Personal vs technical. Just because you can't hear or measure any claimed function for his device is not a license to accuse him of deliberate fraud. It seems clear he believes (and a few others) that his device does something.
SY you gotta admit there are a lot of folks who do trash him personally.
Now I have called John things that are not particularly nice, often true but usually to express humor.
For example we all know the guy pretending to to be J.C. on this thread is really a disgruntled fast food clerk, who just got tired of asking "WYLFWT?"
Not at all clear. Given his total lack of backup data and ridiculous claims, it sure looks to me like the fraud is deliberate and knowing. No data or evidence yet to the contrary.
To be clear, I'll say (again) that I don't think John is deliberately trying to defraud anyone- I think he sincerely believes everything he says. His role in this is as a dupe, not as a con-man.
Hi Guys,
That 10-page "rebuttal" was never published by Gene Pitts of Audio, and for good reason. It made no sense and was subsequently rebutted by me. John should stop living in the past, fighting people who have moved on. It is a shame that he remains so bitter about things that happened 30 years ago.
Anyone who is interested in the controversey John stirs up about my article "Another view of TIM" can read it on my web site. I think it remains accurate today, but you may certainly disagree. But at least if you read it you will see the work directly and not through the distorted lenses of John's agenda.
The one area in which I would change things in favor of one of John's positions is the very high relative slew rate that can be produced by an MC cartridge when it is mis-tracking. In my article, I showed data collected for MM cartidges operating under non-mis-tracking conditions. Nevertheless, I did not understate the need for good slew rate.
Even though we disagreed on many things, I always enjoyed talking with Matti. I thought he was a real gentleman. He was very stubborn in his opinions, but that often comes with the territory. I doubt that It was Matti's fault that John did not fare well at HK.
Cheers,
Bob
No, Bob, because we did not want to embarrass you further, Gene Pitts decided to give you a break, and we wrote a 1 page 'cover letter' instead. YOU were being taken on by Matti Otala, Walt Jung, Marshall Leach, and me. My part was minor. Your rebuttal to our rebuttal to you is here in front of me, do you have that on your website also?
By the way the original rebuttal was 14 pages of dialogue and 2 pages of references.
It must be understood, as I have tried to show the history of TIM here, warts and all, that several of the people who had spent a decade or so and hundreds of hours of lab time, found Bob's 'takeover' of the concept annoying, and found a need to 'clip Bob's wings' and so it came to be.
By the way the original rebuttal was 14 pages of dialogue and 2 pages of references.
It must be understood, as I have tried to show the history of TIM here, warts and all, that several of the people who had spent a decade or so and hundreds of hours of lab time, found Bob's 'takeover' of the concept annoying, and found a need to 'clip Bob's wings' and so it came to be.
When Walt Jung is mentioned, this paper should be mentioned as well:
http://waltjung.org/PDFs/SID_TIM_AES_Preprint_1252.pdf
It shows that just slew rate and closed loop GBW are important.
He also shows that more feedback results in less distortion close to (under) slew rate limit.
http://waltjung.org/PDFs/SID_TIM_AES_Preprint_1252.pdf
It shows that just slew rate and closed loop GBW are important.
He also shows that more feedback results in less distortion close to (under) slew rate limit.
Last edited:
That says it all. Reminds me of that statement of the police guy in the movie 'Six blocks': "F*** the truth! He's bringing the case down!".
jan didden
Yup, one and the same
Best Regards!
Hi John, yes that would be me ! Love reading your threads on this site BTW, good info for those who are willing to listen.
Best Regards!
Hi John,
Just writng an article in Audio is certainly not a "takeover" of the subject, nor was it intended to be. It is silly of you to imply that five guys would feel sole ownership of the subject, and you should only speak for yourself in this regard. I have both the original from you and the rebuttal from me, and maybe I'll get around to PDFing it and putting it up here so people can see what is there without your distortions. As with many other things where you choose to re-write history, your characterization of Gene Pitts' actions and views in that matter are quite distorted.
Cheers,
Bob
Well, yes, I know Hagelin
But Hagelin probably does not know 'nuthin 'bout me. I'm not famous or well known. I'm still only a legend in my own mind...an' that don't look likely to change anytime soon!
There are some really interesting neuro-scientists out this way, and that's where I've gotten a lot of info on how to test for neuro-physiological response to audio (and other stimuli).
There's been some really profound research out here, about of brain-waves and how they interact with our ability to function at higher levels, and I've been able to study quite a lot of this research at the library at MUM (Maharishi University of Management), which is basically the TM university...
Some very cool people in Fairfield, also. I'm very grateful to the Neuro-Physiology guys at the University... when I was feeling stymied because I didn't have a budget to conduct EEG research, they recommended testing with GSR instead, and explained there's a very close correlation with the EEG results as related to production of coherent brain-waves.
Methinks we will eventually incorporate this kind of brain-wave testing in the audio world... if we can't determine exactly what distortions are bugging us, we can still determine their effect, both conscious and subliminal and try to remedy accordingly... we'll be like canaries in the gold-mine... except hopefully we won't keel over as much!
Living in a small town like Fairfield... sure, I know John Hagelin, he is quite the local celebrity, he ran for President as a candidate for the Natural Law Party, and is the local 'head honcho" for the TM people. When I first got here I thought I'd look for a job at Enlightened Audio Design, but by then Hagelin and Co. were pretty much closing it down.
But Hagelin probably does not know 'nuthin 'bout me. I'm not famous or well known. I'm still only a legend in my own mind...an' that don't look likely to change anytime soon!
There are some really interesting neuro-scientists out this way, and that's where I've gotten a lot of info on how to test for neuro-physiological response to audio (and other stimuli).
There's been some really profound research out here, about of brain-waves and how they interact with our ability to function at higher levels, and I've been able to study quite a lot of this research at the library at MUM (Maharishi University of Management), which is basically the TM university...
Some very cool people in Fairfield, also. I'm very grateful to the Neuro-Physiology guys at the University... when I was feeling stymied because I didn't have a budget to conduct EEG research, they recommended testing with GSR instead, and explained there's a very close correlation with the EEG results as related to production of coherent brain-waves.
Methinks we will eventually incorporate this kind of brain-wave testing in the audio world... if we can't determine exactly what distortions are bugging us, we can still determine their effect, both conscious and subliminal and try to remedy accordingly... we'll be like canaries in the gold-mine... except hopefully we won't keel over as much!
Wow you got the mojo working! Any relation to Alexander Abian my old buddie and usenet kook?
Last edited:
Walt remembers testing the 1741S. This is a special version of the 741 that is at least 10 times faster. The problem is that it behaves like the 741 up to a certain point, before it 'changes gears' so to speak and actually measures better for a certain range. This violates the assumption that you can tell EVERYTHING from the slew rate limit and gain bandwidth. Sorry PMA, but this was just the sort of example that kept Matti Otala from using slew rate as the determining criteria for TIM. You need to know and understand the difference between 'soft' TIM and 'hard' TIM as defined by Otala.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.