caught gesture
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Thread Starter
- #21
I ran a comprehensive Mann-Whitney U test in MATLAB.How did you measure it? Any data?![]()
I ran a comprehensive Mann-Whitney U test in MATLAB.How did you measure it? Any data?![]()
Isn't the Philips DNL very similar to (Richard) Burwen Research Dynamic Noise Filter, a "one-way noise reduction system for tape hiss and record rumble", which was available around the same time?For quite a few years it was present in Philips (Magnavox) cassette tape recorders, alongside Dolby-B.
Eventually it disappeared again (unlike Dolby).
It worked quite well and gave the impression of substantially reduced tape noise without affecting the treble.
It worked with cancellation of higher frequencies at low levels only.
The input signal high pass filtered, amplified and then soft clipped. That signal was inverted in polarity opposite the original signal and was then 'mixed'.
This way only the softest higher frequencies were 'cancelled' while larger higher frequencies were only marginally reduced (inaudible amount).
It worked with tape because the noise levels were pretty well determined. With vinyl or other noise sources it would not work as well.
In the forums we have to do our own filtering. Best not to let it get on your nerves (annoyed) by it.
OP has got one of these:
![]()
The use of measurement techniques applied to artifacts (and not to natural objects and phenomena) is not a science, it is a branch of engineering, and it is rather boring, although mandatory and continuous in any project process.
In the design process, this is such a tedious continuous process that usually in small project teams it is a single engineer who does nothing else, because he has no time.
In large projects, this is done by separate departments, the equipment of which is incommensurably more expensive and more complicated than the equipment of designers.
But there are no design processes here, at this forum, so everything is much more fun here.
Isn't it fun to watch situations "I have an oscilloscope but don't know how to use it and now I will bring scammers out of the industry into the light", isn't it?
Isn't it funny to watch how a crowd of people who learned yesterday about THD (this is a very scary thing!) but still do not know about the logarithmic scale pounce on Bob Carver?
Isn't it fascinating when someone writes some kind of warning letter to unknown "audiophiles with golden ears" and that formidable warning with a list of conditions is used for deep scientific discussions for several hundred pages?
Or, for example, the open repentance of "former subjectivists", aren't they funny as a phenomenon that deserves a scientific approach?
There are a lot of phenomena worthy of scientific study here, and all of them in no way correlate with the boring engineering of measuring the parameters of some DACs.
So it's all good with a science![]()
Unless we use AI for that.That's a good idea - getting rid of one word posts and double posts. Amir would need to recruit more moderators though.
Are you related to Rob Watts?The use of measurement techniques applied to artifacts (and not to natural objects and phenomena) is not a science, it is a branch of engineering, and it is rather boring, although mandatory and continuous in any project process.
In the design process, this is such a tedious continuous process that usually in small project teams it is a single engineer who does nothing else, because he has no time.
In large projects, this is done by separate departments, the equipment of which is incommensurably more expensive and more complicated than the equipment of designers.
But there are no design processes here, at this forum, so everything is much more fun here.
Isn't it fun to watch situations "I have an oscilloscope but don't know how to use it and now I will bring scammers out of the industry into the light", isn't it?
Isn't it funny to watch how a crowd of people who learned yesterday about THD (this is a very scary thing!) but still do not know about the logarithmic scale pounce on Bob Carver?
Isn't it fascinating when someone writes some kind of warning letter to unknown "audiophiles with golden ears" and that formidable warning with a list of conditions is used for deep scientific discussions for several hundred pages?
Or, for example, the open repentance of "former subjectivists", aren't they funny as a phenomenon that deserves a scientific approach?
There are a lot of phenomena worthy of scientific study here, and all of them in no way correlate with the boring engineering of measuring the parameters of some DACs.
So it's all good with a science![]()
I'm not sure that charging money will do much to keep out non-scientific content and/or noise. After all, most people pay to access the internet...My solution was impose a fee per year to non experts so to speak.
Glad you got that off of your chest.The use of measurement techniques applied to artifacts (and not to natural objects and phenomena) is not a science, it is a branch of engineering, and it is rather boring, although mandatory and continuous in any project process.
In the design process, this is such a tedious continuous process that usually in small project teams it is a single engineer who does nothing else, because he has no time.
In large projects, this is done by separate departments, the equipment of which is incommensurably more expensive and more complicated than the equipment of designers.
But there are no design processes here, at this forum, so everything is much more fun here.
Isn't it fun to watch situations "I have an oscilloscope but don't know how to use it and now I will bring scammers out of the industry into the light", isn't it?
Isn't it funny to watch how a crowd of people who learned yesterday about THD (this is a very scary thing!) but still do not know about the logarithmic scale pounce on Bob Carver?
Isn't it fascinating when someone writes some kind of warning letter to unknown "audiophiles with golden ears" and that formidable warning with a list of conditions is used for deep scientific discussions for several hundred pages?
Or, for example, the open repentance of "former subjectivists", aren't they funny as a phenomenon that deserves a scientific approach?
There are a lot of phenomena worthy of scientific study here, and all of them in no way correlate with the boring engineering of measuring the parameters of some DACs.
So it's all good with a science![]()
This is the first time I've heard of this person, but I looked up who he is.Are you related to Rob Watts?
What is science if not observation? Measurements are a form of observation. No?This is the first time I've heard of this person, but I looked up who he is.
It turns out that there are several Rob Watts.
No, absolutely not.
I have nothing to do with either BBС in Germany or Chord Electronics (wow, there are some).
I'm just an "objectivist" in the sense that there are some objective things around, not necessarily very scientific, if I may say so.
Repeatable observation.What is science if not observation? Measurements are a form of observation. No?