John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[SY]

It's the little triangle with exclamation point at the lower left of each post.

[Esperado]

We cannot tell exactly what subjective effects some changes applied to a signal will produce in our brains. And that is the reason why "Audiophiles" pretend that measurements don't tell everything.
But there is something obvious, with our actual technology : Any real change at the lowest level applied to a signal witch can have an audible effect will be put in evidence with accurate measurements.

The mystery, for me, in this boring Bybee story, is: How some famous audio designer, supposed to have a scientific basis in electronic, can believe in snake oil, like Bybee blabla, and use to spend its time in 'burning' cables during weeks or mark them in order to mount them in a dedicated sens in his preamplifiers.
The only result produced by such asserts is the question i ask myself about his competency or honesty, while in the same time, (for what i know of his schematics) the rest of his work is compliant with the 'state of art' of electronic. Yes, a big mystery for me.

[qusp]

Originally Posted by clifforrest

JC does himself no favours (British "u"!) with his blunt provocative style and stubbornness,

thats just the way its spelled correctly, it has no nationality

dont forget the ceaseless namedropping and belittling equipment quality/hearing acuity. All pretty stock standard and boring excuses for evidence zero.

@ kgrlee: its a bit of a broken record mate, we got the message, I agree John has in the past made ridiculous statements evoking sorcery, equally tired and cliched anecdotal reports/excuses against the many legged audio creatures at the 7th, particularly apparent when Scott is in the 'room'.

its hard to fathom the alignment with these silly things that can be generously described as having effects that are equal in scale (rather than effect) to the the quantum level they are said to operate at...

Sometimes he appears to be just making stuff up as he goes and says out loud that its a chore to have to provide something by way of proof of his statements.... Given the general population of this thread, this often comes across as actively trolling for a reaction; usually accompanied by some sort of secret suicide pill sauce elucidation.

We are left with self delusion or deception as options and that is indeed a sad state of affairs for such a well respected designer (even the majority of his detractors (and indeed myself) are accepting of this on the whole). he even actively stirs it all up on a regular basis....baffling.

etc etc we/I get that, but you are getting nowhere and its just becoming painful to watch; you are only doing yourself a disservice.

[Esperado]

Originally Posted by qusp

etc etc we/I get that, but you are getting nowhere and its just becoming painful to watch; you are only doing yourself a disservice.

I feel uncomfortable to say that, but, with all my sympathy and respect: +1.

[Jakob2]

Originally Posted by SY

If it's dynamic, it's not DC by definition.

While that is obviously true, a slowly changing fundamental does occur if asymmetrical waveforms are reproduced and if it is not averaged out over a certain time frame, then it would normally be considered to be a dc voltage overlayed with an ac signal within this time frame.

[a.wayne]

John throws out clues not answers, his retorts to question are meant to incite research, frustrating if you want to be given the answers ...

I do wish the over the top disrespectful bashing would cease thou ....

As to the BQP and after doing some research on it , I'm with Sy , well until i can hear this sonic marvel at work myself ....

[qusp]

Originally Posted by a.wayne

John throws out clues not answers, his retorts to question are meant to incite research, frustrating if you want to be given the answers ...

I do wish the over the top disrespectful bashing would cease thou ....

As to the BQP and after doing some research on it , I'm with Sy , well until i can hear this sonic marvel at work myself ....

I speak specifically of backing up his own sometimes dubious (and almost always deliberately vague) pseudo technical assertions, not handouts of secret knowledge...

[scott wurcer]

Originally Posted by RNMarsh

Can you describe the model or make up a model that predicts the thd of an electrolytic or a ceramic (non npo)? Thx-RNMarsh

That would be my only purpose in doing all the measurements. It's a lot of work and no one so far has bothered or proved it can't be done. To Jan's simple point folks soft petal the fact that if AC coupling components are chosen to have little or no AC across them there is little or no distortion. A small second order non-linearity produces a small DC component, hardly the same as Bateman's 2V AC riding on 20V DC. How about comparing 40V p-p AC to 2V AC. It's just like no one being interested in just how much a simple TC and thermal time constant would predict (probably) most of the resistor distortion measurements.

In many cases there is not much interest in maximizing the performance out of ordinary components, instead bespoke or exotic components get put in every socket. So again sorry if I am hard on fashion audio claims.

[Esperado]

Originally Posted by a.wayne

I do wish the over the top disrespectful bashing would cease thou ...

Most of us takes no pleasure to contradict anyone. The only reason we are here is to discover new things from other's experiences and share the ones we had learned and experienced. And exchange in a friendly atmosphere on a subject witch passionate us.
John is a famous designer. This gives a significant weight and responsibility on what he publish.
When John, unfortunately, walk on the obscurantist side of the road (and we all know the dangerous consequences it can lead to) , it is OUR responsibility to less knowledgeable visitors to refocus the debate in the correct scientific direction. And you will see that, in this matter, EVERYBODY with enough electronic background, here, agree on the same technical evidences and methodology.
There is other famous designers, here. No one had to suffer the same controversy. Because they are technically irreproachable. We can have different tastes, we can chose different ways to reach the same goals, we all agree on the maths.

Originally Posted by scott wurcer

In many cases there is not much interest in maximizing the performance out of ordinary components, instead bespoke or exotic components get put in every socket. So again sorry if I am hard on fashion audio claims.

+1

[a.wayne]

Originally Posted by qusp

I speak specifically of backing up his own sometimes dubious (and almost always deliberately vague) pseudo technical assertions, not handouts of secret knowledge...

Yes , agree he does throw this in too , a bit too smoothly not to be enjoying it , we should room both Scott and John for a month ..

JFet vs IC ...