On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 09:40:22 -0500, Clytemnestra
wrote:


That said, you can determine the input impedance fairly easily by feeding a
1 KHz tone through a resistor, and measuring the voltage before the resistor
and after.

I appreciate the advice, but as I said before I only have a digital
multimeter at my disposal. It sounds like I'd have to bench the amp
and connect it up to a tone or sine wave generator to do what you
suggest. Am I interpreting you correctly?

Sure - there are way to get test tones using either a CD player or a computer
sound card output.

http://www.esser.u-net.com/ttg.htm

http://www.globalshareware.com/Mp3-Audio/Utilities-Plug-Ins/SigJenny-download.htm

http://www.dogstar.dantimax.dk/testwavs/



The fact that your digital meter may not be well suited to measurements other
than line frequency really don't matter much, as any error will be the same for
the measurement of source voltage, dropping resistor voltage and voltage across
the amp's input as long as you make these measurements at the same frequency.

That's precisely what I've been doing. It sounds quite good, but
I hear a little cancellation at about 100 Hz. I'm trying to determine
if it is a characteristic of this type of speaker system, or if
something may be out of adjustment.

It doesn't matter. The adjustments (which include moving the speakers around!)
are there to help you get the sound "right." Don't hesitate to experiment.

That's precisely what I've been doing. It sounds quite good, but
I hear a little cancellation at about 100 Hz. I'm trying to determine
if it is a characteristic of this type of speaker system, or if
something may be out of adjustment.

It doesn't matter. The adjustments (which include moving the speakers around!)
are there to help you get the sound "right." Don't hesitate to experiment.

That's precisely what I've been doing. It sounds quite good, but
I hear a little cancellation at about 100 Hz. I'm trying to determine
if it is a characteristic of this type of speaker system, or if
something may be out of adjustment.

It doesn't matter. The adjustments (which include moving the speakers around!)
are there to help you get the sound "right." Don't hesitate to experiment.

That's precisely what I've been doing. It sounds quite good, but
I hear a little cancellation at about 100 Hz. I'm trying to determine
if it is a characteristic of this type of speaker system, or if
something may be out of adjustment.

It doesn't matter. The adjustments (which include moving the speakers around!)
are there to help you get the sound "right." Don't hesitate to experiment.

"Clytemnestra" wrote in message
...

[...] It sounds quite good, but I
hear a little cancellation at about 100 Hz. I'm trying to determine if
it characteristic of this type of speakers system, or if something may
be out of adjustment.



That has nothing to do with the impedance compensation switch. That's a
placement issue. Move the speakers around (particularly the sub) and
listen to the difference.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the audio booth
making even bad news sound good

"Clytemnestra" wrote in message
...

[...] It sounds quite good, but I
hear a little cancellation at about 100 Hz. I'm trying to determine if
it characteristic of this type of speakers system, or if something may
be out of adjustment.



That has nothing to do with the impedance compensation switch. That's a
placement issue. Move the speakers around (particularly the sub) and
listen to the difference.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the audio booth
making even bad news sound good

"Clytemnestra" wrote in message
...

[...] It sounds quite good, but I
hear a little cancellation at about 100 Hz. I'm trying to determine if
it characteristic of this type of speakers system, or if something may
be out of adjustment.



That has nothing to do with the impedance compensation switch. That's a
placement issue. Move the speakers around (particularly the sub) and
listen to the difference.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the audio booth
making even bad news sound good

"Clytemnestra" wrote in message
...

[...] It sounds quite good, but I
hear a little cancellation at about 100 Hz. I'm trying to determine if
it characteristic of this type of speakers system, or if something may
be out of adjustment.



That has nothing to do with the impedance compensation switch. That's a
placement issue. Move the speakers around (particularly the sub) and
listen to the difference.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the audio booth
making even bad news sound good

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.

As to your other question, Yes, you'll need some sort of sine wave generator
or test tone CD.

