|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
91.185.123.111
In Reply to: RE: "the question is incorrectly formulated" posted by Triode_Kingdom on September 01, 2014 at 12:54:25
This is rather strange:
1) If there are hundreds of references, why not quote a few (in academic fashion)?
2) If you are an engineer with amplifier design and lab measurements capabilities, it's strange you ask such questions on a forum? I wouldn't: I don't need to.
3) If you are not willing to discuss distortion (whether it's circuitry related and not device related, etc.) than what are you willing to discuss? Maybe the "meta-physics" of electrons flow in small signal pentodes compared to other devices?
********
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
Follow Ups:
"Pentodes and beam tetrodes DO NOT generate distortion, and particularly not IM distortion, 'per se'."
Again, I suggest you research this topic. Below is a table from Mullard. It doesn't address IM directly, but it does clearly show the reduction in harmonic distortion that results from operating the EL34 and EL84 in pseudo-triode mode. The difference is significant, and would be even more so if we were to compare either of these pentodes to a power DHT.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
Just as I have previously stated, what you are referring to is not necessarily related to tube type (pentodes or triodes) but circuitry and operating points.
I am rather familiar with the table you have posted, and it is quite inconclusive and inconsistent. The text from which you have taken it (and thus it is devoid of meaning, while in academic fashion you should have quoted the source and not shown the table, so everyone can read the text and check-out not only the table but the rest of the source as well for context) is mostly trying to show how ultra-linear connection of pentodes (in push-pull amplifiers) leads to a better result than either pentode or pseudo-triode connection (I don't understand why one would call connecting a pentode in triode mode, i.e. tying anode to g2 and thus having the same AC path for both - "pseudo-triode", unless there was some marketing department involved... and marketing/advertising became the great new thing at approximately the same time when this text was originated).
Among other issues shown in this table, the same tubes are obviously operated with different operating points, where some are "pure" class A (or deep class AB), while others are obvious class AB (rather shallow AB, meaning that most useful operation is not class A, i.e. one of the devices is shut off most of the time).
Another issue is that the output power differs, and thus the distortion figures should be appropriately matched to output power - we should also not forget the difference in load! It is not the same whether you operate a pair of EL84 with a common cathode resistor of 150 ohms into 10k, or a pair of EL84 with separate cathode resistors of 270 ohms each into 8k... adding to the disparity of the comparison, triode connected pentodes have lower Ri but are operated into a higher load -- and while doing that, there is no mention of the necessary input swing.
While very interesting from a historical point, as an illustration of times past and the way the industry was managed at the time - the relevance of this text in scientific/academic terms is non-existent (too much inconsistency and lack of method) while the data presented might be adequate at the time, but is rather lacking by todays standards.
An added minus of this illustration is the fact that most have not done enough reading or research in the past to be able to recognize the source of such a table, which makes it totally irrelevant. I guess I don't need to research this topic, but you obviously do.
As for DHTs, please try to avoid further mix-ups of apples and oranges ;) If you are interested about pentodes, DHTs and similar stuff, you might check out my blog for some inspiration.
**********
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
Somehow, I knew you would attempt to discredit whatever reference(s) I provided. Mullard's work is "lacking by today's standards?" I'm done.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
1) How did you know? Perhaps you are clairvoyant? Or is it something else?
2) You did not provide any reference whatsoever. Only now you are mentioning the brand name "Mullard" - until now this was just a table illustrating your point. NOT FAIR, definitely.
3) "Mullard's work" sounds like it's a person, some genius scientist. But it is not, and there is no "Mullard's work": Mullard is just a company involved in manufacture. They did nothing for free, believe me.
Just like RCA, or GE, or Philips, or Telefunken - Mullard was a manufacturer of electron tubes. They had engineers working on the development of new products and the development of new uses for the existing products, just like they had a marketing department developing new ways to sell. Their work was neither seminal nor scientific, but profit oriented. In one word, they were not different from the Texas Instruments, Maxims, ADs, LTs... etc... of our age.
As for scientific value, all those texts are seriously lacking by the academic standards of today. With the documentation and methodology provided, no contemporary editor would accept such work and publish it in some relevant scientific magazine. If you are not aware of that, you are obviously far from scientific and scholar circles - and thus hardly in a position to give relevant comments.
