Millennium FX Dr Who Sonic Screwdriver

Status
Not open for further replies.
CTs blog has as much bull and half truths in it as it does factual information. It's all geared to sell his products and discredit everyone else's work that he sees as his competition or who he arbitrarily decides to pick on. If you critically read his blog, and don't take it all at face value, you'll see that half of his critiques about the mfx prop no longer hold up since new information has come to light. And even his big claim to fame in the heritage gold/colony cream debate is now a moot point since both sides were shown to be wrong. Mfx said that the season 4 sonic used Heritage Gold paint. Ct argued that the season 4 sonic used Colony cream. It took the Qmx prototype and Nick Robotto'spost about Aleenes crackle to show that they were both wrong.

He put up his own Tennant sonic (what he now calls his mk1) over the mfx and claimed total accuracy. But if you look at his revised design now, it looks more like a MFX than it does his mk1.

He does have some useful information in his blog. But he's not above lying--flat out--and he has done so on a number of occasions to discredit other prop makers. And so you need to do your own research and evaluate what he says with a critical eye. If you consider this trolling, than you have no place in this community.
 
I also dared to question him on one of the other threads, and was contacted by one of his minions via pm, i replied stupidly, should have realised one of his cronies would copy and paste what was said privately, i said i hoped the emails i had gotten from him would stop as they were filled with hatefull remarks and swearing and my kids sometimes opened emails, next thing i get disney emails filled with porn pics, never have i ever had an email like that in all the years i've been online, thats the kind of person he is, scumbag,
 
"And so you need to do your own research and evaluate what he says with a critical eye."

Indeed. Well put. I'd rep you if I didn't get the "spread 'em stick." :lol
 
It’s interesting to note that, Asp9mm's review/add of ct new version of sonic got pulled from RPF last week, and shortly after that he been ct, declared war on RPF and by that RPF been the members, would seem that they have found this thread to wage it on, as Anakin starkiller has pointed out, and I quote:

It's all geared to sell his products and discredit everyone else's work that he sees as his competition or who he arbitrarily decides to pick on

And Frosty

Your so right.

The product that he promotes sure looks nice, however, the financial backers would do a lot better if they did not use someone like him ass there promoter.
 
Nobody's proven diddly squat.

Maybe it's been proven to YOU, but I've read his blog. And NOWHERE does he provide anything resembling proof.

I stand corrected...EXTREMELY corrected. The facts have now been proven to ME beyond a shadow of a doubt. The shape of the ridges on the Robatto-B/11th Hour SS is precisely as CT has reproduced them.

I apologize to any and all who I may have mislead with my previous arguments.
 
I stand corrected...EXTREMELY corrected. The facts have now been proven to ME beyond a shadow of a doubt. The shape of the ridges on the Robatto-B/11th Hour SS is precisely as CT has reproduced them.

I apologize to any and all who I may have mislead with my previous arguments.

It's all right, everyone makes mistakes. This is a prop forum, mistakes are inevitable.
 
Nope. It's just that instead of responding directly to me people seem to prefer talking **** about me on CT's twitter feed. And I'm, of course, waiting for CT to respond in his usual fashion by cursing, hurling childish insults, threatening, and lying about me on his blog.
 
Ok i missed some stuff while I was away. Alright, that gray Sonic shown in the first post obviously is not ment to match the prop I thought we were talking about here, the one MFX used as reference (it may very well match the second Sonic, I don't know and do not have an opinion on that one).

Soooooo any other info on this one (would this be Robatto-A then :lol) ?\


The little cartoon thing is a bit uncalled for I think. If you look at the research that AnikinStarkiller has posted you will notice that there is nothing that indicates that his drawings are wrong. His replicas that he has made from those plans also look spot on.
 
Last edited:
Ok i missed some stuff while I was away. Alright, that gray Sonic shown in the first post obviously is not ment to match the prop I thought we were talking about here, the one MFX used as reference (it may very well match the second Sonic, I don't know and do not have an opinion on that one).

Soooooo any other info on this one?

There's a picture of the actual prop and a close up of it's crackle paint on CT's twitter page. (11th hour sonic)
 
Nope. It's just that instead of responding directly to me people seem to prefer talking **** about me on CT's twitter feed. And I'm, of course, waiting for CT to respond in his usual fashion by cursing, hurling childish insults, threatening, and lying about me on his blog.

