Because it is your interpretation that is so off. For example the shield is part of the cable and it should influence the test. So your discussions undoubtedly contain that filter. that is included in the setup. Numbers?
But if you were actually serious you could do a test yourself to demonstrate.
Max,
Don't worry no one will believe you.
I once ordered a 1 cm slice of fois gras at a local shop and they didn't know what to do.
Mr Soibelman,
a standard drink in the US contains a defined amount of alcohol in fl oz.
With help of an alcohol percentage (which in my narrowminded view is a metric unit), it's then converted to a beverage in fluid ounces.
e.g. a shot of whiskey is 1.5 fl oz.
(you lot have been using metric from the beginning, gotcha)
I'm waiting for the pics with no line harmonic spray or other confounders. I remember the AeX article. I've had my share of head-scratchers like putting high crest factor signals into an ordinary Aglient spectrum analyzer, or noise aliasing on my venerable HP dynamic signal analyzer. BTW you mentioned your 20pV again, I thought that was using the correlator that you built (or were going to build). I assume you didn't parallel 900 of those op-amps. Lots more places for things to go wrong.
Last edited:
I would have sliced off an inch, cut that in 5 equal size pieces, to hand you 2 and tell you to PO, creepy foreigner
(cheese with truffle from Italy, not half bad)
Attachments
I have no idea what you are saying here. Aren't there 12 inch to the foot? Is the ratio in cube therefor not 12^3?
Jan
Jacco,
I was referring to those simple cups and quarts and gallons and converting those to liters and such. We use cups and liquid ounces but most people here would look at you funny if you gave them a recipe in metric units of grams and liters as you would have. Now I have not problem working in cc's or cubic millimeters and such and do just that when doing something that is a precision measure rather than a rough measure such as gallons and ounces. I surely wouldn't do work on a cylinder head for an engine with English measures, I get out a burrete and measure in CC's and I do the same with mixing chemicals. We just have to use those old English measures as the common person here is a dolt when it comes to accurate measurements.
A 2x4 is still 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 as far as I know Sy, I haven't seen a true 2x4 in anything but a truly old building in a long time. Today you also have to deal with steel studs, the most common building material in office building these days.
I was referring to those simple cups and quarts and gallons and converting those to liters and such. We use cups and liquid ounces but most people here would look at you funny if you gave them a recipe in metric units of grams and liters as you would have. Now I have not problem working in cc's or cubic millimeters and such and do just that when doing something that is a precision measure rather than a rough measure such as gallons and ounces. I surely wouldn't do work on a cylinder head for an engine with English measures, I get out a burrete and measure in CC's and I do the same with mixing chemicals. We just have to use those old English measures as the common person here is a dolt when it comes to accurate measurements.
A 2x4 is still 1 5/8 x 3 5/8 as far as I know Sy, I haven't seen a true 2x4 in anything but a truly old building in a long time. Today you also have to deal with steel studs, the most common building material in office building these days.
Yes pretty good. Another weight and measures story. Last Christmas someone at Whole foods pushed the black truffle button when pricing this cheese and put the pieces in the display at $1500 and up.
If i ask someone how much cm3 there s in a m3 the answer is straightfowardly 0.000001m3, for how much cubic inches in a cubic foot the answer provided by SY is 1/12^3, in one case the number can be directly computed while in the imperial "system" the answer cant be computed instantly, unless you can answer as fast that it s 0.0005787037037.
No I quit at four banks of 25. With transformer and correlator I see more noise from a .05 ohm than shorted but just barely. However I have no practical use for the setup. It was just fun doing it.
I suspect you could try the experiment with one laptop as the source and your usual gig doing the measurement.
I do not plan on showing these measurements until other folks seem to get the same results. They are quite interesting.
Lets not talk too much about crest factor, a very hot subject in selecting loudspeakers. The normal process is to use pink noise with a 20 dB crest factor covering the range under test. The power level is increased until the response deviates by 3 db in any 1/3 (IIRC) octave band due to thermal or other compression and that is the maximum output. Now some manufacturers are measuring the peak amplitude not the RMS. This should give them a number 17 dB higher than the folks who do it correctly. Then there is the technique of using a loudspeaker with a minimum impedance of 4 ohms for most of the frequency range under test and since it never dips below that calling it 8 ohms as permitted in the standard. That gives another 3 dB to the output level for a given voltage. (Power is calculated from applied voltage and rated impedance.) So there can be a 20 dB difference even before the conservative guys give their worst case numbers often another 3 dB. Others just take the 1 watt number add a bit for supposed maximum power and present that. Then there are the folks who just lie!
Makes doing a design quite a bit more difficult. I have one project where the prices for what should be a useful system are ranging from $460,000.00 to above $1,600,000.00. Another ranges from $6,000,000.00 to $10,000,000.00
Last edited:
I recently ordered a 20 cm piece of salami and the lady put the knife at slightly less than 10 cm. Smiling: "That much?".
Roaring laughter at the counter.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.