John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 1137 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 15th March 2011, 05:03 PM   #11361
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
The head that was measured had a self resonance of 57KHz.
John, I said add a capacitor till it's 10kHz.
__________________
"The question of who is right and who is wrong has seemed to me always too small to be worth a moment's thought, while the question of what is right and what is wrong has seemed all-important."
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2011, 05:04 PM   #11362
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
DF96, you have taught me a hard lesson, that I will try to follow. It doesn't really matter what I say here, it is just how I say it.
Of course, I try to be reasonable, and it is quite a challenge, as I have had the same arguments with the same people, SY, SE, and JN for 8 years or more. I am rarely proven wrong, but that doesn't stop everyone from arguing the same points over and over. The same 'cheap shots', etc. It is like a formula.
Where are the other audio designers at my experience level? Where is Walt Jung and Charles Hansen? They are my colleagues, and we talk together often. Why don't they post here, anymore? Do you have any ideas or suggestions?
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2011, 05:15 PM   #11363
jlsem is offline jlsem  United States
diyAudio Member
 
jlsem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dallas,TX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post
For the higher frequencies in the audio range there is the "skin effect," that is, the flux tends to concentrate on the
outer surface of the laminations, which accounts for the
fall in effective permeability, as shown in Fig. 16.[/i]

se
Then what accounts for a slight rise in permeability at higher inductions (even at 20kHz) in thin Mumetal laminations when the effect of eddy currents would presumably be at its strongest?

John
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2011, 05:18 PM   #11364
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
DF96, you have taught me a hard lesson, that I will try to follow. It doesn't really matter what I say here, it is just how I say it.
Of course, I try to be reasonable, and it is quite a challenge, as I have had the same arguments with the same people, SY, SE, and JN for 8 years or more. I am rarely proven wrong, but that doesn't stop everyone from arguing the same points over and over. The same 'cheap shots', etc. It is like a formula.
Where are the other audio designers at my experience level? Where is Walt Jung and Charles Hansen? They are my colleagues, and we talk together often. Why don't they post here, anymore? Do you have any ideas or suggestions?
John, in this case no one is trying to prove you wrong. We are discussing amongst ourselves details of this phenomena and how to measure it.
__________________
"The question of who is right and who is wrong has seemed to me always too small to be worth a moment's thought, while the question of what is right and what is wrong has seemed all-important."
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2011, 05:34 PM   #11365
diyAudio Member
 
Steve Eddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlsem View Post
Then what accounts for a slight rise in permeability at higher inductions (even at 20kHz) in thin Mumetal laminations when the effect of eddy currents would presumably be at its strongest?
Can you cite an example of this so I can take a look at what you're talking about?

se
__________________
The Audio Guild
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2011, 05:35 PM   #11366
diyAudio Member
 
Steve Eddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott wurcer View Post
John, in this case no one is trying to prove you wrong. We are discussing amongst ourselves details of this phenomena and how to measure it.
Preferably in a realworld transformer, not a recording head.

se
__________________
The Audio Guild
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2011, 05:52 PM   #11367
DF96 is offline DF96  England
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
John, some of the cheap shots were fired by you. I seem to remember remarks about professionals vs amateurs, apprentices vs graduates, and international prize winners? It was clear to a relative newcomer (on this forum) like me that there was some 'history' between those in the argument. This meant that many people seem predisposed to be more aggressive than they usually are. Your apparent reluctance to offer a simple physics explanation did not help.

Even now, you are talking about "my experience level". Remarks like that do not win friends. Scientific argument must be settled on the science, not the eminence (real or imagined) of the people involved. There is no room for gurus in science!
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2011, 05:58 PM   #11368
diyAudio Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
Freq dependent resistance is the correct way. This is not a fiddle - you can actually measure the resistance. If you put current through it you get I^2R losses. If you assume that the whole transformer is at one temperature you don't even need to worry about the physical origin of each element of measured resistance.
I guess I have to agree with that. Seein's as that's what I said about 3 bazillion posts ago (maybe friday?)

Course, I didn't get the fiddle reference...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
No, but others have implied that JC was imagining things.
Actually, some may have actually said that..especially given John's propensity for shall we say, "creative physics fiction". Over the years he has spouted various physics "explanations" that were without merit, so I believe many will make the assumption of "business as usual".

I try to take each statement or understanding on it's own merit. Despite the fact that John C stated some "crazy" thing, I try to look at it on merit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
I thought so at first, especially when he seemed reluctant or unable to offer a reasonable explanation. At times he resorted to shouting, or sneering, which made me even more suspicious.
That's him...always has been, always will be. The fact that he cannot support a reasonable explanation doesn't mean his observational skills are bad..just that his understanding of physics is pretty rusty. And I do give him credit for attempting to figure out the physics. But he considers a discussion of the physics as an attack against him, especially if he has it all wrong. Again, it is what it is...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
It was only when I began to filter out all the noise and confusion, and think about the actual physics, that I realised that he was probably right but he seemed unable or unwilling to offer a coherent explanation.
He didn't have a coherent explanation to give. Only after I started the eddy loss==>effective resistance stuff and we all started discussing, did he start to jump on the bandwagon..

Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
They seemed to continue banging on his door for an explanation even after I had offered one instead.
Hmm.. this is such a long and fast thread.. Did you post eddy loss/series resistance before me?? I'd love to read it if so, can you provide a link? Thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrfeedback View Post
Some here would do well to listen through JC's ears and hear his words of experience.
Standard theory does not quite explain all.
Eric.
You are half right...half wrong.

Some here would indeed do well to listen to JC....

But...
Standard theory absolutely does explain it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
Gee, I was right, after all! '-)
Don't get a big head now duuuude..

Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
Of course, I try to be reasonable, and it is quite a challenge, as I have had the same arguments with the same people, SY, SE, and JN for 8 years or more.
For my part, I'm keeping you honest John. When you're right, I tell you. When you're wrong, I tell you.

And in all cases, I detail exactly why you are right and why you are wrong.No more, no less.

In this particular case, I refused to allow your accurate observation to be dismissed out of hand..

Condescention on your part has never been justified.

Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
I am rarely proven wrong,..
Certainly incorrect. But no matter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
Where are the other audio designers at my experience level? Where is Walt Jung and Charles Hansen? They are my colleagues, and we talk together often. Why don't they post here, anymore? Do you have any ideas or suggestions?
Honestly, my thinking is that they don't want to be associated with your posting style or some of your hilarious physics meanderings... But, that's just my opinion.

Cheers, John

Last edited by jneutron; 15th March 2011 at 06:05 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2011, 06:03 PM   #11369
iko is offline iko  Canada
diyAudio Moderator
 
iko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Toronto
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
John, some of the cheap shots were fired by you. I seem to remember remarks about professionals vs amateurs, apprentices vs graduates, and international prize winners? It was clear to a relative newcomer (on this forum) like me that there was some 'history' between those in the argument. This meant that many people seem predisposed to be more aggressive than they usually are. Your apparent reluctance to offer a simple physics explanation did not help.

Even now, you are talking about "my experience level". Remarks like that do not win friends. Scientific argument must be settled on the science, not the eminence (real or imagined) of the people involved. There is no room for gurus in science!
+1

Cheap shots on either part makes one look bad no matter the status or level.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2011, 06:06 PM   #11370
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
JN, you have never taught me anything of significance in all of our interactions. Perhaps, it is just me, but I do tend to 'muddle on' to make successful audio products. The very idea of 'keeping me honest' is a slight, that I do not appreciate it, like so many other comments that you made toward me. I have NEVER knowingly lied or gave misinformation on this or any other website in my life experience. It would be a waste of time for me to do it, and it would give 'ammunition' to my distractors. I don't know EVERYTHING, but I know a lot, and I always appreciate any REAL input from engineers and physicists that actually gives more insight to audio design.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:47 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2