Bouncing an idea for a snare strainer off you

Larry

"Uncle Larry"
OK I've had an idea for some time now for a snare strainer. It's akin to the Ludwig Super Sensitive, and I want opinions if my idea differs from the Ludwig.
OK on a standard strainer, (not the SS) the tension knob pulls the snares tight against the snare reso head. I had always envisioned a snare strainer that pulled the wires tight without touching the reso head at all. Then you have a mechanism where you can make the already tensioned (or loosened) snare wires touch the head with as much "pressure" as you desired, and of course it would have to easily "lock" wherever you want it. In addition, the snares would be raised equally up to the reso head on both sides, not just pulled up on one side. In my mind, you could tension the snare wires to any tension, and also control exactly how hard it is pressed against the reso head. On standard strainers, you can only get snares tight if they are pressed hard against the head. My strainer (if my logic is correct) would give you more options. (Like tight wires barely touching the head). So my questions are:

A. Is this exactly like the Ludwig SS?
B. Do you think it would make much of a difference soundwise?
C. When you tension the wires, do you think the twists in the snare wires would "stretch" out, making it a waste of time?

Thanks.
 
First off let me fully understand this.

-You can tension the wires whilst they are not touching the head to desired tension.
-Then the horizontally flat snares can be raised and lowered vertiaclly.
-The snares are raised and lowered equally at both ends.

My only concerns would be

-Snare stands being able to accommodate this 'mechanism'
-Imagine this - Tight snares barely touching head, therefore the string/nylon/plastic would probably not be touching the head. How would snare beds affect the sound if there's no pressure from the string pushing the head into the bed?

I don't know if making this would be worth it in the long run with regards to creating a new snare sound that different from existing sounds we can produce from various snares. It would be a good to if someone had the money/time/ingenuity to fabricate one though to see what happens. email R&D at an existing drum manufacturer?
 
OK I've had an idea for some time now for a snare strainer. It's akin to the Ludwig Super Sensitive, and I want opinions if my idea differs from the Ludwig.
OK on a standard strainer, (not the SS) the tension knob pulls the snares tight against the snare reso head. I had always envisioned a snare strainer that pulled the wires tight without touching the reso head at all. Then you have a mechanism where you can make the already tensioned (or loosened) snare wires touch the head with as much "pressure" as you desired, and of course it would have to easily "lock" wherever you want it. In addition, the snares would be raised equally up to the reso head on both sides, not just pulled up on one side. In my mind, you could tension the snare wires to any tension, and also control exactly how hard it is pressed against the reso head. On standard strainers, you can only get snares tight if they are pressed hard against the head. My strainer (if my logic is correct) would give you more options. (Like tight wires barely touching the head). So my questions are:

A. Is this exactly like the Ludwig SS?
B. Do you think it would make much of a difference soundwise?
C. When you tension the wires, do you think the twists in the snare wires would "stretch" out, making it a waste of time?

Thanks.

You're close to 100 years too late--- http://books.google.com/books?id=SQ...epage&q=Ludwig super sensitive patent&f=false

...and what about these guys? They came out in the last century also. Here's a terrible vid of Fat Cat snare wires- What's he saying??? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIw5jv9y_r8

................................................................................................................................................................
 
Last edited:
wow a super sensitive bakc then was 52.50 for a metal and 50 for mahogany
 
think RhythmTech has a current version - though I'm not sure if the snare wire tension is adjustable or if they are just statically pre-tensioned
 
Yeah, that's a great idea, but I had a Rogers 380 snare that had that exact mechanism on it. It sounded good, especially for a cheap student-model snare. The main problem with it was that the whole piece of hardware was so big that the snare couldn't fit into a hardcase. If you could come up with a version of it that didn't stick out from the shell much or down more than an inch past the bottom hoop, THAT would be ingenious!
 
think RhythmTech has a current version - though I'm not sure if the snare wire tension is adjustable or if they are just statically pre-tensioned

Correct, their Active Snare system is akin to the Rogers Dynasonic frame, except I don't think the tension is adjustable on the Rhythm Tech.

