|
|
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
David Looser wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message om... And qualifications are not required to gain chartered engineering status in a number of fields - Well of course chartered status is a qualification in itself, but I am not aware of any body that will award chartered status without the candidate already having appropriate academic qualifications. Perhaps you can elaborate if you believe otherwise. To become a chartered engineer, you'd need to demonstrate a number of competencies. Formal qualifications are one, but not the only, way to demonstrate some of them. I think perhaps if you'd written a book or acted a consultant, that type of thing. Not really related, I've just had a look at the Institute of Sound and Communications Engineers - absence of quals is not a bar to membership. I would have thought that to be a Royal Engineer you wouldn't need formal qualifications - don't know though. Rob |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Arkansan Raider wrote: It's been my experience that the guy pushing faders is generically called the "sound engineer," and that is fully interchangeable in common usage with "sound man" or "sound guy." Yes, this is not legal in Virginia. The Society of Broadcast Engineers is currently petitioning the state to make an SBE certification or an old FCC First Phone License a legal identification to call yourself a broadcast engineer, however. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I won't be making that mistake again. I have had folks get into big trouble with it when bidding for state contracts. To be honest, I don't know why I didn't think about that before. I don't call my professors "Doctor" unless they've earned that degree. "You can call me doctor, but you'd be wrong because I have a Master's degree. You can call me professor but you'd be wrong there too because I'm a lecturer. So call me Colonel." -- Col. Pasafiume People get touchy about these kinds of things. --scott No joke, there. I'm not big into titles myself, but if someone earned it, that's how I'm addressing them unless they tell me otherwise. Simple matter of respecting the work involved. JMHSO ---Jeff |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Rob" wrote in message
om... To become a chartered engineer, you'd need to demonstrate a number of competencies. Formal qualifications are one, but not the only, way to demonstrate some of them. I think perhaps if you'd written a book or acted a consultant, that type of thing. I just love that!, "you think perhaps". Would anyone employ you as a consultant if you *didn't* have qualifications? As for "writing a book", well anyone can "write a book", what does it prove? Not really related, I've just had a look at the Institute of Sound and Communications Engineers - absence of quals is not a bar to membership. I've just had a look at their website (having never heard of them before). I see nothing there that suggests they have the authority to confer Chartered Engineer status. I would have thought that to be a Royal Engineer you wouldn't need formal qualifications - don't know though. You think they are all squadies? The days when someone could become a professional engineer simply by "learning on the job" are well and truly past. David. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
In article ,
Arkansan Raider wrote: It's been my experience that the guy pushing faders is generically called the "sound engineer," and that is fully interchangeable in common usage with "sound man" or "sound guy." I dunno where that expression came from and as a 'sound guy' I still dislike it. Think it started in the record industry. To me, engineering is where they fix things or actually design the nuts and bolts of an installation, etc. A totally separate area - although of course there are overlaps. I prefer the generic title of operator. As I use equipment - not basically design or repair it. Of course you may have to do front line repairs and hopefully have an input to the design. But as a secondary function. And before anyone starts I have the highest regard for the engineers I work with 'keeping the show on the road' And of course any operator will likely get better results if he has basic knowledge of the equipment he uses - as indeed must an engineer of how it is used if designing or repairing, etc. -- *A chicken crossing the road is poultry in motion.* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Arkansan Raider wrote: It's been my experience that the guy pushing faders is generically called the "sound engineer," and that is fully interchangeable in common usage with "sound man" or "sound guy." I dunno where that expression came from and as a 'sound guy' I still dislike it. Think it started in the record industry. To me, engineering is where they fix things or actually design the nuts and bolts of an installation, etc. A totally separate area - although of course there are overlaps. I prefer the generic title of operator. As I use equipment - not basically design or repair it. Of course you may have to do front line repairs and hopefully have an input to the design. But as a secondary function. And before anyone starts I have the highest regard for the engineers I work with 'keeping the show on the road' And of course any operator will likely get better results if he has basic knowledge of the equipment he uses - as indeed must an engineer of how it is used if designing or repairing, etc. Outstanding post, Dave. ---Jeff |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
David Looser wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message om... To become a chartered engineer, you'd need to demonstrate a number of competencies. Formal qualifications are one, but not the only, way to demonstrate some of them. I think perhaps if you'd written a book or acted a consultant, that type of thing. I just love that!, "you think perhaps". Would anyone employ you as a consultant if you *didn't* have qualifications? As for "writing a book", well anyone can "write a book", what does it prove? Not really related, I've just had a look at the Institute of Sound and Communications Engineers - absence of quals is not a bar to membership. I've just had a look at their website (having never heard of them before). I see nothing there that suggests they have the authority to confer Chartered Engineer status. I would have thought that to be a Royal Engineer you wouldn't need formal qualifications - don't know though. You think they are all squadies? The days when someone could become a professional engineer simply by "learning on the job" are well and truly past. David. Meh? I don't think so. You understudy another PE ( in a discipline) for a year, then take a test in the discipline. The BS degree just helps HR sort resumes... -- Les Cargill |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
Les Cargill wrote:
Meh? I don't think so. You understudy another PE ( in a discipline) for a year, then take a test in the discipline. The problem with the PE test for many years was that it was not specific to any discipline and was in fact very heavy on mechanics and civil engineering stuff. So if you were an electrical engineer and wanted to work as a PE, you had to take a test on truss loads and steam pressures. I am told that these days the test has been broken up somewhat and that there is now a specific EE option, although folks from other engineering disciplines (anything from textile or ceramic engineering to aero) still have to calculate soil erosion. The BS degree just helps HR sort resumes... Yes, and the BS degree is worth more than the PE in a lot of cases. So while in theory you could cram for the PE and pass it without a degree, it wouldn't be all that easy to get a job that way. The guy who does my contract work, though, never got a law degree. He apprenticed with a lawyer back in the fifties, studied a lot, and passed the bar exam. That's not very common today but it used to be very common a century ago. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
David Looser wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message om... To become a chartered engineer, you'd need to demonstrate a number of competencies. Formal qualifications are one, but not the only, way to demonstrate some of them. I think perhaps if you'd written a book or acted a consultant, that type of thing. I just love that!, "you think perhaps". Yes. Would anyone employ you as a consultant if you *didn't* have qualifications? I'd much prefer that they had experience of doing the job I had in mind. As for "writing a book", well anyone can "write a book", what does it prove? I should have spelled it out for you. The book would have to be cognate, and thereby act in lieu of formal qualifications (such as a degree). Not really related, I've just had a look at the Institute of Sound and Communications Engineers - absence of quals is not a bar to membership. I've just had a look at their website (having never heard of them before). I see nothing there that suggests they have the authority to confer Chartered Engineer status. I'm going to have to go quite slowly in future! I used the phrase 'not really related', and thought it might be of interest in a general discussion about qualifications on an audio NG. I would have thought that to be a Royal Engineer you wouldn't need formal qualifications - don't know though. You think they are all squadies? No. I'm not sure what makes you ask that question. The days when someone could become a professional engineer simply by "learning on the job" are well and truly past. If attitudes like yours prevail, then yes. Rob |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Rob" wrote in message
om... David Looser wrote: "Rob" wrote in message om... To become a chartered engineer, you'd need to demonstrate a number of competencies. Formal qualifications are one, but not the only, way to demonstrate some of them. I think perhaps if you'd written a book or acted a consultant, that type of thing. I just love that!, "you think perhaps". Yes. Would anyone employ you as a consultant if you *didn't* have qualifications? I'd much prefer that they had experience of doing the job I had in mind. They need both. Of course nobody will employ you as a consultant straight out of uni. But you aren't going to be able to do the job (to gain that experience) until you have the necessary theoretical knowledge. As for "writing a book", well anyone can "write a book", what does it prove? I should have spelled it out for you. The book would have to be cognate, and thereby act in lieu of formal qualifications (such as a degree). Again, just as with the consultancy you'd need to have a deep knowledge of the subject before any book you wrote would carry the sort of credibility needed for that. And deep knowledge starts with learning the existing state of the art. The self-taught aren't going to have that. Not really related, I've just had a look at the Institute of Sound and Communications Engineers - absence of quals is not a bar to membership. I've just had a look at their website (having never heard of them before). I see nothing there that suggests they have the authority to confer Chartered Engineer status. I'm going to have to go quite slowly in future! I used the phrase 'not really related', and thought it might be of interest in a general discussion about qualifications on an audio NG. We were talking about chartered status, why mention a body that cannot award chartered status? I would have thought that to be a Royal Engineer you wouldn't need formal qualifications - don't know though. You think they are all squadies? No. I'm not sure what makes you ask that question. Because the only people in the army without formal qualifications are the squadies. The days when someone could become a professional engineer simply by "learning on the job" are well and truly past. If attitudes like yours prevail, then yes. Whilst I guess from your attitude that you'd be happy to be operated on by an unqualified surgeon, travel in an airliner flown by a self-taught pilot and be defended in court by someone who learned his law from a book bought in a second-hand book shop. These days formal training is a necessary preliminary to employment in *any* profession. And that includes engineering. David. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
David Looser wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message om... David Looser wrote: "Rob" wrote in message om... To become a chartered engineer, you'd need to demonstrate a number of competencies. Formal qualifications are one, but not the only, way to demonstrate some of them. I think perhaps if you'd written a book or acted a consultant, that type of thing. I just love that!, "you think perhaps". Yes. Would anyone employ you as a consultant if you *didn't* have qualifications? I'd much prefer that they had experience of doing the job I had in mind. They need both. Of course nobody will employ you as a consultant straight out of uni. But you aren't going to be able to do the job (to gain that experience) until you have the necessary theoretical knowledge. As for "writing a book", well anyone can "write a book", what does it prove? I should have spelled it out for you. The book would have to be cognate, and thereby act in lieu of formal qualifications (such as a degree). Again, just as with the consultancy you'd need to have a deep knowledge of the subject before any book you wrote would carry the sort of credibility needed for that. And deep knowledge starts with learning the existing state of the art. The self-taught aren't going to have that. Quite. But and and, you don't need a formal qualification to do that. You can be self-taught. I'd stress this is IME and it just seems obvious. Where I work 3 of the senior academic staff in our team of 9 have no relevant first degree, and no higher degree. One of them published 8 peer reviewed papers last year. The other is leading consultant (or at least was, apparently). The other is normal, er, like me (apart from the senior bit, obviously). Not really related, I've just had a look at the Institute of Sound and Communications Engineers - absence of quals is not a bar to membership. I've just had a look at their website (having never heard of them before). I see nothing there that suggests they have the authority to confer Chartered Engineer status. I'm going to have to go quite slowly in future! I used the phrase 'not really related', and thought it might be of interest in a general discussion about qualifications on an audio NG. We were talking about chartered status, why mention a body that cannot award chartered status? I would have thought that to be a Royal Engineer you wouldn't need formal qualifications - don't know though. You think they are all squadies? No. I'm not sure what makes you ask that question. Because the only people in the army without formal qualifications are the squadies. OK, I didn't know that. Seems stupid to me. The days when someone could become a professional engineer simply by "learning