Jocko Homo Audio

Audio Topics => Digital Audio Stuff => Topic started by: Gen. Dreedle on June 14, 2010, 02:49:08 PM

Title: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 14, 2010, 02:49:08 PM
But it has that Keystone Kops look about it:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168548-spdif-balanced-output-2.html#post2216611 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168548-spdif-balanced-output-2.html#post2216611)

The same buffoons, asking the same questions, and getting the same answers, they will never comprehend.

It's magic!

Jocko
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 14, 2010, 06:08:25 PM
You have made my head hurt.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 15, 2010, 10:15:34 AM
This will make it hurt even more!

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168648-about-jitter-help-math-guy.html#post2217419 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168648-about-jitter-help-math-guy.html#post2217419)

Looks like he is trying to say he has a 11 MHz oscillator, that only has  2 femtoSec of jitter.

Or is it 20-something femtoSec. In any case...............Keystone Kop alert! All it needs now is for one of 2 complete idiots to chime in, and make it more confusing.

Then, your head will really hurt.

Jocko
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 15, 2010, 01:35:05 PM
<sigh>
Title: Even more none of our business.............!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 19, 2010, 06:50:01 PM
Won't say who tipped me off (you will notice I never do), but the gang at The Pub are at it........

Again!

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/121861-homebrew-digital-sampling-audio-spectrum-analyser-14.html#post2209018 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/121861-homebrew-digital-sampling-audio-spectrum-analyser-14.html#post2209018)

Post #154 is most entertaining. If I didn't know better, I would think they are talking about me.

I gotta try harder to annoy some people. Starting with some git in Ireland.

Jocko
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 20, 2010, 06:30:52 AM
Wow.

Revolution and insurrection across the globe.

I don't like seeing our friend from Nova Scotia getting threatened, though.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 20, 2010, 06:35:28 AM
BTW...  Did you observe the interesting trend that is hinted at in that thread?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 20, 2010, 10:47:53 AM
Even more brilliance, at The Pub!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote
Yes they are sold to cut down signal levels - but not to cut down reflections; this is a physical impossibility. Reflections do not depend on signal levels, only on impedance levels. Make sure you terminate properly and there are NO reflections.

Quote
I very much doubt that the engineers responsible for designing these devices are failing to terminate them correctly. They certainly know more about engineering them than the average audio buff. It's simply a matter of arranging for the receiving end to have a resistance of 75 ohms. Hardly rocket science is it? It's also the way to correct the situation if there is a problem, not add attenuation to the interface at whatever point.

You can measure this at the receiving end with a DMM. It'll have to be very low for there to be a problem, and it won't be if the receiver is working at all. If it's too high, just add a parallel resistor to bring it down to 75R.

A friggin' DVM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This bozo gives us great insight to his experience level:

Quote
Originally Posted by jkeny
Ah, it's not this simple now! The zout of the SPDIF driver needs to be taken into account when designing the SPDIF output stage , including SPDIF transformer - this isn't simply a case of putting a 75ohm resistor in. The 75ohm impedance required of the circuit is not a static resistance measurable with a DMM!

Again, you are way off about measuring this with a DMM!


This is simply not true. I have experience of the design of RF circuits up to 2.4GHz.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

He does? How the 'eff does any of it work???

 >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

More of his "wisdom"

Quote
Just $12 down the drain...

And.............

Quote
Yes. You're mistaken in what you hear.

We had to go to considerable lengths with very fast rise times, a very expensive oscilloscope and long, long cables for a university lab demonstration of reflection in digital systems, so I don't believe you've got plots. Not in an SPDIF system.

Gee, I can see it with a typical transport, and Tek 465. What planet is this moron from?

Oh, the UK.........'splains everything!

Cross-posting makes everything better................just like putting Blue Velvet on it.

(I bet when you were a kid, you sang that with "Blue Vomit on it!" Didn't you? Yeah, c'mon.............you all did.)

Jocko, King of the Morons.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 20, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
In the summer between freshman & sophomore years in college, my room mate called me up in a panic one night.  The guy was distraught, which wasn't like him at all.  He lived about an hour from my family, so we arranged to meet at a hamburger joint.

Like me, he had a summer job that was one of those en-ga-near-ing things.  I'll leave the name of his employer out, mostly because it's so scary.

In the first three weeks of being at this, he had become totally freaked out.  After he managed to cover himself in ketchup at the burger place, he finally settled down enough to tell me why.  It seems he'd watched all that went on in the engineering department and in manufacturing.  The good news was that the people who ran the manufacturing machines knew their jobs.  The bad news was that the rest - meaning engineering and management - were barely competent enough to take a leak on their own.  (That's not fair, is it?  My friend never went into the ladies room to check on them.)  He estimated that less than 2% really knew what was going on.  The rest? 

This was an observation made by a kid who'd just gotten through his first year of engineering school.

The whole thing bothered him a lot.  He concluded that roughly 2% of the population had a clue and they were the ones who made everything work.  That seemed impossible to him, so he decided that the only way the world could function was through divine intervention.  So he started going to mass every day.

The above is 100% true.  The only part, aside from the ladies room thing, that may be in doubt is that I can't remember whether the place we went to was a hot dog place that served hamburgers or a hamburger place that served hot dogs.
Title: More 98%ers............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 20, 2010, 06:26:57 PM
Back when I worked at the big telecom company, we had a Sr VP of Engineering that was a lot like me. Short, mean, short-tempered, dictatorial, and well, no tolerance for BS. I liked him: everyone else was terrified of him.

I was watching Faux News the other day. (Who could imagine I would watch Faux News?) They were down in AZ, talking about the illegal criminal problem. They showed the Marine test range, down by Yuma.

Well...............

We put in a 2 GHz shot, for the range. We took an ITT radio, that was built for the railroad (low) 2 GHz band. We had to tune it for the Common Carrier (high) 2 GHz band. I was out, on medical leave, when the conversion was made. Not sure how the guys in charge did it, but they managed to chop off bits of the interdigital filters and matching networks, to get the damn thing to work. (It had problems, and by the time I figured out what was wrong, we had plans to put a MaComm radio in its place. Which is another story, for another time. It was a POC, of the highest order.)

Anyway, something came across my desk, one day. Something about R&D tax credits. We were supposed to show how much time we had spent on various "R&D projects", so we could get a tax break.

One of the projects......................."Unsuccessful attempt to modify ITT radio at Yuma."

Unsuccessful??? Hell, the damn thing was paying everyone's salary. OK, it had some problems, and I had just figured out what was wrong. (When they changed from low band, to high band, no one figured out some IF components worked on a different sideband. No one read the part of the service manual where it showed you had to reverse the polarity of the phase detector in the AFC module. No wonder it wouldn't stay on frequency!) So, I read through the rest of this thing, and realized it was not only wrong about that, but had lots of typos and grammatical and punctuation errors.


Hmmm.........no way this came from the Sr VP's office. He was a stickler for detail. But, it had his name attached. Not his signature, just name. And no mention of where to send it back to.

OK............I was not afraid of the "White Tornado", as he was called. So, I called him up, and asked what he wanted me to do with it.

He had no idea what I was talking about.

"Well, I had my doubts it came from your office. Too many typos, and get this..............'unsuccessful attempt at modifying ITT radio at Yuma.' I have parts for it, that I am fixing, in my hands."

Anyway, the boss didn't seem to care what I did with it, although I suspect he was intrigued when I suggested he look into who was sending out crap, under his name. Especially when he had no knowledge of it.

Did some digging............found the guy who wrote. Called him up. (He was in DC, with all the bigwigs.)

Started in by reaming him out for the Yuma gaff.

"Unsuccessful? Who told you it was unsuccessful? It is paying your salary, at this very moment. I know, because I am the guy who fixes all the parts. On top of that, there is no way this came out of ___ _______'s office, as he would not send out something with all these typos out. To say nothing of something that stupid. Not only that, but you didn't say where to return it to."
"Well, return it to me, of course."
"But I am down here in Texas. I don't know who you are. You better hope ___ _______ doesn't, because I just got off of the phone with him. And I don't think he was amused by all the screw-ups I pointed out."

The far end went silent. I think there was a "brown note", that was silent.

No idea what ever happened to him, but he deserved it, I am sure.

Jocko
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: tommy_t on June 20, 2010, 07:00:07 PM
Cross-posting makes everything better................just like putting Blue Velvet on it.

(I bet when you were a kid, you sang that with "Blue Vomit on it!" Didn't you? Yeah, c'mon.............you all did.)

Blue Bonnet margareeeeen, not Blue Velvet ;D.  And yes, we did say "Blue Vomit"!  Amazing how some of these universal phrases come up.

A relative of mine used to work for the highway department of a state government, and he once described to me a co-worker whose favorite saying was, "They pretend to pay me, and I pretend to work!".

Many years later, I was speaking to a co-worker, a brilliant Ph.D from Russia who used to work in academia over there.  When he mentioned that he worked at a university, I said, "That must have been fun".  Turned out he didn't like it at all.  Then he told me that one of his friends who also worked there used to always say, "They pretend to pay me, and I pretend to work!".  I started laughing like crazy, remembering the story of the guy who worked with my relative in the highway department.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 20, 2010, 07:41:27 PM
Well, when you hang out with depraved weirdos, like Phred, and he laments about the passing of Dennis Hopper, you can see why I had Blue Velvet on my mind.

Yeah, knew it didn't sound right. Blue bonnet........rhymes with vomit..........should have known.

Senior citizen moment.

The comedy at The Pub continues. We now have IM thrown into the discussion. More bloviating that all you need is a DVM.

I would fire that moron, on the spot, if he worked for me, and I read that crap. I especially like the way his sig spells "moron".

He should know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Takes one to know one."
"I'm rubber, and you're glue. Everything you say to me bounces off and sticks to you."

Jocko
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 21, 2010, 06:15:54 AM
With the obvious exception of this august establishment, I've not posted a single message on any forum web since the beginning of this calendar year.  I find that I don't feel any loss.  I also have observed that nobody even noticed.  A perfect match.  (See?  Attenuation really does affect the match...)

So, now I'm going to stop even reading most of the on line forums.  They've lost their value. 

Newbies, I understand fully.  In the end, they are getting screwed by the people they are seeking help from.

People who probably shouldn't be considered newbies, I don't understand.  But, I don't need to.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 25, 2010, 11:08:53 AM
They are still at it. Expert/moderator thinks the clock at the DAC is independent, just because he stuck one in once, and it kinda sorta worked. RF expert still thinks everything is matched, and 2 ohm mismatch on cable makes it a bad cable. Guess he never measured any.

With his DVM...............oy vey.

Jocko
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 28, 2010, 12:53:15 PM
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168901-rf-attenuators-jitter-reducers-18.html#post2229717 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168901-rf-attenuators-jitter-reducers-18.html#post2229717)

"Ask me a hard one."


OK.................

How  can you claim to be an RF engineer and be so friggin' stupid?

Give the man a life jacket. He is going to need it.

Jocko
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 29, 2010, 03:50:47 AM
Quote:

Dreyfuss: Idiot!
Clouseau: How was I to know he was the bank manager?
Dreyfuss: (Sarcastic) How were you to know the bank was being robbed?
Clouseau: That is correct.
Dreyfuss: What is correct?
Clouseau: I did not know the bank was being robbed because I was engaged in my sworn duty as a police officer.
Dreyfuss: You didn't even arrest the old beggar.
Clouseau: There was some question as to whether the beggar or his minkey was breaking the leu (law).
Dreyfuss: 'Minkey'?
Clouseau: What?
Dreyfuss: You said 'minkey'!
Clouseau: That is correct, yes. Chimpanzee minkey. So I let them both off with a warning.
Dreyfuss: The beggar was the lookout man for the gang!
Clouseau: That is impossible.
Dreyfuss: Why?
Clouseau: He was blind. How can a blind man be a lookout?
Dreyfuss: How can an idiot be a policeman? Answer me that!
Clouseau: It's very simple. All he has to do is enlist...
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on June 29, 2010, 04:09:30 AM
Quote:

Inspector Clouseau walks down the sidewalk. He encounters a man standing there with a small dog.
Clouseau: Pardon me; does your dog bite?
Man: Why no...
Dog chomps savagely onto Clouseau's leg.
Clouseau: AIEEEE! I thought you said your DOG does not BITE!
Man (totally deadpan): That's not my dog.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 29, 2010, 09:41:33 AM
OK, now we all know to sell all of our expensive lab gear, and just get more DMMs.

"Oh, bicycle repair man............how can we ever thank you?"

"No need to, Guv...............it's all in a day's work, for Bicycle Repair Man."

I think someone over there has been smoking way too much wackey tabackey. It seems to happen to folks who spend their entire adult life, hanging around at university. What else could explain such utter moron-ness?

(Maybe I should write "moron" in some obvious coded manner, just to show how intellectually superior I am.)

Jocko
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 29, 2010, 11:21:22 AM
I think you may mean moronitude.  Seriously.  Or enciphered, lnrnmftuka.

Y'know, this used to be a pleasant and fun hobby.  Perhaps that was because all of my interactions with fellow DIY enthusiasts were via the telephone or in person.

Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on July 14, 2010, 07:00:45 PM
Maybe we should take up a new hobby. Is it legal to shoot guinea pigs out of a cannon? Will PETA protest us?

Jocko
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on July 15, 2010, 05:01:57 AM
Too many jokes from this one...

http://thechive.com/2009/06/16/lets-get-a-pig-wine-drunk-and-shoot-it-out-of-a-cannon-16-photos/ (http://thechive.com/2009/06/16/lets-get-a-pig-wine-drunk-and-shoot-it-out-of-a-cannon-16-photos/)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on September 10, 2010, 11:13:36 AM
This shows the potential dangers of things like jelly donut cannon DBT testing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cfeTZNcA3g (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cfeTZNcA3g)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on September 10, 2010, 01:02:52 PM
SCORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is great. Not great enough to watch that retarded show, but might be the best waste of a good watermelon, since Gallagher.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on September 10, 2010, 02:46:19 PM
I discovered that while searching for previous art on DBT jelly donut testing.
Title: They are at it.............again...........
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on October 30, 2010, 02:32:50 PM
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168901-rf-attenuators-jitter-reducers-20.html#post2348531 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168901-rf-attenuators-jitter-reducers-20.html#post2348531)

Wish I was as smart as they think they are.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on October 31, 2010, 05:56:53 AM
Quote
OK. I sat and read every post in this thread. 200+ posts, countless hours of theoretical conjecture, and not one person other than the original poster and his compadre doing the excellent scope shots ever actually built and listened to the simplest and cheapest circuit ever proposed on DIYAudio.

Dunning–Kruger effect strikes again, but who is leprechaun's compadre???

Neverending story continues... (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/176303-spdif-waveform-analysis.html)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on October 31, 2010, 11:53:37 AM
"We must repeat................."


Quote
I wish I was as smart as they think they are.

Not sure how pads are going to fix ground bounce, poor supply rejection and bypassing, crappy layout, etc. But, they are welcome to try. They may actually learn something.

(Only if I post it first, so they have something to copy.)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on October 31, 2010, 12:20:18 PM
HA! Check out this turd:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Native-24bit-96k-USB-Spdif-I2S-Converter-DAC-/160473208269?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item255cf2d5cd (http://cgi.ebay.com/Native-24bit-96k-USB-Spdif-I2S-Converter-DAC-/160473208269?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item255cf2d5cd)

"1ppm accuracy of TCXO 12.0 MHz to provide the lowest jitter master clock."

Well, what can you expect? They are Chinese. The ol' accuracy=low jitter myth.

Wonder what the jitter goes up to, once it goes through a PLL scheme, to get the actual sampling rate? (No, not really...........I have a good idea!)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on October 31, 2010, 04:03:08 PM
Chinese marketing kvetch  ;)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 01, 2010, 04:53:00 AM
;D ;D ;D

Muppet show two ol' codgers Cartman & Snotgreen (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168901-rf-attenuators-jitter-reducers-23.html#post2350355)   
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 01, 2010, 08:38:42 AM
I saw that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yep, they hate us, so much, that they can not stop looking at us.

If they were as smart as they like to think they are, they would stop looking at us. But, they are too stupid to stop taking the bait, so we will keep baiting the trap.

"I love it when a plan starts to come together................"
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 01, 2010, 11:39:50 AM
I wonder if we should change our name to "Question Mark and the Mysterians"? (Let 'em Google that, for a while.)

Speaking of which.................I heard the true identity of MystereoN will be revealed in the next "Coon and Friends" episode of South Park. Guess we will all have to watch.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 01, 2010, 12:16:30 PM
South Park....identity of Mysterion or MystereoN?  ;)

(http://jockohomo.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=27.0;attach=68)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 01, 2010, 03:07:51 PM
I think the problem here is the lack of mud-slinging.  We'd do a lot better and be more highly regarded if we insulted each other more often.

Perhaps if we claimed to be from Mars and that we used to live with dinosaurs.  Or played in a Mexican band.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 01, 2010, 04:27:11 PM
C'mon, what we do is much worse.

There is a baseball player, used to play with the Strangers (I want to say it was Carl Everett), who believed dinosaurs never existed, and the moon landing was fake. He made millions of dollars, and we...................well.........we are just a bunch of bitter old white farts. Largely unemployed, and unemployable.

Yeah, playing in a Mexican band sounds real good, about now. Wonder how long it will take to master 2 chords? I might even settle for one, if it puts food on the table.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 01, 2010, 04:35:02 PM
Mexico....prefer olive skin busty latinas over snow white skiny blondes, they even sound different  ;D
But can difference be measured?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 01, 2010, 05:44:15 PM
? and the boys started as a Mexican band. 

Hey; do you think ? played for the Rangers?

Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 01, 2010, 07:55:28 PM
Maybe he should have.................their batting: yuk.

Not surprised SF pitched so well. They have done that, all season long. What surprised me was their sudden outburst of offense. At the expense of the Strangers.

On to next year..............
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 01, 2010, 07:55:58 PM
Mexico....prefer olive skin busty latinas over snow white skiny blondes, they even sound different  ;D
But can difference be measured?

Uh............yeah!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 02, 2010, 03:04:02 AM
WORLD PREMIERE: big bottom black latina Vs. tall skiny snow-white blonde (http://enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/1110/m2tech_hiface_evo_dac.htm)

Enjoy  ;D
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 02, 2010, 04:08:26 AM
Wow!  That was confusing.

What the fellow heard and reported was okey-dokey.  He likes what he likes and that is the whole idea of all of this.

The rest was what confused me.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 02, 2010, 10:55:06 AM
Back to the subject at hand. Wackey-tabackey took exception to this assertion:

Quote
I hope your kit is good enough to measure jitter.

Well, what can you expect, from an idiot, who thinks you can measure input Z with an ohmmeter. Not surprisingly, he has obviously never tried to measure jitter.

Or anything else, for that matter. Unless, of course, it can be seen on an ohmmeter.

Somehow, we are the deluded, and they are the enlightened. Truly amazing.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 02, 2010, 11:00:52 AM
Wow!  That was confusing.

What the fellow heard and reported was okey-dokey.  He likes what he likes and that is the whole idea of all of this.

Ok, you don't get it:

He knew what he was listening to. He knew what it cost. He knew what it looked like. He knew how much more he plunked down on a spiffy linear supply, and how much heavier it was than any wall wart (linear or switcher). He had preconceived notions of what to expect from batteries.

And you want us to believe it is ok to tell us what he heard. Surely, you jest.

"No, and don't call me Shirley."

OK, you should have seen that one coming. Still good for lots of mileage. Along with "I love it when a plan starts to come together."

Now, if he told us how good his $600 bottle of rotted grape juice tasted, well, now we have a whole new kettle of fish.

There is no hope, for some of us. Me included!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 02, 2010, 11:02:43 AM
Oh, I forgot to add something:

Quote
In any of these conjectures I could be wrong.

Uh, how 'bout "You are wrong."

Go back to playing with ohmmeters, sonny.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 02, 2010, 11:59:12 AM
"Ok, you don't get it"

I'm hearing that a lot lately.  I concede.

On the other hand, I think you are lying.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 02, 2010, 03:19:20 PM
What........me, lie?

Never. Merely using absurdity to demonstrate the absurdity, of the other side.

Hey, someone has to occasionally take the role of the opposition. If not to keep us on our toes.

Speaking of which.............I see one of my "buddies" (better use that term loosely), is now backing off his claim of measuring jitter. Only just the analog outputs! So, if he is not going to try to measure jitter, how is he going to show whether or not reducing reflections affects jitter, or not.

"It don't get any better that this!"

I don't understand why they all just don't go out and buy an MP3 player. It all sounds the same, once you strip away all of their reasoning.

But, rotted grape juice................now, there is a different subject! Can't go maligning their sophisticated palate, now, can we?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 04, 2010, 07:26:24 PM
Quote
Of course coming from Waki who believes that he can measure characteristic impedance with an ohmeter - enough said!

Post above is from the same person as post bellow

Quote
I'm looking to work out the impedance of the output stage using a multimeter

feel confused  :o
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 05, 2010, 04:59:39 AM
You are not being fair! You will note that our BFF (best friend forever) was going to try this, before we educated him.