4) You're done? Well, I don't blame you for that. I guess I'm done too.
*********
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
I don't understand where the myth of pentode amps not sounding good with high distortion came from. Some of best sounding tube amps I have heard were pentode, with seperate screen circuitry.
Some of my least favorite tube amps are low powered SET types that have VERY high distortion, especially connected to some ear bleeding horn speakers that could not reproduce a flat response if their life depended on it.
To me, its more about quality engineering. Good sound can be achieved with both low power and high power tube amps, provided they and the speakers are well designed.
"What this country needs is a good 5 watt amplifier!" (Paul Klipsch)
"I don't understand where the myth of pentode amps not sounding good with high distortion came from. Some of best sounding tube amps I have heard were pentode, with seperate screen circuitry."
I suggest you read this thread in its entirety. No one is disparaging pentode-based amplifiers. It's just a fact of life that power pentodes produce greater distortion than triodes, and that hi-fi amplifiers using pentodes require large amounts of NFB. In comparison, many triode amplifiers produce good numbers with no NFB at all.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
I have read the entire thread, and others have already stated more eloquently than I can that the argument you are making is flawed.One has to look at the entire picture when discussing subjects such as this.
"What this country needs is a good 5 watt amplifier!" (Paul Klipsch)
Edits: 09/03/14
"others have already stated more eloquently than I can that the argument you are making is flawed."
Are you still referring to my statement that power pentodes produce more distortion than triodes? No one with any technical authority has disputed that.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
My dear boy, do you need me to dispute that statement (about pentodes generating more distortion)?Let me put this in one sentence, one perspective:
Try to analyze the output vs distortion figures.
Pentodes have much higher gain than triodes. Take a good look at your own posted table! Pentode connection yields more output power than triode connection, and besides the fact that triode connected those tubes cannot even reach the same output power, the distortions generated would rapidly rise and exceed those had by pentode connected tubes for the same output power. As for the harmonic content of those distortion figures, it would rapidly approach odd harmonics values associated with pentodes, and exceed it in a fashion that is considered unfavorable.
The pentode tube was a technical improvement in respect to the triode tubes. Of course, new products need new application techniques, and no-feedback SE is definitely not adequate for pentodes.
It is a different topic whether everyone is capable of designing an amp using pentodes due to added technical complexity, and with the loss of knowledge about tubes, triodes became favorites due to the implicit simplicity of triode amp design.
*********
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
Edits: 09/03/14
So, on the one hand, the Mullard chart is not to be believed, but on the other it supposedly supports your assertion that a triode generates just as much distortion as a pentode - but only if we overdrive the bejeezus out of it. Pretty funny. Incidentally, the distortion numbers in the Mullard chart for the audiophile-grade pentodes are horrendous compared to real triodes. They do make lots of power though!
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
I never stated that the Mullard chart is not to be believed - you either pay little attention to words or you do not understand English, which I assume is your mother tongue, while it is not mine.
The Mullard chart is not objective in not applying the same primary load to all configurations (pentode, UL, triode). Plus, the chart was published in a work that was intended as support for UL applications.
I have already stated that pentodes have higher gain than triodes, and higher output power is possible in pentode connection than in triode connection.
Just like the chart was referring to triode connection, I was referring to triode connection and not triode as well. There is no need to "overdrive the bejeezus out of it" since we can always use it in pentode connection in order to achieve more power.
Furthermore, as I have already explained, while the pentode is a technological advance in respect to the triode, it does need a different approach and maybe added complexity in order to be exploited to full extent. Thus negative feedback, which is particularly necessary in order to lower the output impedance of a pentode amplifier (SE or PP) will also have beneficial effects on the distortions generated by said amplifier.
"Incidentally, the distortion numbers in the Mullard chart for the audiophile-grade pentodes are horrendous compared to real triodes."
1) You should bear in mind the harmonic spectrum of the distortions produced by a device and a circuit configuration. Even order distortions are particularly well cancelled by PP circuitry, which leaves us with predominant odd order distortions - one probable reason why many prefer SE amps to PP amps.
2) Triodes and pentodes in triode connection tend to generate more even order distortion, and thus the figures shown in the table mentioned are even more favorable to triode (and UL, but that would obviously require additional clarification to those who do not know what and why) because as mentioned above it is the odd order harmonics that get cancelled by PP.
3) There is no relevant difference between "real triodes" and "triode connected pentodes" to the subject under discussion here.
I think you are going too far with this - first you said you were done with this, but than you continue with assumptions and accusations that have nothing to do with this thread (which you have started, by the way!!!). Besides that, you are trying to transfer your grudge to other threads as well.
I guess forums are for discussion about subjects, and not personal disputes. You cannot pursue others just because they know more about a subject than you do!
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
Alex,Having read and enjoyed your blog... there are some comments on your being banned from other forums.
I believe that your demeanor is the actual reason for the banning, although perhaps in fairness you make some good points anyhow.
This is a nice forum that doesn't' ban people for having opinions that are outside of the norm. lucky for you drlowmu has paved the way and you can be a total ass here without consequences. :)
Edits: 09/04/14
Hi Rage,
I actually got banned from:
1) AudioKarma - for protesting about copycats of my designs, and the "free-willed" deletion of posts (more about it on my blog:
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/2013/06/why-creative-people-should-avoid-forums.html
2) DiyTube - for taking some pitiful guy too seriously and being too direct in opposing him (but he was really on my back, and as I said, I have to learn to ignore such people)... but with all frankness, I believe that it was a case of stakeholders vs. unwelcome challenge where I just took the bate offered.
On the other hand, I did not get banned from diyaudio - I requested being cancelled because I was offended by the unfair treatment. In the end, the only way they could cancel me was by banning me (and not mentioning I requested it myself, of course). I still have the e-mails between myself and the moderators, maybe I'll publish them on my blog some day.
Some guys out there (on diyaudio in particular) actually hate my guts: every time someone mentions my amps there is a skirmish between those who have built one (and are happy with the result) and those who for one reason or another feel threatened by my work.
As for opinions outside of the norm - that is what makes one interesting... particularly if it's not for show only.
The demeanor issue is not an issue: its a consequence of not being condescending to stakeholders and the ilk (I really cannot see why should I condescend to people?).
Regards,
Alex
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
"I did not get banned from diyaudio - I requested being cancelled"
My second day at diyaudio, one of the mods e-mailed to complain about my signature. I told him it was neither offensive nor obscene, and none of his business. He countered with an ultimatum, so I asked to be cancelled. I just don't have time for those little Mussolinis.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
"...as mentioned above it is the odd order harmonics that get cancelled by PP."
"You cannot pursue others just because they know more about a subject than you do!"
I know English is not your first language but TK knows much more than you think and he, for sure, knows that it is the EVEN order harmonics that are cancelled by PP.
I suggest you bring down your tone a few notches.
You sound like a know-it-all and no one likes a know-it-all.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
"...as mentioned above it is the odd order harmonics that get cancelled by PP."Do you really need to take everything literally and by the word? OK, let me then repeat that part for you:
[QUOTE]
1) You should bear in mind the harmonic spectrum of the distortions produced by a device and a circuit configuration. Even order distortions are particularly well cancelled by PP circuitry, which leaves us with predominant odd order distortions - one probable reason why many prefer SE amps to PP amps.
[/QUOTE]Of course I know, and as I said (in the part quoted above), it is the even harmonics that get cancelled. I got confused, and since English is not my mother tongue, I guess it's normal that words not used every day like "odd" and "even" are easy to confuse - I would not confuse the words "neparno" and "parno", but I guess you would not be able to understand me if I were writing in my mother tongue. Plus, in the future I should wear glasses to be certain that I have read correctly every word I write - thanks for reminding me.
I hope that the fact that I need to write in a foreign language, and need to use glasses because my sight is not like it used to be, makes you feel less threatened by my directness?
Frankly, I don't think you really believe that I do not know whether it is odd or even harmonics that get cancelled in PP amps... but I can see you don't like me, so in the future I must re-check what I write for grammar or other errors, to avoid being ridiculed by people just like you.
-----------
"I know English is not your first language but TK knows much more than you think and he, for sure, knows that it is the EVEN order harmonics that are cancelled by PP.
I suggest you bring down your tone a few notches.
You sound like a know-it-all and no one likes a know-it-all."
Maybe you know TK in person, but you guys sit on the other side of the Ocean, so I don't know you. Thus I can only believe what I read, and that is not at all convincing in terms of knowledge (and particularly not method). And you are aware of that, but you are writing it out of spite, to stand by your friend.
My tone is not "up" at all, I am discussing normally - but I am not condescending to your friends, which obviously offends you. You should try to differentiate between "offensive" and "non-condescending".
As for the "know-it-all" connotation, it does not apply to me for sure. The "know-it-all" guys are people who do not know but pretend they know, while I do know what I am state as something that I do know, which is both obvious from the statements (to those who know, not to the ignorant) and you can very much research both whether what I post is correct, and whether I am someone who presumes knowledge, or someone who possess knowledge. We are not born into knowledge, rather we have to learn to acquire knowledge... having friends pat you on your back will not give you knowledge, but study and perseverance will.
I HOPE YOU ARE HAPPY NOW. CAN WE GET BACK ON TOPIC, IF THERE IS ANY TOPIC LEFT TO GET BACK TO? THANK YOU.
EDIT:
Yes, I just remembered what I wanted to say: I need to learn to ignore comments like the one that I just replied to, since it is not worth loosing time on. But that is how it goes with discussions - you get provoked and do foolish things. I apologize to everyone who has had to read this unnecessary post... I hope I will learn to ignore. Practice makes one perfect (Uebung macht der Meister).********
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
Edits: 09/04/14 09/04/14
"... thanks for reminding me."You're welcome.
You still haven't answered my question about how a 5k output transformer on a SET 300b will cause the loss of "sound".
Is this for all operating points or just the one Balle Clorin reported using?
According to Paul Joppa's (designer for the company Bottlehead, just in case you didn't know) formula 5k is the optimum load for a single ended 300b with 400vdc plate and a idle current of 60ma.
Western Electric gives 5K ohms as the proper load impedance for various operating points and they give the expected 2nd and 3rd harmonic distortion.
Some of the suggested operating points that use a 5k output transformer show favorable HD figures.
So again, why do you say (and you say it as if it is a fact when I think it is just your opinion) that a 5k load impedance is way too high for a 300b?
Edit, Opinions should be stated clearly as opinions and facts should be clearly stated as facts. Mixing the two only leads to mis-understanding and trouble.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 09/04/14
[QUOTE]
You still haven't answered my question about how a 5k output transformer on a SET 300b will cause the loss of "sound".
According to Paul Joppa's (designer for the company Bottlehead, just in case you didn't know) formula 5k is the optimum load for a single ended 300b with 400vdc plate and a idle current of 60ma.
Some of the suggested operating points that use a 5k output transformer show favorable HD figures.
So again, why do you say (and you say it as if it is a fact when I think it is just your opinion) that a 5k load impedance is way too high for a 300b?
[/QUOTE]
Tre':
No wonder you missed my reply: you posted the question in another thread (the one about 300B curves...)!
On the other hand, I had a difficult time finding it myself... the way these threads are organized is something I am not familiar with.
So, here is the reply:
"
3) When it comes to sound, this is probably in the ear of the listener, but in my experience all opinions actually converge, just like parallel lines spreading to infinity (non-Euclidean geometry). A lower than usual load (like 1.5k-2k for 300B) leads to an impression of unnatural, huge instruments and under-developed sound-stage. A higher than usual load (like 4.5k-5.5k for 300B leads to thin sound, instruments that lack body, and uncertainty in the position of instruments...
"
Obviously the satisfaction with a given load and operating point will differ based on individual circumstances and taste. With bass heavy efficient speakers, particularly if using "thicker" sounding tubes (like the EH or Sovtek), you could end up being satisfied with higher loads and lower output power. With efficient speakers power output is not a must, and 300B amps are generally known for a rather syrupy sound (which is why some people explicitly dislike 300B tubes).
But the quoted part is my opinion, based on my experiences with the 300B tubes I have tried, in the amps in which I have used those tubes (RH300B, for instance).
I must add that I enjoy using 300B tubes in my RH-TTA with a load of 3k and a rather strange operating point, 60mA current draw with 250-280V across the tube - an operating point adequate for 2A3 tubes (and using different rectifiers I can increase the B+ thus increasing the voltage across the tube, since for a 300B that is still very low anode dissipation). Power output is basically the same that can be had with 2A3 tubes, and the sound is very enjoyable, showing the intrinsic characteristics of the tubes used.
Having an amp like the RH-TTA gives the unique opportunity of comparing different tubes in the same amplifier (same power supply, same circuit - with added elements for pentode tubes, and the same output transformers). Not only can I play with and evaluate 2A3, 6B4G, 1619, 307A, 2E22, 1624, 45, 300B... but I can also play with the load (3k or 5.5k), slightly different B+ (various tube rectifiers) - and I can even choose between 60mA and 36mA current draw (the latter necessary in order to use the 45, but can be applied to any tube at will). Not to mention that I can also use a wide spectrum of indirect heated tubes in the same amp (EL34, 6L6 - particularly useful with the old ST shaped and metal types, EL38... and of course all the more powerful tubes I would normally use in the Universal). While the conditions might not be optimal for each tube, it does give an opportunity to assess the sound characteristics of different tubes.
Take a good look at it: http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/2014/04/rh-tta-tube-tester-amplifier.html
*************
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
"But the quoted part is my opinion, based on my experiences with the 300B tubes I have tried, in the amps in which I have used those tubes (RH300B, for instance)."
Thanks for clearing that up.
In my opinion this latest post of yours is also just your opinions.
I was looking for a technical reason that a 5k ohm output transformer was/is not suitable for a 300b.
My contention (and Western Electric and electronic math and Paul Joppa) is that 5k is the optimal load impedance for a 300b under certain voltage and current conditions and the "....thin sound, instruments that lack body, and uncertainty in the position of instruments" does not happen when the current and voltage calls for a 5k load.
You chose not to given me a technical reason for your statement and you chose to ignore the technical reasons I gave.
You have just repeated your opinions and there's nothing wrong with that as long as you make it clear that it's just your opinions. ( I would, however, like to hear from you your technical reason for thinking that a 5k load impedance is "way too high" for a 300b)
As for you stating opinions as facts;
"While the conditions might not be optimal for each tube, it does give an opportunity to assess the sound characteristics of different tubes."
I'm not sure that's a valid technical position for you to take. Isn't the second half of that statement just your opinion?
Let me explain why I say that.
If the conditions are not optimal how can we be sure that any assessment is correct?
Can we really know how good (or bad) a output tube is when it's not even running optimally?
In my opinion comparing the sound of different output tubes with one running optimally and the other not is paramount to comparing apples and oranges.
You may have good cause to dispute these points I have made but come back with more of your opinions. If you have technical facts that support your positions, show them to me.
I wait for your reply.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
[QUOTE]
"While the conditions might not be optimal for each tube, it does give an opportunity to assess the sound characteristics of different tubes."I'm not sure that's a valid technical position for you to take. Isn't the second half of that statement just your opinion?
[/QUOTE]Tre':
I stated that the conditions might not be optimal for each tube only in order to retain objectivity and a wide view of the subject. In reality, the only "suboptimal" condition is not exploiting the maximum allowed anode dissipation (either by drawing less current than possible, or by having a lower voltage across the tube) - to a high but reasonable extent, like 80-90%.
For instance, if we use a 300B tube at the operating point which is more or less suitable for a 2A3 - whereby anode dissipation will be between 15-18W - this is rather low compared to the 40W maximum, or 32W which I expect everyone would consider very acceptable.
The same "suboptimal" condition of exploitation is valid for all "above 15W anode dissipation" tubes mentioned or usable, like the 2E22 (30W possible), 1624 (25W possible), and similar examples of tubes that might be used by direct plugging in the amp and choosing heater voltage (like the KT88 which has a maximum anode dissipation of 42W).
When it comes to load, this amp allows a choice of two values - nominally 3k and 5.5k - which can be applied at will (to test, for instance, how does a 300B sound with a load of 5.5k, or how would a a 307 sound with a load of 3k). Generally speaking, most mentioned triodes are suitable for 3k, and most pentodes/beam tetrodes are suitable for 5.5k.
Under the above mentioned conditions, almost all the tubes "tested" will yield similar output power, which can be defined as 5-6W.
Now while it is my opinion that this is a good way to test the sound of different tubes, since each tube can be tested operating into a load that falls in the "expected adequate" category, as well as into a load that falls into the "expected inadequate".
