Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Peter...please read a little more slowly...

Peter: ""I just read your response to another JR post in which you ripped him for quoting partially and out of context. Perhaps you should re-read your own post above. (preamble for continuity)

Peter: ""You took one (minor) point out of JR's post (re non-linear capacitance of PVC), argued with it, and then proceeded to trash the entire post without ever referring to, or commenting on, the primary point(s) of the post.""

What is your purpose for this particular fiction? At no point in my post did I argue with the non-linearity of PVC...You had better re-read the post, to correct your opinion.. To wit, this is exactly what I said:

For long lengths of wire pair, be it zip, or coax, many meters are incapable of isolating the series inductance presented by the wire from the actual capacitance measurement, therebye confounding the measurement of both series resistance and capacitance.

To correct for that effect is quite simple. Cut the cable into foot long lengths, and measure the parallel capacitance of all of them. That gets rid of the long inductance in question.(Of course, it also gets rid of the cable..something I believe that vendor had no desire to allow ).

So where exactly did I argue the point? In point of fact, the measurement of 10 feet of zip does carry with it the issue of series inductance getting in the way of accurate capacitance measurement as you scan up the frequency range..meter sensitive, of course..so, a sharp person would have noticed that, and gone back to re-read the dielectric using this new test method, to assure that one's own measurements were accurate.?

Peter: ""What about the DF vs. DA question? Since that question goes right to the heart of the thread, and was the first point JR raised, perhaps it should be addressed?

Yes, it should...and he raised it..what is it you are requesting of me???

Peter: ""The AH article used the inflammatory "debunking the myth of DA" title, and then completely misses the point technically. Quite a screw-up!

I also have difficulty with the "debunking" schtick..because it allows for no advancement in the science of human hearing and binaural image restoration. So, my work on PC's and lateralization is actually heading towards rendering a lot of the AH commentary irrelevant. If what I am considering is correct, he'll have a lot of re-typing to do, as his science rug could be pulled out from under his feet..

But hey, that debunking stuff does provide site hits..and for now, at least for what I know well, he is within the realm of known engineering. Rod M should be concerned here with the ridiculous reactions produced here by people associated with AA..the cult style..

Peter: ""If you want to be on a crusade to clean up JR that's your business. I'm not defending his posts or his style. However, criticizing him for the way he posts and then doing EXACTLY the same thing is just sad.""

You don't get it..You do so defend his arrogant posts and style by both your disregard for his blatant attacks, and by running interference for him by making up fiction to attack me as you just did.

If you wish to show my behaviour as incorrect...do so using actual facts...not by making up things as you just did..

Peter: ""Do you plan to provide any TECHNICAL input on the primary point of the post, or are you sticking to the op-ed commentary?

technical input? I did, with an explanation of capacitance measuring errors, how to correct them, and why AH did not..

Please read the posts a little slower...you jumped the gun on this one..

Cheers, John




This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Parts Connexion  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.