|
|
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
"notme" wrote in message ... hello everyone i am in a lucky position as a relative left me all his gear(before he departed for other shores) amplifiers with valves in them the biggest being a beard 100, leak tl20, musical fidelity with huge black knobs and separate power,scott 299, quad 2,quad33/303 (which i am using at the moment). although i have been mostly into my ipod and its plugin amplifier, i can now hear a huge difference with the records/cds he also left. he has used for years a pr of monitor audio 352s and one of them has recently developed a rasping sound, sorry to go on this brings me to my question as i am out of my dept here.i have been looking around ebay etc fo a replacement pr of more up to date speakers, i like the look of other monitor audios,splendors,bo etc , in the specification it might have (for amplifiers of at least 25 watts) i am a bit puzzled about this the lowest power amplifier (leak tl20) i think is 10 w1tts and when i have hocked it up to the 352 i have to be conscious of the neighbours, if 10 watts is that loud 25 watts would rightly have the neighbours complaining, at the same time would like to have a nice sounding speaker that i can match with the different amplifiers from time to time. i have also a average size through lounge in a terraced house, would the splendor/ monitor audio bests be too big or would they give the range if needed. i want to make the right decision and dont want to be changing to the latest model all the time dilemma suggestions would be welcome Apparently your style of posting has rattled a few cages...... There is no dilemma. The R352's were "Best Buys" of the 80's being home turf products thus over-priced and nothing special. It's been covered in other replies but watts are just numbers. You could do a search on the subject, but speakers "represent a load" to the amp, start with the search term: "Ampere's law". The "load" will be badged up as something along the lines: "Nominal 8ohms" or similar, But thats just a figure based on one set of measurements to appease some marketiing requirement or other. The "impedance trend" in the real world could bounce or dip, it's just an "averaged" figure, which is not representative of real world usage. The sensitivity claim is again a figure supposedly to represent how loud a speaker will go for 1 watt at one metre using one tone to compare against rivals etc. In the space time continuum well it is figures Jim, but not as we know it ..... In the real world. There is no mystery about how speakers work, though there are important factors to consider, we could go along the road of long throw, frequency range, paper/fibre/metel cones blah blah blah. But in your case if your current crop of ancient amps had no problem pumping the amprers into the R352's then modern efficient units will dance driven by the same amps. If you like the look of the MA cabinets and want savings on shipping costs for bulky boxes, then do what I suggested elsewhere in this thread, replace the drive units, it's simple, all drive units are shaped and sized to set standards. You only have to be concerned with "matching" sensitivity of drives. A variable crossover will be to discern what lumps of the bandwidth is fed to which drive unit, - tweeter and woofer. It's no mystery, it is sod all to do with how much they cost or who gives what a best buy. You can do it yourself with spectacular results all for approx 70 quid. Do a search on following terms: speaker impedance speaker sensitivity speaker efficiency speaker sound pressure level (SPL) speaker crossover Here is a whole pile of video's about speakers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jr9QH0t3h4 http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...dspeakers&aq=f |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 19:21:54 +0100, "Fed Up Lurker"
wrote: "notme" wrote in message .. . hello everyone i am in a lucky position as a relative left me all his gear(before he departed for other shores) amplifiers with valves in them the biggest being a beard 100, leak tl20, musical fidelity with huge black knobs and separate power,scott 299, quad 2,quad33/303 (which i am using at the moment). although i have been mostly into my ipod and its plugin amplifier, i can now hear a huge difference with the records/cds he also left. he has used for years a pr of monitor audio 352s and one of them has recently developed a rasping sound, sorry to go on this brings me to my question as i am out of my dept here.i have been looking around ebay etc fo a replacement pr of more up to date speakers, i like the look of other monitor audios,splendors,bo etc , in the specification it might have (for amplifiers of at least 25 watts) i am a bit puzzled about this the lowest power amplifier (leak tl20) i think is 10 w1tts and when i have hocked it up to the 352 i have to be conscious of the neighbours, if 10 watts is that loud 25 watts would rightly have the neighbours complaining, at the same time would like to have a nice sounding speaker that i can match with the different amplifiers from time to time. i have also a average size through lounge in a terraced house, would the splendor/ monitor audio bests be too big or would they give the range if needed. i want to make the right decision and dont want to be changing to the latest model all the time dilemma suggestions would be welcome Apparently your style of posting has rattled a few cages...... There is no dilemma. The R352's were "Best Buys" of the 80's being home turf products thus over-priced and nothing special. It's been covered in other replies but watts are just numbers. You could do a search on the subject, but speakers "represent a load" to the amp, start with the search term: "Ampere's law". The "load" will be badged up as something along the lines: "Nominal 8ohms" or similar, But thats just a figure based on one set of measurements to appease some marketiing requirement or other. The "impedance trend" in the real world could bounce or dip, it's just an "averaged" figure, which is not