Bob Cordell attacked MY sincerity and honesty, this week, on this thread. Did I go into intellectual meltdown? NO! I have to take it, BECAUSE the moderators ignore it.
Bobken,Bobken said:
does you're experience relate to dual secondaries only, or to any secondary arrangement that is not centre tapped?
Pooge,
can your check be applied to a dual secondary, dual rectifier arrangement, where the audio ground is floating with respect to chassis and only becomes "connected" when the disconnecting network is used to make the audio side safe?
The R in the disconnecting network would provide the means to measure the ground to chassis current.
Indeed, take this discussion to email.
Our efforts here are audio, not personal psychology.
Any further continuation in public will be useless as you can expect the posts to vanish in cyberspace.
/Hugo
Our efforts here are audio, not personal psychology.
Any further continuation in public will be useless as you can expect the posts to vanish in cyberspace.
/Hugo
john curl said:
John,
Bobken's reply was very helpful and interesting, but if I understand him correctly he was doing those experiments on a single transformer by itself. That's what makes his observation so interesting and puzzling. I think what you are referring to here is a "polarity"-dependent interaction between two transformers in physical proximity to each other. This is something entirely different, and is much less puzzling.
Bob
Bob, it has nothing to do with how many transformers are on a chassis. It is just that ALL the transformers have to be adjusted for minimum leakage. 2 out of 3 is not good enough. Is it more clear now?
Hi John,
I'm glad that something I said did lead you to someone who could help you out (I have no idea who). BTW, after you said that you were addressing Scott specifically, things made far more sense. My response was simply to avoid ignoring what may have been a request from you.
Again, I find that we do agree on most things. I think the exact wording is the major thing we may comment on.
I've known this for years when dealing with older tube product. Transformer insulation often does break down a bit over time. Leakage was more pronounced though and I'm surprised that it s still a big issue. I haven't had a chance to construct anything new for a little over 10 years now. I'll admit that I'm more than a bit rusty and did expect transformer leakage to have been greatly reduced by now.
Hi Bobken,
Let me just publicly apologize to you for including you in the group I addressed in response to a post by Charles Hansen. I made the incorrect assumption that he was posting facts and I really should have checked first by asking the named people in that list. I'll PM you as well.
SY is correct in stating that I am not moderating, but participating just as any other member. Moderators try not to take any action in a thread we are participating in. This is to remove any possible bias in a decision that might be made. We generally do use the symbol to make it clear when we are acting as a moderator. Normal members often moderate themselves during normal posting, and we also do. That is normal human behavior.
The reason I have brought up the subjectivist vs objectivist at all was because often we have comments made that suggest that measurements will misguide a designer. I have always been careful to say that both approaches are required. In other words, I try to be inclusive as much as possible, taking the middle of the road approach if you will. If you read my posts, I think you will agree that this is my message. I have repeated it several times. over the years.
All,
One thing that bothers me to some extent are the comments that people are banned for making some statements. The risk of being banned is actually very, very small. In fact, any person who works hard enough to bring this about will know that this action is a possibility, and they even work harder to bring this about. Also, this action requires a lot of involvement from all the other moderators and it isn't something we take lightly.
So let's just drop this reference. It's just a dramatic statement that serves no purpose at all. Scaremongering.
-Chris
I'm glad that something I said did lead you to someone who could help you out (I have no idea who). BTW, after you said that you were addressing Scott specifically, things made far more sense. My response was simply to avoid ignoring what may have been a request from you.
Again, I find that we do agree on most things. I think the exact wording is the major thing we may comment on.
Yup.
I've known this for years when dealing with older tube product. Transformer insulation often does break down a bit over time. Leakage was more pronounced though and I'm surprised that it s still a big issue. I haven't had a chance to construct anything new for a little over 10 years now. I'll admit that I'm more than a bit rusty and did expect transformer leakage to have been greatly reduced by now.
Hi Bobken,
Let me just publicly apologize to you for including you in the group I addressed in response to a post by Charles Hansen. I made the incorrect assumption that he was posting facts and I really should have checked first by asking the named people in that list. I'll PM you as well.
SY is correct in stating that I am not moderating, but participating just as any other member. Moderators try not to take any action in a thread we are participating in. This is to remove any possible bias in a decision that might be made. We generally do use the
symbol to make it clear when we are acting as a moderator. Normal members often moderate themselves during normal posting, and we also do. That is normal human behavior.That is correct.
The reason I have brought up the subjectivist vs objectivist at all was because often we have comments made that suggest that measurements will misguide a designer. I have always been careful to say that both approaches are required. In other words, I try to be inclusive as much as possible, taking the middle of the road approach if you will. If you read my posts, I think you will agree that this is my message. I have repeated it several times. over the years.
