Yes, Scott, and "God would never make anything that the human could not see with the unaided eye" Church official refusing to look into Galileo's telescope to see the moons of Jupiter. 400 years ago.
You need new matierial.
Church official refusing to look into Galileo's telescope to see the moons of Jupiter. 400 years ago.
You're referring to a fable, which somehow seems appropriate.
You're referring to a fable, which somehow seems appropriate.
Indeed. In fact, Vatican officials were so exited when they first heard from Galileo's findings that they invited him to Rome to present his ideas and findings to the Curia.
Galileo didn't go (in fact it took him 20+ years and a lot of prodding before he put his stuff in writing). By that time, Luther had nailed his 100 something statements to the church door which split the Lutherans off the Catholic Church. As a fallout, the Catholic Church closed itself off to anything that was perceived as new (and therefore heretical) which included Gallileo.
So you see, the line between being a hero and a heretical can be pretty thin and completely out of your control. 😉
jan didden
Last edited:
Yes, Scott, and "God would never make anything that the human could not see with the unaided eye" Church official refusing to look into Galileo's telescope to see the moons of Jupiter. 400 years ago.
John,
This is off topic, but the fact that "a" Church official had a problem doesn't really make much difference, as the Pope supported Galileo's findings. Interestingly enough, the Pope had himself been a fellow scientist and colleague of Galileo's for many years before he became the Pope. The problems with the Church came later and involved Galileo's integrity (or lack of it) in his presentation of rather bogus proof that the Earth revolved around the Sun. While his theory was eventually vindicated, his supporting proofs at the time were not even close, contrary to the popular belief.
This and much more is detailed in Arthur Koestler's superb book "The Sleepwalkers".
Best Regards,
TerryO
I can only quote what I have read. I was not there. The 'logic' makes sense to me, for the time, 400 years ago.
Actually, it wasn't a church official, it was a single philosopher at a nearby school. Again appropriate.
Why? All you do, is: 'Just say no!' Where is your proof?
Why? All you do, is: 'Just say yes!' Where is your proof?
As 'philosophy' was 'religion' 400 years ago, today 'science' is 'religion'. A person's reality is ignored, in either case.
By that time, Luther had nailed his 100 something statements to the church door
According to the National Lampoon, it was ninety-five feces.
John
According to the National Lampoon, it was ninety-five feces.
John
I believe that they were referring to "Lex" Luther unless, and it's only a remote possibility, they're just being feceous.
Best Regards,
TerryO
According to the National Lampoon, it was ninety-five feces.
John
OK, I believe that. I wasn't sure, thought it was 104.
BTW missed you at SY's!
jan didden
What is going on here? Why do any of you care about resistors, either measurements, or subjective opinions? It is to my advantage as an electronics manufacturer that many people never use anything but the cheapest of the passive components. My problem is when I have to remove them or bypass them, just so that I can enjoy something that I cannot make, in my own audio system. Right now, just today, I had to listen to some ceramic caps that are in the little Sony FM tuner that I bought. Of course, it could be my imagination. For everyone's sake, I sure hope so. Yet I will bypass them, in time.
Of course, these ceramic caps, being low voltage, high capacitance and very tiny are made of a material that has low frequency distortion that can be measured, dielectric absorption that also can be measured, and I would bet that it has a 3'rd kind of distortion that I measured once, that I call: Non-return to zero, or perhaps hysteresis.
Now, Sony doesn't see a problem using these caps, so perhaps it is just my imagination, but I find the sound rather edgy over extended listening to the best FM available in the SF Bay Area. We shall see.
Of course, these ceramic caps, being low voltage, high capacitance and very tiny are made of a material that has low frequency distortion that can be measured, dielectric absorption that also can be measured, and I would bet that it has a 3'rd kind of distortion that I measured once, that I call: Non-return to zero, or perhaps hysteresis.
Now, Sony doesn't see a problem using these caps, so perhaps it is just my imagination, but I find the sound rather edgy over extended listening to the best FM available in the SF Bay Area. We shall see.
The evidence is weak or non-existent. The argument that this resistor has -130dB and that has -150dB so this must be why they sound different is a logical fallacy. A test to isolate the contribution of the resistor has never been done (and never will be).
Scott,
Have amp almost ready to go, PM address.
The worst resistors are some miniature 1/4W carbon film types. At rated power third order distortion is -75 db.
On hard measurements of -130 or -150 distortion, good practice would dictate using the better unit if costs were equal. My goal was to devise a simple test to among other things enable manufacturers to jiggle their carbon formulas to provide better resistors. As the test can be done with a PC, a sound card, and maybe an amplifier, the cost should be low enough any manufacturer can set up a system. Perhaps they even can improve quality control. If you look at the current industry practices to measure resistors the tests are not as easily done and are not aimed at our industries desires.
So lets try the experiment and see if a single feedback resistor matters to your ears.
I have decided to open a third camp of true believers, my camp will always assume you should be able to measure a difference between any two items. Even if they are supposed to be the same and are consecutive units. If we can't find a difference it is only because our measurements are not yet sensitive enough. In extreme cases we will even compare parameters that should not make a difference such as weight. We will also believe everyone who tells us they can hear a difference. We will also believe everyone who tells us they do not hear a difference. We will try to not believe anyone who tells us what we hear when we don't hear it. When an issue is of interest we will try it or test it before pronouncing judgment unless it causes us to roll on the floor with laughter.
Even though there are always measurable differences it does not mean they should be ignored or worshiped.
The worst resistors are some miniature 1/4W carbon film types. At rated power third order distortion is -75 db.
No one serious would use them, I assume, in case we are in a 'highend' thread. The worst case to consider would be metal film resistor 1%, like Vishay MBB207.
Please do not mention uA741 and 1/4W carbon resistors. This is not a mass-production thread.
BTW, I have not used a carbon 1/4W resistor in ANY of my designs, regardless they were for measuring systems or audio, since 1979.
OK, I believe that. I wasn't sure, thought it was 104.
BTW missed you at SY's!
jan didden
I spent last Thursday evening planning when I should leave for Austin on Friday. Doh! I had to work late Thursday anyhow.
John
We taped the show- I'll have some vids up on YouTube this week just so you can see what you missed. Bad news was the Friday night show, where I got invited to go out barhopping with the band afterward. I keep forgetting I'm old...
BTW, I have not used a carbon 1/4W resistor in ANY of my designs, regardless they were for measuring systems or audio, since 1979.
I have, there are places where it does not matter. I found some 1/8W 56Meg Allen Bradleys around the lab, super high value R's are getting hard to find cheaply. I have no problem using these.
Yes, there are places where we need immunity to impulse surcharge and overloading, e.g., rather than THD.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II