Konnichiwa,
Personal, definitly! Uncharitable? I PERSONALLY, from my dealings with Mr. Elliott do not think so.
The vexed issue is NOT the price, but the fact that Mr. Elliott engages in a "for profit" activity and that he in quite many cases does so with circuits that while not under strict IP protection (due to their by now Public Domain nature), which are almost invariably presented by Him as "My" circuit/design.
And more so that from such a position he chooses to crtiticise others, in the rudest possible manner including personal insults, who are also engaged in "for profit" activities and does so by in effect alledging fraud on behalve of these others (be it 47Labs, Final Labs, Mr. Ennemoser or NBS).
To illustrate the form that Mr. Elliott finds appropriate here some quotes:
http://sound.westhost.com/madashell10.htm#pwr-leads
"This company is called NBS (as in No BS (?)) - well I have to tell you that this is even worse BS than the Gryphon Exorcist."
http://sound.westhost.com/madashell9.htm#unbelievable
" Another opportunity is that maybe, just maybe, the true believers could go to the ear specialist and have the substance between the ears removed, since it is obviously of little or no use to anyone who believes this gibberish."
"In my humble opinion, the author should stick to making violins, and stay well away from things he obviously does not understand. Or perhaps he is just trying to cash in on the apparently profitable business of ripping off people who don't know any better - is this possible? "
(one or two comments on this BTW, Mr Ennemoser, unlike Mr Elliott has a formal academic education on the topics of Audio and Electronics and worked for a good while for the Austrian Radio Service as Sound Engineer, he started making Violins much later)
http://sound.westhost.com/madashell8.htm#german
"I am unsure what "fff" is, but I suspect "Free Form Fatuousness" would come pretty close."
(comment - fff is a musical term on the score describing the loudness at which a passage is played, fff is fortississimo - the second escalation of Forte)
"What I am so bloody annoyed about is the price and the hype and BS that these guys are handing out. At about AU$5,300 for amp and supply, someone is making a killing. A price breakdown, based where available on retail catalogue prices (in AU$) looks like this ... "
<long table snipped for coniseness>
"The items marked * are estimates ("x" is an unknown quantity), and are very generous (actually, extremely generous). Remember that these are retail prices where available. So the amp still has to be built, and this requires labour, so let's add AU$400. Allow a profit margin of 100%, and we get AU$2,111.48.
Converted to US$ at the current exchange rate, this comes to about US$1,300 for amp and power supply (in reality it will be less than this, possibly by a great amount). I have no estimates to hand on how much hype and BS cost, but I can get any amount of it free from my local hi-fi dealer, so it can't be worth that much. "
"Gaincard indeed - try Gainmoney instead!"
http://sound.westhost.com/madashell8.htm#german
"The Final Insult Well, I thought the Gainmoney (Oops
Gaincard was bad. It still is, but thanks to a reader, there is much worse. This little insult to our intelligence is made by (another) Japanese entrepreneur, and the review I read came from the UK. Reviewed were the Music 5 preamp and Music 6 power amp."
"The lunatic who wrote the review is completely, utterly out of his tree."
"My advice (predictably enough) is - don't even think about it. These guys are frauds, liars and scoundrels, and I am quite happy to tell the world what I think of them."
As we can see Mr. Elliott is not sparing when it comes to insulting others. I think then the he considers such behaviour to be just cricket and fine. I fail to see how my comments about Mr. Elliot differ from his about others.
Which is fine if Mr. Elliott does apply the tripple budget on his products but is fraud (according to Mr. Elliott) when others do it.
What was that H word that YsHVH used describe the Pharasies?
Yes. However the obvious lack of in depth FUNDAMENTAL understanding leads to any numbers of "blind spots", causing the "self thought" designer to often run into troubles on account of them. Now in a design for DIY for your personal use this is fine.
Where it becomes a problem is when you set yourself up as Judge over others and proclaim them to be "frauds" when in fact your lack of Education causes you to simply overlook the key factors in the context. In Mr. Elliotts case especially the Mainscable "Mad as Hell" bit is a beautiful illustration of this.
Now it may be just my own misguided view, but if I hae no F@@@ING clue about that of which I talk or write it may be better if just shut the f@@@ up.
Educational Qualifications ARE a Yardstick, but only of several. However, VI Ullianov once remarked:
"Theory without Prectice is sterile, but practice without theory is blind."
With (sadly) very few Engineers in Audio who are strong on both points (or at leas ONE actually) we have often situations of the blind leading the blind and complaining they keep bumping into trees, but insisting the trees cannot exist as they cannot see them.