on the job" are well and truly past. If attitudes like yours prevail, then yes. Whilst I guess from your attitude that you'd be happy to be operated on by an unqualified surgeon, travel in an airliner flown by a self-taught pilot and be defended in court by someone who learned his law from a book bought in a second-hand book shop. I'd rather they be experienced and good at what they do. Of course, and your point I think, is that they won't tend to be in that position unless they have a professional qualification, and that will tend to involve a formal qualification. These days formal training is a necessary preliminary to employment in *any* profession. And that includes engineering. What I'm trying to get across is that while the qualification is necessary, it isn't always, or even often, sufficient. It'd be nice if you could wash yourself of 'necessary'. When I left school I worked in a surveying office. After a while they let me loose and I was out doing surveys, which were then signed off by a chartered surveyor who'd never seen the building/land. Of course, having a qualification helps. But it doesn't necessarily mean you can do whatever you're qualified to do any better than someone with lesser or no qualifications. R |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
In article ,
Rob wrote: Of course, having a qualification helps. But it doesn't necessarily mean you can do whatever you're qualified to do any better than someone with lesser or no qualifications. Absolutely. By nature any qualification may give the basics of a job but lags behind actual practice. -- *When I'm not in my right mind, my left mind gets pretty crowded * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Rob" wrote in message
om... David Looser wrote: Again, just as with the consultancy you'd need to have a deep knowledge of the subject before any book you wrote would carry the sort of credibility needed for that. And deep knowledge starts with learning the existing state of the art. The self-taught aren't going to have that. Quite. But and and, you don't need a formal qualification to do that. You can be self-taught. I'd stress this is IME and it just seems obvious. Being self-taught was all fine and dandy in the past when things were simpler than today. But science and engineering these days are so complex that becoming a recognised authority purely through being self-taught is a bit of a non-starter except, perhaps, for the rare true geniuses of this world. Whilst I can see that in theory a self-taught genius could write a book of such quality that it stands in lieu of formal qualifications I'm not aware of any such book written in the last 50 years in electrical engineering by somebody who did not already have formal qualifications in the subject. As far as chartered engineer status is concerned I'm not aware of any awarding body that doesn't demand both relevant qualifications and proven experience before conferring the title. Where I work 3 of the senior academic staff in our team of 9 have no relevant first degree, and no higher degree. One of them published 8 peer reviewed papers last year. The other is leading consultant (or at least was, apparently). The other is normal, er, like me (apart from the senior bit, obviously). I am surprised. In my experience the world of academia is even more keen on formal qualifications than industry is. Senior academics usually have doctorates. But not all disciplines are equal and I don't know which discipline you are talking about. What I'm trying to get across is that while the qualification is necessary, it isn't always, or even often, sufficient. I never suggested it was. For anyone starting out on a career in engineering the formal qualifications are merely the start. It'd be nice if you could wash yourself of 'necessary'. When I left school I worked in a surveying office. After a while they let me loose and I was out doing surveys, which were then signed off by a chartered surveyor who'd never seen the building/land. In other words you were an apprentice (even if you weren't called that); that was the way things used to be done in many trades, though not in the professions where having formal education first has long been considered necessary. Of course, having a qualification helps. But it doesn't necessarily mean you can do whatever you're qualified to do any better than someone with lesser or no qualifications. Perhaps in theory. Science and engineering is built on the considerable body of knowledge created by those who went before. So unless you want every practitioner to have to re-invent the discipline for himself it is necessary to do a considerable amount of book-work before you can even begin to gain experience, and this is far more easily done in an institution where teaching and guidance are on offer than trying to do the whole thing unaided. And personally I'm glad that my local hospital only employs doctors who have actually been taught medicine and examined on their knowledge and I would still far rather travel in a plane piloted by someone who had actually been trained to fly it. David. David. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
In article , Scott Dorsey
wrote: In article , Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Wally wrote: Powell wrote: Allthough the sonic effects of spikes may vary from speaker to speaker and from room to room, they do move the resonnance of the speaker-floor combo up in frequency. Sometimes it improves overall sound, sometimes it doesn't. But the effects have a very natural explanation. Care to explain the mechanism that causes the resonant frequency to move up? FWIW I decided not to comment on the bulk of the items asserted most recently as I didn't want to widen the issues. But a number of questions like the above did occur to me. The problem is that with no measurements, details of experimental arrangements, etc, it is often hard to assess the assertions people make. I believe that Mr. Powell is a troll. I can't say that I am astonished to be told that. :-) However, I do suggest looking at the following: 1. A system with two masses, one very large and one very small, which are loosely coupled by a flexible joint. 2. A system with two masses, one very large and one very small, which are more tightly coupled. If the masses are the same in these two examples, and you look at the response to excitation of the smaller mass, what happens to the main resonance as the coupling is increased? Hint: both the resonant frequency and the Q are changed. This stuff is easy to model as a two mass spring system, in the simplest cases. --scott I agree with some provisos. The snags in applying that to the assertions made by Powell seem many and various. Mainly due to the combination of 'vague and sweeping' and 'ambiguous' as features of his assertions, plus a series of apparent muddles like using 'mass' when he perhaps meant something else, etc. Does he not know that 'concrete' and 'wood' both come with wide ranges in their mechanical/acoustic properties? And so on... They key one for your comments though is, Are the 'spikes' either '1' or '2' where the 'speaker set down on the same substrate with no spikes' the other? Or do the two specific situations you describe not accurately reflect comparing spikes with simply sitting on a floor? ... or a carpeted floor? And how do you then establish any of this has any audible significance? Is it the case that only the simple 'two masses with a spring' longitudinal vibration matters here? Or do none of these things matter at all? Of course, you or