He owes us more, than he will ever realize. And damn sure won't admit.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 05, 2010, 05:14:40 AM
yes, a lot of us owe you a lot. Me included.
No problem to admit this and say "Thank you".
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 05, 2010, 08:46:12 AM
You are welcome. Especially since you pay attention.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 05, 2010, 12:19:20 PM
Quote from: Gen. Cartman Lee
He owes us more, than he will ever realize. And damn sure won't admit.

this time....you are wrong  :)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 05, 2010, 12:20:26 PM
"No problem to admit this and say "Thank you"."

I think it's just a spelling thing.  Many people confuse than with fuc.  It's a common problem.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 05, 2010, 12:34:01 PM
I don't care what other people are thinking. This is their problem, not mine and they are not paying my bills ;D

Cheers!

(http://jockohomo.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=27.0;attach=74)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 05, 2010, 12:50:13 PM
Some folks have a strange way of showing how much they appreciate us.

isn't it funny, that the only person who isn't telling our BFF that attenuators can not affect jitter is............lemme guess................the guy who measured all of this, 15-20 years ago.

I have said it before, and maybe the pros weren't listening (well, of course, they weren't: I'm just as bad as The Devil), but all you have to do to get an idea if it has any affect is to listen to the PLL pin, on the RX chip.

Now, we will have to conduct a DBT, to determine if there really is a change in that nasty sound one will hear.

No, you may not be able to say that one is clearly better than the other. Just different. And quieter just might be better. Maybe. I dunno. How could I?

But, the point is................if it changes the way it sounds, it has to have some effect. Will it make any difference, at the output? I dunno. You don't expect me to do all of your work.
Title: THE BEST POST...............EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 05, 2010, 01:05:02 PM
Quote
Waki, I just want to say I hang on your every post. They are always interesting, contribute greatly to the community here - no matter what level they are at. Please please post even more in this and other threads.

Let's see.........this guy has shown how stupid he is...........how many times? And you want more!!!!!!!!!! Boy, you are in deeper doo-doo, than you can ever imagine.

Someone please donate a copy of The Art of Electronics, or something, to this poor sod. If his edification hinges on wackey-tabackey, he is in need of serious help.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168901-rf-attenuators-jitter-reducers-41.html#post2355524 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/168901-rf-attenuators-jitter-reducers-41.html#post2355524)

I will try to ignore that fact he lives in Ireland.............is that place trying to rival Sweden for the Idiot Capitol of DIY?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 05, 2010, 01:16:23 PM
I have to admire these guys' passion for what they are doing.  Or what they are arguing over.  Or...  I lost track.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 05, 2010, 01:23:38 PM
OK, now I know the guy is trying to be class clown:

Quote
I agree with you Waki: I think we should now have a new moderation, even legal policy that no-one can mention or describe a mod to any equipment unless they have documented, measured proof that it works. Listening casually should be met with ridicule, possibly should be a matter for criminal prosecution.

Don't give them any ideas! Because they will do this, if they can get away with it.

Especially the "criminal prosecution" part. (I better go into hiding, or the Witness Relocation Program.)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 06, 2010, 09:26:09 AM
WOW!

I see where our BFF was banned, at Head-Fi. Now, let me see.................wasn't he the same guy who claimed that I banned him, at Greaser's Palace?

After I quit, as mod. Yes, he was! Funny, but I was not aware that I was so powerful (and/or feared), that I could impose my will on some other forum, and get the same dispensation handed out there, as well.

Hmmmmmmmm...............not sure how I did that. I will have to look into it, and get back to you!

OK, back to the subject at hand............someone (from Sweden, no less!) asked the great question:

Quote
Why not prove first that an introduction of an attenuator effects the (a) PLL circuits control voltage.

Somehow, I don't think he got the idea, from reading this crap.

God bless you, sir. I take back most everything rotten I have ever said about Sweden.

At least for today.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 06, 2010, 10:11:22 AM
I think that's the transitive property of forum banning.

Possible answer to "why a DBT":

(http://blog.5pm.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/SwedishChef_muppet.jpg)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 06, 2010, 11:52:13 AM
Quote
Funny, but I was not aware that I was so powerful (and/or feared), that I could impose my will on some other forum, and get the same dispensation handed out there, as well.

Hmmmmmmmm...............not sure how I did that. I will have to look into it, and get back to you!

Perhaps you do have telepathic powers and ability to impose your will?
(http://www.crystalinks.com/movtelepathy.gif)

Should we wear tin foil hats to attenuate unwanted signals?  ;D
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 06, 2010, 12:16:46 PM
YES! Especially if you went to Lee Kounty Kow Kollege, aka, API, aka University of Auburn. Aka, "the 'barn"...........those folks are in serious tin foil hat mode, today.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 06, 2010, 12:19:35 PM
I have to admire these guys' passion for what they are doing.  Or what they are arguing over.  Or...  I lost track.

I think they have lost track, long ago. Yet, they continue to pretend they are accomplishing something.

If, by accomplishing something, you mean throwing mud at each other. And muddying up the situation.

"Isn't that what we are doing?"

No, we are fulfilling a different role............sort of like the "color commentator", on a sports broadcast.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 06, 2010, 02:22:03 PM
This could be the site motto:

"I don't have prejudice, I hate everyone equally." - HL Mencken

Color commentator?  I'm not sure how I like being lumped in with Howard Cosell.

Although...

"What's right isn't always popular. What's popular isn't always right." - Howard Cosell
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 06, 2010, 06:21:54 PM
Will someone please shoot that moron, over at The Pub............

Quote
I take great pleasure in reiterating, can have their termination checked with no more sophisticated apparatus than a DMM.

I don't know how he keeps his job. Anyone that stupid deserves their walking papers.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 06, 2010, 07:15:50 PM
C'mon.  I know you know the answer here.

Management.

Those guys have been thrashing through this for months now, haven't they?  My theory is that they are doing for the express and exclusive
purpose of putting you on.  They are having far too much with this for it to be anything else.   

I can imagine it now.  A bunch of guys sitting around in a pub (har har) talking about how they can irritate some guy 7000 km away...
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 06, 2010, 07:34:48 PM
Yes, but there are countless noobs, who will actually believe this moron. Then, they will show up at Greaser's Palace, and expect us to re-educate them.

Sorry, not going to do it.
Title: Hey, moron.................
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 06, 2010, 07:42:15 PM
Measure the input Z, of this circuit, taken right from the Crystal data sheet.

(http://jockohomo.net/data/input_1.jpg)

Take out the cap..............leave it in.............doesn't matter................you can not replace a 3577, with a friggin' DVM.

Moron. Do us all a favor, and shut up.
Title: Re: Hey, moron.................
Post by: MystereoN on November 07, 2010, 04:46:46 AM
Quote
Take out the cap..............leave it in.............doesn't matter................you can not replace a 3577, with a friggin' DVM.

It does matter...with DVM  ;D

With cap = open circuit, infinite resistance
Without cap = almost short circuit, 0.x R resistance

....and nothing else matters, everything is swamped by 110R resistor  ;D ;D ;D

Agree with Seagreen's theory, he is doing for the express and exclusive purpose of putting you on.
He can't be that stupid, if he wrote those articles (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/blogs/wakibaki/)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 07, 2010, 07:16:49 AM
No, I really think he is that stupid. Think about all the noobs, that will be damn near permanently screwed up. The mods are just as stupid as he is.

Look, all of these people, including 99.99% of the folks who design SPDIF gear are audio "engineers". (I use the term "engineers" lightly, as throwing in the likes of buttholes like Russ White into the mix brings the standards down quite a lot.) None of them know squat about RF. I bet a good number of them think the same as wackey-tabackey. In any case, how many do you think are smart enough to know how much an RCA, or long traces, or putting the termination at the wrong point, can really screw up reflections? Let alone whether it is important, or not.

A very well-known, and knowledgeable, transformer designer thinks you only need 15 MHz of BW. Will it work? Of course. Will it sound good? No! Now, I bet, on whole, he knows more than I do. But RF is not his field. They all tend to think of RF as just a mere extension of AF. "A few pF or so will screw it up? You're nuts", is their typical response.

(Never mind a few pF, on the VAS node can lower the BW of a power amp enough to where that pole is too close to the one of the output stage, and the gain margin may be too small for comfort. No, not to worry. Only a few pF. We can fix that by cleaning up the wiring. That is something different. Besides, only a few pF!)

No, I think he is the mainstream. If you had measured the return loss of as many DACs as I have (back in the 90s), you would know how dumb they all are. See, they just copy the Crystal data sheet. They see "transformer.................ok, it goes here.............some wire (twisted pair!), to a RCA jack.............ah, need 75 ohm resistor..............ok, put it next to transformer. Now............3" of PCB trace to RX chip.................there, done!"

Maybe a few know that the circuit will either be infinity, or short (depending if the cap is in, or not), but it is the same mentality. There is a 75R in there: that is the impedance. That is how they all think.

And some smart-ass then posts a circuit with an inverting buffer stage, in front of the RX chip. Remember all the wild guesses, on that one? Yeah, audio engineers.....................op-amp mentality. We all saw the answers they gave!!!!!!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 07, 2010, 08:14:58 AM
Yes, I see your point and almost feel your anger and pain. But you can't save them all, if they don't want to learn.
It is natural law, only stronger, smarter and those who are willing to adapt and learn will survive.
"The Truth is out there", they only need to search  ;D

During my army period, we were spying and listening to all Western and Eastern communications across Europe. Regularly spying on NATO bases and Soviet military objects. Once we received truck loaded with Russian gear. All manuals in Cyrillic and Russian language  >:( We need to learn Cyrillic alphabet in order to operate our gear. It was hard, but not impossible.

Yes, at that time, Berlin wall was still there  :)

Should be much easier for people to search for the truth if English is their native language.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 07, 2010, 09:10:18 AM
It's harder than just Googling.

I've dealt with this for a long time.  The following are absolutely true examples from places I used to work at.

"Why does this buried trace have such high loss?  It's only a few inches long!  Why does the return loss have that squiggle thing in it at 600-700 MHz?  Come on...  We had the impedance measured on this.  Look right here - perfect 75 Ohms, even better than the spec.  It was measured right at 1 MHz exactly."

"Waddya mean that this extra piece of insulation under the connector is affecting the match?  It's what?  .3 pF?  Prove it.  Never mind your measurements and those calculations you just showed me."

"Why shouldn't we use these 16 volt tantalum caps as bypasses on this 12 volt power bus?  That should be plenty of margin.  There must be something else going on for them to blow up like that."

The list could go on.

I think there's a couple reasons for this.

First, engineering is full of simplifying assumptions.  That makes it easier to teach and easier to deal with.  But just because you can often ignore these little details does not mean that they are not there.  As you try to push beyond the basics, these details mean more and more.  Just because something has been ignored for a long time doesn't mean that it has gone away or doesn't matter.  People forget this and end up debating dogma, not reality.  Germany is about 5000 km from here.  That's good enough for a lot of things.  But for a pilot who wants to land on a paved runway in Munich, "about 5000" km isn't quite good enough.

