Trevor, I owe you this. Please study the situation, yourself, before coming to any conclusions. Bob and I have been at each other for 30 years.
john curl said:
I have studied it and I am very happy with the explanation that Bob has given. It makes perfect sense to me.
What is it about what Bob has said that you disagree with ??
Saying that you have been going at each other for 30 years doesn't add to the debate in any way.
You should be able to resolve it here and now. As an engineer myself that is what I would be doing.
regards
trev
john curl said:
It does match the math, the equations are easily solved. The listening experiences are probably the usual "everyone in the room".
What IS ironic, is that in 2 hours a tech will arrive and we will add precise EQ to a FINISHED phono stage design, prototype, fresh from Taiwan, to go into production, once I give it the OK. The IC in the front end of this phono stage is the AD797.
At the same time, Carl Thompson, the 'T' in CTC is in layout of a new power amplifier, with all the feedback in the world, comparable to a Quad 405 (but different) that uses an AD825 supplied to me by the one and only, Scott Wurcer, based on the 'ugly rumor' that it sounds pretty good, according to some.
Of course, Dick Sequerra and I talk 'nonsense' all the time. And so it goes!
At the same time, Carl Thompson, the 'T' in CTC is in layout of a new power amplifier, with all the feedback in the world, comparable to a Quad 405 (but different) that uses an AD825 supplied to me by the one and only, Scott Wurcer, based on the 'ugly rumor' that it sounds pretty good, according to some.
Of course, Dick Sequerra and I talk 'nonsense' all the time. And so it goes!
scott wurcer said:
And again, asymmetrical TIM is less audible for those in the room: the evolution taught us to ignore Doppler shifts...
john curl said:
It does match the math. As for listening experience, how do you know that it is even PIM that is in the amplifier that is affecting the sound? You have never measured an amplifier for PIM.
Bob
john curl said:
Are these the ones made by Wangine who are also a 3rd party manufacturer of audio gear for a lot of other companies ??
regards
Trev
stinius said:
Thanks!
Interesting paper, but why opamps were tested in inverting connection only, and with gain up to -10? Higher gain and non-inverting connection would demonstrate some more interesting pictures.
john curl said:
Hi John,
It's a shame that you keep poisoning a technical discussion by personal references like "Bob has been after Otala for 30 years". I have disagreed with some of his conclusions for quite some time, but it is wrong and unfair of you to accuse me of being after him. I have often given him credit in these threads where it is due.
It is also a shame that you keep bringing up that old TIM letter of yours, especially without mentioning my detailed reply to that letter. You waive it around as if it proves you right. Like so many other things you waive around, on further examination they do not come close to proving your case. Anyone who reads your letter next to mine can see who they wish to believe. I'll supply both letters to anyone here who requests them by email.
For those readers who are not familiar with it, that letter was a protest of the substance of my article in Audio that was titled "Another View of TIM". I think it is a good read, and it is available on my web site at www.cordellaudio.com. The letter John refers to was never published. I think that time has shown that the view of TIM that I published was a sound one that holds up well even today.
By the way, I did not "start" it. Many others came before me.
John, you have a lot to offer this community, but you shoot yourself in the foot by eventually poisoning almost every thread you join with personal stuff. If you can't win a technical argument with substantive contributions, please don't attack your opponent's motives or person.
You also need to understand that there is a difference between being blunt technically ("you are plainly wrong because of thus and such") and engaging in personal attacks, whether direct or veiled ("you're dumb because you have always liked NFB and you are out to get so and so").
Let's try to get back to a technical discussion here. I think that the PIM discussion raises a lot of interesting technical questions, even if you and I don't agree on many of its aspects.
Bob