From Ben Bradley Sent Mon, Nov 12th 2018, 04:36
My father was a ham, built Heathkits, and got me a Heathkit portable radio for my 10th birthday (1967). I didn't understand how it worked back then, but later as a teen I read the "Circuit Description" part of the manual, as well as the same section of every Heathkit manual I could find, and that (among other things) really helped me learn electronics. I never made a synth kit (the closest I got was ordering the manuals for Paia's 2700 series modules), but I can appreciate this: > In MOTM=E2=80=99s case, I included not only schematics, but full, detaile= d theory of operation. Why? Because the goal of kitbuilding, and what you S= HOULD BE PAYING MORE FOR, is to LEARN. I think most kit builders won't notice or understand a theory of operation, but some will be interested enough to read it, and if it starts or continues them along a journey of learning electronics, its value will be much greater than the cost of a kit. Of course, the problem is how do you "monetize" this when you sell the kit - people can't understand the value until well after they'v bought it. On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 8:23 PM <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote: > > For further perspective, you might explore the history of Heathkit: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heathkit > > I built a few ham radio kits back in the day. I not only built them, but = also learned how to align and calibrate them. So, they provided valuable le= ssons in knowing how they work and how to maintain them. It was also part o= f the knowledge required to pass the exam to receive a radio license. I app= reciate receiving the same kind of knowledge when building well documented = synth kits (Paul and John B products are good examples). I look at the sche= matics as I put them together to understand the purpose of each component. = -Karl. > > On November 11, 2018 at 5:38 PM Jimmy Moore <xxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: > > Thank you Paul, these are great points! The last bit is particularly rel= evant in my case. Cheers for taking the time to share. > > On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 11:21 AM Paul Schreiber < xxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx> wro= te: >> >> a) You have to make a 100% on every kit. Now try doing that for 1.8= million parts (what MOTM shipped) >> >> b) The prevailing mindset is: a kit should be CHEAPER than assemble= d. This is 100% INCORRECT. A kit should be 25-50% MORE than assembled. See = (1) above. >> >> c) There is only so much you can do with resistors, caps and op am= ps. The better caps/resistors/ICs are 100% SMT now. Limiting to thru-hole i= n 2018 is just silly. >> >> d) In MOTM=E2=80=99s case, I started running into =E2=80=98The Jigs= aw Puzzle=E2=80=99 issue: everyone wanted BIGGER kits, with MORE parts. Whi= ch takes MORE time. See (1) above. >> >> e) In MOTM=E2=80=99s case, I included not only schematics, but full= , detailed theory of operation. Why? Because the goal of kitbuilding, and w= hat you SHOULD BE PAYING MORE FOR, is to LEARN. Not to blindly solder doo-d= ad 23 into position 14. When I see =E2=80=9Ccan I use a TL072 for a TL082= =E2=80=9D people are not learning. When I see =E2=80=9Ccan I use a 1.1K for= this 1K pullup resistor?=E2=80=9D people are not learning. The point is no= t to learn to FOLLOW a cookbook. The point is learning is to WRITE the cook= book. The point is NOT to =E2=80=98save money=E2=80=99. >> >> >> >> Paul S. >> >> >> >> >> >> From: analogue-return-237220-synth1=xxxxxxxxx.xxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx [mailto:= analogue-return-237220-synth1=xxxxxxxxx.xxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx] On Behalf Of Jim= my Moore >> Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2018 11:29 AM >> To: analogue heaven >> Subject: [AH] Looking for primary sources on why synth designers leave t= he kit-packing game. >> >> >> >> Hi Everyone, >> >> >> >> I'm writing my qualifying exam and one of the questions has to do with t= he practicality of providing embedded hardware kits for non-expert users. >> >> >> >> I'd like to use the modular synth community as an example of the invisib= le labor of providing such a service to a smaller subset of a broader targe= t audience. >> >> >> >> Does anyone have any citable resources (interviews, forum or blog posts,= web pages, formal statements, etc) explaining why people leave the kit pac= king game? I'm thinking of MOTM's Paul Schreiber or Bridechamber, specific= ally. >> >> >> >> Thanks! > > >