And I would like to point out that many of the world's greatest engineering achievers where NOT Autodidacts, in fact in modern times only the fewest of them.
Well, it seems I have then managed to match Mr. Elliotts of courtesy to others. Actually, I personally feel that I was actually still BY FAR to reserved in my comments.
I have repeatedly worked with companies who do on product development, in several recent cases from the very idea all the way to the budgeting and final "industrial design" (not much design as no money for fancy cases was planned).
It is relevent in so far as Mr. Elliott criticises the retail pricing of products in High End audio. Having gone first through the pricing that would ensure that the factory could actually make the product(s), pay Taxes, employees and make a modest profit I found the price (for arguments sake) to be $ 1,000 US. Once the Product is actually on the shelf of the local dealer through a distributor the Sticker price is around $ 2,500 US and no, there is nobody in the whole chain from manufacturer to Customer who will get excessively rich from the sale.
Now Mr Elliott criticised the Gaincard shop price, which has a retail of around $ 5,500 OZ and suggested the factory could make such an amp and a good living for around $ 2,100 OZ. The factory probably selle their product to the Distributor somewhere near that price.
So, there is no fraud, no overcharging, there is merely "the cost of doing business" (as you remineded us earlier in your comment). Except, as someone who clearly has neither practical or theoretical experience of the subject Mr. Elliott crys "Fraud".
Another excellent illustration about how "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing". Another case where the adage of "If you don't know what you are talking - shut up" applies.
Sayonara
AKSA said:
Personal, definitly! Uncharitable? I PERSONALLY, from my dealings with Mr. Elliott do not think so.
AKSA said:
The vexed issue is NOT the price, but the fact that Mr. Elliott engages in a "for profit" activity and that he in quite many cases does so with circuits that while not under strict IP protection (due to their by now Public Domain nature), which are almost invariably presented by Him as "My" circuit/design.
And more so that from such a position he chooses to crtiticise others, in the rudest possible manner including personal insults, who are also engaged in "for profit" activities and does so by in effect alledging fraud on behalve of these others (be it 47Labs, Final Labs, Mr. Ennemoser or NBS).
To illustrate the form that Mr. Elliott finds appropriate here some quotes:
http://sound.westhost.com/madashell10.htm#pwr-leads
"This company is called NBS (as in No BS (?)) - well I have to tell you that this is even worse BS than the Gryphon Exorcist."
http://sound.westhost.com/madashell9.htm#unbelievable
" Another opportunity is that maybe, just maybe, the true believers could go to the ear specialist and have the substance between the ears removed, since it is obviously of little or no use to anyone who believes this gibberish."
"In my humble opinion, the author should stick to making violins, and stay well away from things he obviously does not understand. Or perhaps he is just trying to cash in on the apparently profitable business of ripping off people who don't know any better - is this possible? "
(one or two comments on this BTW, Mr Ennemoser, unlike Mr Elliott has a formal academic education on the topics of Audio and Electronics and worked for a good while for the Austrian Radio Service as Sound Engineer, he started making Violins much later)
http://sound.westhost.com/madashell8.htm#german
"I am unsure what "fff" is, but I suspect "Free Form Fatuousness" would come pretty close."
(comment - fff is a musical term on the score describing the loudness at which a passage is played, fff is fortississimo - the second escalation of Forte)
"What I am so bloody annoyed about is the price and the hype and BS that these guys are handing out. At about AU$5,300 for amp and supply, someone is making a killing. A price breakdown, based where available on retail catalogue prices (in AU$) looks like this ... "
<long table snipped for coniseness>
"The items marked * are estimates ("x" is an unknown quantity), and are very generous (actually, extremely generous). Remember that these are retail prices where available. So the amp still has to be built, and this requires labour, so let's add AU$400. Allow a profit margin of 100%, and we get AU$2,111.48.
Converted to US$ at the current exchange rate, this comes to about US$1,300 for amp and power supply (in reality it will be less than this, possibly by a great amount). I have no estimates to hand on how much hype and BS cost, but I can get any amount of it free from my local hi-fi dealer, so it can't be worth that much. "
"Gaincard indeed - try Gainmoney instead!"
http://sound.westhost.com/madashell8.htm#german
"The Final Insult Well, I thought the Gainmoney (Oops
Gaincard was bad. It still is, but thanks to a reader, there is much worse. This little insult to our intelligence is made by (another) Japanese entrepreneur, and the review I read came from the UK. Reviewed were the Music 5 preamp and Music 6 power amp.""The lunatic who wrote the review is completely, utterly out of his tree."
"My advice (predictably enough) is - don't even think about it. These guys are frauds, liars and scoundrels, and I am quite happy to tell the world what I think of them."
