12dB attenuation cable

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 13:15:51 +0200, Phil Allison wrote:

>> The schematic
>> doesn't show the two 2.2K resistors in parallel at the output end.
>
>
> ** The schematic posed by the OP makes no sense at all.
>

It is not the schematic I would use in this case, but OP had it from the
manual: http/www.electrixpro.com/files/pdf/manual_repeater_E.pdf

>> Reading is FUNdamental.
>
> ** Taking everything you see utterly literally is *AUTISTIC* !!!
>

If you are answering a question, not reading the question does not help a
lot.

>>Apparently so is making irrelevant observations.
>
> ** Nothing irrelevant about some lateral thinking that produces the
> right answer.

Your answer might be right, but the question was wrong?

If you take in account the 1k output impedance of the device a 12 dB
attentuation might be correct. For an asymetric attentuation 2 resistors
would be enough.
As the OP wants to connect this 1kohm +8dB output to a -20 dB input, I
would use a 24dB attentuation using one 3k9 resistor and one 330ohm
resistor, together with the 1k output impedance this would give about
24dB attentuation.
--
Chel van Gennip
Bezoek Serg van Gennip's site http/www.serg.vangennip.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers"
Phil Allison
>
>> > The schematic
>> > doesn't show the two 2.2K resistors in parallel at the output end.
>>
>>
>> ** The schematic posed by the OP makes no sense at all.
>
> Sure it does. Didn't you read my explanation?


** You explained nothing.



** Restoring the original context line the Parrott snipped.

> Reading is FUNdamental.

>
>> ** Taking everything you see utterly literally is *AUTISTIC* !!!
>
> You mean like reading a schematic provided by the equipment
> manufacturer is autistic?


** The Parrott is an incorrigible context shifter !!!!!

Plus he has a bad memory.


>> ** Nothing irrelevant about some lateral thinking that produces the right
>> answer.
>
> We call that "thinking inside the box."


** From a Parrott does all his "thinking" inside a smelly cage - that
is funny.





............. Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Chel van Gennip"
Phil Allison wrote:

>
>> ** The schematic posed by the OP makes no sense at all.
>>
>
> It is not the schematic I would use in this case, but OP had it from the
> manual: http/www.electrixpro.com/files/pdf/manual_repeater_E.pdf


** So ??


>
>>> Reading is FUNdamental.
>>
>> ** Taking everything you see utterly literally is *AUTISTIC* !!!
>>
>
> If you are answering a question, not reading the question does not help a
> lot.


** And you have not read my original post in this thread.


>>
>> ** Nothing irrelevant about some lateral thinking that produces the
>> right answer.
>
> Your answer might be right, but the question was wrong?


** Supplied information can always contain errors.

Technical mistakes, printing errors and missing data are the cause of many
posted queries on NGs.



> If you take in account the 1k output impedance of the device a 12 dB
> attentuation might be correct. For an asymetric attentuation 2 resistors
> would be enough.
> As the OP wants to connect this 1kohm +8dB output to a -20 dB input, I
> would use a 24dB attentuation using one 3k9 resistor and one 330ohm
> resistor, together with the 1k output impedance this would give about
> 24dB attentuation.



** So who is ignoring the supplied info now ??



............... Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"david"
Phil Allison


>> ** Taking everything you see utterly literally is *AUTISTIC* !!!
>
>
> Naa. Autism is considerably more interesting than that.
>


** LOL !!

David just took what I wrote utterly literally !!!




............... Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Joe Sensor" <
> Mike Rivers wrote:
>
>> The schematic doesn't show the two 2.2K resistors in parallel at the
>> output end.
>>
>
> Correct. I think Phil is losing it.



Quote:

" ** If you put the two 2.2 kohms in parallel at the output end, that
creates
13 dB of attenuation with 5 kohms input impedance. "




........... Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers"

> No, he's just up to his usual trick of dismissing the stated facts
> without considering that they could be correct,


** Autistic Parrots like Mike Rivers are incapable of imagining other's have
thoughts.



............. Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <3bbn51F6gad3aU1@individual.net> philallison@tpg.com.au writes:

> ** Autistic Parrots like Mike Rivers are incapable of imagining other's have
> thoughts.

Intelligent posters read the question that's asked and don't reply
with someting that doesn't answer the question. Had the original
poster asked how he could make a 12 dB attenuator, your suggestion
(with a diagram or text explanation of how to connect resistors as a
voltage divider) would have been a (not necessarily the only) correct
solution.

However, he didn't ask how to make a 12 dB attenuator, he posted a
diagram of a circuit taken from the product's manual, which they
recommended for dropping the output level for the purpose of
connecting it to a guitar amplifier. Since the manual states that this
circuit provided 12 dB of attenuation, and being a curious person
wanting to reinforce his understanding of voltage dividers and dB
calculations, tried to verifiy the attenuation and recognized that he
didn't know how to account for all the components and get 12 dB.

I explained that. I answered his question. Hopefully he learned
something that he didn't know, and might be able to apply this
knowledge to something else.

You told him that if he chose to ignore the manufacturer's recommended
circuit and used yours, he could make something that would work in
this instance. You didn't answer his question, you answered a question
that you made up without stating it: "How do I make a 12 dB
attenuator?"

As I said, reading is FUNdamental. Read the question first. If you
choose to answer a different question, you at least own the poster the
explanation of why you're suggesting a different approach rather than
one that (barring publication errors) has apparently been tested by
the manufacturer.

But then, since you're a jerk, details are optional.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[David]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <3bbmusF6gsc2bU1@individual.net>, Phil Allison
<philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:

> >> ** Taking everything you see utterly literally is *AUTISTIC* !!!
> >
> >
> > Naa. Autism is considerably more interesting than that.
> >
>
>
> ** LOL !!
>
> David just took what I wrote utterly literally !!!
>


I'm a bit utterly touchy on that subject. And I would appreciate it if
you found another adjective to poop on people with in this forum.




David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island

CelebrationSound@aol.com
www.CelebrationSound.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 12:29:54 +1000, "Phil Allison"
<philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:

>** Autistic Parrots like Mike Rivers are incapable of imagining other's have
>thoughts

Other's what?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 04:25:14 +0200, Phil Allison wrote:

>> If you take in account the 1k output impedance of the device a 12 dB
>> attentuation might be correct.

Correct answer on the question of the original poster.

>> For an asymetric attentuation 2 resistors would be enough.
>> As the OP wants to connect this 1kohm +8dB output to a -20 dB input, I
>> would use a 24dB attentuation using one 3k9 resistor and one 330ohm
>> resistor, together with the 1k output impedance this would give about
>> 24dB attentuation.

Alternative for the original poster.

> ** So who is ignoring the supplied info now ??
What supplied info?

--
Chel van Gennip
Visit Serg van Gennip's site http/www.serg.vangennip.com