I can guess which choice above is more plausible, and may well be right. But we then need data to see if our surmise stands up in practice. if you look around consumer audio you see all kinds of claims made, presented in apparently technical language and seeming quite plausible... until you start asking if they really make sense. :-) So yes, you can model things. But you do need to be able to choose appropriate parameter values to do so. And establish your model is the relevant one for producing conclusions about what is relevant in real applications. Also, what kind of mode(s) of vibration is he talking about? Vertical longitundinal? Rocking? Or various other possibilities. Again, that would affect the choice of model. Hence the need for some actual measurements to establish the relevant parameter values which would then be used to verify the model against observations. I don't know the answers here, even if you or I could make good guesses. But I have read enough to realise that people make conflicting assertions, and then don't present checkable evidence in the form of measurements *plus* a decent description of how those measurements were obtained. Alas, lacking these things it is easy for people to be mislead by what seems plausible given only what is asserted. A nice example of this is something I looked at a few years ago. I put the results at http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/...eshift/cp.html if anyone is interested. It shows how a series of published articles presented 'evidence' for a radical discovery which would be quite significant... if true. I had doubts that so many EEs any physicists over the years had missed something so obvious. So I looked carefully at what they'd done. This was hard as some of the critical details were only quite tiny features in their diagrams. But the outcome was that their results were consistent with a simple flaw in their measurement arrangements. FWIW I keep resisting the temptation to do similar examinations of various other sets of 'data and claims' I find. But I may give in shortly... it is fun. 8-] However I can't do this when the person(s) making the claims avoid giving any data or details of how it was obtained, though. I can then only proceed on the basis of being cautious of being expected to accept whatever I've been told simply because the person expects that. TBH my real regret is that a journal like the JAES does not have any interest in publishing such 'forensic analysis' on some of the claims people make and the 'data' they sometimes present. No doubt it would annoy some people, though. ;- Slainte, Jim -- 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 |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
David Looser wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message snip As far as chartered engineer status is concerned I'm not aware of any awarding body that doesn't demand both relevant qualifications and proven experience before conferring the title. Blimey David, this isn't difficult. Have a look at p.12 of the C.Eng competency standard. These are examples of non-formal qualifications that can count in lieu of accredited degrees: Writing a technical report, based upon their experience, and demonstrating their knowledge and understanding of engineering principles; Following an assessed work-based learning programme. If I've got this right the Engineering Council confers the 'Chartered' bit, and accredits (that is, gives full exemption from written quals), or recognises (partial exemption) awards. Then there's an element of practical experience that EC UK prescribes. I'm applying this principle from my experience - RTPI, CIH, RICS. Where I work 3 of the senior academic staff in our team of 9 have no relevant first degree, and no higher degree. One of them published 8 peer reviewed papers last year. The other is leading consultant (or at least was, apparently). The other is normal, er, like me (apart from the senior bit, obviously). I am surprised. In my experience the world of academia is even more keen on formal qualifications than industry is. Senior academics usually have doctorates. But not all disciplines are equal and I don't know which discipline you are talking about. I'd have thought in natural sciences you're right. I work in applied social science in a new university. Maybe a quarter have PhDs. None of our academic professors have a PhD. I have my own opinion about this that I suspect is scarily close to your own :-; What I'm trying to get across is that while the qualification is necessary, it isn't always, or even often, sufficient. I never suggested it was. For anyone starting out on a career in engineering the formal qualifications are merely the start. It'd be nice if you could wash yourself of 'necessary'. When I left school I worked in a surveying office. After a while they let me loose and I was out doing surveys, which were then signed off by a chartered surveyor who'd never seen the building/land. In other words you were an apprentice (even if you weren't called that); that was the way things used to be done in many trades, though not in the professions where having formal education first has long been considered necessary. Ah, OK - we can differ on what counts as a profession. I assume therefore you don't count surveying, law, teaching, planning and accountancy as 'professions'. But you do count flying. And architecture. This isn't working, is it? I'd take it you spit at the mention of 'professional footballer' :-) Of course, having a qualification helps. But it doesn't necessarily mean you can do whatever you're qualified to do any better than someone with lesser or no qualifications. Perhaps in theory. Science and engineering is built on the considerable body of knowledge created by those who went before. So unless you want every practitioner to have to re-invent the discipline for himself it is necessary to do a considerable amount of book-work before you can even begin to gain experience, and this is far more easily done in an institution where teaching and guidance are on offer than trying to do the whole thing unaided. Wouldn't argue with that. We have processes called APL/APCL/APEL - accreditation for prior certificated/experiential learning. It's commonly accepted that in a lot of cases it's actually easier (and in some cases cheaper) to do the qualification than jump through the accreditation hoops. But I'd stress that I think this system is flawed - it forces a huge measure of compliance with institutional practice. And personally I'm glad that my local hospital only employs doctors who have actually been taught medicine and examined on their knowledge and I would still far rather travel in a plane piloted by someone who had actually been trained to fly it. Yes, of course. Back to 'washing' - it doesn't make them good doctors or pilots. Rob |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Les Cargill" wrote in message ng.com... I would have thought that to be a Royal Engineer you wouldn't need formal qualifications - don't know though. You think they are all squadies? The days when someone could become a professional engineer simply by "learning on the job" are well and truly past. David. Meh? I don't think so. You understudy another PE ( in a discipline) for a year, then take a test in the discipline. The BS degree just helps HR sort resumes... -- Les Cargill Not quite so simple. I am an Electrical PE and this is what it takes now a days. 1. must graduate from an ABET accredited school and curriculum. 