The operating point (voltage/current) is not necessarily to be considered inadequate for most tubes (on the contrary, it can be considered as optimal or very good for most of the tubes applicable) while the cases where there is less anode dissipation than possible should not be regarded as inadequate by those who share your opinions. At least you advocate (and I am willing to second that to a certain degree) a more liberal choice of operating points, like 400V/60mA for 300B (which is a mere 24W dissipation), so I don't see why you would not accept 300V/60mA?
What we get in the end is:
1) same amplifier: same circuitry, power supply, output transformers;
2) all tubes operated at the same/similar anode dissipation - which actually equalizes their output power and thus neutralizes output power as a reason for better/worse sound quality.I believe these to be better "testing" conditions, a lesser compromise than evaluating tubes by using them in different amplifiers (different power supplies, different output transformers, and probably different circuitry as well). I expect most would agree on this.
Furthermore, a choice of rectifiers, drivers and cathode followers can add to the "optimization" of the sonic result, thus a high level of satisfaction can be achieved with all output tubes used - and a lot of experience and knowledge about the intrinsic characteristics of each output tube can be gathered.
I hope I was clear enough in this explanation. On the other hand, I am not sure whether those two anwers should have been placed in the other thread, the one about 300B tubes?
***********
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
Edits: 09/06/14
"At least you advocate (and I am willing to second that to a certain degree) a more liberal choice of operating points, like 400V/60mA for 300B (which is a mere 24W dissipation), so I don't see why you would not accept 300V/60mA?"This has nothing to do with what I advocate or accept.
Technically speaking, at 400v/60ma a 5k load is required. At 300v/60ma a 3.3k load is required.
But that's assuming no negative feedback.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 09/06/14 09/06/14
Tre':In one of my many posts I have also stated that any point might be valid, and one is and should be free to choose. Thus I am not preaching any Gospel, rather giving my own technical opinion, based on facts and experiences.
It is strange how these forums tend to a polarization to "audiophile and sound" vs. "engineer and technical". Even more interesting is how people use and abuse this polarization at their own will, without bothering to have a wider look. Thus when I state technical matters, opponents accuse me of not taking into consideration the sound quality and behaving just as an engineer; vice versa, when I forward sound related issues, people will accuse me of not being technical enough...
In an RH amplifier feedback is applied between output tube and driver in order to achieve a set of goals. One is lowering the resulting Ri of the output tube. With a lower Ri, you get better damping and better control. This translates into sound quality, but only to a point where a too high load starts working against you and you loose both output power and sound quality. The two, damping and power are particularly important and relatef to a loudspeaker in terms of adequacy.
Let's add to that a comparison of 300B and 2A3. The 300B has higher anode dissipation and maximum voltage across the tube, but the Ri of the two tubes is not all that much different at 700 for 300B and 800 for 2A3. The usual operating point for 2A3 is 250V 60mA into 2.5k - and I don't see why should we use 5k for a tube that has even lower Ri and can draw more current? Never mind what WE offers as possible load and operating point, or what any designer/engineer says. This is pure engineering logic which I am trying to make obvious.
The above engineering logic gets even more pressing if there is feedback involved like in the RH300B. The Ri is reduced by the measure of the feedback applied... and thus might be applied to an even lower load resistance. But, applying a usual load resistance is the optimal solution because you get the added power and damping as a bonus.
My opinion / explanation quoted in the previous posts is more directed towards sound quality, but is backed by the above technical explanation and experience gathered by applying technical solutions to real life amps and listening to the result. That is basically what I try to do, combine technical knowledge and reasoning with audiophile results. I never hide being an economist who has learned electronics for the love of it, as well as being some sort of "economically dissiluded" audiophile who at one point in time has had a sobering experience and decided that he can do much better than what's on offer, and much cheaper too (not feeding those whom I don't need to feed).
While it is possible that more efficient or very efficient speakers require less power and the sonic results of a given load might be less apparent, my opinion and impression was confirmed by others who own high efficiency speakers. It seems that while efficient speakers don't need much power, they do need a good damping factor.
***********
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
Edits: 09/05/14 09/05/14 09/05/14
"In an RH amplifier feedback is applied between output tube and driver in order to achieve a set of goals."
I have to admit I missed that.
" It seems that while efficient speakers don't need much power, they do need a good damping factor."
Well, that depends.
