Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



"Mr.T" wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

I suspect that Graham and the last AP test set he ever used have been
separated for some time.


If indeed he has ever used one


When did you ever use one you useless ignorant piece of slime ?

Graham

  #82   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



"Mr.T" wrote:

pity he didn't do some testing at the levels
he claims are a problem.


Well of course I bloody well did.

How do you think I know how amplifiers perform at those levels ?

You're a priceless piece of trolling ****.

Graham

  #83   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08


"Eeyore" wrote in message
...
No need to take a manufacturers word for it, sound cards with 0.001%

THD &
IMD are readily available for you to do your own FFT testing.


Right, so you're actually MAKING UP what you say.


Only a moron like you could draw that conclusion from what I wrote.

You've NEVER seen such a spec
NOR have you ever made a measurement to support your idiotic assertion.


I''ve seen plenty of specs, both right and wrong, I have also made hundreds
of measurements, but that doesn't stop you making stupid unsubstantiated
assertions as usual.
Where are YOUR results then, so far you have provided nothing but insults
and proof of your stupidity.

If you have never tested an amplifier yourself


Just how ****ing STUPID are you.


Not as stupid as you obviously.

I DESIGN amplifiers for ****'s sake !


Who hasn't?

Do you seriously think I don't run tests
on them ? I use Audio Precision test equipment.
http://ap.com/


So YOUR amps are inferior then?

Little IDIOT pricks like you and your stupid ideas are a blot on humanity.


Pot, kettle, black!

MrT.


  #84   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08


"Eeyore" wrote in message
...
You're an ignorant stupid prick with no experience of anything so SHUT UP.


Another complete idiot who thinks he owns usenet!

The world is already infested with know-nothing idiots. We don't need

another
one posting here.


Agreed, so you'll stop posting then?

MrT.



  #85   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



"Mr.T" wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

No need to take a manufacturers word for it, sound cards with 0.001%
THD & IMD are readily available for you to do your own FFT testing.


Right, so you're actually MAKING UP what you say.


Only a moron like you could draw that conclusion from what I wrote.


Does having an IQ of 155 make me a MORON ?

I'm fed up with your pathetic drivelling nonsense. There are way too many
complete bloody IDIOTS like you infesting the technical groups giving truly bad
advice.

I actually design pro-audio products that you can buy today.

What are YOUR credentials ?

Graham



  #86   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



"Mr.T" wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

You're an ignorant stupid prick with no experience of anything so SHUT UP.


Another complete idiot who thinks he owns usenet!

The world is already infested with know-nothing idiots. We don't need
another one posting here.


Agreed, so you'll stop posting then?


You have no credibility. You're all talk and no substance like every other
IDIOT.

You can find audio products I designed simply by searching on ebay. What did YOU
ever design ?

Graham



  #87   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08


"Eeyore" wrote in message
...
You have no credibility.
You can find audio products I designed simply by searching on ebay.


Ebay!! You call that credibility :-) :-)

MrT.


  #88   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Peter Larsen[_2_] Peter Larsen[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 724
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08

Eeyore wrote:


[quoting Mr. T]

Only a moron like you could draw that conclusion from what I wrote.


Does having an IQ of 155 make me a MORON ?


Guys, neither of you give an impression of wisdom that is quite on par with
some of your better postings.

Graham


Kind regards


  #89   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08

"Eeyore" wrote in
message
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
in

So what's the THD of your QSC USA amplifier @ 100mW / ~
900mV with a speaker load ? That's YOUR reality.


I rummaged around and found some test data I took some
years back at a power level of 1 watt into an 8 ohm
resistive load.

Test 1: sine wave test with 1 KHz tone.

Stimulus 1 was 1 watt @ 1 KHz into 8 ohm resistive load:

All harmonics through approx 40 KHz were 96 dB or more
below 1 watt.


In that case your test was defective.


On what grounds?

That you disagree with the results?

How low can you go?


  #90   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message


"Eeyore" wrote
in message ...
Miniscule ? Care to give a number ? Can you even give an
example. I've never seen such a number quoted on a spec.


No need to take a manufacturers word for it, sound cards
with 0.001% THD & IMD are readily available for you to
do your own FFT testing.


Agreed. M-Audio's $190 AP 24192 has better than 100 dB dynamic range and ca.
100 KHz bandwidth. Emu has cards that test out easily as good, and are
priced just above $120.

If you have never tested an amplifier yourself, why
pretend you are an expert?


It seems that Grapham's posturing about QSC amps is based on sighted
listening tests, only.