I suggest you try to find someone local to help you with this, perhaps at a
ham radio club.

--Ethan

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.

As to your other question, Yes, you'll need some sort of sine wave generator
or test tone CD.

I suggest you try to find someone local to help you with this, perhaps at a
ham radio club.

--Ethan

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.

As to your other question, Yes, you'll need some sort of sine wave generator
or test tone CD.

I suggest you try to find someone local to help you with this, perhaps at a
ham radio club.

--Ethan

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.

As to your other question, Yes, you'll need some sort of sine wave generator
or test tone CD.

I suggest you try to find someone local to help you with this, perhaps at a
ham radio club.

--Ethan

Ethan Winer wrote:

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.


Actually, there are several high-end products on the market
sometimes referred to as "passive pre-amps" (a bit of an oxymoron
I guess :-) These are basically minimalist volume controls with
source switches for putting between sources and an amp. They are
claimed to be able to be very effective with minimal impact on
the sound signature if they are of quality components, built
decent, AND are used in conjunction with appropriate components
(e.g., very low output impedance source components, etc).

I'm not advocating them, just indicating that there are
high-quality passive components currently in the "high quality
audio" market.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious as
well. If it is passive, it was likely to just simply things from
a cost basis.

- Jeff

Ethan Winer wrote:

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.


Actually, there are several high-end products on the market
sometimes referred to as "passive pre-amps" (a bit of an oxymoron
I guess :-) These are basically minimalist volume controls with
source switches for putting between sources and an amp. They are
claimed to be able to be very effective with minimal impact on
the sound signature if they are of quality components, built
decent, AND are used in conjunction with appropriate components
(e.g., very low output impedance source components, etc).

I'm not advocating them, just indicating that there are
high-quality passive components currently in the "high quality
audio" market.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious as
well. If it is passive, it was likely to just simply things from
a cost basis.

- Jeff

Ethan Winer wrote:

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.


Actually, there are several high-end products on the market
sometimes referred to as "passive pre-amps" (a bit of an oxymoron
I guess :-) These are basically minimalist volume controls with
source switches for putting between sources and an amp. They are
claimed to be able to be very effective with minimal impact on
the sound signature if they are of quality components, built
decent, AND are used in conjunction with appropriate components
(e.g., very low output impedance source components, etc).

I'm not advocating them, just indicating that there are
high-quality passive components currently in the "high quality
audio" market.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious as
well. If it is passive, it was likely to just simply things from
a cost basis.

- Jeff

Ethan Winer wrote:

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.


Actually, there are several high-end products on the market
sometimes referred to as "passive pre-amps" (a bit of an oxymoron
I guess :-) These are basically minimalist volume controls with
source switches for putting between sources and an amp. They are
claimed to be able to be very effective with minimal impact on
the sound signature if they are of quality components, built
decent, AND are used in conjunction with appropriate components
(e.g., very low output impedance source components, etc).

I'm not advocating them, just indicating that there are
high-quality passive components currently in the "high quality
audio" market.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious as
well. If it is passive, it was likely to just simply things from
a cost basis.

- Jeff

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious
as well. If it's passive, it was likely to just simply things from a
cost basis.

Most likely. But if all that's needed is a simple 6dB/8ve crossover, I'd rather
achieve it with a high-quality film cap than by running the signal through a
gain stage -- as good as those can be.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious
as well. If it's passive, it was likely to just simply things from a
cost basis.

Most likely. But if all that's needed is a simple 6dB/8ve crossover, I'd rather
achieve it with a high-quality film cap than by running the signal through a
gain stage -- as good as those can be.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious
as well. If it's passive, it was likely to just simply things from a
cost basis.

Most likely. But if all that's needed is a simple 6dB/8ve crossover, I'd rather
achieve it with a high-quality film cap than by running the signal through a
gain stage -- as good as those can be.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious
as well. If it's passive, it was likely to just simply things from a
cost basis.

Most likely. But if all that's needed is a simple 6dB/8ve crossover, I'd rather
achieve it with a high-quality film cap than by running the signal through a
gain stage -- as good as those can be.

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:53:14 GMT, Jeff Wiseman
wrote:

Ethan Winer wrote:

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.

Actually, there are several high-end products on the market
sometimes referred to as "passive pre-amps" (a bit of an oxymoron
I guess :-) These are basically minimalist volume controls with
source switches for putting between sources and an amp. They are
claimed to be able to be very effective with minimal impact on
the sound signature if they are of quality components, built
decent, AND are used in conjunction with appropriate components
(e.g., very low output impedance source components, etc).

I'm not advocating them, just indicating that there are
high-quality passive components currently in the "high quality
audio" market.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious as
well. If it is passive, it was likely to just simply things from
a cost basis.

I use a passive controller, the *parts* cost close to $1,000..........
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:53:14 GMT, Jeff Wiseman
wrote:

Ethan Winer wrote:

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.

Actually, there are several high-end products on the market
sometimes referred to as "passive pre-amps" (a bit of an oxymoron
I guess :-) These are basically minimalist volume controls with
source switches for putting between sources and an amp. They are
claimed to be able to be very effective with minimal impact on
the sound signature if they are of quality components, built
decent, AND are used in conjunction with appropriate components
(e.g., very low output impedance source components, etc).

I'm not advocating them, just indicating that there are
high-quality passive components currently in the "high quality
audio" market.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious as
well. If it is passive, it was likely to just simply things from
a cost basis.

I use a passive controller, the *parts* cost close to $1,000..........
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:53:14 GMT, Jeff Wiseman
wrote:

Ethan Winer wrote:

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.

Actually, there are several high-end products on the market
sometimes referred to as "passive pre-amps" (a bit of an oxymoron
I guess :-) These are basically minimalist volume controls with
source switches for putting between sources and an amp. They are
claimed to be able to be very effective with minimal impact on
the sound signature if they are of quality components, built
decent, AND are used in conjunction with appropriate components
(e.g., very low output impedance source components, etc).

I'm not advocating them, just indicating that there are
high-quality passive components currently in the "high quality
audio" market.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious as
well. If it is passive, it was likely to just simply things from
a cost basis.

I use a passive controller, the *parts* cost close to $1,000..........
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:53:14 GMT, Jeff Wiseman
wrote:

Ethan Winer wrote:

Clyt,

Here is the relevant passage from the owners manual:

I agree with the others. This appears to be a passive crossover, which in my
mind is a terrible idea. There may be some advantage to passive circuits
(though I'm not aware of even one in hi quality audio), but surely any
crossover whose frequency depends on the power amp's input impedance is a
lame design. Really lame.

Actually, there are several high-end products on the market
sometimes referred to as "passive pre-amps" (a bit of an oxymoron
I guess :-) These are basically minimalist volume controls with
source switches for putting between sources and an amp. They are
claimed to be able to be very effective with minimal impact on
the sound signature if they are of quality components, built
decent, AND are used in conjunction with appropriate components
(e.g., very low output impedance source components, etc).

I'm not advocating them, just indicating that there are
high-quality passive components currently in the "high quality
audio" market.

However, in the case being discussed, I'm a little suspicious as
well. If it is passive, it was likely to just simply things from
a cost basis.

I use a passive controller, the *parts* cost close to $1,000..........
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Jeff,

there are several high-end products

Yes, I am fully aware of all the overpriced minimalist drek out there. I've
seen one passive volume control that sells for $4500! The overwhelming
problem with using passive components for that is you are at the mercy of
the signal cables, er, "interconnects" to not reduce the high frequencies
via capacitance. At least Manley has the common sense to add buffering on
their Massive Passive equalizer.