As we can see Mr. Elliott is not sparing when it comes to insulting others. I think then the he considers such behaviour to be just cricket and fine. I fail to see how my comments about Mr. Elliot differ from his about others.
AKSA said:
Which is fine if Mr. Elliott does apply the tripple budget on his products but is fraud (according to Mr. Elliott) when others do it.
What was that H word that YsHVH used describe the Pharasies?
AKSA said:
Yes. However the obvious lack of in depth FUNDAMENTAL understanding leads to any numbers of "blind spots", causing the "self thought" designer to often run into troubles on account of them. Now in a design for DIY for your personal use this is fine.
Where it becomes a problem is when you set yourself up as Judge over others and proclaim them to be "frauds" when in fact your lack of Education causes you to simply overlook the key factors in the context. In Mr. Elliotts case especially the Mainscable "Mad as Hell" bit is a beautiful illustration of this.
Now it may be just my own misguided view, but if I hae no F@@@ING clue about that of which I talk or write it may be better if just shut the f@@@ up.
AKSA said:
Educational Qualifications ARE a Yardstick, but only of several. However, VI Ullianov once remarked:
"Theory without Prectice is sterile, but practice without theory is blind."
With (sadly) very few Engineers in Audio who are strong on both points (or at leas ONE actually) we have often situations of the blind leading the blind and complaining they keep bumping into trees, but insisting the trees cannot exist as they cannot see them.
AKSA said:
And I would like to point out that many of the world's greatest engineering achievers where NOT Autodidacts, in fact in modern times only the fewest of them.
AKSA said:
Well, it seems I have then managed to match Mr. Elliotts of courtesy to others. Actually, I personally feel that I was actually still BY FAR to reserved in my comments.
AKSA said:
I have repeatedly worked with companies who do on product development, in several recent cases from the very idea all the way to the budgeting and final "industrial design" (not much design as no money for fancy cases was planned).
AKSA said:
It is relevent in so far as Mr. Elliott criticises the retail pricing of products in High End audio. Having gone first through the pricing that would ensure that the factory could actually make the product(s), pay Taxes, employees and make a modest profit I found the price (for arguments sake) to be $ 1,000 US. Once the Product is actually on the shelf of the local dealer through a distributor the Sticker price is around $ 2,500 US and no, there is nobody in the whole chain from manufacturer to Customer who will get excessively rich from the sale.
Now Mr Elliott criticised the Gaincard shop price, which has a retail of around $ 5,500 OZ and suggested the factory could make such an amp and a good living for around $ 2,100 OZ. The factory probably selle their product to the Distributor somewhere near that price.
So, there is no fraud, no overcharging, there is merely "the cost of doing business" (as you remineded us earlier in your comment). Except, as someone who clearly has neither practical or theoretical experience of the subject Mr. Elliott crys "Fraud".
Another excellent illustration about how "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing". Another case where the adage of "If you don't know what you are talking - shut up" applies.
Sayonara
Where I come from ( a not too cold country BTW ) we prefer to call the beast by his name. If its not me who you are refering to then the fault lays in the fact that you spoke in general ( which in itself doesn't make things any clearer ). I for instance know a person from a vast country with world dominating tendencies that presented himself under a large amount of fictive identities. You see my point ?
I did not plug Rod's pcb's but I recommended the original boards as it is the IP of Rod AND the low price that makes designing them yourself pretty useless from an economic point of view. If we all start copying boards his ESP site would be too expensive to maintain as Rod points out. A valid point IMO. His ESP web pages are very useful for new DIYers and I am sure a majority of the readers here did take a look in the past. I do not necessarely accept everything on the ESP pages but they sure contribute a lot to the DIY community. If the information shown does not suit your beliefs then there is always the possibility to adress your grief at Rod himself per mail. He has strong opinions but as far as I know him he is willing to discuss them.
I think the personal attacks explain a lot about a persons character and I think these attacks have no place on this forum. They are forbidden as stated by the forums rules. Some of the better audio-related people are even social workers so education should not be the reason for any attack. Daily profession, education and other personal matters should not be misused for propaganda purposes. In fact there should not even be a need for displaying this info as it won't serve ANY useful purpose except for showing the lack of respect of whom it wanted to display for his own benefit. It is very likely that this "benefit" will work out the contrary.
It is frustrating to read this info and I hope things will change for the better. After all this forum is about audio, not about bloated ego's.
Konnichiwa,
I agree. And I do not at any extent take exception to his website as such. I don't even take exception to his selling PCB's and presenting info without extensive source disclosure (often hard to do anyway).
