Audio Media Server - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 79 Old 11-28-2012, 09:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
postrokfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ft. Collins, CO
Posts: 2,816
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

I also like to think of these things in terms of opportunity costs. If you are deciding between purchasing an AVR or a cheaper AVR + separate DAC, another consideration is the room correction software. If the more expensive AVR has better room correction software, you'll typically get a worthwhile improvement in SQ. Unlike DAC performance, that's not controversial. For example, most people find that upgrading to a higher level of Audyssey MultiEQ definitely does offer SQ benefits in most rooms.

Thanks for the input. I actually have two MultEQ receivers (one in living room, the other in the bedroom) and am satisfied with the results. I'm sure XT or higher do offer better SQ. I also have some lower end Parasound two-channel stuff and toyed with the idea of DACs and decided against (currently using Marantz as pre-amp and Parasound pre-amp for lps).

"Guns for show, knives for a pro..."
postrokfan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 79 Old 11-29-2012, 11:11 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,373
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

So in a test by Harman, Harman found that their room EQ worked better than Audyssey? And that people liked the sound better without Audyssey enabled? The oil companies have funded some climatology studies proving there is no global warming if you'd like to read that, too. LOL
biggrin.gif I must say with 15 pages of excuses to not believe a published, controlled test like this in the other thread, no one came up with as colorful analogy as you did. smile.gif Alas, as most analogies go, they fall apart pretty quickly. Exactly how long you think it will be before the environmentalist lash out with their own data to counter what the oil company research showed? I would think the time would be measured in milliseconds. smile.gif. In this case, the research data was presented at AES conference in October 2009. There was no response that came out in 2010, or 2011. And here we are at the end of 2012 and still nothing.

If you read that thread you see that there was a lot more to this research than a listening test. Indeed, its purpose wasn't to crown an EQ system but to determine what system characteristics leads to listeners detecting a positive or negative preference. In that regard, they performed frequency response measurements of each system and using that, they showed why some of the systems performed worse than others. And importantly in this instance, Audyssey lost out to doing no eq at all. Exactly how do you cook a test to generate that kind of result??? Audyssey was competing with doing nothing.

The results also don't point to cooked tests. Two systems performed worse than no EQ but one came very close to Harman's. Why? Because the last system followed the same kind of frequency response measurements that listeners like. Things like smooth frequency response. And a non-flat response. Because of this kind of analysis, the results of the tests are more durable than this just one instance. If a system like Audyssey puts a mid frequency dip, you will hear that if you know what you are listening for. If it brings the bass down, then you will also feel the lack of energy there that you are used to normally hearing. All of this was detailed in excruciating detail in the other thread.

For the purpose of this thread, the point I want to make is that you simply have no controlled, non-sighted listening test to back your recommendation to the other poster. You merely went by your own subjective experience and what you may have heard about others having a positive experience. When presented with controlled tests that show completely opposite data, the reaction is not to try to learn more about why. But to immediately think corruption and invalidity. In what way these excuses any different than an audiophile questioning validity of blind tests of DACs? They, just like you, have a distrust of Arny's of the world or whoever else run these tests and have their version of reasons of the results are no good and again, like you all, want to believe their gut, and personal sighted experiences. Not saying both camps are equally wrong but that the similarity is uncanny. smile.gif

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #63 of 79 Old 11-29-2012, 11:28 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
cel4145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 11,760
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 248 Post(s)
Liked: 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

biggrin.gif I must say with 15 pages of excuses to not believe a published, controlled test like this in the other thread, no one came up with as colorful analogy as you did. smile.gif Alas, as most analogies go, they fall apart pretty quickly. Exactly how long you think it will be before the environmentalist lash out with their own data to counter what the oil company research showed?

I just am not interested in reading any research that discredits another company's product any more than I am interested in reading climatology study data debunking global warming funded by the oil companies. Just way too much bias there for the research to be credible. And the lack of response doesn't mean it is credible. Just means no one has responded to it yet.

(And, btw, it's not the "environmentalists" who would counter such research coming from oil companies. This was not a "what if" scenario. The very large majority of research by climatologists has for years countered the few studies funded by oil companies.)