All,
One thing that bothers me to some extent are the comments that people are banned for making some statements. The risk of being banned is actually very, very small. In fact, any person who works hard enough to bring this about will know that this action is a possibility, and they even work harder to bring this about. Also, this action requires a lot of involvement from all the other moderators and it isn't something we take lightly.
So let's just drop this reference. It's just a dramatic statement that serves no purpose at all. Scaremongering.
-Chris
john curl said:
Hi John,
If you think of it as an attack, I can't help that. It was a response by me to some very inappropriate innuendo by you. You were actually questioning my motives in trying to carry on a sincere exchange with Charles. When you do stuff like that, you are going to get called on it. That is all that happened. You should not whine about being called on something when you engage in that kind of behavior.
I have never attacked your honesty. However, I will say that one of my most sensitive instruments is my BS detector, and you do pin the needle quite frequently. In any case, there was zero information in your innuendo, so there was no possibility of there being an issue about honesty.
Now we come to the sincerity part. I WAS indirectly questioning your sincerity in my replies to those posts of yours. I make no apology for it. I think your posts were indeed insincere. I think that the manipulative innuendo you embeeded in those posts was insincere.
My quest for information and clarification from Charles was sincere, and he was a gentleman in responding to it. You would do well to take a page out of his book.
Bob
Help, moderator, his BS detector is working!
For the record, I never BS! It is useless to do so, and I am not being paid or forced into a position to do so. I may be WRONG, sometimes, but not for lack of my trying to state everything that I say accurately. You may 'call me out of my name', but I have some experience with you, over the last 29 years, and I am not alone in my evaluation of your intent.
For the record, I never BS! It is useless to do so, and I am not being paid or forced into a position to do so. I may be WRONG, sometimes, but not for lack of my trying to state everything that I say accurately. You may 'call me out of my name', but I have some experience with you, over the last 29 years, and I am not alone in my evaluation of your intent.
Hi John,
Yes, Walt is one of those people who really knows what he is talking about. So is Scott I imagine, he's certainly not one I would call into question.
John, Bob,
I know you two fellows disagree on a very basic level. You have for many years from my understanding. Can we accept that and move on? The two of you will never agree.
I also suspect that you two are overly sensitive to each other's remarks. If there is something going on, we don't need to know your business.
Let's keep the personal remarks restricted to phone conversations and personal email.
-Chris
Yes, Walt is one of those people who really knows what he is talking about. So is Scott I imagine, he's certainly not one I would call into question.
John, Bob,
I know you two fellows disagree on a very basic level. You have for many years from my understanding. Can we accept that and move on? The two of you will never agree.
I also suspect that you two are overly sensitive to each other's remarks. If there is something going on, we don't need to know your business.
Let's keep the personal remarks restricted to phone conversations and personal email.
-Chris
There is much more to transformers than meets the eye, or anything dealing with magnetics.
How the cores are stamped affects efficiency.
The direction the cores are assembled; when the laminations are stamped one side of the edge is a clean cut and the other side will be rolled over some.
Are the laminations used in the transformer being tested, stamped from a clean knife or one that's stamped half a million laminations already.
Did the laminations get assembled directly after being annealed or did they sit on a shelf for a year in a high temp, high humidity environment.
Are the laminations annealed? Are half the lams annealed properly and the other half not annealed properly.
The list goes on and I haven't said anything about core material, type of core or any issues dealing with the windings. I've seen all these issues in the real world and more.
Anyways, it doesn't surpries me that one can hear and/or measure differences in transformers.
How the cores are stamped affects efficiency.
The direction the cores are assembled; when the laminations are stamped one side of the edge is a clean cut and the other side will be rolled over some.
Are the laminations used in the transformer being tested, stamped from a clean knife or one that's stamped half a million laminations already.
Did the laminations get assembled directly after being annealed or did they sit on a shelf for a year in a high temp, high humidity environment.
Are the laminations annealed? Are half the lams annealed properly and the other half not annealed properly.
The list goes on and I haven't said anything about core material, type of core or any issues dealing with the windings. I've seen all these issues in the real world and more.
Anyways, it doesn't surpries me that one can hear and/or measure differences in transformers.
john curl said:You forgot the:
No I did not forget the Pinocchio.
It was not meant as a “long nose” answer.
Just read your own posts and see how you behave when you are addressing other respected members.
Hi,
Chris has apologised to me both publicly and privately, which is very gracious of him, and I accept in full his kind and thoughtful words.