Second, much of electrical engineering today is taught through computer based simulation.  There the models mean everything and they are rarely perfect.  Far from it.  That's another example of simplifying assumptions.  But, people dink away at optimizing designs based on these inexact or incomplete models far beyond what the models and simulation will allow.  (Another variation of this is spreadsheets.  Somebody guesses that one parameter is about 50%, another is 33%, and pretty soon the result pops out as 21.77412677%.  And people want to believe it.)

Third, once upon a time when somebody began an engineering career, they were often helped by some guy who had been through all this 30 years prior.  Often this guy mentored the junior guy and taught him the ropes and what really is important.  That's long gone.  Older guys who don't move into management in most cases take on a special role in a lot of companies: Unemployed.  I swear that in a lot of cases that's because the management guys don't want anybody around who knows enough to pop their fantasy balloon.  That's why you get the products you get in many cases. 

People used to replace things in their house when the things either became totally outmoded, like ice boxes, or when they really wore out.  This has been replaced by products that get replaced regularly just for fashion reasons or because they sucked in the first place.  Consumers harbor the dream that the new product, designed by the same gaggle of idiots, will somehow be better.



"But you can't save them all, if they don't want to learn."

Very true.  I'm not sure it's worth even trying.  It just makes them angry.  In other words, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him scuba dive." 

I think somebody wrote a rock opera about this.


Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 07, 2010, 12:26:02 PM
Quote
I didn't come down with the last shower of rain you know. I been doin' this **** for years.

What? Making an ass of yourself, in public? This guy is seriously stupid.

Remember, this is the same moron who didn't know the effect the feedback resistor had, in a very real and simple circuit.

"Who will stop the rain........................?"
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 07, 2010, 12:41:34 PM
How to measure RF impedance, for morons:

Step one..............get one of these..............

(http://jockohomo.net/data/bridge_sm.jpg)

Step two................learn how to use it.
Step three..............remove head from arse.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 07, 2010, 01:30:58 PM
Step 5....................get something that you want to measure. Make sure that you kill the oscillator, or you will get garbage.

(http://jockohomo.net/data/duet_rl.jpg)

Step 6....................read screen.

(http://jockohomo.net/data/duet_screen.jpg)

OK, since this is a crappy picture, you will have to take my word that the return loss, at the following frequencies, is:

1 Mhz...........around -36 dB (Not bad!)
10 MHz.........around -22 dB (Hmmm..............can't be that ferrite bead, coming into action?)
100 MHz........around -3 dB (Yeah, it is that ferrite bead! Even RCA jacks can't mess it up that bad.)

Get your ohmmeter out!

Too bad the ferrite bead measures zero ohms!

Here comes the rain........................

(Step 4??????????? There is no step 4!)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 07, 2010, 01:44:41 PM
Slightly better screen shot. At least you can see the nomenclature.

(http://jockohomo.net/data/better.jpg)

Hey, I never claimed to know anything about cameras. Especially since this one is not mine!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 07, 2010, 02:09:46 PM
My gosh!  A network analyzer that doesn't run Winderrs!  However can you make it work??
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 07, 2010, 02:13:42 PM
See, it easy........just stick the right value resistor, read with DMM, and there you go.

Which, in this case, is a voltage divider, made up a 107R and 249R. Let's see.............74.84R. Gee, my ohmmeter must be right!

Hey..........wait a minute.................here is a Smith chart. Howcum it measures 3.1177 x 75R, @ 70 MHz? That is 233R. And resistive..............the reactance cancels out.............please, someone help me. I am so confused..............my brain hurts.

(http://jockohomo.net/data/smith.jpg)

(Yes, I know...........the photos look poor.........deal with it.)

So, let's see if I can do simple math..................(233-75)/(233+75) = 0.513, or 20*log(0.513) = -5.79.

Which is what the return loss is.

Hmm.............better get my DMM calibrated.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 07, 2010, 02:14:34 PM
If it ran under Windows, I wouldn't be able to figure out how it worked.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 07, 2010, 02:20:42 PM
BTW...............that little resonance "curly cue" is at 58.62 MHz. Damn ohmmeter..............let me down, again. Harder to see on the log scale, but if you blow it up, enough (1 db/), you can see it better.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 07, 2010, 02:44:56 PM
What's a resonance?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 08, 2010, 02:00:41 PM
Quote
And seeing as this thread has run it's course, let me suggest a DBT test in somebody's place that might be interested in hearing these two devices? I just suggest that you don't restrict the listening to one DAC & to avoid ASRC DACs if possible. If anyone is interested in doing this, I'm happy to pay for the shipping to them.

Any takers?

Our BFF is looking for someone to run tests. I think General is well equiped & experienced, maybe after all BFF will send royalty check attached ;D
Anyway, test tones can be found HERE (http://uploading.com/files/4b2m83b5/stereophile_test_cd2.zip/)

Complete package:
1 (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ULIPJW9U)
2 (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=FLPTOXXE)
3 (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=BR4HFH4Q)
Title: It keeps getting better and better............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 10, 2010, 03:54:18 PM
Quote
Because your credibility and appearance of sincerity are on the line...

This, from the guy who says you can measure impedance with a DMM. Someone please give this man a "do-it-yourself" lobotomy kit. It can't make things any worse.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 11, 2010, 08:49:12 AM
I think DIYLobotomy.com is available.  Hmmm...
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 12, 2010, 12:51:28 AM
Quote
I'm not really a hi-fi guy, I'm a musician, programmer and RF designer, now in enforced retirement following some serious illnesses.

Sympathize with him and wish him good health.

But RF designer, RF DESIGNER.....?? :o :o....aaaouch, I feel stomach ache.
My gosh, already searching for my juniper brandy...
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 12, 2010, 07:36:47 AM
Wow..............I've been in "enforced retirement", for decades. Only thing it did to me was ruin my hearing. Didn't make me stupid, overnight.

Seriously, I have no idea how someone who claims to have worked on the type of stuff he wants us to believe can be so damn stupid. Maybe as a fellow member of the "enforced retirement" club, I should offer to be his mentor.

Somehow, I suspect he wouldn't listen.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 12, 2010, 11:00:08 AM
Stomach aches seem to be going around this week.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 12, 2010, 11:18:29 PM
"There is only one thing worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about."

Where is Phred, when you really need him? That is his job, to post the obligatory "Oscar Wilde sketch" quote.

Speaking of which............at least I wasn't accused of being him. I guess it could be worse.

"It will, James, it will."


"I didn't get where I am today by trying to measure impedance with a DMM..........Reggie?"
"Yes, CJ?"
"Do you think I got where I am today by trying to measure impedance with a DMM?"
"Of course not, CJ. No. Certainly not, CJ. If there is anyone that I would think that didn't get where they are today, by trying to measure impedance, with a DMM, it would be you, CJ."
"That's good, Reggie. Because I didn't get where I am today, by trying to measure impedance with a DMM."
"No, of course not, CJ."
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 13, 2010, 02:55:21 PM
Oh, good grief..........they are still at it! Arguing blind vs not blind vs "he was coached" vs "you had expectations", etc.

I did all this stuff, over 15 years ago. I would get some folks together, and let them listen to something. Either with or without attenuation. Of course, they had no idea what they were listening to, what they were listening to, or why they were listening to it, in the first place. They didn't even know if there was going to be a difference, or not. (OK, they probably suspected there was going to be one, as they had all been previously screened to weed out the folks who heard a difference, when all I did was to say "Which one do you like?" Yep, they were hearing the same thing, with nothing changed. It did get rid of some people who thought they were being cute, or whatever, by hearing something that could not have possibly existed.)

So, they heard something, one way, and then something different. The change was attenuation vs no attenuation. Only I knew the order. (Yes, I wanted to see their reactions. I'm sure someone will accuse me of giving them subliminal cues. Bite me.)

So, I can say, to my satisfaction, that attenuators help to reduce jitter. Yeah, go ahead and complain my methods were not up to your spec.

Again, bite me.

OK, the crux of the subject:

The trick is to know how much to use. We conducted lots of tests, to determine how much was needed. When we found that "magic" number, we got outsiders to listen.

Now, the real crux:

We found what was really happening was the "magic" attenuation figure was "magic", because it gave us a certain return loss. Yes, we had data to show how much the attenuation helped the rho. And measurements that did indeed show the recovered clock was cleaner, as the RL improved.

We found other ways, to control RL, and when we did, we got the same listening results. You can either believe me, or bite me. I really don't care. Anyone reading this is free to try to replicate our test(s), or continue to pretend that you have all the answers, when in fact you are a closed-minded twit.

Now, as for our "satellite communications" expert. (You know, the one who says the listeners are stupid, and have shown a preference for more jitter, because the signal level is too low. Yeah, that expert.)


If you are the expert you claim to be, then you have done C/I ratio vs BER tests. Right? Then you would know that you can have............I dunno..........doing this off the top of my head, without any text books, and being >25 years removed from telecom, that you can have a good BER, at.........I dunno.................12-14 dB C/I ratio. Or something close.

So, even if you need a 20 dB C/I, are you going to tell me that a SPDIF line, in a typical home environment, is going to have more that 50 mV, p-p, on a 75 ohm coaxial line. With both ends terminated. And only a meter or two long. Really? Are you going to expect me to believe that?

"I didn't get where I am today, by only having a 12 dB C/I ratio. What do you think, Reggie?"
"Certainly, CJ. You would never have only a 12 dB C/I ratio. No, if there was anyone who would have better than a 12 dB C/I ratio, it would be you, CJ."
"Good. I'm glad you agree, Reggie. I didn't get where I am today, by needing people to agree with me. But, I am glad, Reggie, that you agree with. People who agree with me can go places, Reggie. You do want to go places, don't you, Reggie?"
"Yes, CJ. Certainly, CJ. Thank you, CJ."
"That's good Reggie. Because I didn't get where I am today by not recognizing people who want to go places."
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 13, 2010, 03:29:45 PM
"that you can have a good BER, at.........I dunno.................12-14 dB C/I ratio"

Depends on the modulation type, the demodulator efficiency, and stuff like FEC being used or not.  Obviously some of that doesn't apply to SPDIF.  But that number is in the ball park.

I believe there's two interlocking considerations with this.

If there is overshoot, undershoot, or ringing as the result of lame return loss, the input stages of the receiver devices - and the output stages of the transmitter, maybe too - will tend to "stick" some and be less determinate in their switching times.  Jitter anybody? 

Then there's the reflected wave potentially (har, har) interfering with the forward wave giving more ambiguity in the rise and fall time .  Jitter anybody?

You can even see this with a test instrument if you don't believe your ears.

I suppose that if you have impure thoughts, I mean matching, reducing the level of these overshoots and the like by just attenuating the signal will also reduce the clamping effects and ground bounce as well.  Think about what the instantaneous return loss of the receiver might be if the ringing turns on the diode clamps.  Let's see... You now have 6 Ohms in parallel with your termination instead of a butt-load of Ohms.  I bet you can even measure this one with a DMM if you apply varying levels of DC to the receiver input or the transmitter output.

Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 13, 2010, 04:00:58 PM
I'm surprised and speechless. What's wrong with him?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 13, 2010, 06:26:16 PM
Looks like our BFF has seen the light, and is throwing in the towel.

Translation: He has finally realized that J. J. Hooter & Co. will never be happy. They will always find some silly thing to nitpick at.

What ever happened to try it, and if you like it, then that is all that matters. No, everything that is "NIH" has to endure rigorous scientific inquiry, or it is just plain gobshite. (But good luck trying to resolve how much the jitter is affected. Answer: not much, so there is no way you will resolve it. At least, not to your ridiculous standards. What? You expect it to drop from 1794 pSec, to 104 pSec? Sorry, ain't gonna happen.)

And, this takes us back to the age-old question (no, not why does it hurt when I pee), but the much simpler, and all-encompassing one:

WHY?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 14, 2010, 05:10:08 AM
Yes, where did common sense go?
Why bother with this, if they are happy with current setup? Why bother if they are happy with RCA's and 20$ chinese DACs? Why bother if scientific proof is needed that 12$ attenuater can improve things? Why bother if all sounds the same?
Why bother if mp3 player and pair of 5$ computer speaker is all we need and jitter and reflections are just a fairy tale?
Why bother if we live in perfect world?

Quote
I am a 70 year old numptie newbie to hi-fi with absolutely no knowledge or qualifications in electrics or electronics, just a pair of fading ears and an opinion of what I hear. So arguing theory with me is pointless, please understand.

I like his common sense approach  :)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 14, 2010, 07:23:21 AM
I just read all of this again.  Holy crap!

Technical stuff aside, I'm somewhat taken back by the gang mentality that seems to be led by some moderators.  I'm not sure what their point is.

It's hard for me to imagine that these guys get either enjoyment or satisfaction out of making their playback system better by taking up a soldering iron.

Some f'ing fun hobby...
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 14, 2010, 09:45:13 AM
A few guys finally realized we are talking about a $12 adjunct.................

A $12 adjunct, that most of us can build into our gear, at a cost of around one thin dime. Glad we didn't suggest that. That would probably get banned for life, if not the death penalty. (I mean the real death penalty.)

Yet, it is ridiculed, because it has not endured the scrutiny of the great minds of the world.

I hope everyone, who stumbles upon The Pub, reads that thread, in its entirety, and concludes what any rationale person should:

The real hobby is not DIY audio, but having an argument. The only good part is that it will not cost you a fiver, and you don't have to worry if you can only do it in your spare time. Because it sure as hell isn't about trying stuff out, and having fun. The PTB don't allow either.

Like I said...............Why?

OK, time for us to get back to important stuff. Like jelly-filled donuts, or better yet, 1000 new uses for potatoes. Where are you, Oncle Tom? Our country need you.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 14, 2010, 10:02:10 AM
I think they should rename the place Room 12A.  Or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 15, 2010, 01:09:12 AM
Weeee... :'( ...sandbox is closed  :'(
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 15, 2010, 05:41:00 AM
99 pages of angst, and hand-wringing, over the effect of 3 stinking, lousy resistors.

Imagine the carnage if they knew mine used 5! (H-pad)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 15, 2010, 11:45:27 AM
A buddy had me tweak his crappy DAC. First, I ripped out the cheap transformer, and put a good one in. (No, I didn't think to get a graph of the stock configuration. I saw no need.)

Anyway, here is what it looks like:

(http://jockohomo.net/data/ads_rl.gif)

And, with a "Kenny" special.....................yep, a 10 dB, 75R pad, from some shysters, somewhere in Nu Yawk:

(http://jockohomo.net/data/ads_rl_pad.gif)

Someone please tell me it won't work, because I listened to it. I won't say how much attenuation this unit would take, before losing lock, but it was a lot more than 10 dB.

(Know why? It had a linear stage, before the '8414! No, not one of mine. The stock one..............you know, the kind that has an input Z some git who smokes wackey-tabackey doesn't know the equation for. Yeah, that circuit.)

BTW...............they can all still bite me.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 15, 2010, 12:11:02 PM
Hehehe, according to wackey-tabakey smoker, jitter is now increased with attenuator ;D
This one (http://uploading.com/files/411697mc/DACMAGICAZURServiceManual.pdf/) is quite popular, also maintaining stable lock with 10dB attenuator. Where is wackey-tabackey smoker now?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 17, 2010, 05:33:20 AM
Wow, people from Michigan  (http://www.diyhifi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2102&start=0)get annoyed that easy?

(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a149/TiffyBeans/you_make_me_sick.jpg)

It must be something in the water  :o
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 17, 2010, 06:58:33 AM
What if the dykes aren't on bikes? Does that make a difference.

No wonder that guy hates me................a few of those are me! Not sure I have much in common with baby killers and Mormons, but it takes all kinds.

Now, I wonder how many forums he will kvetch about me, once they boot him from Greaser's Palace. Everyone who gets booted from there, complains about me on other forums. Like I have ever had anything to do, with any of them.

Ok, once................the guy in Canada, who used language too colorful and disgusting for me to even ignore. Yet, I was blamed by some, for not booting him sooner! We had mods quit, over my perceived inaction. Funny thing is that they could have taken care of it, without me, yet blamed me for not doing something sooner.

Well, you can't please everyone. I am to please no one. So, screw you guys!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 17, 2010, 08:33:41 AM
I think you should write a book.

Guess why.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Oncle Tom on November 17, 2010, 08:58:01 AM
Hi all,
My first post ever... here  :-*. I watched the last days of that thread and what I can mention (that is besides the circus we already know) is the pretty poor resolution of the measurements posted by some. What can you hope to see when the SNR of the whole rig is 90dB or less? Why even bother to post that as a valid test?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 17, 2010, 01:22:40 PM
then I have nothing to worry about, I'm in good company. Particullary like Sex-Drugs-Rock Music and pervert horny babes  ;D
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 22, 2010, 11:47:40 AM
I'll pass on the drugs part.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on November 22, 2010, 12:37:07 PM
Legal drugs on my mind, like alcohol, coffein,...no need for illegal crap.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on November 22, 2010, 05:51:13 PM
Don't need them, either. I am strange enough, as it is.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on November 23, 2010, 08:54:17 AM
Here, here!

To both interpretations of that.  (I'm the same way...)

I do drink root beer on occasion, however.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on January 25, 2011, 05:43:37 AM
General is quite popular on all continents ...  ;D

http://www.audiofil.hr/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12305&PN=1 (http://www.audiofil.hr/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12305&PN=1)

... but I'm puzzled about schematic and Zener diodes  ::)

Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on January 25, 2011, 07:16:13 AM
Who could imagine I could inspire 6 pages, of stuff I can not understand.

Ok, the first guy isn't too far off the mark. But the second one (http://www.audiofil.hr/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12305&PID=392556#392556 (http://www.audiofil.hr/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12305&PID=392556#392556)), that guy really missed the mark.

Great way to make sure the level is right................clip it with back-to-back zeners!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on January 25, 2011, 10:22:35 AM
No discussion about attenuators, either.  (Like I'd know...)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Kryten on January 25, 2011, 08:58:28 PM
Courtesy of Google Translate.....
Quote
I'm interested in what type of condom is best used for TH and SMD version?

Davo.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on January 26, 2011, 01:12:55 AM
Quote
I'm interested in what type of condom is best used for TH and SMD version?

funny Google translate  ;D Correct translation is bellow

Quote
I'm interested in what type of capacitor is best used for TH and SMD version?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Kryten on January 26, 2011, 04:40:49 AM
Thanks for clearing that up for me.....I wasn't sure if the Spanish are weird...
Translations can be funny.

Davo.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on January 26, 2011, 10:21:19 AM
SPANISH?
Title: Bloody Swedes.............
Post by: Kryten on January 26, 2011, 08:03:49 PM
Too much beer/typo/etc.....I wasn't sure if the Croations are weird...but I do know the Swedes can be..

Davo.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on February 05, 2011, 09:28:16 AM
So, I was thinking about an RS232 to TOSLink to async USB adapter....
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Kryten on February 06, 2011, 05:28:05 AM
Quote
So, I was thinking about an RS232 to TOSLink to async USB adapter....
Why....what for for....what are you on ...?.

Davo.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on February 10, 2011, 04:00:16 PM
General is quite popular on all continents ...  ;D

More proof, of The General, in the land of his ancestors:

http://www.nexthardware.com/forum/computer-audio-hi-fi/71804-ferriti-pro-e-contro.html#post800639 (http://www.nexthardware.com/forum/computer-audio-hi-fi/71804-ferriti-pro-e-contro.html#post800639)

Too bad they didn't give me any credit. Ma che?

Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on February 10, 2011, 06:47:42 PM
Charlie somehow did manage to get his belief of how ferrites sucketh translated: "effetto grunge."

I'll have to look to see if that's on his web page...
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: mrjam on February 11, 2011, 01:10:41 AM
The General is appreciated here in Italy!
...at least from me and Joseph...  ;)

Thank you for your contribution to our knowledge!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on February 11, 2011, 06:02:14 AM
Si, molto popolare e apprezzato in tutti i continenti e paesi  ;D

Italian Man (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKdR7_rdu0g)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on February 11, 2011, 10:14:51 AM
Get your ice cream!  Your tutsi-frutsi ice cream!
Title: Taxes?
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on February 11, 2011, 11:40:07 AM
"I gotta uncle-a from-a Taxes."
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on February 11, 2011, 12:47:34 PM
History of Italy

(http://jockohomo.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=27.0;attach=92)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on February 11, 2011, 08:33:54 PM
Which one do I resemble? (You know which one I vote for.)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: mrjam on February 11, 2011, 11:13:48 PM
Il duce del TDR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I know the one you (would) vote for!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: zinsula on February 13, 2011, 01:37:18 PM
Hmmm, and which one has/had most fun?? I don't think it was the man in the middle ;-)

Che casino. Un sito italo-texano.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on March 21, 2011, 06:54:20 PM
none of my business, but almost fainted (http://lampizator.eu/szop/szopproducts/LZ-TRANSPORT/Lampizator%20transport.html)

(http://jockohomo.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=27.0;attach=100)

Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on March 22, 2011, 07:43:48 AM
How do you think they did SPDIF digital audio outputs back in the 40's, 50's, and much of the 60's?  They had to use tubes.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on March 22, 2011, 08:18:25 AM
If I built something that ugly, I sure wouldn't take pictures of it, and brag!

