"Telstar Electronics" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 7, 6:13 pm, Frank Gilliland wrote:
How about a testimonial from some of the people on the other end?

How about some feedback from ebay customers who bought some of the pre-
production units...
http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAP...edbackAsSeller

Frank, don't entertain this putz on the feedback idea. It was proven before
that he was bidding on his own products.

On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 21:55:42 -0500, "Yo Mamma"
wrote in :


"Telstar Electronics" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 7, 6:13 pm, Frank Gilliland wrote:
How about a testimonial from some of the people on the other end?

How about some feedback from ebay customers who bought some of the pre-
production units...
http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAP...edbackAsSeller

Frank, don't entertain this putz on the feedback idea. It was proven before
that he was bidding on his own products.


I'm sure some of his feedback is legitimate, but not much that deals
with his "business". It's a classic 'backscratching' scheme -- you
scratch my back and I'll scratch your's. It's a con that's been around
for a very long time, and sometimes perpetrated by very large and very
organized groups of people. Ebay is the perfect hunting ground for
these kinds of crooks. And the venue makes it easy for everyday people
to try their hand at being a con artist.

But then again, there sure are a lot of suckers out there.... how much
would -you- pay for a very stale fried cheese sandwich?

On Jul 9, 12:25 am, Frank Gilliland
wrote:
I'm sure some of his feedback is legitimate, but not much that deals
with his "business". It's a classic 'backscratching' scheme -- you
scratch my back and I'll scratch your's. It's a con that's been around
for a very long time, and sometimes perpetrated by very large and very
organized groups of people. Ebay is the perfect hunting ground for
these kinds of crooks. And the venue makes it easy for everyday people
to try their hand at being a con artist.
But then again, there sure are a lot of suckers out there.... how much
would -you- pay for a very stale fried cheese sandwich?


Hey... don't you know Frank's got an answer to everything.
Not a plausible answer... just an answer... lol
www.telstar-electronics.com

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 02:53:40 -0700, Telspam Electronics
wrote in
om:

On Jul 9, 12:25 am, Frank Gilliland
wrote:
I'm sure some of his feedback is legitimate, but not much that deals
with his "business". It's a classic 'backscratching' scheme -- you
scratch my back and I'll scratch your's. It's a con that's been around
for a very long time, and sometimes perpetrated by very large and very
organized groups of people. Ebay is the perfect hunting ground for
these kinds of crooks. And the venue makes it easy for everyday people
to try their hand at being a con artist.
But then again, there sure are a lot of suckers out there.... how much
would -you- pay for a very stale fried cheese sandwich?


Hey... don't you know Frank's got an answer to everything.
Not a plausible answer... just an answer... lol


The answers are a result of a good education, extensive experience in
the field, with a generous serving of simple logic and common sense.
You are clearly lacking in all three, so it's understandable why my
answers don't seem plausible to you. The sad part is that you are
unwilling to change your situation. That's -your- fault, Brian.

On Jul 9, 10:08 am, Frank Gilliland
wrote:
The answers are a result of a good education, extensive experience in
the field, with a generous serving of simple logic and common sense.
You are clearly lacking in all three, so it's understandable why my
answers don't seem plausible to you. The sad part is that you are
unwilling to change your situation. That's -your- fault, Brian.

Blah Blah Blah Blah...
Frank, this conversation with you is over.
www.telstar-electronics.com

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 08:56:12 -0700, Telspam Electronics
wrote in
.com:

On Jul 9, 10:08 am, Frank Gilliland
wrote:
The answers are a result of a good education, extensive experience in
the field, with a generous serving of simple logic and common sense.
You are clearly lacking in all three, so it's understandable why my
answers don't seem plausible to you. The sad part is that you are
unwilling to change your situation. That's -your- fault, Brian.

Blah Blah Blah Blah...
Frank, this conversation with you is over.


Yeah, if I had a nickel.....

Eventually I will get one of your processors. I haven't even asked any
of my out-of-state friends to make the buy, yet three people from the
group have already volunteered to do it. When I get it I will test it
-thoroughly-, both on the bench and under practical conditions. And I
will post the results, both here and on a web page. Consider it a done
deal. Sticking your head in the sand won't help. It only makes you
look like you can't answer the tough questions. You can't answer them
anyway, but by refusing to address the issues you effectively concede
that I'm right, which I am. So ignore me all you want, that's fine
with me. In fact, it would be much better if you could ignore me all
the time. But we both know -that- ain't gonna happen.... "LOL!!!"

"james" wrote...

Let me be sure that I understand what you are saying.


If you are having trouble with my English, try these...
(Full book titles, authors and ISBN numbers at bottom)


quote ref=Electronics For Engineers, page 11
Amplification This essential process involves an increase
in the amplitude or size of a signal without any change
to the waveform.
/quote


quote ref=Electronics 2, page 114
the input and output will have the same waveshape.
/quote


quote ref=Electronics Servicing Vol2, page 61
we ideally require the output signal to be a faithful but
magnified replica of the input signal.
quote


If that is your position then that is utter bovine, canine, feline and
any other *ine excrement you wish to use.

Tell it to the authors of those books, but you had best consider
their qualifications and experience first.


The only way the output waveform is equal to the input waveform is
when the stage is at unity gain

I have the choice of accepting the word of several well qualified
and experienced lecturers and engineers, or someone on a CB newsgroup.
Tough call... can I think about it?

period.

1/f

A waveform of any continuous time varying signal is defined
as a set of intantaineous points versus time that represent
that signal.

