John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
OK, so basically you can find links but you have no real understanding of NMR. That's OK- until I had to learn enough to publish papers on it, my knowledge was superficial as well. At the point where you get interested, let me know and I can give you some good fundamental references. Actually learning the stuff is unfortunately more difficult than trolling, though, so be warned.



That's actually only a small part of the spread. The resonant frequency is a function of the applied magnetic field and can vary by orders of magnitude. It all depends on the sort of measurement you want to do.

You are welcome to change the subject. The issue was why that isotope of carbon was supposed to be magic in cleaning up noise.

I also did a bit of NMR work and know that a calibration is required for any useful data to follow.

I am pretty sure the power line filtering use has no reference or calibration. Be interesting to measure one to see exactly what effect the carbon coating really has. Of course it would need to be done at reasonable currents and loads with a typical test spectra.
 
The issue was why that isotope of carbon was supposed to be magic in cleaning up noise.

That wasn't the question you asked. Just to remind you, this time around, your meaningless question was:

So what is it's (sic) resonant frequency?

You followed that up with the meaningless question:

When I take the isotope and place it in an NMR magnetic field (sic) and switch the field (sic) what is the frequency of the resonant emission (sic)?

So, am I to conclude now that you have no actual interest in learning about NMR so that you can ask meaningful questions? Trolling does not become a man of your accomplishments. Or are you just indulging John's need for attention?
 
John, never mind SY, you just trust your ears. No-one in their right mind could expect you to launch a full scale scientific study of something that is not even yours by ownership or design.

Remember, ears are not too easy to fool to that extent. Not when they have like 40+ years of experience. You really need to understand your own work only because that's something you can influence in many ways, no more. And when various people, totally unconnected to the matter, react in a similar way, remember: if it quacks like a duck, if it paddles like a duck, if it looks like a duck, then it probably is a duck no matter what science says.
 
That wasn't the question you asked. Just to remind you, this time around, your meaningless question was:



You followed that up with the meaningless question:



So, am I to conclude now that you have no actual interest in learning about NMR so that you can ask meaningful questions? Trolling does not become a man of your accomplishments. Or are you just indulging John's need for attention?

No the first question was why 13C was different and you started by complaining I didn't do a superscript. You didn't mention the magnetic properties. Then I asked to see if you would get to the field strength vs resonant frequency. You again diss'd the question even ignoring the specific isotope issue.

I added the MRI magnetic field to see if you would home in, again you tried to move it.

The issue still is, does that carbon isotope have an effect when coating a wire that is useful or even measurable?

But go ahead with the diversions it seems to be your style.

BTY the MRI gear I used was so old the transistors were in TO-5 cans!

Should we continue about if there is any way to build a filter on the magnetic properties basis?
 
Last edited:
Carbon 13 has interested the life extension folks, but it seems corn metabolism enhances the ratio so corn fed beef and high fructose corn syrup have more C13. This seems a contradiction.
I have to agree . Corn feed beef is ok the antibiotics . steriods and growth hormones etc not so much . High fructose corn syrup is not recognized as sweetener by the body easily so way way to much is in the diet . Cheap calories and too many of them . This is a classic case of being fixated on a small item and missing the big picture remind me of around here many days.
 
You followed that up with the meaningless question:

My thoughts exactly, it wasn't just me then trying to get my head around these remarks.

My own BS:
I propose to the wider community replying to this thread that Technically the purest electrical source would have to be a generator with an infinite number of phases or one that produces DC without switching across windings, so it would be a generator which is a permanent magnet but also has a continuous winding spiraling around the central magnet so that current only ever flows through the wire in one direction (DC), because then we wouldn't need rectifying diodes, and if rectifying diodes are imperfect then we are really only listening to the diodes. That way we can have the purest power source for our audio signal which will be dependent only upon the quality of the generator itself and its noise generation.

I'm thinking maybe a donut or sphere toroid magnetic core with a central rotating point and windings that encase the outside of it in various directions.

I remember reading SOMEWHERE on this site that a particular person doesn't like capacitors, I can't blame him, I can tell a significant difference between Panasonic 3900uF Capacitors and Elna Cerafine 1000uF capacitors and I don't think that much of a change in sound characteristic is related to the change in capacitance values. no. I think its because the capacitor has its own physical and chemical characteristics.

So why are we using capacitors in the first place? Its because we need them, We need an alternative.

The big question is, what do we change it with?