In general, applying more pressure on the head just inhibits the snare sound. While that may be desirable from time to time, it can be easily accomplished with wire tension and appropriate damping to accentuate the snappiness.

Bermuda
 
The rhythm tech is a huge fail on a Dynasonic. Dont waste your money. Buy the dynasonic frame on ebay or from Al Drew and get the puresound wires for it.
 
email R&D at an existing drum manufacturer?


No....don't do this if you are serious about your idea. The drum manufacturing field is littered with small inventors like yourself getting screwed by an existing drum manufacturer. Case in point would be Hal Blaine's Oct-a-plus drum kit that he gave the idea to Ludwig, thinking that he would have the Hal Blaine signature kit and at least get some royalties of off! Boy did he get the shaft! Or Zickos who was the original inventor of the acrylic, see-thorugh drums. Here again, Ludwig jumps in and runs with it!

If you really believe this is the better wheel, do it yourself and prove it to the drumming world.



Mike

http://www.mikemccraw.com
http://www.dominoretroplate.com
http://www.patentcoachmike.com
http://www.youtube.com/drummermikemccraw
http://www.myspace.com/drummermikemccraw
http://www.facebook.com/mike.mccraw
 
it is great that somebody thinks and search for practical things in drums science, not so important if it already exist or not. cheers

I don't think anybody was criticizing the attempt, just commenting on prior art.

I cant tell ya how many inventions have come across my desk that have already been invented - often without having seen the light of day in terms of making it to market (for any number of reasons) or are lesser known.

and just b/c it may not be fully novel, doesnt mean its not a good idea


It certainly shouldn't discourage anyone from exploring the possibilities!
 
What I need answered, since I never even held a dynasonic, does tensioning the wires independently in relation to the pressure on the snare side head make any desireable sonic difference?
 
What I need answered, since I never even held a dynasonic, does tensioning the wires independently in relation to the pressure on the snare side head make any desireable sonic difference?

Well, not enough to design your own strainer anyway. Pearl's older free-floaters also had extended snares and adjustable rollers, along with adjustable strainers on both sides of the drum. These types of strainers do 'stick-out' more than a normal strainer and butt.
 
Yea Les, that's what I thought. Oh well. I have another idea, and I'm pretty sure it has not been done. I sorta knew that the strainer idea has been tried before, but thought it needed updating. What a dilemma. If I let the cat out of the bag on my other idea, someone will take my idea and run with it faster than I probably would. Shall I tell?
 
Yea Les, that's what I thought. Oh well. I have another idea, and I'm pretty sure it has not been done. I sorta knew that the strainer idea has been tried before, but thought it needed updating. What a dilemma. If I let the cat out of the bag on my other idea, someone will take my idea and run with it faster than I probably would. Shall I tell?

No.....develop it, and at least spend the $100 for the provisional patent after determining that is hasn't been invented yet. Try to make some prototypes for your own use to see how well it works. Then tell.

Look at like this, would you rather someone else make millions off of your idea? Then keep it to yourself until it is really time to show the world what you have. I don't say this to insult you but rather see you come up with something which serves you twenty years down the line. By being all too eager to "spill your guts" about this, you will victimize yourself.


Mike

http://www.mikemccraw.com
http://www.dominoretroplate.com
http://www.patentcoachmike.com
http://www.youtube.com/drummermikemccraw
http://www.myspace.com/drummermikemccraw
http://www.facebook.com/mike.mccraw
 
Last edited:
No.....develop it, and at least spend the $100 for the provisional patent after determining that is hasn't been invented yet.

... cept the 'determining' part costs around $1,500 and @ $100 a page (p-patent) you could easily drop $2000

I say do your own research larryace, just google whatever you have cooking. Like if its a holder, google 'drum holder patent'. There's a lot of stuff out there.
 
It sounds like you're trying to recreate the Dyna-sonic. The Dyna has a screw to put tension on the wires, but the adjustment range is limited. The beauty of the Dyna is that the cords connected to the throw-off are connected to the frame, not the wires, so no matter how hard you cranked up the strainer, the tension doesn't choke the wires; They are still free to buzz unimpeded.
 
... cept the 'determining' part costs around $1,500 and @ $100 a page (p-patent) you could easily drop $2000

I say do your own research larryace, just google whatever you have cooking. Like if its a holder, google 'drum holder patent'. There's a lot of stuff out there.

Actually, Les, I wrote and prosecuted my own patent and it didn't cost $100 per page for the patent. I did spend maybe $2000, but that was over 4 years time as I spent some of that time answering the US patent office's correspondence. The band I was playing in at the time was full of lawyers and they were stunned when I told them that my Patent was being issued and published! They were even more stunned when they found out that I didn't even go to law school!

A non-provisional (patent pending) cost $100. That's the filing fee, period. Of course you could hire a patent attorney who will want $10,000 up front ($40,000 for software patents) but I digress; I did everything myself for the most part - had a little help here and there and got 'er done!

It is all in the desire and will to follow thru to the bitter end like Zoro told me to. You know why you follow thru to the bitter end? Because most people won't!


Mike

http://www.mikemccraw.com
http://www.dominoretroplate.com
http://www.patentcoachmike.com
http://www.youtube.com/drummermikemccraw
http://www.myspace.com/drummermikemccraw
http://www.facebook.com/mike.mccraw
 
a small entity provisional filing fee is currently $110 (and abt $165, depending, for a utility app)
though there can be some additional costs for really long stuff

BUT

to be honest, the est that attys will require $10,000-$40,000 up front isn't totally accurate either (I work in IP myself, father was a patent atty, wife is a pat atty)

It certainly CAN run up into (and wouldn't be unusual, but it doesn't have to) that depending on complexity, but it doesn't have to and it's generally not up front (we'll bill ya just like anyone else :D ) - there can be sliding scales, some firms even have the the attys to do a couple of pro-bono apps a year for small entities.

[I'm actually not shocked that non-pat attys were stunned - patent law is the only fed certified specialty in US law - it's a whole different bar, you have to be a recognized engineer as well as an atty - your typical atty just isn't qualified... literally. Hell, patent appeals is one of the big reasons the fed circuit was established - to handle the special needs of patent and international appeals]



One caveat with inventor written patents - getting a patent granted is only part of the battle


[for the last 15 years or so, I feel (just opinion here) there has been kind of a trend for examiners to punt and grant and let litigation sort it out - and I think we are seeing some fallout from that in cases such as Bilski]

A couple things can happen post-grant that can get in the way
-there is mechanism for re-exam (for a number of reasons)
-if claim construction isn't rock solid, a motivated party may be able to "crack the claims" (design around or effectively show a difference in their embodiment)

Sadly, I've seen both happen to small inventors
last year, I've seen poor claim construction in a drum related patent that required filing a CIP to undig that particular hole

Come to think of it, this year I also saw a petition for re-exam by inventor!! b/c there was some problems in the claim structure that left him exposed (not drum stuff)


Larry - I'd suggest the absolute first thing to do is keep development notes and have them signed and witnessed ("read and understood" is the classic).
USA is a first-to-invent not first-to-file country (as usual, we're kind of the hold-out on some stuff)
It's not meant as any sort of bulletproof anything - it's best practices routine that allows for supporting evidence.

From there I would to, at least, a casual prior art search through the USPTO (or google patent search) to get an idea of what's around
CAVEAT - a prior art search (esp if limited to the USPTO, esp if done by an inexperienced guy - but still always) is pessimistic -- it can tell you if there are prior inventions that could knock you out, BUT not getting a hit is NOT an "all clear" by any means.
but "I haven't seen it on the market" - the mantra of the small inventor - just isn't good enough.
There are a lot of inventions that haven't seen the light of (the market) day for a variety of reasons
 
Last edited:
Back
Top