|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
63.246.183.22
In Reply to: RE: triode vs pentode connection posted by deafbykhorns on June 04, 2017 at 14:43:58
Wasn't it the Sakuma goal to preserve and reinforce the sonic integrity of a specific tube by using the same type as both driver and output? I don't see how that could take place with one tube in triode and the other in pentode. The two configurations don't respond the same electrically, and as anyone who has switched a 6BQ5 output stage between triode and pentode can attest, they don't sound the same. Are we certain the schematic you posted is the original Sakuma? In any event, it will be interesting to hear your opinion on the difference when both stages are either pentode or triode. :)
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
Follow Ups:
Not sure who you are responding to, me or deaf. I am going to compare the two modes once I get the original working right. I think your first sentence is the most important part of this though; the idea is not to duplicate a sakuma design entirely but to check on his idea that using the same tube as driver and output will give you a better idea of the true sound of that tube. If what deaf says is correct, it sure isn't going to take much to change the output tube from pentode to triode. I still have a few issue to sort out with my psu, but I am hoping that within a few days I can answer that question, because I really want to know too.
Edits: 06/04/17 06/04/17
Sakuma just rolled over and went digital in his grave.
No one is trying to duplicate his design, we are just investigating his premise that only by using the same tube as a driver can you hear the true sound of a tube. I don't think an interstage tranny is necessary for that. Also, I think Sakuma would have approved as he encouraged experimentation.
"Also, I think Sakuma would have approved..."
Highly unlikely. I read Sakuma's philosophies on audio years ago, and he considered interstage transformers to be absolutely necessary. For that and other reasons, labeling the schematic presented here as having anything in common with Sakuma designs is simply wrong. He would almost certainly consider it an insult.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
Sorry TK, but I just can't agree with that at all. Anyone truly into audio experimenting is not going to be upset by someone else doing a riff on their design as long as they are not trying to steal it or profit from it. I am not doing either one, I'm just trying to give the man the credit he is due for the concept.To quote from the "direct heating" website"
Sakuma says "I opened the reference books every day. And then, that old interstage transformer asked me:
'Sakuma, who do you build this amplifier for?
Do you make the amplifier to get praise from electronics teachers?'
Since that day, I have made amplifiers for my own pleasure as an amateur".Sounds good to me.
Edits: 06/06/17 06/06/17 06/06/17 06/06/17
"...as long as they are not trying to steal it or profit from it."
The individual who first posted the schematic with the "Sakuma" label next to it did exactly that - he stole the Sakuma name by pasting it on something that doesn't meet the fundamental requirements. You're now doing the same thing by attributing the design to Sakuma's concepts, and you're excusing this practice by pretending to know his mind. Really, the man's dead. Have some respect.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
Really, lighten up TK. The amp is called Sakuma STYLE, not Sakuma amp. What part of that is getting past you? No one is claiming it is a Sakuma amp, just that it is following his concept of like tube driving like tube, as I have said 3 or 4 times now. Did you read the quote from the direct heating web site? No mind reading, just quotes.
Edits: 06/06/17 06/06/17 06/06/17 06/06/17
"...following his concept of like tube driving like tube,"
That's only one of many concepts Sakuma explored and implemented in his designs. Ironically, the "Sakuma Style" amplifier schematic you posted doesn't even do that . One tube in pentode, the other in triode is not the concept of interest. This is simply a case of a hanger-on attempting to affiliate sketchy and unrelated work with that of a master. As for what you're doing, it might be accurate to say you're experimenting with one of Sakuma's concepts, but even that's questionable. Unless you're planning to replace the 6BQ5s with DHTs, it's overtly dishonest to refer to the work you're proposing as having any relation to that of Susumu Sakuma. Argue all you want, but that's the long and short of it.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
must be nice to run through things so black and white. Further, if your assessment is anything resembling reality, his memory does not need any attention at all.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
The long and short of it is we have different opinions on this and neither of us is going to get the other to change their mind. Find something else to grouse about TK.
k
No it is not, it is giving credit where it is due.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: