Industrial Controls are not exempt. At least not if you want to ship anything the the EU.
IIRC, we came into compliance around 2004.
Well after Dick Tracy went to the Moon with superconducting magnets, and the subsequent cover up...... 🙂
Dick tracy was nothing but fantasy.
A watch that can work as a videophone...yah right. Like that'll ever happen.
jn
Looks like we need a little battle about definitions, 😉 ... accuracy, eh, - okay, what does the Good Book say ...
Wikipedia:
Okay, it's down to "true value" then - and what's that? What the calibration of the studio equipment and cameras happens to be, and what the television executives have decided as being optimum, to make sure that people who switch to their channel see a bit more "punch", perhaps?
For me, it means things that I can see simultaneously on TV and everywhere else in my environment, at that moment, match in colour balance - the same type of tree outside my window that I can see on TV at that instant match, they give out the same colour balance. If the show producer wants me to see a really brownish tree, because they want to emphasise dryness, or a really pale tree, because they want to project an olde worlde patina - that's fine too, because it quite obviously has been doctored to for an effect - I'm "get" it, but I'm not being 'fooled', 😉.
Sound on audio systems is mostly inaccurate, because it is easy to hear the flaws - I know they're flaws because I've heard the particular recordings playing with these obvious flaws missing. When something is wrong, it will always be wrong no matter how you try to spin it - playing games about my measuring stick being bigger than yours is not going to help in the slightest.
Last edited:
Image skewing occurs because one channel is more accurate, 😀, than the other at that moment. An audio friend I had quite a few sessions with some years ago had this happening on and off a number of times - quite disconcerting feeling one's hearing being dragged somewhat chaotically off-centre like this. The issues were that he was intensely tweaking at the time, and he hadn't balanced the changes between left and right - exactly like a car's front tyres being different types, or widely mismatched pressures.
Last edited:
Just to repeat, for those those who still haven't picked this up yet - my days of doin' lots of things are gone, I managed to cook my brain in the software world - and I have to take ... things ... real ... slow ... now. Which is why I don't get into the technical hurly burly that goes on here - my brain would explode, or at least it feels like that, if I had to seriously soak it up. That's just the way it is, it's tough titties time I'm afraid ...
I would term it less inaccurate.😉
Before I 'discovered' directionality, yes, I did not take care in which direction cables got replugged/reconnected.
This caused me grief, lost time and uncertain modding results because inadvertently I was changing more than one variable at a time.
By throwing this extra variable into the equation I was obscuring/confusing subjective test results......I now know better, much better.
By definition stereo replay/recording requires that both channels be identical, and if they are not this skewing or lack of image centering occurs.
Many recordings suffer channel level imbalance and gain change of one channel wrt the other channel by as little as 0.25 or 0.5 dB snaps centre image into focus.
Perceived power suffers also when channels gains/levels are not correctly matched.
The gain tracking of typical stereo volume controls is quite inadequate.
Alps 'blue' controls are better than most but still not very good really.
Switched volume control/attenuators or electronic volume controllers with resolution of 0.5 dB or less are required imo.
That's just stupid, really stupid. 🙄
Dan.
Wasn't intentional, just in the haste of making changes just not quite enough care was taken in doing things - in this audio game one can get carried away in a gush of enthusiasm, from the feedback that one's actions are making very positive advances ... a tendency to overcook at times ... 😉.
As you say, it's a major headache keeping track of the parameters that are really being changed, the combinations spiral out of control very easily ... go the tortoise, not the hare, 😎.
Sure, I have made two or more changes to a circuit/system in the one operation, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse.
It can be most instructive to revert those changes and then reapply them in isolation one by one.
Dan.
Read what I said, I was referring specifically to audio cable manufacturers similar to the examples I gave, don't twist things or give me silly replies....
You don't get it though, we had this argument on another thread and even though many pointed out you cant set it by eye, you still persist in claiming your senses are that good you cant be fooled!
And you don't get that what matters is that the colour rendition is convincing, irrespective of what a measuring device says - if the device says "correct", but my eyes say "incorrect", then the device gets biffed ...
Even when it is your eyes (or ears) that are wrong🙁
I am sorry but you need reference points, you don't have any so all you are doing is tinkering and playing with no goal to aim for as you have no reference for that goal, the same applies to hearing as well as seeing, calibration sets a reference and removes the uncertainty of the eye (ear) to brain processing!!!!
I am sorry but you need reference points, you don't have any so all you are doing is tinkering and playing with no goal to aim for as you have no reference for that goal, the same applies to hearing as well as seeing, calibration sets a reference and removes the uncertainty of the eye (ear) to brain processing!!!!
As to the rest regarding cable directivity at audio frequencies, if true there must be SOME evidence however small, please present it (real evidence, not hearsay).
Sigh! I will say it again: T-line theory is unnecessary for short audio cables - the lumped single cell tells us everything we need to know. I never claimed that T-line cannot work, because I am well aware that it can be made to work. All I have said is that it is false to claim that using the T-line model provides new information for audio. If you wish to calculate the flight of a ball using Schrodinger instead of Newton then you may but you will gain no new information about its path. To use the former when you could be using the latter is not a sign of wisdom.jneutron said:
At last: you appear to have accepted what I have been saying all along. Unless, of course, you are merely quoting lucky and don't agree with him on this.
Anything correctly derived from the T-line model will also (N.B must also) appear from the single cell lumped model at sufficiently low frequencies. If not, circuit theory is not valid.
So, we all agree: the T-line, 201 cell and single cell models all give the same result for audio frequencies on a sufficiently short cable. Circuit theory works!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.