Dan da Man! Thank you for this info, Dan, that's what I experienced before, and unfortunately, many viruses hit at the boot sector because it' so sensitive.
I am told if you run in Linux you won't get so much trouble. When I used it I found it very easy to understand.
http://www.ubuntu.com/
http://www.ubuntu.com/
So you mean those softwares that come bundled with the installer...they change search engines and homepage etc, install other system checker softwares etc.
They are uninstallable, in Programs and Features choose date order listing, and you will find them all.
That was a joke...I do not go to porn sites because I find them lethally boring. Hey man, I don't want to watch the action, I want to be in it.
.As for software, there is so much freeware available nowadays that it is easy to avoid paying except for some specialist softwares.
I did pay for OEM version of Windows 8 Pro, and was happy to do so.
Dan.
No, you will find a whole new set of trouble!. My microserver runs linux and whilst it does its job perfectly, whenever I want to change something it annoys the hell out of me for a few days. For example adding a USB-SPDIF adaptor to hook into the stereo took me a couple of evenings to debug as there are about 100 ways to do anything and of those 100 ways only 20 are still applicable to the version you are running.
I wouldn't run linux as my only desktop, but for a NAS/streamer it is perfect. ssh in and everything is available on the command line.
I mean those "special offers" which pop up and no matter what you press, they will have it their way. Damn nuisance. I would ban any such offers and heavily fine those who have such ads. In effect, they are illegally hijacking your PC.
That was a joke
As for software, there is so much freeware available nowadays that it is easy to avoid paying except for some specialist softwares.
I did pay for OEM version of Windows 8 Pro, and was happy to do so.
Dan.
Well, my response was not a joke.
Like music, I prefer my action to go live.Agreed, I also paid for Windows and MS Office, most of my work and my support for my wife's work requires them, so I must be certain. Generally, I hate Microsoft, but stealing is stealing, even if from a thief. The only illegal software I have is my simulator, and that only because I simply don't have €8,500 for a legal version. If its price was normal, say up to €500, I would have paid for it.
Buying my new TV I was given a £10 voucher. With this I bought a £10 Chinese radio for the bathroom. The water vapour means nothing better required. Rather an impressive device considering the silly price. The major vice a very honky colouration. 5 minutes work using some tight weave webbing behind the cone, a dramatic improvement. That's when it pays to try. Writing this took more time.
I think I might try the same trick with the OB speakers. There might be a point between when the cotton moves and when it damps that is like aperiodic damping. A soft box if you like. A worn out pillow case might do the trick. I asume loose would be best. I will make it full size so as to have the largest " box " size.
I think I might try the same trick with the OB speakers. There might be a point between when the cotton moves and when it damps that is like aperiodic damping. A soft box if you like. A worn out pillow case might do the trick. I asume loose would be best. I will make it full size so as to have the largest " box " size.
If you look closely, very closely, there is usually an exit X, or cancel, or skip etc greyed out and only visible when the mouse is over that part of the window.
Sneaky, irritating but probably meeting legal requirements this way.
Is the world ready for DVV live action streaming web cam ?.Well, my response was not a joke.
Yes, MS have built their empire on this 'universal standard'.
But it works, and works quite well.
I have tried playing with Linux and gave up....too much rooting around, especially when installing new peripherals.
IME, Windows Plug and Play works perfectly fine, and if not is very easily solvable.
IME/IMO Windows OS works perfectly well, is economically priced, and any idiot can use it.....ooops, that better describes Apple products.
Dan.
It's good. Security Essentials sometimes likes to steal focus on occasion and may hog RAM space and disk IO, sometimes. As a light user, you'll probably never notice it. AVG is good, as well (they got bloated for a few years, but aren't bad, now).
The most important things, though, are just being careful (watch for bundled software, for example), and keeping software up to date. Flash, Java, and Adobe Reader, for example, can all load in different web browsers, and provide common paths to get to your system (why break into IE11, when breaking into Flash means breaking into IE, Chrome, and Firefox?). Vulnerabilities have been found and exploited in a matter of hours, sometimes. Patches can come out very quickly, as well, though. With a patched version, if you come across a compromised website, you'll either not even notice, get a blank space where the offending code was using an embedded object for delivery, or an error opening the file. If you don't reboot your PC and wait for the update popups all the time, a helper, like is in Avast!, can make it easier to do (there are others, including stand-alone ones, but I use Avast! at home, which includes one, so I don't keep track of others
).If you use Chrome, setting it to click to play for plugins speeds up browsing, and prevents plugins loading you didn't know about.
McAfee's AV can break other software, and still sometimes prevents VPNs from functioning (last time I saw it was a Windows 8.1 HP laptop that is, right now, less than 6 months old). Their consumer presence would go away completely if they didn't pay OEMs to be bundled, and then tell users the world will end if they don't pay for a subscription. Norton's is also a bloated POS to avoid, but breaks Windows less often.
Finally, the porn site thing is a long-standing myth. Targets tend to be popular sites, ads that go to popular sites (Doubleclick has been used as a vehicle for malware many times, now), or very easy sites to break into (charities, churches, small towns, HOAs...).
Now, back on topic...
Dan, the littleX in many instances does nothing at ll but start up that application. Some of them do that, no matter what you click on them, they start up and screw you. THAT in my view should be punishable by law. And they block or radically slow down your machine, so in fact, they force you to click on something.
hmm so Top smut site Flashes visitors, leaves behind nasty virus ? The Register and Enough is ENOUGH: It's time to flush Flash back to where it came from ? Hell ? The Register
in the last couple of weeks? Ok dailymotion isn't JUST a porn site, but not far off it. Perhaps not as bad as some say, but certainly NOT a myth.
This is and extract of something I posted on Dans Behringer page. The chap was saying harsh as volume advanced. I wanted to see if this cat would stir the pigeons.
One thing people would not exspect is to reduce negative feedback can help voice quality. You will be very limited in how much you can try. If it were me I would double the gain. If the lower feedback arm is 1K add another 1K to make it 500 R. The volume control will not be as loud as you might think when changed. Bare in mind it will be at full volume earlier. The distortion will say when you must stop. What you might find is it will sound warmer. This works well with all feedback amps. When op amps gain of 1 or > 10 often is optimum. 2 to 9 less so. This is possibly because most designers must ensure gain of 1 is safe. Some op amps have compenstation pins. If so any gain can be made to work. Power amps also as most are big op-amps in layout. When a power amp the compensation is called Cdom ( most ). Very unwise to play with it if unsure. By doubling the gain the demands on the feedback loop are halved. In a technical sense distortion will double. Usually the distortion could rise by a factor of ten and still be OK on modern amps. The distortion that can be reduced was called TID. Some say it doesn't really exist. That is becuase they do not use music as a test. This gain doubling is 20 minutres to do and can work wonders. Some amplifers are much better as designed. That is rare. Yamaha might be one. I don't like their sound but would accept it is a type of perfection. They have no obvious faults. I only speak of the domestic designs. I dare say doubling the gain on a Yamaha would not change it for the better. Crossover distortion seems not to suffer by doing this. That would be the biggest doubt. I suspect other things prevent the correction which are actually helped by relaxing the loop. This is seen as crossover distortion away from the centre line ( 50 kHz + ). This is slew limiting and is not helped by feedback falling apart.
Forgive the English skills. I defer to Dejan on that ( no joke ).