representative of real world usage. The sensitivity claim is again a figure supposedly to represent how loud a speaker will go for 1 watt at one metre using one tone to compare against rivals etc. In the space time continuum well it is figures Jim, but not as we know it ..... In the real world. There is no mystery about how speakers work, though there are important factors to consider, we could go along the road of long throw, frequency range, paper/fibre/metel cones blah blah blah. But in your case if your current crop of ancient amps had no problem pumping the amprers into the R352's then modern efficient units will dance driven by the same amps. If you like the look of the MA cabinets and want savings on shipping costs for bulky boxes, then do what I suggested elsewhere in this thread, replace the drive units, it's simple, all drive units are shaped and sized to set standards. You only have to be concerned with "matching" sensitivity of drives. A variable crossover will be to discern what lumps of the bandwidth is fed to which drive unit, - tweeter and woofer. It's no mystery, it is sod all to do with how much they cost or who gives what a best buy. You can do it yourself with spectacular results all for approx 70 quid. Do a search on following terms: speaker impedance speaker sensitivity speaker efficiency speaker sound pressure level (SPL) speaker crossover Here is a whole pile of video's about speakers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jr9QH0t3h4 http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...dspeakers&aq=f Hello Fed Up Lurker Very good post it was never my intention to rattle cages etc, but just to enlist the help of the obviously experienced posters here, and if I might say so I might not be so fluent as very rarely have I posted to forums af any sort, but any criticisms I take on board as long as they are not condescending, anon. Shoot me down in flames if required, on the matter of replacement woofers I have the idea (may be totally wrong) that when any quality loudspeaker system I designed the volume, shape, tweeter spec, all have to be considered and played around with in a sound negative room. Crossovers are modified and the sound engineers try many drivers before they finally indeed I believe monitor audio drivers are specially made to their own spec so buying a replacement driver may actually be a bit. chancy? Might be better to hang the ex pence and go for another pair of speakers very interesting your you tube videos, had no idea they were available i am a retired prototype wiremam maybe a new hobby i havent so far had time for |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
"notme" wrote in message ... Hello Fed Up Lurker Very good post it was never my intention to rattle cages etc, but just to enlist the help of the obviously experienced posters here, and if I might say so I might not be so fluent as very rarely have I posted to forums af any sort, but any criticisms I take on board as long as they are not condescending, anon. Shoot me down in flames if required, on the matter of replacement woofers I have the idea (may be totally wrong) that when any quality loudspeaker system I designed the volume, shape, tweeter spec, all have to be considered and played around with in a sound negative room. Crossovers are modified and the sound engineers try many drivers before they finally indeed I believe monitor audio drivers are specially made to their own spec so buying a replacement driver may actually be a bit. chancy? Might be better to hang the ex pence and go for another pair of speakers very interesting your you tube videos, had no idea they were available i am a retired prototype wiremam maybe a new hobby i havent so far had time for Hi notme, For your speakers you go the route you feel comfortable with. Apologies for the immature pettiness displayed by some in this group, most of them are clueless old biddies, so best to just shrug it off. For me the major disappointment to how you were targeted started by someone who is actually a professional who claims his aim is to bring the hobby to more people, oh well sigh.... Good luck. |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
"notme" wrote in message
... snip Hello Fed Up Lurker Very good post it was never my intention to rattle cages etc, but just to enlist the help of the obviously experienced posters here, and if I might say so I might not be so fluent as very rarely have I posted to forums af any sort, but any criticisms I take on board as long as they are not condescending, anon. Shoot me down in flames if required, on the matter of replacement woofers I have the idea (may be totally wrong) that when any quality loudspeaker system I designed the volume, shape, tweeter spec, all have to be considered and played around with in a sound negative room. Crossovers are modified and the sound engineers try many drivers before they finally indeed I believe monitor audio drivers are specially made to their own spec so buying a replacement driver may actually be a bit. chancy? Might be better to hang the ex pence and go for another pair of speakers very interesting your you tube videos, had no idea they were available i am a retired prototype wiremam maybe a new hobby i havent so far had time for Hi notme, For your speakers you go the route you feel comfortable with. Apologies for the immature pettiness displayed by some in this group, most of them are clueless old biddies, so best to just shrug it off. For me the major disappointment to how you were targeted started by someone who is actually a professional who claims his aim is to bring the hobby to more people, oh well sigh.... Good luck. |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
In article ,
