Why can't companies be charged with fraud

[3db]

I have implied nothing.

I have stated directly that testing in the microsecond domain has nothing to do with the starvation of the supply caps in an amplifier. Beefing up a supply cord to solve this "problem" is useless.

I can tell with certainty, as I do this kind of thing for a living. And as the white paper is now out, I can see that I was absolutely on the mark with respect to what they test, how they do it, and why they err.




Haversine currents are odd harmonics of the powerline frequency. The stiffer the transformer, sharper the bridge rectifiers, the lower the supply cap esl and the higher the capacitance, the higher the haversine currents will be. As I stated, only the ratio they have used could be of contention.

Cheers, John

Thanks for taking the time to explain. When I said implied, I meant what you expected to see based on your background.

About the power supply caps charging time.. I know I'm not getting the message thru to you..trying to figure out how to say that we're on the same wavelength. ... trying this... the instantaneous current carrying capability of this chord plays no advantage to the steady state operation of the power supply.

 

[jneutron]

Thanks for taking the time to explain. When I said implied, I meant what you expected to see based on your background.

About the power supply caps charging time.. I know I'm not getting the message thru to you..trying to figure out how to say that we're on the same wavelength. ... trying this... the instantaneous current carrying capability of this chord plays no advantage to the steady state operation of the power supply.

We are certaily in violent agreement on that point.

Any audible changes that would result from a power cord that is measured better in their test setup is not a result of anything it did to allow more current to flow to the power supply capacitors. It would only be a result of lower e/m field coupling to a ground loop formed by all the cords.

Cheers, John