Are future improvements in Amp/PreAmps slowing to a crawl?

Do you honestly think I'm blowing smoke or selling snake oil?

Since you have consistently avoided answering a rather simple question, one that **should** have been very easy, I'm forced to conclude regardless of what I want to believe that the correct answer to the question above is 'yes'.

Here's why: you claim to have a circuit to correct this 'speed' issue. At this point we don't have to know anything technical about it; its mere alleged existence points to a means of quantifying the 'speed' of an amplifier circuit, which it then corrects. This has been true apparently for some years as there is another thread on this site wherein this circuit is discussed, and that thread is several years old.

But apparently despite the existence of this circuit, it has not helped in the means of measuring the speed of the amplifier circuit, which it surely must do, otherwise how could it correct; for that matter you would have to have a reference to know how to set the 'speed'. The logical issue here is obvious: obviously the 'circuit' does not exist. Otherwise you would have a specification to look for so that when you shipped a product out the door, you would know it was correct.

Pissing contest. That's exactly what Pass was talking about - a lot of that but virtually no progress.
I won.

@atmasphere 

" This has been true apparently for some years as there is another thread on this site wherein this circuit is discussed, and that thread is several years old."

This can tell you how long I have been working on the same problem.
The difference now is that I have perfected the solution. As far as knowing it will be correct when the customer gets it - that is in the hands of the automatic-focus circuit. (self correcting).

Here is an example of a failure in logic -
(Kosst) " Circuits vary the pitch through intermodulation distortion through summing the fundamental with harmonics."

I then asked "where did the harmonics come from that mix with the fundamental?" I am well aware of analog distortion including IMD.
The problem overlooked here is that in order to have IMD you must have harmonic distortion to mix with the fundamental. IMD requires harmonic distortion to exist. Since my circuitry does not distort - there are no harmonics to work with. IMD is therefore non-existent. Same as harmonics are non-existent.

Harmonic distortion is born when the fundamental signal begins to move up or down the spectrum. It starts out as vanishing low amounts of phase shift near the fundamental frequency.  For example take a  1khz fundamental tone applied to a "standard" amp circuit. It typically has some amount of energy that can be seen at 2khz (as harmonic distortion)

These 2 energies do not co-exist because it is a continuum. They are time sharing their presence. IOW the small amount of energy seen at 2khz is taken from the 1khz energy. The circuit cannot put out 2 frequencies at the same time so it is alternating. 

Here is the kicker...

At that moment in time we have moved the pitch up by a factor of 2.
For that brief time the amplifier is running at TWICE the speed! You are making my point about how an amp can alter the pitch. For at least that brief moment in time you are injecting 1khz at the input and 2khz is leaving the circuit

The pitch has been altered.

If you can observe the movement of the fundamental slowed down (like with a high speed camera) you would see that the fundamental actually passes through every frequency between 1khz and 2khz. 
When it is seen at 2khz - that small portion of the 1khz signal is MISSING. It has to multiplex to be seen at different parts of the spectrum.
This happens so rapidly it can't be monitored by worthless THD analizers. The reason it is at a multiple of 1khz is because of the repetition rate. It repeatedly runs into the same nonlinear event during the 360 degree range of each cycle of the 1000 cycles. Each cycle literally takes a "hit" along an otherwise linear transfer. This "hit" damages the purity of the sine wave and leaves a DENT. Its SHAPE has been altered. If you zoom in on the dent you will see that it looks more like a small piece of another sign wave that is higher in frequency. The dent is small enough to only time share by the percentage of the dent size relative to the total size of the full 360 degree wave. IOW 1% distortion leaves 99% of the fundamental alone.

Here's how my correction works...
 If you zoom in on just the dent you will see that it has a beginning and an end. At the very beginning of the dent it is just starting to deviate from the shape of the input sign wave. This is the point at which the velocity is first becoming unstable. Since the velocity detector has massive gain it can "see" the signal veering off the track early on and applies red shift or blue shift to force the signal to stay on the original path. Since it is only allowed to stay exactly on top of the traced shape of the fundamental - it cannot slide up the spectrum to become a harmonic.
It cannot (PM) phase modulate or (FM) frequency modulate or make side bands.

The mechanism for generating harmonic distortion has been removed and cannot show up anywhere on the spectrum as a temporary burst of energy. As a result the only thing the circuit can amplify is the fundamental. The would be harmonic has been nipped in the bud.
This technique yields an amplifying method the has the same distortion as air (zero).

The beauty is that it works on a music signal the same way since we are cloning the shape of the signal. There are no harmonics or side bands from IMD do the absence of harmonics needed to mix with the fundamental.

About the velocity detector..
This is what I have spent decades trying to design. In order to "zoom" in on the dent which is tiny requires massive gain in a single spot in the circuit. The velocity detectors output is used to drive the auto-focus stage making it self correcting. This correction is only used along the time domain path (not the vertical path like typical feedback) and with this much pressure the circuit has no choice but to behave flawlessly. A NFB loop is not necessary to remove distortion since there isn't any.

As a result the output shape is a clone of the input shape which includes the wave portion of the sound.

Devices needed to create the gain I needed for the detector are not made. So I make my own devices at the factory. During part of my 30 years working on this one concept I was able to learn how to import a specific property from one device into another device and have it act as if it always had this property as its own.

The amplifier can extract critical data from the input signal at a "DNA" level (between nanovolts and picovolts) including the exact sound of an unlimited number of instruments.The actual layout of the original venue is easily decoded and a sharp focus of every sound object is presented in the playback field with unlimited depth.

There is so much more but the net result is I wanted to match the properties of air so the integrity of the sound wave is not damaged.
Even tough it is an electrical amplifier it "feels" like air to the signal and at the point of conversion back to acoustic energy at the speaker it simply allows a continuance of the flowing sound waves at the same speed as it struck the recording microphone - Mach One.

Roger

It wouldn’t be the first time someone automatically called something snake oil before coming to grips with what the idea actually was. Folks sometimes appear programmed to jump on just about anything that deviates a little too much from the standard model. Like ducks on a June bug.

Hm. This explanation is very different from the one you gave several years ago.

I'm very open to the idea that there are new vistas to be explored. That's why I have patents. But I think you need to get your story straight.

One problem with your story is that you don't have a measurement means. That's a problem that anyone with an engineering background will point to; and like me they will find it odd that you've had a circuit to compensate for this 'effect' but you've not developed a means of measurement. Anyone can see that such will lead to QC problems.

So my advice to you is to develop solid repeatable measurements. You already have the circuit (allegedly); so it itself is your means of measurement, as if that was not abundantly clear earlier. It is this particular fact that will send up red flags for anyone with a logical mind.