Thanks, Mark. And, yeah, if the referee goes by Manny, that's just the guy you want doing all the patents for utility-level electrical systems. 😀
Richard, that's what I was trying to say--the link I gave just showed the parasitic series inductance/resistance of the respective capacitors and the self inductance of the traces. Yours is a many-tap explicit RLC array. I'm admittedly surprised you were able to get this patent, truth be told, but 1991 means it's well past its last renewal.
Based on some of the software patents that have been issued, I am not surprised it was granted. Truly a broken office.
This kind of shows how you guys really think about the efforts and successes of others. Richard got a patent on something that he developed. You should congratulate him for his success, rather than berate the patent.
Of course, most patents are just annoyances that people inflict on each other, AND if you don't have big money to back it, others will just steal it with impunity. That is why I have never bothered to patent anything other than the one that Mark Levinson paid for. And he only wanted the patent to attempt to take control of the circuit from me by having me 'assign' the patent to him, which I did not. In his disappointment of not being able to take advantage of me, he kept the original paperwork just to annoy me.
Patents can be useful in deterring people from directly copying only if you are prepared to sue. I was not, so Ortofon and others copied my patented JC-1 design over my protest. That's life folks!
Of course, most patents are just annoyances that people inflict on each other, AND if you don't have big money to back it, others will just steal it with impunity. That is why I have never bothered to patent anything other than the one that Mark Levinson paid for. And he only wanted the patent to attempt to take control of the circuit from me by having me 'assign' the patent to him, which I did not. In his disappointment of not being able to take advantage of me, he kept the original paperwork just to annoy me.
Patents can be useful in deterring people from directly copying only if you are prepared to sue. I was not, so Ortofon and others copied my patented JC-1 design over my protest. That's life folks!
John, I think Scott's reply to my surprise hits the nail on the head. I'm more surprised by the awarding of said patent than anything, which speaks more to our patent system than Richard's contribution. Also why I wonder about its enforceability, given prior art.
As Richard wrote, though, patents are "complicated".
As Richard wrote, though, patents are "complicated".
No, the flag is waved as a reminder: beware the Mother of Stupidity, it is always pregnant.
I also have given up on patents for anything I do.
There was an interesting article in a trade magazine, suggesting that we all just do away with patents entirely...
There would be both benefits and hardships.
There was an interesting article in a trade magazine, suggesting that we all just do away with patents entirely...
There would be both benefits and hardships.
Yeah, the ones busy making synapses throughout my brain have been telling me all kinds of great things.
Do you honestly believe that you're going to go ahead and beat Maxwell's equations in an audio circuit? They've got a long history of working quite quite well. 🙂
Do you honestly believe that you're going to go ahead and beat Maxwell's equations in an audio circuit? They've got a long history of working quite quite well. 🙂
Hi Robert,
-Chris
It's not a secret handshake. It's just easier to discuss these matters using accepted industry jargon. High end audio has it's own jargon, much of which totally escapes me. Some stuff is just made up, and that's annoying when it contradicts known scientific principles. Especially when the defense is "it could be, how do you know this isn't true?". Then of course the folks who just like to enjoy music can't understand what they are being told. It would be much easier for everyone to do a little studying in the electronics field so they can at least understand what is going on. Then they wouldn't be taken in by snake oil salesmen.
-Chris
And yet YOU decide to use Latin? And reference Marx?
So by your own rule you're in the club who don't know. welcome.
Honest question: do you live in a purely relative world where every idea is held to the same merit? Because my point was that no amount of thinking a circuit will behave a certain way or produce an effect will cause the circuit to change what exactly it's going to do based on the rules governing it. Maxwell's equations has much greater control of the situation than our hopes and aspirations, so it's best if we align ourselves with nature's rules.
Of course one can design a different circuit if one chooses. But to make the example tangible, bypassing a large electrolytic at its pins will not materially change the hf impedance of the circuit several centimetres of wire and pcb away. The self inductance of the write will dominate at high frequency. That's why bypass needs to be done as close to the load as physically possible with the appropriate compromise between bypass capacitor package and its ability to store charge.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.