John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
JC said:
I told you that the test was done at AMES Research
Does anybody at AMES Research even admit to this test?

What's with the weird orthography? The NASA research center is named for Joseph Ames, and should be written "Ames Research Center", not "AMES". Or maybe JC meant these guys . Or maybe these guys, who at least do research on exotic materials? (That one is in Ames, Iowa.)
 
See what I mean everybody? Don't worry, IF AMES cannot do a useful measurement, nothing I can contribute will pass JN either.

WHAT IS THE MEASUREMENT????

Who at Ames Research Center is responsible for this sham? (thanks nezbleu).

What are the test details?

What is the schematic?

Where is the writeup?

Who peer reviewed the results?

Why is it nobody is given enough information to duplicate or refute the test?

Why are you so afraid?

jn
 
WHAT IS THE MEASUREMENT????

Who at Ames Research Center is responsible for this sham? (thanks nezbleu).

What are the test details?

What is the schematic?

Where is the writeup?

Who peer reviewed the results?

Why is it nobody is given enough information to duplicate or refute the test?

Why are you so afraid?

jn
This has been asked numerous times before. John has no idea, it was just something handed to him from his scam artist associate.
 
john curl said:
I deeply resent the hint that you 'amateurs' are more 'honest' that us 'professionals'.
I made no such hint. I'm not aware that anyone else did. You will note that I said the only difference is money; I did not say integrity.

May we 'deeply resent' your hint that amateur tests are somehow inferior to professional tests? Surely this could not be a hint about competence?

Why is it OK for you to insult us, but unacceptable when you feel (wrongly, in this case) that we are insulting you?
 
No matter who calls whom an amateur, the 'result' and 'proof' shown counts and is self-explanatory. No reason to label anyone, anyone can make his own conclusions from the current debate. For future, I do not expect any reliable evidence would be provided. It would only turn in same circles. This is not any scientific debate, the subject is not scientific.
 
Last edited:
I think that many here should resent the implications that if we are not paid we are not competent to make an electronic test that is accurate. John, Scott and JN have shown you multiple times graciously that you have made an error in your test protocol. Does this make you an amateur in the rest of our eyes, no, but you are human and make mistakes like anybody else. The fact that I have Clio test gear and access to a complete B&K Audio lab, does this make me any less credible when I say something about a loudspeaker because I am not working for JBL or EV? I have done work for them by the way. I don't think so, as long as what I am doing is accurate and credible. You need to get off of your high horse and see that if you stay away from the minefield that is Bybee most people do respect your work in circuit design. I for one do, just not when you get all uppity and condescending with those who don't agree with something that you say. You just did that with JN, and I would have to think that in electronic design he is really on a different level than you are, that is not a putdown, just an observation of his level of expertise and education.
 
Last edited:
I for one do, just not when you get all uppity and condescending with those who don't agree with something that you say. You just did that with JN, and I would have to think that in electronic design he is really on a different level than you are, that is not a putdown, just an observation of his level of expertise and education.
My expertise is in magnetics, E/M, test and measurement, high speed/high current/high energy devices, and semiconductor handling w/r to power, current, heating, and slew rate. I have lots of experience actually building hardware both mundane and 10 to 15 years beyond SOTA.

But that said, I must respectfully disagree with you on my level of electronic circuit prowess with respect to JC, I too respect his abilities and accomplishments. I would however, like to see him advance his skills in that regard, and for him to be able to learn from others, as I try to do from him when possible.

jn
 
This one.
 

Attachments

  • Picture 115.jpg
    Picture 115.jpg
    419 KB · Views: 195
JN,
I accept your position, at the same time I see a different level of professionalism when you help someone or critic a problem you see. I try and help others in other forums that have nothing to do with audio, areas of composites and plastics that I know well. I don't have to argue in those forums, we freely trade ideas back and forth. I still help others when it comes to loudspeakers and waveguide design an area that I have been working in for over 30 years. No my name is not out there but I really don't care about that. I have known the John Curl name for long before I ever came to this forum and heard only good things about his designs. that is why it is hard to watch some of the goings on here, it is beneath him to have to resort to that.

ps. I still don't believe that the Bybee's have a chance in H..l of working as stated in their literature.
 
Really?!? In my opinion at least the last 10 to 20 pages of useless bickering should be deleted. I think we should add Bybee to the list of forbidden topics, next to religion and politics.
Absolutely!
Iko, you're the moderator, you've got the power - go ahead and delete them!
A lot of people will thank you for doing so. Also, it will lower the number of personal attacks significantly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.