Bits is bits?

[mansr]

Just now, sandyk said:

 NO !

 You are the one that often uses "shorthand"  in your posts where other members often have to  2nd guess what you are trying to say, or even who you are referring to, or for that matter which post you were referring to. 

At least he's referring to something. You should try it some time.

[Ralf11]

Let me try and break it down for the Sandman and his lapdog too:

 

A says that B (his partner) has measured noise inside a DAC caused it being transmitted by USB cables

one or bot of A & B say that they will publish this info

a few years later, mansr asks "where is this info?" (he apparently doubts that it is possible or that it was measured - I don't know which)

mansr repeats this question periodically over the next few years

He gets attacked for asking that question

I point out that ANYONE can ask such a valid question

some austrailians act snarky perhaps due to BP issues and not reading correctly

 

 

[sandyk]

21 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Let me try and break it down for the Sandman and his lapdog too:

 

A says that B (his partner) has measured noise inside a DAC caused it being transmitted by USB cables

one or bot of A & B say that they will publish this info

a few years later, mansr asks "where is this info?" (he apparently doubts that it is possible or that it was measured - I don't know which)

mansr repeats this question periodically over the next few years

He gets attacked for asking that question

I point out that ANYONE can ask such a valid question

some austrailians act snarky perhaps due to BP issues and not reading correctly

 

 

Mansr is not being criticised for asking for measurements. He is being criticised for his nasty personal attacks including referring to John's designs (and other qualified members including Gordon Rankin recently IIRC) as Snake oil.

This is highly UNPROFESSIONAL behaviour.

 

[kumakuma]

2 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Mansr is not being criticised for asking for measurements. He is being criticised for his nasty personal attacks including referring to John's designs as Snake oil.

YOU are the willing lapdog !

 

If you've got a problem with someone's posts, just report it to Chris and let him decide what to do.

 

Otherwise, please STFU!

[Ralf11]

right, use the little blue letters at the bottom

 

 

also what are "qualified members"???   do they have to be australian, or what?

[fas42]

5 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

We don't need perfect isolation, if noise is 140 dB down that should be just fine.

 

Of course, you'd have to... measure to know that.

 

The problem, as always, in the audio world is that people are measuring what's easy to measure, and what looks incredibly impressive as a number - we're back to searching where the streetlight shines brightly, 'cause it makes everything so much easier to see ... 😉.

 

Technical types want numbers, and especially awe inspiring ones, to confirm their thinking - the smell of scientism wafts up far too easily; and inhibits forward movement - when people know things "ain't that simple", conflict ensues ...

[John Dyson]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

Which is something you have yet to do, because you haven't even tried designing one, let alone build it

 Yet you are very good at criticising the work of other qualified designers, even when they are members of this forum.

 

Just thinking about a situation where I would be requested to design a chip...   not very likely....

 

I am SUPER good at taking on challenging projects, but when someone is like me -- who can do other interesting things, MUST know their limitations.  if I was required to design a sophisticated DAC or any non-trivial chip, I would demure and quit my job if I had to.   There is NO WAY that I have the expertise to do it.   There is a huge difference between being expert at software or discrete analog circuitry, mostly in the bipolar/JFET world, and actually doing a chip.   There are individuals that I know who could have a chance of doing that kind of thing, but I have ZERO experience at that level.  Frankly, I wouldn't even consider doing any kind of chip -- all I could do is be a support or lead (depending) person on such a project. * 

 

* probably eccentrically, I have the attitude that a lead person on a project is also a support person on the team.

 

A person can be an expert in several areas, but it is so important to maintain integrity and know ones limits.

 

John

 

[Blackmorec]

10 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Let me try and break it down for the Sandman and his lapdog too:

 

A says that B (his partner) has measured noise inside a DAC caused it being transmitted by USB cables

one or bot of A & B say that they will publish this info

a few years later, mansr asks "where is this info?" (he apparently doubts that it is possible or that it was measured - I don't know which)

mansr repeats this question periodically over the next few years

He gets attacked for asking that question

I point out that ANYONE can ask such a valid question

some austrailians act snarky perhaps due to BP issues and not reading correctly

 

 

OK, fair enough. So ‘acid test’. Let’s have the fuse testing that proves that SQ improvements are hooey 😊

[Allan F]

On 10/18/2019 at 4:30 AM, mansr said:

The physics of bridges has been well-known for centuries. There is nothing mysterious about it.

 

This is really a meaningless statement. One could argue that the physics has been known since Isaac Newton.

