Will you use two resistor for your input common mode voltage spilter ??

Boki, you really should work on your English writing skills. While just a little bit charming, your English is so fractured sometimes we can't tell exactly what you meant to say. For example, did you mean,

"I saw an audio circuit schematic, and was amazed at how simple it looked." Or did you mean, "... was amazed at how simple it was to design," but then we'd wonder how you determined that.

Or perhaps you meant, "I was amazed at the simple solution to what I had learned was complicated to design," although then we'd wonder what you had in mind.

Did you mean, "It looked different from anything I was taught."? But why would that be amazing? Most industrially-produced designs look quite different from what you find in a textbook or on a blackboard. Your next stage of learning can be to study the production designs of hundreds of skilled engineers, to see their approaches and to learn new tricks. I have done that by analyzing instrument service-manual schematics since I was a teenager. And when my oceanographic company shipped its instruments, we always included full schematics. Sadly, these days the manuals of new instruments routinely omit or hide the schematics, but old manuals can be purchased on eBay, or are available on the web in some cases.

Yes, that's a good sentence.

You mean, "from anything I was taught." Or, "from anything I learned." (The latter is short for "anything I had learned," but you can leave out the "had," which is silently understood.)

Why don't you try some more good English, and tell us what you had learned in school, and what you just saw as a more simple alternate.

Dear Winfield,

1. Yes, this one, "I was amazed at the simple solution to what I had learned was complicated to design,"
2. I want to express "It looked different from anything I was learnt."

Wow, you do help me a lot, thank you very much for your advice, I really need these advices, and I will run to catch what I insufficient.

Best regards, Boki.

"W>>

You mean, "I was amazed." What chip provider, and what was attached to the resistors? What kind of input are you talking about, a low-Z balanced microphone input? Details, please.

Oops, that sentence doesn't make sense. Try again.

Well, if you were amazed at what you saw, you need the right English tense to say that. But if you insist that you were amazing at the time, that means others found you to be amazing -- they were amazed by you, not by what you saw. Is that what you meant to say to us?

Yes, boki, sometimes we're truly "amazed" by what you write here. :>)

I read in sci.electronics.design that Winfield Hill wrote (in ) about 'Will you use two resistor for your input common mode voltage spilter ??', on Sun, 27 Mar 2005:

.... in the traditional sense of 'being utterly confused.'

1. Ya, I knew that is a good sentence, I just copy from a good man.
2. Just now, I am studying for a good English, it needs time. :)

I just think it was not a very special problem to avoid temperature/process/... variation at imporatant node, for example, input common mode voltage of OP When I saw the schematic on a worldwide chip provider

If I want to express "I was amazing at that time", doesn't it ?

: ) Sorry.

Vdd | R |------------> input voltage R | GND

Nothing attached...

Um... the part of schematic perform a high resolution signal amplifier. I don't not like to lose any signal at this part, but there are only two resistor to perform voltage divider for input common mode votlage of opamp.

==> I feel that I be challenged from people before doesn't make sense. ?

Best regards, Boki.

No, I was amazed that time. I think I really need to study hard on the grammar lesson .., hi Professor ... :D

Best regards, Boki.

"W>>

Ya, so different. ( checked dictionary ) Thank you!

Best regards, Boki.

"John Fields" ???????: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Those two words must be hyphenated to make it blue (but phonetically, it's OK). Study my grammar lesson hard.... is the best syntax derived from these words

derived = foremost, accepted format obtained from omitting unnecessary preposition and juggling the words Do not add "to". If you have to, it must be "to derive"....

Now, will you get back to your (poorly-written) question in the header?

"Jim Gregory" ¼¶¼g©ó¶l¥ó·s»D:AhT1e.455$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...

Got it.

how about: => is the best syntax "to" derived from these words I alwyas write down in this form, correct?

Thank you.

Best regards, Boki

Thank you.

but why not add "to' ==> is the best syntax "to" derived from these words.

Are they different?

Best regards, Boki.

"Jim Gregory" ¼¶¼g©ó¶l¥ó·s»D:AhT1e.455$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...

I am enjoying this lesson...:D

"Jim Gregory" ¼¶¼g©ó¶l¥ó·s»D:pTU1e.1997$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...