Yes. I thought I had just not used the lytics on the same board, but instead I then had two 1uf (per channel) film caps in series with the lytics. It was due to a minor mishap with the PCB board, but provided an interesting lesson in what a bunch of DC voltage on signal caps does (for lytics).
When I was so curious about why it sounded like it did, I found that significant DC voltage was at the cap/s.
When I was so curious about why it sounded like it did, I found that significant DC voltage was at the cap/s.
Observation...
John Curl hardly ever posts here on Fridays and Saturdays. Anyone else think he probably parties like a rock star?
John Curl hardly ever posts here on Fridays and Saturdays. Anyone else think he probably parties like a rock star?
If it includes a massage, a couple whiskies, and going to the Golden Coral... Sure. You know, between trying on reading glasses at Walgreens and comparing insurances from different issues of AARP.
I know he used to. When I met him (years ago),
he was setting on the floor in the hallway outside
the Mark Levinson room at the CES (then in Chicago)
show, with a well used bottle of Scotch .... 🙂
Well before noon.........
he was setting on the floor in the hallway outside
the Mark Levinson room at the CES (then in Chicago)
show, with a well used bottle of Scotch .... 🙂
Well before noon.........
If I was in Cali right now, I'd be looking to find some Russian River Pliny the Elder 🙂
I'm curious, what do you think of Devialet and their hybrid Class A/D amplifiers? Have you had a chance to take a look at one?
I'm curious, what do you think of Devialet and their hybrid Class A/D amplifiers? Have you had a chance to take a look at one?
One, yes he was.
Two, I agree that there's seemingly no separation in affront between kooky ideas that have essentially no basis in the reality they purport (whether they have other effects, sure, maybe), and the rest of the design, which is solid. Or the revisiting of either sins of 50 years past which no modern design would pass qualifications if it suffered, or disproven theories that are held with religious zeal.
We fall back on the tropes time and again. I've certainly been critical but have tried to stick to the ideas.
And what do you think about my assumption; that the kooky ideas just continue until they unknowingly screw something up just enough that the product sounds different, not "better" by engineering standards? Then they can still brag about good engineering, because they don't even know what they did wrong. If this isn't happening, then you would probably need to assume they know what they are doing in bad principle, but to get sales. And if that is so, then why so much deliberate avoidance of truth? WELL actually we know the answer to the last question - it's because audiophiles believe less pure representations are more pure since they mask the studio and remind them of real life in some, but not all ways.
I guess that analogy sorta works...
Personally I don't think the audiophiles are delusional or anything like that. But I am impressed by what attributes they'll trade for which. It often just makes me think they can't hear particularly well..
If studios/mastering were better, there would be less need for the silliness. They do good work on a lot of attributes I like for music, but fail on others that might be big concern for audiophiles. So sometimes a bunch of RF pumped into gear is the only answer to stop a recording from sounding like it's an etched picture that's small.
Personally I don't think the audiophiles are delusional or anything like that. But I am impressed by what attributes they'll trade for which. It often just makes me think they can't hear particularly well..
If studios/mastering were better, there would be less need for the silliness. They do good work on a lot of attributes I like for music, but fail on others that might be big concern for audiophiles. So sometimes a bunch of RF pumped into gear is the only answer to stop a recording from sounding like it's an etched picture that's small.
John Curl gets unfairly ridiculed around here. And so did Charles Hansen. I've read many posts...
Some people read a few books, take a class, buy an $80 used Tek on eBay, and feel like Jedi Masters. As if they now know everything there is to know about electronics, audio, physics. They are now Earth's greatest gift. But in reality, they're no different than a Flat Earther back in the day measuring his backyard with a ruller.
We live in an infinitely complex Universe. We will never be able to measure everything and know everything, yet alone with an $80 Tektronix. We haven't even begun to scratch the surface of psychoacoustics.
Engineers like that, will never do anything great. They lack imagination.
But John has. He has spent his entire life innovating, studying, listening, trying new things, and thinking outside of the box. And he has done great things.
And others like him, will continue to do great things in the future.
Imagination manifests reality. If you don't have any, you're not a worthy engineer, scientist, or anything.
What makes one great is not understanding and using today's sound engineering principles, but innovating tomorrow's engineering principles.
Some people read a few books, take a class, buy an $80 used Tek on eBay, and feel like Jedi Masters. As if they now know everything there is to know about electronics, audio, physics. They are now Earth's greatest gift. But in reality, they're no different than a Flat Earther back in the day measuring his backyard with a ruller.
