As far as I know, this is a DIY website where mostly NON-professional hobyists enjoy sharing and building audio gear. John, you take pride in intellectual engineering discussions, but when it comes to present hard figures or measurements of the Blowtorch, you just vanish or spread some more smoke to confuse people here. It's just ego-boosting and looking for playmates supporting your ego in an ongoing game!
You may go on and use those childish emoticons again in your response as you did the last time.
FrankWW,
You are right. Lots of good info, but when it comes to hard figures or measurements about this thread's topic, there is zero evidence. Look at PMA's request to actually listen to the BT. All he gets is a vague response to contribute more. He has given a lot already, so where is mr. Curl with hard figures, measurements, evidence??????
You are right. Lots of good info, but when it comes to hard figures or measurements about this thread's topic, there is zero evidence. Look at PMA's request to actually listen to the BT. All he gets is a vague response to contribute more. He has given a lot already, so where is mr. Curl with hard figures, measurements, evidence??????
This forum and every single one of its threads is accessible to every member and every member has equal right to post in the topic of its/her choice if he/she has something to contribute, ask or explain.
While it is perfectly acceptable to ignore someone, it is against the fundamental spirit of this place to exclude others for whatever reason.
I’ve seen this happen on more than one occasion in this thread and I will make sure it stops.
/Hugo
Just as I expected; no figures or measuremens whatsoever! Just sweet talk to suit those that fall for it and, as it turns out now, are being used without even being aware.
Sad to see that this thread has turned into the playground of the "happy few" who consider themselves engineers, well educated and experienced with all the knowledge and rubbing it over and over in our face that we're not good enough to participate in their gentlemens discussion.
However there are still some who can see through this sharade and stick to their own opinions and discoveries. For the record, I'm not an engineer, but someone who intuitively discovers and explores. Sometimes I seek help, but most of the time I follow my own course which has been more than rewarding till now.
Sad to see that this thread has turned into the playground of the "happy few" who consider themselves engineers, well educated and experienced with all the knowledge and rubbing it over and over in our face that we're not good enough to participate in their gentlemens discussion.
However there are still some who can see through this sharade and stick to their own opinions and discoveries. For the record, I'm not an engineer, but someone who intuitively discovers and explores. Sometimes I seek help, but most of the time I follow my own course which has been more than rewarding till now.
N-Channel J-FETs only
No suppression of second harmonics; does that harm?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1794&highlight=
A perfectly working discrete circuit can be built with N-channel J-FETs only. Of course is not complementary...Steve Eddy said:
No suppression of second harmonics; does that harm?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1794&highlight=
Those who want can learn here. One might not expect everything to be explained as a cook-book, there is a lot of high-value intellectual property. And, it has hardly been intended to make reverse-engineering and build a BT copy, DIY or not. This is the real reason why some here complaints.
Get this, and get this straight; I'm NOT reverse-engineering anything but try to grasp the function of a certain topology. I have not cloned nor built anything related to the BT. Furthermore I mentioned it here repeatedly that I do not expect any cookbook education here or anywhere else. Once more, I follow my OWN course!
I respect the intellectual property of others as such, but mere figures or measurements of a so called "unique product" are normal data which can be found in any respected audio magazine review.
I do not complain but POINT OUT that I have my own opinion which does not necessarily has to be in unison with the so called "thread owners" here. I don't have to be likeable either. Everyone in this thread is here for a personal reason, including you Pavel. You made your goal very clear some posts ago. Now why would you want to do that? Just think about it....
I respect the intellectual property of others as such, but mere figures or measurements of a so called "unique product" are normal data which can be found in any respected audio magazine review.
I do not complain but POINT OUT that I have my own opinion which does not necessarily has to be in unison with the so called "thread owners" here. I don't have to be likeable either. Everyone in this thread is here for a personal reason, including you Pavel. You made your goal very clear some posts ago. Now why would you want to do that? Just think about it....
I see no need for measurements on the Blowtorch. Measurements do not tell much about sonics.
PMA has simulated a design that is very close to the Blowtorch,
and we have seen PMA:s distortion simulations. Good enough for me.
I even think that John said that PMA:s dist spectrum was close to the real thing.
I find that this thread has positively moved away from the Blowtorch design and into other stuff related to sonics.
Sigurd
PMA has simulated a design that is very close to the Blowtorch,
and we have seen PMA:s distortion simulations. Good enough for me.
I even think that John said that PMA:s dist spectrum was close to the real thing.
I find that this thread has positively moved away from the Blowtorch design and into other stuff related to sonics.
Sigurd
courage said:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.