Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Rick, seriously, it is the logic that is flawed...It isn't about cables, or noise, its about a tortured logic.

Posted by robert young on June 19, 2010 at 08:01:15:
I agree with most of what you write. You need to step back from the technical conversation about systems and cables and noise and analyze the meaning of Don's statement again: "I mean let's get real some of us actually believe susceptability to external noise signifies a high resolution system..."

This sentence means: "Some people believe that a system is high-resolution IF that system is susceptible to external noise." That is pure nonsense. No one on this forum has made that claim. It has, however, been stated that resistance to external noise is not a prerequisite for a system to be high-resolution, as some system installations are not subject to external noise (for example, I have a battery-powered system in a cabin in Maine where there aren't any microwave ovens or cell phones. Not that it is "high-res," but there aren't external noise issues as part of the total system (equipment plus physical context).)

I have been laughing at the logical mash-up of Don's recent posts, not necessarily their implied content.

When it was said that to be considered high-res a system didn't have to be resistant to the effects of external noise, Don reinterpreted that to mean that a system HAD TO BE SUSCEPTIBLE to exterior noise to be high-res. Do you see that interpretive accident?

Don has constructed a strawman either through his neglect of the basics of logic, or through willfully twisting words to draw for himself an easier target. He does a great disservice to Tony with his falsely-based attacks below, and he does a great disservice to the value of the debate here, as he fabricates an opponent where there is none, and constructs an impediment to rational discussion where there should be none.