That's exactly how it is.
AND every "TRAFO" works in both directions, even a pickup -> and this is where Bob's approach, among others, starts to get very interesting, no matter what the logical outcome of the investigation.
Correct statements can only be made with a complete model. I'm afraid the Bob Cordell 'ian damping method won't yield any real advantage (which seems to be also Hans P's point).
HBt.
Your so called translation shows that you still haven't read the document in detail and that you are just shooting from the hip.
The paper clearly states that pink noise was used, but for almost six times you repeated that nobody knows what signal was used.
Please read the paper, it clearly mentions pink noise.
The electrical model was generated by converting the impedance into a LTSpice model, having exactly this impedance.
The paper also mentions that with or without the cantilever connected, there was no detectable difference in impedance despite the high accuracy and BW of the VNA measurement, but that does not mean that no information is transduced from Cantilever to Generator, so far for your derogatory "TRAFO" and students theory.
The generator was not constructed by matching the recorded frequency responses but by accepting the validity of the Lorenz reciprocity theorem for passive components, you seem to have missed that somewhere.
The only thing that was constructed was the model for the mechanical part by subtracting the Generator's response including termination the from Recorded overall frequency response using the same termination, resulting in only one possible outcome.
And now by simulating with different termination loads, the life recordings happens to match perfectly to the simulations as a prove of the correctness of the complete model.
Result is two birds with one shot
1) The final prove that the mechanical part is not affected by whatever termination despite many postings in this forum telling the opposite.
2) A valid model for the complete Cart including the mechanical part, useful to showing what different termination does on the FR.
There are definitely things deep down not included in the model, but their contribution have to be within the measured accuracy and go far beyond the scope of my paper.
This is not the first time you asked, but your question is completely unspecified and like I said before, I have no idea what you want to know on top of all the info in the paper.
In my terminology a lower resistance, means a higher resistor value.
In this specific case we went from 50k to 100K, so before coming with unfounded accusations, read before you write.
Some sort of apology from your side would be adequate.
So to conclude, instead of coming with one negative posting after the other, try for once to turn this into positive contributions adding somewhat to the subject.
Hans.
Rectification
that is an observation and not a “derogatory” statement.
1V / 50kOhm = 20µA
1V / 100kOhm = 10µA
You equate electricity (the current) with your definition of resistance in a strange way.
Dear Mr. Polak,
if there is a vendetta between the two of us now, I suggest we play it out as PM ping pong.
best regards,
HBt.
PS
G = 1 / R
Now you have the preferred proportionality - conductance. You obviously don't mean the mechanical side.
I have read the *.pdf paper very carefully and several times. I understand it in detail. This does not change.
Very good, then may I remind you of your PM of 05.02.2025 to me, there you clearly express that it was not noise but a sweep.
This point is undisputed.
Completely logical; I thought this would also be catchy.
Mr. Polak,
that is an observation and not a “derogatory” statement.
A nice attempt at discrediting, but unfortunately I'm not overlooking anything here. I do not question the validity of Lorenz's reciprocity theorem. My critical (and winking) sentences express something else.
We (and especially myself) understood that from the very beginning.
Yes, very much so - they have to, especially if the values used by the network members make this possible in the first place.
Although this part is addressed to everyone, it may be aimed more at Bob C. than at me.
If you equate resistance with load, then of course you are absolutely right in the voltage source model (on the electrical side). Then the load (of the driving source) would be inversely proportional to [V]/[A] .
for example:
1V / 50kOhm = 20µA
1V / 100kOhm = 10µA
You equate electricity (the current) with your definition of resistance in a strange way.
What should the demanded apology look like?
I would very much like to do that. I can simply praise and gloss over everything as I wish - but then it's no longer a discussion or debate.
Dear Mr. Polak,
if there is a vendetta between the two of us now, I suggest we play it out as PM ping pong.
best regards,
HBt.
PS
G = 1 / R
Now you have the preferred proportionality - conductance. You obviously don't mean the mechanical side.
Last edited:
@Hans Polak
I am now quietly withdrawing. Please contact me via PM about this sensitive topic so that we don't disrupt the thread.
thx
I am now quietly withdrawing. Please contact me via PM about this sensitive topic so that we don't disrupt the thread.
thx
Just as an interesting addition to the quadrophonic LP that Bob mentioned, here is a picture of a Shibata tip in a CD4 LP.
It shows the 30Khz additional signal that's needed for demodulation.
The point is that looking at it, the ratio in dimensions between tip and 30Khz signal seems to be so huge that one would expect it to be almost impossible to faithfully reproduce.
Hans
It shows the 30Khz additional signal that's needed for demodulation.
The point is that looking at it, the ratio in dimensions between tip and 30Khz signal seems to be so huge that one would expect it to be almost impossible to faithfully reproduce.
Hans
Many thanks for the beautiful picture of CD4. And if we consider that the information on the 30kHz carrier is angle modulated, then we automatically know why it works. Because the information is no longer in the deflection and therefore no longer in the acceleration.
The line contact (Shibata) is required (mainly) because of the inevitable clamping effect that occurs
Sorry,
I'm already quiet.
The line contact (Shibata) is required (mainly) because of the inevitable clamping effect that occurs
Sorry,
I'm already quiet.
Some posts have been split to a new thread here:
- https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...response-to-clicks-and-pops-unencoded.424462/
With your so called Rectification that does not rectify anything at all, you have presented yourself as a textbook example of a narcissist who demands recognition and attention by telling and suggesting a lot , but so far without any content.
You are not interested in a real discussion, your patronizing and school mastering postings are obviously meant to promote yourself.
In response to your several requests "to provide any detailed and consistent information", suggesting that the information may be incomplete or even incorrect, I have asked you just as many times to be more concrete for what you are looking for, on top of all the extensive information provided in the paper.
Never got an answer.
This proves once more that you are not really interested in a discussion.
With all your interventions, you have killed a discussion with Bob Cordell on very interesting and novel subject, thereby preventing to come to some sort of mutual consensus with Bob.
Like any scientific research, to get the results confirmed, an independent second source should repeat the tests.
So, repeat the whole exercise as described in the paper yourself, and show us the outcome.
That would command respect and hopefully leading to important and in depth discussions.
Hans
Then I would now politely ask Mr. Cordell (@Bob Cordell) to answer the two questions posed by Mr. Polak in his posting #230.
I will not, under any circumstances, disrupt this thread.
hbt.audio
Sadly, this thread has turned somewhat toxic and has devolved into going around in circles. My post #204 pretty much sums up my position, which I believe shows that the damped cartridge loading technique provides accurate RIAA equalization while providing much greater achievable and bandwidth. This will be my last post in this thread.
Bob
Bob
Hi Bob,
Yes true, the thread completely derailed in a non constructive way.
With full respect for your opinion, we can conclude that we can agree to disagree,
All the best.
Hans