are a few others like that in this list as well.

> The only way to avoid this is to become an expert, immerse youself in the
> software, and fix it yourself by writing your own programs.

_And the hardware...!_   A "system" of any sort is a combination of both!

> But I don't have time for that, I really want a computer that I can just
> switch on and *effortlessly* send emails, design pcbs, create graphics, and
> maybe design synths.

That's not a terribly long list of functions.

> Having to fight viruses, reload programs, search for drivers, and upgrade
> programs that work just fine now because somebody wants to sell me a new one
> just does not work for me.

Nor for me.

> I really feel that it is long past time to invent a totally new, modern,
> optimised computer platform, instead of just bolting more crap on to the
> same old Mac/PC platforms.

Yeah,  but the big advantage to the commonality of current platforms is how 
they make stuff so much cheaper!  There are other kinds of computers out 
there,  they just don't sell anywhere near as much as what you're talking 
about and they cost a whole heck of a lot more.

> But of course this will not happen, too many mainstream users are dedicated
> to the old hypercorporate bloated crap system.

No,  it _is_ happening but too many of those folks don't want to take the time 
or spend any energy exploring what the alternatives are.  And the "required 
expertise" is getting less and less all the time.

> > one of the reasons I have a problem with it, as the "physical presensce"
> > of what I've got now occupies way too much of this room,  the hallway in
> > front of my bookshelves,  and most of a 10x20 storage unit!  :-)

> Well, as a certified packrat and junk collector, I think that that is
> actually a GOOD thing ;-)=  Nothing impresses me more than a great pile of
> interesting hardware!

I really do need to weed some of the junk out of it, though,  and get it 
better organized.

> > I also find it a bit of a hassle.  And the bigger and more complicated the
> > project is,  the more of a hassle I find it.  Maybe that'll change,  I
> > dunno -- maybe part of it is me not having a real work area to do stuff in
> > at this point in time,  and for the past several years.  We'll see.

> Hmmm, if you see hardware construction as a "hassle", then you cannot be a
> true DIYer.  ;-)=   The physical construction is almost more fun than using
> the completed project for me.

Depends on what I have available for tools and workspace...

Right now it's a hassle!	:-)