[Bret L]

On Apr 20, 9:36*am, John Byrns wrote:
In article ,



*flipper wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 12:08:26 -0700 (PDT), "Watt? Me worry?"
wrote:

Hi RATs!

I did not say tubes were not purposely designed. I said using tubes
for audio that were not designed for audio is neither sinful nor
foolish.

Not quite. You said "The reason a tube sounds good is the circuit it
is in, if it ever sounds good. Not because it was "designed" for low
(audio) frequency...
.
.
.
It doesn't matter what the tube was designed to do..."

It most certainly does "matter what the tube was designed to do." A
remote cutoff pentode, for example, is a lousy choice for 'hi-fi'
because it was specifically "designed" for a different purpose and, as
a result, isn't very linear.

Still anyone who has listened to an AM, FM, or even an FM stereo
broadcast in the early years has listened to audio processed through
remote cut off tubes, specifically chosen because of their particular
nonlinearity.

You presumably are talking about the use of these tubes in the
receivers, they were used in the RF sections ahead of the
discriminator and did not affect linearity of the demod signal.

They were also used in certain broadcast limiters in the audio chain
as gain controllers. This is a most interesting application and the
surviving such units are worth insane sums to working record cutting
facilities, e.g. the Fairchild 670.