I only use my tube amps for 200Hz and up and the midrange speaker I use does not need a good damping factor.
On the other hand, without feedback the higher load impedance will give a higher damping factor so you have confused me a little with that one.
I assume you are referring to your use of feedback?
From what you have said I see you do understand the difference between opinion and fact ("audiophile and sound" vs. "engineer and technical") so it shouldn't be that hard for you, from now on, to make it clear when you're just stating your opinion and when you think you're stating facts.
No one can argue with opinion but you should do your best to keep your facts straight.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
[QUOTE]
From what you have said I see you do understand the difference between opinion and fact ("audiophile and sound" vs. "engineer and technical") so it shouldn't be that hard for you, from now on, to make it clear when you're just stating your opinion and when you think you're stating facts.No one can argue with opinion but you should do your best to keep your facts straight.
[/QUOTE]From your reply I can conclude that you are not at all interested in hearing a reasonable, reasoned, or objective reply.
Thus there is no reason to answer any of the questions you have posted, because you are not interested in getting any answers.
Keeping with what I have previously written, how I must learn to avoid unnecessary disputes, I will ignore anything you write from now on.
As for your knowledge, opinion, and anything else, let us know when you start sharing a blog, or site... so we can all enjoy in what you have to share with us. Until that moment, you remain an anonymous figure with nothing to contribute.
*******
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
Edits: 09/06/14
> > I will ignore anything you write from now on.
Good plan, because the clips below are representative of the kind of comments we are receiving behind the scenes:
Here we go again, AK start attacking anyone that disagrees with him ...
He has been banned from numerous audio forums for the exact same sort of behavior ...
Perhaps he is still providing enough entertaining value to keep him on the Asylum ...
Let's watch just how far he can take this! ;-)...
Ban him? Not yet, but he is going to need a short leash.
I don't know who Alex is but he hasn't make a good impression with me with his first 16 posts.
He states his opinion as fact. He's disrespectful to inmates with stellar credentials. (Triode Kingdom, Jim Dowdy)
My opinion is that Alex will only be trouble to this forum.
The moderators' take?
Your intended messages are frequently valid. The problem is with how you frame them. You are consistently unnecessarily rude and confrontational, to put it kindly.
How you say things is more about how you feel than what you think. If people have trouble relating to you or respecting you—and it's clear that most do—you're not as self-aware as you think you are.
Fax mentis incendium gloria cultum, et cetera, et cetera...
Memo bis punitor delicatum! It's all there, black and white,
clear as crystal! Blah, blah, and so on and so forth ...
[QUOTE]
Ban him? Not yet, but he is going to need a short leash.
[\QUOTE]
Whoever wrote this "clip" obviously suffers from serious complexes (is this the way to say it in your country - or "is a challenged person"?
How does this individual imagine he can do that? By banning me? Come on, you can always do that, but in that case there is no leash - I would be gone and that's it.
Maybe we will find out who that person is? It's a pity we cannot meat in person, it would be a lot of fun!
[QUOTE]
The moderators' take?
Your intended messages are frequently valid.
[\QUOTE]
That's the real nature of the problem. And it leads to some people considering that:
[QUOTE]
My opinion is that Alex will only be trouble to this forum.
[\QUOTE]
Most probably because I don't understand what is it that makes some people have "stellar credentials"? Is it because they have special merits like:
- contribution to the DIY community, or
- many published designs, or
- lots of ideas they share with the community...
Or is it because these people are friends, contributors - in one word: stakeholders?
While it would be a good thing to mark such people with special signs like "do not offend, be condescending" so those new to the circles would know whom to avoid - I guess this would be a far step away from the virtues of democracy and human rights that are being preached by the "civilized and developed".
http://rh-amps.blogspot.com/
There's a really good chance that you'll deal with one or two people who are dumber than a box of hair. But, if everyone is, you may need to rethink your definition of stupid.IOW, “If one person tells you you're a horse, they are crazy. If three people tell you you're a horse, there's conspiracy afoot. If ten people tell you you're a horse, it's time to buy a saddle”
—Jack Rosenblum
Fax mentis incendium gloria cultum, et cetera, et cetera...
Memo bis punitor delicatum! It's all there, black and white,
clear as crystal! Blah, blah, and so on and so forth ...
Edits: 09/06/14
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: