expensive Cd Players

Hi,

Renegging on my own "good intentions".

Well, given that it took you six weeks or more (cannot be bothered to check) to find a basic equation on em fields and to mindlessly repost them and in the process misapplying them in ways a 1st year ee student would not, it appears the only scientist in memory to speak of who could have the right mentality to appreciate you would be Freud, definitly not Jung or anyone else of note.

It may come as a shock to you, but we do.

I never asked you for ANYTHING. To paraphrase you, you had hoped to learn from me.....

A corollary from the kybalion - "The lips of wisdom are closed, except to the ears of Understanding".

Okay. Here it goes:

"Why did you constrict your modifications to the Marantz CD Player you use to the analogue stage, given that the minimal possible use of a 100MHz 'scope reveals huge amounts of supply line noise in the digital section which invariably modulates the clock, thus inducing jitter, which, due to the propensity of the bitsream/delta sigma/time slicing DAC to fold above Fs jitter back into the audio band results in the classic "Marantz" sound which is strictly speaking a 'creative use of jitter artifacts'?"

Oh, and while we are it, illustrate why the equation you posted a few weeks back (I agree that it is mathematically/physically correct) in the cable thread has any bearing of consequence to the admittance of noise of any kind to a tightly spaced pair of conductors.

L8er T

 

Hi,

Funny, back in the days when I designed modular plug-ins for the system used by east german radio/tv we ended up using exceedingly complex mechanics and electronics to take a ten-turn linear wirewound rotary pot and make into a logarythmic sliding fader.

Of course, we did all that simply because we had no better past time and because actually spending three times on parts in a "fixed price" module (we did get the money back through back door charges nobody had to accept unless they wanted to) amused us.

You know, you should occasinally have an actual talk with your "friend" Tim. It might teach you a thing or two.

Past that, you might just want to try what replacing ANY pot (including the switched resistor ladder type one) with a transformer does....

L8er T

 

Actually, no I deliberately mistyped that equation. So why do you agree that it's correct ?

In any case, that was another thread. If you really want to restart that, then please post in the appropriate thread, and I'll answer.

The simple answer is that I don't have enough knowledge of digital electronics to carry out such modifications. My main interests are in analogue electronics.

 

probably because it is a well known equation that was sourced from google and he took a very quick look at it.?

why comment so strongly on a subject you admit to knowing nothing about?

what analogue stuff have you designed?
valve?
ss?

 

I do not even have a basic knowledge of electronics compared to 3D, but it seems to me he was suggesting a PSU upgrade. Not exactly digital electronics, is it? Besides that, isn’t digital electronics either on or off, so it is really not as hard to implement as analogue audio circuitry which has a subjective outcome. (didn't some wise dude say something to that nature?)

Okay I'm sure you are all sick of me posting in this thread by now so I will stop!

 

Actually, I allowed the mistakes as I often mistype myself (lysdexia?), so I took the mistakes as non-intentional. In fact, I barely even noticed them.

Regardless, quoting or misquoting an equation does not actually address the question I originally posed nor does it address the issue that a copper screen provides very little supression of magnetic fields at all.

So, would you kindly explain the physical mechanism by which a copper screen around a set of closely spaced conductors would disrupt external EM fields?

L8er T

 

Can we sort this thread out ourselves please, if some of the insults aren't removed I'll take them out, and we'll consider banning the perpetrator(s)

 

I appologise for any insult implied or otherwise, without reservation.

Also any offer's made were in good faith and still stands.....

I did not intend to cause offence .....I wrongly assumed if it was being thrown in my dirrection I could respond in kind....sorry

please accept my appologise for any offence caused and in the spirt intended.

I would of course be obliged if my previously stated questions
could be answered, these including........

What gear are you currently using ?

[Thats not too contensious is it?]

I suspect that everyone would feel better and understand a little more clearly, in knowing where Johnny is coming from to makes some of his more unusual comments.

 

I've deleted some posts that were either offensive or made reference to the posts. Sorry if any continuity has been lost

 

That speaks volumes!

 

Dear all,

First, I must apologise for getting wound up enough to loose my cool. My bad.

We, as a community here at ZG have to consider how we handle Johnny in particular. If anyone reviewed the thread referenced by Simon (Tenson) it should be clear how Johnny behaves, even if you never exchanged e-mails with him.

His principle is simple and time-honoured since Ghandi (who however unlike Johnny had a point), namely to provoke "the powers that be" (in our case the ZG community at large) untill they react.

Ignoring () does not work as he will simply push and pull untill he gets a reaction and in a large enough community there will be invariably someone who reacts.

As I see it, we have two options:

1) As community seek to marginalise Johnny as much as possible and put up with the remaining nuisance in the name of freedom (people like Johnny are the price of freedom)

2) Petition the Moderators to exclude Johnny from the community (which IMHO sets a dangerous precept but is defensible as ZG is "our sandbox" and not an area of unrestricted free speech)

I'd welcome constructive comments on this....

Ciao T