Fed Up Lurker wrote: For your speakers you go the route you feel comfortable with. Apologies for the immature pettiness displayed by some in this group, most of them are clueless old biddies, so best to just shrug it off. For me the major disappointment to how you were targeted started by someone who is actually a professional who claims his aim is to bring the hobby to more people, oh well sigh.... Interesting that the last post from Mr notme would not IMHO have attracted any such reply regarding its construction. Usenet like any 'club' has its conventions and anyone who contravenes them is likely to attract adverse comment. Like to those who top post. -- *I wished the buck stopped here, as I could use a few* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 19:33:26 +0100, "Fed Up Lurker"
wrote: "notme" wrote in message .. . snip Hello Fed Up Lurker Very good post it was never my intention to rattle cages etc, but just to enlist the help of the obviously experienced posters here, and if I might say so I might not be so fluent as very rarely have I posted to forums af any sort, but any criticisms I take on board as long as they are not condescending, anon. Shoot me down in flames if required, on the matter of replacement woofers I have the idea (may be totally wrong) that when any quality loudspeaker system I designed the volume, shape, tweeter spec, all have to be considered and played around with in a sound negative room. Crossovers are modified and the sound engineers try many drivers before they finally indeed I believe monitor audio drivers are specially made to their own spec so buying a replacement driver may actually be a bit. chancy? Might be better to hang the ex pence and go for another pair of speakers very interesting your you tube videos, had no idea they were available i am a retired prototype wiremam maybe a new hobby i havent so far had time for Hi notme, For your speakers you go the route you feel comfortable with. Apologies for the immature pettiness displayed by some in this group, most of them are clueless old biddies, so best to just shrug it off. For me the major disappointment to how you were targeted started by someone who is actually a professional who claims his aim is to bring the hobby to more people, oh well sigh.... Good luck. i would like to sign off now,and thank some of the less prissy folks for answering (back to my old ways). usenet posting, will sign on to an open university coarse if available, lol. there are many more questions i would like to ask, quite a lot of valves and avo tester(not here),its time to get back to my watchlist.( AIM) over n out |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
In article , notme
wrote: i would like to sign off now,and thank some of the less prissy folks althoughyoumaywanttodismissitasprissysomeofusthink itmakessenseto considerthereaderswhenpostinginparticulartoconside rthemwhenasking forhelporinformationusenetisnotawriteonlymediumand whileyoumayfind ithardtowriteclearlysomeotherswhohaveinfoyouwouldf indusefulmayalso findreadingbadlyformattedtextapitastillyouareasfre easanyoneelsetowrit easyouchoosejustastherestofusarefreetostruggletore adwhatiswrittenor nottherealityisithinkthatyoudontneedtogototheoutol earnhowtowriteinaw ayotherscanreadnortolearnhowtobepoliteandconsidera te. slaintejim :-) -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
over n out Pedants mode on: "over" means "I have finished speaking and require a reply". "Out" means "I have finished speaking and do NOT require a reply". Therefore "over and out" has entirely contradictory meanings. Constantly misused in WW2 films since the forties. Probably won't bother the OP much, I suppose. GMacK |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
Geoff Mackenzie wrote:
over n out Pedants mode on: "over" means "I have finished speaking and require a reply". "Out" means "I have finished speaking and do NOT require a reply". Therefore "over and out" has entirely contradictory meanings. Constantly misused in WW2 films since the forties. Probably won't bother the OP much, I suppose. All that usage in films has established "over and out" as a bona fide expression, surely? If the OP had just written "out" I wouldn't have known what he meant. Maybe it makes sense if you take it to mean "I'll still be listening but shan't reply" Here's a paradox: http://www.answers.com/topic/over-and-out Reminds me of "This statement is not true". Or perhaps it actually means "an oxymoron", as in "Microsoft Works is over and out"? Then there's: http://dictionary.pokerzone.com/Over+and+Out Finally: http://www.internetslang.com/OAO.asp I might add that the OP is quite a good writer. In a couple of paragraphs he has established a character in all essential details, baited us with a list of desirable audio gear, and hung it all on the device of a rhetorical question. Perhaps formula stuff you might expect in a mediocre novel or a magazine article, but an impressive contrivance all the same, IMHO. Maybe his attenuated grammar is normal in financial markets? Otherwise it doesn't quite fit with the rest of his persona. Ian |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On 23/08/2010 11:12 p.m., Jim Lesurf wrote:
In , notme wrote: i would like to sign off now,and thank some of the less prissy folks althoughyoumaywanttodismissitasprissysomeofusthink itmakessenseto considerthereaderswhenpostinginparticulartoconside rthemwhenasking forhelporinformationusenetisnotawriteonlymediumand whileyoumayfind ithardtowriteclearlysomeotherswhohaveinfoyouwouldf indusefulmayalso findreadingbadlyformattedtextapitastillyouareasfre easanyoneelsetowrit easyouchoosejustastherestofusarefreetostruggletore adwhatiswrittenor nottherealityisithinkthatyoudontneedtogototheoutol earnhowtowriteinaw ayotherscanreadnortolearnhowtobepoliteandconsidera te. slaintejim :-) Nice one Jim.:) As an aside,I hope your PHD students didn't write their assignments in that style. I can see it now -- FAILED! Mike |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
In article , Mike Coatham
