Beating the Dead Horse
Ok, so let's beat the horse back to live:
This evening I closed the chassis for the clock project - meaning everything works fine now. I tested everything with my bench DAC which is a RPI with the FiFoPi from Ian Canada. The clock is going to the sinePI squarer from Ian.
There was one problem though with the automatic switching. For that I need the L/R clock signal to determine the FS rate. I thought I could pick this from the NON-Isolated side on the FIFOPI - well.... wrong
.... The problem was solved though by picking the L/R signal directly from the GPIO at the RPI....
tomorrow I will get the clock signals and FS signal connected to my Audio Rack DAC and will be able to do (finally) the listening review on the doublers when yes or no in series with the basic clock.
below are some pictures of the current state of work
.
Ok, so let's beat the horse back to live:
This evening I closed the chassis for the clock project - meaning everything works fine now. I tested everything with my bench DAC which is a RPI with the FiFoPi from Ian Canada. The clock is going to the sinePI squarer from Ian.
There was one problem though with the automatic switching. For that I need the L/R clock signal to determine the FS rate. I thought I could pick this from the NON-Isolated side on the FIFOPI - well.... wrong
.... The problem was solved though by picking the L/R signal directly from the GPIO at the RPI.... tomorrow I will get the clock signals and FS signal connected to my Audio Rack DAC and will be able to do (finally) the listening review on the doublers when yes or no in series with the basic clock.
below are some pictures of the current state of work
.
Attachments
True, but nevertheless the flies are attracted. Oh, and there is no such thing as bad publicity.
> Well, that's your opinion and not surprising, given your afflation.
> Claims were made, questions were asked, dancing ensued without answers. Period.
Hardware was developed, hardware was built, real hardware was measured, no one
complained, both of those who had it and those who got it. And the results were
Ferrari style when Dacia would have done. Top notch, also verified by others.
Was there a single case where one of the group buy people complained that he paid
too much or got less than he expected?
> The only muddying that occurred were attempts to not answer reasonable questions.
> I would say that everything has been talked about. Others did technical research
> for your group and you didn't like what the results were. Okay, fine.
Who should that have been, doing research for this thread other than Andrea, Roberto
and occasionally 2 or 3 other people, injecting facts?
You? Do you really think that you are qualified discussing top notch crystal oscillator
design from the experience you gained from watching eye diagrams on broken
CD players, as you wrote?
Or syn08, who found late in the discussion that his position was lost without PN
measuring capability and promptly bought 30 year old garbage without cross correlation,
and immediately presented unphysical garbage like 100 MHz/100Hz/-160 dBc from
an average mass production oscillator?
> But if you are going to claim anything about confusion, take onus for your own actions.
Who is that you are talking about? Joseph? For duplicating the results on a completely
different machine? Do you know his daytime job?
> If you couldn't get your point across after 5040 posts now, just how long do you think
> it would take?
50000, like the sh*tty ego surfing thread of JC, part 1, 2, 3? (no, no, not Jesus)
> This is now a dead horse.
Yes, you and your's killed it, and now it's food for the blowflies.
You may return now to your usual diet of op amp rolling, p-channel fet matching
and dielectric absorption. The owner of this place will be proud on you, eh, maybe?
Gerhard
> Claims were made, questions were asked, dancing ensued without answers. Period.
Hardware was developed, hardware was built, real hardware was measured, no one
complained, both of those who had it and those who got it. And the results were
Ferrari style when Dacia would have done. Top notch, also verified by others.
Was there a single case where one of the group buy people complained that he paid
too much or got less than he expected?
> The only muddying that occurred were attempts to not answer reasonable questions.
> I would say that everything has been talked about. Others did technical research
> for your group and you didn't like what the results were. Okay, fine.
Who should that have been, doing research for this thread other than Andrea, Roberto
and occasionally 2 or 3 other people, injecting facts?
You? Do you really think that you are qualified discussing top notch crystal oscillator
design from the experience you gained from watching eye diagrams on broken
CD players, as you wrote?
Or syn08, who found late in the discussion that his position was lost without PN
measuring capability and promptly bought 30 year old garbage without cross correlation,
and immediately presented unphysical garbage like 100 MHz/100Hz/-160 dBc from
an average mass production oscillator?
> But if you are going to claim anything about confusion, take onus for your own actions.
Who is that you are talking about? Joseph? For duplicating the results on a completely
different machine? Do you know his daytime job?
> If you couldn't get your point across after 5040 posts now, just how long do you think
> it would take?
50000, like the sh*tty ego surfing thread of JC, part 1, 2, 3? (no, no, not Jesus)
> This is now a dead horse.
Yes, you and your's killed it, and now it's food for the blowflies.
You may return now to your usual diet of op amp rolling, p-channel fet matching
and dielectric absorption. The owner of this place will be proud on you, eh, maybe?
Gerhard
Last edited:
Guess whom I had in mind with the blowflies?
Typical trolls who add nothing to the hard facts, but poison everything?
Last edited:
So Andreas "DIY partner" is posting in this thread, thanks for the clue, you must know more than you are willing to admit. Should I guess what Roberto's nickname is?
I hope you have solid facts supporting your shameless false claims. I will not stop otherwise.
You are lying about my status.
I have declared on different occasions, that I am not affiliated in any way with Andrea.
