Seeking for all Norman H. Crowhurst papers

[plovati]

I'm seeking all the audio related papers of Norman H. Crowhurst, in order to set up a online Crowhurst's papers Section. If You have some works of Crowhurst please scan it and sent it to my, PDF high quality preferred.

Also some link to already available materil over the net is appreciated. I already collect everythin I can on the net but maybe I missed some.

Contact me thru a private message and I'll give all the infos to send these files.

Thanks in advance

[dhaen]

Hi,

I have some on my site here .
Please let me know what you have and collect. I'd like to publish or mirror them.

[tubemaster]

Hello,

there is a nice collection of Norman H. Crowhurst's articles at Audioexpress.

Audioexpress (who used to publish Glass Audio) also have reprints of two books by Mr. Crowhurst, "Understandig HiFi Circuits" and "Audio Measurements".

Best regards
Michael

[kevinkr]

Before you publish any of his work on the net you should make sure that you know who (if any) the current copyright holders are and if these are not considered public domain or orphaned works in the copy right domain you should seek permission from the current copyright holders before mirroring or publishing his works on the net. It may well be the case that his estate still holds rights to some of these works. I imagine that AudioExpress may also hold rights to these works at the current time - particularly those which they have republished.

I may be all wet, but this is something to think about before blindly mirroring or publishing on the web or otherwise someone elses work.

Kevin

[Bandersnatch]

too hell with figuring out who owns the copyrights. first sift out the wrong stuff, then get permission for putting up the ones which do not contradict themselves.

At best, he says two opposing and exclusive things are true.

If you can sift out the chaff, good ole NC did some nice work. Unfortunatley one of his talents was not writing unequivocally.
cheers,
Douglas

[kevinkr]

A valid point, obviously one would not bother to get permission for articles one was not going to publish or make available on the net..
The dismissive tone of your comment does weaken the point you make.

As to whether or not he contradicts himself from one article to the next I cannot say as I find most of the articles relatively passe in terms of technical content, and methodology.

Kevin

[plovati]

Originally posted by dhaen
Hi,

I have some on my site here .
Please let me know what you have and collect. I'd like to publish or mirror them.

Yes, I have these one, found somewhere over the net in the past. I know also the Audioxpress reprint (but they forget the last part 6b). Most part of what I have is here: http://www.audiofaidate.it/sito.asp?goto=primo

I'm aware of copyrights, and I'm not to publish all what is available on paper by some editor, but what about papers of 50 or more years ago, that nobody has interest to reprint? It is a shame that they will be lost forever.

Maybe that the net can be a veichle to move somebody to reprint a Crowhurst collection. What about a diyaudio community reprint by means of the new publish.on-demand online services?

[plovati]

Originally posted by Bandersnatch
too hell with figuring out who owns the copyrights. first sift out the wrong stuff, then get permission for putting up the ones which do not contradict themselves.

At best, he says two opposing and exclusive things are true.

If you can sift out the chaff, good ole NC did some nice work. Unfortunatley one of his talents was not writing unequivocally.
cheers,
Douglas

Please can give me an example of these contraddictions?

[Bandersnatch]

my favourite was his desciption on the PP output stage. He comes close to getting it right, points his finger at a correct diagram, and then goes back to being wrong. Good ole Mikey of MQ transformes fell in right behind NC, and decided to be wrong as well. A few folks jumped in with the math and such that *DID* show what was going on, and how badly NC had botched the job.

The whole experience showed how important reading and analyzing the old tube books is before believing the urban legends.

I am also sure that if he made one mistake, he made othes to accompany it.
cheers,
Douglas

[plovati]

On over 2000 papers and some hundreds of patents there sure are some tenths of errors. Nobody is error-proof, but I haven't understand the error You mentioned, on wich paper?

Up to now I do not discover any math error on his works, maybe not 100% accurate but very useful and with a deep insight view into the real basic of the matter.