One thing people would not exspect is to reduce negative feedback can help voice quality. You will be very limited in how much you can try. If it were me I would double the gain. If the lower feedback arm is 1K add another 1K to make it 500 R. The volume control will not be as loud as you might think when changed. Bare in mind it will be at full volume earlier. The distortion will say when you must stop. What you might find is it will sound warmer. This works well with all feedback amps. When op amps gain of 1 or > 10 often is optimum. 2 to 9 less so. This is possibly because most designers must ensure gain of 1 is safe. Some op amps have compenstation pins. If so any gain can be made to work. Power amps also as most are big op-amps in layout. When a power amp the compensation is called Cdom ( most ). Very unwise to play with it if unsure. By doubling the gain the demands on the feedback loop are halved. In a technical sense distortion will double. Usually the distortion could rise by a factor of ten and still be OK on modern amps. The distortion that can be reduced was called TID. Some say it doesn't really exist. That is becuase they do not use music as a test. This gain doubling is 20 minutres to do and can work wonders. Some amplifers are much better as designed. That is rare. Yamaha might be one. I don't like their sound but would accept it is a type of perfection. They have no obvious faults. I only speak of the domestic designs. I dare say doubling the gain on a Yamaha would not change it for the better. Crossover distortion seems not to suffer by doing this. That would be the biggest doubt. I suspect other things prevent the correction which are actually helped by relaxing the loop. This is seen as crossover distortion away from the centre line ( 50 kHz + ). This is slew limiting and is not helped by feedback falling apart.
Forgive the English skills. I defer to Dejan on that ( no joke ).
Dailymotion is a very popular website, and so a good target. Dailymotion isn't a porn site, but is less restrictive than Youtube and such (the front page has a tiger cub, half-time performance, basic new LED info video, etc.). It was directly hit, IIRC.
Then, note that xHamster's problem was an ad service. This has happened many times, with ads going to perfectly SFW websites, and keeps on happening. Adblock not only speeds up browsing, but is a useful safety measure, too. 3rd-party content always increases risk.
Malvertising Campaign Hits The Huffington Post Through AOL Ad Network
Malvertising Campaign Hits AOL Ad Network, Leads to Exploit Kit | Threatpost | The first stop for security news
The Wild Wild Web: YouTube ads serving malware | Bromium Labs
http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/download/?id=2A2D6AD9-77A6-43D3-B47D-C6797EA421DE
That visiting porn sites increases your risks for malware, but visiting others decreases it, is a myth. Sites are targeted by the potential scale of victims, and ease of exploitation. It has a grain of truth, but coming from a time when kids being malcontents was a real problem. Today, it's organized crime.
Last edited:
I would expect the increase in system closed loop gain would result in a decrease in bandwidth.
Actually Nige, all you did was tell the truth. In my experience, very low GNFB amps tend to have a midrange clarity and immediacy as few others can match. For example, normally H/K amps with extremely low GNFB of only 12 dB have excellent bass and midrange lines, but they can on occasion get the treble not so right. There is an air of immediacy, of sheer presence in their sound few classic high GNFB amps can even approach. And, best of all, this does NOT require heavy duty designs, a standard one will do just fine as long as its was designed to work so from the outset. I'd give a year of my life just to bet you three (Nige, Frank and Dan) in a room with my 6550 integrated amp, I guarantee you'd be amazed what that SEPP design with GNFB of 17 dB can do, it's impossible to imagine, you just have to hear it. First next thing after incredible. Although I must admit the big PA 2400 power amp (2*170W/8 Ohms) is just as good, but with lots of power added. More power than most would ever need, more than most speakers can withstand, it can deliver peak outputs of 195/385/695W into 8/4/2 Ohms (as per IEC standards, t=20 mS).
This type of wide open door performance is one of the key reasons why I like low GNFB designs, this is more common with them than with traditional high GNFB designs. However, as ever, this is just a probability, not any guarantee, I jave also heard some low GNFB amps which dismaly failed in this respect, just as I've heard high GNFB designs which also had it (Bryston comes to mind).
This type of wide open door performance is one of the key reasons why I like low GNFB designs, this is more common with them than with traditional high GNFB designs. However, as ever, this is just a probability, not any guarantee, I jave also heard some low GNFB amps which dismaly failed in this respect, just as I've heard high GNFB designs which also had it (Bryston comes to mind).
