Amp/Preamp Asylum

Looking for a new Amp or Preamp? If you're after tubes, post over here.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: When you use name calling that is abusive on most websites.

Posted by morricab on March 5, 2025 at 01:49:45:
There is no measurement in the patent to substantiate this claim. Therefore, it is just a claim and not a fact. Just circuit diagrams, which are interesting and maybe result in a good sounding amp.

The question then is: if this amp was low distortion/no zero crossing and low consumption, why then didn't you build such an amp? This patent was clearly expired when you started building amps?

Why did you make high bias amps, if it was possible to make them as good with low bias?