Distortions' dynamics and human perceptions-what to measure?

[Guest]

[quote author="recnsci"]Highly offtopic:

Funny thing is, I just noticed that John Roberts sells one gizmo for 400
bucks, that would probably make (if it works well) more diference
(in drum recording) than $20000 spent in signal path electronics

cheerz
urosh[/quote]

I even don't know how to measure cost of detuned drums. :shock:

 

[Guest]

[quote author="JohnRoberts"]
I find the physics or mechanics of this more interesting than the electronics involved. I've patented the basic invention so I can talk freely about how it works with any who are interested, but it's clearly OT here.
[/quote]

Hmmm... Do you mean, if you did not patent it somebody could read you on forum and patent the thing you've described? :shock:

 

[mikep]

you could probably do so research without spending a penny. If you have an orchestral sample CD or even a modern multisampled, sample-playback synth you could look at p, mf, fff for the same note, same instrument in an FFT. I suspect you will rediscover the logarithm.

what about a circuit that has level dependant feedback, going to zero at the clip point? the open loop gain would have to be inversely level dependant. maybe using a couple of log amps? the clipping behaivour would benefit, but the distortion at low levels for class-a no FB is already going to be low so it might be a waste of time. maybe not though.

mike

 

[Guest]

[quote author="mikep"]

what about a circuit that has level dependant feedback, going to zero at the clip point? the open loop gain would have to be inversely level dependant. maybe using a couple of log amps? the clipping behaivour would benefit, but the distortion at low levels for class-a no FB is already going to be low so it might be a waste of time. maybe not though.

mike[/quote]

I did such thing in the early 80'th, to replace output tubes in the amp with dead output transformer:

There are symmetrically connected complementary operational amplifiers (transistors in differential pairs are replaced by diodes, because break-down voltage of b-e junctions is low, and in my case feedback resistance is very low so no transistor is needed).

When overloaded feedback by voltage from output turns gradually down, output transistors turn to amplifiers of the current limited by input transistors, now with local feedback by current.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Hmmm... Do you mean, if you did not patent it somebody could read you on forum and patent the thing you've described? :shock:

No, but I would be a fool to help other manufacturers compete with me.

The whole thrust of the patent system is to get new knowledge published, not hidden as a trade secret.

JR

 

[Guest]

[quote author="JohnRoberts"]

Hmmm... Do you mean, if you did not patent it somebody could read you on forum and patent the thing you've described? :shock:

No, but I would be a fool to help other manufacturers compete with me.

The whole thrust of the patent system is to get new knowledge published, not hidden as a trade secret.

JR[/quote]

Hmmm... I thought it is the way to rename well known things and prevent usage of them by other people anymore.

For example, what if some Microhard Corporation patents "method of connecting of conductive matherials using melted conductors"? :grin:

May be I am a fool, but I believe if I publish my designs openly no crooks can patent them anymore, but since I am still working on them I can always improve them more and more, so competitors will have to run after me forewer.

 

[JohnRoberts]

[quote author="Wavebourn"]

Hmmm... I thought it is the way to rename well known things and prevent usage of them by other people anymore.

For example, what if some Microhard Corporation patents "method of connecting of conductive matherials using melted conductors"? :grin:

May be I am a fool, but I believe if I publish my designs openly no crooks can patent them anymore, but since I am still working on them I can always improve them more and more, so competitors will have to run after me forewer.[/quote]

AFAIK none of mine are renamed variants of some prior art but suspect some may go that way with the inexperieced examiners on the job. I don't see how an overt copy would survive inspection by the courts.

Your's is an odd business plan based on a rather optimistic set of expectations. You may find yourself running alone with no one chasing you.

I'll take my chances with the patent system but concede if attacked by a competitor with deep pockets I may need to look for partners with pockets too.

JR

 

[Guest]

[quote author="JohnRoberts"]

Your's is an odd business plan based on a rather optimistic set of expectations. You may find yourself running alone with no one chasing you.

[/quote]

It exactly what happened with Sun Microsystems when they put their SPARC technology in public domain and tried to heat up competition around it.

 

[Jen]

This a dangerous topic on this forum, as there are those that are die-hard measurement objectivists who will actually ban people for discussing the possibility that there might be things that are audible that can't be measured .

 

[metalockpick]

There are a few great single ended tube amplifiers and a lot of terrible ones. Ditto for mics, preamps, speakers, etc. Since waves are not music, music IS dynamic and transient. If you can hear it but you can't measure it, then you suck at measuring or don't have the proper tools. Distortion analysers are for measuring the purity of sine waves. FFTs measure distortion in audio gear (That's why all the ".001% THD" gear from the 60s/70s/80s was abandoned, because the actual distortion was atrocious). Don't believe any marketing claims. Just because a thing sounds awful in a particular circuit doesn't necessarily mean it's universally awful. Clear and accurate reproduction of natural acoustic sounds is a noble goal, but if your aim is to make your Sequential Circuits Pro One sound extra thicc and sikk, I ain't gonna judge...

 

[user 37518]

This a dangerous topic on this forum, as there are those that are die-hard measurement objectivists who will actually ban people for discussing the possibility that there might be things that are audible that can't be measured .

You just tagged as "dangerous" a thread from 2006.

 

[andia]

You just tagged as "dangerous" a thread from 2006.

there are books, nearly 2k years old, that could be considered dangerous, the way humans fight about their content.

 

[user 37518]

there are books, nearly 2k years old, that could be considered dangerous, the way humans fight about their content.

Lets then talk about how a thread from 2006 can get you banned. On a second thought, lets not, I am not in the mood today.

 

[gyraf]

objectivists who will actually ban people for discussing

Nope, no ban for discussing, but very much so for verbally attacking and openly trolling

/Jakob E.

 

[ruffrecords]

Who is this person "Guest" with no details or number of posts. Are we allowing unregistered people to post now?

Cheers

Ian

 

[user 37518]

Who is this person "Guest" with no details or number of posts. Are we allowing unregistered people to post now?

Cheers

Ian

My best guess is that it is someone who cancelled his account

 

[gyraf]

..naa, this is very-early posts (~17 years ago) from back when you could still participate without registering..

 

[JohnRoberts]

Dead thread walking.... No need to dredge up old business but Wavebourn was one of the very few people kicked off the island, years ago for trolling and unnecessarily anti-social behavior. As I recall he remained active on Gearslutz for years after being asked to leave here. [edit- I just checked and he was active over there as recently as 2018 /edit]

Guest is probably some old posts where the author is no longer a forum member.

JR