Your questions are answered: Speaker FAQ
HT: Energy RC-50, RC-LCR, Veritas VS Surrounds | Dual CHT SS 18.1s | Denon AVR-888 | modified Dayton SA1000 | Antimode 8033C
Desktop: CBM-170 SE | SVS SB-1000 | Audio-GD NFB-11 | HK 3390
Headphone & Portable HE-400 | K612 Pro | HP150 | DX50 | E12
cel4145 is offline  
post #64 of 79 Old 11-29-2012, 02:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

So in a test by Harman, Harman found that their room EQ worked better than Audyssey? And that people liked the sound better without Audyssey enabled? The oil companies have funded some climatology studies proving there is no global warming if you'd like to read that, too. LOL
biggrin.gif I must say with 15 pages of excuses to not believe a published, controlled test like this in the other thread, no one came up with as colorful analogy as you did.

Hmm what alternative universe was that?

I saw an out-of-date, poorly designed test with very limited applicability in this day and age defended tirelessly for 15 pages for some unknown reason by people that have a reputation for wasting everybody's time with such weirdness. ;-)
arnyk is offline  
post #65 of 79 Old 12-03-2012, 07:47 AM
Member
 
TLCW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Motherboards have a lot of noises in music playing.
The quality of the DAC's on motherboard is even worse. .
An external (USB) DAC is a whole lot better in noise suppressing and price may vary from $5 to 1,000+. I use $5 ext DAC to play some background music while I am using computer on Study room 2.0 system
I rather play SSD / SD / USB Flash on Hi-Fi DAC or BD /DVD player with USB input . I use OSD control. on TV.
But I enjoy open CD box and load CD on my vintage CD player and 2.0 Hi-Fi system more as the CDs do not wear out like LP .
TLCW is offline  
post #66 of 79 Old 12-03-2012, 08:29 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLCW View Post

Motherboards have a lot of noises in music playing.

If that is true why is so much commercial music and sound tracks produced on PCs?

That's just it, what you say is not any kind of global rule. Not all motherboards sound the same.
Quote:
The quality of the DAC's on motherboard is even worse. .

Again nothing like a global truth. Many people have PC's with good sound coming off of the motherboards.
Quote:
An external (USB) DAC is a whole lot better in noise suppressing and price may vary from $5 to 1,000+. I use $5 ext DAC to play some background music while I am using computer on Study room 2.0 system

External DACs can work, and you're right they don't have to cost a ton of money. However they have no inherent advantages over all PC systems that have the sound board inside the box or on the system board. Sometimes they are more problematical than other solutions.
arnyk is offline  
post #67 of 79 Old 12-05-2012, 09:36 AM
Member
 
TLCW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
arnky: I agree that some M/B are better than the others, I came across sound cards ( M/B or even in separate board ) with only a few components for DAC, and external DAC may have a lot more. Furthermore, as long as they are inside the computer , the CPU fan, PS fan(s), the ferrite core etc cause noises / interference. Quite similar to inside many AV Receivers where HF Video processing is shut down for pure / direct 2.0 play back.
Anyway, my main point is : to have digital signal going outside the computer and then use a DAC externally ( even the same chip as the MB ) to give sound for better SQ.
TLCW is offline  
post #68 of 79 Old 12-05-2012, 11:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLCW View Post

arnky: I agree that some M/B are better than the others,

Indeed. The general quality level of onboard sound has been rising in general. System boards intended for the HTPC market often have better sound.
Quote:
I came across sound cards ( M/B or even in separate board ) with only a few components for DAC, and external DAC may have a lot more.

All the parts count means is how highly integrated the sound system is. In general it takes fewer and fewer parts with the more modern chips.
Quote:
Furthermore, as long as they are inside the computer , the CPU fan, PS fan(s), the ferrite core etc cause noises / interference. Quite similar to inside many AV Receivers where HF Video processing is shut down for pure / direct 2.0 play back.

The fans run on DC and use SS commutators so they cause few noise problems. I know of no AVRs that have substantially better noise specs when they are used in a non-video mode. Typically the video processing is on its own card(s). Most of the audio processing is done in the digital domain, anyhow.

Quote:
Anyway, my main point is : to have digital signal going outside the computer and then use a DAC externally ( even the same chip as the MB ) to give sound for better SQ.

Trouble is that a DAC chip always has digital data and clock lines running right up to it. That can't be avoided.

Mixed signal (IOW digital and analog on the same circuit card) circuit design has progressed significantly so having digital and analog circuits in the same box just isn't a problem and hasn't been a problem for years.

