CAL-LAB Inventor’s Observations on a cover-
story in EDN-magazine (Aug 20 2009)
Date: Aug 21 2009 by Paul Chang
It was an email exchange that led to CAL-LAB sending 5 units of PLC-CLLI (4X
MD-PLC-3 & 1X MD-PLC-1) to The Senior Technical Editor of EDN for testing –
when he said (to the effect) “If your product functions as you have claimed, I
will use it in my August cover-story!”
I am pleased to see a picture he later asked for and the web-site of CAL-LAB
appearing among industry big-guns. Indeed, he has used PLC-CLLI in the cover-
story! My thanks to Brian Dipert!
However, the fact that he has not expressed or indicated the ‘WOW!’ factor that I
had expected him to also find – as those who came to our KL-PJ showroom to
put our claims to the test had found, got me wondering if PLC-CLLI (CAL-LAB’s
PLC-Booster-Isolators) had been fully and correctly exploited. See below:
1. Whether all PCs, Servers and Network devices (whose built-in
switching power supplies and EMI-filters adversely affect the
performance of PLC-adapters) had ALL obtained power via the
filtered outlets of the PLC-CLLI at the setup during tests;
2. Whether ALL PLC-adapters in use or connected were appropriately
connected via the un-attenuated outlets of PLC-CLLI – and ALL
interconnected equipment were powered via the filtered outlets of
the same PLC-CLLI.
3. Whether any other devices or equipment were plugged into the other
wall-outlets near the one where a PLC-CLLI was added – as full
advantages of PLC-CLLI would only be obtained when all nearby
equipment (noise-generating or not) were powered via the PLC-CLLI.
I respect Brian’s vast experiences and knowledge and by no means am I
questioning his capabilities BUT simply wish to confirm if he had thought it
necessary to do as such!
I am confident that the following advantages should still be viable, when PLC-
CLLI is widely & correctly employed:
1. A 2~5 folds improvement on connection-rate – depending on how
elaborately and widely PLC-CLLI has been necessarily em