OK, dig this:

Quote
I must say that I don't know. It just does.
There are two main factors probably involved here:
The chip trat produces SPDIF square wave is not loaded - it can relax because my Lampizator presents infinite impedance and zero capacitance.
The tube can "drive" the output cables and DAC input circuitry better because it has low impedance output, high speed and high power. So the transport is much less dependant on the digital cable quality. No need to buy exotic cables anymore. ($$$)

Uh, we learned how to do that with SS, years ago. Yes, many of us built ham radio gear that way. Only because we had to. Thankfully, we no longer have to.

Having said that..................butt ugly.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on March 24, 2011, 01:18:31 PM
Quote from: seagreen
<snip> ...SPDIF digital audio outputs back in the 40's,... <snip>

S/PDIF in 40's ?  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Edison's invention of the Phonograf...
Post by: MystereoN on March 24, 2011, 01:32:39 PM
LOL, almost pissed in my pants ;D

<snip> ...that is more money than the entire music recording industry has made since Edison's invention of the phonograph in 1877... <snip> (http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/03/23/1930238/Limewire-Being-Sued-For-75-Trillion)

What they are smoking, since this is all money on planet Earth? (http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/world/world_economy.html)
Title: Better overall performance than anything available
Post by: MystereoN on March 27, 2011, 06:37:36 AM
http://www.belleson.com/ (http://www.belleson.com/)

with 28 µVrms broadband noise this is hard to believe  ;D
Title: standalone DAC
Post by: MystereoN on April 02, 2011, 01:11:07 PM
WOW, our famous RF expert is getting his first standalone DAC (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/186177-chinese-dac.html#post2524677).
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on April 02, 2011, 05:25:11 PM
Quote
My cd player many times have a metallic sound so i want to couple a dac.

I'm sure our RF expert will be the first to point out how this will solve all of his problems.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on April 03, 2011, 06:50:57 AM
Yes, the number one determinant of sound quality is price.  (Pick low or high...)
Title: Hall of fame?
Post by: MystereoN on May 11, 2011, 04:22:18 AM
Hall of Fame or Wall of Shame? (http://www.tvcaudio.com/modules/SPDIF_HallOfFame.html)  ::)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on May 11, 2011, 07:20:28 AM
Yeah, theirs has to be better, because the level is wrong!

A word about 'scope rise and fall times...............

I have access to a $$$ HP sampling 'scope. Depending on how you trigger it............

On the same circuit (that I measure frequently), I get all sorts of answers. Even when I do nothing, except to clear the memory, and do the measurement over. I get numbers under 1 nSec, to numbers over 10 nSec. So, which is it?

With a 1 nSec rise time, that would mean it has (roughly) a 350 MHz BW. Which exceeds the BW, of all my "normal" Tek 'scopes. So, I have to borrow this funky HP one, that has a 12.4 GHz BW. If your 'scope has BW, that is comparable to your rise time, can you get an accurate reading? No, don't think so.

So, these guys have, for the sake of discussion, a 3 nSec rise and fall time. Meaning it is about the same as my Tek 465. Is their 350 MHz Tek enough? Maybe.

The other thing................

Outputs with a transformer, without enough core material, to have decent LF performance, are going to have lots of droop. (CD-80 is a good expample.) Problem is.............

Rise and fall times are going to be measured at the 10% and 90% points. Lots of droop..............it is going to make that fall time really long. While is technically correct, it does not accurately portray the dv/dt, of the UUT. You can see this as the rise time is much longer, but the dv/dt looks the same. (Because it is.)

Those measurements are handy, as design tools. Not always an accurate portrayal, of performance.

But, we already know theirs is better......................it has such a strong level.

So does that Hi Farce POC, the Leprechaun mods.

So much for strong level...................
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on May 12, 2011, 01:33:08 AM
Yes, all of them are POC.
Reference unit is a little bit better and there is still room for improvement and attenuating output signal (http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w48/renaudmumu/Micromega/BSTVC/image06.jpg).
And better cable + connectors (http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w48/renaudmumu/Remi/SPDIF_INPUT/ModuleInput01.png).

Once measured output signal and got similar results as CD-80, with horizontal line tilted down. Transformer was Murata 76601/3C.

Ad least DA101 is decent performer, but would like to see measurement of DA101 with your expensive $$$ equipment.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on May 12, 2011, 05:50:36 AM
our favorite RF expert is active again  ;)

SPDIF OUTPUT  &  220 fS clock thread (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/188184-spdif-output.html)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on May 12, 2011, 07:38:58 AM
Quote
1-2 pS is insane and I flatly don't believe you can measure that, much less hear it. Timing jitter of 1 part in 11 MILLION? I want to see this ABX tested.

Typical DIYer. No clue what they are talking about, yet adamant they are right.

The other guy is not worth commenting about.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on May 12, 2011, 07:40:10 AM
Ad least DA101 is decent performer, but would like to see measurement of DA101 with your expensive $$$ equipment.

Send me $2, and I will get one from Mouser!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on May 12, 2011, 09:10:28 AM
You got PM
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on May 12, 2011, 11:58:25 AM
Better than BM.

(This is what happens when you have to care for an aging parent. It warps your mind.)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on May 14, 2011, 09:29:46 AM
The ultimate answer to the ultimate (audio) question.  (No, not 42)

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-1207.html#post2571074 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-1207.html#post2571074)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on May 15, 2011, 01:24:12 AM
 I saw that. The humor was lost on them.

Steenking fer'ners! (All of our Euro members should disregard that remark, as it obviously does not apply to them.)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on May 15, 2011, 06:11:37 AM
Just to put this in context, that comment was part of a friendly conversation (aren't they always?) about whether passive components actually make difference.  This came up because of a recently published article in an engineering journal about some capacitor types making acoustic noise due to piezoelectric effects, and what could be done about it.

Best summary is this:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-1207.html#post2571050 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-1207.html#post2571050)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on May 17, 2011, 11:09:19 AM
"Doctor, it hurts when I do this..............."
"Stop doing that!"

"What? Reading audio forums?"

No. Sticking 16 kHz tones, into caps, and complaining about the noise. At our age, we can't hear horizontal outputs, so who cares? Not the young kids, because CRTs are going the way of the dinosaur, so no more 15.75 kHz noise getting in all of your measurements. (Ever notice that little spike in all the speaker decay plots that StereoPhoole makes?) And so what if your caps sing at 30-40 kHz, in all those solid-state ballasts? Not me.

Well, maybe I do...............

There is this one CD player, that does strange things, when I put it into the "lab", where I have solid-state ballasts. Yeah, it thinks the flicker of the fluorescent lights is a IR signal! Changes track............other bizarre stuff.

"Then don't play that CD player in your tech-cave."

I can. I just turn off the over-head fluorescent lights!



Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on May 17, 2011, 06:54:03 PM
I once saw fluorescent lights affect the timing of a circuit that had some glass diodes (probably 1N4148's) in it.  The circuit worked in the box, but not on the lab bench.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on May 17, 2011, 10:23:58 PM
60 Hz flicker.............probably a lot more interesting.

I think the ones I have are closer to 40 kHz. One died, last week. Must be a bad cap, because it smelled worse than a bad conventional ballast. (I'll report back, once I can find the $20, or so, it will cost for a new one, at Home Despot. Probably made in China, now. Old ones are Mexico.)
Title: Humming In Twos, Maybe Threes..... (....01:09)
Post by: Kryten on May 18, 2011, 07:26:37 AM
One repair item was as old as Noah at the time and this was a very long time ago.....wet behind the ears and still in my telecom 'prenticeship moonlighting part time at the local radio/tv repair shop.. ..paid extracurricular learning out in the real world....
Anyway this repair job was a battery operated nice quality in it's era and quite expensive (B&O maybe) all germanium portable radio whose complaint was that is humming on am....at night time   ???
I opened it up on the bench last job on a Saturday almost evening, and yep it hummed.   I turned it around back and forth and determined that the hum was directional so it must be due to misalignment.
Fresh from a prac module that covered optimal alignment of rf/if stages, yay I was able to put into practice what I had just learned at school and in doing so this radio's reception improved a bit...well sort of but the hum wouldn't quite go away...hmmm, this thing is battery operated so what's going on ?.
The bosses missus was on the blower so time to shut up shop...I reached up and tuned off the bench light and zip...no more hum...huh ??.
Flouro on, hum...flouro off, no hum......hmmmmmmm.
On close examination it turned out that one of those large glass geranium diodes coated with matt black paint had lost some of it's paint rendering the whole thing light sensitive and a lick of black paint cured the problem in an instant.
The mention of the 4148 experience brought all of that back....thanks SG for help in delaying early onset symptoms...but brings fresh crazy thoughts though...if a blue led in the cd player drawer changes sound, what about illuminating circuit diodes with blue leds...or white...or trimodal leds....?.

...off to put newly printed photos of leds in the freezer right now.

Davo.

Cute, I thing she means The Humping Song  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=henK08ESjSw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=henK08ESjSw)






Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Kryten on May 18, 2011, 08:08:43 AM
60 Hz flicker.............probably a lot more interesting.

I think the ones I have are closer to 40 kHz. One died, last week. Must be a bad cap, because it smelled worse than a bad conventional ballast. (I'll report back, once I can find the $20, or so, it will cost for a new one, at Home Despot. Probably made in China, now. Old ones are Mexico.)
It's Chinese....5 cents worth of solder and a couple of caps out of your drawers and better than new....save petrol.

Davo.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on May 23, 2011, 10:42:27 PM
Interesting (http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/en/detail.jsf;jsessionid=D65483F436A479FEE523FC1EC9B26824.wapp1?docId=WO2010151417&recNum=1&tab=PCTDocuments&maxRec=1&office=&prevFilter=&sortOption=Pub+Date+Desc&queryString=FP%3A%28wo%2F2010151417%29)
Anything can be patented novadays. Ho unfiltered voltage reference, ho gain feedback network, say welcome (http://www.belleson.com/techdetails.php)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on May 24, 2011, 03:50:01 AM
Amazing...

I'm not sure how this will bring him fame and/or fortune though.  It's a really narrow patent, since it is only a variation on Walt Jung's well publicized original concept.

Besides, the guys who are likely to steal the design for profit don't need no stinkin' patents. 
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on May 24, 2011, 05:16:54 PM
yes, this patent looks very familiar.
I know I'm not that stupid, I already know this circuit from the past.....
National Semi, Application Note AN-32 from year 1970, page 6
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on June 04, 2011, 01:59:52 PM
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-1272.html#post2594807 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-1272.html#post2594807)

those picoseconds can be translated as "microseconds @ audio band"
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 19, 2011, 05:08:49 PM
Still haven't learned your lesson, have you? Arguing with a guy who defends some guy with a MSEE.