--Ethan

Jeff,

there are several high-end products

Yes, I am fully aware of all the overpriced minimalist drek out there. I've
seen one passive volume control that sells for $4500! The overwhelming
problem with using passive components for that is you are at the mercy of
the signal cables, er, "interconnects" to not reduce the high frequencies
via capacitance. At least Manley has the common sense to add buffering on
their Massive Passive equalizer.

--Ethan

Jeff,

there are several high-end products

Yes, I am fully aware of all the overpriced minimalist drek out there. I've
seen one passive volume control that sells for $4500! The overwhelming
problem with using passive components for that is you are at the mercy of
the signal cables, er, "interconnects" to not reduce the high frequencies
via capacitance. At least Manley has the common sense to add buffering on
their Massive Passive equalizer.

--Ethan

Jeff,

there are several high-end products

Yes, I am fully aware of all the overpriced minimalist drek out there. I've
seen one passive volume control that sells for $4500! The overwhelming
problem with using passive components for that is you are at the mercy of
the signal cables, er, "interconnects" to not reduce the high frequencies
via capacitance. At least Manley has the common sense to add buffering on
their Massive Passive equalizer.

--Ethan

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:31:56 -0500, "Ethan Winer" ethanw at
ethanwiner dot com wrote:

Jeff,

there are several high-end products

Yes, I am fully aware of all the overpriced minimalist drek out there. I've
seen one passive volume control that sells for $4500! The overwhelming
problem with using passive components for that is you are at the mercy of
the signal cables, er, "interconnects" to not reduce the high frequencies
via capacitance.

Not a problem. If you don't understand *system* design, then you
shouldn't be messing with passives. I know of at least one commercial
design (Audio Synthesis) which has hard-wired low-capacitance output
cables for exactly this reason.

At least Manley has the common sense to add buffering on
their Massive Passive equalizer.

Which makes it a basic lie - it's *not* passive.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:31:56 -0500, "Ethan Winer" ethanw at
ethanwiner dot com wrote:

Jeff,

there are several high-end products

Yes, I am fully aware of all the overpriced minimalist drek out there. I've
seen one passive volume control that sells for $4500! The overwhelming
problem with using passive components for that is you are at the mercy of
the signal cables, er, "interconnects" to not reduce the high frequencies
via capacitance.

Not a problem. If you don't understand *system* design, then you
shouldn't be messing with passives. I know of at least one commercial
design (Audio Synthesis) which has hard-wired low-capacitance output
cables for exactly this reason.

At least Manley has the common sense to add buffering on
their Massive Passive equalizer.

Which makes it a basic lie - it's *not* passive.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:31:56 -0500, "Ethan Winer" ethanw at
ethanwiner dot com wrote:

Jeff,

there are several high-end products

Yes, I am fully aware of all the overpriced minimalist drek out there. I've
seen one passive volume control that sells for $4500! The overwhelming
problem with using passive components for that is you are at the mercy of
the signal cables, er, "interconnects" to not reduce the high frequencies
via capacitance.

Not a problem. If you don't understand *system* design, then you
shouldn't be messing with passives. I know of at least one commercial
design (Audio Synthesis) which has hard-wired low-capacitance output
cables for exactly this reason.

At least Manley has the common sense to add buffering on
their Massive Passive equalizer.

Which makes it a basic lie - it's *not* passive.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:31:56 -0500, "Ethan Winer" ethanw at
ethanwiner dot com wrote:

Jeff,

there are several high-end products

Yes, I am fully aware of all the overpriced minimalist drek out there. I've
seen one passive volume control that sells for $4500! The overwhelming
problem with using passive components for that is you are at the mercy of
the signal cables, er, "interconnects" to not reduce the high frequencies
via capacitance.

Not a problem. If you don't understand *system* design, then you
shouldn't be messing with passives. I know of at least one commercial
design (Audio Synthesis) which has hard-wired low-capacitance output
cables for exactly this reason.

At least Manley has the common sense to add buffering on
their Massive Passive equalizer.

