Abraxilito,
Kind of, but also consider learning from others mistakes so that we don't have
to make them too, otherwise we don't get ahead much.
AND
If we can learn from the mistakes of others we live.
an example...Madaam Curie with her plutonium in her pocket.
perhaps war time strategy or tactics...very costly to make a mistake
which is why training is so important, make them there not on the
battlefield.
Sadly, in politics...they seem to make the same ones over and over again.
Cheers,
Kind of, but also consider learning from others mistakes so that we don't have
to make them too, otherwise we don't get ahead much.
AND
If we can learn from the mistakes of others we live.
an example...Madaam Curie with her plutonium in her pocket.
perhaps war time strategy or tactics...very costly to make a mistake
which is why training is so important, make them there not on the
battlefield.
Sadly, in politics...they seem to make the same ones over and over again.
Cheers,
The big picture version of his work is here, High Quality Audio Systems - ResearchGate - warning: 50Meg download !
Sine wave test?
If you have to apply a DC voltage to a cap for a relatively long time, then short it for a relatively short time, then go open circuit in order to get DA to even raise its head, then how is a steady state sign wave ever going to even bring DA into the picture?
The big mistake here was assuming the caps were producing actual audible differences. You're putting the cart before the horse. First you establish actual audible differences. If you can't do that, then you can never know if you're just chasing your tail.
se
The notion of 'actual audible difference' is just dogma. If not, let's have a rigorous description of what it is.
There is a problem here --- models. Why assume the model is completely accurate?
We have learned to not believe some transistor models when we use them in SIM .... for good reason... they dont give the result you expect when you measure.
Here is an example of using your model of capacitor from formula -- you should get a straight line for Xc and Xl according to the standard model (see fig A) but when we measure this cap, it measures like in (B). You will see it at #66100 www there as well with no explanation for it via the model. It isnt in the model... the cap models are not complete.
View attachment cap model of Z.pdf
This doesnt prove anything except the models are not complete or fully accurate. So I would not stake my life on models... rather measurements are closer to the truth. Now its just a matter of interpretation after that.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I memory serves he himself later acknowledged that '....although
there was a degree of speculation in it, I stand behind the major conclusions to
this day. If I write something like that I always try to indicate what is fact, as we electronic engineers understand it, and what is more of a gut feeling.'
See here and here.
And here is his (in)famous cable article.
Jan
Last edited:
Malcolm was at U of Essex (UK) and wrote peer-reviewed material, but also held forth in a column called the Essex Echo, where I think he could indulge his more speculative tendencies.
EDIT: I sometimes reply before reading all the water under the bridge, so I see that this was addressed now.
Last edited:
Hawksford's "Fuzzy Distortion in Analog Amplifiers" is part of this package of papers ...
That partial pole-zero cancellation in a lumped network, a special case of it, is the technique by which pink noise is made out of white over a specified bandwidth. I used it in another form in a simulated surround matrix which for marketing purposes was dubbed Fractal Expansion.
I just did a quick preliminary 1 KHz thd test of Dadod's nice 200W CFA amp. Looking real good. Until I have a larger heat sink attached to it, I just looked at 1w and 10W levels approximately. There is residual 2H but thd is below -100dB re 1-10W output level. These are important levels to test as we spend a lot of time in that region when listening. Noise is quit low as well.
congrates!
THx- RNMarsh
congrates!
THx- RNMarsh
Last edited:
Welcome in my ignore list.
By the way, what means thee word "impunity ? I've seen a lot of pure illegal posts here.
Last edited:
How do you figure that? How have you determined that what you're seeing is due to DA rather than something else? That was the question and still is.
Because, as Scott showed, it accurately predicts the recovery behavior?
Please, if you have better explanations or hypothesis, can-you give-it to us ? And justify in what they are closer to reality !
Anyway, as i'm not a cap manufacturer, the only things that interest-me are the distortions of the various technologies. I don't care too much of their causes, as i cannot modify them. The only interesting thing, for DIYers and designers, is how and where to use them, and how to chose the best ones or combinations of them for each purpose.
Last edited:
I didn't make the claim. I am trying to understand the claim that Dick made, how he eliminated other possibilities, and how he arrived at his conclusion.
So just looking for trouble ?
The only way to demonstrate an hypothesis is wrong is to prove it don't give results in accordance with what we can observe from experiments.
Do you feel asking to Albert Einstein "how he eliminated other possibilities, and how he arrived at his conclusion" ?
(Not to say Mr Jung is Albert Einstein ;-)
Mr Marsh said exactly the same thing: "rather measurements are closer to the truth".
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.