Words Of Wisdom by John Curl

[Blumlein 88]

They were tested for EMI/RFI noise production at, say, 10A? If not, then maybe nobody thought of it?

I'll leave off here with one final observation. Here is an graph showing what it takes to bias on a tunnel diode to be used in an oscillator at room temperature:
View attachment 361584

This is not to say I think the coating on the cylinder generated noise by tunneling. Maybe or maybe not. Only point here is that some electronic devices can function at lower than .6v or .7v

The point is Bybee is a con trying to con people out of money for stories attached to useless products. If they make you think it might maybe could be possible what they claim, then it only shows they've told a good story to you. Your post is an example of someone falling for their con. When people have shown you who they are believe them.

 

[Wanman]

I don't think I'm falling for a con. I know the advertising claims are absurd.

Its just that for me what the marketing department does is a separate function from what the engineering department does.

I would like to separate out the two job functions and look at the engineering part of it: Do the devices do anything real under any specified operating conditions at all? From the responses so far, it seems at least one possible electronic effect was not measured for.

Regarding the advertising claims, I will say straight out they are B.S. in my opinion too.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I don't think I'm falling for a con. I know the advertising claims are absurd.

Its just that for me what the marketing department does is a separate function from what the engineering department does.

I would like to separate out the two job functions and look at the engineering part of it: Do the devices do anything real under any specified operating conditions at all? From the responses so far, it seems at least one possible electronic effect was not measured for.

It is your life to waste your time as you wish. When a company has repeatedly lied and played fast and loose with the facts seems strange to continue offering the benefit of doubt. Maybe after you've spent time doing such tests on a few of their products you'll feel differently. We don't need to test out theories of flat earthers and they have more credibility than Bybee.

 

[SIY]

They were tested for EMI/RFI noise production at, say, 10A? If not, then maybe nobody thought of it?

That’s not their claim. This just something pulled out of thin air.

I will admit I didn’t test their momentum at escape velocity, either. Nor their properties under neutron bombardment.

 

[SIY]

I don't think I'm falling for a con

The only other alternative I can see is not an attractive one.

 

[Wanman]

That’s not their claim. This just something pulled out of thin air.

I will admit I didn’t test their momentum at escape velocity, either. Nor their properties under neutron bombardment.

Running some current through something rated for 15A is something no reasonable person would think of?

OTOH, momentum at escape velocity and or neutron bombardment read to me a lot like Strawman examples.

Straw Man Fallacy

What is a straw man fallacy? Are you making this error without even realizing it? Learn about this error in arguments with Excelsior OWL.

owl.excelsior.edu

Straw man - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sy, with all due respect sir, I think you are being unreasonable.

 

[SIY]

Running some current through something rated for 15A is something no reasonable person would think of?

Testing for claims that were never made by a fraud is a sucker's game. Or a vehicle for a shill. Testing the claims that ARE made and finding them false is the way frauds like Bybee and hucksters like Curl are exposed.

 

[SIY]

Then in his capacity as an engineer and a scientist he screwed up. He claimed it didn't do anything at all without putting on his engineer hat and seriously checking. IOW, he made up a story that the Bybee didn't do anything, and used his reputation as an engineer to back up something he couldn't be bothered to check for truth. IOW, in a way he lied. He said the Bybee couldn't do anything when he never really checked to see if it could.

That, of course, is a lie. Any 0.030 ohm resistor will do something and Scott never said anything to the contrary. Attributing false things to someone who can't defend himself is unbelievably sleazy.

Scott checked to see if it would do what it claimed. So did I. It didn't. It acts exactly like a 0.030 ohm resistor. It's a fraud. The claims made were fraudulent. You are shilling for a fraud and doing it in a remarkably immoral and disgusting way.

 

[sq225917]

They don't. They are low value resistors (the ones I tested were 30 milliohms) wrapped in layers of bullshit and fraud.

It's fraud. Straight up. And fraud of the most transparent sort.

For the record, that's the greatest thread in diyaudio.com history. It was a joy to read it day by day, DUT by DUT.

John curl made some amazing amps, and one of the best sensible money phonostages of the day. He's like a bitter, arsehole version of Nelson Pass. No offence to pappa.

 

[SIY]

For the record, that's the greatest thread in diyaudio.com history.

You shoulda seen the stuff that was pulled.

 

[Keith_W]

That, of course, is a lie. Any 0.030 ohm resistor will do something and Scott never said anything to the contrary. Attributing false things to someone who can't defend himself is unbelievably sleazy.

Scott checked to see if it would do what it claimed. So did I. It didn't. It acts exactly like a 0.030 ohm resistor. It's a fraud. The claims made were fraudulent. You are shilling for a fraud and doing it in a remarkably immoral and disgusting way.

Hasn't Scott passed away (RIP)? So yeah he won't be defending himself.

BTW is this the thread that was referenced: Bybee fraud protection. Should be fun reading.

 

[Blumlein 88]

SIY, Yes I agree about exposure of false advertising. IIRC Scott Wurcer did something like that in another forum. He showed that a Bybee didn't do one thing the advertising claimed. Not one. One of the most stupid claims was that it would make a TV picture look better if a Bybee was set on top of the TV set, something like that anyway. IMHO there was no need for Scott to try that, it was obviously doomed to failure.

However, IMHO where Scott when wrong was when he took apart the Bybee, and based on a very cursory visual inspection claimed it didn't do anything at all. Why do I think he went wrong there? Because everything he said up until that point was absolutely true. Then in his capacity as an engineer and a scientist he screwed up. He claimed it didn't do anything at all without putting on his engineer hat and seriously checking. IOW, he made up a story that the Bybee didn't do anything, and used his reputation as an engineer to back up something he couldn't be bothered to check for truth. IOW, in a way he lied. He said the Bybee couldn't do anything when he never really checked to see if it could.

Of course, back in those days his response was more understandable because we knew much less about the audible effects of EMI/RFI noise on audio gear. Its only been with increased use of sigma-delta modulation that we have added extremely nonlinear noise generators into the world of what had been mostly analog audio. Nowadays, we should be much more attuned to the possibility of what looks like noise on an FFT may in reality may be a deterministic signal. In this very audio forum @KSTR showed the time domain waveform of ESS hump distortion. How about that, it was more of a signal than a noise when a way was found to display it.

And so, now that we know more about noise, or what appears to be noise, and how it can intermodulate with audio signals, the question of whether or not Bybees ever did anything physical to affect sound may once again be relevant in the sense that it may add to our understanding of what can be euphonic noise intermodulation effects in some systems.

Thus, I reject name calling type responses such as saying I must be stupid or a shill. Neither one my friend. I am just interested in noise as it affects audio. Nothing more.

Ridiculous as simple as that. Not what Scott Wurcer said either.

 

[Graham849]

Hasn't Scott passed away (RIP)? So yeah he won't be defending himself.

BTW is this the thread that was referenced: Bybee fraud protection. Should be fun reading.

omg, a thread almost as interesting as skim reading three body problem trilogy over 4 days.

 

[BDWoody]

I am just interested in noise as it affects audio.

That was just a bunch of nonsense.

Enough noise for a while.

 

[solderdude]

Of course we know that 'noise matters even at -350dB' which we can learn from a 'reputable source' who is the brain behind some expensive but usually well performing circuits.
Maybe we can fold and unfold a little of that noise in here as well ?

(Introducing some extra unwanted noise, albeit at inmeasurable low level, in this thread just because I felt it would not further this discussion)

 

[antcollinet]

Of course we know that 'noise matters even at -350dB' which we can learn from a 'reputable source' who is the brain behind some expensive but usually well performing circuits.
Maybe we can fold and unfold a little of that noise in here as well ?

(Introducing some extra unwanted noise, albeit at inmeasurable low level, in this thread just because I felt it would not further this discussion)

This always makes me laugh. "I am just interested in noise as it affects audio." as though noise can alter perception of sound in some way other than the presence of noise.

If you can't hear noise, you don't have a noise problem.


(Just my own thread noise injection post)

 

[solderdude]

If you can't hear noise, you don't have a noise problem.

Words Of Wisdom by antcollinet​