2. must pass the fundamentals of engineering exam (8hrs open book multiple choice) 3. must have two years work experience in the field of license 4. must present multiple endorsements from registered professional engineers who have reviewed your work 5. must pass 2nd 8 hr test. Mine had 24 questions and I had to answer 8 of them. Open book, calculators allowed , all work and assumptions shown, hand graded. 6. too keep the license you must complete 12 professional development hours of education each year and keep the license(s) for every state you are licensed in current. http://www.ncees.org/licensure/licensure_for_engineers/ peace dawg P.E. ps: There is no PE for a sound guy. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Les Cargill wrote: Meh? I don't think so. You understudy another PE ( in a discipline) for a year, then take a test in the discipline. The problem with the PE test for many years was that it was not specific to any discipline and was in fact very heavy on mechanics and civil engineering stuff. So if you were an electrical engineer and wanted to work as a PE, you had to take a test on truss loads and steam pressures. Not in the USA at least for the past 28 years as I have been licensed. In fact now there are actually three subcatigories of Electrical. Computer, Power and Electronics. Fortunatly I grandfather into all three. http://www.ncees.org/exams/professio...ical_exams.php I am told that these days the test has been broken up somewhat and that there is now a specific EE option, although folks from other engineering disciplines (anything from textile or ceramic engineering to aero) still have to calculate soil erosion. The BS degree just helps HR sort resumes... Yes, and the BS degree is worth more than the PE in a lot of cases. So while in theory you could cram for the PE and pass it without a degree, it wouldn't be all that easy to get a job that way. Being alowed to take licensure exams without graduating from and ABET accredited curriculum has not been allowed for over 40 years. When the first licenses were given in 1966 perhaps, but today there is no way to get your PE without going through the process. Most people graduating in engineering now-a-days do not peruse a PE. Fresh graduates taking the electrical FE pass at 63%. Only 63% of first time PE takers pass. These are people who have degrees and work experience and PE endorsements and have passed the FE. This is not an easy test. I could not pass it today without some big time cramming at least. The guy who does my contract work, though, never got a law degree. He apprenticed with a lawyer back in the fifties, studied a lot, and passed the bar exam. That's not very common today but it used to be very common a century ago. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Rob" wrote in message news:si6mm.73140 What I'm trying to get across is that while the qualification is necessary, it isn't always, or even often, sufficient. It'd be nice if you could wash yourself of 'necessary'. When I left school I worked in a surveying office. After a while they let me loose and I was out doing surveys, which were then signed off by a chartered surveyor who'd never seen the building/land. In the USA this is called "plan checking" It is illegal and subjects the licensed party (surveyors are licensed by the professional engineering boards in USA) to disciplinary action by the board and could result in criminal liability is someone is hurt because of your negligence. Of course, having a qualification helps. But it doesn't necessarily mean you can do whatever you're qualified to do any better than someone with lesser or no qualifications. R peace dawg p.e. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
Wecan do it wrote:
ps: There is no PE for a sound guy. LOL Roger that. So is someone who gradgimicates from Full Sail or Berklee with a recording arts degree considered an operator or tech? Or just an intern? I've always wanted to spend the time and money for a degree so I can pour someone's coffee... ;^) ---Jeff |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
In article , Rob
wrote: David Looser wrote: "Rob" wrote in message I am surprised. In my experience the world of academia is even more keen on formal qualifications than industry is. Senior academics usually have doctorates. But not all disciplines are equal and I don't know which discipline you are talking about. I'd have thought in natural sciences you're right. I work in applied social science in a new university. Maybe a quarter have PhDs. None of our academic professors have a PhD. I have my own opinion about this that I suspect is scarily close to your own :-; FWIW In my experience it has become quite rare in the UK for a permanent employed Uni academic in Physics or Engineering to not have a PhD. I have worked with one or two exceptions, though. Indeed, when I was first employed as a fixed-term 'postdoc' at Uni I didn't have a PhD so got that later on. So people are sometimes employed in such roles on the basis of relevant experience and aptitude judged in some other ways. :-) Mind you, the Prof who ran that group is both an outstanding scientist/engineer and a real gentleman. Slainte, Jim -- 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 |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Rob" wrote in message
om... David Looser wrote: "Rob" wrote in message snip As far as chartered engineer status is concerned I'm not aware of any awarding body that doesn't demand both relevant qualifications and proven experience before conferring the title. Blimey David, this isn't difficult. Have a look at p.12 of the C.Eng competency standard. These are examples of non-formal qualifications that can count in lieu of accredited degrees: Writing a technical report, based upon their experience, and demonstrating their knowledge and understanding of engineering principles; Following an assessed work-based learning programme. OK I've looked. You are correct that it is not essential to have an accredited qualification. But I also noticed that it then went on to say "For CEng registration, this knowledge and understanding is set at Master's degree level". I wonder how one is going to acquire such knowledge and understanding without formal training? I suggest that the word "accredited" is important here. It's not that they expect the self-taught to be able to take advantage of this route, rather it will be those who's qualifications are not, for whatever reason, accredited. If I've got this right the Engineering Council confers the 'Chartered' bit, and accredits (that is, gives full exemption from written quals), or recognises (partial exemption) awards. I'm not sure I follow the above. Accreditation applies to courses and qualification awarding bodies. Thus a student who takes and passes such an accredited course has already achieved the qualification part of gaining CEng status. Then there's an element of practical experience that EC UK prescribes. Precisely. Ah, OK - we can differ on what counts as a profession. I assume therefore you don't count surveying, law, teaching, planning and accountancy as 'professions'. But you do count flying. And architecture. This isn't working, is it? I wonder why you assume I don't count law? Are you suggesting that it's possible to work as a lawyer without qualifications? And school teachers must have a teaching qualification (itself equivalent to a first degree) as well (for secondary school teachers) as a degree in one's specialist subject. I'd take it you spit at the mention of 'professional footballer' :-) The "professions" is a rather old-fashioned notion, long pre-dating professional footballers. But one can be a "professional" anything if it's what one does to earn one's crust. We have processes called APL/APCL/APEL - accreditation for prior certificated/experiential learning. It's commonly accepted that in a lot of cases it's actually easier (and in some cases cheaper) to do the qualification than jump through the accreditation hoops. I agree, with the proviso that I'd say "most cases", rather than "a lot of cases" But I'd stress that I think this system is flawed - it forces a huge measure of compliance with institutional practice. I wouldn't disagree with that. The ever increasing tendency to insist that people hold certificates to be allowed to do what they do is not something I am entirely happy with. Of course it does weed out the truly incompetent, but it also inhibits innovation and individuality as well. I recently took a teaching course (the short one for adult training, not the full school-teachers course) and I was frankly appalled at the "one size fits all" mentality of the course syllabus and the accrediting body. David. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
Wecan do it wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message news:si6mm.73140 What I'm trying to get across is that while the qualification is necessary, it isn't always, or even often, sufficient. It'd be nice if you could wash yourself of 'necessary'. When I left school I worked in a surveying office. After a while they let me loose and I was out doing surveys, which were then signed off by a chartered surveyor who'd never seen the building/land. In the USA this is called "plan checking" It is illegal and subjects the licensed party (surveyors are licensed by the professional engineering boards in USA) to disciplinary action by the board and could result in criminal liability is someone is hurt because of your negligence. While not illegal in the UK (or at least England; Scotland seems to change by the day), it isn't much more than cheap labour or delegated trust and responsibility (take your pick). We charged clients many thousands for reports I'd write from surveys I'd done. This would include home purchase surveys, but more commonly commercial valuations. Around £100k pa fees for that type of work IIRC (early-mid-80s). I got paid £1500pa when I started, and not much more when I left. It was common knowledge that once you'd 'got your letters' your salary would increase considerably. Ever one to ride the crest of a wave, by the time I'd almost qualified I lost interest :-) But it's the signatory who'd take the liability for professional negligence/plain bad work. So, they'd be a fool if they didn't take *any* interest in the paper they were signing, and most were many things but not fools. I have to say I had a couple of scrapes that nearly got my boss in deep water. Rob |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:49:12 +0100, "David Looser"
wrote: "For CEng registration, this knowledge and understanding is set at Master's degree level". I wonder how one is going to acquire such knowledge and understanding without formal training? Why couldn't you acquire it "on the job"? We're talking about technical people here. They know how to find and use resources - probably the same resources they'd study on a formal course. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
In article , Arkansan Raider
wrote: Wecan do it wrote: ps: There is no PE for a sound guy. LOL Roger that. So is someone who gradgimicates from Full Sail or Berklee with a recording arts degree considered an operator or tech? Or just an intern? I've always wanted to spend the time and money for a degree so I can pour someone's coffee... ;^) FWIW The UK govenment claim that having a 'degree' boosts lifetime earnings for UK residents by the order of a couple of hundred thousand pounds [1] relative to other with the same school results but no degree. However a BBC Radio 4 program ('More or Less') that looks at the use of statistics investigated this. It found what you might expect. That when you take depeciation/inflation into account and analyse by subject then... Computer science and physical science/eng/maths grads tend to do rather better than the generalised average. ....but on average 'art' grads earn over a lifetime *less* if they went to Uni for a degree. Moral there somewhere, I guess. :-) Slainte, Jim [1] Can't recall the exact figures they said, but they may be on the BBC website if anyone is curious. -- 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 |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
In article ,
Arkansan Raider wrote: Wecan do it wrote: ps: There is no PE for a sound guy. LOL Roger that. So is someone who gradgimicates from Full Sail or Berklee with a recording arts degree considered an operator or tech? Or just an intern? Most of these 'meja studies' type degrees are relatively new in the scheme of things. Didn't exist in the UK when I started out. I've always wanted to spend the time and money for a degree so I can pour someone's coffee... ;^) Or ask if you want fries with it. ;-) Pretty well all the youngsters I come across in my industry these days have a university or college qualification. But it doesn't seem to mean they have greater skills where it matters than in olden days - as so much of the job is learned by hands on experience. Which no academic course can really provide. -- *Never kick a cow pat on a hot day * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
... On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:49:12 +0100, "David Looser" wrote: "For CEng registration, this knowledge and understanding is set at Master's degree level". I wonder how one is going to acquire such knowledge and understanding without formal training? Why couldn't you acquire it "on the job"? We're talking about technical people here. They know how to find and use resources - probably the same resources they'd study on a formal course. How are they going to know how to find and use resources? Are you suggesting that "technical people" are born with this innate ability?, or do they absorb it with their Mother's milk? And the reason they can't acquire it "on the job" is that without qualifications nobody is going to give them a job! David. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
Arkansan Raider wrote:
So is someone who gradgimicates from Full Sail or Berklee with a recording arts degree considered an operator or tech? Or just an intern? It's enough for them to get five minutes in front of a console and at that point it becomes very clear whether they are an operator, tech, or intern. I've always wanted to spend the time and money for a degree so I can pour someone's coffee... ;^) I get a couple calls a week from kids with shiny new fresh degrees from the recording trade schools. I ask them if they can solder or read a conductor's score. I have yet to find any of them who can answer this well. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Jim Lesurf" wrote Since my background is in science and engineering, There are ZERO qualifications, not even a Drivers License, for someone to call themselves a "Engineer". What kind of formal education in engineering do you have... undergraduate/graduate and in what field? I'm not bothered if you doubt I am 'qualified' or not. Hehehe, HAHAHA... yea, right! I've seen a number of bull-**** artists like you over the last dozen years on USEnet. **** off tea bag. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Powell" wrote in message