I honestly did not seek any such apology, but I did sincerely hope that perhaps drawing attention to some unfortunate points (which I believed were relevant to make) might just help to dissuade some others from apparently and regularly criticising 'out of hand' those posters who are *not only concerned with measurements*, which any other sensible individual in this field attempting to improve their audio systems must surely appreciate *are also as vitally important* as any listening trials/experiments, as of course do I.
For the vast majority of those posting here this comment doesn't apply, so please don't take exception to what I say here.
I guessed that there had to be some misunderstandings here, partly (and entirely unwittingly in my opinion) due to a very minor slip (one letter added unfortunately, that is all) in Charles' earlier posting which when read quickly altered what I am sure he intended to say. However, I still believe that this would have been less likely to have occurred if all Members would simply give others a fair chance in this thread whether they understand or agree with what is posted or not, and not immediately (over?)react with such enthusiasm.
Personally, I am also extremely sorry that such a daft situation arose at all, and that at least in part I was responsible for any time-wasting off-topic unpleasantness, but I can assure everyone that I had no intentions that this should happen.
Maybe everyone involved, including myself, has learned something worthwhile from this, and I do also sincerely hope that this will not arise again. It makes life unbearable in my view, and for no sane reason. In my earlier posting I willingly acknowledged the almost impossible tasks faced by Moderators on such a large forum as this, I meant what I said then, and it is to my regret that my intentions might have been misinterpreted.
Please, just let us all give each other a chance to have their say and not automatically dismiss their comments, as I for one am still learning from what I see here on occasions, and with life being so short (especially at my age!) sharing experiences is extremely valuable to many of us, even though many others don't perhaps hold similar views. 🙂
Regards,
Chris has apologised to me both publicly and privately, which is very gracious of him, and I accept in full his kind and thoughtful words.
I honestly did not seek any such apology, but I did sincerely hope that perhaps drawing attention to some unfortunate points (which I believed were relevant to make) might just help to dissuade some others from apparently and regularly criticising 'out of hand' those posters who are *not only concerned with measurements*, which any other sensible individual in this field attempting to improve their audio systems must surely appreciate *are also as vitally important* as any listening trials/experiments, as of course do I.
For the vast majority of those posting here this comment doesn't apply, so please don't take exception to what I say here.
I guessed that there had to be some misunderstandings here, partly (and entirely unwittingly in my opinion) due to a very minor slip (one letter added unfortunately, that is all) in Charles' earlier posting which when read quickly altered what I am sure he intended to say. However, I still believe that this would have been less likely to have occurred if all Members would simply give others a fair chance in this thread whether they understand or agree with what is posted or not, and not immediately (over?)react with such enthusiasm.
Personally, I am also extremely sorry that such a daft situation arose at all, and that at least in part I was responsible for any time-wasting off-topic unpleasantness, but I can assure everyone that I had no intentions that this should happen.
Maybe everyone involved, including myself, has learned something worthwhile from this, and I do also sincerely hope that this will not arise again. It makes life unbearable in my view, and for no sane reason. In my earlier posting I willingly acknowledged the almost impossible tasks faced by Moderators on such a large forum as this, I meant what I said then, and it is to my regret that my intentions might have been misinterpreted.
Please, just let us all give each other a chance to have their say and not automatically dismiss their comments, as I for one am still learning from what I see here on occasions, and with life being so short (especially at my age!) sharing experiences is extremely valuable to many of us, even though many others don't perhaps hold similar views. 🙂
Regards,
Bobken, an intellectual shield is necessary to fend off random attacks. Please continue to contribute.
Transformer polarity has been understood for as long as there have been transformers. The primary winding goes on first with the secondary over it. When the primary in connected one way, the neutral is wound closest to the core. The other way, the hot is nearest the core. The leakage is different because the potential is different. This only applies to one hot and one neutral mains connections. US type 220VAC is different.
This can easily be measured with a digital meter. Connect one lead to ground and the other to the transformer frame. If the transistor has been varnished you will need to cut through the varnish to make an electrical connection. Check the AC voltage with the transformer primary wired each way. One way will be high and one low.
For toroidal transformers (no metal exposed), simply place a sheet of metal under the transformer and measure between that and ground.
It is not necessary to load the transformer for this test. Use the polarity that shows the lowest voltage reading.
This can easily be measured with a digital meter. Connect one lead to ground and the other to the transformer frame. If the transistor has been varnished you will need to cut through the varnish to make an electrical connection. Check the AC voltage with the transformer primary wired each way. One way will be high and one low.
For toroidal transformers (no metal exposed), simply place a sheet of metal under the transformer and measure between that and ground.
It is not necessary to load the transformer for this test. Use the polarity that shows the lowest voltage reading.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.