I have bought his designs offered in the group buy.
I have paid hard money for it.
Given my interest extending much more backwards that Your newfound business aspirations, I had used my tools at my disposal to test it.
On the other hand Gerhard is completely right.
This is a very interesting aspect about You.
Together with your sudden offer/disponibility to 'fill the gap' in services regarding Laptech crystals.
So tell us about your (plural) plans about beating dead horses.
If it is such a worthless topic and activity, how come it was worth only some thousand dollars for You, to invest in a hurry?
All the best wishes, Joseph
You are lying about my status.
I have declared on different occasions, that I am not affiliated in any way with Andrea.
I have bought his designs offered in the group buy.
I have paid hard money for it.
Given my interest extending much more backwards that Your newfound business aspirations, I had used my tools at my disposal to test it.
On the other hand Gerhard is completely right.
This is a very interesting aspect about You.
Together with your sudden offer/disponibility to 'fill the gap' in services regarding Laptech crystals.
So tell us about your (plural) plans about beating dead horses.
If it is such a worthless topic and activity, how come it was worth only some thousand dollars for You, to invest in a hurry?
All the best wishes, Joseph
So you did some work on this project, and that entitles you to post, correct?
Could you please do me a favor and don't periodically edit your ignore list?
Hi gerhard,
Well, you insulted my experience without knowing me. Naturally I guess. I can assure you that my experience with CD systems extends far beyond "broken CD players and looking at eye patterns". I had more respect for you than this. Anyway, you haven't the faintest clue about my experience or abilities.
Just because you do not agree with someone does not make them a a troll. syn08 did in fact post technical information. If you don't like it, ignore physics and live in that world. I haven't read everything and don't care to, but others may have also posted helpful technical information.
People,
This is a dead horse speaking technically. Absolutely dead and decomposed. However, if you want to discuss subjective claims please go ahead. I'm fine with that. Try not to engage in character assassination. It is unprofessional and only reflects on yourself.
Well, you insulted my experience without knowing me. Naturally I guess. I can assure you that my experience with CD systems extends far beyond "broken CD players and looking at eye patterns". I had more respect for you than this. Anyway, you haven't the faintest clue about my experience or abilities.
Just because you do not agree with someone does not make them a a troll. syn08 did in fact post technical information. If you don't like it, ignore physics and live in that world. I haven't read everything and don't care to, but others may have also posted helpful technical information.
People,
This is a dead horse speaking technically. Absolutely dead and decomposed. However, if you want to discuss subjective claims please go ahead. I'm fine with that. Try not to engage in character assassination. It is unprofessional and only reflects on yourself.
You have absolutely no shame in lying and misrepresenting what was said. Since chances to see your pants on fire is zero, all I can say you are re-confirming the already obvious: you clearly have a vested interest in promoting Andreas products.
Set aside you missed the point of my post (I was inferring if he had no contribution, then why is he entitled to post in this thread?), you appear really knowledgeable about the who's and what's in Andreas project(s). Not surprising.
No, I cited you from upstream posts of yours. Any level of knowledge about CD
systems is no help here, and the idea that a time tagging counter can help at that
level speaks for itself. I was strictly limiting my opinion of experience for precision
oscillators.
The community of people specialized in that is small, maybe a few 100 people
worldwide. Without knowing the right people to ask and without the testing
infrastructure the learning curve will take no end. AFAIK Andrea asked Rubiola,
for example. One of the gods, I would not have dared to do that, for my tiny
problems in comparison.
I did publish on crystal oscillators in 1995 or so, in a ham radio quarterly and
their technical bi-yearly book. That was peer reviewed and I felt great.
But then, on the day-time job, I had to synchronize a hydrogen maser and a
Cesium, both in space (the maser is more short term stable but the cesium
is the law) with a DMTD system. Or measuring the flight time of photons
from ground to orbit / "my clock" in ps resolution.
I noted pretty fast that I had to learn, and the right people were in reach,
and the lab was superb. That took quite some years.
This is nothing where you can get any success in passing by.
I can say, I was mightily impressed how fast An/Ro got to speed.
And I repeat, I had no work on these oscillators. I do not know
the circuits, of no version.
All we did was swapping some infrastructure, like MTI-260 double
ovens or MiniCircuits parts.
Yes, wrong information. And it ignored physics.
And just watch where he goes. That's where peace goes away.
Last edited:
And now that you took the opportunity to praise your own career long experience as a RF/Microwave professional, can you please state what has this to do with audio?
Asking because beyond any technical questions regarding the implementation and characterization of Andreas product (which are perfectly legitimate<*>), the big question which was always snubbed, was "what does it do for audio"? Hint: nothing, zip, nada, jack ****. And "asking Mr. Rubiola" doesn't change this fact, but only qualifies in this context as what is in general known as "name dropping".
<*> Speaking about technical questions, I am sure the ultra low phase noise oscillators you sent on orbit to "synchronize a hydrogen maser and a Cesium..." were <$50 SC cut crystals dangling on a PC board like Andreas, and these oscillators were not subject to a guaranteed parameter specification, but otherwise suspended by rubber bands. You can search yourself and see how Andreas decided to answer to such concerns.
This is only an example, other technical observations from this thread are available upon request and also available via the search engine.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.