Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:35:09 +0000, John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
mick wrote:

On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:32:51 -0300, robert casey wrote:

snip
Okay, how about class AB? That's usually a push pull configuration
where, at or near zero crossing, both devices are conducting. But
get above, say 10% of maximum input signal level, one of the devices
stops conducting, and the other device is doing the work. Lets also
say that this is a 100W amplifier, if you run it with an input signal
that makes only 1 watt (the volume control is set low), then, sure
you could call it a 1 watt class A amp. But that'd be rather
silly...

Class B is where there is no class A overlap. Sure, you could have
low quiescent current, but you could easily have crossover
distortion. And it'd sound like a cheap op-amp...

snip


AFAIK classes AB and B are *always* PP, as they both depend on that
mode for cancellation of even harmonics. You just can't do that with SE
output.

That is presumably true in audio applications, but it isn't true in all
applications, for example single ended class AB and class B amplifiers
are often used in applications like Television broadcast transmitters.


dunno... What I know about TV broadcast transmitters can be written on
the screen grid of a 2A3. ;-)

I suppose you can run SE class AB by running the bias low though. Whether
you'd want to listen to it (on an audio system) is something else...

--
Mick (Working in a M$-free zone!)
Web: http://www.nascom.info http://mixpix.batcave.net

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

Serge Auckland

A lot of the problem with the term "engineer" in English
stems from the use of the word "engine" to mean a machine,
consequently an engineer is perceived by the general
public to be someone who tends a machine. Hence when my
washing machine breaks down, Hotpoint send "an engineer",
or it was the "engineer" who greased the wheels of a steam
engine on the railways.

However, I understand that the root of the word "engineer"
is the same as the word "ingenuity" and that consequently,
an "engineer" is someone who practices "ingenuity". That's
why I have always been proud to be called an "engineer",
and why I complain to Hotpoint that they're sending me a
fitter or a mechanic, or at best a technician, not an
"engineer".

I'm proud to *be* an engineer...whatever they call me.

To paraphrase Marx, philosophers have interpreted the world
so that engineers can change it.

Incidentally, I thought train drivers drive trains, and
engineers keep the engine running, mostly by shovelling
coal. Hence with the coming of diesels, drivers remain
whereas engineers, in that sense, are gone.

cheers, Ian

Spitting on Newton's grave (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

On Oct 26, 7:59 am, Andre Jute wrote:
On Oct 26, 6:45 am, Eeyore
wrote:



Andre Jute wrote:
On Oct 26, 6:18 am, Thomas Tornblom wrote:
I am probably making a mistake, sticking my head into this, but
doesn't your statement:
---
Here we have three self-proclaimed engineers claiming that Class A is
an amplification Class in which "the output device(s)never cease
conducting under any signal condition."
---

fall flat when you consider that it is no longer a Class A amp if you
drive it outside of the designed range?

Exactly. I'm pointing out the idiocy of Messrs Stevenson, Krueger and
Pearce in negating their definition within the same sentence: "the
output device(s)never cease conducting under any signal condition."
That's not my statement, hence the quotation marks: it's their
statement. They have several times repeated that silly statement and
hotly defended it with personal abuse.

You're the miserable ****ing abusive (and stupid. ingorant, pontlessly
argumentative) one here Joot.

You're missing the point, Poopie. There is a certain decency in
physics, as in society, which we honour by paying attention to the
very words of the classical definitions, and new definitions when they
achieve general acceptance. You spat on Newton's grave when for your
personal, petty purposes you crudely redefined a classic definiton.
Arny Krueger and Don Pearce stood beside you and spat on Newton's
grave.

Now you've been caught out and you're abusive about it. You're scum,
and so are Krueger and Pearce.

By those criteria NOTHING is Class A, so we can all stop talking about it now.

You're right. Your malicious qualification "under any signal
condition" makes Class A impossible. I'm glad you now admit it. Will
you also apologize for your offensive behaviour and for wasting so
much of our time? Can we expect apologies from Krueger and Pearce as
well for spitting on Newton's grave?

Graham

Andre Jute
Zero tolerance for the enemies of science

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

On Oct 26, 8:27 am, Chel van Gennip wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Chel van Gennip wrote:

Andre Jute wrote [of Don Pearce]:
he has never overdriven
a Class A amp; perhaps he doesn't own a Class A amp; on the evidence
in this thread he doesn't even know what a Class A amp is.
There is a difference between an amplifier and a mode/class of
amplification.

I know, Chel. In fact I pointed out elsewhere that the class of
amplifier and the class of operation shouldn't be confused in casual
conversation because it leads to loose thinking. But I didn't think
that it was necessary to tell you guys that...

Some amplifiers, designed to operate in Class A, will
operate in Class C when input signals are exceeding specifications
(overdriven).

That is why we have this thread, to explain to the three self-styled
"engineers" Graham Stevenson, Arny Krueger and Don Pearce that a Class
A amplifier must have its signal limited or it is no longer a Class A
amplifier. How can any properly educated engineer not know that the
signal in an amplifier class is by necessity limited? Yet those three
signed their names repeatedly to a claim that Class A is
an amplification Class in which "the output device(s)never cease
conducting under any signal condition."

You really should try to express yourself more clearly. There are
several modes of amplification. In Class A "the output device(s)never
cease conducting" Amplifiers are designed to use one (or more) modes of
amplification. When used outside the specified signal range, the
amplifier wont operate in the designed mode(s) of amplification. e.g. if
you don't supply mains power, none of the output devices will conduct.
Even switched off, and not operating at all, an amplifier designed to
operate in Class A will remain an amplifier desinged to operate in Class A,

No need for flaming.

--
Chel van Gennip (chel vangennip nl)
Visit Serg van Gennip's sitehttp://www.serg.vangennip.com

You want to pull the plug to make Poopie's silly misdefintion work, go
ahead, waste your own time. If you're here for serious work, see "A
challenge to the Dutch".

Andre Jute
Our legislators managed to criminalize fox-hunting and smoking; when
will they get off their collective fat backside and criminalize
negative feedback? It is clearly consumed only by thickoes.

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

On Oct 26, 9:23 am, Eeyore
wrote:
Deputy Dumbya Dawg wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote

By your thinking possibly NOTHING would be Class A. That's
clearly a very silly idea.

If it ever is powered down there goes class A eh?

That's another way of doing it.

Apparently the non-engineers like the miserable piece of slime Joot can't
understand the importance of context (like 'is the power on').

Graham

I love it. Serge Auckland tells us engineers are supposed to be men of
ingenuity. The best Poopie can think of after Poopie screws the pooch
is to pull the plug.

Phil is right. Someone should pull the plug on Poopie. He is an
embarrassment. What is even more embarrassing is that Poopie didn't
even have the plug-pulling idea first. No, Chel van Gennip and Dogface
had to tell Poopie twice before he got it.

No, Poopie, no! You're on the pavement to leave a turd, not to eat the
turds already there. Even for a certifiable idiot, you're a reeeeeeeal
slow learner, Poopie.

Andre Jute
No mercy for the enemies of fidelity

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

On Oct 26, 9:25 am, Eeyore
wrote:
John Byrns wrote:
Eeyore wrote
John Byrns wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
John Byrns wrote:

You are letting your ignorance show again,

Go **** yourself.

best to keep your mouth
tightly closed so as not to embarrass yourself. The RF output stage in
most Television and AM radio broadcast transmitters operate with a
decidedly non constant RF output level. Although I suppose you are
technically correct

I am indeed correct.

I am sure you are since you aren't admitting to what you actually meant

Stop trying to suppose what I allegedly 'meant' will you ? It just makes you
look STUPID.

Well then why don't you simply state clearly what you actually did mean?

It's perfectly clear to anyone with a FUNCTIONING BRAIN what I meant.

Graham

So that's why even you don't understand the gross errors you keep
making, Poopie. Congratulations on being big enough to admit it,
though you don't need to shout with capitals.

Andre Jute
Samaritan

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

In article . com,
Andre Jute wrote:

Our legislators managed to criminalize fox-hunting and smoking; when
will they get off their collective fat backside and criminalize
negative feedback? It is clearly consumed only by thickoes.

I'm not so sure criminalizing negative feedback is a good idea, is there
any other good way to stabilize the the gain of an amplifier?


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

On Oct 26, 1:49 pm, "Ian Iveson"
wrote:
Serge Auckland

A lot of the problem with the term "engineer" in English
stems from the use of the word "engine" to mean a machine,
consequently an engineer is perceived by the general
public to be someone who tends a machine. Hence when my
washing machine breaks down, Hotpoint send "an engineer",
or it was the "engineer" who greased the wheels of a steam
engine on the railways.

However, I understand that the root of the word "engineer"
is the same as the word "ingenuity" and that consequently,
an "engineer" is someone who practices "ingenuity". That's
why I have always been proud to be called an "engineer",
and why I complain to Hotpoint that they're sending me a
fitter or a mechanic, or at best a technician, not an
"engineer".

I'm proud to *be* an engineer...whatever they call me.

To paraphrase Marx, philosophers have interpreted the world
so that engineers can change it.

That sounds like Harpo all right. (1)

Incidentally, I thought train drivers drive trains, and
engineers keep the engine running, mostly by shovelling
coal. Hence with the coming of diesels, drivers remain
whereas engineers, in that sense, are gone.

cheers, Ian

Andre Jute

(1) There was a poster on the glass wall of my library once, inviting
children to "study mime with a view to appearing in radio broadcast".
Half the people my assistant asked why I was laughing so hard I had to
sit down against the opposite wall didn't get it.

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

In article ,
"Ian Iveson" wrote:

Incidentally, I thought train drivers drive trains, and
engineers keep the engine running, mostly by shovelling
coal. Hence with the coming of diesels, drivers remain
whereas engineers, in that sense, are gone.