 

What is important and fundamental to the issue is what is known about bridge design and engineering; IOW, how to apply the known physics to the actual design and construction of a bridge. The nature of the materials available for construction and relative costs also factor into the equation. I don't claim to be an expert on the subject but I do know a bit, having earned a degree in civil engineering a long time ago. New design challenges have continually presented themselves to allow for the construction of bridges with increasingly longer spans. Lack of proper maintenance has been a factor in a number of bridge failures. 

[Allan F]

27 minutes ago, Allan F said:

Sorry, duplicate post.

 

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, Allan F said:

 

This is really a meaningless statement. One could argue that the physics has been known since Isaac Newton.

 

What is important and fundamental to the issue is what is known about bridge design and engineering; IOW, how to apply the known physics to the actual design and construction of a bridge. The nature of the materials available for construction and relative costs also factor into the equation. I don't claim to be an expert on the subject but I do know a bit, having earned a degree in civil engineering a long time ago. New design challenges have continually presented themselves to allow for the construction of bridges with increasingly longer spans. Lack of proper maintenance has been a factor in a number of bridge failures. 

 

One would be wrong.  Newton did not study electro-magnetism relevant to electronic circuits.

 

mansr is correct, tho as several pointed out there can be some factors to take account of.

[Albrecht]

On 10/18/2019 at 10:30 AM, John Dyson said:

Well, I consider myself to have been swindled when a piece of equipment is sold as 'superior', and ends up being worse than a normal, good quality competent design.   Even if the snake-oil equivalent to a normal quality design, it is dishonest to claim superiority.

 

So, you *might* be  re-interpreting the sense of the term 'swindled'.   Maybe another equivalent word would be 'cheated'.   Of course, caveat emptor.

 

I might seem more negative than I really am, but not intending to hurt the 'swindled' individual, but instead I intend to help protect (caveat emptor) the prospective purchaser.

 

A mistake is a mistake, a dishonest claim is a swindle.   There is too much a pattern of 'mistakes.'   The only reasonable conclusions are incompetence when representing the product (not good), or taking advantage of those who don't know the truth (almost any vulnerable consumer -- including me sometimes), which is dishonesty...   Therefore -- swindle.

 

John

It's good that that never happens, - as we all know that with no "objective" (and I say this in terms of the fact that the so-called objectivists on these forums are not objectivist at all, but in fact, naysaying subjectivists), - claims being made. "This might enhance performance" is the claim made by high end manufacturers,  "try it and see if it works for you and your system: for it will never work on someone's sharp boombox."

 

If you don't like science fiction movies, - you are likely not going to like Blade Runner.

 

With the 6 or 7 troll posters here, - no amount of evidence presented will ever sway them. That is not science. Science is constantly evolving and changing with the presentation of new evidence. Instead of examinig the evidence, - the person who presents the evidence is vilified and demonized. This is especially the case with computing industry engineers who've come into the high end audio industry with ideas inspired by computing products applied to high performance audio. 

 

Likely these people are seen as "traitors" to entrenched, brick-wall, cult-of-personality people who are certain that everything presented will not work, - no matter the evidence to the contrary. This is not science, or scientific investigation, it is medieval Catholic Church style, blind, entrenched, "anti-reason."

 

Scientific investigation and discovery by its very nature requires an open mind, and directed questions. 

 

 

[Albrecht]

On 10/16/2019 at 3:22 PM, pkane2001 said:

 

Am I correct in understanding that using knowledge and understanding disqualifies one from being an audiophile then?

LOL... 

As if the 6 or 7 trolls here were not so entrenched that they'd actually engage in reason, logic, understanding and testing...

[pkane2001]

54 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

Scientific investigation and discovery by its very nature requires an open mind, and directed questions. 

 

An open mind devoid of knowledge and understanding is an empty mind. That's the last place I'd expect a new discovery to come from.

[kumakuma]

1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

It's good that that never happens, - as we all know that with no "objective" (and I say this in terms of the fact that the so-called objectivists on these forums are not objectivist at all, but in fact, naysaying subjectivists), - claims being made. "This might enhance performance" is the claim made by high end manufacturers,  "try it and see if it works for you and your system: for it will never work on someone's sharp boombox."

 

If you don't like science fiction movies, - you are likely not going to like Blade Runner.

 

With the 6 or 7 troll posters here, - no amount of evidence presented will ever sway them. That is not science. Science is constantly evolving and changing with the presentation of new evidence. Instead of examinig the evidence, - the person who presents the evidence is vilified and demonized. This is especially the case with computing industry engineers who've come into the high end audio industry with ideas inspired by computing products applied to high performance audio. 

