[applebook]

Someone is describing some sort of quiet static coming from the left speaker out of his OII. Could this be due to the can's lack of charging after prolonged inactivity, and/or could the new McAlister amp be responsible for the noise? What about potential culprits being the wiring, IC, power cord, power supply, etc?

 

[nikongod]

my o2's never had "static" in them. ever. if they were off for a week, plugged in and instantly put on your head you would not hear any hiss.

umm, noisy tubes? has the user in question attempted to rotate tubes if possible?

 

[applebook]

Well, the amp is brand new and just built, so I'm thinking that it is the possible cause. I played the OIIs, which were brand new, for over two dozen hours and never had a single problem, but this was months ago.

 

[mirumu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by applebook /img/forum/go_quote.gif Someone is describing some sort of quiet static coming from the left speaker out of his OII. Could this be due to the can's lack of charging after prolonged inactivity, and/or could the new McAlister amp be responsible for the noise? What about potential culprits being the wiring, IC, power cord, power supply, etc?

My STAX SR-003s had a slight squealing once in the past and I've heard the same from a friend's Sennheiser HE60s at times. Caused by gunk in the stators. In the case of my SR-003 I opened them up and cleaned them out with a small air pump but it was very fiddly and they were tricky to get back in the right place so I wouldn't recommend this. Edit: Oh, and I should mention that it solved the problem.

 

[Konig]

try to bias the amp's left channel - it might work even though it wont work theoretically. Things dont work perfectly as theory predicts all the time.

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig /img/forum/go_quote.gif try to bias the amp's left channel - it might work even though it wont work theoretically. Things dont work perfectly as theory predicts all the time.

If the theory doesn't work then the theory is wrong.

 

[rincewind]

Try the O2 out of a completely different amp if possible. If it's OK that way > amp! Substitution is the easiest troubleshooting method that even a monkey like I can do

Ook ook!

 

[akwok]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl /img/forum/go_quote.gif If the theory doesn't work then the theory is wrong.

Quote of the year.

 

[Konig]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl /img/forum/go_quote.gif If the theory doesn't work then the theory is wrong.

Not true. Classical theory cannot explain the phenomenons of quantum theory but it doesnt mean the classical camp is "WRONG". it simply means it is inadequate.

 

[akwok]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not true. Classical theory cannot explain the phenomenons of quantum theory but it doesnt mean the classical camp is "WRONG". it simply means it is inadequate.

Mutually exclusive. Simple if A then B -- if A is true, then B must be true. But if not A then anything can be said.

 

[Konig]

Quote:

Originally Posted by akwok /img/forum/go_quote.gif Mutually exclusive. Simple if A then B -- if A is true, then B must be true. But if not A then anything can be said.

I would like to know if any1 can understand Awoks A-B rule. If u do please translate it to me. My computing knowledge in csc108 only taught me and/or/not but never "Simple if A then B -- if A is true, then B must be true".

 

[Carl]

Basically what Adrian was trying to say is that it's a logical falacy to link something being incapable of proving something else wrong with something proving something else right. The arguement is used a lot when dealing with religion and philosophy, but we'll leave that for a different forum.

In any case, my point was that if a theory proves to be incorrect, then the theory is logically incorrect. It's different from just not being able to explain something so therefore not even trying.

 

[Konig]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl /img/forum/go_quote.gif Basically what Adrian was trying to say is that it's a logical falacy to link something being incapable of proving something else wrong with something proving something else right. The arguement is used a lot when dealing with religion and philosophy, but we'll leave that for a different forum. In any case, my point was that if a theory proves to be incorrect, then the theory is logically incorrect. It's different from just not being able to explain something so therefore not even trying.

i get what u mean. if only logic is supreme in quantum theory students would have a much easier time.

 

[applebook]

Keep those theories and suggestions coming, everyone.

Thanks.

 

[nikongod]

if the amp is a tube amp, have you tried to move the tubes around? it could be a noisy tube.

stax uses protective films over BOTH sides of the electrostatic drivers, its exceptionally unlikely that dust got in. dust in the driver sounds more like a constant HF squeal anyways.