If you're referring to me, I'll say this right here, directly to you. I do, honestly, respect the sonics you've built. I think they're great work.
But I also think it incredibly presumptuous to post your work in lieu of the actual prop as a form of reference.
I mean, would you sculpt (or 3D model) a replica of the Statue of David and use it to highlight inaccuracies on a different replica of the same statue?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
If you're referring to me, I'll say this right here, directly to you. I do, honestly, respect the sonics you've built. I think they're great work.
But I also think it incredibly presumptuous to post your work in lieu of the actual prop as a form of reference.
I mean, would you sculpt (or 3D model) a replica of the Statue of David and use it to highlight inaccuracies on a different replica of the same statue?


When CT did the exact same thing, did you chastise him on being incredibly presumptuous? Or did you thank him for explaining what he thought he was seeing as characteristics of the original prop? Because I don't see any consistency in your criticism. Building 3d models and and using them to test out what we're seeing in reference pictures is the way that research is done on the RPF. I'm sorry if that offends your sense of propriety.

"Strut Edge Thickness:
The edge thickness of the struts are also too shallow on the MFX and lack a seriously distinctive design feature that is obvious on the original prop and was an inherent part of the rather unique geometry of the head. The way in which the original was constructed meant that the windows were drilled in a certain way to bisect the support struts halfway into the thickness of the strut. Look at the following comparison of my Sonic and the MFX one and the difference will be obvious:
Strut+compare.jpg


I have circled in yellow the area of attention. The MFX is on the left, mine is on the right. You can see that not only is the MFX struts too thin, the strut is not cut into by the window as it should. In fact, the window dows not cut into the strut at all but stops at the natural strut/body join.

To give you a better view of what is going on, here is a pic of my CAD model of my Season 1-2 emitter:
CT+Sonic+3D+Model+Bisect.jpg

"[/QUOTE]
 
When CT did the exact same thing, did you chastise him on being incredibly presumptuous? Or did you thank him for explaining what he thought he was seeing as characteristics of the original prop? Because I don't see any consistency in your criticism. Building 3d models and and using them to test out what we're seeing in reference pictures is the way that research is done on the RPF. I'm sorry if that offends your sense of propriety.

"Strut Edge Thickness:
The edge thickness of the struts are also too shallow on the MFX and lack a seriously distinctive design feature that is obvious on the original prop and was an inherent part of the rather unique geometry of the head. The way in which the original was constructed meant that the windows were drilled in a certain way to bisect the support struts halfway into the thickness of the strut. Look at the following comparison of my Sonic and the MFX one and the difference will be obvious:
Strut+compare.jpg


I have circled in yellow the area of attention. The MFX is on the left, mine is on the right. You can see that not only is the MFX struts too thin, the strut is not cut into by the window as it should. In fact, the window dows not cut into the strut at all but stops at the natural strut/body join.

To give you a better view of what is going on, here is a pic of my CAD model of my Season 1-2 emitter:
CT+Sonic+3D+Model+Bisect.jpg

"
[/QUOTE]

He used it to illustrate a difference between his and the MFX. You are using it to illustrate a point between the original and the MFX. Big difference buddy.:rolleyes
 
The Following is in response to CT's recent blog about me.

A sample of the erroneous information on CT’s blog that needs to be corrected.

The Season 3-4 Sonic.
To start off with. CT has in the past and currently does sell two models of sonic screwdrivers. In the past he had what he called an Eccleston season 1-2 sonic and a Tennant season 3-4 sonic. Now he has his Aztec sonic, which has replaced his Eccleston sonic and his updated Tennant season 3-4 sonic.
As such, he perpetuated the misinformation that David Tennant used the same sonic prop in seasons 3 and 4. This is information is wrong. The siding prop that DT used in season 3 was built by Mark Cordory out of the remains of the Eccleston season 1 prop and Tennant season 2 prop (which was the wide slider fx sonic). The body on this prop featured a square slider that was held in place by two slotted screws and used a third slotted screw to actuate the light. Nick Robatto has shared pictures of the remains of this sonic and the body can be seen here. http://www.therpf.com/f9/9-10-sonic-screwdrivers-new-me-info-137253/