In American parlance the guys who shoveled coal were called firemen, and
they are indeed gone while the engineers remain on the diesels.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

On Oct 26, 2:24 pm, John Byrns wrote:
In article . com,
Andre Jute wrote:

Our legislators managed to criminalize fox-hunting and smoking; when
will they get off their collective fat backside and criminalize
negative feedback? It is clearly consumed only by thickoes.

I'm not so sure criminalizing negative feedback is a good idea, is there
any other good way to stabilize the the gain of an amplifier?

Of course there is. Poopie has already told you: pull the plug! The
silence will be utterly stable, fully balanced and have zero
distortion. What more could you possibly ask for? It's called Poopie
Music.

Or you could try the Rational Jute Method (RJM) and simply limit the
gain of the amplifier so that no/little NFB is required. A good start
is acquiring sensitive speakers. Trioded PP EL34 in Class A1 operated
with conservative 6SN7 stages require no NFB, or very little if you
want a bit more power, and sound heavenly.

The problem with NFB is always controlling the THD mix so that the the
very high, very disturbing fractional odd residuals are many tens of
decibels below the residual second harmonic.

Of course something else "engineers" are poorly educated about, or
more often not at all, is subliminal perceptions, which can be very
disturbing indeed, and very difficult to devise tests to track down
the causes.

Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

John Byrns wrote:

Incidentally, I thought train drivers drive trains, and
engineers keep the engine running, mostly by shovelling
coal. Hence with the coming of diesels, drivers remain
whereas engineers, in that sense, are gone.

In American parlance the guys who shoveled coal were
called firemen, and
they are indeed gone while the engineers remain on the
diesels.

America must be really complicated. What do you call people
who put out fires?

Trying to remember the Casey Jones theme tune. Or was it the
Grateful Dead song. Somehow I knew that American engineers
drive trains.

A train that treks across a wilderness is rather more of a
venture than one that snakes between towns, so I wouldn't be
surprised at a different division of labour amongst the
crew.

Ian

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

I've worked in the audio/video business as an engineer for 25 years
now, primarily in systems integration. And yes, I attended some well
recognized engineering schools.

An engineering school can only prepare you with the basics and teach
you approaches and processes. No one that's sat through differential
equations, electromechanics, and physical chemistry will ever tell you
that it's easy.

Recognize you've focused on a very tiny slice of a traditional
electrical engineering education- amplifier design. Analog circuit
design may amount to less than 100 class hours during a four year
degree. Amplifier design may amount to 15% of that course at most.
You do the math.

Clearly there have been amplifier successes and failure in every class
listed. Can you honestly say a Quad 303 (Class B) was not a success,
remaining in production for years? How many of the initial Class D
amps were a total failure, yet some of the chip amps today are
incredibly good values and sound great? Most Class A amplifiers are
incredibly annoying in summertime and can't move woofers. The vast
majority of amplifier are AB for a number of practical reasons, yet
that hardly makes them superior in all aspects.

I think you owe these folks an apology.

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 13:35:06 GMT, "Ian Iveson"
wrote:

A train that treks across a wilderness is rather more of a
venture than one that snakes between towns, so I wouldn't be
surprised at a different division of labour amongst the
crew.

Technically easier to "set it and leave it" on a long run, I'd have
thought. More skill needed on a complex urban route.

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

" wrote:

I think you owe these folks an apology.

Joot owes the entire WORLD an apology for his mere existence.

Graham

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

Laurence Payne wrote:

A train that treks across a wilderness is rather more of a
venture than one that snakes between towns, so I wouldn't
be
surprised at a different division of labour amongst the
crew.

Technically easier to "set it and leave it" on a long run,
I'd have
thought. More skill needed on a complex urban route.

OTOH, if you break down in the middle of nowhere in America,
or run into a bison or an elk, there's wildcats, bears,
wolves, coyotes, rattlesnakes, injuns, Billy the Kid, and
vultures. You need to be able to fix the train and get out
of there fast.

"Train driver" encourages the misconception, common I guess
among children who want to be train drivers, that trains
have steering wheels, and require great skill to keep them
on the tracks.

Oh, and ...

http://www.trainweb.org/caseyjones/song.html

"A story 'bout a brave engineer"

"If I can have Sim Webb, my fireman, my engine 382"

Ian

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 17:10:13 GMT, "Ian Iveson"
wrote:

Technically easier to "set it and leave it" on a long run,
I'd have
thought. More skill needed on a complex urban route.

OTOH, if you break down in the middle of nowhere in America,
or run into a bison or an elk, there's wildcats, bears,
wolves, coyotes, rattlesnakes, injuns, Billy the Kid, and
vultures. You need to be able to fix the train and get out
of there fast.

I'd be more worried about the human coyotes who'd have the train
stripped if you broke down on an urban run :-)

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorlyeducated?)
 

Ian Iveson wrote:

"Train driver" encourages the misconception, common I guess
among children who want to be train drivers, that trains
have steering wheels, and require great skill to keep them
on the tracks.

What a load of absurd nonsense. But then, what else to expect fom you ? It
certainly never confused me for sure.

Graham

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

On Oct 27, 6:39 am, " wrote:
I've worked in the audio/video business as an engineer for 25 years
now, primarily in systems integration. And yes, I attended some well
recognized engineering schools.

Congratulations.

An engineering school can only prepare you with the basics and teach
you approaches and processes. No one that's sat through differential
equations, electromechanics, and physical chemistry will ever tell you
that it's easy.

Congratulations to all of them.

Recognize you've focused on a very tiny slice of a traditional
electrical engineering education- amplifier design. Analog circuit
design may amount to less than 100 class hours during a four year
degree. Amplifier design may amount to 15% of that course at most.
You do the math.

I don't have to. This isn't actually about competent engineers and
their education, about whom I said nothing at all, but about your
comprehension skills. Apparently you didn't notice that I put
"engineers" in quotation marks because I was speaking of an egregious
minority posturing on the internet as experts on amp design. If you
had read the thread, you would have discovered that I named three self-
styled engineers and accused them of lying on professional matters for
personal reasons. The three are Graham "Poopie" Stevenson, Arny
"Slapdash" Krueger and Don "Bluster" Pearce. If, as you say, their
entire amplifier design education/experience between the three of them
adds up to only 45 hours, why are they spouting off on the net,
pretending to know more than those who have spent hundreds, perhaps
thousands of hours, with amplifier design?

Since you're so righteous, why didn't you long since kick their slack
arses for their presumption?

Clearly there have been amplifier successes and failure in every class
listed. Can you honestly say a Quad 303 (Class B) was not a success,
remaining in production for years? How many of the initial Class D
amps were a total failure, yet some of the chip amps today are
incredibly good values and sound great? Most Class A amplifiers are
incredibly annoying in summertime and can't move woofers. The vast
majority of amplifier are AB for a number of practical reasons, yet
that hardly makes them superior in all aspects.

Sure, but so what? Quad wasn't designed by a braggartly incompetent
like Poopie Stevenson, or a liar like Slapdash Krueger, or a dullard
like Bluster Pearce. (I'm big on Quad, having two kinds of
electrostats and quite a few Quad amps both solid state and tube.)

I think you owe these folks an apology.

Why? You haven't made a case for anything except that engineers (all
of them in your version) suffer a lack of education in amplifier
design, the metasubject of this thread. My accusation was much, much
more limited and specific and, what is more, I proved my case by
making the main transgressor, Poopie Stevenson, recant his lie several
times right out in public. I stand by it. Seems to me you're the one
owing an apology to all these perfectly sound engineers you have now
included, absolutely against my intention as the starter and owner of
this thread, in " Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?"

I absolutely repudiate your calumnies against the good engineers,
" .

Andre Jute
If you think I'm tough on engineers, you should hear what I say about
psychiatrists and economists...

Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

On Oct 27, 7:42 am, Eeyore
wrote:
" wrote:
I think you owe these folks an apology.

Joot owes the entire WORLD an apology for his mere existence.

Graham

Stop whining, Poopie. You held yourself up as an expert, Slapdash
Krueger and Bluster Pearce joined you in your lie, you were caught out
in a professional lie, you got your butt kicked for it, you recanted
(several times), so why drag out your humiliation any further. Let it
die, sonny.

Andre Jute
"Blessed is the man who, having nothing to say, abstains from giving
us wordly evidence of the fact."-- George Elliot

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

Andre Jute wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
" wrote:
I think you owe these folks an apology.

Joot owes the entire WORLD an apology for his mere existence.

Graham

Stop whining, Poopie. You held yourself up as an expert, Slapdash
Krueger and Bluster Pearce joined you in your lie, you were caught out
in a professional lie, you got your butt kicked for it

No I didn't.

Now stop telling lies.

Graham

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
" wrote:
I think you owe these folks an apology.

Joot owes the entire WORLD an apology for his mere existence.

Graham

Stop whining, Poopie. You held yourself up as an expert, Slapdash
Krueger and Bluster Pearce joined you in your lie, you were caught out
in a professional lie, you got your butt kicked for it

No I didn't.

Didn't what, hold yourself up as an expert, or get your butt kicked for
it? Near as I can tell you did both, you "held yourself up as an
expert", and you "got your butt kicked for it".


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

In article . com,
Andre Jute wrote:
On Oct 27, 7:42 am, Eeyore
wrote:
" wrote:
I think you owe these folks an apology.

Joot owes the entire WORLD an apology for his mere existence.

Graham

Stop whining, Poopie. You held yourself up as an expert, Slapdash
Krueger and Bluster Pearce joined you in your lie, you were caught out
in a professional lie, you got your butt kicked for it, you recanted
(several times), so why drag out your humiliation any further. Let it
die, sonny.

Andre Jute
"Blessed is the man who, having nothing to say, abstains from giving
us wordly evidence of the fact."-- George Elliot



Guys, please take this thread out of rec.audio.pro. It does not belong here.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...