We live in an infinitely complex Universe. We will never be able to measure everything and know everything, yet alone with an $80 Tektronix. We haven't even begun to scratch the surface of psychoacoustics.
Engineers like that, will never do anything great. They lack imagination.
But John has. He has spent his entire life innovating, studying, listening, trying new things, and thinking outside of the box. And he has done great things.
And others like him, will continue to do great things in the future.
Imagination manifests reality. If you don't have any, you're not a worthy engineer, scientist, or anything.
What makes one great is not understanding and using today's sound engineering principles, but innovating tomorrow's engineering principles.
Last edited:
Well said.
"I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important
than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination encircles the world" ― Albert Einstein
As quoted in "What Life Means to Einstein: An Interview by George Sylvester Viereck"
in The Saturday Evening Post (26 October 1929)
Last edited:
Yawn on the rants. Notice that the very people you complain about don't have any issues with, or are supportive of, folks like Nelson or Patrick, who have their own self chosen design ideologies that could be considered "suboptimal"?
Hint, they say using xyx or doing abc gives them joy, by and large.
If silver wire, or incorrect beliefs that have been disproved, or bqps are being creative then I'm okay being creative in totally different ways that have a chance of being real effects. There's so much room to play without needing to violate first principles.
Ridicas, do you actually know what innovation looks like?
Destroyer, I haven't read carefully what you wrote beyond realizing that I have to draw the schematic to understand what you did.
Hint, they say using xyx or doing abc gives them joy, by and large.
If silver wire, or incorrect beliefs that have been disproved, or bqps are being creative then I'm okay being creative in totally different ways that have a chance of being real effects. There's so much room to play without needing to violate first principles.
Ridicas, do you actually know what innovation looks like?
Destroyer, I haven't read carefully what you wrote beyond realizing that I have to draw the schematic to understand what you did.
Last edited:
Thank you for posting this so soon after my calm observation, as it makes for a fantastic example.
Actually, the people who hold mystical beliefs that are not supported by any evidence in reality are the flat earthers. Most here are open to any theory provided it can be supported by evidence. You know, like in every other field. Plenty of audio designers are like quack doctors; lots of claims but little evidence.
Yes, because you obviously know best. You've got 30 minutes to think better on your reply. 🙂
And when did frothing from the mouth insults that anyone who criticises John lacks innovation or the ability to be scientist/engineer become calm? I swear every flavour of this rant cannot figure out how openly wrong their stance is.
And when did frothing from the mouth insults that anyone who criticises John lacks innovation or the ability to be scientist/engineer become calm? I swear every flavour of this rant cannot figure out how openly wrong their stance is.
Actually, you don't need any evidence to have a new idea. That comes much later. If you can think it, it's real.
When Flat Earthers used a three foot stick to measure their farm and prove that Earth was fat, that was their scope and sound engineering principles of the time.
It's only mystical, because you don't know better. Yet.
I mean, I'll give you your username, really!
But the very logic you're using in your analogy means that John is stuck in the pre-276'ish BC era (scope and sound engineering principles) of electronics. A time before Eratosthenes. Which I don't think you want to state! 😉
But the very logic you're using in your analogy means that John is stuck in the pre-276'ish BC era (scope and sound engineering principles) of electronics. A time before Eratosthenes. Which I don't think you want to state! 😉
Last edited:
Yeah, well, people like Charles have been coming up with crackpot theories blaming feedback for bad sound or whatever they can use for their pseudoscientific marketing. It's only been 30+ years to come up with some actual evidence, I'm not holding my breath.
People need to get over the fact that audio engineering is not going to redefine the laws of physics or basic engineering principles.
I'm sorry that Charles Hansen's health failed far too soon, but his final rants on the Audio Asylum were not pretty. He lashed out at the very subjectivist camp that he tried to serve. His views were sometimes the most extreme, I tried the wooden cable lifters (no effect) but not the $$ myrtle ones. At some point how stupid does this stuff need to be?
I see the subjectivist side feeling more marginalized and paranoid all the time, hence the rant here last week.
What laws of physics? You only know some of them because people had crazy ideas. What you call laws of physics, is just what you know with current limited knowledge. They change all the time. And maybe soon you'll find out that virtually everything you think you know is wrong.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.