What I take exception to however are Mr. Elliotts unqualified, often factually false and allways very insulting personal attacks on others engaged in one form or other of Audio manufacturing on the same site.
Agreed.
However, A post was made in this forum, that promoted an Article by Mr. Elliott that is full of personal attacks. I choose to point out that the actual writer of this Article (Mr. Elliott) shows a behaviour that I personally find hippocritical and full "sour grapes" type envy.
I put my critique indeed in very strong wording, but nothing any different or worse than what Mr. Elliott finds himself justified in using.
Maybe, just maybe, you would suggest this to Mr. Elliott. I agree that HIS comments where not made on this forum. But they where specifically re-posted here by millwood and several of the quite severe verbal attacks reposted verbatim and endoresed by millwood.
I agree. But please note that any such policy cuts both ways. Much of the beginning of this thread is as much in contradiction of the rules as my follow on comments, in my view anyway.
Sayonara
PS, I am happy to persue this discussion all the way to the sin-bin.
jean-paul said:
I agree. And I do not at any extent take exception to his website as such. I don't even take exception to his selling PCB's and presenting info without extensive source disclosure (often hard to do anyway).
What I take exception to however are Mr. Elliotts unqualified, often factually false and allways very insulting personal attacks on others engaged in one form or other of Audio manufacturing on the same site.
jean-paul said:
Agreed.
However, A post was made in this forum, that promoted an Article by Mr. Elliott that is full of personal attacks. I choose to point out that the actual writer of this Article (Mr. Elliott) shows a behaviour that I personally find hippocritical and full "sour grapes" type envy.
I put my critique indeed in very strong wording, but nothing any different or worse than what Mr. Elliott finds himself justified in using.
jean-paul said:
Maybe, just maybe, you would suggest this to Mr. Elliott. I agree that HIS comments where not made on this forum. But they where specifically re-posted here by millwood and several of the quite severe verbal attacks reposted verbatim and endoresed by millwood.
jean-paul said:
I agree. But please note that any such policy cuts both ways. Much of the beginning of this thread is as much in contradiction of the rules as my follow on comments, in my view anyway.
Sayonara
PS, I am happy to persue this discussion all the way to the sin-bin.
That makes quite a difference. He has the right to write on his webpages what he wants and so do you. At least his pages are open to everyone and I am pretty sure you can discuss the entire content with Rod.
FYI I mailed Rod to join the discussion here so that he can show his opinion in this matter. To me that seems the best approach.
I don't see the need for that. Do you ? There is really nothing to prove. If we are the grown up people I think we are we won't end up there.
Konnichiwa,
What makes more of a difference that parts from Mr. Elliotts website where RE-POSTED in this forum, containing clear personal attacks and insults against third persons and in fact this started the whole thread.
If that is acceptable I feel my comments are in exactly teh same spirit that allows the one, though from an opposite position.
Either the whole thread, from the very first post is out of order, or anything within it is cricket and on the green.
Sayonara
jean-paul said:
What makes more of a difference that parts from Mr. Elliotts website where RE-POSTED in this forum, containing clear personal attacks and insults against third persons and in fact this started the whole thread.
If that is acceptable I feel my comments are in exactly teh same spirit that allows the one, though from an opposite position.
Either the whole thread, from the very first post is out of order, or anything within it is cricket and on the green.
Sayonara
Kuei Yang Wang ... you are such an angry man, aren't you?
For your information, everyone (everyone) who has been named in the Mad As Hell column was e-mailed, and asked to respond. I was more than happy to print the responses to provide a balanced viewpoint, but none was forthcoming.
You have made some very bold statements regarding my ability, products, designs and philosophy, and have shown nothing but venom and spite. I refuse to lower myself to your level with a personal attack.
If you would be so kind as to point out one (just one) circuit that I have "stolen" without credit, this might help us to understand what you are so vehement about. There are indeed "application note" circuits, and these are acknowledged. There are generic "public domain" circuits that I have adapted, and to attempt to give credit is impossible since the original designer is unknown. There are also circuits that look very similar to other circuits published elsewhere - such is electronics.
If you don't like my site, don't visit it. No-one has forced you to read and re-read the material, and perhaps when you decide to put a DIY site together, we may all get the opportunity to marvel at the depth of engineering excellence you seem to attribute to yourself.
BTW - I have searched my e-mail archives, and found no reference to you amongst the many thousand messages, so I can only presume that you approached me under an assumed name, or gave no name at all (this is very common with those who have a hidden agenda).
My thanks to everyone who has posted in my defence - I won't try to thank you all individually, since there are so many. Thank you all, and I appreciate your support.
For your information, everyone (everyone) who has been named in the Mad As Hell column was e-mailed, and asked to respond. I was more than happy to print the responses to provide a balanced viewpoint, but none was forthcoming.
You have made some very bold statements regarding my ability, products, designs and philosophy, and have shown nothing but venom and spite. I refuse to lower myself to your level with a personal attack.
If you would be so kind as to point out one (just one) circuit that I have "stolen" without credit, this might help us to understand what you are so vehement about. There are indeed "application note" circuits, and these are acknowledged. There are generic "public domain" circuits that I have adapted, and to attempt to give credit is impossible since the original designer is unknown. There are also circuits that look very similar to other circuits published elsewhere - such is electronics.
If you don't like my site, don't visit it. No-one has forced you to read and re-read the material, and perhaps when you decide to put a DIY site together, we may all get the opportunity to marvel at the depth of engineering excellence you seem to attribute to yourself.
BTW - I have searched my e-mail archives, and found no reference to you amongst the many thousand messages, so I can only presume that you approached me under an assumed name, or gave no name at all (this is very common with those who have a hidden agenda).
My thanks to everyone who has posted in my defence - I won't try to thank you all individually, since there are so many. Thank you all, and I appreciate your support.
Konnichiwa,
Hardly. It's not me who vigerously attacks others and insults them publically FIRST.
It is not me who runs a column that attacks anything I fail to comprehend, calling people names in the process, alledging improper conducts etc....
It's actually YOU, who does that.
Ahhm, in some cases repies where forthcomming, however after seeing the way you treted those responses I am not surprised that you where ignored after that.
Actually, I have not done ANY of this. I remarked that you are in the process of making money from selling PCB's for projects, a number of which you credit as your own, when at best they are a repeat of common public domain circuits. Now there is as such nothing wrong with being in business and taking others peoples money for products.
However, if you do so, it becomes questionable if you take exceptions to other people doing business.
BTW, it seems your website has been hacked. Someone, no doubt maliciouly placed there a page attempting to sell what looks a lot like a kitchentop rip-off of the Marantz M7 linestage, build with desperatly cheap parts attempting to be sold for $ 1,800 factory direct.... And said preamp has ****-poor technical specifications as well. Surely, this cannot POSSIBLY be one of YOUR products?
http://sound.westhost.com/project75.htm
Rane, including key values. Or perhaps Rane and you cribbed from the same PD publication.
http://sound.westhost.com/project48.htm
Circuit directly from the Patent, yet credit is given only for the Trademarks, the circuit is marked:
"Rod Elliott (ESP)"
http://sound.westhost.com/project26.htm
Mitsu App note, for at least 95%
http://sound.westhost.com/project97.htm
Tonecontrol Bandaxall, rest generic yet credits "Rod Elliott (ESP)"
http://sound.westhost.com/project51.htm
Generic, too many app notes and publications to mention, but one by D.Self predates you by at least a decade.
http://sound.westhost.com/project03.htm
RCA Transistor Databook in all salient points, LH published identical in all salient points ages ago.
Those I found in the first 2 minutes.
You understand very well what the key point is. You accuse others of unethical behaviour, insult them in the process yet if it suits you you display the very same identical behaviour (from where I stand). Plus, you claim "final judgement" authority on things of which you fail to understand the basics.
THOSE are my points.
I usually don't.
How do you know I did not? Did you stop to find out? Like clicking my "handle" link and following the link included there?
You seem very swift in passing judgement and very tatty in research.
Maybe the other way around? My handle on this board is a nome de plume, yet my identity (and e-mail) easily obtained from my linked website. However I doubt you find much in your e-mail archive, but there have been occasional public spats.
So, when will you start to keep it real, or is bad behaviour okay as long as it conincides with your views but unacceptable when it happens to go against them?
Sayonara
rode said:
Hardly. It's not me who vigerously attacks others and insults them publically FIRST.
It is not me who runs a column that attacks anything I fail to comprehend, calling people names in the process, alledging improper conducts etc....
It's actually YOU, who does that.
rode said:
Ahhm, in some cases repies where forthcomming, however after seeing the way you treted those responses I am not surprised that you where ignored after that.
rode said:
Actually, I have not done ANY of this. I remarked that you are in the process of making money from selling PCB's for projects, a number of which you credit as your own, when at best they are a repeat of common public domain circuits. Now there is as such nothing wrong with being in business and taking others peoples money for products.
However, if you do so, it becomes questionable if you take exceptions to other people doing business.
BTW, it seems your website has been hacked. Someone, no doubt maliciouly placed there a page attempting to sell what looks a lot like a kitchentop rip-off of the Marantz M7 linestage, build with desperatly cheap parts attempting to be sold for $ 1,800 factory direct.... And said preamp has ****-poor technical specifications as well. Surely, this cannot POSSIBLY be one of YOUR products?
rode said:
http://sound.westhost.com/project75.htm
Rane, including key values. Or perhaps Rane and you cribbed from the same PD publication.
http://sound.westhost.com/project48.htm
Circuit directly from the Patent, yet credit is given only for the Trademarks, the circuit is marked:
"Rod Elliott (ESP)"
http://sound.westhost.com/project26.htm
Mitsu App note, for at least 95%
http://sound.westhost.com/project97.htm
Tonecontrol Bandaxall, rest generic yet credits "Rod Elliott (ESP)"
http://sound.westhost.com/project51.htm
Generic, too many app notes and publications to mention, but one by D.Self predates you by at least a decade.
http://sound.westhost.com/project03.htm
RCA Transistor Databook in all salient points, LH published identical in all salient points ages ago.
Those I found in the first 2 minutes.
rode said:
You understand very well what the key point is. You accuse others of unethical behaviour, insult them in the process yet if it suits you you display the very same identical behaviour (from where I stand). Plus, you claim "final judgement" authority on things of which you fail to understand the basics.
THOSE are my points.
rode said:
I usually don't.
rode said:
How do you know I did not? Did you stop to find out? Like clicking my "handle" link and following the link included there?
You seem very swift in passing judgement and very tatty in research.
rode said:
Maybe the other way around? My handle on this board is a nome de plume, yet my identity (and e-mail) easily obtained from my linked website. However I doubt you find much in your e-mail archive, but there have been occasional public spats.
So, when will you start to keep it real, or is bad behaviour okay as long as it conincides with your views but unacceptable when it happens to go against them?
Sayonara
Thorsten, so what about Rod's site.?.
Regardless of your views it is still an excellent resource for all audio enthusiasts.
I consider that your use of a non deplume like " Kuei Yang Wang" of Sanjian and signing your posts "Sayonara" is disingenuous in the extreme.
At least we know who we are dealing with when dealing with "Rod Elliot" who is honest, forthright and straight to the point in his views and opinions regardless of your views of these.
You have done yourself a great dis-service in your verbose, in your views, critique of the efforts of Rod.
Eric.
Regardless of your views it is still an excellent resource for all audio enthusiasts.
I consider that your use of a non deplume like " Kuei Yang Wang" of Sanjian and signing your posts "Sayonara" is disingenuous in the extreme.
At least we know who we are dealing with when dealing with "Rod Elliot" who is honest, forthright and straight to the point in his views and opinions regardless of your views of these.
You have done yourself a great dis-service in your verbose, in your views, critique of the efforts of Rod.
Eric.
Oh brother
I just checked out the "thunderstoneaudio" site. It includes projects identified as copies of Thorsen Loesch projects. Considering the contents of the complains against Rod Elliot, this strikes me as most peculiar. Unless the above posting complainer is indeed Loesch ingognito.
Regarding the alleged examples from Rod's site they seemed to provide credit where credit was due. They even indicat that Linkwitz was contacted in connection with his circuits.
App notes are intended to be implemented in order to sell the a product - surely disseminating a circuiy based on an app note cannot then be an injury. Other sources seen to be in the public domain.
I believe any patents involved have expired. Perhaps the complainant does not realize there is a reason patents expire - so that anyone who cares to can use them anyway they please. That's the way it is supossed to work - give the patent holder a temporary but enforcable legal monopoly in exchange to dissemination to all others without limitation.
If as some suspect, the compainant has been posting under false pretenses with a maicious purpose I ask the moderator to contisider blocking him/her/whatever.
I just checked out the "thunderstoneaudio" site. It includes projects identified as copies of Thorsen Loesch projects. Considering the contents of the complains against Rod Elliot, this strikes me as most peculiar. Unless the above posting complainer is indeed Loesch ingognito.
Regarding the alleged examples from Rod's site they seemed to provide credit where credit was due. They even indicat that Linkwitz was contacted in connection with his circuits.
App notes are intended to be implemented in order to sell the a product - surely disseminating a circuiy based on an app note cannot then be an injury. Other sources seen to be in the public domain.
I believe any patents involved have expired. Perhaps the complainant does not realize there is a reason patents expire - so that anyone who cares to can use them anyway they please. That's the way it is supossed to work - give the patent holder a temporary but enforcable legal monopoly in exchange to dissemination to all others without limitation.
If as some suspect, the compainant has been posting under false pretenses with a maicious purpose I ask the moderator to contisider blocking him/her/whatever.
Reply to Thorsten
Thorsten, before you criticise others for "tatty" research, for your reference (and in order) ...
The valve preamp shown is a prototype, and you have absolutely no idea of the circuit, yet claim it is a rip-off ??? Either you are a (flawed) psychic or are suffering dementia. As usual, you take one comment out of context (which you have done consistently throughout this thread), and attempt to make something of it. The technical specifications are "poor" compared to those obtained from a premium opamp (for example) - for a valve preamp they rival the best I have seen.
Why are you picking on that particular line? From what I have been able to see, you do not believe in technical specs anyway, so should have been delighted with the fact that they are "poor".
I received very few responses to any e-mails, and those that I did receive were of zero value (mostly the same kind of moaning and whinging that you are doing right now).
Project 75 - Referenced to Rane (including link)
Project 48 - Absolutely untrue - I don't have a copy of the patent, and designed the project using basic principles. The concept is quite simple if one knows anything about electronics.
Project 26 - Application note circuit, and plenty of reference to Mitsubishi. I was unable to publish a link to the data sheet since it vanished between my acquisition of it and the publication of the circuit.
Project 97 - Yes, it is a basic (modified) Baxandall circuit, as used in thousands of other designs. So what? I don't see references to PJ Baxandall in every single version of the tone control published. Now you are just being silly!
Project 51 - Generic in the extreme. Don't be an idiot!
Project 03 - Similar to other designs - very probably. Such is life, but the design is based on one that I did independently over 30 years ago!
The "basics" that I seem to not understand - what would they be? Obviously, you have knowledge far removed from that of mere mortals. There is no "final judgement" - I have merely put forward an opinion, and there is neither an expectation nor requirement that everyone else will agree. Some do, some don't - I can live with that.
I have been informed by two people today of KYW's true identity - I did click on your website link, but did not realise (how insufferably ignorant of me) that you were using a nom de plume. I do not have psychic abilities, so did not learn your true identity until this morning.
Unlike you, I reveal myself fully in all posts. I do not hide behind a nom de plume nor rip into other people, their products or abilities on public forum pages unless in defence of my own position.
There is no reason (other than the advanced age of the column) to make changes to what I have written - it is not "bad behaviour", any more than it is considered "bad behaviour" for a movie, theatre or music critic to say that a particular performance is dreadful, and give it a 1 star rating - this is done every day on radio, TV and in newspapers worldwide.
Perhaps you take exception to this practice as well, but remember that I request comment, and give right of reply - which will be published if it has anything remotely interesting or useful to add to the article.
Keep it real? Perhaps you should take that sentiment to heart.
Thorsten, before you criticise others for "tatty" research, for your reference (and in order) ...
The valve preamp shown is a prototype, and you have absolutely no idea of the circuit, yet claim it is a rip-off ??? Either you are a (flawed) psychic or are suffering dementia. As usual, you take one comment out of context (which you have done consistently throughout this thread), and attempt to make something of it. The technical specifications are "poor" compared to those obtained from a premium opamp (for example) - for a valve preamp they rival the best I have seen.
Why are you picking on that particular line? From what I have been able to see, you do not believe in technical specs anyway, so should have been delighted with the fact that they are "poor".
I received very few responses to any e-mails, and those that I did receive were of zero value (mostly the same kind of moaning and whinging that you are doing right now).
Project 75 - Referenced to Rane (including link)
Project 48 - Absolutely untrue - I don't have a copy of the patent, and designed the project using basic principles. The concept is quite simple if one knows anything about electronics.
Project 26 - Application note circuit, and plenty of reference to Mitsubishi. I was unable to publish a link to the data sheet since it vanished between my acquisition of it and the publication of the circuit.
Project 97 - Yes, it is a basic (modified) Baxandall circuit, as used in thousands of other designs. So what? I don't see references to PJ Baxandall in every single version of the tone control published. Now you are just being silly!
Project 51 - Generic in the extreme. Don't be an idiot!
Project 03 - Similar to other designs - very probably. Such is life, but the design is based on one that I did independently over 30 years ago!
The "basics" that I seem to not understand - what would they be? Obviously, you have knowledge far removed from that of mere mortals. There is no "final judgement" - I have merely put forward an opinion, and there is neither an expectation nor requirement that everyone else will agree. Some do, some don't - I can live with that.
I have been informed by two people today of KYW's true identity - I did click on your website link, but did not realise (how insufferably ignorant of me) that you were using a nom de plume. I do not have psychic abilities, so did not learn your true identity until this morning.
Unlike you, I reveal myself fully in all posts. I do not hide behind a nom de plume nor rip into other people, their products or abilities on public forum pages unless in defence of my own position.
There is no reason (other than the advanced age of the column) to make changes to what I have written - it is not "bad behaviour", any more than it is considered "bad behaviour" for a movie, theatre or music critic to say that a particular performance is dreadful, and give it a 1 star rating - this is done every day on radio, TV and in newspapers worldwide.
Perhaps you take exception to this practice as well, but remember that I request comment, and give right of reply - which will be published if it has anything remotely interesting or useful to add to the article.
Keep it real? Perhaps you should take that sentiment to heart.
Of the examples of plagiarism given by KYW, the only one that would be of real consequence is the first example involving the Rane Corporation. I found the following credit provided by Rod Elliot at the bottom of the page referred to by KYW.
KYW,
No one questions the way you feel about this or your opinion. On the other hand, the comments of Rod's are on his own site, not here. If you want to excoriate Rod on your site, that's your business, but in this forum, we must ask you to stick to particular criticisms of technical facts, not personality or motivation.
Please consider this an official warning.
KYW,
No one questions the way you feel about this or your opinion. On the other hand, the comments of Rod's are on his own site, not here. If you want to excoriate Rod on your site, that's your business, but in this forum, we must ask you to stick to particular criticisms of technical facts, not personality or motivation.
Please consider this an official warning.
Konnichiwa,
It has the information added now. As I distinctly remembererd seeing this page sans this I checked the wayback machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20011112063255/http://sound.westhost.com/project75.htm
It seems that after looking again in more detail that many of Rods projects have aquired additional source aknowledgements since I last noticed this (and also then remarked).
So Rod, sorry for thinking that you still omitted to give credit. It comes from not visiting your site and remembering it the way it was, not how it is.
Sayonara
roddyama said:
It has the information added now. As I distinctly remembererd seeing this page sans this I checked the wayback machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20011112063255/http://sound.westhost.com/project75.htm
It seems that after looking again in more detail that many of Rods projects have aquired additional source aknowledgements since I last noticed this (and also then remarked).
So Rod, sorry for thinking that you still omitted to give credit. It comes from not visiting your site and remembering it the way it was, not how it is.
Sayonara
Thorsten,
You are really stretching the truth, and are now squirming to try to extricate yourself from the bind you got yourself into.
Project 75 has not been changed, modified or added to since 25 Jan 2002 (nearly 1 1/2 years). The archive is dated 11 Dec 2001 - I do not recall when the reference was included, but it has obviously been present for a considerable period. Likewise, it was omitted for some time - my mistake, and fixed as soon as I realised it.
All articles and projects are subject to revision and additions, and omissions do happen - I'm not perfect, and don't claim to be. When an omission is noticed, it is fixed as quickly as possible.
If you had bothered to read my disclaimer page, you would have seen a section that reads (in part) ...
All you (or anyone else) needs to do is send an e-mail letting me know of an omission or "prior art", and the correction will be made within a week or less.
That's not difficult, now is it?
You are really stretching the truth, and are now squirming to try to extricate yourself from the bind you got yourself into.
Project 75 has not been changed, modified or added to since 25 Jan 2002 (nearly 1 1/2 years). The archive is dated 11 Dec 2001 - I do not recall when the reference was included, but it has obviously been present for a considerable period. Likewise, it was omitted for some time - my mistake, and fixed as soon as I realised it.
All articles and projects are subject to revision and additions, and omissions do happen - I'm not perfect, and don't claim to be. When an omission is noticed, it is fixed as quickly as possible.
If you had bothered to read my disclaimer page, you would have seen a section that reads (in part) ...
All you (or anyone else) needs to do is send an e-mail letting me know of an omission or "prior art", and the correction will be made within a week or less.
That's not difficult, now is it?
Maybe Thorsten can shake hands with Rod now and be friends?
I give Rod my full support. His website contains mostly facts and not very much voodoo and he has a certain trademark in his projects (not like mine exactly).
I think it's not too bad to questioning some business areas in hifi and high-end.
Rod is allways nice in his manners
but he isn't silent (like Björn Borg vs John McEnroe) when abuse is poured over him.
I give Rod my full support. His website contains mostly facts and not very much voodoo and he has a certain trademark in his projects (not like mine exactly).
I think it's not too bad to questioning some business areas in hifi and high-end.
Rod is allways nice in his manners
but he isn't silent (like Björn Borg vs John McEnroe) when abuse is poured over him.- Status
- Not open for further replies.