John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Case in point: within a stranded cable, there cannot be strand to strand currents when the end to end voltage drop is 10 millivolts. In this case, the actual truth is that it can based on dI/dt driven effects.

I was very clear my question was DC (no dI/dt). Anyone can look it up #10 wire is almost exactly 1 mOhm per ft. so 10' is 10mV at an amp no room for any dI/dt. I believe in starting simple, I see no one was up for any measurement. I'm not equipped to do measurements at 100kHz, certainly not to your standards.
 
I was very clear my question was DC (no dI/dt). Anyone can look it up #10 wire is almost exactly 1 mOhm per ft. so 10' is 10mV at an amp no room for any dI/dt. I believe in starting simple, I see no one was up for any measurement. I'm not equipped to do measurements at 100kHz, certainly not to your standards.
Perhaps your intend was clear to you, and you are indeed correct at DC.
A #10 twisted pair at 10 kHz has significant proximity effect, but the endpoint resistive change would not be easily measured, even with the stuff I have access to. With a speaker load, no possible effect could be measured.

Badly oxidized/greenified...not so sure, test and/or audibility. Me, I'd test.

Jn
 
Personally I would put greenified in the pathalogical box.

Frankly I would too. I will also remind folks that ADSL worked over an infrastructure that was at times almost 100yr. old and exposed to the elements the whole time, it was several MHZ in BW and very sensitive to IMD. Alcatel was disappointed when we told them they could not use cheap Hi-K ceramic capacitors for POTS isolation.
 
Last edited:
Scott: My ADSL is barely working this evening! But given how far I am from the exchange it's a miracle it ever works. Krone strips are the work of a demonic force.



But solid core Cu or Al is remarkably resiliant all things considered. When I was in my early teens we were given a talk at school by a Professor Lew Schnurr who explained why 1200 baud was the maximum you could ever get down a phone line. Sadly never met him again to remind him of this minor error in his thinking.
 
I was unaware it was required. I have in the past actually, but have been off forum for roughly 3 years, I had other concerns.

Richard's mention of bias vs flatness was indeed an audibility claim, and as you see, I dove in. Not to accept or refute his claim, but to engage a technical discussion on the theory and practice of ESLs.

Others ran the gamut on Richard from saying attaboy, to you have an agenda, to your selling something, or other badgering type things.

I chose to first detail the concept of acceleration based system response changes as I deal with it daily, then to apply it to the topic at hand, that being ESLs. It was rough going at first, as I was presenting theory that was not known, and some were quite miffed as it were, accusing me of knowing nothing (in essence). But as you see, the result was a bit more understanding, as well as a possible test regimen. And, many provided great links to research, all benefitted.

Whenever I present anything theoretical, I try my best to provide a test that can either confirm or deny what I state. If I have the test capability, I will not ask others to do the test, I will.

Oh, if an audibility claim involving soundstage or image blurring comes up, just ask scottjoplin about that....ITD baby!!!!😱

Jn
There have been many extraordinary audibility claims posted without extraordinary evidence, not just by Richard but others as well. "Not to accept or refute his claim"? How can there be an engagement of a technical discussion when one does not accept or refute a claim? For such person, he/she can only moderate such discussion but not engage it. Doesn't make much sense.
 
How can there be an engagement of a technical discussion when one does not accept or refute a claim?
Think that sentence through. If I refute the claim, there is no reason to engage a technical discussion. If I chose to engage in a technical discussion of what I do not believe, that will certainly tailor my thinking.

The same if I accept, my thinking will be tailored toward that.

I would rather approach the technical discussion with no preconceived notions.
Jn
 
Perhaps your intend was clear to you, and you are indeed correct at DC.
A #10 twisted pair at 10 kHz has significant proximity effect, but the endpoint resistive change would not be easily measured, even with the stuff I have access to. With a speaker load, no possible effect could be measured.

Badly oxidized/greenified...not so sure, test and/or audibility. Me, I'd test.

Jn

Wasnt clear to me either. so no comment on it. But why even bring Dc into it when the discussion was oxide and its effects... strand to strand.

pathological isnt the point... most all copper wires will oxidize in good time. How long will also depend on the insulation material.

If 2 wires, strands or not, are oxidized and are in contact..... then what? That is what we were talking about. Well, at least I was.

So was the conclusion that it cant matter? Compared to the unoxidized path? Not even at 10KHz and above?

I'm slow this morning.



THx-RNMarsh
 
Last edited:
There have been many extraordinary audibility claims posted without extraordinary evidence, not just by Richard but others as well. "Not to accept or refute his claim"? How can there be an engagement of a technical discussion when one does not accept or refute a claim? For such person, he/she can only moderate such discussion but not engage it. Doesn't make much sense.

I tthink you have me confused with someone else. What extraordinary claim are you attributing to me?

THx-RNMarsh
 
Think that sentence through. If I refute the claim, there is no reason to engage a technical discussion. If I chose to engage in a technical discussion of what I do not believe, that will certainly tailor my thinking.

The same if I accept, my thinking will be tailored toward that.

I would rather approach the technical discussion with no preconceived notions.
It wouldn't be a no preconceived notion case unless you are completely new to sound reproducing electronics. Since you are not (correct me if I'm wrong), you deliberately consider yourself as completely new to this and engage in technical discussion. The essence of my earlier question was, why do you do that?

I tthink you have me confused with someone else. What extraordinary claim are you attributing to me?
Another case of willful ignorance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.