Especially when it is now so
easy at the low power levels you are worried about.


Agreed. It takes next to no addtional infrastructure to test power amps at
the 1 watt level.

The theory is correct, but not necessarily a real
problem.


I'll bet that the 100mW THD is still MORE than the 'just
prior to clip' THD.


Only if one confuses THD+N with THD.

Usually, but still insignificant, so what is the problem?


The problem is that even when faced with actual lab results, Graham attacks
the results instead of learning the lesson.




  #91   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08

"Peter Larsen" wrote in message

Eeyore wrote:


[quoting Mr. T]

Only a moron like you could draw that conclusion from
what I wrote.


Does having an IQ of 155 make me a MORON ?


Guys, neither of you give an impression of wisdom that is
quite on par with some of your better postings.


Agreed.

IQ is an abstract concept, not a measure of audio technical ability.


  #92   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



"Mr.T" wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message

You have no credibility.
You can find audio products I designed simply by searching on ebay.


Ebay!! You call that credibility :-) :-)


Yes, I find the fact that people bought my products by the thousands VERY
credible.

Some of the stuff I have designed was bought in the TENS of thousands and
one was even past the HUNDRED thousand mark.

Graham

  #93   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



Peter Larsen wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

[quoting Mr. T]

Only a moron like you could draw that conclusion from what I wrote.


Does having an IQ of 155 make me a MORON ?


Guys, neither of you give an impression of wisdom that is quite on par with
some of your better postings.


Sorry, this bloody country and its apparent desire to dumb down everything to
the extent that they now give away graduate degrees with the Corn Flakes is
getting to me.

Graham

  #94   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote

So what's the THD of your QSC USA amplifier @ 100mW / ~
900mV with a speaker load ? That's YOUR reality.

I rummaged around and found some test data I took some
years back at a power level of 1 watt into an 8 ohm
resistive load.

Test 1: sine wave test with 1 KHz tone.

Stimulus 1 was 1 watt @ 1 KHz into 8 ohm resistive load:

All harmonics through approx 40 KHz were 96 dB or more
below 1 watt.


In that case your test was defective.


On what grounds?

That you disagree with the results?


On the grounds that I know it to be 100% implausible. I'd be stunned if
I could design a low-cost commercial amp that good quite frankly and I
know that Pat Quilter's no better at it than I am.


How low can you go?


I didn't actually say that to YOU because I was being nice but you
really do need to revisit your test methods.

The numbers you quoted suggests to me that there was no load attached.
Maybe you'd like to try the test again ?

Graham


  #95   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



Arny Krueger wrote:

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
"Eeyore" wrote


Miniscule ? Care to give a number ? Can you even give an
example. I've never seen such a number quoted on a spec.


No need to take a manufacturers word for it, sound cards
with 0.001% THD & IMD are readily available for you to
do your own FFT testing.


Agreed. M-Audio's $190 AP 24192 has better than 100 dB dynamic range and ca.
100 KHz bandwidth. Emu has cards that test out easily as good, and are
priced just above $120.


I was talking about POWER AMPLIFIERS, not sound cards !

Graham



  #96   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



Arny Krueger wrote:

"Peter Larsen" wrote
Eeyore wrote:

[quoting Mr. T]

Only a moron like you could draw that conclusion from
what I wrote.


Does having an IQ of 155 make me a MORON ?


Guys, neither of you give an impression of wisdom that is
quite on par with some of your better postings.


Agreed.

IQ is an abstract concept


Abstract in what way ?

Graham

  #97   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08

"Eeyore" wrote in
message
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Peter Larsen" wrote
Eeyore wrote:

[quoting Mr. T]

Only a moron like you could draw that conclusion from
what I wrote.

Does having an IQ of 155 make me a MORON ?

Guys, neither of you give an impression of wisdom that
is quite on par with some of your better postings.


Agreed.


IQ is an abstract concept


Abstract in what way ?


Abstract in the sense that IQ is a single number, and human intelligence is
not yet well enough understood to effectively reduce it to a single,
one-size-fits-all number.

We can't even do that with power amps, and they are fantastically simple
compared to the human mind. ;-)



  #98   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08

"Eeyore" wrote in
message

Sorry, this bloody country and its apparent desire to
dumb down everything to the extent that they now give
away graduate degrees with the Corn Flakes is getting to
me.