wrote: On 23/08/2010 11:12 p.m., Jim Lesurf wrote: In , notme wrote: i would like to sign off now,and thank some of the less prissy folks althoughyoumaywanttodismissitasprissysomeofusthink itmakessenseto [snip] Nice one Jim.:) As an aside,I hope your PHD students didn't write their assignments in that style. I can see it now -- FAILED! One of the duties of a PhD supervisor is to make sure the PhD is readable - if only by the chosen examiners! :-) Glad to say that none of my students ever failed a PhD or even failed to submit. Although I think that tells you more about them than it does about me. :-) One of my best students later admitted he chose me as supervisor because he found me one day using a stereo microscope to read microfiches of old copies of SF magazines. Decided I was mad enough to be his preferred supervisor. 8-] However one of the reasons I've become 'sensitised' to poor presentation is the sheer number of exam scripts, essays, etc, I've had to assess over the years that were virtually unreadable. Some had no paragraphs or sections. No page numbers. etc. Some were 'handwritten' illegibly. To me this is a concern on a number of levels. It shows lack of thought for the *reader*. It may mean in exams, etc, marks are not given because the info was indecyperable. And employers (or potential employers) presented with such rubbish might not be best pleased. But for me the bottom line is that writing for others to read is a form of *communication*. So it seems daft or lazy or even arrogant to write in a way that makes the result needlessly harder for others to read. Matter of being considerate as well as an aid to clarity. However I do realise that some people find this much harder. e.g. some have difficulty with various aspects of language, etc. And I'm sure that some devices like tiny phones may make 'normal' typing hard. But "cannae be bothered" doesn't seem to me to be decent reason when you are trying to ask other for help/info. Slainte, Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
"Ian Iveson" wrote in message news:jFBco.161232$qO1.110662@hurricane... Geoff Mackenzie wrote: over n out Pedants mode on: "over" means "I have finished speaking and require a reply". "Out" means "I have finished speaking and do NOT require a reply". Therefore "over and out" has entirely contradictory meanings. Constantly misused in WW2 films since the forties. Probably won't bother the OP much, I suppose. All that usage in films has established "over and out" as a bona fide expression, surely? If the OP had just written "out" I wouldn't have known what he meant. Yes, accepted. The English language is constantly evolving, and justly so. I am probably biased due to my pilot training in the early seventies when my R/T instructor insisted on "correct" usage. English is the common language for all air traffic controls bar one, and where pilots do not have English as a first language it is important for there to be clear understanding of not only not what you say but the reply you expect. Here's a paradox: http://www.answers.com/topic/over-and-out ??? Couldn't get beyond "find a Chinese wife". Then there's: http://dictionary.pokerzone.com/Over+and+Out Yes, defines it exactly. Maybe his attenuated grammar is normal in financial markets? Otherwise it doesn't quite fit with the rest of his persona. Ian Yes, quite possibly. Missed the bit about financial markets - I've deleted the OP. Every trade/profession has its jargon! Probably better get back to the origins of this thread - ish; anybody want a pair of Quad ESL 63s, pair of monoblock Quicksilver amps and an REL sub? Will be on eBay later this year. Downsizing with a vengeance! Geoff MacK |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
"Geoff Mackenzie" wrote
English is the common language for all air traffic controls bar one, Which one is the exception? David. |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , notme wrote: i would like to sign off now,and thank some of the less prissy folks althoughyoumaywanttodismissitasprissysomeofusthink itmakessenseto considerthereaderswhenpostinginparticulartoconside rthemwhenasking forhelporinformationusenetisnotawriteonlymediumand whileyoumayfind ithardtowriteclearlysomeotherswhohaveinfoyouwouldf indusefulmayalso findreadingbadlyformattedtextapitastillyouareasfre easanyoneelsetowrit easyouchoosejustastherestofusarefreetostruggletore adwhatiswrittenor nottherealityisithinkthatyoudontneedtogototheoutol earnhowtowriteinaw ayotherscanreadnortolearnhowtobepoliteandconsidera te. slaintejim :-) Have you moved to Glasgow, Jimmy? ;-) -- *Sorry, I don't date outside my species. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
Geoff Mackenzie wrote:
Here's a paradox: http://www.answers.com/topic/over-and-out ??? Couldn't get beyond "find a Chinese wife". :-) Just below that is quote from a comms dictionary: "(Commtalk)Does not exist--an oximoron." Probably better get back to the origins of this thread - ish; anybody want a pair of Quad ESL 63s, pair of monoblock Quicksilver amps and an REL sub? Will be on eBay later this year. Downsizing with a vengeance! I want the Quads. It's the bidding more than everyone else that I'm not keen on. Ian |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
In article ZMMco.1318$P75.792@hurricane,
Ian Iveson wrote: I want the Quads. It's the bidding more than everyone else that I'm not keen on. You just set a figure you're willing to pay and stick to that. If it's more than anyone else you win. If not, you get a bargain - ie less than you were willing to pay. These speakers come up quite regularly. If someone *must* have them at that point in time they'll go for a 'high' price. If no one wants them, not. Varies from month to month. -- *If you lived in your car, you'd be home by now * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
"David Looser" wrote in message ... "Geoff Mackenzie" wrote English is the common language for all air traffic controls bar one, Which one is the exception? David. Quebec, Canada. They insisted on French, to the total bewilderment of many overseas pilots. Don't know how they got that past the Powers That Be. I'm probably out of date, though; that was the case in the seventies and eighties, but I would hope that they've been brought up to date by now. Regards, Geoff MacK |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