This sliding prop, made by Mark Corday, and the Aztec props (which did not have a slider, but a tac switch embedded to the side of the prop) were the props used for season 3. The season 4 sonics were different builds. If you read Nick Robatto’s web page you will see this stated clearly.
For season 4, Nick Robatto took the season 3 slider prop, and an Aztec prop and cannibalized the heads to make two new props for the remainder of Tennant’s tenure as the Doctor and for Matt Smith’s first episode.
prop makers


The prop that was made out of Mark Cordory’s season 3 emitter head became the prop used in the 11th Hour by Matt Smith.
The prop that was made out of the Aztec emitter head became the prop that was referenced by MFX in building their replica and can be seen here.
dtsonic.jpg

It is currently owned by David Tennant.
The two props differ subtly from each other. Because the emitter heads came from different sources, the DT sonic (and I use this abbreviation to signify the prop now owned by David Tennant, but of course both props were used by Tennant as the Doctor) features an emitter head with slightly larger and squarer windows. The grip ridges are a bit rounder and more bulbous, and the bottom aluminum cylinder is a bit thicker.
I have attempted to illustrate some of the body details here http://www.therpf.com/f9/millennium-fx-dr-who-sonic-screwdriver-84607/index17.html#post2387777
The 11th hour sonic can additionaly be distinguished in its later appearances by the addition of a cross head screw that was added at the base of the sliding channel.
The “teeth” on the bodies and emitters of the two sonics are also aligned differently.
So, when CT talks about a season 3-4 sonic. He is really confusing everyone who listens to him since the sliding sonic used in season 3 and the sliding sonics used in season 4 were totally different builds.

Now onto CT’s posts concerning the MFX replica.
When CT reviewed the MFX replica. He compared the emitter head on his Eccleston sonic to that on the MFX. Here is what he wrote.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_VpKh__f_aao/S4HDSJk41lI/AAAAAAAAARg/tPNVhEY7NpU/s640/100_1679.JPG
" Let's take a close-up comparison of the head:
The finish is completely wrong on the MFX and the proportions and dimensions are all over the place. The head should look elegant and slender yet on the MFX there is a squatness and cylindrical look. Compare with my head which looks more balanced, more slender due to the correct window placement and thicker struts. Overall detail in the MFX is incredibly low with dull edges and lack of definition especially in the struts which need to stand proud of the main body in order to avoid the flat cylindrical shape the MFX exhibits.

The lens cap is also the wrong shape and colour. The prop possessed a shiny gloss cap of dark blue yet the MFX has a dull matt finish and the incorrect colour. The shape is also wrong in that it is a partial hemisphere. The prop possessed a straight cylindrical side topped with a hemisphere as does mine. It also varied in height depending on who assembled the prop so therefore the lens cap sometimes sits quite high up in the emitter head showing more of the straight sides and sometimes low. I have adopted a mid position often seen during Season 2 as seen here:
Tennant+Runaway+bride.jpg
"

Now there are a couple things wrong with this comparison. First off,as a tool by which to assess the accuracy of the MFX, he’s using his own replica as the standard of accuracy against which another replica is to be measured, a comparison which as Shawn McBeen (Jedibugs) might argue is flawed “Yeah, I love how he's using his own models as proof of something. Talk about an inflated ego.”.

Then, instead of comparing the MFX to a photo of the prop which it was modeled after—the season 4 prop made from the emitter head taken from an Aztec prop—CT compared the MFX prop to a blurry photo of the season 3 slider prop that was made by Mark Cordory. So, many of the differences he’s highlighting as deficiencies in the MFX prop are due to the fact that he was comparing two different props and two different emitter heads.

The emitter on the MFX does look a little dull. But that is not, as CT has claimed because it was cast. But because in the finishing process, the MFX emitter heads were run through a de-burring process to remove the machine marks left by milling, which gave them a sort of satin texture.

I would never contend that the MFX replica was in any way a perfect replica. But I recognize that in the manufacturing process they had two options. They could put their emitter heads through a finishing treatment that removed the tool marks, but also consequently decreased the luster and sharpness of the machining. Or they could keep the part in its raw state and leave it as is (like CT has done with his replicas and like I have done with mine) and hope not to be flooded with complaints that the sonics are covered with tool marks.
As to CT’s critique of the lens cap “The lens cap is also the wrong shape and colour. The prop possessed a shiny gloss cap of dark blue yet the MFX has a dull matt finish and the incorrect colour. The shape is also wrong in that it is a partial hemisphere. The prop possessed a straight cylindrical side topped with a hemisphere as does mine”. He provides no evidence of the season 4 sonic to support this claim.

He then goes on to critique the MFX end cap.
"The MFX endcap is substantially incorrect. It looks too boxy and squat. The original props had some degree of variance in their dimensions but the overall shape still fell within certain parameters of a millimeter or so. All exhibited a noticeable and distinctive taper. The MFX endcap is just plain wrong bears little to no resemblance to any filming prop.

Compare to the original filming prop MFX claimed to have copied:
origdrivercomposite.jpg


And the 2005 Season 1 prop:
SS2005edit.jpg


Here's what the MFX endcap should remind you of:


100_1720.JPG


Bulb.jpg


Yes, your eyes deceive you not, it does look very similar to a CO toy endcap!

So there you have it. Knockout I think".


However in the years since he wrote this critique. CT has admitted that the end cap on his own sonic was wrong. “I deliberately altered the design of the black bulb to change it from the original prop including the dimensions of the black bulb which were a little smaller than the prop and had a distinctive tip end. This alteration is NOTICEABLY different and distinctive from the prop”.


In the following months CT posted a number of other things that were not true, such as, “Neill's apparent prototypes were the same as the prop. No question. That's because MFX didn't make them. Nick Robatto, the original propmaker, did”.

CT really should go back and correct his blog, since it persists in dissemination bad information. In fact, Nick did not make the MFX prototypes, Chris Martin did. As CT himself has stated in his twitter feed form July 29, 2012.
He tussled with Neil Gordon on this point,

"So CT’s – FACT – is shown to be a complete – LIE – and fabrication and includes accusations of passing off of others work as his own against rpf. member Chris Martin.
Nowhere above have you proven anything of the sort. Are you saying 'Chris Martin' made the slider sonic prototype or not? Because all you have shown is a couple of pics of a person with a blurred face and a psuedonym apparently measuring a few props. I still contend that the slider 'prototype' was made by and obtained from Nick Robatto. Nice try, but you are going to have to do a lot better than that".

And he tried to use this point of contention to call Neil Gordon a liar. But now it looks like he has silently conceded this issue without an apology or emendation.

CT also tore apart the MFX sonic for not having “a join on the upper part of the inner recess too. This is where the ball join screws into the emitter head cage”. He claimed that this picture of the season 4 prop
Sonic19.jpg

Showed that the MFX emitter was inaccurate, and that it should have had a “large upper aperture where an LED holder, such as on mine will fit into. This aperture is clearly larger than the diameter of the central pipe”
The images he posted to convince everyone were these two
Sonic19.jpg

2005+sonic+enlarge+head+seam+trace.JPG

And consequently, he concluded “Look and all shall be revealed. I think this what you call, getting 'pwned', lolololol”
However, in his 2012 redesign of his Tennant season 4 prop replica, CT appears to have removed this detail from his replica—silently admitting that he was incorrect—but never apologizing to Neil for calling him a liar or amending his blog so as to reflect the truth.
If you look at CT’s new replica
http://celestialtoystore.com/catalog/images/Sonic Screwdriver/11th Hour UE_08.jpg
you will see that this detail—the join in the upper part--
Head+disassembled+2.jpg

which was so essentially missing on the MFX replica and consequently made the MFX replica a “nowhere near 'screen accurate'”.
Seems to be unimportant on CT’s new sonic.

In this blog, The Celestial Toystore: Analysis of the MFX Sonic Screwdriver and Inaccuracies to the Prop
CT compares the emitter head of a MFX to pictures of an original sonic. But in each case, he is comparing a replica of one prop to pictures of another.
In this picture,
P241009_15.57.JPG

CT is comparing the MFX season 4 sonic to pictures of the Mark Cordory season 3 sonic.
In this picture, CT is comparing the MFX sonic (which was modeled on the DT sonic—the one Tennant has in his collection) to the prop which would go on to be the 11th Hour sonic, which was a different prop.
MFX+Window+Prop+Upper.jpg

I’m not saying that the MFX is 100% accurate, but I think it’s important to understand the problems with CT’s evidence.
In these pictures, CT is comparing the MFX, not to an original prop, but to his own replica—which even he admits was based off of the season 1 prop, not the season 4 prop--to attempt to argue for the inaccuracy of the MFX replica.
Strut+compare.jpg

In order to elucidate his argument, CT uses his own cad models as the standard by which the MFX is to be measured “To give you a better view of what is going on, here is a pic of my CAD model of my Season 1-2 emitter:”
CT+Sonic+3D+Model+Bisect.jpg


Subsequently, he and his supporters have argued, however, that this is not a reasonable mode of analysis and comparison. “You cannot start off with a belief then build a data set to support it” (CT). “Yeah, I love how he's using his own models as proof of something. Talk about an inflated ego”(Shawn McBee ‏@jedibugs). “You're not comparing the MFX to the original though, are you? You are comparing the MFX to a 3d model of what you think the original looks like” (LeAngeSolitaire).


The Color and the Crackle

As to the color of the sonic, one of CT’s big gripes with the prop community at the RPF has been that he’s not given enough credit. He argues that it’s , “amazing that I still do not get any credit for a) questioning the colour b) proving the correct colour c) the crackle”.

Now in June of 2010. He made a very big deal about the color of the MFX sonic. He convinced a number of people that they had been taken by Neil Gordon because the MFX replica had been painted in Plasticote Heritage Gold. There was a big debate on the RPF where people argued over what shade of Plasticote crackle the season 4 sonic should be painted in.
CT argued


"Here's my theory over the 'Heritage Gold' color:

It is a combination of thin paint application of Plastikote Colony Cream OVER a yellow brass body PLUS natural grubbiness and accumulation of grease and dirt from prolonged handling.

I think MFX/RussRep, in the absence of a definitive color reference knew that it was PlastiKote crackle touch but didn't know the exact colour. On the shelf, the Heritage Gold was closest to the grubby sonic but in reality this was just illusory. Hence they picked the wrong colour!!!!!"

Now in the years that have past since writing this, CT has proved to be right in certain aspects and wrong in others. He was correct that the season 4 sonics were not painted in Plasticoat Heritage Gold. But he is wrong that they were painted in Plasticoat Colony Cream OVER a yellow brass body.

In fact the bodies on the season 4 sonic were not brass, they were aluminum and Plasticoat was not used on any of the season 4 sonics. So, CT waged a Flame war against Neil Gordon and attempted to get people to take legal action against Neil Gordon for making false claims and selling an inaccurate replica. The Celestial Toystore: How to get a screen accurate Sonic Screwdriver from MFX

But he was just as mistaken as MFX was in claiming that the season 4 sonic was painted in a different shade of Plasticoat crackle.

Here is a picture of the original sonic paint job

4687819353_709aa63d02_b.jpg


Here is a picture of the MFX paint job that attempted to replicate this prop
Doctor-Who-TV-2005-movie-props.jpg


Here is a picture of one of CT’s sonics from when I released his replica of the season 4 sonic.
Doctor-Who-TV-2005-movie-props.jpg


As you can see. Neither paint job was accurate.

It should also be noted that although CT now becomes quite upset that people do not recognize that he was the one who resolved the debate about the season 4 sonic “amazing that I still do not get any credit for a) questioning the colour b) proving the correct colour”, yet in June of 2010 he has written “It appears that the mystery of Tennant's sonic color has finally been resolved courtesy of The Card over on the Gallifrey Base forum. Because I don't want to take credit for this…”. So, apparently in June of 2010 he did not feel comfortable taking credit for another’s work but in July of 2012 he is ok with doing so.


An accurate paint job did not come until QMX released pictures of their first prototype, which looked like this.
qmx-10thdoctorsonic-12.jpg


It was QMX’s prototype that changed people’s opinion about the crackle paint used on the original season 4 prop. And subsequently, Nick Robatto himself told the RPF that the crackle paint he used on the season 4 sonics was made by Aleene’s, not Plasticoat or Perfetto—which was the paint that CT began using on his sonics when he began attempting to replicate that achieved by QMX.

[And as an aside, Perfetto and Aleene's are definitely not the same product. I've worked with both and their application and effect are completely different]

CT consistently argues that he should be given credit for “proving the correct colour c) the crackle,” but if you look at the sequence of events in detail. That credit really belongs to QMX and Nick Robatto himself.
 