Take a CD player. Since the beginning CD players have been primarily digital with only a little bit of analog circuity over in one corner.
arnyk is offline  
post #69 of 79 Old 12-05-2012, 02:20 PM
 
SAM64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,592
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 74
Quote:
the ferrite core etc cause noises / interference.

Who told you that?
SAM64 is offline  
post #70 of 79 Old 01-09-2013, 07:44 AM
Member
 
TLCW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

Who told you that?
I am an electronic engineer and building Windows based commercial computer systems for 30 years.
The CPU cooling fan, The fan inside Power supply, Hard Disk ,.. are coils & moving magnets ( i.e. ferrite core) ,- all motors at their RPM , generate RF.
Put a probe inside a Motherboard you can see from the scope before and after the computer is on.
TLCW is offline  
post #71 of 79 Old 01-09-2013, 08:40 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLCW View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

Who told you that?
I am an electronic engineer and building Windows based commercial computer systems for 30 years.

30 years ago was 1983

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows

"Microsoft introduced an operating environment named Windows on November 20, 1985."

Fail!

I admit it, I built my first Windows-based system only about 25 years ago, but since then I personally built about 2,000 of them. How about you?
Quote:
The CPU cooling fan, The fan inside Power supply are coils & moving magnets ( i.e. ferrite core) ,- all motors at their RPM , generate RF.

The idea of fans powered by brushless motors generating RF is pretty interesting.

http://forum.orientalmotor.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=488

"Q: Which motor exhibits the most electrical magnetic interference/noise between AC motors, brushed DC motors, and brushless motors?

A: If we look at the 3 motor's design, construction, and characteristics, the brushless motor would likely exhibit the least amount of EMI. The bearings of both an AC motor and a brushless motor are the only rotating parts. The brushed motor also has rotating brushes to commutate its windings. The brushes of a brushed motor generate some EMI. The current losses resulting from the inefficiency of an AC motor also generates EMI. The brushless motor is more efficient than AC motors so its current losses are lower, which means less EMI.

In addition, we also need to look at EMI generated by the respective controllers or drivers of these motors as well to make a complete comparison. AC inverters which generate sine waves, like our FE series inverters, will output cleaner noise. Some say some brushless motor system generate more erratic noise since it generates square wave pulses. However, components we have in today's driver designs as well as measures to reduce EMI makes this comparison very difficult. Testing is the best method to find out.
"

So friend, got any tests to back up your excpetional claim?

Quote:
Put a probe inside a Motherboard you can see from the scope before and after the computer is on.

Yeah, but what does that have to do with EMI that you say is allegely generated by fans?

And why is it that the audio interfaces with the best dynamic range are on PC cards that have to sit inside a computer box?
arnyk is offline  
post #72 of 79 Old 01-10-2013, 01:11 AM
Member
 
TLCW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I try to explain myself in more details:
After graduation in 1982 Summer in Austin, TX. Then I started selling computers, first IBM PC DOS period packed with my macros for lotus and softwares using dBase II & III then Windows as the platform (when the OS became more stable from 1987). And since then, I had had assembled and sold Desktop / notebook computers of about 300 a year from 1985 to 2000, they were IBM, Dell, HP, Sony, Epson, Fujitsu, Toshiba, Lenovo & Self-Assembles . Then I handled Local Networking & Web -based software systems as project manager. And my only hobbies are AV, Music & DIY audio gears All the people in the computer field whom I know do believe the main unit of a PC is noisy (Noisy fan, video interference) for audio ( CAS) . Also, a lot of threads saying so for many years in knowledge bases . Once , I recalled , back a few years ago, I was looking for the Onkyo PCI sound card, Wavio SE-300PCIE US$200+, a reviewer said he would prefer external over internal sound card more or less repeated what I had said . Also, The shut down of the video circuit in pure audio mode in AVR is for the lesser distortion -not only PS for more headroom but also because of HF interference of the video circuits. The manufacturers ( as what I recall, one is Onkyo) say so for many years til now in their catalog !!!
Bryston says so:
http://hi-fi-avenue.blogspot.hk/2010/12/super-size-your-sonics-with-bryston.html
Furthermore , the air turbulence and vibrations all add to loss in ANALOG stage of amplification in the computer .
There may be some multi-tank missile proof chassis with absolute vibration-free mounts , plus absolute silent fan but ..
I am using Dell Dimension Desktop at Home. I watch and hear you-tube with a External DAC ( USB ) ( 1.5" x 1") . Very clean and clear and with amplified sound much much better than that Dell onboard sound card . It was for US$4.5 in 2011!!!
My DAC is next to my keyboard while the computer is under Desk . The copper shielding of Onkyo PCI sound card may or may not do its work but my CDP is noisy with the variable RCA output though the IR remote chip is shielded by 3M copper film tape. Same circuit external / Internal differ only by the USB interface+ PS + chassis - not much lol!
Anyway, I just want to emphasis: digital signals processing, e.g. computer mixing , studio editing .. ,of course , is all digital,,, is lossless and faultless but the output of a DAC is not audible unless it is amplified to line level .. etc and that analog circuit is subjected to RF frequency , variable/rotating magnetic field interaction, mechanical vibration all add to distortion / Loss . By using USB / coaxial to do DAC outside the computer box is my stand.
p.s. I do see CAS is the trend for future audio. I am DIYing a AK 4396 USB Kit (US$40 + case($6.) +PS( $6.) which is 1 box for all my sources (CD, SACD, DVD Audio, Digital Concerts, Computer Files, Internet Music.. for serious music listening in my system 1. to preamp ...
TLCW is offline  
post #73 of 79 Old 01-10-2013, 04:19 AM
Member
 
TLCW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Also:
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Yeah, but what does that have to do with EMI that you say is allegely generated by fans?

The EMI is magnetic field, when the analog current pass through magnetic field ,though it is moderate, the EM force acting on the current (electrons) alters its velocity , therefore the current / voltage changes. This account for interference / distortions. If It is a moving magnetic field, the result is worse, The voltage / current is fluctuating from its original values - rather than shifted by a finite offset), by fan RPM cycle,
When digital signal pass through the moderate magnetic field , many error- detection / packet-resend will guard and correct for distortions. But in analog, ( as far as I know), has no means to so do as it is not countable (e.g. parity-check logic).

The other questions " best dynamic range card " , I have not seen the statement and , IMHO, I don't agree. . Shortest linkage ? But decent digital signal cables, say LAN (unshielded), go 50 feet easily in a office without loss. For External / Internal DAC , we are talking 3 - 5 feet for Coaxial & USB LOL.
TLCW is offline  
post #74 of 79 Old 01-10-2013, 05:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLCW View Post

Also:
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Yeah, but what does that have to do with EMI that you say is allegely generated by fans?

The EMI is magnetic field, when the analog current pass through magnetic field ,though it is moderate, the EM force acting on the current (electrons) alters its velocity , therefore the current / voltage changes. This account for interference / distortions. If It is a moving magnetic field, the result is worse, The voltage / current is fluctuating from its original values - rather than shifted by a finite offset), by fan RPM cycle,

Obviously not the writing of an EE or any person with adequate training in Electrical Engineering.
Quote:
When digital signal pass through the moderate magnetic field , many error- detection / packet-resend will guard and correct for distortions. But in analog, ( as far as I know), has no means to so do as it is not countable (e.g. parity-check logic).

It is true that when properly implemented digital audio has a great deal of inherent resistance to audible changes during transmission and receiption. However there is no mechanism for retransmission or data in many common digital audio transmission protocols including those used by SP/DIF , TOSLINK and most that are used over USB. Analog signal transmission in noisy contexts is a mature art and even very small signals are commonly transmitted dozens of feet in noise environments with negligible degradation.
Quote:
The other questions " best dynamic range card " , I have not seen the statement and , IMHO, I don't agree.

Speaks to a lack of knowledge of modern audio interface products. A willingness to blithely disagree with well-known facts speaks volumes.
Quote:
Shortest linkage ? But decent digital signal cables, say LAN (unshielded), go 50 feet easily in a office without loss.

The actual distance limit for LAN cables is about 6 times 50 feet or more like 300 feet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_5_cable

"According to the ANSI/TIA/EIA standard for category 5e copper cable (TIA/EIA 568-5-A[5]), the maximum length for a cable segment is 100 meters (328 feet)."
Quote:
For External / Internal DAC , we are talking 3 - 5 feet for Coaxial & USB LOL.

