>> Those of you who have been so engrossed in this issue for so long, it
>> is probably clear what you intend. But for those of us who are just trying
to
>> understand the comments and remarks that get posted, we could use, if it
>> exists, the generic model which you (and any others who contribute to the
>> overall signal level) assume
>
>The above has been my point all along.
>
>What the suppressor is, all by itself on a table, has little to do with how
>well it works in an actual system.
** ... which translates as: 'this stuff is just way too complex and
esoteric for persons who are not recognized amplifier experts to
understand. During the Grate Debate, Mr. Rauch found no problem with
Wes' proposal to scientifically test each type of suppressor by itself.
The problem came when Wes published his measurements.
>You have to know the system.
>Claiming lower Rp, higher Rp, Q, more heat, etc is "better" really is just a
>bunch of arm-flapping, it is the system that matters.
>
** "system" =s smoke.
>Now I don't fault advertising or someone making a buck, goodness knows $15
>isn't going to bankrupt anyone. I'm sure Force12 will tell you their
>antennas work better than anyone else's, just like every MFJ product is
>super, so that's the way life is.
>
>The only problem is the constant slandering of everyone and anyone who
>technically disagrees
** anyone who disagrees with AC circuit-analysis is destined to go
through life being disagreed with.
>with claims the system is so simple one product fixes
>all, and the destruction of useful knowledge caused by "cooking the facts"
>to sell a specific product.
** Wes was in the Rauchian camp before and after he proposed making
scientific measurements.
>This applies especially to amplifiers, where the
>general technical base of people trying to learn has been seriously eroded
>by salesmanship for one particular product.
>
>73 Tom
- R. L. Measures, a.k.a. Rich..., 805.386.3734, AG6K,
www.vcnet.com/measures.
end
|