How Science Got Sound Wrong

[Wonfor14]

Geoff we all need to think and with our combine knowledge we could solve all problems, but working together you always get the EGO effect , as in it was my idea let me have the Award, sharing has not been engineering strong point manly due to shit head bosses and marketing men ripping them off. The Doc and I have had this done to us a lot. I miss his words.

[Wonfor14]

If the all important thing is about timing then that would align with the way RD assessed things. Not entirely on topic but it explains why some like single point source speakers, why time alignment in multiple driver speakers is important and why phase (time) shifting filters can really mess up the sonic experience for some.

Spot on Phase is so important, i.e. it relates to time and thus speed and frequency why do only a few people get it? And as we now understand filter not only crush/lift frequency but screws phase.
So you can have fast amp to control speakers with massive damping but a high frequency filter in the input giving -3dB roll on and about 800KHz but the cable also can not be a load to the amp especially capacitance. The same applies but less in input leads, and USB digital lies cable.
The subject has not been fully explored IMO. Let alone the effects of the environment as in RFI/EMC/temperature and air pressure, and the dreaded mother in-laws effect.

Coiln, have you ever tried a poweramp without a low pass filter at it's input ? There is a risk that radio frequency etc gets amplified, amp oscillates and over heats but would it happen in every case ?

[Geoff.R.G]

I remember a college lecturer, many years ago, tapping his forehead and saying "write on the inside of this lump of bone 'phase angles is important'". He was talking about electrical power but he was right.

[Wonfor14]

I remember a college lecturer, many years ago, tapping his forehead and saying "write on the inside of this lump of bone 'phase angles is important'". He was talking about electrical power but he was right.

I bet it was the same guy I had, Dr Quirk and he was.

Yes I have tried amps with no filter, the one I use now will survive no problem and the WD goes to well over 1MHz but the crossover in the speaker hate Radio stations and as live only a mile away from City (London) airport I do get pickup from Radar and RF crap some days, my PIT is RF shielded but on hot day like today I have the door open , and the Radar is on mush......................mush in a regular beat.
And that is much higher than 1MHz, I can sometimes pick up on the mic pleasure sensor sub 10Hz stuff as there is a large underground something near by.
On foggy days I can detect oddly the Radar better, I might make a Gunn Diode detector just for fun.

[Geoff.R.G]

I remember a college lecturer, many years ago, tapping his forehead and saying "write on the inside of this lump of bone 'phase angles is important'". He was talking about electrical power but he was right.

I bet it was the same guy I had, Dr Quirk and he was.

Yes I have tried amps with no filter, the one I use now will survive no problem and the WD goes to well over 1MHz but the crossover in the speaker hate Radio stations and as live only a mile away from City (London) airport I do get pickup from Radar and RF crap some days, my PIT is RF shielded but on hot day like today I have the door open , and the Radar is on mush......................mush in a regular beat.
And that is much higher than 1MHz, I can sometimes pick up on the mic pleasure sensor sub 10Hz stuff as there is a large underground something near by.
On foggy days I can detect oddly the Radar better, I might make a Gunn Diode detector just for fun.

His name was Reynolds. But he was clearly from the same mould.
Secondary Surveillance Radar operates in the 1GHz range, Primary radar at about 2.5GHz and Airfield Surface Radar at around 15GHz. You are probably getting Primary Radar pulses as that is the more powerful emitter.

[karatestu]

Colin, are you saying you have RF shielded your room ? Or house even ?

[Wonfor14]

Colin, are you saying you have RF shielded your room ? Or house even ?

No I have log cabin in the garden it is my workshop it is solar powered well insulated and RF shielded.

[Wonfor14]

I remember a college lecturer, many years ago, tapping his forehead and saying "write on the inside of this lump of bone 'phase angles is important'". He was talking about electrical power but he was right.

I bet it was the same guy I had, Dr Quirk and he was.

Yes I have tried amps with no filter, the one I use now will survive no problem and the WD goes to well over 1MHz but the crossover in the speaker hate Radio stations and as live only a mile away from City (London) airport I do get pickup from Radar and RF crap some days, my PIT is RF shielded but on hot day like today I have the door open , and the Radar is on mush......................mush in a regular beat.
And that is much higher than 1MHz, I can sometimes pick up on the mic pleasure sensor sub 10Hz stuff as there is a large underground something near by.
On foggy days I can detect oddly the Radar better, I might make a Gunn Diode detector just for fun.

His name was Reynolds. But he was clearly from the same mould.
Secondary Surveillance Radar operates in the 1GHz range, Primary radar at about 2.5GHz and Airfield Surface Radar at around 15GHz. You are probably getting Primary Radar pulses as that is the more powerful emitter.

I check on the rectum paralyzer later, a arse of a job to get it from loft.

[Geoff.R.G]

This thinking is dangerous!
Conventional loudspeakers are current driven devices, low impedance tells us that, so why is it that manufacturers and reviewers tell us the output of an amplifier in Watts? Surely what would be more appropriate would be the output in Amps but even that could be misleading. We don't actually need to know the output, as long as it is sufficient for our needs. The same applies to cars, most people have no idea of the relationship between power and torque. Magazines and reviews bandy about specifications and measurements with little or no indication to the reader as to the relevance, or otherwise, of what they print.

There are so many terms used and abused by reviewers that it can be no surprise that most buyers haven't a clue. I have seen a post, not sure where, in which the writer was talking about "floor noise", I think he meant "Noise floor' the level at which a signal is lost in the noise. There are other examples.

What has this to do with science getting it wrong? Simple really, to the average person the output of reviewers is science and the try to understand it but in reality most of it is $cience, a quest for the almighty dollar. Getting the timing right, something digital can't do, would probably have a drastic effect on the profits of the companies that trade on the convenience and "superiority" of digital music. It might however do wonders for the artists and performers.

[karatestu]

Indeed Geoff.

I am on holiday in Scotland and I don't usually read hifi comics but I purchased four of the finest just for a laugh. Reading them certainly has been a laugh. Science is ££££££££ these days it seems. I have forgotten the number of instances I came across whole sentences of flowery language that means absolutely nothing and serves no purpose that I can see other than to get the greatest amount of £juices£ flowing in as many middle and old aged little boys with too much money who must have a new toy to play with.

What I want to know is

What transformer has it got, how many secondary windings, what voltage, which topology is used, any unneeded bells and whistles. Number and size of smoothing caps, types of rectifier diodes used, earthing arrangement, how they route the wiring.
What are the drivers and cabinet made of, how many music removing components are in the xover, why the designer took the decisions he or she made, what makes it special or stand out from the crowd.

I am left wanting in every example. There are very few internal photo's printed these days. Is there something to hide ??