In Reply to: Sorry, I don't see the basis for your statement.. posted by Triode_Kingdom on March 19, 2007 at 08:17:54:
"Which of HK's product specifications improved as a result of applying the UL technique?"Improved as compared to what? If there was EVER a "clean sheet of paper" design the II was one of them. And H-K wasn't U/L across the board. The Cit V was a true pentode amp (and it's marvelous!).
"If the answer is "none," and if you're correct that this wasn't market-driven, then perhaps it was just an excercise in innovation. Engineers do that sometimes."
Sure, that happens in a lot of fields.
But in addition to the published material, I've had the honor of speaking with people who were personally well acquainted with Stu before he passed away. They tell me to a man that he was absolutely driven to make the finest amplifier in the world. He could have chosen triode, pentode, U/L, whatever. He had free reign. He chose U/L. And really, by 1959-1960 U/L was hardly an innovation, it had been around for 5-6 years.
There was only one design and one construction compromise in the Cit II that Stu made anyone aware of - and it wasn't the ouput stage.
1. Construction - It had to be buildable by an average Joe - the huge majority of those amps were kits.
2. Design - Stu was not able to resolve a 1 Hz oscillation in the Cit II the way he wanted. He ended up using a different approach to solving the problem than he wanted because he ran out of time to work on it. The amp was scheduled to begin production, and he simply had to use a less elegant solution than he preferred.
With the benefit of way more time and much better parts than he had, I've been able to eliminate the 1Hz oscillation without applying Stu's fix. I must tell you, his fix may not have been as elegant as he wanted, but it is totally inaudible - and fixes the problem.
In light of all this, do you still believe he used U/L just as a marketing gimmick, or just to prove he could??
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Sorry, I don't see the basis for your statement.. - Jim McShane 08:51:17 03/19/07 (8)
- Re: Sorry, I don't see the basis for your statement.. - Triode_Kingdom 21:04:06 03/19/07 (5)
- Re: Sorry, I don't see the basis for your statement.. - Jim McShane 07:16:08 03/20/07 (0)
- Re: Sorry, I don't see the basis for your statement.. - Jim McShane 06:45:45 03/20/07 (0)
- Re: What UL did better for Citation II - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 04:14:01 03/20/07 (2)
- Nonsense - Triode_Kingdom 06:22:08 03/20/07 (1)
- Re: Nonsense - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 10:19:14 03/20/07 (0)
- Was the reason because when the transformers he ordered were delivered - Ivan303 17:46:05 03/19/07 (1)
- Re: Was the reason because when the transformers he ordered were delivered - Jim McShane 19:14:27 03/19/07 (0)