In Reply to: Re: Remember the point of the thread.... posted by john curl on May 5, 2004 at 23:04:55:
I got SY, a PhD in materials science over recently. He sees what you and I have seen.Did you borrow a cup of red herrings from Jon, John?
I've never said you weren't seeing what you were reporting to see. I've only addressed what you claimed to be the the CAUSE of what you were seeing.
Since you hold SY's Ph.D. in materials science in such high esteem (higher than he does), why don't you ask him about dielectric absorption? I did. You probably won't like much of what he has to say about it though.
When's he finally going to finish his gauge R&R on your test setup?
When it comes to DA, only an asymmetrical pulse really pulls out DA.
So what? Tell me, John, how does DA behave fundamentally any differently with regard to an asymmetrical pulse than any other RC circuit or RL circuit for that matter?
Pease's work is also very good and we referenced him in our own research paper, even though he doesn't think much about audio quality, himself.
So what? Are you saying his understanding of DA's fundamental behavior is flawed?Of course, SE would have to discount both Scott Wurcer and Walt Jung, as well as me, in order to attack my DA measurements, since I got the technique from them.
The technique is fine. But the technique gives you effectively the same result whether you're measuring DA or an equivalent RC circuit.
So what makes DA any more a problem than any other RC or RL circuit element?
We have varified our measurements by computer simulation.
Sure. It's verified by computer simulation using ideal RC circuit elements. So what makes DA worse than any other RC circuit elements in the system or for that matter RL circuit elements?
se
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Remember the point of the thread.... - Steve Eddy 00:14:05 05/06/04 (0)