I don't know what you're talking about, Graham. I have two children with
PhDs and one with a BS and a MBA. I've monitored the work they did to get
the degrees they've got, and it was a whole lot more than opening a box of
Wheaties. ;-)

I also know a little something about their IQs and mental abilities. None of
them are slouches in the IQ department to say the least, but their generally
useful thinking ability ranking pretty much reverses the order of their IQs.
I think that they would all agree with that evaluation, as well.

Other than a few bleeding souls, most adults with very high IQs keep that
info pretty quiet.


  #99   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08

"Eeyore" wrote in
message
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
"Eeyore" wrote


Miniscule ? Care to give a number ? Can you even give
an example. I've never seen such a number quoted on a
spec.


No need to take a manufacturers word for it, sound cards
with 0.001% THD & IMD are readily available for you to
do your own FFT testing.


Agreed. M-Audio's $190 AP 24192 has better than 100 dB
dynamic range and ca. 100 KHz bandwidth. Emu has cards
that test out easily as good, and are priced just above
$120.


I was talking about POWER AMPLIFIERS, not sound cards !


I guess you haven't noticed that Mr. T and I are now talking about what it
takes to make effective tests on high performance power amps.


  #100   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08

"Eeyore" wrote in
message

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Eeyore" wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote

So what's the THD of your QSC USA amplifier @ 100mW /
~ 900mV with a speaker load ? That's YOUR reality.


I rummaged around and found some test data I took some
years back at a power level of 1 watt into an 8 ohm
resistive load.

Test 1: sine wave test with 1 KHz tone.

Stimulus 1 was 1 watt @ 1 KHz into 8 ohm resistive
load:

All harmonics through approx 40 KHz were 96 dB or more
below 1 watt.


In that case your test was defective.


On what grounds?


No grounds provided other than a gut feel.

That you disagree with the results?


On the grounds that I know it to be 100% implausible.


I believe that you're using the resolution of the controversy to judge it.
That's a fallacy, you know.

I'd be stunned if I could design a low-cost commercial amp
that good quite frankly and I know that Pat Quilter's no
better at it than I am.


Show me your evidence.

How low can you go?


I didn't actually say that to YOU because I was being
nice but you really do need to revisit your test methods.


Been there, done that.

The numbers you quoted suggests to me that there was no
load attached.


Not a chance.

The tests were done as follows. We tested 5 amplifiers, at 4 power levels,
with two different loads. We tested each amplifier 5 times. The first test
of each group of 5 started by playing back a 3 minute sequence of test
signals, both test tones and music, and recording the output of the
amplfiier. A 1 KHz test tone at the same level as the peak level of the
sequence was used to set the operational level at the beginning of each
test. The peak level of the sequence as played and recorded was 1 dB below
FS of the recording and playback equipment.

The sucessive 4 additional tests in each group were performed by feeding the
output signal from the previous test into the next one.

The recording and playback was done using a LynxTWO under the control of
CoolEdit 2.1 running in 32 bit 96 KHz multitrack mode. The LynxTWO was
running in 24 bit mode.

What I have today are the recordings of the input and output signal. I found
them on some old hard drives that I archived.

The power levels were 1 watt, 10 watts, 100 watts, and a "full output" level
that we chose on the spot to correspond to a nice round number that was
below clipping throughout the test sequence.

The two test loads were a resistive load composed of NI wirewound resistors,
and a reactive speaker load simulator that I have documented many times in
many places including both of my web sites.

By the time we tested each amplifier at its "full output" level, we were
definately straining the infrastructure. The 2 KW line conditioner was
humming loudly, and the test loads were more than a little warm. Becase of
the way we did the tests, the actual duration of the high-powered sine wave
tests was only a few seconds so nothing broke and no breakers tripped. The
speaker simulator was by far the easist load for any of the amplifiers to
drive.

The bottom line is that there was no doubt in my mind that the amplifiers
were tested under load. By the end of the test all we had to do is put our
hand a few inches over the load to know which one we were using! ;-)

Maybe you'd like to try the test again ?


What, and subject myself to more baseless redicule? ;-)





  #101   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Peter Larsen" wrote
Eeyore wrote:

[quoting Mr. T]

Only a moron like you could draw that conclusion from
what I wrote.

Does having an IQ of 155 make me a MORON ?

Guys, neither of you give an impression of wisdom that
is quite on par with some of your better postings.


Agreed.


IQ is an abstract concept


Abstract in what way ?


Abstract in the sense that IQ is a single number, and human intelligence is
not yet well enough understood to effectively reduce it to a single,
one-size-fits-all number.