Stage 1: Assumes common-mode crud is the biggest problem. Even if it is, ignores the other problems. (Hey, ever hear of designing an active stage, that has good CMR, and none of the problems that POC transformer creates? Does that take a Ph. D.?)

Stage 2: Uses a WM8805. A good chip, but not the only one. (Takes a Ph. D. to read a bunch of data sheets, to decide which one to try.)
(Speaking of which.............when I come into some money, I may try some of the AKM ones. They make similar jitter claims.)

Stage 3: OK, he uses an ESS DAC. A good chip. But, again, it doesn't take a Ph. D. to know that.

Might be a good DAC, might be crap. More likely a decent one, based on most of his parts selections are ok. So what? If he likes it, and people buy it, no one here is going to demand a DBT to determine its value.

Doesn't mean we can't pick at his defenders. Their arguments should be held to the same level of scrutiny, as those of The Devil. But, we all know they won't.

Have fun, young man!!!!!!!
Title: HAVE WE READ IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 19, 2011, 05:12:37 PM
Unfortunately, yes.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on June 20, 2011, 06:27:33 AM
yes, it should be funny hobby and arguing is not funny at all.

Two months ago received a phone call and man on the other side asked me if I could make a digital cable for him. I know that person only through internet forum, we never met. I respect him for his knowledge about speakers.
Couple of days later I put together double shielded coax with BNC-BNC conectors and called him back. We agreed to meet at his place since he lives only app. 20 miles away and I was curious to hear his speakers (http://live.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/ces.pl?soulsonicspeake&&ManuView&FM&&&&&&THE11) presented in Las Vegas at CES 2011. I was really impressed with appearance and sound from those almost 7' monsters.
Those listening moments are funny and worth searching for improvements in sound  :)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on June 20, 2011, 06:54:18 AM
holly cow... this must be Waki #2 or his cousin  :o What is wrong with those English gentlemans?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 20, 2011, 03:52:30 PM
For $65K, they better sound good.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 20, 2011, 03:53:47 PM
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/191113-rf-cable-spdif-interconnect.html (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/191113-rf-cable-spdif-interconnect.html)

Should I tell him??

Nah................I'll let him find out the hard way. And it will be the hard way, with some of those morons.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 20, 2011, 04:29:01 PM
If you speak up, it's almost guaranteed to generate an argument.  Maybe even an epic long arduous one.

That might be fun to watch, at least for the rest of us.

If you don't speak up, the topic may die sooner.  But it might be fun to see where it goes.

FWIW, my new strategy on this is simple.  I carefully compose and edit the best reply I can.  Then I just don't send it.  It actually gets it out of my system and works for me.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 20, 2011, 05:16:57 PM
I let you guys trick me again and read that entire thread.   >:(

A couple questions:

1.  Does anybody much understand anything about jitter?  Maybe there should be a curse placed upon the first person who used the term jitter to describe anything in the audio world.  It's so misleading to so many people.  Phase noise would be much easier to get across.  Wait; who am I kidding?

2.  Does anybody understand anything about the concept of "ground"?

Finally, these guys are clearly managers.

One time the guy I worked for was the worst manager in the history of engineering.  How bad was he?  You know how we joke about Lucent guys?  This guy had worked for ITT.   (These were the telecom guys who finagled the Pinochet debacle so well.) 

For some reason I got sucked into a meeting with the general manager and a bunch of other "important" people, including my boss.  They didn't ask me anything, so I just sat there.

I don't remember now what the original topic was, but somehow it degenerated into a huge shouting match having to do with Ohm's Law.  It went something like this.  Keep in mind that every one of these guys allegedly had been engineers at some point in their career.

Side A: "Listen, the current is equal to the voltage times the resistance!"

Side B: "No!  The current is equal to the resistance divided by the voltage!"

A: "&^$$#it!  Don't be such a stupid @$$**!%!!"

B: "&&%$#@%^*()!!!!"

And so on.  For at least 15 minutes.

It was great.  I didn't even crack a smile because I wanted to see how long it would go on and how far.   :-X

Sadly, no punches were thrown.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 20, 2011, 09:12:52 PM
Hey, I had to work on a 2 GHz ITT radio, that was not bad.

But, as for EEs, with a convoluted view of the world:

"The big difference here is that with analogue, cables could make a difference, with digital its a different story. One of the big advantages of digital is the error correction done by the DAC. It cleans up the jitter, fixes small data errors and reclocks before it gets turned into audio signals."

REALLY!!??

Error correction fixes jitter...................good grief.

He makes some other erroneous observations. Despite having a VNA, and supposedly the knowledge to use it, he misses the boat.

Yes, looking at the demod clock is a good place to look. But, you can see the clues, before that point.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 21, 2011, 03:37:42 AM
"Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding" - Oldest known variation on a quote attributed to various people.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 21, 2011, 02:53:24 PM
Phred wandered over to my pigsty, today, to borrow my RF sweeper. Anyway, I wanted to show him the posts, by one of my students, on why SC transformers suck. (Because they do!)

Anyway..............all of those posts have been deleted!!!!

You can always count on The Pub to do what is right. Right, by them, that is.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on June 21, 2011, 03:15:11 PM
Found a lot of wisdom & experience in his posts. Pack all this with sharp tongue and restless mind....we should have him on board.
We want Phred, we want Phred, we want...  ;D

(http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/tzu/lowres/tzun196l.jpg)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 21, 2011, 04:17:31 PM
I'll tell him...........I think he will be less than ecstatic.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 21, 2011, 05:59:44 PM
They deleted the posts all right.

This finally, totally, completely convinces me that they do what they can to maximize traffic.  In their mind that must mean minimizing good content and maximizing the arguing and bloviating.  To what end?  Who knows?

But, perhaps it's just me.  I don't recall them ever trying to make me especially welcome, no matter how polite I was.

I'm not quite sure why they continue to tolerate the same, ahh, male urinary devices that act badly over and over, but they do.  Perhaps they add to the traffic.

It's too bad, because a lot of people have tried offering real valuable information and have gone away shaking their heads.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 21, 2011, 08:42:22 PM
A bit o/t, but..............

Have you noticed the banner ads they have there? I have some s/w that turns them off, but............

Before I did, I saw ads for the Bybee Music Rail.

Yep, the very same thing they trash, relentlessly, they accept money from. Does the word "hypocrite" come to mind?

Now, think back to all the stuff I kvetched about. And why I was so dangerous, and had to be banned. Make sense, now?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on June 22, 2011, 01:21:57 AM
I'll tell him...........I think he will be less than ecstatic.

Why? Are we such a bad companion?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 22, 2011, 03:54:45 AM
Didn't notice since my banner blocker killed them.  Nice.

(I thought of a bunch of crude jokes for placement here involving the world's oldest profession, but decided not to...)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 22, 2011, 10:41:40 PM
I'll tell him...........I think he will be less than ecstatic.

Why? Are we such a bad companion?

Has nothing to do with us. Have you seen him, on any forum, in the last several years?

No, he is just sick of forums.

Watch, with my luck, he will be exposed as some sock puppet, over at The Pub.

I have no knowledge whether, or not, Phred has any operating sock puppets. He never told me about any of them, when he was doing that sort of thing. I see no reason he would change his approach, and now tell me, if he was. And I really doubt he is.

Maybe the Mod Squad should peruse all the member's names.............looking for some character from some obscure sci-fi book. That seemed to be his M. O. Maybe that is why I never caught any of them. I stopped reading sci-fi, in junior high school.

Right about the time I discovered electronics. And maybe a few other things. Mmmmm, heh-heh.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: zinsula on June 23, 2011, 01:44:59 AM
Found a lot of wisdom & experience in his posts. Pack all this with sharp tongue and restless mind....we should have him on board.
We want Phred, we want Phred, we want...  ;D
We want Phred, we want Phred.....

And a sockpuppet at the Pub, yes, that would be fun! We could give a price to the member here who discovers him first, maybe a SC pulse transformer (well, it's a joke anyway, isn't it?)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Joseph K on June 23, 2011, 02:18:46 AM
I would not call Harry Haller a sci-fi hero..
Though high school rebellion time sounds about the right age.

And I have this creepy feeling that somebody has had quite a fun just recently..

But the show just goes on:

"Jocko? Who's Jocko?"
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on June 23, 2011, 03:25:29 AM
I would not call Harry Haller a sci-fi hero..
Though high school rebellion time sounds about the right age.

And I have this creepy feeling that somebody has had quite a fun just recently..

But the show just goes on:

"Jocko? Who's Jocko?"

Ditto  ;D

Maybe you have just won the prize (SC pulse transformer)  ;)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 23, 2011, 03:57:29 AM
Let's see then...

Maybe Phred has been using the nom de plume of "John Curl."

Or even better, "Jocko Homo!"

Both would be good rumors to start, just to see what the responses might be.  (I thought of others, but they probably have no sense of humor...)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Joseph K on June 23, 2011, 05:27:08 AM
I would never be able to maintain a sock puppet. For doing it really well, someone has to hide not only the technicalities, but most importantly be able to change temper/ personality, while creating a whole new, credible "professional background" which is coincident with his own real one / but still hard to connect..

An Art in itself..

Tip of the hat from my part :)

Ciao, George
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 23, 2011, 06:52:13 AM
Have you guys seen the latest post, at Greaser's Palace? Some guy asks a thousand questions, and expects someone (probably called Jocko), to answer them all.

Wonder how long it will take before someone tells him Jocko isn't going to answer.

Off to check The Pub, to see who is looking for me..............
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 23, 2011, 06:54:53 AM
Let's see then...

Maybe Phred has been using the nom de plume of "John Curl."

Or even better, "Jocko Homo!"

Both would be good rumors to start, just to see what the responses might be.  (I thought of others, but they probably have no sense of humor...)

Usually, it was me, being suspected of being Phred. Many times.

Yeah, start some rumors, and watch the yuks. Of course, doing so will get you banned!

Speaking of which..............I wonder if yesterday's posts, containing those verboten words, are still there.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 23, 2011, 06:56:42 AM
Still there, as of 9 AM, in Texas. Guess the Mod Squad is asleep.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 23, 2011, 10:46:59 AM
From the World's Longest DIY Post:

"Still with me?"

Nope.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 23, 2011, 10:54:07 AM
I love this quote:

"Jocko? Who's Jocko?"

All I can think of is Gold Hat talking to Fred Dobbs: "We don't need no steeeknink Jocko!"  (The quote from the book is even better, but this a family friendly web forum.)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on June 23, 2011, 11:46:17 AM
From the World's Longest DIY Post:

"Still with me?"