 

Likely these people are seen as "traitors" to entrenched, brick-wall, cult-of-personality people who are certain that everything presented will not work, - no matter the evidence to the contrary. This is not science, or scientific investigation, it is medieval Catholic Church style, blind, entrenched, "anti-reason."

 

Scientific investigation and discovery by its very nature requires an open mind, and directed questions. 

 

 

 

Can you share with us your qualifications for lecturing on the nature of science?

[kumakuma]

2 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

An open mind devoid of knowledge and understanding is an empty mind. That's the last place I'd expect a new discovery to come from.

 

Exactly!

 

If we take our friend's argument to its logical extreme, we would have research into the claims of this Australian naturopath:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/oct/03/naturopath-who-said-bicarbonate-soda-cures-cancer-banned-for-life-by-health-watchdog

 

Quote

A naturopath who told vulnerable clients that their cancer was a fungus that could be cured with bicarbonate soda rather than through conventional medical treatment has been barred from practising for life, according to the New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission.

 

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

It's good that that never happens, - as we all know that with no "objective" (and I say this in terms of the fact that the so-called objectivists on these forums are not objectivist at all, but in fact, naysaying subjectivists), - claims being made. "This might enhance performance" is the claim made by high end manufacturers,  "try it and see if it works for you and your system: for it will never work on someone's sharp boombox."

 

If you don't like science fiction movies, - you are likely not going to like Blade Runner.

 

With the 6 or 7 troll posters here, - no amount of evidence presented will ever sway them. That is not science. Science is constantly evolving and changing with the presentation of new evidence. Instead of examinig the evidence, - the person who presents the evidence is vilified and demonized. This is especially the case with computing industry engineers who've come into the high end audio industry with ideas inspired by computing products applied to high performance audio. 

 

Likely these people are seen as "traitors" to entrenched, brick-wall, cult-of-personality people who are certain that everything presented will not work, - no matter the evidence to the contrary. This is not science, or scientific investigation, it is medieval Catholic Church style, blind, entrenched, "anti-reason."

 

Scientific investigation and discovery by its very nature requires an open mind, and directed questions. 

 

 

 

stop calling people who know more than you trolls

 

you also know nothing whatsoever about scientific research, so that is another area to STFU and avoid em-bare ass ment

 

[Ralf11]

53 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Can you share with us your qualifications for lecturing on the nature of science?

 

I am also interested to hear this, but as with Blackmorec I doubt it will be answered

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

An open mind devoid of knowledge and understanding is an empty mind. That's the last place I'd expect a new discovery to come from.

 

You keep assuming that these kinds of reports come from those with no knowledge or understanding  of the subject ( not necessarily to E.E. or S/W people standards)

 Please excuse me while I go back to installing in my DIY DAC the latest version of the ultra low noise Jung Regulator which is currently being developed by Walt Jung in association with an E.E. friend of mine, who provided Walt with the new PCB that he is using.

 I have already found that the tolerance of the LM329 6.9V reference (in this case100mV higher) greatly influences the Output voltage to an unexpected degree, in fact 500mV higher than expected on BOTH +VE and -VE supply rails.

[fas42]

This is not a science issue - it's an integrity issue. The best design in the world will fail, if the implementation is poorly executed - to my eyes, nearly audio systems are full of subtle weaknesses, which are not given sufficient attention - they add up, to produce the type of sound that people recognize immediately as being sub-par. Rectifying each of the 'mistakes', poor choices - one by one - brings one closer to a setup which is adequately 'sorted' - the "magic" happens when the mind doesn't have to fight its way through, to discard sounds that it knows are not right, don't fit in.

 

So, desired SQ results, when the correct QA is applied.

[sandyk]

42 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

I am also interested to hear this, but as with Blackmorec I doubt it will be answered

 

Can you share with us your qualifications for lecturing us on the subject of Electronics ?

[kumakuma]

Just now, sandyk said:

 

Can you share with us your qualifications for lecturing on the subject of Electronics ?

 

Has he ever done that?

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, kumakuma said:

 

Has he ever done that?

 You must have jumped in within seconds before I corrected my post .

Quote

Can you share with us your qualifications for lecturing us on the subject of Electronics ?

.

[mansr]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

You must have jumped in within seconds before I corrected my post .

Quote

Can you share with us your qualifications for lecturing us on the subject of Electronics ?

Has he ever done that?

[kumakuma]

2 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 You must have jumped in within seconds before I corrected my post .

.

 

Doesn't change my response.

 

When has he lectured us on electronics?