"Ian Iveson" wrote in message news:ZMMco.1318$P75.792@hurricane... Geoff Mackenzie wrote: Here's a paradox: http://www.answers.com/topic/over-and-out ??? Couldn't get beyond "find a Chinese wife". :-) Just below that is quote from a comms dictionary: "(Commtalk)Does not exist--an oximoron." Probably better get back to the origins of this thread - ish; anybody want a pair of Quad ESL 63s, pair of monoblock Quicksilver amps and an REL sub? Will be on eBay later this year. Downsizing with a vengeance! I want the Quads. It's the bidding more than everyone else that I'm not keen on. Ian Unfortunately market forces (and my current impoverished state) prevail! Sorry. Geoff MacK |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:12:10 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote: In article , Mike Coatham wrote: On 23/08/2010 11:12 p.m., Jim Lesurf wrote: In , notme wrote: i would like to sign off now,and thank some of the less prissy folks althoughyoumaywanttodismissitasprissysomeofusthink itmakessenseto [snip] Nice one Jim.:) As an aside,I hope your PHD students didn't write their assignments in that style. I can see it now -- FAILED! One of the duties of a PhD supervisor is to make sure the PhD is readable - if only by the chosen examiners! :-) Glad to say that none of my students ever failed a PhD or even failed to submit. Although I think that tells you more about them than it does about me. :-) One of my best students later admitted he chose me as supervisor because he found me one day using a stereo microscope to read microfiches of old copies of SF magazines. Decided I was mad enough to be his preferred supervisor. 8-] However one of the reasons I've become 'sensitised' to poor presentation is the sheer number of exam scripts, essays, etc, I've had to assess over the years that were virtually unreadable. Some had no paragraphs or sections. No page numbers. etc. Some were 'handwritten' illegibly. To me this is a concern on a number of levels. It shows lack of thought for the *reader*. It may mean in exams, etc, marks are not given because the info was indecyperable. And employers (or potential employers) presented with such rubbish might not be best pleased. But for me the bottom line is that writing for others to read is a form of *communication*. So it seems daft or lazy or even arrogant to write in a way that makes the result needlessly harder for others to read. Matter of being considerate as well as an aid to clarity. However I do realise that some people find this much harder. e.g. some have difficulty with various aspects of language, etc. And I'm sure that some devices like tiny phones may make 'normal' typing hard. But "cannae be bothered" doesn't seem to me to be decent reason when you are trying to ask other for help/info. Slainte, Jim I wish you could have helped more widely, Jim. I've read many PhDs in my time, and they have been pretty much universally bad. Far too much text on each page. Non-proportional fonts (must they really look typewritten?), one paragraph per two pages, roughly. Add to that nonsensical chapter ordering, and finally a conclusion that always read "More work is needed on this subject" and the sinking feeling was complete. Oh yes, graphs. A microwave filter usually figured somewhere. If it was centred on 20GHz, and had a bandwidth of 100MHz, it would be presented on a scale of 0 to 60 GHz. There would also be upwards of a dozen different plots on the same set of axes. An indecipherable mess would be my kindest description. d |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
In article , Don Pearce
wrote: On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:12:10 +0100, Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Mike Coatham wrote: On 23/08/2010 11:12 p.m., Jim Lesurf wrote: In , notme wrote: i would like to sign off now,and thank some of the less prissy folks althoughyoumaywanttodismissitasprissysomeofusthink itmakessenseto [snip] Nice one Jim.:) As an aside,I hope your PHD students didn't write their assignments in that style. I can see it now -- FAILED! One of the duties of a PhD supervisor is to make sure the PhD is readable - if only by the chosen examiners! :-) Glad to say that none of my students ever failed a PhD or even failed to submit. Although I think that tells you more about them than it does about me. I wish you could have helped more widely, Jim. I've read many PhDs in my time, and they have been pretty much universally bad. Far too much text on each page. Non-proportional fonts (must they really look typewritten?) The font and size may sometimes be determined by the examination rules for the particular university. No bad thing considering the range of weird fonts and absurd sizes you risk if there were no limits set! ;- The regs may even give the range of number of words per full text page. And the bindery may limit how many pages per volume they will bind. So meaning the candidate is tempted to pack it all in to too few pages. It can sometimes throw up oddities, though. IIRC my old uni (now Queen Mary, U London) had regs that specified the required type of font in a strange way. They meant to tell students things like 'don't use roman numbers for sections, equation numbers, etc'. But ended up saying essentially 'use arabic'. One of the students in the same dept as myself at the time was from Egypt and was tempted to write his thesis in Egyptian arabic. It may have met the regs, but I doubt his supervisor of the time (who he didn't like) would have been pleased. 