Like that isn't broken every other post... "go learn something and come back" "nope nothing to see here"
re: post #74917
"...don't even use the term" and "contrived tests" reveal a strong bias. Or at least entrenched ideas.
"...hence he is making no conscious decisions" vs. "...that is what he does for a living" are contradicting ideas that need further explanatory differentation. Or round filed.
"...don't even use the term" and "contrived tests" reveal a strong bias. Or at least entrenched ideas.
"...hence he is making no conscious decisions" vs. "...that is what he does for a living" are contradicting ideas that need further explanatory differentation. Or round filed.
Exactly!!!
If Stuart turns up on various different threads and called me a huckster, that is harassment.
Even stalking.
I just thought it was time somebody should stand up to Stuart. He thinks he can invoke the fear of God into others, not me though. I am tougher than that.
An apology, or at least a little more civility, that is not too much to ask for?
Richard,
Way back in post #74835 you asked about opamps with access to the VAS stage.
The AD744 allows such access, and while I haven't tried it, LTspice modelling shows it look promising. Attached are some LTspice models and symbols that you can try.
Regards,
Paul Bysouth
Way back in post #74835 you asked about opamps with access to the VAS stage.
The AD744 allows such access, and while I haven't tried it, LTspice modelling shows it look promising. Attached are some LTspice models and symbols that you can try.
Regards,
Paul Bysouth
Attachments
I honestly get 2 sentences into Joe's long writing and can't do it. I tried, and, well, as long as I stick with technical things, I'm okay. I really don't mean that as a slight because generally anything written with that much emotional content sends me scurrying.
I get paid (or, well, don't get paid well, but that's the price of entry) to make objective improvements in the work I partake. Some days I flatter myself by believing what I do might actually benefit others, but most of the time I know better and just hope I get lucky. Things with hard endpoints--will we be able to reliably detect and enrich something at parts per (insert scary large sounding number here) in such a manner that it has some meaning and provides actionable, clinical evidence. Can we do it better? Can we make it cheaper/easier to use/more reliable/accessible? Is this data ultimately useful towards providing actionable, clinical evidence? Obviously a lot of these questions are outside of my day-to-day domain (or my domain at all), but are things I have to ask myself.
It is oftentimes utterly soul-crushing work because what you think is doing something beneficial isn't, or, worse, has introduced a subtle new problem that you have to find/balance against. I've learned quickly not to take things for granted, nor assume much of anything. Intuition provides hypotheses, and over time, my hit rate has probably gotten better. But I still have to validate those hypotheses. I'm wrong. A lot. The last person I trust is myself, because there's no one better at pulling one past me than myself.
Unfortunately, or fortunately, there's plenty of work being done in the cognitive sciences/neurosciences to show simply how fallible we humans are and how imagined our reality really is. What we hear is perhaps far, far more up in our head than we probably want to admit. You hear something in the system? Great. Now validate it with a robust test or get comfortable being relegated to a storyteller. The louder you shout and more emotional you get about your otherwise invalidated experience, the less weight I'm going to give to what you're saying. I really mean no disrespect to your expertise and background--perhaps you're that good and would validate your claims reliably. I don't doubt your sincerity--I simply doubt your/my/everyone's ability to reliably and (moderately) confidently hear what you claim to hear, ESPECIALLY when contradicts prior information. Thomas Bayes was an optimist.
"In God we trust; everyone else bring data"
When I pointed that out, Stuart almost went ballistic. He hates wives? Me, I take it with a grain of salt, but yeah, sometimes the circumstances are such that it can actually be saying something. Sadly many women don't care about hi-fi and, as you say, it's a man's hobby. So anything they say is purely volunteered - but you have to put a blind-fold on them first? Sorry, I am jesting.
"Some subjects are so serious that one can only joke about them." Niels Bohr
But that is not a good thing, and nothing to be proud of either as posters nor in terms of what the forum tolerates, IMO.
It is a form of trolling or baiting, designed to imflame, and some posters seem to make an artform of testing the boundaries of what mods tolerate. Joe seemed to do this to one of my posts recently, IIRC, but it's pretty widespread here I think, and best ignored.
Non-involved observers can equally pick up cues from how involved observers react.......for example 'the wife' might read non-verbal behavioural cues provided by 'the husband', in many and various ways. And summise the reason, or make a good guess.
Citation required? IIRC He merely pointed out one of his articles where he discovered that, the vast majority of the time wife says something positive to cheer hubby up. The wife in the kitchen has been a staple of audio reviewers and more than a few people on this site for decades.
The relationship between SY and Mrs SY would seem to have little bearing on Audio though.
You are joking, of course................
I? I spent my misbegotten life believing that a kick drum was in the bass region, but please look at post 74904 to see how I was oh so wrong.
So if you need an explanation, do ask billshurev, he disagrees.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.