[R-390] Ray*s Receiver Article

[Tim Shoppa]

>  Let's look at this logically. (AKA "the duck" test).  Mounting
soapbox.

Ooh, I decided to not get on my soapbox here anymore. Too many times I
saw obvious-to-everyone-else-parodies and offered simple physical
measurements that prove them wrong, and I got raked over the coals.

Some of these are in fact long-running parodies-of-parodies (we've gone
into, I think, the SEVENTH level of self-parody with respect to ballast
tube replacements via semiconductors, so Perry if I were you, when
somebody suggests that average voltage = RMS voltage you should realize
that you're only seeing a THIRD-level parody.)

Sometimes parodies mix with parodies: when the ballast tube thread meets
the audiofoolery thread, you reach what is essentially IMD and can
produce new threads that are not harmonically related to either of the
originals, and just like parody you can have third, fifth, etc. order
IMD :-).

Now in fact I will parenthetically admit that I'm playing around with an
807's-in-push-pull modulator the past couple of weeks and am starting to
see some of the audiofoolery point of view!!! Of course it's all
irrelevant to me because I've got this nasty HUM on my power supply that
an audiofool would never admit the existence of...

For some strange reason I never saw the original post that inspired all
these posts. "Ray" or "Roy" or ??? I look backwards in the mailing list
archives and see nothing obvious. Is this Fisk's article or the
"competition grade" article or ???

Tim.