[Patrick Turner]

Eeyore wrote:

Stuart Krivis wrote:

On 24 Sep 2006 16:18:06 -0700, "Andre Jute" wrote:

But fine, you want to reject my explanation, then you must offer a
better reason to explain why triodes are such superior amplification
devices to anything else, so much more pleasing to the ear, so much
more accurate to the cultivated taste.

First we would have to accept these things as true. :-)

In the face of overwhelming evidence that as far as accuracy is concerned,
triodes are really quite flawed.

The simple explanation being that for some, accuracy of reproduction is
not what they seek, they simply seek what they consider to be 'a nice
sound'. Which is all fine and well but accuracy ain't part of it.

Graham

Graham, you may not realise it, but you speak with a flawed reasoning ability
on this issue, IMHO.

Its easily possible to build a class A triode PP amp with say a pair of KT90
strapped as triodes fo 30 watts at about 0.7% thd with no global NFB.
If 26dB of global NFB is connected (as it used to be done so often in 1955),
THD at 30 watts drops to 0.035% and at normal average listening levels of a
watt
the THD is quite negligible at around 0.01% and accuracy is what would be
heard in your ears
and accuracy is what you want and it depends on the
measuable artfacts being audible or not. Since artifacts of 0.01% are
inaudible,
mainly a tiny amount of 3H and without any crossover distortions etc, the
music is accurate, no?

Perhaps you need to buy a pair of Halcros made in Sth Aust and they give only
0.0001% at 200 watts at 20 kHz.

All the accuracy anyone might crave for.

Meanwhile, many ppl don't mind THD being 0.1% or more, and are flat out trying
to
determine if that is audible or not.

Patrick Turner.