Frankly I think that converting from AC to DC and then regulating is a messy and haphazard way to go about powering a circuit. And not one which has changed much over the years.

I think that all circuits should be regulated in AC using LM317's and then rectified and filtered only later right next to the chip.

The big question is, has it been done before, and if so then what were the findings. The idea is to remove some of the noise that the LM317 produces by putting it far away from the chips behind a large filtering capacitor and a diode. But as stated above this is still imperfect.
 
Last edited:
John, never mind SY, you just trust your ears. No-one in their right mind could expect you to launch a full scale scientific study of something that is not even yours by ownership or design.
When doing this audio stuff, and it really hits that supposedly irrelevant aspects of materials influence what's going on, it's not a good place to be - often it feels like navigating through quicksand, how the hell does one sort it out? It caused me to give the game away for many years, because the frustration of not understanding, not having decent control over the situation was too disturbing - I just went back to casual listening, midfi sound, and could relax about things ...

Then, inspired by a good sounding demo, slowly I got back into it, and make steady progress over the years. I realised there are no ultimate solutions, but in every situation the sound can be made good enough, and stably so, to have satisfying, convincing playback - the materials will always play a part, but just get the overall system behaviour to a high enough level that the remaining gremlins do not disturb the listening, and that is an adequate solution ...
 
So.. A Dynamo or maybe even better a spinning disc (like a compact disc) with a perfect magnetic field without any breaks in between and a spiraling coil underneath of it which goes into the inner track and back out to the outer track without any line breaks, except one, where you add the load.

http://www.edisontechcenter.org/generators.html

Its interesting to think but we may not even be having this conversation if Edison won The Current wars.

All we would need is a resistor and a capacitor to shunt that voltage and we would probably be still using valves but ones which use 70-300v with fragile filaments.

Semiconductors probably would've been made with far higher voltage tolerances.

Cats and Dogs would sleep together without the fear of a vacuum cleaner, etc.
 
Last edited:
High fructose corn syrup is not recognized as sweetener by the body easily so way way to much is in the diet . Cheap calories and too many of them . This is a classic case of being fixated on a small item and missing the big picture remind me of around here many days.
Essential reading - Death by sugar
Essential viewing - Sugar: The Bitter Truth

fructose-overload-infographic.jpg

Dan.
 
When doing this audio stuff, and it really hits that supposedly irrelevant aspects of materials influence what's going on, it's not a good place to be - often it feels like navigating through quicksand, how the hell does one sort it out? It caused me to give the game away for many years, because the frustration of not understanding, not having decent control over the situation was too disturbing - I just went back to casual listening, midfi sound, and could relax about things ...

Then, inspired by a good sounding demo, slowly I got back into it, and make steady progress over the years. I realised there are no ultimate solutions, but in every situation the sound can be made good enough, and stably so, to have satisfying, convincing playback - the materials will always play a part, but just get the overall system behaviour to a high enough level that the remaining gremlins do not disturb the listening, and that is an adequate solution ...
Yeah, I have been through very much the same experiences myself.
After a long process of elimination, I find correlations in system sounds due to typically used materials.
Once this is understood, any system sound can be changed at will.

Dan.
 
After a long process of elimination, I find correlations in system sounds due to typically used materials.
Once this is understood, any system sound can be changed at will.

Dan.
But, this is a bad place to go! The aim is get the system to a point where it has no "sound" or at least where the presence of such is sufficiently low level to not intrude, subjectively.

My experience is that if one is aware of a "system sound" then the corollary is that you always have "bad" recordings - ones whose characteristics are at odds with the audible system distortion artifacts, the latter emphasise far too strongly the particular negative aspects of those recordings. Eliminate or minimise the "system sound", and the pile of less favoured recordings dwindles dramatically ...
 
But, this is a bad place to go! The aim is get the system to a point where it has no "sound" or at least where the presence of such is sufficiently low level to not intrude, subjectively.

My experience is that if one is aware of a "system sound" then the corollary is that you always have "bad" recordings - ones whose characteristics are at odds with the audible system distortion artifacts, the latter emphasise far too strongly the particular negative aspects of those recordings. Eliminate or minimise the "system sound", and the pile of less favoured recordings dwindles dramatically ...
Agreed.
I'm sayin' that the system signature and therefore system can be made to disappear at will, and pretty much all music then sounds good.
This is at cable level, internal treatment takes things to the next level.

Dan.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.