At the input of an amplifier, you have a single frequency signal...
10mV @ 1Khz
The waveform is...
sin 2pi f t

The signal at the output is amplified...
100mV @1KHz
The waveform should now be
sin 2pi f t

That is assuming a perfectly linear amplifier. We both
agree that perfection doesn't exists in this world.
Transistors are not perfectly linear but, with good design,
an amplifier can get pretty damn close.


Generally distortion results in harmonics and other
highfrequency components of the signal.

Distortion of a waveform will add components at other
frequencies.
Pure amplification is not a distortion, it does not add any
extra frequency components to the signal and does not
change the waveform.


+++The question is whether "Telstar" and "well designed" go together.
+++I would like to see an independent review from someone without
+++an axe to grind.
************

Now that will depend on examination of the product.

That was the whole idea, it was also the suggestion that Frank
made... only I find it hard to believe he would be objective. He
appears to have issues with Brian.


Regards,
Peter.


Book references (author quals. as at print dates)

Electronics 2,
D. C. Green MTech, CEng, MIEE
(Engineer for BT and Ministry of Defence, Senior
Lecturer at Willesden College of Technology).
Longman Scientific & Technical
ISBN 0-582-24519-2

Electronics For Engineers.
R. J. Maddock (Former principle lecturer,
Southampton Institute of Higher Education)
D. M. Calcutt (Senior Lecturer, School of Systems
Engineering, University of Portsmouth).
Longman Scientific & Technical. (UK)
ISBN 0-582-21583-8

Electronics servicing Vol 2
K. J. Bohlman. I.Eng, F.S.E.R.T, A.M.Inst.E.
(Senior Lecturer, North Lincolnshire College)
Dickson Price Publishers Ltd. (UK)
ISBN 0 85380 191-6
(C&G 224 core studies reference)

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 05:28:56 +0100, " Peter"
wrote in :

snip
+++The question is whether "Telstar" and "well designed" go together.
+++I would like to see an independent review from someone without
+++an axe to grind.
************

Now that will depend on examination of the product.

That was the whole idea, it was also the suggestion that Frank
made... only I find it hard to believe he would be objective. He
appears to have issues with Brian.


Empirical data has no bias. Just install the device according to his
instructions, take some measurements that can easily be duplicated by
anyone who chooses to do the same tests, then present the results in
comparison to Brian's claims. That's about as objective as it gets.
Bias is strictly limited to the conclusion, and everybody can draw
their own (they usually do anyway).

That was the whole idea, it was also the suggestion that Frank
made... only I find it hard to believe he would be objective. He
appears to have issues with Brian.

Now what ever gave you that idea?... lol
www.telstar-electronics.com

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 05:28:56 +0100, " Peter"
wrote:

+++"james" wrote...
+++
+++ Let me be sure that I understand what you are saying.
+++
+++
+++If you are having trouble with my English, try these...
+++ (Full book titles, authors and ISBN numbers at bottom)
+++
+++
+++quote ref=Electronics For Engineers, page 11
+++ Amplification This essential process involves an increase
+++ in the amplitude or size of a signal without any change
+++ to the waveform.
+++/quote
+++
+++
+++quote ref=Electronics 2, page 114
+++ the input and output will have the same waveshape.
+++/quote
+++
+++
+++quote ref=Electronics Servicing Vol2, page 61
+++ we ideally require the output signal to be a faithful but
+++ magnified replica of the input signal.
+++quote
+++
+++
+++ If that is your position then that is utter bovine, canine, feline and
+++ any other *ine excrement you wish to use.
+++
+++Tell it to the authors of those books, but you had best consider
+++their qualifications and experience first.
+++
+++
+++ The only way the output waveform is equal to the input waveform is
+++ when the stage is at unity gain
+++
+++I have the choice of accepting the word of several well qualified
+++and experienced lecturers and engineers, or someone on a CB newsgroup.
+++Tough call... can I think about it?
+++
+++ period.
+++
+++ 1/f
+++
+++ A waveform of any continuous time varying signal is defined
+++ as a set of intantaineous points versus time that represent
+++ that signal.
+++
+++At the input of an amplifier, you have a single frequency signal...
+++ 10mV @ 1Khz
+++The waveform is...
+++ sin 2pi f t
+++
+++The signal at the output is amplified...
+++ 100mV @1KHz
+++The waveform should now be
+++ sin 2pi f t
+++
+++That is assuming a perfectly linear amplifier. We both
+++agree that perfection doesn't exists in this world.
+++Transistors are not perfectly linear but, with good design,
+++an amplifier can get pretty damn close.
+++
*********************

Partially correct in your formulae.

Consider this and reflect with your noted lecturers and writers.

let the input signal of an amplifier be:
f(t) = Ai * sin(2*PI*f*t)

Where Ai is the input signal amplitude.

Now let the scalar value of the transfer function of the amplifier be
a real number greater than one and represented by the constant K. This
becomes essentially a distorionless amplifier and does not consider
internal noise generated in the amplifier.

The output signal from the amplifier:
g(t) = Ai * K *sin(2*PI*f*t)

Now if you can prove that g(t) is equal to f(t) when K greater than
one I will be glad to nominate you for a Noble prize for mathematics.

The frequency component of the function, sin(2*PI*f*t),remains the
same in both equation. The amplitude does not. Therefore the two
functions are not equal. They will have similar waveshapes in that
they will be mathematical multiples of each other. To state that they
are the same is ludicrous. Now I can believe the mathematics that I
have been taught or accept your hypothesis.

Hmmm. Let me get back to you on that.



james