Well, of course I cannot 'see' the graphs, but they do seem to not be using
real world tests, I mean not terminating things an testing things in
isolation..

I'm not saying that there will be no effect of these counter measures, but I
do feel that in any given installation there is a heap of wire used for all
sorts of interconnects, all of which probably act as very good aerials.
In the end, I can see him selling a specially built audio room with filtered
mains and steel walls with earth spikes at each corner. Then there is the
acoustic treatment inside, yes, could be a very expensive product delivered
on a low loader.


There is a serious side to all this though, of course. If those making
equipment that creates crap could see their way to stop them making said
crap, and if designers of audio gear did realistic test and just added a
few pence to the cost to make their immunity better, none of this would be
required at all.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
I got my latest copy of 'Stereophile' yesterday and started to read it. I
came across comments by Paul Messenger about some work that Russ
Andrews and Ben Duncan have recently put onto the web. This seems to be
taken by Paul Messenger as showing that Russ's claims re some of his
products are "now supported by proper scientific analysis".

But having looked at

http://www.russandrews.com/downloads...estPremRes.pdf

[above file size 700K]

I can't say I agree with that belief simply on the basis of what the above
contains. But that may in part be because I've examined a past set of
measurements by Ben Duncan and come to rather different conclusions to the
ones he and a co-author asserted about them at the time.[1] I would
therefore like to know all the measurement systems/proceedure details that
are sadly omitted from the above.

I thought others here might be interested to read the above pdf and
consider it for themself.

I am curious to know if the reactions of others agree with my own. In
particular, if others can spot 'The dog that did not bark in the night'.
:-)

Enjoy,

Jim

[1] See
http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/...eshift/cp.html

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics
http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html