... I've seen a number of bull-**** artists like you over the last dozen years on USEnet. **** off tea bag. Ah, at last Powell is showing us his true colours. The bull**** was entirely your own. David. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:55:26 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote: Computer science and physical science/eng/maths grads tend to do rather better than the generalised average. ...but on average 'art' grads earn over a lifetime *less* if they went to Uni for a degree. Moral there somewhere, I guess. :-) Yeah. My brother, with a Classics degree from Oxford, always says his highest-paid job was when he filled in as a dustman. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
David Looser wrote:
"Laurence Payne" wrote in message ... On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:49:12 +0100, "David Looser" wrote: "For CEng registration, this knowledge and understanding is set at Master's degree level". I wonder how one is going to acquire such knowledge and understanding without formal training? Why couldn't you acquire it "on the job"? We're talking about technical people here. They know how to find and use resources - probably the same resources they'd study on a formal course. How are they going to know how to find and use resources? Are you suggesting that "technical people" are born with this innate ability?, or do they absorb it with their Mother's milk? It's not innate. People do read, watch, listen and learn you know. Some of my more awkward teaching moments arise with councillors. Two spring to mind in the last couple of years - barely an O level between them but with technical skill and ability well beyond mine - and that's level 7 in this particular field. My role is relegated to trying to make them fit within the constraints of a curriculum - one of the few times I have to answer the question 'Why?' with 'Because I say so'. If they want the qualification they're going to have to do as I advise. Not big or clever, I know. Interestingly and at last research is starting to come out relating to the myth of working class 'ignorance' - I saw something by Chris Allen at Salford recently. And the reason they can't acquire it "on the job" is that without qualifications nobody is going to give them a job! Yes, I think people know that that's generally what happens. Doesn't make it *right* though! Rob |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Rob wrote: David Looser wrote: "Rob" wrote in message I am surprised. In my experience the world of academia is even more keen on formal qualifications than industry is. Senior academics usually have doctorates. But not all disciplines are equal and I don't know which discipline you are talking about. I'd have thought in natural sciences you're right. I work in applied social science in a new university. Maybe a quarter have PhDs. None of our academic professors have a PhD. I have my own opinion about this that I suspect is scarily close to your own :-; FWIW In my experience it has become quite rare in the UK for a permanent employed Uni academic in Physics or Engineering to not have a PhD. I have worked with one or two exceptions, though. Indeed, when I was first employed as a fixed-term 'postdoc' at Uni I didn't have a PhD so got that later on. So people are sometimes employed in such roles on the basis of relevant experience and aptitude judged in some other ways. :-) If anything I think having a PhD might have been a hindrance at the interview for my current job. None of the panel were strong academics, and I spent a fair amount of time explaining how I could 'do' admin, marketing and so forth. So yes, I think you could be right - I can operate a photocopier like no other :-) which makes me a rather overpaid and overqualified copier person - not unlike Stuart Pinkerton :-) Mind you, the Prof who ran that group is both an outstanding scientist/engineer and a real gentleman. A rare set of qualities there. Makes all the difference. Rob |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:56:57 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote: So is someone who gradgimicates from Full Sail or Berklee with a recording arts degree considered an operator or tech? Or just an intern? Most of these 'meja studies' type degrees are relatively new in the scheme of things. Didn't exist in the UK when I started out. You can argue about the utility of courses such as Full Sail offers. But they aren't "Media Studies". If you're not clear what that term means, Wikipedia describes it quite well. It doesn't HAVE to be a joke subject. It could study all the media in the same way as an English degree studies just one. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
"Laurence Payne" wrote in message ... On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:49:12 +0100, "David Looser" wrote: "For CEng registration, this knowledge and understanding is set at Master's degree level". I wonder how one is going to acquire such knowledge and understanding without formal training? Why couldn't you acquire it "on the job"? We're talking about technical people here. They know how to find and use resources - probably the same resources they'd study on a formal course. The PE exams in USA are open book. Take as many in as you can wheel or carry. You still get only 8 hours to answer 8 of the 24 questions you chose. 63% of the first time takers pass. They all qualified with 4 year accredited degrees and have years of real experience endorsed by many other PE's. Must be an easy test huh? peace dawg pe |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
In article ,
Laurence Payne wrote: On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:56:57 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote: So is someone who gradgimicates from Full Sail or Berklee with a recording arts degree considered an operator or tech? Or just an intern? Most of these 'meja studies' type degrees are relatively new in the scheme of things. Didn't exist in the UK when I started out. You can argue about the utility of courses such as Full Sail offers. But they aren't "Media Studies". If you're not clear what that term means, Wikipedia describes it quite well. Oh I know. I was using 'meja studies' to cover anything to do with broadcasting and recording etc - as I said they are relatively new. It doesn't HAVE to be a joke subject. Sadly many of the colleges in the UK seem to turn out technicians who want to run before they can walk. Which can be extremely frustrating for the individuals. It could study all the media in the same way as an English degree studies just one. I doubt any one individual has a comprehensive knowledge of all the media. Although plenty *think* they have. -- *Welcome to **** Creek - sorry, we're out of paddles* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 18:16:16 -0400, "Wecan do it"