Nope.

Zzzzzzzzz...................

Let me know when someone responds.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on June 23, 2011, 12:25:07 PM
Nah.

Those TV advertised sleep aids have nothing on that thread now.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on July 23, 2011, 03:29:35 PM
This seems so appropriate for this week's social intercourse over on another forum.  (For people outside the United States and/or born after maybe the early 60's, you may have to Google this one...)

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_2OgpsMgKSls/S91TrI5ZOSI/AAAAAAAAF_Q/NcNWHevsT4I/s1600/dithers6.jpg)
Title: Oh, crap, they are at it.........again!
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on August 25, 2011, 08:38:37 AM
Yet another thread about terminating SPDIF. One expert advises using a transformer, per the app note, I am sure, to a guy who just has a DMM. (Where is their DMM expert?!)

A new "expert", who has discovered that fast  rise times are less tolerant of crappy terminations. Gee, how many times do I have to say "The faster the rise time, the greater the BW over which you need to have a good termination"?

OK.........one more time.......for all the hoobyists at The Pub, and Greaser's Palace:

If all you have is a DMM, just stick a resistor on the end, and don't try to play RF engineer. Probably all you will do is muck it up, even further. Just because guys like Phred, and some of my "students", have the knowledge, and tools, to be able to make better, doesn't mean that you can.

Your DAC probably sucks, but all 99% of you can do is make it suck in different ways. Leave it alone, and be happy in your ignorance.

Nothing wrong with ignorance, as long as you recognize you are ignorant, and can accept it. You don't see me trying to design DSP, do you?

Hell no..............

BTW, my 'scope goes to 20 GHz. Eat my shorts.
Title: Re: Oh, crap, they are at it.........again!
Post by: MystereoN on August 25, 2011, 10:11:53 AM
Quote
shorter is always better

our female readers will probably disagree  ;D
Title: Re: Oh, crap, they are at it.........again!
Post by: seagreen on August 25, 2011, 10:38:06 AM
You don't see me trying to design DSP, do you?

 :-X
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on August 26, 2011, 07:24:38 PM
Quote
Think about applying signal gain and limiter at the average data level ( AC coupled).

I can't imagine who has been doing this, for the last 20 years, or so.

Guesses, anyone?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on August 27, 2011, 06:43:50 AM
Gee, just like an FM receiver. Oops!

"Everything old is new again." - P. Allen & C. Bayer, 1974
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on August 30, 2011, 01:17:27 PM
Probably should not mention MECL, either!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on August 31, 2011, 01:15:22 PM
Oddly enough, I had to try to explain that to somebody recently. 

This is the look I got:

(http://www.wpclipart.com/recreation/sports/bowling/bowling_ball/bowling_ball_blue_250.png)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on September 16, 2011, 12:07:40 PM
He replied only 3 days later, but....if he replied, he's still into audio stuff  ;D
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/power-supplies/196703-jans-quizz-september-newsletter.html (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/power-supplies/196703-jans-quizz-september-newsletter.html)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on September 16, 2011, 01:12:19 PM
Not really.

If he was really into it, it would not have taken 3 days.

Could be he ran out of teenage Oriental porn, to look at.

He got bored...........saw a chance to tweak their nose, and since that is "in his wheelhouse", he couldn't walk away.

Maybe one of his FarceBook buddies told him about it!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on September 16, 2011, 05:58:22 PM
I will never learn!  I had to look and then wandered down to a thread about power cables.

Arrgh!

Doesn't anybody study networks and/or transmission lines in their EE courses?  (I'm presuming that these guys are all engineers based on their firm stances on the subject...)

(http://tillstrom.net/fredrik/humor/cartman_angry.jpg)

Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on September 19, 2011, 02:05:11 PM
The wolf can change his shape, but not his spirit  ;D
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on September 25, 2011, 10:31:46 AM
From some other audio forum:

Quote
That might work better, for a DAC. Assuming I find time to actually design one............

(Yes, the design has been in my head, for months. No time for making a proto. He says, trying not to fall asleep, in his chair.)

If this is announcement of new product, I'm already putting myself into waiting row.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on September 26, 2011, 09:40:49 AM
That might be the most cryptic post, on this place. I guess it means something, to someone.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on September 26, 2011, 11:08:53 AM
Decrypting...

Name this product, and you win one! (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=96664.msg967432#msg967432)

 ;)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Joseph K on September 26, 2011, 11:53:49 AM
Iso-Lato ?

And I want one!!!

giorgio
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on September 26, 2011, 10:13:51 PM
I have a name:

Damifino. (Ya gotta say it with an American accent...........not an eye-tie one.)


"You're sure to love the big, 'gangs all here' back seat."
"Hinton, try that again, with an American accent."
"That was an American accent, sir."
"Good Lord..............what's going on over there?"
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on February 13, 2012, 02:12:00 PM
A bit o/t, but since no one can tell me to stop thread jacking...............

They are at, again. Kinda sorta. Arguing if you can use a pair of 75R coax cables, in a balanced setup. Some get it, some don't, and some of the reasons they don't get it are amusing.

Well, for 30 seconds, or so.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on February 13, 2012, 05:51:00 PM
http://www.gore.com/en_xx/products/cables/microwave/passive_intermodulation_pim_tech_note.html (http://www.gore.com/en_xx/products/cables/microwave/passive_intermodulation_pim_tech_note.html)

http://amphenolrf.com/simple/PIM%20Paper.pdf (http://amphenolrf.com/simple/PIM%20Paper.pdf)

http://www.kaelus.com/Kaelus/media/KaelusDocuments/WP_Performance_RF_Cable_Assemblies.pdf (http://www.kaelus.com/Kaelus/media/KaelusDocuments/WP_Performance_RF_Cable_Assemblies.pdf)

And about 1.67 million others, give or take.

Hey; it was either this or the Cartman picture again.

No double blind testing was used in the making of this post.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on February 13, 2012, 07:18:01 PM
Not sure they qualify as "serious", as no one over there knows about them.

See how simple this is?
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on February 13, 2012, 07:19:04 PM
No double blind testing was used in the making of this post.

You need to make that your signature!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on February 22, 2012, 10:48:15 AM
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/power-supplies/207202-smd-regulator-identification.html#post2918123 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/power-supplies/207202-smd-regulator-identification.html#post2918123)

... at least they could replace RCA with BNC
... fix wrong R66 and R67 combo on S/PDIF output (220R series with 100R termination)
... throw out C65 capacitor mounted parallel with terminating resistor

Output chip is marked C79, according to THIS (http://www.electronicspoint.com/top-markings-those-tiny-smd-5-pin-sc70-package-logic-devices-t99563.html), it is 74AHCT1G79GV with 3.3V power supply. Anyway, there is a slight overshot with original values. Full of 0402 SMT elements, almost too small for my strong myopic eyes  ;D
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on February 22, 2012, 03:09:34 PM
I like the solid polymer caps with 1/4" long leads! Yeah, that is the way to keep EMI down, to a minimum.

Hobbyists..................
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on February 22, 2012, 04:48:47 PM
SP-Caps still waiting to be discovered...
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on February 22, 2012, 06:35:43 PM
Jeez, I've given up on 0805, 0603, and 0402 caps for bypasses.  At least where ceramics can be used.  0508, 0306, and 0204 do a better job.

Poop on using vias to ground, too...

Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on February 23, 2012, 01:43:19 AM
Following story is much more funny...
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster.html?ref=hp (http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster.html?ref=hp)

LOL  ;D
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on February 23, 2012, 03:47:06 AM
Crap!  This will definitely make my commute to work longer than I thought!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on July 23, 2012, 02:42:33 AM
Quote
Nein. Might be one of the better examples, but over here, cars are considered to be a real car based on how fast they can do 1/4 mile.

damn spoiled Americans  ::)

With current gas prices over here, everything over 2.000 cm3 (122 in3) is considered luxurious and unnecessary. With my V8 gas guzzler I am considered as Texas oil magnate  ;D

(http://jockohomo.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=27.0;attach=194)

Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on July 23, 2012, 08:52:45 AM
"Highly polished turd." Guy sounds like one of us.................

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-2482.html#post3101607 (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-2482.html#post3101607)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on July 23, 2012, 11:08:59 AM
The orange (or whatever it is) roof cover is my favorite part.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on July 30, 2012, 06:07:40 PM
These threads are awesome...

http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/digital/messages/16/164952.html (http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/digital/messages/16/164952.html)

Of course, one guy does get it.  No surprise.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on July 31, 2012, 06:30:04 AM
Why are you even reading that?

Who is going to 'splain to our Zinzinatti branch that it is 6 dB.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Stewie on July 31, 2012, 12:02:49 PM

Followed the audioasylum link, clicked on the digital drive out of interest and the first post...;

http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=digital&m=164916

wtf...

Thought i've seen it all. But no.

Actually have a 10MHz GPS slaved XO, but i forgot to put audiophool components in  :P
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on July 31, 2012, 04:20:00 PM
What part of "It is 10 MHz" doesn't that guy understand?

Some of those clocks actually are good. But, only if you need a 10 MHz reference clock.

Like for a phase noise measurin' gizmo.................
Title: Grreetings from AES....
Post by: zinsula on August 16, 2012, 08:29:30 AM
General, please find this document for your enjoyment....

http://www.aes.org/standards/comments/drafts/aes-2id-xxxx-cfc-120816.pdf

And now i'll run for cover, when the blood pressure of the General starts rising...
i'm not guilty....i'm not guilty....mercy!!!
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on August 22, 2012, 06:28:14 AM
Quote
…. but your grumpy old-fart character makes the whole thing just pop!

Reminds me to Il Numero Uno, the supreme and fearless leader of TNT group (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Ford_%28comics%29).

My favorite comics in my youth  :D
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on August 22, 2012, 07:15:02 AM
Pop?  I didn't understand that part when I read it either.  Language barrier, probably.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: MystereoN on August 22, 2012, 11:41:10 AM
neither do I understand "pop" in this sentence.

It could be Pissed-Of-Person or prince-Of-Persia or ..... what is "pop"? (http://www.acronymfinder.com/POP.html)
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: seagreen on August 22, 2012, 05:02:29 PM
They all work at a far higher level than I do.
Title: Re: Probably none of our business.............
Post by: Gen. Dreedle on August 22, 2012, 07:59:12 PM
I prefer this one:

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Persistent+Organic+Pollutant (http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Persistent+Organic+Pollutant)

Toxic in all locales! That is me.................
Title: ...don't believe in their conclusions
Post by: MystereoN on August 25, 2013, 05:09:22 AM
30 Cables carry S/PDIF up to 1000 euro (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=el&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=el&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.avmentor.gr%2Freviews%2Fgroup_test_spdif_coaxial_cables_2011_00.htm&act=url)