Home
AudioAsylum Trader
Tube DIY Asylum

Do It Yourself (DIY) paradise for tube and SET project builders.

For Sale Ads

FAQ / News / Events

 

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


Login to access features only available to registered Asylum Inmates.
    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

RE: Slew rate, TIM hogwwash

Posted by Paul Eizik on July 11, 2017 at 16:02:29:

Gusser

As Otala has performed tests demonstrating that TIM in transistor amps is audible and that it can be detected down to a level of 0.003% by 6 out of the 68 listeners in his test group, then it would seem that there would need to be tests with a group of at least that size to seriously contradict Otala's findings. Neither you or I have been able to find any references to tests like this. Let's try it another way, can you supply the name of a transistor amp from the 80's with TIM specs lower than the 0.003% which was clearly audible to the 6 golden ears? Just what number would you buy as being below the level of audibility, and what amps have specs matching this? Feel free to add in any TIM specs for SET's too as we are on the Tube DIY Asylum

I quoted directly from sentences in both of the abstracts of the JAES papers I referenced, and I assumed that this would be obvious to anyone who has read the papers as you claim to have As to digging occult information out of these papers, well I would have to go down to the library, I would need help with the microfiche machine, and my knee is acting up causing me to drag my foot at times. Well you get the idea. If you were to write a rebuttal to the Otala papers to the JAES, then I would drop the Hogwash stuff, and you'll have to use your real name as you'll be subject to peer review. I've been to a number of JAES meetings and nobody wore a mask or used a pseudonym.

Paul