wrote: The PE exams in USA are open book. Take as many in as you can wheel or carry. You still get only 8 hours to answer 8 of the 24 questions you chose. 63% of the first time takers pass. They all qualified with 4 year accredited degrees and have years of real experience endorsed by many other PE's. Must be an easy test huh? Or a badly aimed one. No way to tell from the data you've given. |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 23:42:41 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote: You can argue about the utility of courses such as Full Sail offers. But they aren't "Media Studies". If you're not clear what that term means, Wikipedia describes it quite well. Oh I know. I was using 'meja studies' to cover anything to do with broadcasting and recording etc - as I said they are relatively new. Nice wriggle! I suppose it's also OK to "use" reverb to mean echo (no, hold on, they're too close), blue to mean green (that's better!) ...... |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Arkansan Raider wrote: Wecan do it wrote: ps: There is no PE for a sound guy. LOL Roger that. So is someone who gradgimicates from Full Sail or Berklee with a recording arts degree considered an operator or tech? Or just an intern? I've always wanted to spend the time and money for a degree so I can pour someone's coffee... ;^) FWIW The UK govenment claim that having a 'degree' boosts lifetime earnings for UK residents by the order of a couple of hundred thousand pounds [1] relative to other with the same school results but no degree. However a BBC Radio 4 program ('More or Less') that looks at the use of statistics investigated this. It found what you might expect. That when you take depeciation/inflation into account and analyse by subject then... Computer science and physical science/eng/maths grads tend to do rather better than the generalised average. ...but on average 'art' grads earn over a lifetime *less* if they went to Uni for a degree. Moral there somewhere, I guess. :-) Well, perhaps one moral might be to look at the remit and design of the research :-) Earnings can also be related to gender, ethnicity, class and age for example. Simply correlating degree type and earnings doesn't tell you a great deal about anything. Depends what you want to hear, I suppose. Rob |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
In article , Rob
wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: FWIW The UK govenment claim that having a 'degree' boosts lifetime earnings for UK residents by the order of a couple of hundred thousand pounds [1] relative to other with the same school results but no degree. However a BBC Radio 4 program ('More or Less') that looks at the use of statistics investigated this. It found what you might expect. That when you take depeciation/inflation into account and analyse by subject then... Computer science and physical science/eng/maths grads tend to do rather better than the generalised average. ...but on average 'art' grads earn over a lifetime *less* if they went to Uni for a degree. Moral there somewhere, I guess. :-) Well, perhaps one moral might be to look at the remit and design of the research :-) Earnings can also be related to gender, ethnicity, class and age for example. Simply correlating degree type and earnings doesn't tell you a great deal about anything. It may do if you are wondering if the generalisation presented by the government means what the govenment want you to think it means. :-) The point here is that graduates *regardless of topic* are now expected to pay fees, etc, and the statistic is wheeled out by the government as one way to justify this. The point of the examination was to see if the situation was the same across all topics. The results reported indicated big differences from one topic to another. So you would need - as common for experimental results and statistics - to know the context in which the figures are presented. The implication is that - if you are a studying a topic like comp sci, etc, - that your degree does tend to increase your probable lifetime earnings. But that for some other topics going to uni and getting a degree may be likely to reduce them. People deciding what courses to take, or careers to aim at, might find that of some interest. Of course you can argue that 'averages' "don't tell you a great deal" in any (individual) case. If so, then the initial statistic can also be dismissed. :-) Personally, I'd stick with my own standard advice to students, etc. Simply do what you find interesting and find you can do enjoyably well. But I know that many students are anxious to take degrees that will give them a good job or career for obvious reasons. So I can't help suspecting that such a breakdown by degree topic might be of interest to those considering going to uni and comparing that with simply getting to work. Depends what you want to hear, I suppose. Well, if you are in the UK you can hear it for yourself. :-) The program was broadcast on Friday, so should still be on the BBC iPlayer 'listen again', etc. They explained in detail how they had examined the figures. If you find a flaw in their approach, let us know. Indeed, you can also email them as they actively encourage that from listeners. I know from previous programs that they do sometime correct what they said and acknowledge that an email pointed out their error. So now's your chance. :-) The point of the program is to re-examine the 'statistics' the government and other issue to see if they actually mean what the issuers claim. I find it an excellent program as it often uncovers ways in which dubious conclusions are drawn from misuse of 'statistics'. The R4 'Media Program' is also worth a listen IMO. They recently discussed 'media studies' and gave quite a range of views as the speakers on the program included people involved with teaching and assessing such topics. Slainte, Jim -- 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 |
Convert speaker spikes from quadrupod to tripod
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote: In article , Laurence Payne wrote: Oh I know. I was using 'meja studies' to cover anything to do with broadcasting and recording etc - as I said they are relatively new. It doesn't HAVE to be a joke subject. Sadly many of the colleges in the UK seem to turn out technicians who want to run before they can walk. Which can be extremely frustrating for the individuals. I recall being shouted at by an aged professor of physics because the basic 'electronics' course I was giving physical science undergrads included teaching them to solder and to build their own simple circuits. He was furious that I was 'wasting their time', and that 'soldering was for technicians, not graduates'. Fine for them to have lectures on semiconductors and devices, but not to actually solder or make anything. He was quite angry. And I was quite shocked by his reactions. I was/am used to the idea that experimentalists should be able to design, built, and test their own kit. Not just buy it all from the HP and Minicircuits catalogue without having a clue how it worked. But so far as he was concerned a 'graduate' would simply get someone else to do all that and just step in to take down the results and publish them. Weird. Similarly, I feel that even theoreticians find it useful to appreciate how the kit that gathers their data actually works. Helps them to avoid 'over interpretation' of the data, and to see what improvements might be sensibly asked for. Alas, his view wasn't unique. I have come across one or two 'EE' grads who can't solder, and Mech ones who can't tell brass from aluminimum when given two lumps of metal and asked which is which. Again, this does seem weird to me. I guess they just get lectures and computer simulations. Who needs to solder when they have spice, etc? :-) Mind you, I admit to being old-fashioned. Took decades to wean me off FORTRAN onto 'C' and I still dislike people modelling with Mathcad, Spreadsheets, etc. 8-] Still... after 25 years, the labwork I put into the course is still there. :-) Slainte, Jim -- 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 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:56 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk