[RapidRonnie]

.....right through the wall voice coils first!

http://www.pmillett.com/file_downloads/bereskin_3kw.pdf

Note also the output transformer details. You could build one from
this....


and even better detail on a 50 watter he

http://www.pmillett.com/file_downloa...in_buildit.pdf
http://www.pmillett.com/Books/lockhart.pdf


Zzzzzzappppp!!!!

I'd like to wind that opt myself. I wonder how it compares to a
Peerless or partridge. Any thoughts, experenced winders?

[BretLudwig]

http://www.pmillett.com/file_downloa...in_buildit.pdf

Patrick doesn't have these quality of photos. Nor has he really studied
the really good transformers, the Peerless 20-20 Plus series and the best
Partridges, because they aren't found in Australia.


Of course, what do you expect in a country where the Holden 6 is
considered a good engine? ;-)

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html

[Patrick Turner]

On Jun 5, 9:55*am, "BretLudwig" wrote:
http://www.pmillett.com/file_downloa...in_buildit.pdf

*Patrick doesn't have these quality of photos. Nor has he really studied
the really good transformers, the Peerless 20-20 Plus series and the best
Partridges, because they aren't found in Australia.

No, I ain't never tested or dismantled the Peerless 20-20.
Hardly any american hi-fi sets were ever imported to Oz in the good
ol'
days of pre 1960 because the prices were ourageous and the gear needed
110V.

I have studied good OPT design regardless of what you may say about
me.

At my website there is my design of OPT No1 offered to the public
as an alternative to the mediocre designs offered by 90% of other
manufacturers.

This basic design of mine is mentioned often at my pages and and
thouroughly
detailed and used for design logic flow examples which may be used by
anyone wanting to
wind their own OPT to get wide BW and low THD and low shunt C and low
leakage L.

The design information I offer enables anyone to increase the
bandwidth and reduce the
winding losses if they want to, but the benefits become tinier
as the size and cost increase one past what my OPT No1 entails.
In other words, there's always a better OPT, but to get one there
follows a law of decreasing betterment for exponential increase in
size, weight, core material
choice, etc.

If anyone wants to use silver wire, 50% nickel cores, and teflon
insulation,
then I wish them good luck.

*Of course, what do you expect in a country where the Holden 6 is
considered a good engine? ;-)

Huh? What we get depends which US designed engine General Motors has
imposed on us.

The old straight 6 was easy for most ppl to get along with for many
years.
Speed freaks like the Holden V8, another dinosaur from GM.
Then came the V6, and some better fuel efficiency, and beyond that I
dunno what is available from Holden.

Australians buy a wide range of different vehicles with different
styles
of engines.
To me a Ford Laser with 4 cyl 1.6ltr is fine, 1986 model
and maybe worth now $2,500.

I think its utter folly to have a huge lumbering vehicle with high gas
consumption.

If someone gave me a car with what you think might have an ideal
engine,
maybe I'd sell it ASAP.

I ride a bicycle more distance than I drive though.

Patrick Turner.

[BretLudwig]

Peerless and Partridge sold just the transformers, not complete hi fi
sets. At that time the UK and US were in some competition for the hi fi
leadership. Japan hadn't started yet.

Australia is irrelevant to hi-fi and what was or was not done in
Australia then is to be studiously ignored if you want to build a world
class set.

Have you ever been off the small island of Australia?

(I call it "a small island" because despite considerable size everyone
lives on the costline, meaning its ecumene is small.)

I'm not saying you are not knowledgeable, but your knowledge is too
Australia-centric and you need to travel, at least virtually speaking.

The RDH 4 is a limited subset of knowledge even of its time and Peerless
and Partridge and others were working _far_ in advance of it. I suggest
you purchase and dismantle some samples.

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html

[BretLudwig]

"If Patrick dared to dismantle a Peerless design, he would surely be
thankful that he lives on that "small island" far away, because the
Magnequest boys would at the least be threatening him with lawsuits for
misappropriating their intellectual property, if it weren't for the
great distance involved."

They'd just be laughed at.

There is no "intellectual property" in a Peerless transformer, other than
the Peerless brand name and logo on the case.

If Mike says otherwise, he's full of ****.

Anyone may copy any Peerless transformer. They can even say it is " a
copy of Peerless S-xxx-sx".

There is nothing he can do and he knows it.

He does not have any "exclusive right" to make ANYTHING. The only way he
could is if an outstanding patent applied to the design. Ercel Harrison,
the only creative person at Peerless of note, died so long ago any patent
he got is now expired.

He has the logo, obtained through disuse, and he has a bunch of old
drawings. That's IT. He does not have the expertise to do half the parts
he has drawings for, and does not have the capital to have them mede by
people who do.

He is a latent homosexual who lives off his wife, who is a legal
secretary or something. She subsidizes his "business" MagneQuest (a/k/a
Magnequeef) and his circle track racing team.

Winding good transformers consistently is women's work. You need a bunch
of them in a big room winding five days a week eight hours a day. And
schedule critical jobs for the days when they, having synched up as women
in buildings do, are not menstruating en masse. Even flowing their worst
they still out _QC and outproduce men at this work though. Odd isn't it?

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html

[John Byrns]

In article
outaudio.com,
"BretLudwig" wrote:

Peerless and Partridge sold just the transformers, not complete hi fi
sets. At that time the UK and US were in some competition for the hi fi
leadership. Japan hadn't started yet.

Australia is irrelevant to hi-fi and what was or was not done in
Australia then is to be studiously ignored if you want to build a world
class set.

Have you ever been off the small island of Australia?

(I call it "a small island" because despite considerable size everyone
lives on the costline, meaning its ecumene is small.)

I'm not saying you are not knowledgeable, but your knowledge is too
Australia-centric and you need to travel, at least virtually speaking.

The RDH 4 is a limited subset of knowledge even of its time and Peerless
and Partridge and others were working _far_ in advance of it. I suggest
you purchase and dismantle some samples.

If Patrick dared to dismantle a Peerless design, he would surely be
thankful that he lives on that "small island" far away, because the
Magnequest boys would at the least be threatening him with lawsuits for
misappropriating their intellectual property, if it weren't for the
great distance involved.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[Andre Jute[_2_]]

On Jun 7, 12:45*am, John Byrns wrote:
In article
outaudio.com,



*"BretLudwig" wrote:
*Peerless and Partridge sold just the transformers, not complete hi fi
sets. At that time the UK and US were in some competition for the hi fi
leadership. Japan hadn't started yet.

*Australia is irrelevant to hi-fi and what was or was not done in
Australia then is to be studiously ignored if you want to build a world
class set.

Yeah, that's why the key handbook about tube audio was created by the
Australian Wireless company, by an Australian engineer, with
Australian associates -- and later bought by RCA to train their own
engineers. You're such an ignorant, opinionated ******, Ludwig, it is
no surprise a wrongo like you cannot get a woman.

*Have you ever been off the small island of Australia?

*(I call it "a small island" because despite considerable size everyone
lives on the costline, meaning its ecumene is small.)

*I'm not saying you are not knowledgeable, but your knowledge is too
Australia-centric and you need to travel, at least virtually speaking.

*The RDH 4 is a limited subset of knowledge even of its time and Peerless
and Partridge and others were working _far_ in advance of it. I suggest
you purchase and dismantle some samples. *

Partridge wasn't an American, you silly little man. He was British.

If Patrick dared to dismantle a Peerless design, he would surely be
thankful that he lives on that "small island" far away, because the
Magnequest boys would at the least be threatening him with lawsuits for
misappropriating their intellectual property, if it weren't for the
great distance involved.

LOL. If Patrick dared to dismantle a Peerless transformer, Ludwig
would be the first to mutter darkly about "offshore ollies stealing
American know-how". All I can say about the Magnequest Scum is that --
having owned a Magnequest copy of a Peerless transformer that self-
disassembled because Creepy Mike Lafevre, the Maximum Magnequestie,
built it so shoddily -- is that I often wished that Creepy Mike would
spend less time conducting flame wars on the net and more time
disassembling real Peerless transformers so that he could learn how
things were done in the golden age of American craftsmanship. Not that
it would have made any difference, as Mike learned his
"craftsmanship", such as it was, in the smoky caucus rooms of
Philadelphia's very own Tammany Hall (Creepy Mike isn't an engineer,
he is a "political scientist" so badly educated that he thinks
Gothenburg is in Austria...). And now that American "craftsmanship" is
in the hands of incompent jerkups like Bret Ludwig (who had to go to
three, count 'em, three soldering schools before he learned to solder)
and the Atlanta rentass Jon Yaeger, it is probably too late ever to
return it to decency.

Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, *http://fmamradios.com/

Andre Jute
An Australian from the Big Country

PS I once had a couple of American servants on a tour around the
coastline of Australia. They could neither change a wheel nor put up a
tent, and their idea of a barbeque was to open a tin of beans -- well,
they would've, except they hadn't even remembered to pack the can
opener. As soon as we got back to civilization, I gave them a Mickey
Mouse watch each and got rid of them. Every time I see a post from
Bret Ludwig or Jon Yaeger, I think of those two incompetents.

[Andre Jute[_2_]]

On Jun 7, 12:38*am, "BretLudwig" wrote:
"If Patrick dared to dismantle a Peerless design, he would surely be

thankful that he lives on that "small island" far away, because the
Magnequest boys would at the least be threatening him with lawsuits for
misappropriating their intellectual property, if it weren't for the
great distance involved."

*They'd just be laughed at.

*There is no "intellectual property" in a Peerless transformer, other than
the Peerless brand name and logo on the case.

*If Mike says otherwise, he's full of ****.

*Anyone may copy any Peerless transformer. They can even say it is " a
copy of Peerless S-xxx-sx".

*There is nothing he can do and he knows it.

*He does not have any "exclusive right" to make ANYTHING. The only way he
could is if an outstanding patent applied to the design. Ercel Harrison,
the only creative person at Peerless of note, died so long ago any patent
he got is now expired.

*He has the logo, obtained through disuse, and he has a bunch of old
drawings. That's IT. He does not have the expertise to do half the parts
he has drawings for, and does not have the capital to have them mede by
people who do.

*He is a latent homosexual who lives off his wife, who is a legal
secretary or something. She subsidizes his "business" MagneQuest (a/k/a
Magnequeef) and his circle track racing team.

*Winding good transformers consistently is women's work. You need a bunch
of them in a big room winding five days a week eight hours a day. And
schedule critical jobs for the days when they, having synched up as women
in buildings do, are not menstruating en masse. Even flowing their worst
they still out _QC and outproduce men at this work though. Odd isn't it?

--
Message posted usinghttp://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/
More information athttp://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html

The above self-exposure of Bret Ludwig's deepest obsessions
(homosexuality and menstruating women) crossed with my post explaining
to Ludwig that he cannot get a woman because he's such a jerk. If only
Ludwig weren't such a commonplace barbarian of such limited range, I
could interest my poker group in him and make a few bucks betting on
my predictions of what he would say and do next...

Andre Jute
My middle name is Nostrodamus

[Andre Jute[_2_]]

On Jun 7, 12:45*am, John Byrns wrote:
In article
outaudio.com,



*"BretLudwig" wrote:
*Peerless and Partridge sold just the transformers, not complete hi fi
sets. At that time the UK and US were in some competition for the hi fi
leadership. Japan hadn't started yet.

*Australia is irrelevant to hi-fi and what was or was not done in
Australia then is to be studiously ignored if you want to build a world
class set.

*Have you ever been off the small island of Australia?

*(I call it "a small island" because despite considerable size everyone
lives on the costline, meaning its ecumene is small.)

*I'm not saying you are not knowledgeable, but your knowledge is too
Australia-centric and you need to travel, at least virtually speaking.

*The RDH 4 is a limited subset of knowledge even of its time and Peerless
and Partridge and others were working _far_ in advance of it. I suggest
you purchase and dismantle some samples. *

If Patrick dared to dismantle a Peerless design, he would surely be
thankful that he lives on that "small island" far away, because the
Magnequest boys would at the least be threatening him with lawsuits for
misappropriating their intellectual property, if it weren't for the
great distance involved.

Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, *http://fmamradios.com/

I'm not so sure at all that Patrick could learn much from
disassembling even good vintage transformers. When we first met
Patrick somewhat nearer the turn of the century, he was very keen on
persuading other winders to publish their winding regimens, but even
back then I didn't think he would benefit as much as he expected to
from a study of what others did. Secondhand knowledge acts as a sort
of validation to what you have already taught yourself but that's a
pretty minor benefit, of more use to the those lacking in
selfconfidence than to someone with the confidence to teach himself
transformer design and winding from first principles.

Andre Jute
I musta learned all that from all those "how-to" books I wrote...
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/T...re%20Jute.html

[Patrick Turner]

On Jun 7, 8:48*am, "BretLudwig" wrote:
*Peerless and Partridge sold just the transformers, not complete hi fi
sets. At that time the UK and US were in some competition for the hi fi
leadership. Japan hadn't started yet.

*Australia is irrelevant to hi-fi and what was or was not done in
Australia then is to be studiously ignored if you want to build a world
class set.

*Have you ever been off the small island of Australia?

*(I call it "a small island" because despite considerable size everyone
lives on the costline, meaning its ecumene is small.)

*I'm not saying you are not knowledgeable, but your knowledge is too
Australia-centric and you need to travel, at least virtually speaking.

*The RDH 4 is a limited subset of knowledge even of its time and Peerless
and Partridge and others were working _far_ in advance of it. I suggest
you purchase and dismantle some samples. *



RDH4 refers to Partridge and their better figures for OPT performance.
Probably due to copyright reasons a pile of stuff has been left out of
RDH4,
but its in references.

If you follow RDH4 reasoning, the relationships of Lp, LL, Cshunt,
and Rw in cojunction to RL and Ra are all explained well enough.

Good OPT all were expensive and hardly any makers obeyed the
recomendations of DTN Williamson
or Partridge style practices which were merely good applications of
the
RDH4 message.

One can easily make OPT with the best Partridge or Peerless type specs
if you simply obey a few ratyher expensive to apply rules.

I have spelled everything out at my website.

I've made OPT for 300 watt amps that have 3Hz to 270kHz bandwidth
without reliance on NFB,
and with less than 5% winding losses.

Anyone can do it if they apply themselves.

If Partridge and the other fancy old makers had never ever existed,
it'd make no difference.

As for the issue of Oz being a small island, etc, etc, well, its
entirely irrelevant.
In Nigeria, or Indonesia, the message about decent OPT manufacture
wasn't something on anyone's mind in 1955.

Really good hi-fi OPT were made by a few Oz makers in the 1950s by AR
in Melbourne
and a few others, but mostly oz makers wound crap with low BW at a
cheap price
which many Chinese try to copy now.
AR and Fergeson of Sydney had the "high" range of OPT but mostly sold
cheaper "medium fi"
and "low fi" to suit the cash stapped masses unable to spend much on
hobbies.

In 1955, hi-fi was a rare beast indeed.

Something the rich had, and everyone else didn't.

Patrick Turner.

[Patrick Turner]

On Jun 7, 2:26*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
On Jun 7, 12:45*am, John Byrns wrote:





In article
outaudio.com,

*"BretLudwig" wrote:
*Peerless and Partridge sold just the transformers, not complete hi fi
sets. At that time the UK and US were in some competition for the hi fi
leadership. Japan hadn't started yet.

*Australia is irrelevant to hi-fi and what was or was not done in
Australia then is to be studiously ignored if you want to build a world
class set.

*Have you ever been off the small island of Australia?

*(I call it "a small island" because despite considerable size everyone
lives on the costline, meaning its ecumene is small.)

*I'm not saying you are not knowledgeable, but your knowledge is too
Australia-centric and you need to travel, at least virtually speaking.

*The RDH 4 is a limited subset of knowledge even of its time and Peerless
and Partridge and others were working _far_ in advance of it. I suggest
you purchase and dismantle some samples. *

If Patrick dared to dismantle a Peerless design, he would surely be
thankful that he lives on that "small island" far away, because the
Magnequest boys would at the least be threatening him with lawsuits for
misappropriating their intellectual property, if it weren't for the
great distance involved.

Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, *http://fmamradios.com/

I'm not so sure at all that Patrick could learn much from
disassembling even good vintage transformers. When we first met
Patrick somewhat nearer the turn of the century, he was very keen on
persuading other winders to publish their winding regimens, but even
back then I didn't think he would benefit as much as he expected to
from a study of what others did. Secondhand knowledge acts as a sort
of validation to what you have already taught yourself but that's a
pretty minor benefit, of more use to the those lacking in
selfconfidence than to someone with the confidence to teach himself
transformer design and winding from first principles.

Andre Jute
I musta learned all that from all those "how-to" books I wrote...
*http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/T...e%20Jute.html- Hide quoted text -

I have dismantled many OPT that have all too easily failed in many
amplifiers
and usually been horrified at what I have found.

Nobody who has designed the crap I have seen could teach me anything.

I sure could have taught them something, while some deserve to have
their
OPT shoved where the sun don't shine, sideways.