The maximum length for a standard USB cable is either 9 or 15 feet, not 5 feet:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usb

"The USB 1.1 Standard specifies that a standard cable can have a maximum length of 3 meters with devices operating at Low Speed (1.5 Mbit/s), and a maximum length of 5 meters with devices operating at Full Speed (12 Mbit/s).[citation needed]
USB 2.0 provides for a maximum cable length of 5 meters for devices running at Hi Speed (480 Mbit/s)."

The length limit for Coax (SP/DIF) can be 100s of feet depending on the quality of the cable:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spdif

Shows maximum lengths ranging from 100 feet to 1,000 feet depending on format under "Hardware Specifications"

The above two posts (72 and 73) slough just about every issue that I raised, and for what little was actually touched on, the answers were all based on nothing but personal speculations and almost completely erroneous.

The little actually said seems to be just as reliable as the initial claim of building Windows goodly numbers of computers several years before MS initially released the product. :-(
arnyk is offline  
post #75 of 79 Old 01-10-2013, 09:00 AM
Member
 
TLCW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
" Obviously not the writing of an EE or any person with adequate training in Electrical Engineering."

Then, who am I?

You are too Offensive and insulting , This is the most unfriendly 'sharing' site !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, so much talking already. PERIOD. I leave the site for good.
TLCW is offline  
post #76 of 79 Old 01-10-2013, 10:01 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLCW View Post

" Obviously not the writing of an EE or any person with adequate training in Electrical Engineering."

Then, who am I?

I'm talking about what was said.

Here's one very odd statement (of many):

"The EM force acting on the current (electrons) alters its velocity "

Do you seriously believe that external electromagnetic fields alter the velocity of signals or current in a wire?

Furthermore, the current in an electrical wire is different from the speed of the charge carriers (electrons) in the wire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_electricity

"The speed at which energy or signals travel down a cable is actually the speed of the electromagnetic wave, not the movement of electrons."

When the applied voltage is alternating current (such as an audio signal) the electron's velocity is zero.

"When a DC voltage is applied the electrons will increase in speed proportional to the strength of the electric field. These speeds are on the order of millimeters per hour."

If an person doesn't learn this in high school physics, they surely learn it in first year college physics, a universal prerequisite for any EE.
arnyk is offline  
post #77 of 79 Old 01-10-2013, 12:25 PM
Senior Member
 
syd123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: mid-atlantic region of US
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Arnyk,

..You're obviously very well informed when it comes to the technical side of this hobby, but your interpersonal skills could use a bit more work. You just chased from this site, forever it seems, someone who might have contributed a thing or two.

I respect your technical knowledge and have learned from it, but would it kill you to dial down the snide rhetoric a bit?

syd123
syd123 is offline  
post #78 of 79 Old 01-10-2013, 01:06 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 View Post

Arnyk,
..You're obviously very well informed when it comes to the technical side of this hobby, but your interpersonal skills could use a bit more work.

Since you are gratuitously judging me in public, the same might be said of you. ;-)
Quote:
You just chased from this site, forever it seems, someone who might have contributed a thing or two.

Rule of thumb, it is harder to correct self-righteous know-nothings the longer they fester in your presence.

If he was chased away, it was his ego that did the deed.

This guy had and still has all of the chances in the world to contribute something worthwhile, but if you asked me for odds... ;-)

The way the posts read (and they started last year), he may have gone through his whole life making little or no technical sense, but nobody ever corrected him.

It is true that people in sales get a pass from a lot of technical people myself included, when it comes to making sense.
Quote:
I respect your technical knowledge and have learned from it, but would it kill you to dial down the snide rhetoric a bit?

Ah yes, "snide rhetoric" says the man of charm and wisdom with perfect diplomacy. ;-)

It was rhetoric, but snide lies in the eyes of the beholder.

And speaking of eyes, what about that beam in yours? ;-)
arnyk is offline  
post #79 of 79 Old 01-11-2013, 10:23 PM
Member
 
TLCW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
syd123:
Thanks .
Sorry , I think It is waste of time to give good advice, sometimes,

I quote:

"An electric current is a flow of electric charge through an electrical conductor.[1] Electric currents flow when there is voltage present across a conductor....
In electric circuits this charge is often carried by moving electrons in a wire"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current

Also, magnetic field is covered.

Any EE experts want to correct it ?
TLCW is offline  
Reply 2-Channel Audio

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off