8-] And I can't say that all of my own students managed to do as well in terms of presentation and layout as one another. One of the best was am Australian who used TeX and his thesis was very clear and ordered. The poorest used 'Word' because he was used to it, but seemed unable to do completely satisfactory equations and graphics. I don't use 'Word' but I have a low opinion of it, judging by the results I've seen from many people. I wonder if it makes decent technical layout hard to achieve. Certainly I often found that the appearance of 'Electronics World' looked dire to me for reasons that seemed curiously similar to the problems I saw in reports, etc, from students using it. Classic being lousy bitmap versions of graphs. With lines more like arrays of lego than actual continuous lines. And quite odd-looking equations. How much that is the software and how much the users I can't really tell. Others may be better placed than I to comment! , one paragraph per two pages, roughly. Add to that nonsensical chapter ordering, and finally a conclusion that always read "More work is needed on this subject" and the sinking feeling was complete. "More work is needed" is a vital conclusion for all academic research. Otherwise they'd all be out of a job. :-) It also is a catch-all signal to the examiners that the candidate realises he doesn't know everything. He just needs to know more than the examiners... about that one narrow topic. Oh yes, graphs. A microwave filter usually figured somewhere. If it was centred on 20GHz, and had a bandwidth of 100MHz, it would be presented on a scale of 0 to 60 GHz. There would also be upwards of a dozen different plots on the same set of axes. An indecipherable mess would be my kindest description. Yes, graphics are also a minefield for the unwary. Made harder when theses and other publications have all the graphics in monochrome. One good thing about modern printing is that it is now possible to have very well printed results compared to the medieval period when I typed my own PhD thesis. TippX, carbon paper copies, and hand-written equations. Seems like stone tablets, now... :-) The root of the problem is, I suspect, often the same as the cause of computer manuals being indecypherable. The writer knows the content and is unable to grasp that the reader *doesn't* know and needs things explained with due care. The result is often a text which only makes sense once you have understood the contents for yourself. So can then be a useful 'reminder' or 'reference' *if* you can ever find things though the muddle of poorly organised sections, no real index, etc. Slainte, Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On 24/08/2010 17:34, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In , Don Pearce wrote: On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:12:10 +0100, Jim wrote: snip I wish you could have helped more widely, Jim. I've read many PhDs in my time, and they have been pretty much universally bad. Far too much text on each page. Non-proportional fonts (must they really look typewritten?) Do you mean content or style? Or both? Sounds like style. IME, in social science, the problem tends to be content. The font and size may sometimes be determined by the examination rules for the particular university. No bad thing considering the range of weird fonts and absurd sizes you risk if there were no limits set! ;- The regs may even give the range of number of words per full text page. And the bindery may limit how many pages per volume they will bind. So meaning the candidate is tempted to pack it all in to too few pages. snip Just on Word, I think it's knowing how to use it rather than it being fundamentally awful. But then I'm not sure. Do you think this sort of thing, done in Word, is acceptable: http://www.ifyoucan.org.uk/pages/equations.html For other stuff, it's 'styles'. Should be mandatory training for anyone WPing :-) Rob |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:49:14 +0100, Rob wrote:
On 24/08/2010 17:34, Jim Lesurf wrote: In , Don Pearce wrote: On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:12:10 +0100, Jim wrote: snip I wish you could have helped more widely, Jim. I've read many PhDs in my time, and they have been pretty much universally bad. Far too much text on each page. Non-proportional fonts (must they really look typewritten?) Do you mean content or style? Or both? Sounds like style. IME, in social science, the problem tends to be content. I must agree that in many of the PhDs I've studied, both style and content have ben seriously lacking. I wondered why some of them even bothered. I certainly couldn't figure out how they passed. But PhDs tend to be streets ahead of Masters, which are usually cringingly poor. The font and size may sometimes be determined by the examination rules for the particular university. No bad thing considering the range of weird fonts and absurd sizes you risk if there were no limits set! ;- The regs may even give the range of number of words per full text page. And the bindery may limit how many pages per volume they will bind. So meaning the candidate is tempted to pack it all in to too few pages. snip Just on Word, I think it's knowing how to use it rather than it being fundamentally awful. But then I'm not sure. Do you think this sort of thing, done in Word, is acceptable: http://www.ifyoucan.org.uk/pages/equations.html For other stuff, it's 'styles'. Should be mandatory training for anyone WPing :-) Rob There is nothing wrong with Word; you just need to know how to use it. When it comes to equations, mine tend to be OLE links from MathCad which not only does a good job of presentation, but lets you do something useful with them too. d |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
In article , Rob
wrote: Just on Word, I think it's knowing how to use it rather than it being fundamentally awful. But then I'm not sure. Do you think this sort of thing, done in Word, is acceptable: http://www.ifyoucan.org.uk/pages/equations.html The equations look poor to me, although it is hard to say too much as the above is a low-res bitmap. The most obvious problem is that some of the elastic delimiters (brackets, braces, etc) are visibly broken and but right against each other with no gaps. That said, it is certainly better than many of the attempts at equations I've seen in documents! Slainte, Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
In article , Don Pearce
wrote: There is nothing wrong with Word; you just need to know how to use it. When it comes to equations, mine tend to be OLE links from MathCad which not only does a good job of presentation, but lets you do something useful with them too. That I think reveals the problem. 'Word' isn't actually providing the equations. Hence different users will choose different ways to get equations in the documents. I guess I am spoiled by having used a document processor (TechWriter) that has its own object-based equation editor that conforms to the 'rules' for math typography laid out by the various maths organisations. Now been happily using this for nearly 20 years. For graphs, etc, I tend to use programs written in 'C' as I am wary of methods like MathCad. I then either use the 'C' to generate object based graphics directly or use a package like Tau (RISC OS) or Veusz (Linux). Slainte, Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On 25/08/2010 10:18, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In , Rob wrote: Just on Word, I think it's knowing how to use it rather than it being fundamentally awful. But then I'm not sure. Do you think this sort of thing, done in Word, is acceptable: http://www.ifyoucan.org.uk/pages/equations.html The equations look poor to me, although it is hard to say too much as the above is a low-res bitmap. The most obvious problem is that some of the elastic delimiters (brackets, braces, etc) are visibly broken and but right against each other with no gaps. That said, it is certainly better than many of the attempts at equations I've seen in documents! Ah - OK, thanks. I had no reference and it's not really my field, so that's good to know. Rob |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On 25 Aug, wrote:
In article , Rob wrote: Just on Word, I think it's knowing how to use it rather than it being fundamentally awful. But then I'm not sure. Do you think this sort of thing, done in Word, is acceptable: http://www.ifyoucan.org.uk/pages/equations.html In case anyone is interested I just did an example you can see at http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/temp/TW.png The boxed part containing an equation is taken from the above as I used it as a guide to type something similar. What I typed is the lower equation. I didn't try to get all the subscripts, etc, exactly like the boxed example from the orginal. Just wrote something of a similar form. TechWriter allows the user to type in equations quite easily and the result is WYSIWYG editable. Here I just did a grab from my display for the sake of producing a png for the above so people could see. The kerning, relative character sizes, etc, are all handled automatically according to the rules laid down by the relevant maths bodies for math typography. Slainte, Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 17:14:30 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote: On 25 Aug, wrote: In article , Rob wrote: Just on Word, I think it's knowing how to use it rather than it being fundamentally awful. But then I'm not sure. Do you think this sort of thing, done in Word, is acceptable: http://www.ifyoucan.org.uk/pages/equations.html In case anyone is interested I just did an example you can see at http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/temp/TW.png The boxed part containing an equation is taken from the above as I used it as a guide to type something similar. What I typed is the lower equation. I didn't try to get all the subscripts, etc, exactly like the boxed example from the orginal. Just wrote something of a similar form. TechWriter allows the user to type in equations quite easily and the result is WYSIWYG editable. Here I just did a grab from my display for the sake of producing a png for the above so people could see. The kerning, relative character sizes, etc, are all handled automatically according to the rules laid down by the relevant maths bodies for math typography. Slainte, Jim Here's what my equations look like - I typed the same one http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/equation.png That's a screen grab from Word. Not Mathcad sourced, but using MathType - an add-in equation editor I also use. d |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On 25/08/2010 18:01, Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 17:14:30 +0100, Jim wrote: On 25 Aug, wrote: In , Rob wrote: Just on Word, I think it's knowing how to use it rather than it being fundamentally awful. But then I'm not sure. Do you think this sort of thing, done in Word, is acceptable: http://www.ifyoucan.org.uk/pages/equations.html In case anyone is interested I just did an example you can see at http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/temp/TW.png The boxed part containing an equation is taken from the above as I used it as a guide to type something similar. What I typed is the lower equation. I didn't try to get all the subscripts, etc, exactly like the boxed example from the orginal. Just wrote something of a similar form. TechWriter allows the user to type in equations quite easily and the result is WYSIWYG editable. Here I just did a grab from my display for the sake of producing a png for the above so people could see. The kerning, relative character sizes, etc, are all handled automatically according to the rules laid down by the relevant maths bodies for math typography. Slainte, Jim Here's what my equations look like - I typed the same one http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/equation.png That's a screen grab from Word. Not Mathcad sourced, but using MathType - an add-in equation editor I also use. d That's excellent - thanks very much (and Jim). The article has been submitted to a top journal, so if (when!) it bounces back we'll (I'm the second author) have a go at the equations. Rob |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
In article , Don Pearce
wrote: Here's what my equations look like - I typed the same one http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/equation.png That's a screen grab from Word. Not Mathcad sourced, but using MathType - an add-in equation editor I also use. That looks good to me. I do personally prefer the kerning on the TW version, but that's probably a matter of what I'm used to. From your example it seems clear that Word + MathType is capable of good results. Does MathType let you WISIWYG edit the equations inplace on the Word page? With TechWriter the equation instructions are easily typed in. So for example if I want to do a fraction inside parenthesis I'd just type Alt-D ( Alt-F A return B return return To get A over B inside elastic () delimiters reaching over the height of a full-sized fraction. I can then put the caret inside this structure and type to edit it, etc, as I choose. Makes writing and editing easy and TechWriter automatically arranges the correct appearance. The result is entirely object/vector based so can be exported as PS/PDF/TeX and print with a resolution set by the printing device. No need for bitmaps - unless I choose to use them for something like a webpage. The problem I've found over the years with students (and professionals) using Word is that I find a wild variety of types of 'equations'. Ditto for graphs. Not sure of the extent to which this is lack of knowledge or care on their part, or poor choice of the way they create the equations. My impression is that many Word users blindly assume all equations and pictures have to be bitmaps. That was one reason I used to find reading Electronics World a right PITA due to the really horrible graphs and diagrams crudely made from lego! Decent mags have no problem with accepting object graphs in formats like PS or PDF and thus get far better results on the page. Slainte, Jim -- Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:39:08 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote: In article , Don Pearce wrote: Here's what my equations look like - I typed the same one http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/equation.png That's a screen grab from Word. Not Mathcad sourced, but using MathType - an add-in equation editor I also use. That looks good to me. I do personally prefer the kerning on the TW version, but that's probably a matter of what I'm used to. From your example it seems clear that Word + MathType is capable of good results. Does MathType let you WISIWYG edit the equations inplace on the Word page? With TechWriter the equation instructions are easily typed in. So for example if I want to do a fraction inside parenthesis I'd just type Alt-D ( Alt-F A return B return return To get A over B inside elastic () delimiters reaching over the height of a full-sized fraction. I can then put the caret inside this structure and type to edit it, etc, as I choose. Makes writing and editing easy and TechWriter automatically arranges the correct appearance. The result is entirely object/vector based so can be exported as PS/PDF/TeX and print with a resolution set by the printing device. No need for bitmaps - unless I choose to use them for something like a webpage. The problem I've found over the years with students (and professionals) using Word is that I find a wild variety of types of 'equations'. Ditto for graphs. Not sure of the extent to which this is lack of knowledge or care on their part, or poor choice of the way they create the equations. My impression is that many Word users blindly assume all equations and pictures have to be bitmaps. That was one reason I used to find reading Electronics World a right PITA due to the really horrible graphs and diagrams crudely made from lego! Decent mags have no problem with accepting object graphs in formats like PS or PDF and thus get far better results on the page. Slainte, Jim Not quite that easy. You have to choose to insert an object - select MathType from a drop-down list. Then to use the editor you get a palette of structures that you select - something over something else, or a subscripted variable. That appears in the equation space and you then click on the blanks and fill them in. There may be a quicker way to do it, but I haven't found it yet. http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/equedit.png With Mathcad, of course, you just type the equation using the standard arithmetic operators and a few easy shortcuts like backslash for square root, CTRL-S for a sum (sigma) etc. Choice of brackets for nesting is automatic. The nice thing with Mathcad is that having typed the equation you can do stuff with it with a button push. Rearrange to solve for another (right hand side) variable, or simplify etc. The latest MathCad has quite sophisticated symbolic capability. d |
dilemma, speaker decision for different amplifiers
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:18:34 +0100, Rob wrote:
On 25/08/2010 18:01, Don Pearce wrote: On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 17:14:30 +0100, Jim wrote: On 25 Aug, wrote: In , Rob wrote: Just on Word, I think it's knowing how to use it rather than it being fundamentally awful. But then I'm not sure. Do you think this sort of thing, done in Word, is acceptable: http://www.ifyoucan.org.uk/pages/equations.html In case anyone is interested I just did an example you can see at http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/temp/TW.png The boxed part containing an equation is taken from the above as I used it as a guide to type something similar. What I typed is the lower equation. I didn't try to get all the subscripts, etc, exactly like the boxed example from the orginal. Just wrote something of a similar form. TechWriter allows the user to type in equations quite easily and the result is WYSIWYG editable. Here I just did a grab from my display for the sake of producing a png for the above so people could see. The kerning, relative character sizes, etc, are all handled automatically according to the rules laid down by the relevant maths bodies for math typography. Slainte, Jim Here's what my equations look like - I typed the same one http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/equation.png That's a screen grab from Word. Not Mathcad sourced, but using MathType - an add-in equation editor I also use. d That's excellent - thanks very much (and Jim). The article has been submitted to a top journal, so if (when!) it bounces back we'll (I'm the second author) have a go at the equations. Rob Good luck with that. d |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:16 PM. |
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