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/