|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.70.59.148
In Reply to: RE: Hmmmmmmm... posted by Michael Samra on August 17, 2016 at 01:56:51
...Tre' was asking for an example of where one would sacrifice linearity for some other parameter. And yes, while in this hypothetical example I "threw away some major objectives", I achieved two other objectives: greater output and use of a a single output device. Life is full of compromise.
Bottom line is that while greater relative linearity may be a characteristic of class A operation, it is not the definition of class A operation.
Follow Ups:
"Bottom line is that while greater relative linearity may be a characteristic of class A operation, it is not the definition of class A operation."
But the greatest linearity (for the chosen tube) is what is shown in all the examples of "good practice" Class A in the books.
So would your hypothetical be a "bad practice" example of Class A but by definition, still Class A? (I'm asking if that is your position)
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
...My example would be "good practice" class A for a low cost console amp. It would be "bad practice" class A for a recording studio monitoring amp.
As an interesting aside, consider some of the SET amps reviewed in Stereophile. They are necessarily class A and are described as such. By measurements these are grossly non-linear....to the point that JA has referred to them as tone controls. And yet the subjective review is totally positive.
"It would be "bad practice" class A for a recording studio monitoring amp."
So wouldn't that make it "bad practice" for a DIY audiophile?
And why should/would we spend time dealing with bad practice?
John Wooden taught his players to never practice wrong, it fosters bad habits.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
...A good designer can at will design a low cost console amp or a high quality monitor amp. And yes it probably would be bad practice for an audiophile diyer unless the diyer was called upon to design a low cost amp. Basic definitions like amplifier classes shouldn't be subject to the whims of a fringe hobby. Also the term "practice" as used here isn't the same as practice (repetition) of music.
"Basic definitions like amplifier classes shouldn't be subject to the whims of a fringe hobby. "
Yet that's exactly what you're doing by attempting to include unorthodox operating conditions under definitions that have been well-understood for decades. It's also exceedingly silly to think that an AB1 amplifier operating at reduced signal levels suddenly fits the definition of Class A.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
"It's also exceedingly silly to think that an AB1 amplifier operating at reduced signal levels suddenly fits the definition of Class A."
But that's the problem. A Class AB1 amplifier operating at reduced signal levels does meet the short definition of Class A. So does a lot of other amps. I think there's always some leakage current.
That's why I've been trying to explain that there is more to Class A than the short definition.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
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: