Guys, Stop Shooting The Messengers....Please.
Hi Jan, I didn't say that I didn't like the result.
I was sure that the test described only revealed impedence variation of the speaker, and I proved that.
There has been discussion of DC coupled amplifiers with servo DC correction stage and the importance of VERY low frequency response of that stage....ie too high servo FR causes sonic problems.
BB claims to "eliminating sub-audible noise"....DC servo amplifiers can cause audible effects even when the servo response is well below 20 Hz.
If QP's do reduce sub 20 Hz noise then that noise reduction may cause audible changes.
I am just trying to make suggestions of a more suitable testing method before dismissing QP's out of hand.
We all know that there are wild claims touted, but there are some hints here and there..one is
There are plenty of instances of sound changes due to well explainable causes.
The QP may be one of these even if the mechanism is not fully understood.
Does anybody know of software that can record very low frequency noise over very long period and provide analysis ?.
Eric.
Hi Jan, I didn't say that I didn't like the result.
I was sure that the test described only revealed impedence variation of the speaker, and I proved that.
There has been discussion of DC coupled amplifiers with servo DC correction stage and the importance of VERY low frequency response of that stage....ie too high servo FR causes sonic problems.
BB claims to "eliminating sub-audible noise"....DC servo amplifiers can cause audible effects even when the servo response is well below 20 Hz.
If QP's do reduce sub 20 Hz noise then that noise reduction may cause audible changes.
I am just trying to make suggestions of a more suitable testing method before dismissing QP's out of hand.
We all know that there are wild claims touted, but there are some hints here and there..one is
Another is
I have experimented with samples of high temp superconducting material in the past, long before I had heard of BB QP, and when placed on top of a DAC chip or other locations the sound was subtly changed, however the resultant change was not pleasant to my ear....the new sound was a little clearer, but had an unpleasant 'flavour' that I found disturbing.
There are plenty of instances of sound changes due to well explainable causes.
The QP may be one of these even if the mechanism is not fully understood.
Does anybody know of software that can record very low frequency noise over very long period and provide analysis ?.
Eric.
I have just duplicated MB test procedure and I get the same results.
Circuit was amp out > 4 ohm resistor > speaker (single cone Bose) > amplifier speaker return.
M-Audiophile USB external sound card feeding the amplifier.
Standard Cro in X-Y mode connected across the 4 ohm resistor. (ie. one probe on amplifier output terminal and other probe on load side of resistor)
When feeding the amplifier with swept sinewave I get ellipse as per MB.
When feeding the amplifier with swept sinewave I get variable 'height' ellipse that collapses to flat line at a couple of frequencies.
This test is a measure of QP impedence vs. speaker impedence and is not revealling QP behaviour.
Next test protocol.....
Eric.
I recommend you get a better set of resistors. A 4 ohm load resistor and a current view resistor, perhaps .1 ohm, both with inductance below a nanohenry each.
If you are handy with a soldering iron and your hands, I can detail a combo resistor which does both..and has no inductive component.
I do not recommend buffing beryllium copper, nor machining either. Berylliosis can affect no more than 4 percent of the human population. There is no test to discern who is susceptible.
It is the beO dust inhaled that is the problem. No particulates, no problem. It is not toxic to ingest. It just replaces the potassium in the aveoli, rendering the lining impermeable to oxygen.
Cheers, John
Why? The data look fine- a voltage divider with an R on top and loudspeaker on the bottom. One expects an ellipse that opens and closes with frequency, and that's what's seen.
The varying impedance behaviour of the speaker swamps what one is looking for.
Get the ellipse outta there. Make the circuit purely resistive, use a gain block and variable input summer to null the circuit resistive response out.
Once gain is added, variation caused by the external shunt element can be viewed (or not).
Are all the resistors discussed here bifilar, helix, or deposited?
Cheers, John
The exact type number shown in the picture of an open Bybee device is not listed on the Pacific Resistor Company website, but their "Type B" compact power resistor is described thusly:
My italics, but their typos. PRC are located in Tarzana, CA and describe themselves as "in the business of manufacturing high quality wire wound resistors."
My italics, but their typos. PRC are located in Tarzana, CA and describe themselves as "in the business of manufacturing high quality wire wound resistors."
Thanks. Mil-R-26 is wirewound, that elimates a deposited type.
Now, is it helix or bifilar? (non-inductive).
Cheers, John
Be - OH! MY!
yes, John ..I don't believe I recommended buffing or machining berylium, BeO, etc.... simply an anecdote; that's why one of my primary goals 30 years ago was to eliminate or minimize this stupid exposure (the procedures were designed by EE's and physicists). However, no one was injured, and I implemented effective work-arounds, so another bullet dodged I guess..
FWIW:
The beryllium lymphocyte proliferation test (BeLPT), a blood test that can detect beryllium sensitivity (i.e. an allergic reaction to beryllium), is used to screen individuals at risk of developing berylliosis. When screening results reveal a high level of sensitivity, BeLPT is performed on cells washed from the lungs. This test is now considered the most definitive diagnostic test for berylliosis.
If the BeLPT determines that you have been sensitized to beryllium, you may wish to pursue further medical evaluation to find out if you have Chronic Beryllium Disease (CBD).
If your cells did not react strongly to beryllium, then your test result is called "normal" or "non-reactive." The majority of those exposed to beryllium will not become sensitized. For those who do, sensitization can occur within a short period of time after initial exposure or it can take years after the initial exposure before sensitization occurs.
Safety and Health Topics: Beryllium - Brochures - The Beryllium Lymphocyte Proliferation Test
carry on
John L.
yes, John ..I don't believe I recommended buffing or machining berylium, BeO, etc.... simply an anecdote; that's why one of my primary goals 30 years ago was to eliminate or minimize this stupid exposure (the procedures were designed by EE's and physicists). However, no one was injured, and I implemented effective work-arounds, so another bullet dodged I guess..
FWIW:
The beryllium lymphocyte proliferation test (BeLPT), a blood test that can detect beryllium sensitivity (i.e. an allergic reaction to beryllium), is used to screen individuals at risk of developing berylliosis. When screening results reveal a high level of sensitivity, BeLPT is performed on cells washed from the lungs. This test is now considered the most definitive diagnostic test for berylliosis.
If the BeLPT determines that you have been sensitized to beryllium, you may wish to pursue further medical evaluation to find out if you have Chronic Beryllium Disease (CBD).
If your cells did not react strongly to beryllium, then your test result is called "normal" or "non-reactive." The majority of those exposed to beryllium will not become sensitized. For those who do, sensitization can occur within a short period of time after initial exposure or it can take years after the initial exposure before sensitization occurs.
Safety and Health Topics: Beryllium - Brochures - The Beryllium Lymphocyte Proliferation Test
carry on
John L.
Last edited:
I had not implied that you did. Sorry for the mis-understanding.
Excellent, thank you for the information. I knew not of this back in the 80's.
From what it says, it appears that this test will not find a person who is genetically predisposed to sensitivity of BeO, but rather, one who has been exposed to it and has become sensitized. But great to know anywhoo..
Cheers, John
As far as I can see, claims of superconductivity have not been made by Bybee...
Yes, they have.
May I make the case for this or would my post just be deleted?
se
On the bybee website, the claim includes:
""Current flow within the Quantum Purifier is unimpeded and ideal ""
That is the definition of superconductivity.
I do recall claims of "near superconductivity", but this may be attributable to Mr. Curl. I have not seen this statement on Bybee's website.
Cal, if you wish to delete this post, I have no objection..your call.
Cheers, John
I sit confused.
I do not believe any discussion of superconductivity is relevant to that of measurement of these devices. Were there additional posts that fell by the wayside?
Cheers, John
Not at all relevant. Nor are gamma ray measurements. Or electron spin resonance. This has devolved into straw-grasping- if someone wants to offer up data, that's great. Hand-waving pataphysics and buzzwords are OT.
Steve, see below
Yes I must have glazed over before getting to that part. Thanks for posting John.
That's already been dispensed with. Impedance from DC to 40kHz is a constant 25 milliohms.
Old Women's Sewing Circle...
The inputs have been relating experiences and pointed towards working out how to attempt to measure QP effects....so far the tests attempted have returned null result, but this does not preclude QP effects.
There are enough brains around here to work together to work it out, surely.
So far it has taken eight months and 1400 posts of noise...now there are some here who are talking sense and polite posts are now disappearing....I am thinking that there is some kind of agenda here to prove that QP cannot work as claimed to reduce LF pink noise.
Also, why would anybody send $200 worth of items internationally without registering and/or insuring the goods in question.
Also Stuart, you have admitted to listening to QP but have ignored requests to state your subjective opinions - why is this.
Eric.
The inputs have been relating experiences and pointed towards working out how to attempt to measure QP effects....so far the tests attempted have returned null result, but this does not preclude QP effects.
There are enough brains around here to work together to work it out, surely.
So far it has taken eight months and 1400 posts of noise...now there are some here who are talking sense and polite posts are now disappearing....I am thinking that there is some kind of agenda here to prove that QP cannot work as claimed to reduce LF pink noise.
Also, why would anybody send $200 worth of items internationally without registering and/or insuring the goods in question.
Also Stuart, you have admitted to listening to QP but have ignored requests to state your subjective opinions - why is this.
Eric.
What I do believe pertinent to the measurement is a good understanding of what level of effect needed to be measured. Running an I/V plot of a 4 ohm speaker load is insufficient. Second order entities will totally swamp any possibility of measurement of any "subtle" effects. A good example is the flux modulation within the speaker motor, and eddy effects within the pole piece, magnet, and flux return path..nevermind cone things..
Use a perfect 4 ohm resistor, a perfect current viewing resistor, and the bybee device in series with all three. If the bybee does absolutely nothing, there will be zero ovality in the x-y plot. A more exacting method is to null the I/V components. Any deviation from linearity, even at the .1% level, has to be accessible from the measurement setup.
Cheers, John
- Status
- Not open for further replies.