Mjonah, you would be right to expect that. I ditched my original Centurion design because I feel I can do better, mostly by including a cascoded JFET input stage which was origianlly a simple BJT diff amp.
When properly adjusted for 20 dB of GNFB, its open loop full power bandwidth can be extended to 130 kHz. However, when adjusted and balanced for 26 dB of GNFB, this will drop to below 100 kHz, depending on how the VAS was done to 70...90 kHz. If we assume a nominal output of 28.3V, and an open loop bandwidth of 70 kHz, this would mean an open loop slew rate of around 25 V/uS, the Miller C compensation will not intrude. A closed loop slew rate of around 150 V/uS is quite possible, and frankly, I see no point in driving it higher still, that's a nice, healthy figure with which you can say you have that problem solved.
If you are not a figure/spec hunter, that is.
When properly adjusted for 20 dB of GNFB, its open loop full power bandwidth can be extended to 130 kHz. However, when adjusted and balanced for 26 dB of GNFB, this will drop to below 100 kHz, depending on how the VAS was done to 70...90 kHz. If we assume a nominal output of 28.3V, and an open loop bandwidth of 70 kHz, this would mean an open loop slew rate of around 25 V/uS, the Miller C compensation will not intrude. A closed loop slew rate of around 150 V/uS is quite possible, and frankly, I see no point in driving it higher still, that's a nice, healthy figure with which you can say you have that problem solved.
If you are not a figure/spec hunter, that is.
Warmer and also correcting crossover distortion better! There is an optimum feedback point. As far as I know no one suggests this. Zero loop feedback valve amps never suffer slewing problems. This partially is because they are class A and SE at that. Also that there is no loop to close. Sometimes they are painfully week if using square wave tests. Yet they can sound the most open, fast and extended of all amps if they have a reasonable output transformer. I don't buy the idea that valve distortion is nice distortion. A valve amp only has to have slightly bad performance to sound awful. A cheap Danbury transformer dropped off at 15 Hz and 62 kHz. Not bad for a SE type. Many cheap transformers sink the ship.
My suggestion is many designers push the bandwidth far too far. However having the bandwidth potential is useful.
On English skills, let me remind you that Jospeh Conrad ("Lord Jim", "Heart of Darkness"), who is regarded as one of the Grand masters of English language, was actually Polish and learnt English later on in life.
I beat the odds given me by my English teacher in Quantock School, who rated me at an uncertain pass for my O level exam by achieving a Grade 4, while his expected favorites mostly failed the exam, or got grade 6, ALL of them native Britons.
I did it by playing on my ears. I never liked grammar, I always relied on how it sounded to me, right or wrong. I was fortunate to be born with an ear for languages and to have received a classic education, meaning I also learnt Latin. Once you do that, you start noticing similarities between various languages and eventually you pick up a thread of what is alike to what in every European language. You hear just how true is the view that Roman languages (Italian, French, Spanish) are indeed very similar in both words and structure, despite some differences. Pick up one of them (in my case French) and you have like 30-40% of the others already learnt. So I can understand a lot of Italian, if they don't talk at machine gun rate as they usually do.
English has much taken from latin (as most European languages do, some more, some less) and is not at all too different from German, in some cases the words being practically the same, only pronounced differently. Shouldn't surprise anyone, the Windsors, going back to Victoria, were in fact more German than English by origins. ALL European royal houses were more or less related to each other, the Russian house of the Romanoffs was also heavily influenced by German blood.
You see, there's an automatic process in the heads of people to whom English is not their mother tonugue which simply does not allow them to take it as flippantly as do those to whom it is their mother tongue. Like grammar or not, one does learn it and it always works in your head as a sort of a servo and it keeps you on track. Besides, English grammar is child's play compared to Serbian grammar - 7 declensions, for the love of God! What I love about English is its ability to portary things in so many fine nuances, although that is also much influenced by English culture, helping one to be not quite so bunt as one has to be in other languages. However, for grammar complexity, German is worse yet.
In essence, all of Europe is one big village, completely interrelated and the sooner we realize and embrace that, the better for all of us.
