In Reply to: Re: So what? posted by john curl on June 11, 2003 at 10:15:40:
""and any other 'critics' of Jon Risch and me into this particuliar discussion""JCIs it required that one must be a "critic" of both of you? And why that pairing?
I am critical of the espousing of bad science, poor behaviour, condescending attitude, and twisting of facts to suit one's needs....not of the people. Therefore, I'm not sure if I fall within the group you are inviting.
Now, as to your question...I've not been critical of the actual test equipment, or the reading of the graphs...I do, however, have an appreciation as to the difficulty in finding 30 nanovolt signals, and am wary of tests which may be beyond the accuracy of the equipment. And, have questioned the applicability of nanovolt signals to audio cables..
That said, I am still far more interested in the technical details surrounding the use of imperfect equipment (imperfect being everything we use every day) in finding signals which are on the hairy edge of resolvable..And in verification by independent test and evaluation.
And in the technical details of what it is you are seeing, and how it is produced..Is it an artifact of the metals? Of the geometry?..or shielding? Or, even, in the RATIO of DCR between the shield, and the center conductor..
For the ST1700B...what is it's rated accuracy and low end resolution..I've not found specs for it, as it's really old..
As I recall, you had found that moving the coax in front of your analyzer changed some of the signals you found. You subsequently found that the analyzer was broadcasting signals which were making it back into the cable. Did you try doing the same for the cables you are testing, with respect to any signals the ST1700 may have been broadcasting, or coupling, into the cable under test?
If the ST1700 is capable of broadcasting these harmonics, then a different cable could indeed, repeatably, pick up these harmonics in a different fashion...
Also, if the output to the cable and the input from the cable are located on the same piece of equipment, then there is a possibility that the overall shield DC resistance of the cable is able to form an intercept loop with the front panel or ground connects on the front panel, witha coupling coefficient dependent on the internal/external ground DRC's, allowing the coupling of harmonics within the ST1700 to the shield. That type of error mechanism will be oblivious to the movement of the cable one would normally do to check for loop coupling. I note that this is from my own experience.. I also note that you saw a difference when you cleaned the contacts on a RS cable, wasn't it?
I don't particularly care for equipment based errors like that scenario, though..not very romantic...I like the low level non-linearity possibility with the Seebeck/Peltier effect..that one would be cool, and wondrously difficult to test...especially if it has merit..
Cheers, John
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: So what? - jneutron 11:01:05 06/11/03 (46)
- Re: So what? - john curl 12:49:47 06/12/03 (45)
- Re: So what? - john curl 22:07:54 06/12/03 (0)
- Re: So what? - jneutron 14:34:11 06/12/03 (42)
- You need an instruction manual? - rcrump 18:54:01 06/12/03 (41)
- People don't read - FairyTale 05:16:20 06/13/03 (40)
- People don't think! - rcrump 05:51:13 06/13/03 (39)
- Oh, Bobby Boy... - FairyTale 10:05:05 06/13/03 (0)
- Hi Bob - jneutron 06:05:51 06/13/03 (37)
- Re: Hi Bob - Dan Banquer 10:22:24 06/13/03 (4)
- Hi Dan - jneutron 10:31:13 06/13/03 (3)
- P.S. - Dan Banquer 10:56:28 06/13/03 (1)
- Re: P.S. - jneutron 12:59:04 06/13/03 (0)
- Re: Hi Dan - Dan Banquer 10:38:32 06/13/03 (0)
- Johnny, sit your butt down - rcrump 06:19:09 06/13/03 (31)
- Re: Johnny, sit your butt down - biggerdog 08:52:58 06/13/03 (19)
- Re: Johnny, sit your butt down - Steve Eddy 10:13:44 06/13/03 (18)
- Thanks Steve! - rcrump 13:20:44 06/13/03 (17)
- HI Bobby - jneutron 14:05:42 06/13/03 (16)
- High yet Johnny? It is Friday! - rcrump 14:24:15 06/13/03 (5)
- My goodness..can't keep the subject line civil there bobby? - jneutron 18:25:10 06/13/03 (4)
- Johnny, I have been civil, but you are the biggest - rcrump 19:20:01 06/13/03 (3)
- No, you haven't.. - jneutron 20:19:00 06/13/03 (2)
- Re: No, you haven't.. - Steve Eddy 21:48:24 06/13/03 (1)
- Re: No, you haven't.. - jneutron 22:05:28 06/13/03 (0)
- Re: HI Bobby - Steve Eddy 14:22:40 06/13/03 (9)
- Hi steve - jneutron 18:28:34 06/13/03 (8)
- Re: Hi steve - Steve Eddy 21:16:37 06/13/03 (7)
- Re: Hi steve - jneutron 21:29:18 06/13/03 (6)
- Re: Hi steve - john curl 21:49:47 06/13/03 (5)
- Re: Hi steve - Steve Eddy 21:53:23 06/13/03 (4)
- Guys??? - jneutron 22:08:39 06/13/03 (3)
- Re: Guys??? - Steve Eddy 22:57:39 06/13/03 (2)
- Re: Guys??? - jneutron 05:55:53 06/14/03 (0)
- Amen! (nt) - rcrump 00:50:50 06/14/03 (0)
- I await even one answer.. - jneutron 07:04:18 06/13/03 (10)
- Re: I await even one answer.. - Phil Tower 07:38:49 06/13/03 (9)
- Re: I await even one answer.. - jneutron 09:09:51 06/13/03 (8)
- Re: I await even one answer.. - john curl 09:24:57 06/13/03 (7)
- Re: I await even one answer.. - jneutron 10:25:19 06/13/03 (6)
- Re: I await even one answer.. - john curl 11:24:09 06/13/03 (0)
- Re: I await even one answer.. - john curl 10:56:24 06/13/03 (4)
- Hi John - jneutron 12:47:00 06/13/03 (3)
- Re: Hi John - john curl 15:24:22 06/13/03 (2)
- Hi John - jneutron 19:05:25 06/13/03 (0)
- Re: Hi John - Steve Eddy 16:13:10 06/13/03 (0)
- Re: So what? - Steve Eddy 13:39:40 06/12/03 (0)