Ian Iveson wrote:

"Train driver" encourages the misconception, common I
guess
among children who want to be train drivers, that trains
have steering wheels, and require great skill to keep
them
on the tracks.

What a load of absurd nonsense.

Do you see any part of this thread that is *not* absurd?

But then, what else to expect fom you ?

Nothing less I hope...although I admit I need more practice,
I find absurd a particularly difficult mode to master.
Why are the flanges on the inside, BTW? Is it so a tyre can
be changed without removing the wheel?

It certainly never confused me for sure.

LOL.

Ian

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

On Oct 26, 3:48?pm, "Deputy Dumbya Dawg"
wrote:
This raises the question of what is an engineer? The
following are a
few of the many definitions I have heard.

1. The person responsible for the operation and maintenance
of a
buildings infrastructure.

2. The person who drives a Train.

3. A person who has received an "engineering" degree from a
University.

4. A person licensed to practice "engineering", similar to
the way
Doctors and Lawyers are licensed.

Regards,

John Byrns

To advertise engineering services in any of the 50 united
states takes #4 above. Registration with the professional
engineering board of the state you offer service in. It is a
crime to offer services or practice electrical engineering
without a the license.

I am a registered professional electrical engineer in
California.

peace
dawg- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

Definition of an engineer:

Anybody who can't hear the difference between amplifier A and
amplifier B but states that amplifier B sounds better because it has
less distortion.

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

"Andy Evans" wrote in message
ups.com...
Definition of an engineer:

Anybody who can't hear the difference between amplifier A and
amplifier B but states that amplifier B sounds better because it has
less distortion.


The main prerequisite for anyone to be able to call themselves an
'engineer' is for them to be able to spell the job title correctly...

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

Andy Evans said:

Definition of an engineer:

Anybody who can't hear the difference between amplifier A and
amplifier B but states that amplifier B sounds better because it has
less distortion.

Definition of an Audio 'Borg:

Also can't hear the difference, but states that B is superior because the
phrase "sounds better" is incomprehensible.

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

In article . com,
Andy Evans wrote:

Definition of an engineer:

Anybody who can't hear the difference between amplifier A and
amplifier B but states that amplifier B sounds better because it has
less distortion.

Definition of an audiophile:

Anybody who can't tell which of two amplifiers sounds better without
seeing the amplifiers and knowing which one he is listening to.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

These "Definition of an engineer" jokes, inspired by the current
threads, might amuse you; they're from newsgroups not normally
included in the distribution list for this now nearly concluded
thread:

DEFINITION OF AN ENGINEER:

Anybody who can't hear the difference between amplifier A and
amplifier B but states that amplifier B sounds better because it has
less distortion.

-- Andy Evans

The main prerequisite for anyone to be able to call themselves an
'engineer' is for them to be able to spell the job title correctly...

-- Keith G



On Oct 25, 5:07 pm, Andre Jute wrote:
You really have to wonder.

Here we have three self-proclaimed engineers claiming that Class A is
an amplification Class in which "the output device(s)never cease
conducting under any signal condition."

The three "engineers" in question are Graham "Poopie" Stevenson, Don
"Bluster" Pearce and Arny "I spoke in error" Krueger. Apparently they
are perfectly unable to understand, after they have been told so a
handful of times already, that "any signal condition" includes
overdrive which turns even the correct part of the definition into
absurd nonsense.

Here's the sequence of their errors, with a small sample of their
abuse liberally spattered over the newsgroups:

First Andre Jute, he of the saintly patience, pointed out that Poopie
Stevenson made a silly error:

Poopie's absurd redefinition of Class A as
a Class in which "the output device(s)never cease conducting *under
any signal condition*," (emphasis added). It's ludicrous.

Then Poopie Stevenson confirmed:

It's actually the only accurate definition.

And Arny "I spoke in error" Krueger agreed without any qualification:

Agreed.

Then Andre Jute, he of the saintly patience even with fools, pointed
out that the two parts of redefinition are mutually exclusive:

Any amp can be driven out of class by excessive signal voltage.

Which Poopie tried to blow away with poor-quality smoke:

Overdriving to cut-off is merely gross abuse and a complete red herring /
irrelevance.

Fully supported of course by his yes-man, Arny "I spoke in error"
Krueger:

Agreed. Jute seems to be addicted to excluded-middle arguments. Kick out
those and the straw men, and he's hardly have anything to say. ;-)

Now Don Pearce tries to bluster the argument out with an obvious lie:

Can you overdrive a class A amp to cutoff? In my experience what
happens when you overdrive a class A amp is that one device saturates,
and the other sticks with its normal bias condition. There is no
circumstance in which I have ever managed to put a class A amplifier
output device into cutoff.

d

Of course, it is irrelevant (perhaps even commendable) that Don Pearce
lives such a dull and unadventurous life that he has never overdriven
a Class A amp; perhaps he doesn't own a Class A amp; on the evidence
in this thread he doesn't even know what a Class A amp is. What
matters is that Don Pearce, like Arny Krueger, supports Poopie
Stevenson's absurd definition of Class A operation as 360 degrees of
conduction "under any signal condition".

How can any properly educated engineer not know that the signal in an
amplifier class is by necessity limited?

It is difficult not to conclude that these three clowns, Stevenson,
Krueger and Pearce, are either not engineers, or were not properly
educated, or are too old and fat and slack to remember the basics they
were taught.

I have on previous occasions demonstrated what Poopie Stevenson's
claim of a University of London degree actually means: not very much,
as he got his degree from a jumped-up polytechnic (a British version
of the soldering schools Ludwig is addicted to) forced onto UL by a
socialist government trying to save a buck. Others have noted that
Krueger was "educated" at a community college I have never even heard
of. Who knows where Pearce was so misshapen as to believe that it
doesn't matter how much signal voltage you use in an amplifier?

Poopie Stevenson, Bluster Pearce and Erroneous Krueger are, in
engineering terms, ignorant and abusive clowns "under any signal
condition".

Andre Jute
The trouble with most people is not what they don't know, but what
they know for certain that isn't true. ---Mark Twain

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

Andre-

I suspect I've designed and integrated systems for Disney, Apple, NBC,
AT&T, Sony, Techicolor. It is nearly impossible for you to not have
experienced something I've designed and successfully installed
somewhere in this world unless you've hung out with Bin Laden the last
twenty years. Projects include theme parks, stadia, transportation
systems, retail stores, theater, education, and corporate and military
communication. I've worked with superb engineers and truly lousy
ones.

I've also owned and worked on every class of amplifier, every means
of transduction from plasma to electrostatic, and am a member of ASA,
SMPTE, AES (Executive Committee), and the NFPA. I even have a copy of
"Tube or Not Tube", sitting on my desk.

To that end, my immediate reaction is to dismiss you as a somewhat
frustrated learner with a website. I've yet to see a circuit or
transform named after you, see you present a paper at an Audio
Engineering Society convention, or even develop a successful
commercial product. Yet you have an attitude that transcends those
that have. If you are unable to apologize to those you've insulted,
perhaps it would be prudent for you to think about putting your
keyboard away until the maturization process synchonizes up.

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

Definition of an audiophile:
Anybody who can't tell which of two amplifiers sounds better without
seeing the amplifiers and knowing which one he is listening to.
Regards, John Byrns


Nice one! Like it.

Andy Evans

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

On Oct 28, 5:13 pm, " wrote:
Andre-

I suspect I've designed and integrated systems for Disney, Apple, NBC,
AT&T, Sony, Techicolor. It is nearly impossible for you to not have
experienced something I've designed and successfully installed
somewhere in this world unless you've hung out with Bin Laden the last
twenty years. Projects include theme parks, stadia, transportation
systems, retail stores, theater, education, and corporate and military
communication. I've worked with superb engineers and truly lousy
ones.

If any of this is true, then why don't you proudly sign your name to
your posts?

Gee. You can find out which eight of the ten most recognized brands in
the world I worked on: all you have to do is buy one of my books and
read all about it on the cover, where my name also proudly appears.
Some of my books are mentioned on my netsite, including some of the
engineering books.

But I don't come on the net and claim that being able to drop names
gives me a special right to be functionally illiterate, as you do, as
I shall shortly prove you do. Nor do I claim that being a leading
expert in several fields gives me the right to demand that you shut up
and make obeissance merely because I pass.

I've also owned and worked on every class of amplifier, every means
of transduction from plasma to electrostatic, and am a member of ASA,
SMPTE, AES (Executive Committee), and the NFPA. I even have a copy of
"Tube or Not Tube", sitting on my desk.

Again, why don't you tell us your name, so we can check these claims?

And again, how does membership of professional bodies entitle you to
behave like a functional illiterate?

For you have simply cut out my denials of your accusations, and made
the same accusations again.

To that end, my immediate reaction is to dismiss you as a somewhat
frustrated learner with a website.

To what end? There is no logical connection between your bragging and
your attempt to denigrate me. You can dismiss me all you like, as
often as you like, and until you make a valid point I shall treat you
with the same contempt I treat all the irrational clowns with diplomas
that I lump together as "diplomaed quarterwits".

I've yet to see a circuit or
transform named after you, see you present a paper at an Audio
Engineering Society convention,

Are those qualifications for pointing out that a diplomaed quarterwit,
Poopie Stevenson, made a gross professional error, and was backed up
in it by two further diplomaed quarterwits, Slapdash Krueger and
Bluster Pearce? That is what I did in the preceeding thread. If you
don't like it, there is an accompanying challenge to prove me wrong.
You won't do that by abuse. You can only do it by science.

or even develop a successful
commercial product.

Huh? You clearly don't know who I am and have made not the slightest
effort to find out. In any case, what is the relevance? is there an
entrance bar to pointing out that a diplomaed quarterwit, Poopie
Stevenson, made a gross professional error for personal reasons, and
was backed up in it by two further diplomaed quarterwits, Slapdash
Krueger and Bluster Pearce, also for the most unprofessional of
personal reasons?

Yet you have an attitude that transcends those
that have.

Are you trying to say that only credentialled engineers are permitted
to be confident of their facts? You're off the wall, sonny.

If you are unable to apologize to those you've insulted,

You suffer from a comprehension deficiency, anonymous whiner. Below I
reprint my entire previous exchange with you in which I point out that
I made no general condemnation such as you claim I did but named the
three "engineers" whom I accused. About Poopie Stevenson, Slapdash
Krueger and Bluster Pearce I am perfectly right, as Poopie Stevenson
admitted several times in public by withdrawing the offending
solecism. I owe them no apology. Instead you owe me thanks for doing
a job you lot on RAP should have done and failed to do. If you can't
follow the threads, anonymous whiner, you should get someone with
everyday English to explain to you what it all means. Meanwhile you
look like a functional illiterate for insisting on an apology for
something I didn't do and have now twice told you I didn't do.

Furthermore, why are you so sensitive about your professional dignity?
Is there perhaps something niggling at you, responsible for this
sickening lack of self-confidence you display?

perhaps it would be prudent for you to think about putting your
keyboard away until the maturization process synchonizes up.

"The maturization process synchonizes up"?

Oh, I see, you mean "synchronizes". A literate person would say, as I
now do to you:

Grow up, sonny.

Unsigned

HERE IS THE PREVIOUS EXCHANGE IN WHICH I UNEQUIVOCALLY DENY INCLUDING
ENGINEERS AT LARGE IN MY CONDEMNATION, WHICH THIS ANONYMOUS WHINER
"EMMACO" HAS DECEITFULLY SNIPPED:

On Oct 27, 6:39 am, " wrote:
I've worked in the audio/video business as an engineer for 25 years
now, primarily in systems integration. And yes, I attended some well
recognized engineering schools.

Congratulations.

An engineering school can only prepare you with the basics and teach
you approaches and processes. No one that's sat through differential
equations, electromechanics, and physical chemistry will ever tell you
that it's easy.

Congratulations to all of them.

Recognize you've focused on a very tiny slice of a traditional
electrical engineering education- amplifier design. Analog circuit
design may amount to less than 100 class hours during a four year
degree. Amplifier design may amount to 15% of that course at most.
You do the math.

I don't have to. This isn't actually about competent engineers and
their education, about whom I said nothing at all, but about your
comprehension skills. Apparently you didn't notice that I put
"engineers" in quotation marks because I was speaking of an egregious
minority posturing on the internet as experts on amp design. If you
had read the thread, you would have discovered that I named three
self-
styled engineers and accused them of lying on professional matters for
personal reasons. The three are Graham "Poopie" Stevenson, Arny
"Slapdash" Krueger and Don "Bluster" Pearce. If, as you say, their
entire amplifier design education/experience between the three of them
adds up to only 45 hours, why are they spouting off on the net,
pretending to know more than those who have spent hundreds, perhaps
thousands of hours, with amplifier design?

Since you're so righteous, why didn't you long since kick their slack
arses for their presumption?

Clearly there have been amplifier successes and failure in every class
listed. Can you honestly say a Quad 303 (Class B) was not a success,
remaining in production for years? How many of the initial Class D
amps were a total failure, yet some of the chip amps today are
incredibly good values and sound great? Most Class A amplifiers are
incredibly annoying in summertime and can't move woofers. The vast
majority of amplifier are AB for a number of practical reasons, yet
that hardly makes them superior in all aspects.

Sure, but so what? Quad wasn't designed by a braggartly incompetent
like Poopie Stevenson, or a liar like Slapdash Krueger, or a dullard
like Bluster Pearce. (I'm big on Quad, having two kinds of
electrostats and quite a few Quad amps both solid state and tube.)

I think you owe these folks an apology.

Why? You haven't made a case for anything except that engineers (all
of them in your version) suffer a lack of education in amplifier
design, the metasubject of this thread. My accusation was much, much
more limited and specific and, what is more, I proved my case by
making the main transgressor, Poopie Stevenson, recant his lie several
times right out in public. I stand by it. Seems to me you're the one
owing an apology to all these perfectly sound engineers you have now
included, absolutely against my intention as the starter and owner of
this thread, in " Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?"

I absolutely repudiate your calumnies against the good engineers,
" .

Andre Jute
If you think I'm tough on engineers, you should hear what I say about
psychiatrists and economists...

Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

"Andy Evans" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 26, 3:48?pm, "Deputy Dumbya Dawg"
wrote:
This raises the question of what is an engineer? The
following are a
few of the many definitions I have heard.

1. The person responsible for the operation and maintenance
of a
buildings infrastructure.

2. The person who drives a Train.

3. A person who has received an "engineering" degree from a
University.

4. A person licensed to practice "engineering", similar to
the way
Doctors and Lawyers are licensed.


To advertise engineering services in any of the 50 united
states takes #4 above. Registration with the professional
engineering board of the state you offer service in. It is a
crime to offer services or practice electrical engineering
without a the license.

Does not apply to all types of qualified engineers though. Mostly just
electrical and mechanical IME.

MrT.

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

In article ,
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:

"Andy Evans" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 26, 3:48?pm, "Deputy Dumbya Dawg"
wrote:
This raises the question of what is an engineer? The
following are a
few of the many definitions I have heard.

1. The person responsible for the operation and maintenance
of a
buildings infrastructure.

2. The person who drives a Train.

3. A person who has received an "engineering" degree from a
University.

4. A person licensed to practice "engineering", similar to
the way
Doctors and Lawyers are licensed.


To advertise engineering services in any of the 50 united
states takes #4 above. Registration with the professional
engineering board of the state you offer service in. It is a
crime to offer services or practice electrical engineering
without a the license.

Does not apply to all types of qualified engineers though. Mostly just
electrical and mechanical IME.

I would think Civil engineers too, although we obviously don't have many
of those in this group.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

On 28 Oct, 22:07, John Byrns wrote:
In article ,



"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:
"Andy Evans" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 26, 3:48?pm, "Deputy Dumbya Dawg"
wrote:
This raises the question of what is an engineer? The
following are a
few of the many definitions I have heard.

1. The person responsible for the operation and maintenance
of a
buildings infrastructure.

2. The person who drives a Train.

3. A person who has received an "engineering" degree from a
University.

4. A person licensed to practice "engineering", similar to
the way
Doctors and Lawyers are licensed.

To advertise engineering services in any of the 50 united
states takes #4 above. Registration with the professional
engineering board of the state you offer service in. It is a
crime to offer services or practice electrical engineering
without a the license.

Does not apply to all types of qualified engineers though. Mostly just
electrical and mechanical IME.

I would think Civil engineers too, although we obviously don't have many
of those in this group.


i am not an engineer, but i retired from a civil engineering office.
the requirement is more for signing, sealing and certifying plans.

btw, my job was real estate acquisitions.

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

John Byrns wrote:






Definition of an audiophile:

Anybody who can't tell which of two amplifiers sounds better without
seeing the amplifiers and knowing which one he is listening to.



That doesn't make sense, Mr. Byrns.

What are the standard criteria that form or constitute the
quality of sounding better ? TIA.



In the future, do try to keep these type of garbage out of
Rao.



Regards,

John Byrns

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

On Oct 28, 10:38 pm, Clyde Slick wrote:

i am not an engineer, but i retired from a civil engineering office.
the requirement is more for signing, sealing and certifying plans.

btw, my job was real estate acquisitions.

One may purchase an engineer for a fairly reasonable hourly rate. You
may not like what they do for you as most (good) engineers tend to be
moderately conservative and want their designs to be moderately
enduring, so most (again, good) engineers tend not to like poor, fast,
quick or dirty solutions. I often explain to the people I work with
that whereas I am emphatically not an engineer, I do recognized when
there is the need for one. Similarly, when other design professionals
are required such as Architects.

At this time, our company has two engineers best described as 'on
call', both have been around since more-or-less the beginning of time
- one of them was my structures professor in grad-school, the other
mentored him in his early years of practice. It is quite an experience
to listen to these two guys when they get started. And both of them
will be down in a hole or up a ladder faster than most people a third
of their ages.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

What is an "engineer" (was Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?)
 

On 29 Oct, 07:49, Peter Wieck wrote:



At this time, our company has two engineers best described as 'on
call', both have been around since more-or-less the beginning of time

.. And both of them
will be down in a hole
faster than most people a third
of their ages.


No doubt!!!!

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

In article ,
"JBorg, Jr." wrote:

John Byrns wrote:


Definition of an audiophile:

Anybody who can't tell which of two amplifiers sounds better without
seeing the amplifiers and knowing which one he is listening to.

That doesn't make sense, Mr. Byrns.

What are the standard criteria that form or constitute the
quality of sounding better ? TIA.

In the future, do try to keep these type of garbage out of
Rao.

I guess the truth hurts. If the "engineers can take it why can't you?


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

Why are "engineers" so poorly educated?
 

In article , keithr
wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

How about simply specifying that a Class A
amplification stage will never cease to conduct when operated within it's
designed operating range (presuming that it was properly designed).

That's what I was trying to persuade those three clowns to say
instead. As thanks for my efforts Poopie Stevenson (Eeyore
)wrote to me "you're an
ignorant **** and what you say is a load of ********". Charming.

Of course there is a viable body of opinion that an amplification stage
designed to work under Class A conditions, when driven into clipping, is no
longer working as a Class A stage. Under that definition, they are
completely correct.

And that same logic also resolves the original question, when a class AB
amplifier is driven at a low enough level it becomes a class A amplifier
and then obviously pots out "class A" power.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/