I beat the odds given me by my English teacher in Quantock School, who rated me at an uncertain pass for my O level exam by achieving a Grade 4, while his expected favorites mostly failed the exam, or got grade 6, ALL of them native Britons.
I did it by playing on my ears. I never liked grammar, I always relied on how it sounded to me, right or wrong. I was fortunate to be born with an ear for languages and to have received a classic education, meaning I also learnt Latin. Once you do that, you start noticing similarities between various languages and eventually you pick up a thread of what is alike to what in every European language. You hear just how true is the view that Roman languages (Italian, French, Spanish) are indeed very similar in both words and structure, despite some differences. Pick up one of them (in my case French) and you have like 30-40% of the others already learnt. So I can understand a lot of Italian, if they don't talk at machine gun rate as they usually do.
English has much taken from latin (as most European languages do, some more, some less) and is not at all too different from German, in some cases the words being practically the same, only pronounced differently. Shouldn't surprise anyone, the Windsors, going back to Victoria, were in fact more German than English by origins. ALL European royal houses were more or less related to each other, the Russian house of the Romanoffs was also heavily influenced by German blood.
You see, there's an automatic process in the heads of people to whom English is not their mother tonugue which simply does not allow them to take it as flippantly as do those to whom it is their mother tongue. Like grammar or not, one does learn it and it always works in your head as a sort of a servo and it keeps you on track. Besides, English grammar is child's play compared to Serbian grammar - 7 declensions, for the love of God! What I love about English is its ability to portary things in so many fine nuances, although that is also much influenced by English culture, helping one to be not quite so bunt as one has to be in other languages. However, for grammar complexity, German is worse yet.
In essence, all of Europe is one big village, completely interrelated and the sooner we realize and embrace that, the better for all of us.
I would suggest that there's no such thing as pushing the bandwidth too far as long as we are talking about open loop bandwidth. The only provisio is that one uses as little fancy compensation as possible, meaning that one has each stages optimised to the point that it doesn't need much compensation. Some will always be required as with Miller C.
On the minus side, such amps require much care in layout, more so than alternative high GNFB amps. A small slip could be fatal.
As for optimal point, I thought that went without saying. Adjust it for just 20 dB of GNFB and make it work well, and you will find that you need to make a quantum leap in GNFB to obtain meaningfully better published spec, but you will also have to sacrifice much for it. Not that I know why you'd want to improve what is available with 20 dB of GNFB, when it lets you go down as low as a THD figure, at rated nominal power into 4 Ohms of 0.035% or less.
All this talk of THD being under -100 dB sounds to me as a lot of engineers talking about it who do not trust their own ears. My cuerrent model produces 0.4% THD at 20 kHz open loop into 4 Ohms.
Dejan. That's exactly right. The potential bandwidth should be the best possible. The one choosen is a choice and not dictated by book spec. For example 200 kHz or 50 kHz. As DF 96 say the amplifer is a series of filters . These surely are what we hear and not the - 3 dB point. Mr DF builds a picture of fences to be jumped.
If I read you correctly using less feedback allows you a greater bandwidth ? I suspect that is true when master of you own choices. The op amp will be an imposed choice if not with external compenstion. Even so it might be a limited choice. Thus the open loop bandwith of a NE5534 will not exactly represent a power amp.
I did an experiment of unity gain stability of a simplifed Hitachi MOS FET amp. That is single VAS. I was very surprised how little needed to be added to the usual 27 pF. Would this be a reality check for amps ?
If I read you correctly using less feedback allows you a greater bandwidth ? I suspect that is true when master of you own choices. The op amp will be an imposed choice if not with external compenstion. Even so it might be a limited choice. Thus the open loop bandwith of a NE5534 will not exactly represent a power amp.
I did an experiment of unity gain stability of a simplifed Hitachi MOS FET amp. That is single VAS. I was very surprised how little needed to be added to the usual 27 pF. Would this be a reality check for amps ?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.