Which makes it a basic lie - it's *not* passive.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article writes:

I appreciate the advice, but as I said before I only have a digital
multimeter at my disposal. It sounds like I'd have to bench the amp
and connect it up to a tone or sine wave generator to do what you
suggest. Am I interpreting you correctly?

Well, yes. Your digital multimeter doesn't have an input impedance
scale does it? It's not the same as resistance in most cases, in case
that's what you were dreaming about.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

I appreciate the advice, but as I said before I only have a digital
multimeter at my disposal. It sounds like I'd have to bench the amp
and connect it up to a tone or sine wave generator to do what you
suggest. Am I interpreting you correctly?

Well, yes. Your digital multimeter doesn't have an input impedance
scale does it? It's not the same as resistance in most cases, in case
that's what you were dreaming about.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

I appreciate the advice, but as I said before I only have a digital
multimeter at my disposal. It sounds like I'd have to bench the amp
and connect it up to a tone or sine wave generator to do what you
suggest. Am I interpreting you correctly?

Well, yes. Your digital multimeter doesn't have an input impedance
scale does it? It's not the same as resistance in most cases, in case
that's what you were dreaming about.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

I appreciate the advice, but as I said before I only have a digital
multimeter at my disposal. It sounds like I'd have to bench the amp
and connect it up to a tone or sine wave generator to do what you
suggest. Am I interpreting you correctly?

Well, yes. Your digital multimeter doesn't have an input impedance
scale does it? It's not the same as resistance in most cases, in case
that's what you were dreaming about.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Stewart,

If you don't understand *system* design, then you shouldn't be messing
with passives.

I guess I just don't see the value of passive audio gear. I appreciate that
reducing the number of devices in the chain is always a good idea when all
else is equal. But in this case all else is decidely not equal. An active
output can drive cables with no HF loss, and the low output impedance
reduces or avoids altogether RFI and other interference problems. An active
input can be balanced to reduce hum and RFI. Further, the obssession some
people have to avoid adding 0.001% distortion seems silly given that all
loudspeakers have 100 times more distortion. And any room you're likely to
put speakers in has a response that varies by 20-30 dB throughout the entire
low end.

Which makes it a basic lie - it's *not* passive.

As Paul explained, a passive device with input and output buffering can
still legitimately be considered passive. Not to defend Manley. I have no
use for tubes either. :-)

--Ethan

Stewart,

If you don't understand *system* design, then you shouldn't be messing
with passives.

I guess I just don't see the value of passive audio gear. I appreciate that
reducing the number of devices in the chain is always a good idea when all
else is equal. But in this case all else is decidely not equal. An active
output can drive cables with no HF loss, and the low output impedance
reduces or avoids altogether RFI and other interference problems. An active
input can be balanced to reduce hum and RFI. Further, the obssession some
people have to avoid adding 0.001% distortion seems silly given that all
loudspeakers have 100 times more distortion. And any room you're likely to
put speakers in has a response that varies by 20-30 dB throughout the entire
low end.

Which makes it a basic lie - it's *not* passive.

As Paul explained, a passive device with input and output buffering can
still legitimately be considered passive. Not to defend Manley. I have no
use for tubes either. :-)

--Ethan

Stewart,

If you don't understand *system* design, then you shouldn't be messing
with passives.

I guess I just don't see the value of passive audio gear. I appreciate that
reducing the number of devices in the chain is always a good idea when all
else is equal. But in this case all else is decidely not equal. An active
output can drive cables with no HF loss, and the low output impedance
reduces or avoids altogether RFI and other interference problems. An active
input can be balanced to reduce hum and RFI. Further, the obssession some
people have to avoid adding 0.001% distortion seems silly given that all
loudspeakers have 100 times more distortion. And any room you're likely to
put speakers in has a response that varies by 20-30 dB throughout the entire
low end.

Which makes it a basic lie - it's *not* passive.

As Paul explained, a passive device with input and output buffering can
still legitimately be considered passive. Not to defend Manley. I have no
use for tubes either. :-)

--Ethan