John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[janneman]

Originally Posted by john curl

Janeman, look at around 5K and 1K for a balanced pair of sidebands. NOTE that they have no ID on them.

Ahhh yes, actually there's several pairs of them. Hmmm.
Did you guys really disregard those? No questions from the audience at the presentation? SOMEONE must have noticed that at the time and have an explanation. No?

jd

[Wavebourn]

Originally Posted by Juergen Knoop

ok...stirr it up again...what if the measured distortion/intermodulation spectra is clean, without sidebands, harmonics etc.
Do we still blame a high feedback approach as sounding bad?

Do we blame anything?

We are speaking of design of something that at least has "the measured distortion/intermodulation spectra is clean, without sidebands, harmonics, etc"

[john curl]

Mitch Cotter saw them, and pointed them out to Matti, but not during the presentation. Everyone else was running for cover. I was there, in NY, when the paper was presented. I went out to dinner with Matti, Michael Gerzon, Walt Jung, and several others, afterward. No negative comments, then.

[jam]

Jan,
Sorry if I offended you, I was just trying to bring some levity into the situation.......leave for a few hours and see what happens. You might find that Mr.Curl is not so bad after all....then again maybe not.......but Steve Eddy is the wrong person to ask.

Regards,

Jam

[scott wurcer]

Originally Posted by janneman

So this is the Fig 3 John has brought up. What is that confounded 'blip'?

jd

Thanks Jan, you have to be kidding? Hopefully the scale is linear enough to get close but those will all be related to the input (remember two intermods can beat and gererate even more). With this much distortion you can go up to many orders.

[anatech]

Hi John,
No, you don't have to prove anything, but then you shouldn't expect to be believed then either. You can't have it both ways. Were you an only child by chance?

Note that I didn't suggest you write anything. I simply stated that you should provide your references (which you do). However, those references should be made easily available to people you are making your argument to (that would be .... us). That means the references are either in print or pdf file. Besides, if you claim something to be true and write a paper on this same thing, it's useless as a reference. It's just your word - twice. Duh! So is repeating something that you heard or were told.

John, basic scientific process here. State your claim, prove your claim citing references made available to your audience. Put yourself in someone else's shoes for a change. You hear a claim being made without any supporting evidence. The claim is questionable simply because you are not aware whether it's true or not. Requests for anything to substantiate the claim are not really answered, then you get insulted and put down by someone who doesn't know you. John, I know you'd be hounding that person to back up their story. In fact, you would not allow the subject to drop until the proof was delivered, or you had humiliated or defamed their reputation in public. You are the person making the claims. It is you that must back up your claims.

Otherwise, you are not helping anyone here.

As for who is, and who isn't an engineer, who cares? I have a business card somewhere that identifies me as an engineer. So what? I am not an engineer, you are not an engineer and it matters not. I just don't like to see you using a title to elevate your own status over your peers. That's the same thing as Conrad Black, he just had to have the title "Sir". He bought that title, he didn't earn it. I wonder if he was stripped of that title since he was jailed (I think he was anyway). If you can't stand on your own merit John, I pity you. 'Tis a small thing you chase, not rightfully yours to claim.

So, John. Stand on your own two feet, not the shoulders of others. Make your claim and be man enough to provide evidence to back up what you say. It's also okay to make mistakes, everyone does. Open debate and discussion is what teaches us all.

-Chris

[janneman]

Originally Posted by jam

Jan,
Sorry if I offended you, I was just trying to bring some levity into the situation.......leave for a few hours and see what happens. You might find that Mr.Curl is not so bad after all....then again maybe not.......but Steve Eddy is the wrong person to ask.

Regards,

Jam

I hate nobody in particular, but I'm getting quickly frustrated if people .. ohh forget it.
I guess SE will be again at BAF09. You coming? Trio at the bar ?

jd

[Nelson Pass]

[janneman]

Originally Posted by Nelson Pass

John, if you plot the following components:

2F2-4F1;
2F2-5F1;
2F2-6F1;
2F2-7F1;
etc.

where do these components fall on the graph?

jd

[janneman]

Originally Posted by john curl

Wavebourn, the article has to be PURCHASED. Why don't you buy it, and tell us what it gives to the discussion? Puts a different emphasis on it, doesn't it?

Anatolyi, is it an AES pub?

jd