Basically, all aspects of OPT design in 95% of old and new gear was
and still is determined
by accountants, and their favourite word is "No!"

Its so darn easy to make better OPT than are made, and
were made, 50 years ago.

I do think the OPT made by ARC and CJ and Manley Labs are good stuff.
I'd reckon they are still using greybeards working in the US to tried
and true recipes,
but they'll retire or expire, and then it'll be other to you Mr China,
and you will then see the full craperization of the good 'ol American
product.

Its half way to crap now in the board designs and circuit design;
I know, I have had to rewire far too many smoky ****ing US mades.
Good OPT though.
Just as well.

Patrick Turner.

[BretLudwig]

Today, the best opt are made in the UK, in Sweden, in Japan, and also in
the US. Certainly someone could set up a plant in Australia and make very
fine ones in quantity at semi-affordable prices. I have nothing against
Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Argentina, or anywhere else as a place to
buy from.

But in the past all the good ones of any notoriety were UK-Partridge,
etc-or US-Peerless, UTC, Freed, etc. The Australian ones you mention
aren't in any literature I have come across.

I'm told by some that the German ones Telefunken used were good too.

As I've said before, the RDH 4 is a good book, but it is essentially
wartime tech. A lot happened between 1950 and 1965 that advanced the art.


Right now, with the fall of the US dollar, the US is once again
attractive as a place to build things to a good standard. But that doesn't
mean Australia isn't. Although you have even bigger, more socialist
government and the "tall poppy syndrome" to contend with. That's why
Aussie expats are common enough here I meet one most every day, although
our immigration laws are very biased against them and in favor of
ineducable mestizos.

Fortunately, Ted Kennedy will die soon, and he's the son of a whore who
came up with that law.

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html

[[email protected]]

In 1955, hi-fi was a rare beast indeed.

Something the rich had, and everyone else didn't.


It was quite common amongst a certain set, which is all that matters.

In New York there were hugely successful hi-fi shows, it was like
computers in the 80s. Not for the masses per se but for a lot of
hobbyists, an in thing. That's true of anything worht doing. If
everyone has it why bother?

[Patrick Turner]

wrote:


In 1955, hi-fi was a rare beast indeed.

Something the rich had, and everyone else didn't.


It was quite common amongst a certain set, which is all that matters.

In New York there were hugely successful hi-fi shows, it was like
computers in the 80s. Not for the masses per se but for a lot of
hobbyists, an in thing. That's true of anything worht doing. If
everyone has it why bother?

The idea of a "certain set" implies who ever was crazy
about hi-fi in 1955 were a mix of ppl, and not only rich ones.

Certainly the rich, ie, doctors, lawyers and the big end of town
liked their lil ol electronicals for nightly entertainment
regardless of the cost. The rich don't ask about the price.
They just ring up and order it, and have it installed.
But hi-fi appealed to a the nutzoid poor, so many of them cobbled
together their
own gear which was a lot less expensive than buying anything from Leak,
Quad, or McIntosh etc.

It could be said that everyone does have "IT" these days, ie have hi-fi,
even from a $97 complete system made in China. It'd measure well at 0.3
watts.

Someone asked me to make them a full amp system the other day
using a whole bunch of odd no-longer-made transmitting tubes,
4 x 300 watt monos plus 2 x 100 watt monos, and I quoted $35,000.

He sure changed his tune. He has the silliest of dreams,
and it costs silly money.
He could be far sillier, and shop for Halcro amps.

Typically, like so many dreamers not short of a dollar, he never repied
to social issues I mentioned in my quote about
people wanting lotsa things for which they refuse to pay as much for
compared to what they are being paid.
He's a typical snobby medical practitioner with an emotionally walnut
sized brain.

gimme gimme me wantee nowie pleasee.

Like a spoiled brat.

Hardly anyone has 1,400 watts in their home system, and
so why is it that some ppl behave like they ain't arrived
if they ain't got what other people don't have?

Its utter BS behaviour, putting on the agony, putting on the style,
and otherwise called affluenza; the more you have, the more you want,
and if poor, dream to live like a king, if rich, become grumpy
with the poor who slave to make you what you dream you must have.
Its killing the world of course, this too-muchication that's goin on.

Give me 100 watts and a decent pair of full range speakers, and its all
I ever need.

The rich were never custodians of mental purity; the more money
some folks get the worse they become.

Patrick Turner.