In as much as it's an over-simplification I'd agree with you but it's the only
FOM we currently have available.


We can't even do that with power amps, and they are fantastically simple
compared to the human mind. ;-)


Well .... it COULD be done with amplifiers, but we'd have to agree to spec THD
at 100m as well as full power.

Graham


  #102   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

Sorry, this bloody country and its apparent desire to
dumb down everything to the extent that they now give
away graduate degrees with the Corn Flakes is getting to
me.


I don't know what you're talking about, Graham. I have two children with
PhDs and one with a BS and a MBA. I've monitored the work they did to get
the degrees they've got, and it was a whole lot more than opening a box of
Wheaties. ;-)


As it should be. Education at that level *should* be HARD ! That's the whole
point of it.

I take it their degrees aren't in 'media studies' or the like then !


I also know a little something about their IQs and mental abilities. None of
them are slouches in the IQ department to say the least, but their generally
useful thinking ability ranking pretty much reverses the order of their IQs.
I think that they would all agree with that evaluation, as well.

Other than a few bleeding souls, most adults with very high IQs keep that
info pretty quiet.


It seems you missed the point of my post.

I'm pleased to hear you have smart high-achieving kids. Did they not ever
encounter 'peer pressure' to be stupid ?

Graham


  #103   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
"Eeyore" wrote

Miniscule ? Care to give a number ? Can you even give
an example. I've never seen such a number quoted on a
spec.

No need to take a manufacturers word for it, sound cards
with 0.001% THD & IMD are readily available for you to
do your own FFT testing.

Agreed. M-Audio's $190 AP 24192 has better than 100 dB
dynamic range and ca. 100 KHz bandwidth. Emu has cards
that test out easily as good, and are priced just above
$120.


I was talking about POWER AMPLIFIERS, not sound cards !


I guess you haven't noticed that Mr. T and I are now talking about what it
takes to make effective tests on high performance power amps.


I recognise that is now the topic of this sub-thread but my comments you
quoted were not in reference to them.

Graham


  #104   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08

"Eeyore" wrote in
message
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

Sorry, this bloody country and its apparent desire to
dumb down everything to the extent that they now give
away graduate degrees with the Corn Flakes is getting to
me.


I don't know what you're talking about, Graham. I have
two children with PhDs and one with a BS and a MBA. I've
monitored the work they did to get the degrees they've
got, and it was a whole lot more than opening a box of
Wheaties. ;-)


As it should be. Education at that level *should* be HARD
! That's the whole point of it.

I take it their degrees aren't in 'media studies' or the
like then !


The PhDs are in Cancer Biology, which included 5 years in research labs.

The BS holder did his work in chemical engineering and environmenal
engineering

I also know a little something about their IQs and
mental abilities. None of them are slouches in the IQ
department to say the least, but their generally useful
thinking ability ranking pretty much reverses the order
of their IQs. I think that they would all agree with
that evaluation, as well.

Other than a few bleeding souls, most adults with very
high IQs keep that info pretty quiet.


I'm pleased to hear you have smart high-achieving kids.
Did they not ever encounter 'peer pressure' to be stupid ?


Not at home! ;-)


  #105   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08



Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

I'm pleased to hear you have smart high-achieving kids.
Did they not ever encounter 'peer pressure' to be stupid ?


Not at home! ;-)


You know what I'm talking about though don't you ?

I had parents who really encouraged my education too. They were fabulous.
They made it fun to learn things, something I've never lost. It's just a
shame they died so young.

Graham




  #106   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default Stereo receievers: THD of .04 vs. .08


"Eeyore" wrote in message
...
Some of the stuff I have designed was bought in the TENS of thousands and
one was even past the HUNDRED thousand mark.


Tell us the name of this amp please, and is the circuit available on-line
for us to look at?

MrT.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA: 360 Systems Model 2800 Programmable stereo Parametric EQ for stereo bus or mastering kellykevm Pro Audio 0 February 16th 07 03:54 AM
Escort '97 - Can I add Stereo RCA input plugs to my factory stereo? David Car Audio 0 November 29th 04 09:46 PM
AM receievers and tuners,1. Patrick Turner Vacuum Tubes 14 June 26th 04 07:26 PM
"Lost" left channel into stereo headphones through 3.0 / 3.5 mm stereo jack socket / plug Clive Long,UK General 0 June 9th 04 05:57 PM
Mazda Tribute - Stereo upgrades/mods, 7 speaker cd and cassette stereo - upgrd prairieboy Car Audio 0 March 9th 04 03:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:53 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"