3D?
I have some Kapton film. If laser printer can print on it it is quite interesting: I can iron the drawing back on a copper clad board, to make boards for prototypes. Let's try!
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, emerges from the 3D printer and slouches towards diyaudio to be born?
Plain printer paper will deteriorate after just a few decades. How about some copper-clad? Just fuse your laser-printed words from glossy inkjet paper onto some copper-clad FR4, with a clothes iron, and then remove the paper and drop the FR4 into a nice bath of 1 part 30-something-% hydrochloric acid (aka "muriatic") and 2 parts common 3% hydrogen peroxide, for about five minutes. Then rinse and don't repeat.
Maybe use some of the really-thin flexible PCB material and then put the pages into a three-ring binder. That should make a fairly-permanent copy.
Maybe use some of the really-thin flexible PCB material and then put the pages into a three-ring binder. That should make a fairly-permanent copy.
That depends. If it's read out loud it will sound like a perfect reproduction of someone reading it. And if it's read to oneself it will be completely silent, even with your ear pressing right up against it.
Dont get too involved in this particular filter. So many filters in audio speakers and cross-overs have complex shapes and configurations and many would have a lot of trouble when viewed in this way - loss of details being retreived in the decay times of the filter (corner) or what ever. Just get the point being illustrated is what I am trying to communicate..... not to be limited to what is being shown to make the point. (Dean Jensen's transformers were noted as sounding the best for the apps designed -- they were designed to have a Bessel rolloff, btw.) -Thx RNM
Last edited:
We learned base width modulation. That was imaginable modulation, used in equations. But if transistors sing that means their real geometry modulates as well!
Thank you Wavebourn.
Although you answer in brief, you are very informative.
I would like to know if all these effects (1-4) and their results have been analyzed . They are not included in the typical capacitor parameters, nor in any capacitor equivalent circuit I have seen
George
An asymmetrical waveform necessarily includes even harmonics, and may include DC. DC will obviously show up DA, as DA is a low frequency phenomenon. DC will also act as a bias and cause a cap with symmetrical non-linearity (and so only odd-order inherent distortion) to produce asymmetrical non-linearity and so even-order distortion.john curl said:
It may also be that asymmetry is easier to spot by eye than symmetry. If you start with a symmetrical waveform (only odd harmonics) and apply it to a symmetrical DUT (most non-electrolytic caps) then the result must be symmetrical as there is nothing to introduce asymmetry. An asymmetrical test waveform changes things, simply by introducing asymmetry. Now it is possible to get asymmetric results.
Why do you keep giving illustrations which actually illustrate a different point from the one you are making? Even though superficially they may look relevant at first glance, and may fool some people. Could it be that the point you are making has no illustrations because it is false?RNMarsh said:
We have had audibility of energy storage in filters, which turned out to be a multipole very sharp filter so bound to store energy. We were asked to add up the same parcel of energy at different times, as though these were separate lumps of energy. Then we had audibility of filter slope, which may actually be audibility of sharpness of filter corner.
Does the emperor have any clothes?
Though ferro-magnetic hysteresis with its "S" shaped curve will make odd harmonic distortion. Even a a pair of needle nose pliers brought near an air core crossover inductor is measurable (but very small, -140dB thirds).
It doesnt matter to me how many different ways we can view the same thing that has been already known. I am correlating the sound with the test... which one corelates best? I have said this before.
For example, the sharpeness of the corner - it is for You to try and see if this test or view Does correlate. Explore it further on your own. If you are satified that other tests better corelate... fine. I disagree. -Thx, RNM
The sine-square test was useful some 35 years ago, I agree. With up-to-date devices, and our good knowledge of slew rate issues, it became quite useless, IMO. Especially for the reason of very complicated evaluation of the output that this test provides us with. We should not live in the past.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.