Last edited:
The other point in question that has come up is whether or not I was correct in saying that CT's blog is full of lies.

On this point I am 100% sure that I am right since he lied about me.
The Celestial Toystore: CT Aztec Universal TV remote - opinions needed
In October 2010, CT wrote
" Dan Stokes who goes by the rather bellicose moniker 'Anakin Starkiller'. This deluded carpetbagger somehow thinks he can produce an accurate machined metal sonic for $100-$200 and has been actively courting business on the RPF. It seems that this tool has harvested the wisdom and observations from this blog yet has missed out some of the more pertinent gems that I have let slip. That is, it is simply not possible to create a CNC'ed machined, accurate sonic with custom sound chip for less than what I charge and I'm in China where prices are less (but going up rapidly). Any less and I'll be doing it for charity. Dan will learn this the hard way and his little sycophants will have their hopes for a £60 sonic sadly and hilariously dashed.

Anyway, this ****stick has now roped in Russ Brown to help him machine this and we already know that Russ and his old man were responsible for the infamous MFX. Indeed, Russ has been selling unofficial MFX's for quite a while now, both above and below the counter, so maybe he will shift a few more of his 'overrun' MFX's via Dan Stokes? Who knows...maybe even QMx might use Russ too. It's very chummy little world we live in, eh?"

I cannot stress this enough,
AT NO TIME WAS I EVER WORKING WITH RUSSEL BROWN, MFX, OR QMX.

CT just made this up so as to discredit my project before it even began, to bring me onto the license holder's radar as someone to pursue with a C&D, and to try to get Russel Brown in trouble with the people he had worked for.
 
Last edited:
I've been a spectator here for a while and feel I should chime in.

A long time ago CT called me out for some sloppy photoshop work I did and he was right. I admitted it here on the RPF and moved on. Was he harsh? Yes. But he was right and I stuck my nose where it didn't belong so I left it at that.

Recently a thread here was locked because of CT talk and it was made very clear that linking to his blog or store would not be tolerated on the RPF and talk of him would be highly moderated. That is of course the decision of the moderators here but I would think that it should apply BOTH to people who appreciate his work and those who have issue with it.

At this point I think it best that AS edit this most recent comment or, even better, this thread get locked up and bad blood moved elsewhere.

I don't have a bone to pick with anyone here but let's be fair.

As a gesture of peace if anyone has a sonic that they aren't happy with I will gladly take it off their hands...
 
That is the longest post I've ever seen. Sheesh.

Check your PMs, though. I responded to you RE: the 3D model comparison. Read it and then you may want to edit YOUR post.
 
I've been a spectator here for a while and feel I should chime in.

A long time ago CT called me out for some sloppy photoshop work I did and he was right. I admitted it here on the RPF and moved on. Was he harsh? Yes. But he was right and I stuck my nose where it didn't belong so I left it at that.

Recently a thread here was locked because of CT talk and it was made very clear that linking to his blog or store would not be tolerated on the RPF and talk of him would be highly moderated. That is of course the decision of the moderators here but I would think that it should apply BOTH to people who appreciate his work and those who have issue with it.

At this point I think it best that AS edit this most recent comment or, even better, this thread get locked up and bad blood moved elsewhere.

I don't have a bone to pick with anyone here but let's be fair.

As a gesture of peace if anyone has a sonic that they aren't happy with I will gladly take it off their hands...

:lol:thumbsup

O_B. you da man!
 
Anakin, one more thing:

You said:
This sliding prop, made by Mark Corday, and the Aztec props (which did not have a slider, but a tac switch embedded to the side of the prop) were the props used for season 3. The season 4 sonics were different builds. If you read Nick Robatto’s web page you will see this stated clearly.<br />
For season 4, Nick Robatto took the season 3 slider prop, and an Aztec prop and cannibalized the heads to make two new props for the remainder of Tennant’s tenure as the Doctor and for Matt Smith’s first episode. <br />
prop makers<br />

But then when I clicked on the link you provide at the end of that paragraph, I get a page that says:
"During series one and two the sonic was maintained and serviced by Mark Cordory. In series three Nick Robatto rebuilt the two sonics so both had the sliding mechanism."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top